• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Predictive value of De Ritis ratio in metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors

F. Janisch, T. Klotzbücher, P. Marks, C. Kienapfel, CP. Meyer, H. Yu, C. Fühner, T. Hillemacher, K. Mori, H. Mostafei, SF. Shariat, M. Fisch, R. Dahlem, M. Rink

. 2021 ; 39 (8) : 2977-2985. [pub] 20210301

Jazyk angličtina Země Německo

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc22012345
E-zdroje Online Plný text

NLK ProQuest Central od 1997-02-01 do Před 1 rokem
Medline Complete (EBSCOhost) od 2000-02-01 do Před 1 rokem
Health & Medicine (ProQuest) od 1997-02-01 do Před 1 rokem

Odkazy

PubMed 33649869
DOI 10.1007/s00345-021-03628-2
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje

BACKGROUND: Predictive markers can help tailor treatment to the individual in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). De Ritis ratio (DRR) is associated with oncologic outcomes in various solid tumors. OBJECTIVE: To assess the value of DRR in prognosticating survival in mRCC patients treated with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKI). METHODS: Overall, 220 mRCC patients treated with TKI first-line therapy were analyzed. An optimal cut-off point for DRR was determined with Youden's J. We used multiple strata for DRR, performed descriptive, Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox-regression analyses to assess associations of DRR with progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Patients above the optimal cut-off point for DRR of ≥ 1.58 had fewer liver metastases (p = 0.01). There was no difference in PFS (p > 0.05) between DRR groups. DRR above the median of 1.08 (HR 1.42; p = 0.03), DRR ≥ 1.1(HR 1.44; p = 0.02), ≥ 1.8 (HR 1.56; p = 0.03), ≥ 1.9 (HR 1.59; p = 0.02) and ≥ 2.0 (HR 1.63; p = 0.047) were associated with worse OS. These associations did not remain after multivariable adjustment. In the intermediate MSKCC group, DRR was associated with inferior OS at cut-offs ≥ 1.0 (HR 1.78; p = 0.02), ≥ 1.1 (HR 1.81; p = 0.01) and above median (HR 1.88; p = 0.007) in multivariable analyses. In patients with clear-cell histology, DRR above median (HR 1.54; p = 0.029) and DRR ≥ 1.1 (HR 1.53; p = 0.029) were associated with OS in multivariable analyses. CONCLUSION: There was no independent association between DRR and survival of mRCC patients treated with TKI in the entire cohort. However, OS of patients with intermediate risk and clear-cell histology were affected by DRR. DRR could be used for tailored decision-making in these subgroups.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc22012345
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20220506130216.0
007      
ta
008      
220425s2021 gw f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1007/s00345-021-03628-2 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)33649869
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a gw
100    1_
$a Janisch, Florian $u Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany $u Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $1 https://orcid.org/0000000305170482
245    10
$a Predictive value of De Ritis ratio in metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors / $c F. Janisch, T. Klotzbücher, P. Marks, C. Kienapfel, CP. Meyer, H. Yu, C. Fühner, T. Hillemacher, K. Mori, H. Mostafei, SF. Shariat, M. Fisch, R. Dahlem, M. Rink
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: Predictive markers can help tailor treatment to the individual in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). De Ritis ratio (DRR) is associated with oncologic outcomes in various solid tumors. OBJECTIVE: To assess the value of DRR in prognosticating survival in mRCC patients treated with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKI). METHODS: Overall, 220 mRCC patients treated with TKI first-line therapy were analyzed. An optimal cut-off point for DRR was determined with Youden's J. We used multiple strata for DRR, performed descriptive, Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox-regression analyses to assess associations of DRR with progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Patients above the optimal cut-off point for DRR of ≥ 1.58 had fewer liver metastases (p = 0.01). There was no difference in PFS (p > 0.05) between DRR groups. DRR above the median of 1.08 (HR 1.42; p = 0.03), DRR ≥ 1.1(HR 1.44; p = 0.02), ≥ 1.8 (HR 1.56; p = 0.03), ≥ 1.9 (HR 1.59; p = 0.02) and ≥ 2.0 (HR 1.63; p = 0.047) were associated with worse OS. These associations did not remain after multivariable adjustment. In the intermediate MSKCC group, DRR was associated with inferior OS at cut-offs ≥ 1.0 (HR 1.78; p = 0.02), ≥ 1.1 (HR 1.81; p = 0.01) and above median (HR 1.88; p = 0.007) in multivariable analyses. In patients with clear-cell histology, DRR above median (HR 1.54; p = 0.029) and DRR ≥ 1.1 (HR 1.53; p = 0.029) were associated with OS in multivariable analyses. CONCLUSION: There was no independent association between DRR and survival of mRCC patients treated with TKI in the entire cohort. However, OS of patients with intermediate risk and clear-cell histology were affected by DRR. DRR could be used for tailored decision-making in these subgroups.
650    _2
$a alanintransaminasa $x analýza $x krev $7 D000410
650    _2
$a aspartátaminotransferasy $x analýza $x krev $7 D001219
650    12
$a karcinom z renálních buněk $x krev $x farmakoterapie $x patologie $x chirurgie $7 D002292
650    _2
$a cytoredukční chirurgie $x metody $7 D065426
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    12
$a indazoly $x aplikace a dávkování $x škodlivé účinky $7 D007191
650    _2
$a Karnofského skóre $7 D017567
650    12
$a nádory ledvin $x krev $x farmakoterapie $x patologie $x chirurgie $7 D007680
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a stupeň nádoru $7 D060787
650    _2
$a staging nádorů $7 D009367
650    _2
$a nefrektomie $x metody $7 D009392
650    _2
$a prediktivní hodnota testů $7 D011237
650    _2
$a prognóza $7 D011379
650    _2
$a inhibitory proteinkinas $x aplikace a dávkování $x škodlivé účinky $7 D047428
650    12
$a pyrimidiny $x aplikace a dávkování $x škodlivé účinky $7 D011743
650    _2
$a sorafenib $x aplikace a dávkování $x škodlivé účinky $7 D000077157
650    12
$a sulfonamidy $x aplikace a dávkování $x škodlivé účinky $7 D013449
650    12
$a sunitinib $x aplikace a dávkování $x škodlivé účinky $7 D000077210
650    _2
$a analýza přežití $7 D016019
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Klotzbücher, Thomas $u Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Marks, Phillip $u Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Kienapfel, Christina $u Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Meyer, Christian P $u Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Yu, Hang $u Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Fühner, Constantin $u Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Hillemacher, Tobias $u Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Mori, Keiichiro $u Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
700    1_
$a Mostafei, Hadi $u Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
700    1_
$a Shariat, Shahrokh F $u Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria $u Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia $u Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical School, New York, NY, USA $u Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA $u Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria $u Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Fisch, Margit $u Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Dahlem, Roland $u Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Rink, Michael $u Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. m.rink@uke.de
773    0_
$w MED00004739 $t World journal of urology $x 1433-8726 $g Roč. 39, č. 8 (2021), s. 2977-2985
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33649869 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20220425 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20220506130208 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1789789 $s 1163546
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2021 $b 39 $c 8 $d 2977-2985 $e 20210301 $i 1433-8726 $m World journal of urology $n World J Urol $x MED00004739
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20220425
Zpět

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace