ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To determine effect of body mass index (BMI) on safety and cancer-related outcomes of thermal ablation for renal cell carcinoma (RRC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated 427 patients (287 men and 140 women; mean [SD] age, 72 [12] y) who were treated with thermal ablation for RCC between October 2006 and December 2017. Patients were stratified by BMI into 3 categories: normal weight (18.5-24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25-29.9 kg/m2), and obese (≥ 30 kg/m2). Of 427 patients, 71 (16%) were normal weight, 157 (37%) were overweight, and 199 (47%) were obese. Complication rates, local recurrence, and residual disease were compared in the 3 cohorts. RESULTS: No differences in technical success between normal-weight, overweight, and obese patients were identified (P = .72). Primary technique efficacy rates for normal-weight, overweight, and obese patients were 91%, 94%, and 93% (P = .71). There was no significant difference in RCC specific-free survival, disease-free survival, and metastasis-free survival between obese, overweight, and normal-weight groups (P = .72, P = .43, P = .99). Complication rates between the 3 cohorts were similar (normal weight 4%, overweight 2%, obese 3%; P = .71). CONCLUSIONS: CT-guided renal ablation is safe, feasible, and effective regardless of BMI.
Subject(s)
Body Mass Index , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/surgery , Cryosurgery , Kidney Neoplasms/surgery , Microwaves/therapeutic use , Obesity/diagnosis , Radiofrequency Ablation , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/mortality , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/secondary , Cryosurgery/adverse effects , Cryosurgery/mortality , Disease Progression , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Humans , Kidney Neoplasms/mortality , Kidney Neoplasms/pathology , Male , Microwaves/adverse effects , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Obesity/mortality , Patient Safety , Radiofrequency Ablation/adverse effects , Radiofrequency Ablation/mortality , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The coronavirus pandemic has provoked discussions among healthcare providers how to manage cancer patients when faced with the threat of severe acute respiratory syndrome related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) containing regimens are standard of care in the majority of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) patients. It remains unclear whether therapies should be modified in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We performed an online survey among physicians involved in the treatment of mccRCC, and 41 experts responded. Questions focused on criteria relevant for treatment decision outside the pandemic and the modifications of systemic therapy during COVID-19. FINDINGS: For the majority of experts (73%), the combination of International metastatic renal cell carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk category and patient fitness are two important factors for decision-making. The main treatment choice in fit, favourable risk patients outside the pandemic is pembrolizumab/axitinib for 53%, avelumab/axitinib, sunitinib or pazopanib for 13% of experts each. During the pandemic, ICI-containing regimens are chosen less often in favour of a tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) monotherapy, mainly sunitinib or pazopanib (35%).In fit, intermediate/poor-risk patients outside the pandemic, over 80% of experts choose ipilimumab/nivolumab, in contrast to only 41% of physicians during COVID-19, instead more TKI monotherapies are given. In patients responding to established therapies with ICI/ICI or ICI/TKI combinations, most participants modify treatment regimen by extending cycle length, holding one ICI or even both. CONCLUSION: mccRCC treatment modifications in light of the coronavirus pandemic are variable, with a shift from ICI/ICI to ICI/TKI or TKI monotherapy.