Kidney CancerValidation of the 2009 TNM Version in a Large Multi-Institutional Cohort of Patients Treated for Renal Cell Carcinoma: Are Further Improvements Needed?
Introduction
TNM classification is the globally accepted method of describing the anatomic extent of cancer. In kidney tumors, the outcome stratification proposed in the sixth edition of the TNM, published in 2002, was validated in several studies [1], [2], [3]. However, some studies suggested that patients with localized cancers could be better dichotomized around a tumor diameter of 5–6 cm [4], [5], [6], [7] and that T3a and pT3b stages were heterogeneous [8]. Consequently, several proposals for further updates were implemented, both for localized [9], [10] and locally advanced [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17] disease.
Very recently, the Union Internationale Contre le Cancer (UICC) and the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) released the seventh edition of the staging system, which took effect on January 1, 2010. In this latest update, some modifications were made to the staging system for kidney tumors. In comparison with the sixth edition of TNM, T2 cancers were subclassified into two subgroups based on a tumor size cut-off point of 10 cm (T2a ≤10 cm vs T2b >10 cm). Moreover, tumors with renal vein involvement or perinephric fat involvement were classified as T3a, whereas those with adrenal involvement were classified as T4 cancers. All the other categories were unchanged [18].
The purpose of the present study was to validate the recently released seventh edition of the TNM staging system for primary tumor classification in kidney tumors in a multicenter series of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated with radical nephrectomy (RN) or partial nephrectomy (PN) in 16 academic centers in Italy.
Section snippets
Patients and methods
The Surveillance and Treatment Update Renal Neoplasms (SATURN) project was promoted by LUNA, the Leading Urological No-Profit Foundation for Advanced Research of the Società Italiana di Urologia (ie, the Italian Society of Urology). A total of 16 academic centers in Italy provided data. The database comprised 5893 patients who underwent RN or PN between 1995 and 2007 because of a suspicion of kidney cancer. The patients with benign histology (n = 430), those lacking histologic subtypes of the
Results
Table 1 summarizes the clinical and pathologic features of the 5339 analyzed patients. Based on the novel TNM staging system, 1897 of the patients (35.5%) were classified as pT1a, 1453 (27%) as pT1b, 437 (8%) as pT2a, 153 (3%) as pT2b, 1059 (20%) as pT3a, 117 (2%) as pT3b, 26 (0.5%) as pT3c, and 197 (4%) as pT4.
At a median follow-up of 42 mo (IQR: 24–75 mo), 3949 patients (74%) were alive and disease free, 786 (15%) had died of disease, and 335 (6%) had died of other causes. Median follow-up of
Discussion
We have reported what is to our knowledge the first attempt to validate the recently released seventh edition of the TNM staging system for RCC. In the present series, the novel classification of the primary tumor was a powerful independent predictor of CSS. However, some of the substages identified by the classification had overlapping prognoses (pT2b and pT3a; pT3c and pT4 RCC), whereas both pT3a and pT3b stages included patients with heterogeneous outcomes. Lastly, in multivariable analysis,
Conclusions
In the present series, the recently released seventh edition of the primary tumor staging system for RCC was a powerful independent predictor of CSS. However, some of the substages identified by the classification had overlapping prognoses, whereas other substages included patients with heterogeneous outcomes. Although in the past few years several reports have highlighted the need to change the TNM classification both for localized and locally advanced stages, only a few modifications have
References (24)
- et al.
Independent validation of the 2002 American Joint Committee on cancer primary tumor classification for renal cell carcinoma using a large, single institution cohort
J Urol
(2005) - et al.
Prognostic stratification of localized renal cell carcinoma by tumor size
J Urol
(2008) - et al.
Prognostic features of pathologic stage T1 renal cell carcinoma after radical nephrectomy
Urology
(2002) - et al.
The impact of a 4 cm. cutoff point for stratification of T1N0M0 renal cell carcinoma after radical nephrectomy
J Urol
(2001) - et al.
TNM staging system for renal-cell carcinoma: current status and future perspectives
Lancet Oncol
(2007) - et al.
pT2 classification for renal cell carcinoma. Can its accuracy be improved?
J Urol
(2005) - et al.
Cancer specific survival for patients with pT3 renal cell carcinoma—an the 2002 primary tumor classification be improved?
J Urol
(2005) - et al.
Proposal for reclassification of the TNM staging system in patients with locally advanced (pT3–4) renal cell carcinoma according to the cancer-related outcome
Eur Urol
(2007) - et al.
A new staging system for locally advanced (pT3–4) renal cell carcinoma: a multicenter European study including 2,000 patients
J Urol
(2007) - et al.
Reappraisal of T3N0/NxM0 renal cell carcinoma: significance of extent of fat invasion, renal vein invasion, and adrenal invasion
Hum Pathol
(2008)
Multi-institutional validation of a symptom based classification for renal cell carcinoma
J Urol
Renal cell carcinoma guideline
Eur Urol
Cited by (191)
Prognostic significance of pT3a staging subclassifications in renal cell carcinoma: Not all pT3a are equal
2024, Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original InvestigationsTGMIL: A hybrid multi-instance learning model based on the Transformer and the Graph Attention Network for whole-slide images classification of renal cell carcinoma
2023, Computer Methods and Programs in BiomedicineTumor Stage and Substage Predict Cancer-specific Mortality After Nephrectomy for Nonmetastatic Renal Cancer: Histological Subtype-specific Validation
2022, European Urology FocusCitation Excerpt :Stratification of surgically treated nmRCC by T stage and substage is the most important prognostic tool for patient counseling. To date, only two historical and institutional-based studies tested its ability to predict CSM [2,3]. However, neither study stratified RCC according to histological subtype.
- 1
See appendix.