Saeed Dabestani

EAU Guidelines on Renal Cell Carcinoma: 2014 Update.

CONTEXT The European Association of Urology Guideline Panel for Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) has prepared evidence-based guidelines and recommendations for RCC management. OBJECTIVES To provide an update of the 2010 RCC guideline based on a standardised methodology that is robust, transparent, reproducible, and reliable. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION For the 2014 update, the panel prioritised the following topics: percutaneous biopsy of renal masses, treatment of localised RCC (including surgical and nonsurgical management), lymph node dissection, management of venous thrombus, systemic therapy, and local treatment of metastases, for which evidence synthesis was undertaken based on systematic reviews adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Relevant databases (Medline, Cochrane Library, trial registries, conference proceedings) were searched (January 2000 to November 2013) including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective or controlled studies with a comparator arm. Risk of bias (RoB) assessment and qualitative and quantitative synthesis of the evidence were performed. The remaining sections of the document were updated following a structured literature assessment. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS All chapters of the RCC guideline were updated. For the various systematic reviews, the search identified a total of 10,862 articles. A total of 151 studies reporting on 78,792 patients were eligible for inclusion; where applicable, data from RCTs were included and meta-analyses were performed. For RCTs, there was low RoB across studies; however, clinical and methodological heterogeneity prevented data pooling for most studies. The majority of studies included were retrospective with matched or unmatched cohorts based on single or multi-institutional data or national registries. The exception was for systemic treatment of metastatic RCC, in which several RCTs have been performed, resulting in recommendations based on higher levels of evidence. CONCLUSIONS The 2014 guideline has been updated by a multidisciplinary panel using the highest methodological standards, and provides the best and most reliable contemporary evidence base for RCC management. PATIENT SUMMARY The European Association of Urology Guideline Panel for Renal Cell Carcinoma has thoroughly evaluated available research data on kidney cancer to establish international standards for the care of kidney cancer patients.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy of Percutaneous Renal Tumour Biopsy

CONTEXT The role of percutaneous renal tumour biopsy (RTB) remains controversial due to uncertainties regarding its diagnostic accuracy and safety. OBJECTIVE We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the safety and accuracy of percutaneous RTB for the diagnosis of malignancy, histologic tumour subtype, and grade. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies providing data on diagnostic accuracy and complications of percutaneous core biopsy (CB) or fine-needle aspiration (FNA) of renal tumours. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis of malignancy. The Cohen kappa coefficient (κ) was estimated for the analysis of histotype/grade concordance between diagnosis on RTB and surgical specimen. Risk of bias assessment was performed (QUADAS-2). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS A total of 57 studies recruiting 5228 patients were included. The overall median diagnostic rate of RTB was 92%. The sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic CBs and FNAs were 99.1% and 99.7%, and 93.2% and 89.8%, respectively. A good (κ = 0.683) and a fair (κ = 0.34) agreement were observed between histologic subtype and Fuhrman grade on RTB and surgical specimen, respectively. A very low rate of Clavien ≥ 2 complications was reported. Study limitations included selection and differential-verification bias. CONCLUSIONS RTB is safe and has a high diagnostic yield in experienced centres. Both CB and FNA have good accuracy for the diagnosis of malignancy and histologic subtype, with better performance for CB. The accuracy for Fuhrman grade is fair. Overall, the quality of the evidence was moderate. Prospective cohort studies recruiting consecutive patients and using homogeneous reference standards are required. PATIENT SUMMARY We systematically reviewed the literature to assess the safety and diagnostic performance of renal tumour biopsy (RTB). The results suggest that RTB has good accuracy in diagnosing renal cancer and its subtypes, and it appears to be safe. However, the quality of evidence was moderate, and better quality studies are required to provide a more definitive answer.

Local treatments for metastases of renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review

Local treatment of metastases such as metastasectomy or radiotherapy remains controversial in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. To investigate the benefits and harms of various local treatments, we did a systematic review of all types of comparative studies on local treatment of metastases from renal cell carcinoma in any organ. Interventions included metastasectomy, radiotherapy modalities, and no local treatment. The results suggest that patients treated with complete metastasectomy have better survival and symptom control (including pain relief in bone metastases) than those treated with either incomplete or no metastasectomy. Nevertheless, the available evidence was marred by high risks of bias and confounding across all studies. Although the findings presented here should be interpreted with caution, they and the identified gaps in knowledge should provide guidance for clinicians and researchers, and directions for further research.

