Watchful waiting for small renal masses

Current Urology Reports

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 22-25

  Mattar, Kamal ^b   Jewett, Michael A S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; HUMAN; KIDNEY CARCINOMA; KIDNEY SURGERY; KIDNEY TUMOR; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; METASTASIS; PROGNOSIS; REVIEW;

HUMANS; KIDNEY NEOPLASMS;

EID: 38349080041     PISSN: 15272737     EISSN: 15346285     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11934-008-0006-3     Document Type: Review

References (44)

1. American Cancer Society: Cancer Facts & Figures 2007. Available at http://www.cancer.org/docroot/stt/stt_0.asp. Accessed August 2007.
2. Hollingsworth JM, Miller DC, Daignault S, Hollenbeck BK: Rising incidence of small renal masses: a need to reassess treatment effect. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006, 98:1331-1334. A contemporary review highlights the rising incidence and treatment of localized kidney cancer over the last two decades, without reduction in mortality.
3. Chow WH, Devesa SS, Warren JL, Fraumeni JF Jr: Rising incidence of renal cell cancer in the United States. JAMA 1999, 281:1628-1631.
4. Hock LM, Lynch J, Balaji KC: Increasing incidence of all stages of kidney cancer in the last 2 decades in the United States: an analysis of surveillance, epidemiology and end results program data. J Urol 2002, 167:57-60.
5. Jayson M, Sanders H: Increased incidence of serendipitously discovered renal cell carcinoma. Urology 1998, 51:203-205.
6. Delahunt B, Kittelson JM, McCredie MRE, et al: Prognostic importance of tumor size for localized conventional (clear cell) renal cell carcinoma. Cancer 2002, 94:658-664.
7. Elmore JM, Kadesky KT, Koeneman KS, Sagalowsky AI: Reassessment of the 1997 TNM classification system for renal cell carcinoma. Cancer 2003, 98:2329-2334.
8. Steiner T, Knels R, Schubert J: Prognostic significance of tumour size in patients after tumour nephrectomy for localised renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 2004, 46:327-330.
9. Ficarra V, Guillè F, Schips L, et al.: Proposal for revision of the TNM classification system for renal cell carcinoma. Cancer 2005, 104:2116-2123. Analysis in a large cohort reveals that an optimal tumor size of 5.5 cm most accurately predicts cancer-related outcomes.
10. Karakiewicz PI, Lewinshtein DJ, Chun FK, et al.: Tumor size improves the accuracy of TNM predictions in patients with renal cancer. Eur Urol 2006, 50:521-528. Review demonstrating the importance of tumor size in predicting oncologic outcomes in RCC.
11. Zisman A, Pantuck AJ, Chao D, et al.: Reevaluation of the 1997 TNM classification for renal cell carcinoma: T1 and T2 cutoff point at 4.5 rather than 7 cm better correlates with clinical outcome. J Urol 2001, 166:54-58.
12. Remzi M, Ozsoy M, Klingler HC, et al.: Are small renal tumors harmless? Analysis of histopathologic features according to tumors 4 cm or less in diameter. J Urol 2006, 176:896-899. An elegant study evaluating the histopathologic features of small RCC that may predict aggressive malignant potential.
13. Bretheau D LE, Eghazarian C, Grisoni V, Coulange C: Prognostic significance of incidental renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 1995, 27:267-270.
14. Thompson IM, Peek M: Improvement in survival of patients with renal cell carcinoma - the role of the serendipitously detected tumor. J Urol 1988, 140:487-490.
15. Patard JJ, Rodriguez A, Rioux-Leclercq N, et al.: Prognostic significance of the mode of detection in renal tumours. BJU Int 2002, 90:358-363.
16. Tsui K-H, Shvarts O, Smith RB, et al.: Renal cell carcinoma: prognostic significance of incidentally detected tumors. J Urol 2000, 163:426-430.
17. Duchene DA, Lotan Y, Cadeddu JA, et al.: Histopathology of surgically managed renal tumors: analysis of a contemporary series. Urology 2003, 62:827-830.
18. Frank I, Blute ML, Cheville JC, et al.: Solid renal tumors: an analysis of pathological features related to tumor size. J Urol 2003, 170:2217-2220.
19. Schlomer B, Figenshau R, Yan Y, et al.: Pathological features of renal neoplasms classified by size and symptomatology. J Urol 2006, 176:1317-1320. Study examines the relationship between tumor size and pathologic findings, and relates the findings to the presence of symptoms.
20. Moinzadeh A, Gill IS, Finelli A, et al.: Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: 3-year follow-up. J Urol 2006, 175:459-462.
