• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Oncological Outcomes of Active Surveillance versus Surgery or Ablation for Patients with Small Renal Masses: A Systematic Review and Quantitative Analysis

I. Tsuboi, P. Rajwa, R. Campi, M. Miszczyk, T. Fazekas, A. Matsukawa, M. Kardoust Parizi, RJ. Schulz, S. Mancon, A. Cadenar, E. Laukhtina, T. Kawada, S. Katayama, T. Iwata, K. Bekku, K. Wada, PI. Karakiewicz, M. Remzi, M. Araki, SF. Shariat

. 2025 ; 8 (2) : 544-553. [pub] 20241024

Jazyk angličtina Země Nizozemsko

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, systematický přehled, srovnávací studie, přehledy

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc25009394

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: While active surveillance (AS) is an alternative to surgical interventions in patients with small renal masses (SRMs), evidence regarding its oncological efficacy is still debated. We aimed to evaluate oncological outcomes for patients with SRMs who underwent AS in comparison to surgical interventions. METHODS: In April 2024, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were queried for comparative studies evaluating AS in patients with SRMs (PROSPERO: CRD42024530299). The primary outcomes were overall (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). A random-effects model was used for quantitative analysis. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: We identified eight eligible studies (three prospective, four retrospective, and one study based on Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results [SEER] data) involving 4947 patients. Pooling of data with the SEER data set revealed significantly higher OS rates for patients receiving surgical interventions (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73; p = 0.007), especially partial nephrectomy (PN; HR 0.62; p < 0.001). However, in a sensitivity analysis excluding the SEER data set there was no significant difference in OS between AS and surgical interventions overall (HR 0.84; p = 0.3), but the PN subgroup had longer OS than the AS group (HR 0.6; p = 0.002). Only the study based on the SEER data set showed a significant difference in CSS. The main limitations include selection bias in retrospective studies, and classification of interventions in the SEER database study. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Patients treated with AS had similar OS to those who underwent surgery or ablation, although caution is needed in interpreting the data owing to the potential for selection bias and variability in AS protocols. Our review reinforces the need for personalized shared decision-making to identify patients with SRMs who are most likely to benefit from AS. PATIENT SUMMARY: For well-selected patients with a small kidney mass suspicious for cancer, active surveillance seems to be a safe alternative to surgery, with similar overall survival. However, the evidence is still limited and more studies are needed to help in identifying the best candidates for active surveillance.

2nd Department of Urology Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education Warsaw Poland

Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit University of Montreal Health Centre Montreal Canada

Collegium Medicum Faculty of Medicine WSB University Dąbrowa Górnicza Poland

Department of Biomedical Sciences Humanitas University Pieve Emanuele Italy

Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine University of Florence Florence Italy

Department of Urology 2nd Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague Czechia

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria

Department of Urology Jikei University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan

Department of Urology Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences Okayama Japan

Department of Urology Semmelweis University Budapest Hungary

Department of Urology Shariati Hospital Tehran University of Medical Sciences Tehran Iran

Department of Urology Shimane University Faculty of Medicine Shimane Japan

Department of Urology University Medical Center Hamburg Eppendorf Hamburg Germany

Department of Urology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Dallas TX USA

Department of Urology Weill Cornell Medical College New York NY USA

Division of Urology Department of Special Surgery The University of Jordan Amman Jordan

European Association of Urology Young Academic Urologists Renal Cancer Working Group Arnhem The Netherlands

Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health Sechenov University Moscow Russia

Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology Vienna Austria

Research Center for Evidence Medicine Urology Department Tabriz University of Medical Sciences Tabriz Iran

Unit of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Urology and Andrology Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine Careggi Hospital University of Florence Florence Italy

Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation Careggi Hospital University of Florence Florence Italy

