[Cutaneous metastases of renal cell carcinoma]. / Metastasis cutánea de carcinoma de células renales.

Renal cell carcinoma has an unknown evolution. We report a case of a man with a skin metastases from renal cell carcinoma and an unfortunate result, five years after its radical surgical treatment. We review the literature and emphasize the need of a long and exhaustive surveillance in these patients.

[Survival analysis for localized renal cell carcinoma. Prognostic value of 1997 TNM classification]. / Análisis de supervivencia de los carcinomas de células renales organo-confinados. Valor pronóstico de la clasificación TNM 1997.

BACKGROUND: The 5th edition of TNM classification for renal cell carcinoma changed the cut-off point of the tumor size for localized tumors, achieving a better distribution of patients with similar survival. Nevertheless, because of the variable evolution of renal cell carcinoma, the prognostic significance of tumor size is questioned as a staging criterion in organ-confined renal cell carcinoma. We analyse renal cell carcinoma specific survival and the prognostic significance of tumor size in I and II stage. METHODS: We made a retrospective study with 158 renal cell carcinoma surgically treated in our hospital along 12 years. It was created a data base with clinical variables from patient and tumor and analyzed pathological staging, nuclear grade and specific survival, overall stage I and II. RESULTS: 27 renal cell carcinoma were pT1 (17.08%), 52 pT2 (32.91%), 45 pT, (28.45%), 10 pT3B (6.32%), y 24 pT4 (15.18%). The specific survival at 5 years for pT1-pT2, I-II stage, was 100% and 94% respectively, and no statistic significant differences were found between stage I and II (log-rank test 0.53, p>0.05). The specific survival at 5 years for pT3a, pT3B, y pT4 was 76.5%, 66.6% y 38.4%. There was a significant difference in survival in accordance with the tumor location, intrarenal (T1 y T2) versus extrarenal (T3A, T3B, T4) (log-rank test 9.06, p< 0.05). According to nuclear grade we don't find significant differences for pT1 y pT2 (Fisher test, p=1). Regarding the relation between pT stage and nuclear grade of the tumor we obtained a chi-square inear tendency of 38.19, p<0.001. CONCLUSION: The differences in the evolution of the organ-confined renal cell carcinoma with respect to the tumor size may be due to other molecular and biological variables, probably associated with stage, not controlled in essays. The TNM classification for organ-confined renal cell carcinoma based in tumor size seems artificial. New revisions of the classification system are necessary to identify which organ-confined carcinoma will have unfavourable evolution and to include them in a different category.

Metástasis cutánea de carcinoma de células renales / Cutaneous metastases of renal cell carcinoma

El carcinoma de células renales se caracteriza por su evolución impredecible. Presentamos un caso clínico de aparición de metástasis cutánea de carcinoma renal de células claras con pronóstico ominoso, tras cinco años de tratamiento quirúrgico curativo del primario renal. Revisamos la literatura e incidimos en la necesidad de un seguimiento prolongado y exhaustivo en estos pacientes

Renal cell carcinoma has an unknown evolution. We report a case of a man with a skin metastases from renal cell carcinoma and an unfortunate result, five years after its radical surgical treatment. We review the literature and emphasize the need of a long and exhaustive surveillance in these patients

Análisis de supervivencia de los carcinomas de células renales órgano-confinados. Valor pronóstico de la clasificación TNM 1997 / Survival analysis for localized renal cell carcinoma. Prognostic value of 1997 TNM classification

