Oncological control associated with surgical resection of isolated retroperitoneal lymph node recurrence of renal cell carcinoma
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcome of patients after surgical resection of isolated retroperitoneal lymph node (RPLN) recurrence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) using a multicentre international cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 50 patients were identified who underwent resection of isolated RPLN recurrence of RCC at four institutions after nephrectomy for pTany Nany M0 disease. Progression-free (PFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess the association of clinicopathological characteristics with disease progression. RESULTS: The median (interquartile range, IQR) age at resection was 57.0 (50.0-62.5) years. The median (IQR) time to RPLN recurrence after nephrectomy was 12.6 (6.9-39.5) months, with no significant difference in median time to RPLN recurrence between patients with N+ disease at nephrectomy (10.7 [6.5-24.6] months) and those with Nx/pN0 disease at nephrectomy (13.7 [8.7-44.2] months) (P = 0.66). The median (IQR) size of the RPLN recurrence before resection was 2.6 (1.9-5) cm. The most common site for RPLN recurrence was within the interaortocaval region (34%). The median (IQR) follow-up after RPLN resection for patients alive at last follow-up was 28.0 (13.7-51.2) months. During follow-up, 26 patients developed RCC recurrence, at a median (IQR) of 9.9 (4.0-18.5) months after RPLN resection. Of those who developed a secondary recurrence, disease was again isolated to the retroperitoneum in seven patients. In all, 11 patients subsequently died, including 10 who died from disease. The median PFS after RPLN resection was 19.5 months, with a 3- and 5-year PFS of 40.5% and 35.4%, respectively. We also found that RPLN recurrence at ≤12 months after nephrectomy was associated with a significantly inferior median PFS (12.3 months) compared with RPLN recurrence at >12 months after nephrectomy (47.6 months; P = 0.003). Moreover, on multivariate analysis, a shorter time to recurrence remained associated with a significantly increased risk for subsequent disease progression (hazard ratio 3.51; P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Surgical resection of isolated RPLN recurrence from RCC may result in durable cancer control in appropriately selected patients. Recurrence at ≤12 months after nephrectomy was associated with a significantly increased risk of progression after resection, underscoring the importance of this variable for risk stratification. Thus, we recommend that, in the setting of isolated RPLN recurrence of RCC (in patients without precluding comorbidities), careful consideration with the patients and medical oncology colleagues be undertaken about the relative and individualised benefits of surgical resection, systemic therapy, and surveillance.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».