Rarely Described Renal Malignancies Associated With Venous Tumor Thrombus.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Collecting duct carcinoma, epithelioid angiosarcoma and neuroendocrine/carcinoid tumor are uncommon renal malignancies, and their association with tumor thrombus extending into the inferior vena cava is extremely rare. Owing to the rarity of the above-mentioned malignancies and short follow-up of the cases published in the literature, the prognosis and clinical behavior of these tumors remains unclear. Up to date, the culprit of treatment is surgical management with radical nephrectomy, lymph node dissection, thrombectomy and vascular reconstruction if necessary. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We herein describe in detail the first cases published of the above-mentioned renal malignancies associated with extensive inferior vena cava (IVC) thrombus, in which complex vascular reconstruction was performed. RESULTS: Three male patients were identified as having collecting duct carcinoma, epithelioid angiosarcoma and neuroendocrine/carcinoid tumor with IVC involvement. Tumor thrombus levels were II, I and IIIc respectively. Patient ages were 42, 60 and 47 years and tumor sizes were 9.2, 10.9 and 3.7 cm correspondingly. Patient 2 underwent cavectomy, IVC replacement using polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-Tex®) vascular graft and IVC filter deployment inside the graft. None of the patients developed any pulmonary emboli postoperatively. At the last follow-up, IVC graft for patient 2 remained patent. CONCLUSION: Owing to the rarity of the aforementioned malignancies and short follow-up of cases published in the literature, the prognosis and clinical behavior of these tumors remains unclear. Up to date, the culprit of treatment is surgical management with radical nephrectomy, lymph node dissection, thrombectomy and vascular reconstruction if necessary. Polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-Tex) vascular grafts are an excellent and safe option for complex vascular reconstructions in patients with evidence of IVC invasion.

Large and rapid local recurrence of clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

After radical nephrectomy, clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) recurs locally in <3% of patients. Recurrences typically occur 1-2 years postoperatively and grow at 5-20 mm per year. In contrast, this patient's recurrence was unexpectedly large and swift. A 71-year-old woman was initially found on workup for recurrent urinary tract infections to have a 12 cm left renal tumour. After negative staging scans, she progressed to left open radical nephrectomy. Histology revealed a stage T2b 12 cm ccRCCwith sarcomatoid differentiation, International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 4, with clear margins. Only 3 months later, the patient developed left-sided abdominal pain, and CT scans revealed a 15 cm left retroperitoneal local recurrence, as well as widespread peritoneal tumours. In discussion with her treating team, the patient and her family elected not to undergo biopsy or systemic therapy. The patient was palliated and passed away 8 days after re-presentation.

ROBOCOP II (ROBOtic assisted versus conventional open partial nephrectomy) randomised, controlled feasibility trial: clinical trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Randomised controlled trials comparing robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and open PN (OPN) are lacking. Therefore, we aim to report the study protocol and a trial update for a randomised controlled feasibility trial comparing RAPN versus OPN for renal neoplasms. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The ROBOtic assisted versus conventional Open Partial nephrectomy II trial is designed as a single-centre, randomised, open-label, feasibility trial. Participation will be offered to patients with renal neoplasms and deemed feasible for both, OPN and RAPN. We aim to enrol 50 patients within 15 months using a 1:1 allocation ratio. The primary endpoint of the trial is feasibility of recruitment and will be successful if one third of eligible patients agree to participate. Secondary endpoints include perioperative results, health-related quality of life, inflammatory response as well as surgical ergonomics of the operating team. If the primary outcome, feasibility of recruitment, is successful, the secondary results of the trial will be used for planning a confirmative phase III trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the local institutional review board (Ethik-Kommission II at Heidelberg University: 2020-542N). Results will be made publicly available in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at appropriate congresses and social media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04534998.

Impact of Body Mass Index on Perioperative Complications and Oncologic Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Thermal Ablation for Renal Cell Carcinoma.

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.

RAMPART: A phase III multi-arm multi-stage trial of adjuvant checkpoint inhibitors in patients with resected primary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) at high or intermediate risk of relapse.

