Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
  • About Us
    • About the Ochsner Journal
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • Ochsner Journal Blog

User menu

  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Ochsner Journal
  • Other Publications
    • Ochsner Journal Blog
  • My alerts
  • Log in
Ochsner Journal

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
  • About Us
    • About the Ochsner Journal
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Outcomes of Patients With Late-Relapse Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated With Targeted Therapies: A Single Institution Experience

John Kucharczyk, Kamal Mandalapu, Suma Satti and Marc R. Matrana
Ochsner Journal December 2017, 17 (4) 331-334;
John Kucharczyk
1Department of Internal Medicine, NYU Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, NY
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kamal Mandalapu
2Department of Hematology and Oncology, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Suma Satti
2Department of Hematology and Oncology, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marc R. Matrana
2Department of Hematology and Oncology, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA
3The University of Queensland School of Medicine, Ochsner Clinical School, New Orleans, LA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background: Late relapse with presentation of metastatic disease >5 years after nephrectomy with curative intent is a known behavior of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), but data on outcomes, especially regarding targeted therapies, are limited. In this study, we analyze clinicopathologic features and response to targeted therapy in patients with late-relapse metastatic RCC (mRCC).

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed clinical data on consecutive patients treated with targeted therapy for mRCC diagnosed >5 years after nephrectomy with curative intent.

Results: A total of 24 patients (100% clear cell histology, median age 72 years, 83% males, all with prior nephrectomies) met inclusion criteria; 71% had favorable risk, and 25% had intermediate risk by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium criteria. The estimated median overall survival for all patients was 60.5 months, and the 3-year overall survival rate was 71.78% (95% confidence interval, 47.98%-84.77%). All patients were treated with targeted therapy; first-line treatments included pazopanib (46%), sorafenib (25%), sunitinib (17%), and cytokine (13%), with no significant difference in time to treatment failure between therapies. Median time on first-line therapy was 19.7 months; 67% of patients received second-line treatment. Metastases were detected at considerable rates in sites considered historically uncommon, such as the pancreas, adrenal glands, and soft tissue.

Conclusion: Patients with late-relapse mRCC treated with targeted therapy had prolonged survival that compared favorably to historical controls, and metastases in uncommon sites were noted.

Keywords
  • Cancer–renal cell
  • metastasis
  • nephrectomy

INTRODUCTION

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is an increasingly common malignancy in the United States and accounts for approximately 90% of kidney cancer cases.1 The increased detection of small, localized lesions has led to more opportunities to resect RCC with curative intent.2 However, approximately 30% of patients who have undergone a nephrectomy with curative intent develop metastatic disease recurrence.3 In patients who relapse after having no evidence of disseminated disease at the time of resection, most metastases occur within 2 years of resection, although late recurrence >5 years after resection is a known biologic behavior of RCC.3,4 In fact, a large cohort study published in 2014 found that 26% of patients receiving targeted therapy after curative-intent nephrectomy relapsed >5 years after resection of the primary tumor.5

Studies have characterized patients with late relapse, occurring after a disease-free interval >5 years, in terms of patient and tumor prognostic features to adjust surveillance protocols and increase the length of surveillance in patients with an increased propensity to relapse after 5 years.6,7 A 5-year disease-free interval is most commonly used to define the late-relapse population and has been shown to be the most useful interval length in clinical practice.7 The prognosis and response to targeted therapies of patients with late relapse are less studied. The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic model reliably predicts the survival and treatment response of patients with metastatic RCC (mRCC), allowing for improved patient counseling and application of clinical trials.8 Patients with late relapse are associated with favorable patient and tumor characteristics, but their specific outcomes are less understood.

We retrospectively analyzed patients with late relapse after nephrectomy with curative intent at our institution to characterize the survival and response to targeted therapy within this unique subset of patients with mRCC.

METHODS

Study Population

We retrospectively reviewed clinical data on consecutive patients treated with targeted therapy for mRCC diagnosed >5 years after nephrectomy with curative intent. All patients were treated at our institution between November 1, 2006, and November 1, 2013. Inclusion criteria were tumors previously treated with radical or partial nephrectomy to render the patient with no evidence of disease, no evidence of metastases at the time of surgery, and relapse to any stage of mRCC after a disease-free survival >5 years.