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc25009394
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20250429135513.0
007      
ta
008      
250415s2025 ne f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1016/j.euo.2024.10.008 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)39455341
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a ne
100    1_
$a Tsuboi, Ichiro $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Shimane University Faculty of Medicine, Shimane, Japan; Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
245    10
$a Oncological Outcomes of Active Surveillance versus Surgery or Ablation for Patients with Small Renal Masses: A Systematic Review and Quantitative Analysis / $c I. Tsuboi, P. Rajwa, R. Campi, M. Miszczyk, T. Fazekas, A. Matsukawa, M. Kardoust Parizi, RJ. Schulz, S. Mancon, A. Cadenar, E. Laukhtina, T. Kawada, S. Katayama, T. Iwata, K. Bekku, K. Wada, PI. Karakiewicz, M. Remzi, M. Araki, SF. Shariat
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: While active surveillance (AS) is an alternative to surgical interventions in patients with small renal masses (SRMs), evidence regarding its oncological efficacy is still debated. We aimed to evaluate oncological outcomes for patients with SRMs who underwent AS in comparison to surgical interventions. METHODS: In April 2024, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were queried for comparative studies evaluating AS in patients with SRMs (PROSPERO: CRD42024530299). The primary outcomes were overall (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). A random-effects model was used for quantitative analysis. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: We identified eight eligible studies (three prospective, four retrospective, and one study based on Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results [SEER] data) involving 4947 patients. Pooling of data with the SEER data set revealed significantly higher OS rates for patients receiving surgical interventions (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73; p = 0.007), especially partial nephrectomy (PN; HR 0.62; p < 0.001). However, in a sensitivity analysis excluding the SEER data set there was no significant difference in OS between AS and surgical interventions overall (HR 0.84; p = 0.3), but the PN subgroup had longer OS than the AS group (HR 0.6; p = 0.002). Only the study based on the SEER data set showed a significant difference in CSS. The main limitations include selection bias in retrospective studies, and classification of interventions in the SEER database study. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Patients treated with AS had similar OS to those who underwent surgery or ablation, although caution is needed in interpreting the data owing to the potential for selection bias and variability in AS protocols. Our review reinforces the need for personalized shared decision-making to identify patients with SRMs who are most likely to benefit from AS. PATIENT SUMMARY: For well-selected patients with a small kidney mass suspicious for cancer, active surveillance seems to be a safe alternative to surgery, with similar overall survival. However, the evidence is still limited and more studies are needed to help in identifying the best candidates for active surveillance.
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    12
$a nádory ledvin $x chirurgie $x mortalita $x patologie $7 D007680
650    12
$a pozorné vyčkávání $7 D057832
650    12
$a nefrektomie $x metody $7 D009392
650    _2
$a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
650    _2
$a ablace $x metody $7 D055011
650    _2
$a tumor burden $7 D047368
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a systematický přehled $7 D000078182
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
655    _2
$a přehledy $7 D016454
700    1_
$a Rajwa, Pawel $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Second Department of Urology, Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education, Warsaw, Poland
700    1_
$a Campi, Riccardo $u Unit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy; Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy; European Association of Urology Young Academic Urologists Renal Cancer Working Group, Arnhem, The Netherlands
700    1_
$a Miszczyk, Marcin $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Collegium Medicum Faculty of Medicine, WSB University, Dąbrowa Górnicza, Poland
700    1_
$a Fazekas, Tamás $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
700    1_
$a Matsukawa, Akihiro $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
700    1_
$a Kardoust Parizi, Mehdi $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Shariati Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
700    1_
$a Schulz, Robert J $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Mancon, Stefano $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy
700    1_
$a Cadenar, Anna $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Unit of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Urology and Andrology, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
700    1_
$a Laukhtina, Ekaterina $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia
700    1_
$a Kawada, Tatsushi $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
700    1_
$a Katayama, Satoshi $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
700    1_
$a Iwata, Takehiro $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
700    1_
$a Bekku, Kensuke $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
700    1_
$a Wada, Koichiro $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Shimane University Faculty of Medicine, Shimane, Japan
700    1_
$a Karakiewicz, Pierre I $u Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
700    1_
$a Remzi, Mesut $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
700    1_
$a Araki, Motoo $u Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan
700    1_
$a Shariat, Shahrokh F $u Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA; Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czechia; Division of Urology, Department of Special Surgery, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan; Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria; Department of Urology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary; Research Center for Evidence Medicine, Urology Department, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. Electronic address: shahrokh.shariat@meduniwien.ac.at
773    0_
$w MED00205913 $t European urology oncology $x 2588-9311 $g Roč. 8, č. 2 (2025), s. 544-553
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39455341 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20250415 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20250429135508 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2311023 $s 1246475
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2025 $b 8 $c 2 $d 544-553 $e 20241024 $i 2588-9311 $m European urology oncology $n Eur Urol Oncol $x MED00205913
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20250415

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...