BACKGROUND: 20-60% of patients with initially locally advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) develop metastatic disease despite optimal surgical excision. Adjuvant strategies have been tested in RCC including cytokines, radiotherapy, hormones and oral tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs), with limited success. The predominant global standard-of-care after nephrectomy remains active monitoring. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are effective in the treatment of metastatic RCC; RAMPART will investigate these agents in the adjuvant setting. METHODS/DESIGN: RAMPART is an international, UK-led trial investigating the addition of ICIs after nephrectomy in patients with resected locally advanced RCC. RAMPART is a multi-arm multi-stage (MAMS) platform trial, upon which additional research questions may be addressed over time. The target population is patients with histologically proven resected locally advanced RCC (clear cell and non-clear cell histological subtypes), with no residual macroscopic disease, who are at high or intermediate risk of relapse (Leibovich score 3-11). Patients with fully resected synchronous ipsilateral adrenal metastases are included. Participants are randomly assigned (3,2:2) to Arm A - active monitoring (no placebo) for one year, Arm B - durvalumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) 4-weekly for one year; or Arm C - combination therapy with durvalumab 4-weekly for one year plus two doses of tremelimumab (CTLA-4 inhibitor) at day 1 of the first two 4-weekly cycles. The co-primary outcomes are disease-free-survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes include safety, metastasis-free survival, RCC specific survival, quality of life, and patient and clinician preferences. Tumour tissue, plasma and urine are collected for molecular analysis (TransRAMPART). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN #: ISRCTN53348826, NCT #: NCT03288532, EUDRACT #: 2017-002329-39, CTA #: 20363/0380/001-0001, MREC #: 17/LO/1875, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03288532, RAMPART grant number: MC_UU_12023/25, TransRAMPART grant number: A28690 Cancer Research UK, RAMPART Protocol version 5.0.

Delayed surgery for localised and metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis for the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the cancellation or deferment of many elective cancer surgeries. We performed a systematic review on the oncological effects of delayed surgery for patients with localised or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the targeted therapy (TT) era. METHOD: The protocol of this review is registered on PROSPERO(CRD42020190882). A comprehensive literature search was performed on Medline, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL using MeSH terms and keywords for randomised controlled trials and observational studies on the topic. Risks of biases were assessed using the Cochrane RoB tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. For localised RCC, immediate surgery [including partial nephrectomy (PN) and radical nephrectomy (RN)] and delayed surgery [including active surveillance (AS) and delayed intervention (DI)] were compared. For metastatic RCC, upfront versus deferred cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) were compared. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included for quantitative analysis. Delayed surgery was significantly associated with worse cancer-specific survival (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.23-2.27, p < 0.01) in T1a RCC, but no significant difference was noted for overall survival. For localised ≥ T1b RCC, there were insufficient data for meta-analysis and the results from the individual reports were contradictory. For metastatic RCC, upfront TT followed by deferred CN was associated with better overall survival when compared to upfront CN followed by deferred TT (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.43-0.86, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Noting potential selection bias, there is insufficient evidence to support the notion that delayed surgery is safe in localised RCC. For metastatic RCC, upfront TT followed by deferred CN should be considered.

How uro-oncology has been affected by COVID-19 emergency? Data from Piedmont/Valle d'Aosta Oncological Network, Italy.

INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has dramatically hit all Europe and Northern Italy in particular. The reallocation of medical resources has caused a sharp reduction in the activity of many medical disciplines, including urology. The restricted availability of resources is expected to cause a delay in the treatment of urological cancers and to negatively influence the clinical history of many cancer patients. In this study, we describe COVID-19 impact on uro-oncological management in Piedmont/Valle d'Aosta, estimating its future impact. METHODS: We performed an online survey in 12 urological centers, belonging to the Oncological Network of Piedmont/Valle d'Aosta, to estimate the impact of COVID-19 emergency on their practice. On this basis, we then estimated the medical working capacity needed to absorb all postponed uro-oncological procedures. RESULTS: Most centers (77%) declared to be "much"/"very much" affected by COVID-19 emergency. If uro-oncological consultations for newly diagnosed cancers were often maintained, follow-up consultations were more than halved or even suspended in around two out of three centers. In-office and day-hospital procedures were generally only mildly reduced, whereas major uro-oncological procedures were more than halved or even suspended in 60% of centers. To clear waiting list backlog, the urological working capacity should dramatically increase in the next months; delays greater than 1 month are expected for more than 50% of uro-oncological procedures. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 emergency has dramatically slowed down uro-oncological activity in Piedmont and Valle d'Aosta. Ideally, uro-oncological patients should be referred to COVID-19-free tertiary urological centers to ensure a timely management.

