Background The benefit of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) for overall survival (OS) is unclear in patients with synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in the era of targeted therapy. Objective To determine OS benefit of CN compared with no CN in mRCC patients treated with targeted therapies. Design, setting, and participants Retrospective data from patients with synchronous mRCC (n = 1658) from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) were used to compare 982 mRCC patients who had a CN with 676 mRCC patients who did not. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis OS was compared and hazard ratios (HRs) adjusted for IMDC poor prognostic criteria. Results and limitations Patients who had CN had better IMDC prognostic profiles versus those without (favorable, intermediate, or poor in 9%, 63%, and 28% vs 1%, 45%, and 54%, respectively). The median OS of patients with CN versus without CN was 20.6 versus 9.5 mo (p < 0.0001). When adjusted for IMDC criteria to correct for imbalances, the HR of death was 0.60 (95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.69; p < 0.0001). Patients estimated to survive <12 mo may receive marginal benefit from CN. Patients who have four or more of the IMDC prognostic criteria did not benefit from CN. Data were collected retrospectively. Conclusions CN is beneficial in synchronous mRCC patients treated with targeted therapy, even after adjusting for prognostic factors. Patients with estimated survival times <12 mo or four or more IMDC prognostic factors may not benefit from CN. This information may aid in patient selection as we await results from randomized controlled trials. Patient summary We looked at the survival outcomes of metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients who did or did not have the primary tumor removed. We found that most patients benefited from tumor removal, except for those with four or more IMDC risk factors.
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
Financial disclosures: Daniel Y.C. Heng certifies that all conflicts of interest, including specific financial interests and relationships and affiliations relevant to the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript (eg, employment/affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, or patents filed, received, or pending), are the following: Daniel Y.C. Heng is a consultant for Pfizer, Novartis, and Bayer/Onyx. Brian A. Rini is a consultant for Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Aveo, and Bayer/Onyx. He receives research funding from GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer. Jennifer J. Knox is a consultant for Aveo and receives research funding from Pfizer. Georg A. Bjarnason is a consultant and receives research funding and honoraria from Pfizer. Christian K. Kollmannsberger is a consultant for Pfizer, Novartis, and GlaxoSmithKline. He receives honoraria and research funding from Pfizer, Novartis, and GlaxoSmithKline. Sandy Srinivas is a consultant for Pfizer, Novartis, and Genentech. Frede Donskov receives research funding from Novartis. Lori A. Wood is a consultant for Pfizer and Novartis; she receives research funding from Pfizer, Novartis, and GlaxoSmithKline. Ulka Vaishampayan receives honoraria and research funding from Pfizer, Novartis, and GlaxoSmithKline. Sun Young Rha is a consultant for Pfizer, Novartis, and GlaxoSmithKline, and receives research funding from Novartis and Bayer Korea. Toni K. Choueiri is a consultant for Aveo, Pfizer, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech, and Bayer/Onyx, and receives research funding from Pfizer.
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes