Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Growth rates and outcomes of observed large renal masses.
Touma, Naji J; Hosier, Gregory W; Di Lena, Michael A; Leslie, Robert J; Ho, Louisa; Menard, Alexandre; Siemens, D Robert.
Afiliação
  • Touma NJ; Department of Urology, Queen's University Kingston, ON, Canada.
  • Hosier GW; Department of Urology, Queen's University Kingston, ON, Canada.
  • Di Lena MA; Department of Urology, Queen's University Kingston, ON, Canada.
  • Leslie RJ; Department of Urology, Queen's University Kingston, ON, Canada.
  • Ho L; Department of Urology, Queen's University Kingston, ON, Canada.
  • Menard A; Department of Radiology, Queen's University Kingston, ON, Canada.
  • Siemens DR; Department of Urology, Queen's University Kingston, ON, Canada.
Can Urol Assoc J ; 13(8): 276-281, 2019 08.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30526807
INTRODUCTION: The natural history of small renal masses has been well defined, leading to the recommendation of active surveillance in some patients with limited life expectancy. However, this information is less clear for large renal masses (LRM), leading to ambiguity for management in the older, comorbid patient. The objective of this study was to define the natural history, including the growth rate and metastatic risk, of LRM in order to better counsel patients regarding active surveillance. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of patients with solid renal masses >4 cm that had repeated imaging identified from an institutional imaging database. Patient comorbidities and outcomes were obtained through retrospective chart analysis. Outcomes assessed included tumour growth and metastatic rates, as well as cancer-specific (CSS) and overall survival (OS) usimg Kaplan-Meier methodology. RESULTS: We identified 69 patients between 2005 and 2016 who met the inclusion criteria. Mean age at study entry was 75.5 years; mean tumour maximal dimension at study entry was 5.6 cm. CSS was 83% and OS 63% for patients presenting without metastasis, with a mean followup of 57.5 months. The mean growth rate of those that developed metastasis during followup (n=15) was 0.98 cm/year (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-1.63) as compared to those that did not develop metastasis (n=46), with a growth rate of 0.67 cm/year (95% CI 0.34-1) (non-significant). Seven patients had evidence of metastasis at the baseline imaging of their LRM and had subsequent growth rate of 1.47 cm/year (95% CI 0.37-2.57) (non-significant) CONCLUSIONS: Compared to small renal masses, LRM are associated with higher metastasis rates and lower CSS and more rapid growth rates. Selection criteria for recommending observation of LRM in older, comorbid patients should be more conservative than for small renal masses.

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: Can Urol Assoc J Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: Can Urol Assoc J Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article