Immunotherapy: A new standard in the treatment of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma

Renal cell cancer (RCC) represents 2%-3% of all adulthood cancers and is the most common malignant neoplasm of the kidney (90%). In the mid-nineties of the last century, the standard of treatment for patients with metastatic RCC was cytokines. Sunititib and pazopanib were registered in 2007 and 2009, respectively, and have since been the standard first-line treatment for metastatic clear cell RCC (mccRCC). Renal cell cancer is a highly immunogenic tumor with tumor infiltrating cells, including CD8+ T lymphocytes, dendritic cells, natural killer cells (NK) and macrophages. This observation led to the design of new clinical trials in which patients were treated with immunotherapy. With the growing evidence that proangiogenic factors can have immunomodulatory effects on the host’s immune system, the idea of combining angiogenic drugs with immunotherapy has emerged, and new clinical trials have been designed. In the last few years, several therapeutic options have been approved [immunotherapy and immunotherapy/tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI)] for the first-line treatment of mccRCC. Nivolumab/ipilimumab is approved for the treatment of patients with intermediate and poor prognoses. Several checkpoint inhibitors (pembrolizumab, nivolumab, avelumab) in combination with TKI (axitinib, lenvatinib, cabozantinib) are approved for the treatment of patients regardless of their International mRCC Database Consortium prognostic group and PD-L1 expression. There is no specific and ideal biomarker that could help in selecting the ideal patient for the appropriate first-line treatment.     

Long-Term Results from the Pivotal Multicenter Trial of Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Arteriovenous Fistula Creation for Hemodialysis Access

PurposeTo report the 5-year results from the Pivotal Multicenter Trial of Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Arteriovenous Fistula (pAVF) Creation for Hemodialysis Access.Materials and MethodsThe retrospective review of 107 intent-to-treat (ITT) patients from the pivotal trial provided a long-term follow-up population (LTP) of 85 patients with a median follow-up duration of 50 months (range, 12–60 months). Data evaluated in the LTP group were fistula maturation and usage, secondary procedures, and complications. The Kaplan-Meier analysis of primary patency, assisted primary patency, cumulative patency, and functional patency (time from 2-needle cannulation to abandonment) were performed for the ITT population.ResultsIn the LTP, 99% (84 of 85) of fistulae were mature, with 99% (78 of 79) of patients requiring hemodialysis using their pAVF. Sustained fistula use (2-needle cannulation at the prescribed rate, 2 of 3 sessions) was achieved in 92% (78 of 85) of patients, with 7 patients not using their pAVF because they were not on dialysis (n = 4), were on peritoneal dialysis (n = 2), and refused to use fistula (n = 1). Fistula maintenance was required in 31.8% (27 of 85) of patients and included fistula dysfunction (21.2%), thrombosis (5.9%), cannulation injury (12.9%), and arm swelling (4.7%). The number of procedures performed per patient per year to maintain function and patency was 0.32 (91 of 288) for years 2–5. The cumulative patency rates were 89.5%, 88.4%, 88.4%, 85.6%, and 82.0% for years 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. The functional patency was 91.8% at the end of the study. There were no major complications related to pAVF during the long-term follow-up.ConclusionsPercutaneous fistulae have provided clinically effective and durable access for hemodialysis with low complications. The continued use and evaluation of pAVF are warranted.     

微创治疗方法在输尿管上段结石中应用进展

输尿管上段结石为临床中常见泌尿系结石类型之一,如不能及时诊治,可引起重度积水、泌尿系感染,甚至脓毒血症,对患者肾功能、健康造成严重影响。随着微创治疗技术在泌尿系结石中应用,微创治疗方法能降低对患者造成治疗性创伤,降低相关并发症发生率,促进患者康复,了解临床中微创治疗输尿管上段结石方法,对临床中合理治疗输尿管上段结石有重要价值。     

Metastatic stage vs complications at radical nephrectomy with inferior vena cava thrombectomy

BackgroundTo investigate perioperative complication rates at radical nephrectomy (RN) according to inferior vena cava thrombectomy (IVC-T) status and stage (metastatic vs non-metastatic) within kidney cancer patients.Materials and methodsWe ascertained perioperative complication rates within the National Inpatient Sample database (2016–2019). First, log-link linear Generalized Estimating Equation function (GEE) regression models (adjusted for hospital clustering and weighted for discharge disposition) tested complication rates in IVC-T patients, according to metastatic stage. Subsequently, a subgroup analysis relied on RN patients with or without IVC-T. Here, multivariable logistic regression models tested complication rates in RN patients according to IVC-T status, after propensity score matching including metastatic stage.ResultsOf 26,299 RN patients, 461 (2%) patients underwent IVC-T. Of those, 252 (55%) were non-metastatic vs 209 (45%) were metastatic. Rates of acute kidney injury (AKI), transfusion, cardiac, thromboembolic and other medical complications in non-metastatic vs metastatic patients were 40 vs 40%, 25 vs 22%, 21 vs 23%, 19 vs 14% and 38 vs 40%, respectively (all p ≥ 0.2). Metastatic stage in IVC-T patients did not predict differences in complications in log-link linear GEE regression models (all p > 0.1). However, in logistic regression models with propensity score matching, relying on the overall cohort of RN patients, IVC-T status was associated with higher complication rates (all p < 0.001): AKI (Odds ratio [OR]:2.60; 95%-CI [95%-Confidence interval: 1.97–3.44), transfusions (OR:2.40; 95%-CI: 1.72–3.36), cardiac (OR:2.27; 95%-CI: 1.49–3.47), thromboembolic (OR:9.07; 95%-CI: 5.21–16.58) and other medical complications (OR:2.01; 95%-CI: 1.52–2.66).ConclusionsThe current analyses indicate that presence of concomitant IVC-T is associated with higher complication rate at RN. Conversely, metastatic stage has no effect on recorded complication rates.     

肾透明细胞癌不同CT影像学征象对患者术后康复情况的影响

目的探究肾透明细胞癌不同CT影像学征象对患者术后康复情况的影响。方法选取2010年1月到2014年4月我院收治的50例肾透明细胞癌患者的CT征象,进行T分期,并分析不同CT征象与患者预后关系。结果利用CT征象进行T分期区别主要在T3a期,T3a期分为T3a-CT(10例)和T3a-仅病理(6例),T3a-仅病理CT分期可分为T1期2例,T2期4例;单因素分析显示,肿瘤大小、肿瘤是否侵及肾被膜外、是否侵及肾窦集合系统、是否侵及肾静脉及分支、是否侵及下腔静脉、有无广泛性坏死、是否存在囊性改变、瘤周是否受侵、瘤周是否存在新生血管与5年生存率具有一定相关性(P<0.05);多因素回归分析显示,肿瘤≥7cm、肿瘤穿透肾被膜、肾静脉及分支受侵、下腔静脉受侵、肿瘤无囊变、瘤周受侵及瘤周新生血管是影响肾透明细胞癌预后的独立危险因素(P<0.05)。结论肾透明细胞瘤患者肿瘤大于7cm、肿瘤穿透肾被膜、肾静脉及分支受侵、下腔静脉受侵、肿瘤无囊变、瘤周受侵及瘤周新生血管是影响肾透明细胞癌预后的独立危险因素,肿瘤周围受侵及瘤周新生血管形成可降低患者5年生存率,而肿瘤囊变可作为预测术后康复情况较好的标志之一。