Patients were treated with pazopanib, sunitinib, sorafenib, and cytokines as first-line therapy. Treatment was interrupted or doses were adjusted as needed in response to adverse events and according to standard guidelines. First-line therapy was continued until evidence of disease progression, unacceptable adverse events, or death. Second-line therapies included temsirolimus, everolimus, and axitinib. Prognostic features of the cohort prior to the initiation of targeted therapy were described according to the IMDC model (also referred to as the Heng criteria). The Heng criteria are an externally validated prognostic model for patients with mRCC who receive targeted therapy.9 The model stratifies patients into favorable, intermediate, and poor survival groups. The risk factors are >1 year from diagnosis to systemic therapy, Karnofsky Performance Scale status score <80 (a score >80 indicates that the patient has only minor symptoms from his/her illness), low hemoglobin, elevated calcium, elevated neutrophil count, and elevated platelet count.

Outcomes and Statistical Analysis

Overall survival, the primary outcome, was defined as the time from initiation of first-line treatment to death from any cause. Secondary outcomes were time to treatment failure and treatment response. Time to treatment failure was defined as the time between initiation of a targeted therapy treatment to drug cessation, death, or censoring. Treatment response was scored via the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v.1.1.10 Adverse events were graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.4.11 The Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis. We used analysis of variance to identify significant differences between groups.

RESULTS

Clinical and Pathologic Characteristics

Of the 520 patients with all stages of RCC who were analyzed, 28 patients were found to have stage I-III RCC, underwent nephrectomy and relapsed late, and developed mRCC recurrence >5 years from the date of nephrectomy. Four patients were excluded because they did not have complete data available for analysis. The study cohort consisted of 24 patients. Median follow-up was 38.3 months (range, 6.7-129.3 months). Table 1 shows patient characteristics. The median time from nephrectomy to recurrence was 8.3 years (range, 5.6-29.0 years). At relapse, the majority (83%) of patients had >1 site of metastatic disease, most often involving lung, bone, and pancreas. A majority of the cohort presented with favorable IMDC (Heng) scores (71%).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 1.

Patient and Tumor Characteristics of Patients With Late-Relapse Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (n=24)

Treatment Response and Survival Outcomes

The estimated median overall survival time was 60.5 months after detection of metastatic disease (Figure). The 3-year overall survival rate after detection of metastatic disease was 71.78% (95% confidence interval, 47.98%-84.77%). All patients received targeted therapy; pazopanib, sunitinib, sorafenib, or cytokine therapy was used as first-line treatment in 11, 4, 6, and 3 patients, respectively (Table 2). Targeted therapies in the second-line setting were administered to 16 patients (67%). Median time to treatment failure on first-line therapy was 19.7 months (range, 0.5-41.6). We found no significant difference in time to treatment failure between therapies.

Figure.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure.

Overall survival in patients with late-relapse metastatic renal cell carcinoma from time of recurrence.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 2.

Evaluation of Overall Response to First-Line Therapy by RECIST v.1.1 Guidelines in Patients With Late-Relapse Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (n=24)

The most common adverse events associated with treatment were fatigue (54%), diarrhea (33%), hypertension (29%), anorexia (29%), hair and skin changes (25%), increased liver function tests (21%), and nausea/vomiting (17%), with 95% of adverse events being grade 1 or 2.

DISCUSSION

Previous reports have suggested that the distribution of late-relapse mRCC is comparable to the distribution of early-relapse mRCC, although late-relapse mRCC is associated with a higher number of unusual metastases.5,12 We observed this pattern in our study; metastases were most commonly detected in the lung, bone, lymph nodes, kidney, and pancreas, but disease was also commonly seen in the adrenal gland and occasionally in the bowel, pleura, muscle, and abdominal wall. This increased tendency of unusual metastases may be important when evaluating patients with late-relapse mRCC or when considering imaging modalities for surveillance.

Our study cohort had a high metastatic burden, with a majority (83%) of patients presenting with multiple metastases, including areas considered to confer a poor prognosis in mRCC such as liver and bone.13 Furthermore, a noteworthy portion of our cohort (33%) developed pancreatic metastases that have been shown to be more common in the late-relapse population,6 and the pancreas is a metastatic site known to be associated with extended survival in patients with mRCC.14,15 Kalra et al found pancreatic metastasis to be independently associated with extended survival in a multivariate analysis accounting for number of metastatic sites, presence of lung metastases, and Heng risk category.15 These authors speculate that this unique clinical phenomenon could be explained by host and tumor features representing a more indolent tumor phenotype in patients with late relapse than in patients with early relapse.

RCC is divided into 2 histologic subtypes: clear cell RCC, the most common histology, and non–clear cell RCC that encompasses several histologies including papillary RCC, chromophobe RCC, collecting duct carcinoma, and renal medullary carcinoma.16 Clear cell mRCC has been shown to have a more favorable treatment response and prognosis than non–clear cell mRCC, and comparative reports on early-relapse RCC vs late-relapse RCC have shown that non–clear cell RCC is less common in the late-relapse population.17 All 24 patients in our study had clear cell histology, possibly conferring an additional favorable prognostic characteristic.

