After cancer, safe to remove whole kidney
U. ROCHESTER (US) — Losing an entire kidney does not translate into worse outcomes for cancer patients, according to new research that contradicts earlier findings.
Surgery is often the first step in treating kidney cancer, and new data question whether removal of only the tumor (partial nephrectomy) is better than removing the entire kidney (radical nephrectomy).
The decided trend, based on several earlier studies suggesting that it’s better to save as much kidney tissue as possible, and thus preserve kidney function and reduce the likelihood of kidney failure in the long run, has been toward a partial resection in the case of smaller cancers.
Many physicians inferred that a radical nephrectomy would be worse for kidney cancer patients, due to a concern that even mild or moderate dysfunction in the remaining kidney could lead to an earlier death.
“Our data appears to seriously question the assumption that by saving kidney tissue, we are helping patients avoid future kidney failure,” says Edward Messing, chair of urology at the University of Rochester Medical Center. “It may be that losing kidney tissue from surgery is not the same as losing kidney function from medical diseases like diabetes or hypertension.”
The latter point is an important one for patients who’re weighing surgical options, Messing says. Often, all types of kidney impairments are lumped into one category. It may be, however, that common medical conditions such as high blood pressure or diabetes take the biggest toll on kidney health.
Therefore, if a patient is otherwise healthy and the second kidney is functioning well, he or she can safely consider a radical nephrectomy, if that seems to be the best option for cancer removal, he said.
Published in the journal European Urology, the study, led by Emelian N. Scosyrev, an epidemiologist and assistant professor of urology, analyzed more than 500 patients registered by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer randomized trial from 1992 to 2003.
In collaboration with EORTC investigators, Scosyrev looked at various stages of renal dysfunction based on the EORTC trial data.
Specifically researchers compared the incidence of moderate kidney dysfunction, advanced kidney disease, and kidney failure among two groups: 255 people who were treated with a partial nephrectomy and 259 patients who had a radical nephrectomy. (The latter surgery removes the entire organ, adrenal gland, and surrounding tissue.) All patients had been diagnosed with a small kidney cancer and had a normal-functioning second kidney.
Each patient’s kidney function was analyzed for a median of seven years after surgery, and continued to follow the cohort for approximately nine years, to determine the impact of both surgeries on patient survival.
At the median follow-up of 6.7 years, the frequency of moderate kidney dysfunction was 20 percent lower among those patients who received a partial nephrectomy, compared with those randomized to a radical nephrectomy. However, the better overall kidney function in the partial nephrectomy group did not result in improved survival. Indeed, at the last follow-up point of about nine years, fewer deaths had occurred in the radical nephrectomy group, the study showed.
Kidney failure was the same in both groups, at about 1.5 percent. This outcome was a bit surprising, Messing says, as it demonstrated that patients in the radical nephrectomy group who had initially suffered a mild or moderate degree of kidney dysfunction did not see their condition progress to kidney failure. When choosing a surgery, therefore, it’s important to consider the best option for removing the cancer in the broader context of other medical conditions that impact kidneys.
The most common type of kidney cancer is renal cell carcinoma, which forms in the lining of the tubes that filter blood and remove waste. An estimated 65,000 new cases of kidney cancer will be diagnosed in the United States this year, and approximately 13,700 deaths are expected to occur, according to the National Cancer Institute.
Source: University of Rochester
You are free to share this article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported license.