Challenging Cases of Renal Cell Cancers With or Without Tumor Thrombus During the Covid-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Large or bilateral multiple renal cell carcinoma (RCC) without/with tumor thrombus (TT) in the renal vein (RV) or inferior vena cava (IVC) poses a challenge to the surgeon due to the potential for massive hemorrhage, tumor thromboemboli and dialysis, and the situation is more critical due to Covid-19 pandemic. We report our experience and measures in dealing with challenging cases of large or multiple RCCs without/with TT during the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 4/2020-10/2020, five patients underwent RCC resection with/without TT. Patients 1 and 2 had RCCs/TT in RV; Patient 3 had RCC/TT supradiaphragmatic below right atrium; Patient-4 had a 26 cm RCC; Patient-5 had multiple RCCS as part of Birt-Hogg-Dube syndrome. RESULTS: Patients were preoperatively tested negative for Covid-19. Operation times were 105, 85, 255, 200 and 247 minutes for Patients 1-5. Estimated blood loss was: 100, 50, 3,900,100 and 50 ml, respectively. Patient 3 underwent RCC resection en bloc with IVC/TT. Patients 1 and 2 underwent resections of RCC/TT in RV. Patient 4 underwent a 26 cm RCC resection. Patient 5 underwent laparoscopic bilateral radical nephrectomies. No immediate postoperative complications were reported. CONCLUSION: We successfully managed 5 challenging cases of RCCs despite the recommendations imposed by hospitals due to Covid-19 pandemic, with favorable outcomes.

Delaying surgery for clinical T1b-T2bN0M0 renal cell carcinoma: Oncologic implications in the COVID-19 era and beyond.

PURPOSE: During COVID-19, many operating rooms were reserved exclusively for emergent cases. As a result, many elective surgeries for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) were deferred, with an unknown impact on outcomes. Since surveillance is commonplace for small renal masses, we focused on larger, organ-confined RCCs. Our primary endpoint was pT3a upstaging and our secondary endpoint was overall survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively abstracted cT1b-T2bN0M0 RCC patients from the National Cancer Database, stratifying them by clinical stage and time from diagnosis to surgery. We selected only those patients who underwent surgery. Patients were grouped by having surgery within 1 month, 1-3 months, or >3 months after diagnosis. Logistic regression models measured pT3a upstaging risk. Kaplan Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models assessed overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 29,746 patients underwent partial or radical nephrectomy. Delaying surgery >3 months after diagnosis did not confer pT3a upstaging risk among cT1b (OR = 0.90; 95% CI: 0.77-1.05, P = 0.170), cT2a (OR = 0.90; 95% CI: 0.69-1.19, P = 0.454), or cT2b (OR = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.62-1.51, P = 0.873). In all clinical stage strata, nonclear cell RCCs were significantly less likely to be upstaged (P <0.001). A sensitivity analysis, performed for delays of <1, 1-3, 3-6, and >6 months, also showed no increase in upstaging risk. CONCLUSION: Delaying surgery up to, and even beyond, 3 months does not significantly increase risk of tumor progression in clinically localized RCC. However, if deciding to delay surgery due to COVID-19, tumor histology, growth kinetics, patient comorbidities, and hospital capacity/resources, should be considered.

Association of Surgical Delay and Overall Survival in Patients With T2 Renal Masses: Implications for Critical Clinical Decision-making During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To test for an association between surgical delay and overall survival (OS) for patients with T2 renal masses. Many health care systems are balancing resources to manage the current COVID-19 pandemic, which may result in surgical delay for patients with large renal masses. METHODS: Using Cox proportional hazard models, we analyzed data from the National Cancer Database for patients undergoing extirpative surgery for clinical T2N0M0 renal masses between 2004 and 2015. Study outcomes were to assess for an association between surgical delay with OS and pathologic stage. RESULTS: We identified 11,848 patients who underwent extirpative surgery for clinical T2 renal masses. Compared with patients undergoing surgery within 2 months of diagnosis, we found worse OS for patients with a surgical delay of 3-4 months (hazard ratio [HR] 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-1.25) or 5-6 months (HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.19-1.91). Considering only healthy patients with Charlson Comorbidity Index = 0, worse OS was associated with surgical delay of 5-6 months (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.21-2.34, P= .002) but not 3-4 months (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.93-1.26, P = 309). Pathologic stage (pT or pN) was not associated with surgical delay. CONCLUSION: Prolonged surgical delay (5-6 months) for patients with T2 renal tumors appears to have a negative impact on OS while shorter surgical delay (3-4 months) was not associated with worse OS in healthy patients. The data presented in this study may help patients and providers to weigh the risk of surgical delay versus the risk of iatrogenic SARS-CoV-2 exposure during resurgent waves of the COVID-19 pandemic.