Mp44-13 Cytoreductive Partial Versus Radical Nephrectomy: Analysis of the National Cancer Database

You have accessJournal of UrologyKidney Cancer: Localized: Surgical Therapy III (MP44)1 May 2024MP44-13 CYTOREDUCTIVE PARTIAL VERSUS RADICAL NEPHRECTOMY: ANALYSIS OF THE NATIONAL CANCER DATABASE Luke Wang, Kit Yuen, Cesare Saitta, Margaret Meagher, Franklin Liu, Dhruv Puri, Yu-Wei Chen, Rana R. McKay, Juan Javier-Desloges, and Ithaar Derweesh Luke WangLuke Wang , Kit YuenKit Yuen , Cesare SaittaCesare Saitta , Margaret MeagherMargaret Meagher , Franklin LiuFranklin Liu , Dhruv PuriDhruv Puri , Yu-Wei ChenYu-Wei Chen , Rana R. McKayRana R. McKay , Juan Javier-DeslogesJuan Javier-Desloges , and Ithaar DerweeshIthaar Derweesh View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001009508.69111.d0.13AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Cytoreductive surgery, whether radical nephrectomy (CRN) or partial nephrectomy (CPN) have been utilized in management of select patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). With improved outcomes in mRCC and increased utilization of PN for larger and more complex masses in localized disease, we assessed outcomes of CPN and CRN with respect to primary tumor size. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Database from 2004-2019 for patients who underwent CPN or CRN for mRCC. We performed multivariable logistic regression to determine variables associated with CPN and multivariable Cox regression to evaluate variables associated with all-cause mortality (ACM). Kaplan Meier Analysis (KMA) evaluated overall survival (OS) in Charlson 0 patients who underwent CRN vs CPN in tumors ≤4 cm, >4 to ≤7 cm, and >7 cm. RESULTS: 20,232 patients were analyzed CRN 19,540 (96.6%)/CPN 692 (3.4%). Increased odds of receiving CPN was associated with papillary (OR=1.89, p4 to ≤7 cm (OR=0.32, p7 cm (OR=0.19, p7 cm (HR=1.13, p4 cm to ≤7 cm (29.1% vs 41.8%, p=0.001), but not >7 cm (24.5% vs 24.1%, p=0.480; Figure 1). CONCLUSIONS: In mRCC, CPN is more likely to be performed in patients with papillary histology and less likely in tumors >4 cm. While CPN was independently associated with improvement in ACM, when compared according to size, CPN did not provide benefit in tumors >7 cm. CPN may be considered as a primary option in patients with mRCC and tumor size <7 cm when safe and feasible. Download PPT Source of Funding: Stephen Weissman Kidney Cancer Research Fund © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e735 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Luke Wang More articles by this author Kit Yuen More articles by this author Cesare Saitta More articles by this author Margaret Meagher More articles by this author Franklin Liu More articles by this author Dhruv Puri More articles by this author Yu-Wei Chen More articles by this author Rana R. McKay More articles by this author Juan Javier-Desloges More articles by this author Ithaar Derweesh More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...