• Something wrong with this record ?

Cancer-specific Mortality After Cryoablation vs Heat-based Thermal Ablation in T1a Renal Cell Carcinoma

G. Sorce, B. Hoeh, L. Hohenhorst, A. Panunzio, S. Tappero, Z. Tian, A. Kokorovic, A. Larcher, U. Capitanio, D. Tilki, C. Terrone, FKH. Chun, A. Antonelli, F. Saad, SF. Shariat, F. Montorsi, A. Briganti, PI. Karakiewicz

. 2023 ; 209 (1) : 81-88. [pub] 20221128

Language English Country United States

Document type Journal Article

Persistent link   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc22032010

PURPOSE: Guidelines suggest less favorable cancer control outcomes for local tumor destruction in T1a renal cell carcinoma patients with tumor size 3.1-4 cm. We compared cancer-specific mortality between cryoablation vs heat-based thermal ablation in patients with tumor size 3.1-4 cm, as well as in patients with tumor size ≤3 cm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2004-2018), we identified patients with clinical T1a stage renal cell carcinoma treated with cryoablation or heat-based thermal ablation. After up to 2:1 ratio propensity score matching between patients treated with cryoablation vs heat-based thermal ablation, we addressed cancer-specific mortality relying on competing risks regression models, adjusted for other-cause mortality and other covariates (age, tumor size, tumor grade, and histological subtype). RESULTS: Of 1,468 assessable patients with tumor size 3.1-4 cm, 1,080 vs 388 were treated with cryoablation vs heat-based thermal ablation, respectively. After up to 2:1 propensity score matching that resulted in 757 cryoablations vs 388 heat-based thermal ablations, in multivariable competing risks regression models, heat-based thermal ablation was associated with higher cancer-specific mortality (HR:2.02, P < .001), relative to cryoablation. Of 4,468 assessable patients with tumor size ≤3 cm, 3,354 vs 1,114 were treated with cryoablation vs heat-based thermal ablation, respectively. After up to 2:1 propensity score matching that resulted in 2,217 cryoablations vs 1,114 heat-based thermal ablations, in multivariable competing risks regression models, heat-based thermal ablation was not associated with higher cancer-specific mortality (HR:1.13, P = .5) relative to cryoablation. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings corroborated that in cT1a patients with tumor size 3.1-4 cm, cancer-specific mortality is twofold higher after heat-based thermal ablation vs cryoablation. Conversely, in patients with tumor size ≤3 cm either ablation technique is equally valid. These findings should be considered at clinical decision making and informed consent.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc22032010
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20230131151124.0
007      
ta
008      
230120s2023 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1097/JU.0000000000002984 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)36440817
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Sorce, Gabriele $u Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada $1 https://orcid.org/0000000324362412
245    10
$a Cancer-specific Mortality After Cryoablation vs Heat-based Thermal Ablation in T1a Renal Cell Carcinoma / $c G. Sorce, B. Hoeh, L. Hohenhorst, A. Panunzio, S. Tappero, Z. Tian, A. Kokorovic, A. Larcher, U. Capitanio, D. Tilki, C. Terrone, FKH. Chun, A. Antonelli, F. Saad, SF. Shariat, F. Montorsi, A. Briganti, PI. Karakiewicz
520    9_
$a PURPOSE: Guidelines suggest less favorable cancer control outcomes for local tumor destruction in T1a renal cell carcinoma patients with tumor size 3.1-4 cm. We compared cancer-specific mortality between cryoablation vs heat-based thermal ablation in patients with tumor size 3.1-4 cm, as well as in patients with tumor size ≤3 cm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2004-2018), we identified patients with clinical T1a stage renal cell carcinoma treated with cryoablation or heat-based thermal ablation. After up to 2:1 ratio propensity score matching between patients treated with cryoablation vs heat-based thermal ablation, we addressed cancer-specific mortality relying on competing risks regression models, adjusted for other-cause mortality and other covariates (age, tumor size, tumor grade, and histological subtype). RESULTS: Of 1,468 assessable patients with tumor size 3.1-4 cm, 1,080 vs 388 were treated with cryoablation vs heat-based thermal ablation, respectively. After up to 2:1 propensity score matching that resulted in 757 cryoablations vs 388 heat-based thermal ablations, in multivariable competing risks regression models, heat-based thermal ablation was associated with higher cancer-specific mortality (HR:2.02, P < .001), relative to cryoablation. Of 4,468 assessable patients with tumor size ≤3 cm, 3,354 vs 1,114 were treated with cryoablation vs heat-based thermal ablation, respectively. After up to 2:1 propensity score matching that resulted in 2,217 cryoablations vs 1,114 heat-based thermal ablations, in multivariable competing risks regression models, heat-based thermal ablation was not associated with higher cancer-specific mortality (HR:1.13, P = .5) relative to cryoablation. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings corroborated that in cT1a patients with tumor size 3.1-4 cm, cancer-specific mortality is twofold higher after heat-based thermal ablation vs cryoablation. Conversely, in patients with tumor size ≤3 cm either ablation technique is equally valid. These findings should be considered at clinical decision making and informed consent.
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    12
$a karcinom z renálních buněk $x chirurgie $7 D002292
650    _2
$a vysoká teplota $7 D006358
650    12
$a nádory ledvin $x chirurgie $7 D007680
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Hoeh, Benedikt $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada $u Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
700    1_
$a Hohenhorst, Lukas $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada $u Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Panunzio, Andrea $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada $u Department of Urology, University of Verona, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata di Verona, Verona, Italy
700    1_
$a Tappero, Stefano $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada $u Department of Urology, IRCCS Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
700    1_
$a Tian, Zhe $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
700    1_
$a Kokorovic, Andrea $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
700    1_
$a Larcher, Alessandro $u Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
700    1_
$a Capitanio, Umberto $u Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
700    1_
$a Tilki, Derya $u Martini-Klinik Prostate Cancer Center, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany $u Department of Urology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany $u Department of Urology, Koc University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
700    1_
$a Terrone, Carlo $u Department of Urology, IRCCS Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy
700    1_
$a Chun, Felix K H $u Department of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
700    1_
$a Antonelli, Alessandro $u Department of Urology, University of Verona, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata di Verona, Verona, Italy
700    1_
$a Saad, Fred $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
700    1_
$a Shariat, Shahrokh F $u Departments of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York $u Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, Texas $u Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Praga, Czech Republic $u Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia $u Division of Urology, Hourani Center for Applied Scientific Research, Al-Ahliyya Amman University, Amman, Jordan $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
700    1_
$a Montorsi, Francesco $u Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
700    1_
$a Briganti, Alberto $u Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
700    1_
$a Karakiewicz, Pierre I $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, Division of Urology, University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, Québec, Canada
773    0_
$w MED00003040 $t The Journal of urology $x 1527-3792 $g Roč. 209, č. 1 (2023), s. 81-88
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36440817 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20230120 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20230131151119 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1891035 $s 1183345
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2023 $b 209 $c 1 $d 81-88 $e 20221128 $i 1527-3792 $m The Journal of urology $n J Urol $x MED00003040
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20230120
Back

Find record

Citation metrics

Archiving options