Analysis of additional prognostic factors in patients with renal cancer metastases to the liver
https://doi.org/10.37748/2686-9039-2025-6-1-5
EDN: qxdznf
Abstract
Purpose of the study. Was to identify additional prognostic factors in patients with renal cell cancer metastases to the liver influencing survival rates.
Patients and methods. In patients with renal cell cancer (RCC) metastases to the liver, a search for new prognostic factors affecting survival rates is needed. The retrospective analysis of data of 141 patients with liver metastases of RCC treated at the Moscow City Oncological Hospital No. 62 in Moscow and the City Clinical Oncological Dispensary (St. Petersburg) from 2006 to 2022 was carried out. Men prevailed (66.7 %), age 60–74 years in 51.1 %, low-differentiated tumors (56,0 %) and multiple metastases (83.7 %) were detected more often. The study investigated clinical and morphological prognostic factors influencing survival rates in patients with liver metastases of RCC. Statistical analysis was performed using Statistica 10.0 software packages (StatSoft, USA) by constructing Kaplan-Meier curves and survival tables, building a mathematical model of survival.
Results. The 3- and 5-year OS in patients with liver metastases of RCC (n = 141) was 42.4 % and 23.7 %, respectively, with a median OS of 22 months.
In a single-factor analysis in patients with renal cancer metastases to the liver, it was found that ECOG status (p < 0.001), histological subtype (p = 0.01) had a negative impact on survival rates, Fuhrman tumor differentiation (p < 0.001), type (p < 0.001) and number of metastases (p = 0.024), metastases to lymph nodes (p = 0.006), IMDC prognosis (p < 0.001), nephrectomy (p < 0.001) and metastasectomy (p = 0.0006).
In multivariate analysis, ECOG status [HR = 10.09 (95 % CI = 1.31–77], histological subtype [HR = 3,45 (95 % CI = 1.77–6.71], lymph node metastasis [HR = 1.93 (95 % CI = 1.21–3.07], hemoglobin level [HR = 2.44 (95 % CI=1.39–4.29], and undergoing nephrectomy [HR = 2.10 (95 % CI = 1.16–3.79] were additional predictors affecting OS rates in patients with liver metastases of RCC.
Conclusion. In our study, ECOG status, histological subtype, lymph node metastasis, hemoglobin level and nephrectomy were additional independent prognostic factors affecting AE rates in patients with RCC liver metastases. Further studies are needed to identify additional prognostic factors in patients with RCC liver metastases to improve the efficacy of personalized treatment.
About the Authors
D. V. Semenov
St. Petersburg State University; City Clinical Oncological Dispensary
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Dmitry V. Semenov – Cand. Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor of the Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine St. Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation; doctor of the Oncourology department, City Clinical Oncological Dispensary, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4335-8446, SPIN: 2342-6530, AuthorID: 202214, ResearcherID: KQU-5717-2024, Scopus Author ID: 58596081800
Competing Interests:
the authors declare that there are no obvious and potential conflicts of interest associated with the publication of this article
R. V. Orlova
St. Petersburg State University; City Clinical Oncological Dispensary
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Rashida V. Orlova – Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Head of the Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine St. Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation; Chief Specialist in Clinical Oncology, City Clinical Oncological Dispensary, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9368-5517, SPIN: 9932-6170, AuthorID: 401170
Competing Interests:
the authors declare that there are no obvious and potential conflicts of interest associated with the publication of this article
V. I. Shirokorad
Moscow City Oncological Hospital No. 62 of the Moscow City Health Department
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Valery I. Shirokorad – Dr. Sci. (Med.), Head of the Oncourological Department Moscow City Oncological Hospital No. 62 of the Moscow City Health Department, Moscow, Russian Federation
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4109-6451, AuthorID: 481900
Competing Interests:
the authors declare that there are no obvious and potential conflicts of interest associated with the publication of this article
S. V. Kostritsky
Moscow City Oncological Hospital No. 62 of the Moscow City Health Department
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Stanislav V. Kostritsky – MD, oncourologist, Moscow City Oncological Hospital No. 62 of the Moscow City Health Department, Moscow, Russian Federation
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4494-1489, SPIN: 1421-2469, AuthorID: 980451, ResearcherID: Y-6978-2018
Competing Interests:
the authors declare that there are no obvious and potential conflicts of interest associated with the publication of this article
References
1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortalityworldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: Cancer J Clin (2018) 68:394–424. doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492.
2. Capitanio U, Bensalah K, Bex A, Boorjian SA, Bray F, Coleman J, et al. Epidemiology of renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol (2019) 75:74–84. doi: 10.1016/ j.eururo.2018.08.036.
3. Pikoulis E, Margonis G, Antoniou E. Surgical management of renal cell cancer liver metastases. Scandinavian J Surg (2016) 105:263–8. doi: 10.1177/1457496916630644.
4. Capitanio U, Montorsi F. Renal cancer. Lancet (2016) 387:894–906. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00046-X.
5. Pecoraro A, Palumbo C, Knipper S, Mistretta FA, Rosiello G, Tian Z, et al. Synchronous metastasis rates in T1 renal cell carcinoma: A surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database–based study. Eur Urol Focus (2021) 7:818–26. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.02.011.
6. (Bianchi M, Sun M, Jeldres C, Shariat SF, Trinh QD, Briganti A, et al. Distribution of metastatic sites in renal cell carcinoma: a population-based analysis. Ann Oncology: Off J Eur Soc Med Oncol (2012) 23:973–80. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdr362.
7. Alves A, Adam R, Majno P, Delvart V, Azoulay D, Castaing D, et al. Hepatic resection for metastatic renal tumors: is it worthwhile? Ann Surg Oncol (2003) 10:705–10. doi: 10.1245/ASO.2003.07.024.
8. Hatzaras I, Gleisner AL, Pulitano C, Sandroussi C, Hirose K, Hyder O, et al. A multi-institution analysis of outcomes of liver-directed surgery for metastatic renal cell cancer. HPB (2012) 14:532–8. doi:10.1111/j.1477-2574.2012.00495.x.
9. Kim SH, Kim JK, Park EY, Joo J, Lee KH, Seo HK, et al. Liver metastasis and heng risk are prognostic factors in patients with non-nephrectomized synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with systemic therapy. PloS One (2019) 14:e0211105. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211105.
10. Bowman IA, Pedrosa I, Kapur P, Brugarolas J. Renal cell carcinoma with pulmonary metastasis and metachronous non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Genitourinary Cancer (2017) 15:e675–80. doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2017.01.026).
11. He Y, Luo Y, Huang L, Zhang D, Wang X, Ji J, et al. New frontiers against sorafenib resistance in renal cell carcinoma: From molecular mechanisms to predictive biomarkers. Pharmacol Res (2021) 170:105732. doi: 10.1016/j.phrs.2021.105732.
12. Rousseau B, Kempf E, Desamericq G, Boissier E, Chaubet-Houdu M, Joly C, et al. First-line antiangiogenics for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Crit Rev Oncol/Hematol (2016) 107:44–53. doi: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2016.08.012.
13. Kim SH, Park WS, Park B, Pak S, Chung J. A retrospective analysis of the impact of metastasectomy on prognostic survival according to metastatic organs in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Front Oncol (2019) 9:413. doi:10.3389/fonc.2019.00413.
14. Choueiri TK, Motzer RJ. Systemic therapy for metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. New Engl J Med (2017) 376:354–66. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1601333.
15. Motzer RJ, Tannir NM, McDermott DF, Arén Frontera O, Melichar B, Choueiri TK, et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in advanced renalcell carcinoma. New Engl J Med (2018) 378:1277–90. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1712126.
16. Hahn AW, Klaassen Z, Agarwal N, Haaland B, Esther J, Ye XY, et al. Firstline treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol (2019) 2:708–15. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2019.09.002.
17. Bruns F, Christiansen H. Is there always a need for invasive treatment of limited liver metastases in renal cell cancer or other solid tumors? World J Urol (2015) 33:443–4. doi: 10.1007/s00345-014-1331-4).
18. Verbiest A, Renders I, Caruso S, Couchy G, Job S, Laenen A, et al. Clear-cell renal cell carcinoma: molecular characterization of IMDC risk groups and sarcomatoid tumors. Clin Genitourinary Cancer (2019) 17:e981–94. doi: 10.1016/ j.clgc.2019.05.009.
19. Albiges L, Powles T, Staehler M, Bensalah K, Giles RH, Hora M, et al. Updated European association of urology guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: immune checkpoint inhibition is the new backbone in first-line treatment of metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol (2019) 76:151–6. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.05.022.
Review
For citations:
Semenov D.V., Orlova R.V., Shirokorad V.I., Kostritsky S.V. Analysis of additional prognostic factors in patients with renal cancer metastases to the liver. South Russian Journal of Cancer. 2025;6(1):41-49. https://doi.org/10.37748/2686-9039-2025-6-1-5. EDN: qxdznf
Views:
123
Email this article 