Updated EAU Guidelines for Clear Cell Renal Cancer Patients Who Fail VEGF Targeted Therapy

The European Association of Urology renal cancer guidelines have been updated to recommend nivolumab and cabozantinib over the previous standard of care in patients who have failed one or more lines of VEGF targeted therapy.

Updated European Association of Urology Guidelines: Recommendations for the Treatment of First-line Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cancer

The randomised phase III clinical trial Checkmate-214 showed a survival superiority for the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab when compared with the previous standard of care in first-line metastatic/advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) (Escudier B, Tannir NM, McDermott DF, et al. CheckMate 214: efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs sunitinib for treatment-naïve advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma, including IMDC risk and PD-L1 expression subgroups. LBA5, ESMO 2017, 2017). These results change the frontline standard of care for this disease and have implications for the selection of subsequent therapies. For this reason the European Association of Urology RCC guidelines have been updated. PATIENT SUMMARY The European Association of Urology guidelines will be updated based on the results of the phase III Checkmate-214 clinical trial. The trial showed superior survival for a combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab (IN), compared with the previous standard of care, in intermediate- and poor-risk patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma. When IN is not safe or feasible, alternative agents such as sunitinib, pazopanib, and cabozantinib should be considered. Furthermore, at present, the data from the trial are immature in favourable-risk patients. Therefore, sunitinib or pazopanib remains the favoured agent for this subgroup of patients.

Updated European Association of Urology Guidelines Regarding Adjuvant Therapy for Renal Cell Carcinoma

The European Association of Urology Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) guidelines panel updated their recommendation on adjuvant therapy in unfavourable, clinically nonmetastatic RCC following the recently reported results of a second randomised controlled phase 3 trial comparing 1-yr sunitinib to placebo for high-risk RCC after nephrectomy (S-TRAC). On the basis of conflicting results from the two available studies, the panel rated the quality of the evidence, the harm-to-benefit ratio, patient preferences, and costs. Finally, the panel, including representatives from a patient advocate group (International Kidney Cancer Coalition) voted and reached a consensus to not recommend adjuvant therapy with sunitinib for patients with high-risk RCC after nephrectomy. PATIENT SUMMARY In two studies, sunitinib was given for 1 yr and compared to no active treatment (placebo) in patients who had their kidney tumour removed and who had a high risk of cancer coming back after surgery. Although one study demonstrated that 1 yr of sunitinib therapy resulted in a 1.2-yr longer time before the disease recurred, the other study did not show a benefit and it has not been shown that patients live longer. Despite having been diagnosed with high-risk disease, many patients remain without recurrence, and the side effects of sunitinib are high. Therefore, the panel members, including patient representatives, do not recommend sunitinib after tumour removal in these patients.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Comparing the Effectiveness and Adverse Effects of Different Systemic Treatments for Non-clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

CONTEXT While vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibition are effective strategies in treating clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), the most effective therapeutic approach for patients with non-clear cell RCC (non-ccRCC) is unknown. OBJECTIVE To systematically review relevant literature comparing the oncological outcomes and adverse events of different systemic therapies for patients with metastatic non-ccRCC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION Relevant databases including MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to March 24, 2016. Only comparative studies were included. Risk of bias and confounding assessments were performed. A meta-analysis was planned for and only performed if methodologically appropriate; otherwise, a narrative synthesis was undertaken. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS The literature search identified 812 potential titles and abstracts. Five randomized controlled trials, recruiting a total of 365 patients, were included. Three studies compared sunitinib against everolimus, one of which reported the results for non-ccRCC as a subgroup rather than as an entire randomized cohort. Individually, the studies showed a trend towards favoring sunitinib in terms of overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS; Everolimus versus Sunitinib in Patients with Metastatic Non-clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma hazard ratio [HR]: 1.41, 80% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.92 and 1.41, 95% CI: 0.88-2.27, Evaluation in Metastatic Non-clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma HR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.67-2.01, Efficacy and Safety Comparison of RAD001 Versus Sunitinib in the First-line and Second-line Treatment of Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma HR: 1.5, 95% CI: 0.9-2.8), but this trend did not reach statistical significance in any study. Meta-analysis was performed on two studies which solely recruited patients with non-ccRCC reporting on PFS, the results of which were inconclusive (HR: 1.30, 95% CI: 0.91-1.86). Sunitinib was associated with more Grade 3-4 adverse events than everolimus, although this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS This systematic review and meta-analysis represent a robust summary of the evidence base for systemic treatment of metastatic non-ccRCC. The results show a trend towards favoring vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy for PFS and overall survival compared with mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, although statistical significance was not reached. The relative benefits and harms of these treatments remain uncertain. Further research, either in the form of an individual patient data meta-analysis involving all relevant trials, or a randomized controlled trial with sufficient power to detect potential differences between treatments, is needed. PATIENT SUMMARY We examined the literature to determine the most effective treatments for advanced kidney cancer patients whose tumors are not of the clear cell subtype. The results suggest that a drug called sunitinib might be more effective than everolimus, but the statistics supporting this statement are not yet entirely reliable. Further research is required to clarify this unmet medical need.