Kroeger et al reported in 2014 that patients with late-relapse RCC have a better response to targeted therapy and increased overall survival compared to patients with early-relapse RCC.5 Similarly, our late-relapse cohort demonstrated a high overall survival compared to historic controls treated with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors.9,18

Adamy and colleagues suggested that patients with late-relapse mRCC fall in better risk stratification categories compared to patients with early-relapse mRCC, a factor that may contribute to favorable outcomes.6 Indeed, 71% of patients in our study presented with no IMDC (Heng) risk factors at relapse. Perhaps a prolonged disease-free and treatment-free interval permits hematologic and immunologic recovery, allowing targeted therapy to be more effective. This concept is supported by Santoni et al who demonstrated that an elevated pretreatment neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio is a poor prognostic factor for patients with late-relapse mRCC treated with targeted therapy.19

Our study was retrospective, albeit composed of consecutive patients, and thus subject to all limitations inherent to this study design. Furthermore, our cohort size was relatively small, making comparisons difficult. Including more subjects with a longer follow-up would be beneficial to verify equivalence between first-line treatment responses in terms of objective response rate and time to treatment failure.

CONCLUSION

Late relapse is a known phenomenon in RCC and is associated with unusual metastatic sites such as the pancreas, adrenal glands, and soft tissue. Patients with late-relapse mRCC have increased time to treatment failure and overall survival when treated with targeted therapy because of their favorable prognostic features. These characteristics of late-relapse mRCC are relevant when considering long-term disease surveillance and informing patients of their prognosis.

This article meets the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and the American Board of Medical Specialties Maintenance of Certification competencies for Patient Care, Medical Knowledge, and Practice-Based Learning and Improvement.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors have no financial or proprietary interest in the subject matter of this article.

