Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hara, I.
Right arrow Articles by Kamidono, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hara, I.
Right arrow Articles by Kamidono, S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology 32:291-295 (2002)
© 2002 Foundation for Promotion of Cancer Research

Clinical Outcome of Surgical Resection for Renal Cell Carcinoma

Isao Hara, Shoji Hara, Hideaki Miyake, Mototsugu Muramaki, Satoko Hikosaka, Akinobu Gotoh, Masato Fujisawa, Hiroshi Okada, Soichi Arakawa and Sadao Kamidono+

Department of Urology, Kobe University School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan

Purpose: To evaluate prognostic factors for patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) who had undergone surgical resection.

Patients and methods: We analyzed data from 371 patients with RCC who had undergone surgical resection. Prognostic factors were identified from clinical and pathological data using univariate and multivariate analysis.

Results: When we analyzed all patients including lymph node metastasis, multivariate analysis showed that only pN factor was an independent prognostic factor. We then analyzed 359 patients without lymph node metastasis, and the presence of symptoms, pT, grade, IFN and venous involvement were considered significant. However, pT (pT1 vs pT2–4), tumor grade and presence of symptom were judged to be independent prognostic factors by multivariate analysis. When the patients were stratified according to the tumor size (2.5, 4, 7 cm), a significant difference in disease specific survival was found by 4 and 7 cm, but not by 2.5 cm.

Conclusions: The current TNM staging accurately predicts patient survival. Tumor grade is also an important prognostic factor for patients with RCC.

+ For reprints and all correspondence: Isao Hara, Department of Urology, Kobe University School of Medicine, 7–5–1, Kusunoki-cho, Chuo-ku, Kobe 650-0017, Japan. Email: hara@med.kobe-u.ac.jp


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.