Role of Hormonal Treatment in Prostate Cancer Patients with Nonmetastatic Disease Recurrence After Local Curative Treatment: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT The relative benefits and harms of hormonal treatment (HT) versus no or deferred HT in patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer (PCa) relapse after primary curative therapy are controversial. OBJECTIVE To assess the effectiveness of HT for nonmetastatic PCa relapse, prognostic factors for treatment outcome, timing of treatment, and the most effective treatment strategy to provide guidance for clinical practice. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A systematic literature search was undertaken incorporating Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library (search ended March 2015). Studies were critically appraised for risk of bias. The outcomes included overall and cancer-specific survival, metastasis-free survival, symptom-free survival, progression to castrate resistance, adverse events, and quality of life. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Of 9687 articles identified, 27 studies were eligible for inclusion (2 RCTs, 8 nonrandomised comparative studies, and 17 case series). The results suggest that only a subgroup of patients, especially those with high-risk disease, may benefit from early HT. The main predictors for unfavourable outcomes were shorter PSA doubling time (<6-12 mo) and higher Gleason score (>7). Early HT may be warranted for patients with high-risk disease. An intermittent HT strategy appears feasible. Most studies had a moderate to high risks of bias. CONCLUSIONS HT for PCa relapse after primary therapy with curative intent should be reserved for patients at highest risk of progression and with a long life expectancy. The potential benefits of starting HT should be judiciously balanced against the associated harms. PATIENT SUMMARY This article summarises the evidence on the benefits and harms of hormonal treatment in prostate cancer (PCa) patients in whom the disease has recurred following earlier curative treatment. We found that only a select group of patients with aggressive PCa and a fast rising prostate-specific antigen may benefit from early hormonal treatment (HT), whereas in others HT may be more harmful than beneficial.

European Association of Urology Guidelines for Clear Cell Renal Cancers That Are Resistant to Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-Targeted Therapy

The European Association of Urology renal cancer guidelines panel recommends nivolumab and cabozantinib over the previous standard of care in patients who have failed one or more lines of vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy. New data have recently become available showing a survival benefit for cabozantinib.

Systematic Review of Surgical Management of Nonmetastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma with Vena Caval Thrombus

CONTEXT Overall, 4-10% of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) present with venous tumour thrombus. It is uncertain which surgical technique is best for these patients. Appraisal of outcomes with differing techniques would guide practice. OBJECTIVE To systematically review relevant literature comparing the outcomes of different surgical therapies and approaches in treating vena caval thrombus (VCT) from nonmetastatic RCC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION Relevant databases (Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) were searched to identify relevant comparative studies. Risk of bias and confounding assessments were performed. A narrative synthesis of the evidence was presented. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS The literature search identified 824 articles. Fourteen studies reporting on 2262 patients were included. No distinct surgical method was superior for the excision of VCT, although the method appeared to be dependent on tumour thrombus level. Minimal access techniques appeared to have better perioperative and recovery outcomes than traditional median sternotomy, but the impact on oncologic outcomes is unknown. Preoperative renal artery embolisation did not offer any oncologic benefits and instead resulted in significantly worse perioperative and recovery outcomes, including possibly higher perioperative mortality. The comparison of cardiopulmonary bypass versus no cardiopulmonary bypass showed no differences in oncologic outcomes. Overall, there were high risks of bias and confounding. CONCLUSIONS The evidence base, although derived from retrospective case series and complemented by expert opinion, suggests that patients with nonmetastatic RCC and VCT and acceptable performance status should be considered for surgical intervention. Despite a robust review, the findings were associated with uncertainty due to the poor quality of primary studies available. The most efficacious surgical technique remains unclear. PATIENT SUMMARY We examined the literature on the benefits of surgery to remove kidney cancers that have spread to neighbouring veins. The results suggest such surgery, although challenging and associated with high risk of complications, appears to be feasible and effective and should be contemplated for suitable patients if possible; however, many uncertainties remain due to the poor quality of the data.