  • © Academic Division of Ochsner Clinic Foundation 2017

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Znaor A,
    2. Lortet-Tieulent J,
    3. Laversanne M,
    4. Jemal A,
    5. Bray F
    International variations and trends in renal cell carcinoma incidence and mortality. Eur Urol. 2015 3; 67 3: 519- 530. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.002. pmid:25449206
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Sun M,
    2. Thuret R,
    3. Abdollah F,
    4. et al.
    Age-adjusted incidence, mortality, and survival rates of stage-specific renal cell carcinoma in North America: a trend analysis. Eur Urol. 2011 1; 59 1: 135- 141. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.10.029. pmid:21035250
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Leibovich BC,
    2. Blute ML,
    3. Cheville JC,
    4. et al.
    Prediction of progression after radical nephrectomy for patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a stratification tool for prospective clinical trials. Cancer. 2003 4 1; 97 7: 1663- 1671. pmid:12655523
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Park YH,
    2. Baik KD,
    3. Lee YJ,
    4. Ku JH,
    5. Kim HH,
    6. Kwak C
    Late recurrence of renal cell carcinoma >5 years after surgery: clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis. BJU Int. 2012 12; 110 11 Pt B: E553- E558. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11246.x. pmid:22578274
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Kroeger N,
    2. Choueiri TK,
    3. Lee JL,
    4. et al.
    Survival outcome and treatment response of patients with late relapse from renal cell carcinoma in the era of targeted therapy. Eur Urol. 2014 6; 65 6: 1086- 1092. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.07.031. pmid:23916693
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Adamy A,
    2. Chong KT,
    3. Chade D,
    4. et al.
    Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with recurrence 5 years after nephrectomy for localized renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2011 2; 185 2: 433- 438. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.09.100. pmid:21167521
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Brookman-May S,
    2. May M,
    3. Shariat SF,
    4. et al.
    Members of the CORONA project and the SATURN project. Features associated with recurrence beyond 5 years after nephrectomy and nephron-sparing surgery for renal cell carcinoma: development and internal validation of a risk model (PRELANE score) to predict late recurrence based on a large multicenter database (CORONA/SATURN Project). Eur Urol. 2013 9; 64 3: 472- 477. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.06.030. pmid:22748912
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Heng DY,
    2. Xie W,
    3. Regan MM,
    4. et al.
    External validation and comparison with other models of the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium prognostic model: a population-based study. Lancet Oncol. 2013 2; 14 2: 141- 148. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70559-4. pmid:23312463
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Heng DY,
    2. Xie W,
    3. Regan MM,
    4. et al.
    Prognostic factors for overall survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted agents: results from a large, multicenter study. J Clin Oncol. 2009 12 1; 27 34: 5794- 5799. doi:10.1200/JCO.2008.21.4809. pmid:19826129
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Eisenhauer EA,
    2. Therasse P,
    3. Bogaerts J,
    4. et al.
    New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009 1; 45 2: 228- 247. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026. pmid:19097774
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    US Department of Health and Human Services. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 4.0. https://evs.nci.nih.gov/ftp1/CTCAE/CTCAE_4.03_2010-06-14_QuickReference_5x7.pdf. Accessed August 4, 2017.
  12. 12.↵
    1. Santoni M,
    2. Conti A,
    3. Porta C,
    4. et al.
    Sunitinib, pazopanib or sorafenib for the treatment of patients with late relapsing metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2015 1; 193 1: 41- 47. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.07.011. pmid:25046616
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. McKay RR,
    2. Kroeger N,
    3. Xie W,
    4. et al.
    Impact of bone and liver metastases on patients with renal cell carcinoma treated with targeted therapy. Eur Urol. 2014 3; 65 3: 577- 584. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.08.012. pmid:23962746
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Grassi P,
    2. Verzoni E,
    3. Mariani L,
    4. et al.
    Prognostic role of pancreatic metastases from renal cell carcinoma: results from an Italian center. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2013 12; 11 4: 484- 488. doi: 10.1016/j.clgc.2013.04.022. pmid:23791435
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Kalra S,
    2. Atkinson BJ,
    3. Matrana MR,
    4. et al.
    Prognosis of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma and pancreatic metastases. BJU Int. 2016 5; 117 5: 761- 765. doi: 10.1111/bju.13185. pmid:26032863
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Valenca LB,
    2. Hirsch MS,
    3. Choueiri TK,
    4. Harshman LC
    Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma, part 2: therapy. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol. 2015 6; 13 6: 383- 391. pmid:26352894
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Kroeger N,
    2. Xie W,
    3. Lee JL,
    4. et al.
    Metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma treated with targeted therapy agents: characterization of survival outcome and application of the International mRCC Database Consortium criteria. Cancer. 2013 8 15; 119 16: 2999- 3006. doi:10.1002/cncr.28151. pmid:23696129
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Motzer RJ,
    2. Hutson TE,
    3. Cella D,
    4. et al.
    Pazopanib versus sunitinib in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2013 8 22; 369 8: 722- 731. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1303989. pmid:23964934
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Santoni M,
    2. Buti S,
    3. Conti A,
    4. et al.
    Prognostic significance of host immune status in patients with late relapsing renal cell carcinoma treated with targeted therapy. Target Oncol. 2015 12; 10 4: 517- 522. doi: 10.1007/s11523-014-0356-3. pmid:25559290
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Ochsner Journal
Vol. 17, Issue 4
Dec 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Ochsner Journal.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Outcomes of Patients With Late-Relapse Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated With Targeted Therapies: A Single Institution Experience
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Ochsner Journal
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Ochsner Journal web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Outcomes of Patients With Late-Relapse Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated With Targeted Therapies: A Single Institution Experience
John Kucharczyk, Kamal Mandalapu, Suma Satti, Marc R. Matrana
Ochsner Journal Dec 2017, 17 (4) 331-334;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Outcomes of Patients With Late-Relapse Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated With Targeted Therapies: A Single Institution Experience
John Kucharczyk, Kamal Mandalapu, Suma Satti, Marc R. Matrana
Ochsner Journal Dec 2017, 17 (4) 331-334;
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Adductor Canal Blocks Are Not Associated With Improved Early Postoperative Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Total Knee Arthroplasty
  • Differential Impact of Body Mass Index in Hip Arthroscopy: Obesity Does Not Impact Outcomes
  • Revision Carpal Tunnel Release With Umbilical Cord Allograft: A Four-Year Retrospective Cohort Study
Show more ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Cancer–renal cell
  • metastasis
  • nephrectomy

Current Post at the Blog

No Author Credit for ChatGPT

Our Content

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive
  • Featured Contributors
  • Ochsner Journal Blog
  • Archive at PubMed Central

Information & Forms

  • Instructions for Authors
  • Instructions for Reviewers
  • Submission Checklist
  • FAQ
  • License for Publishing-Author Attestation
  • Patient Consent Form
  • Submit a Manuscript

Services & Contacts

  • Permissions
  • Sign up for our electronic table of contents
  • Feedback Form
  • Contact Us

About Us

  • Editorial Board
  • About the Ochsner Journal
  • Ochsner Health
  • University of Queensland-Ochsner Clinical School
  • Alliance of Independent Academic Medical Centers

© 2023 Ochsner Clinic Foundation

Powered by HighWire