21. Robson CJ, Churchill BM, Anderson W: The results of radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 1969, 101:297-301.
22. Mejean A, Vogt B, Quazza JE, et al.: Mortality and morbidity after nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma using a transperitoneal anterior subcostal incision. Eur Urol 1999, 36:298-302.
23. Corman JM, Penson DF, Hur K, et al.: Comparison of complications after radical and partial nephrectomy: results from the National Veterans Administration Surgical Quality Improvement Program. BJU Int 2000, 86:782-789.
24. Gill IS, Schweizer D, Hobart MG, et al.: Retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: the Cleveland Clinic experience. J Urol 2000, 163:1665-1670.
25. Dunn MD, Portis AJ, Shalhav AL, et al.: Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy: A 9-year experience. J Urol 2000, 164:1153-1159.
26. Portis AJ, Yan Y, Landman J, et al.: Long-term follow-up after laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. J Urol 2002, 167:1257-1262.
27. Licht MR, Novick AC: Nephron sparing surgery for renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 1993, 149:1-7.
28. Fergany AF, Hafez KS, Novick AC: Long-term results of nephron sparing surgery for localized renal cell carcinoma: 10-year follow-up. J Urol 2000, 163:442-445.
29. Ramani AP, Desai MM, Steinberg AP, et al.: Complications of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in 200 cases. J Urol 2005, 173:42-47.
30. Weld KJ, Landman J: Comparison of cryoablation, radiofrequency ablation and high-intensity focused ultrasound for treating small renal tumours. BJU Int 2005, 96:1224-1229.
31. Gill IS, Remer EM, Hasan WA, et al.: Renal cryoablation: outcome at 3 years. J Urol 2005, 173:1903-1907.
32. Hegarty NJ, Gill IS, Desai MM, et al.: Probe-ablative nephron-sparing surgery: cryoablation versus radiofrequency ablation. Urology 2006, 68:7-13.
33. Kunkle D, Egleston B, Uzzo R: Excision, ablation, or surveillance of small renal masses: meta-analysis and contemporary literature review. Presented at the American Urological Association. Anaheim, CA; May 2007.
34. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2004: Available at http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2004/. Accessed August 2007.
35. Bosniak MA, Birnbaum BA, Krinsky GA, Waisman J: Small renal parenchymal neoplasms: further observations on growth. Radiology 1995, 197:589-597.
36. Oda T, Miyao N, Takahashi A, et al.: Growth rates of primary and metastatic lesions of renal cell carcinoma. Int J Urol 2001, 8:473-477.
37. Kato M, Suzuki T, Suzuki Y, et al.: Natural history of small renal cell carcinoma: evaluation of growth rate, histological grade, cell proliferation and apoptosis. J Urol 2004, 172:863-866.
38. Wehle MJ, Thiel DD, Petrou SP, et al.: Conservative management of incidental contrast-enhancing renal masses as safe alternative to invasive therapy. Urology 2004, 64:49-52.
39. Hollingsworth JM, Miller DC, Daignault S, Hollenbeck BK: Five-year survival after surgical treatment for kidney cancer. Cancer 2007, 109:1763-1768. A refreshing study questioning the practice of systematically treating SRMs in elderly patients who have a high rate of competing-cause mortality.
40. Volpe A, Panzarella T, Rendon RA, et al.: The natural history of incidentally detected small renal masses. Cancer 2004, 100:738-745.
41. Chawla SN, Crispen PL, Hanlon AL, et al.: The natural history of observed enhancing renal masses: meta-analysis and review of the world literature. J Urol 2006, 175:425-431. A comprehensive review and meta-analysis of literature on active surveillance of renal masses.
42. Kunkle DA, Crispen PL, Li T, Uzzo RG: Tumor size predicts synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma: implica tions for surveillance of small renal masses. J Urol 2007, 177:1692-1697. Authors define the relationship between tumor size and the metastatic potential of SRMs, implicating the role of active surveillance.
43. Mattar K, Azuero J, Basiuk J, et al.: The natural history of small renal masses: a prospective multi-centre Canadian trial. Presented at the American Urological Association. Anaheim, CA; June 2007.
44. Walther MM, Choyke PL, Glenn G, et al.: Renal cancer in families with hereditary renal cancer: prospective analysis of a tumor size threshold for renal parenchymal sparing surgery. J Urol 1999, 161:1475-1479.