We analyzed the prognosis of patients affected by metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) with an intermediate or a poor prognosis using the International mRCC Database Consortium criteria and treated with first-line sunitinib. We found that within the intermediate class, as well as within the poor prognosis group, the expected survival will be significantly different according to the presence of 1 or 2 prognostic factors. Background: The International mRCC (metastatic renal cell carcinoma) Database Consortium (IMDC) is the standard classification for mRCC. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of a large cohort of patients with an intermediate or a poor prognosis treated with sunitinib using a different cutoff point for IMDC to improve the classification. Patients and Methods: Patients with an intermediate or a poor prognosis according to the IMDC criteria and treated with sunitinib were included in the present study. A new cutoff point was used to categorize the patients. The new score was validated in an independent cohort of patients. Results: A total of 457 patients were included in the present study. Significant differences in overall survival (OS) were highlighted regarding the number of prognostic factors. Three categories were identified according to the presence of 1 (ie, favorable-intermediate group), 2 (ie, real-intermediate group), and > 2 (ie, poor group) factors. The corresponding median OS periods were 32.9, 20.0, and 8.9 months, with significant differences among the groups. The validation cohort included 389 patients. The median OS period for the favorable-intermediate group, real-intermediate group, and poor group was 34.3, 19.4, and 9.0 months, respectively, with confirmed significant differences among the groups. Conclusion: Our analysis revealed significant differences among patients with an intermediate prognosis using the IMDC prognostic factors. Further investigations to optimize the use of available and upcoming therapies are required.
Is It Possible to Improve Prognostic Classification in Patients Affected by Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma With an Intermediate or Poor Prognosis? / Iacovelli, R.; De Giorgi, U.; Galli, L.; Zucali, P.; Nole, F.; Sabbatini, R.; Fraccon, A. P.; Basso, U.; Mosca, A.; Atzori, F.; Santini, D.; Facchini, G.; Fornarini, G.; Pasini, F.; Masini, C.; Massari, F.; Buti, S.; Sava, T.; Sacco, C.; Ricotta, R.; Sperduti, I.; Tortora, G.; Porta, C.. - In: CLINICAL GENITOURINARY CANCER. - ISSN 1558-7673. - 16:5(2018), pp. 355-359.e1. [10.1016/j.clgc.2018.04.007]
Is It Possible to Improve Prognostic Classification in Patients Affected by Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma With an Intermediate or Poor Prognosis?
Buti S.;
2018-01-01
Abstract
We analyzed the prognosis of patients affected by metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) with an intermediate or a poor prognosis using the International mRCC Database Consortium criteria and treated with first-line sunitinib. We found that within the intermediate class, as well as within the poor prognosis group, the expected survival will be significantly different according to the presence of 1 or 2 prognostic factors. Background: The International mRCC (metastatic renal cell carcinoma) Database Consortium (IMDC) is the standard classification for mRCC. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of a large cohort of patients with an intermediate or a poor prognosis treated with sunitinib using a different cutoff point for IMDC to improve the classification. Patients and Methods: Patients with an intermediate or a poor prognosis according to the IMDC criteria and treated with sunitinib were included in the present study. A new cutoff point was used to categorize the patients. The new score was validated in an independent cohort of patients. Results: A total of 457 patients were included in the present study. Significant differences in overall survival (OS) were highlighted regarding the number of prognostic factors. Three categories were identified according to the presence of 1 (ie, favorable-intermediate group), 2 (ie, real-intermediate group), and > 2 (ie, poor group) factors. The corresponding median OS periods were 32.9, 20.0, and 8.9 months, with significant differences among the groups. The validation cohort included 389 patients. The median OS period for the favorable-intermediate group, real-intermediate group, and poor group was 34.3, 19.4, and 9.0 months, respectively, with confirmed significant differences among the groups. Conclusion: Our analysis revealed significant differences among patients with an intermediate prognosis using the IMDC prognostic factors. Further investigations to optimize the use of available and upcoming therapies are required.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
