Characteristics and prognosis of chromophobe non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A multicenter study

Abstract

Objectives: To analyze the characteristics and the prognostic significance of chromophobe renal cell carcinomas (chRCC). Methods: Data about 2981 patients with non-metastatic renal cell carcinomas (RCC) at the time of surgery were retrospectively collected from 26 institutions between 1998 and 2008. All patients had undergone partial or radical nephrectomies. Of the 2981 patients, 2602 patients with conventional RCC (cRCC) and 148 with chRCC were studied. Clinical and pathological parameters were determined in all patients. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were assessed. Results: Patients with chRCC differed significantly from those with cRCC on the following parameters: younger age (P = 0.026), greater female ratio (P < 0.001), and larger tumor diameter (P < 0.001). Both groups were alike with respect to body mass index (P = 0.943), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (P = 0.163), T stage (P = 0.375), and Fuhrman`s grade (P = 0.134). The 5-year RFS rates in patients with chRCC and cRCC were 82.7% and 83.3%, respectively (P = 0.762). The 5-year CSS rates in patients with chRCC and cRCC were 88.8% and 92.2%, respectively (P = 0.980). Both groups showed equivalent oncological outcomes in terms of RFS and CSS for cases stratified by T stage and Fuhrman`s grade. In multivariate analysis, the histological subtype was not retained as an independent prognostic variable (RFS: P = 0.893; CSS: P = 0.729). Conclusions: Despite being significantly different from cRCC in terms of several clinical and pathological parameters, chRCC shows equivalent oncological outcomes.Leibovich BC, 2010, J UROLOGY, V183, P1309, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2009.12.035Waldert M, 2010, EUR UROL, V57, P661, DOI 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.05.009Teloken PE, 2009, J UROLOGY, V182, P2132, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2009.07.019Stec R, 2009, J EXP CLIN CANC RES, V28, DOI 10.1186/1756-9966-28-134Jemal A, 2009, CA-CANCER J CLIN, V59, P225, DOI 10.3322/caac.20006Capitanio U, 2009, BJU INT, V103, P1496, DOI 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.08259.xEichelberg C, 2009, EUR UROL, V55, P851, DOI 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.01.003Amin MB, 2008, AM J SURG PATHOL, V32, P1822Klatte T, 2008, UROL ONCOL-SEMIN ORI, V26, P604, DOI 10.1016/j.urolonc.2007.07.015Tickoo SK, 2008, UROL CLIN N AM, V35, P551, DOI 10.1016/j.ucl.2008.07.001Raj GV, 2008, J UROLOGY, V179, P2146, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2008.01.101Karakiewicz PI, 2007, J CLIN ONCOL, V25, P1316, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2006.06.1218Pignot G, 2007, UROLOGY, V69, P230, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2006.09.052Delahunt B, 2007, PATHOLOGY, V39, P459, DOI 10.1080/00313020701570061CAMPBELL SC, 2007, CAMPBELLWALSH UROLOG, P2762Shuch BM, 2006, SEMIN ONCOL, V33, P563, DOI 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2006.06.006Cohen HT, 2005, NEW ENGL J MED, V353, P2477Cindolo L, 2005, CANCER, V104, P1362, DOI 10.1002/cncr.21331Schuetz AN, 2005, J MOL DIAGN, V7, P206Patard JJ, 2005, J CLIN ONCOL, V23, P2763, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2005.07.055LAM JS, 2005, CURR UROL REP, V6, P7Kim H, 2004, HUM PATHOL, V35, P1556, DOI 10.1016/j.humpath.2004.06.011Patard JJ, 2004, J CLIN ONCOL, V22, P3316, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2004.09.104Furge KA, 2004, CANCER RES, V64, P4117Beck SDW, 2004, ANN SURG ONCOL, V11, P71, DOI 10.1245/ASO.2004.06.016EBLE JN, 2004, WHO CLASSIFICATION T, P12GREENE FL, 2002, AJCC CANC STAGING MA, P323Kattan MW, 2001, J UROLOGY, V166, P63Kovacs G, 1997, J PATHOL, V183, P131Delahunt B, 1997, MODERN PATHOL, V10, P537FUHRMAN SA, 1982, AM J SURG PATHOL, V6, P655