Introducción: En la 5ª edición de la clasificación TNM de 1997 para tumores renales se modificó el punto de corte del tamaño del tumor primario para los estadios I y II, permitiendo una mejor agrupación de pacientes con distinta supervivencia. Sin embargo, dada la variable evolución del carcinoma de células renales determinada por su agresividad biológica, se cuestiona la utilidad del tamaño tumoral como elemento pronóstico y de estadiaje. Se realiza un estudio de supervivencia del carcinoma de células renales para valorar si la nueva clasificación TNM para el estadio I y II es la que mejor predice la supervivencia basándose en el tamaño del tumor. Material y Método: Se ha realizado un estudio retrospectivo de 158 carcinomas de células renales intervenidos en nuestro hospital en un periodo de 12 años. Se ha creado una base de datos con variables clínicas debidas al paciente y al tumor, y se ha valorado estadio patológico, grado nuclear y supervivencia causa específica, centrándonos en los estadios I y II. Resultados: Según la categoría pT obtuvimos 27 pT1 (17,08%), 52 pT2 (32,91%), 45 pT3A (28,45%), 10 pT3B (6,32%), y 24 pT4 (15,18%). La supervivencia tumor-específica a los 5 años para pT1-pT2, estadio I-II, es de 100% y 94% respectivamente, sin encontrar diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre los estadios I y II (log-rank test 0,53, p no significativa). La supervivencia tumor-específica a los 5 años para la categoría pT3A, pT3B, y pT4 es de 76,5%, 66,6% y 38,4%. Encontrando una diferencia en la supervivencia estadísticamente significativa según la localización del tumor primario intrarrenal (T1 y T2) y la extrarrenal (T3A, T3B, T4) (log-rank test 9,06, p < 0.05). Para pT1 y pT2 no se encuentran diferencias estadísticamente significativas según el grado nuclear (test exacto de Fisher, p=1). Comparando la relación entre estadio pT y grado nuclear del tumor primario obtenemos un valor para X2 de tendencia lineal de 38,19, p<0.001. Conclusiones: Las diferencias en la evolución del carcinoma de células renales órgano-confinado según el tamaño tumoral pueden ser debidas a la existencia de otras variables biológicas y moleculares, posiblemente asociadas al estadio, que no se controlan en los estudios. La clasificación TNM en los carcinomas de células renales órgano-confinados basándose en el tamaño del tumor nos parece artificiosa. Son necesarias nuevas revisiones del sistema de clasificación para identificar qué grupo de pacientes con carcinoma de células renales órgano-confinado va a presentar evolución desfavorable e incluirlos en una categoría distinta

Background: the 5th edition of TNM classification for renal cell carcinoma changed the cut-off point of the tumor size for localized tumors, achieving a better distribution of patients with similar survival. Nevertheless, because of the variable evolution of renal cell carcinoma, the prognostic significance of tumor size is questioned as a staging criterion in organ-confined renal cell carinoma. We analyse renal cell carcinoma specific survival and the prognostic significance of tumor size in I and II stage. Methods: We made a retrospective study with 158 renal cell carcinoma surgically treated in our hospital along 12 years. It was created a data base with clinical variables from patient and tumor and analyzed pathological staging, nuclear grade and specific survival, overall stage I and II. Results: 27 renal cell carcinoma were pT1 (17.08%), 52 pT2 (32.91%), 45 pT3A (28.45%), 10 pT3B (6.32%), y 24 pT4 (15.18%). The specific survival at 5 years for pT1-pT2, I-II stage, was 100% and 94% respectively, and no statistic significant differences were found between stage I and II (log-rank test 0.53, p>0.05). The specific survival at 5 years for pT3A, pT3B, y pT4 was 76.5%, 66.6% y 38.4%. There was a significant difference in survival in accordance with the tumor location, intrarenal (T1 y T2) versus extrarenal (T3A, T3B, T4) (log-rank test 9.06, p< 0.05). According to nuclear grade we don’t find significant differences for pT1 y pT2 (Fisher test, p=1). Regarding the relation between pT stage and nuclear grade of the tumor we obtained a X2 inear tendency of 38.19, p<0.001. Conclusion: The differences in the evolution of the organ-confined renal cell carcinoma with respect to the tumor size may be due to other molecular and biological variables, probably associated with stage. not controlled in essays. The TNM classification for organ-confined renal cell carcinoma based in tumor size seems artificial. New revisions of the classification system are necessary to identify which organ-confined carcinoma will have unfavourable evolution and to include them in a different category