The value of histologic subtyping on outcomes of clear cell and papillary renal cell carcinomas: A meta-analysis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the survival differences among clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and type 1 and type 2 papillary RCCs by means of a meta-analysis. METHODS: We combined data from studies published between 1997 and 2009. The effect sizes of overall survival were estimated by unadjusted or adjusted hazard ratio. Survival rates between clear cell RCC and nonclear cell RCC were compared by uni- and multivariate analyses of 3 studies including 2169 and 2455 patients, respectively. Survival outcomes between clear cell RCC and papillary RCC were compared by uni- and multivariate analyses of 17 studies involving 21,856 patients and 3 studies involving 3112 patients, respectively. Survival rates between type 1 and type 2 papillary RCCs were compared by uni- and multivariate analyses of 8 studies involving 634 patients and 5 studies involving 438 patients, respectively. RESULTS: Patients with clear cell RCC had poorer survival than patients with nonclear cell type in univariate analysis (hazard ratio, 2.02; P < .001). The overall survival of patients with clear cell RCC was not different from that of patients with papillary RCC in uni- and multivariate analyses. Patients with type 2 papillary RCC had a poorer outcome than patients with type 1 papillary RCC in uni- and multivariate analyses (hazard ratios, 2.91 and 1.80; P < .001 and P = .044, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis confirms that clear cell RCC and papillary RCC are not different in survival outcomes. In addition, type 2 papillary RCC shows poorer survival than type 1 papillary RCC.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)889-894
Number of pages6
JournalUrology
Volume76
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010 Oct 1

Fingerprint

Renal Cell Carcinoma
Meta-Analysis
Survival
Multivariate Analysis
Survival Rate

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

@article{50e07992756042f5ad454d942ea6190e,
title = "The value of histologic subtyping on outcomes of clear cell and papillary renal cell carcinomas: A meta-analysis",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: To investigate the survival differences among clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and type 1 and type 2 papillary RCCs by means of a meta-analysis. METHODS: We combined data from studies published between 1997 and 2009. The effect sizes of overall survival were estimated by unadjusted or adjusted hazard ratio. Survival rates between clear cell RCC and nonclear cell RCC were compared by uni- and multivariate analyses of 3 studies including 2169 and 2455 patients, respectively. Survival outcomes between clear cell RCC and papillary RCC were compared by uni- and multivariate analyses of 17 studies involving 21,856 patients and 3 studies involving 3112 patients, respectively. Survival rates between type 1 and type 2 papillary RCCs were compared by uni- and multivariate analyses of 8 studies involving 634 patients and 5 studies involving 438 patients, respectively. RESULTS: Patients with clear cell RCC had poorer survival than patients with nonclear cell type in univariate analysis (hazard ratio, 2.02; P < .001). The overall survival of patients with clear cell RCC was not different from that of patients with papillary RCC in uni- and multivariate analyses. Patients with type 2 papillary RCC had a poorer outcome than patients with type 1 papillary RCC in uni- and multivariate analyses (hazard ratios, 2.91 and 1.80; P < .001 and P = .044, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis confirms that clear cell RCC and papillary RCC are not different in survival outcomes. In addition, type 2 papillary RCC shows poorer survival than type 1 papillary RCC.",
author = "Ju-Han Lee and Jung-Woo Choi and Kim, {Young Sik}",
year = "2010",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.urology.2010.01.039",
language = "English",
volume = "76",
pages = "889--894",
journal = "Urology",
issn = "0090-4295",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The value of histologic subtyping on outcomes of clear cell and papillary renal cell carcinomas

T2 - A meta-analysis

AU - Lee, Ju-Han

AU - Choi, Jung-Woo

AU - Kim, Young Sik

PY - 2010/10/1

Y1 - 2010/10/1

N2 - OBJECTIVES: To investigate the survival differences among clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and type 1 and type 2 papillary RCCs by means of a meta-analysis. METHODS: We combined data from studies published between 1997 and 2009. The effect sizes of overall survival were estimated by unadjusted or adjusted hazard ratio. Survival rates between clear cell RCC and nonclear cell RCC were compared by uni- and multivariate analyses of 3 studies including 2169 and 2455 patients, respectively. Survival outcomes between clear cell RCC and papillary RCC were compared by uni- and multivariate analyses of 17 studies involving 21,856 patients and 3 studies involving 3112 patients, respectively. Survival rates between type 1 and type 2 papillary RCCs were compared by uni- and multivariate analyses of 8 studies involving 634 patients and 5 studies involving 438 patients, respectively. RESULTS: Patients with clear cell RCC had poorer survival than patients with nonclear cell type in univariate analysis (hazard ratio, 2.02; P < .001). The overall survival of patients with clear cell RCC was not different from that of patients with papillary RCC in uni- and multivariate analyses. Patients with type 2 papillary RCC had a poorer outcome than patients with type 1 papillary RCC in uni- and multivariate analyses (hazard ratios, 2.91 and 1.80; P < .001 and P = .044, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis confirms that clear cell RCC and papillary RCC are not different in survival outcomes. In addition, type 2 papillary RCC shows poorer survival than type 1 papillary RCC.

AB - OBJECTIVES: To investigate the survival differences among clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and type 1 and type 2 papillary RCCs by means of a meta-analysis. METHODS: We combined data from studies published between 1997 and 2009. The effect sizes of overall survival were estimated by unadjusted or adjusted hazard ratio. Survival rates between clear cell RCC and nonclear cell RCC were compared by uni- and multivariate analyses of 3 studies including 2169 and 2455 patients, respectively. Survival outcomes between clear cell RCC and papillary RCC were compared by uni- and multivariate analyses of 17 studies involving 21,856 patients and 3 studies involving 3112 patients, respectively. Survival rates between type 1 and type 2 papillary RCCs were compared by uni- and multivariate analyses of 8 studies involving 634 patients and 5 studies involving 438 patients, respectively. RESULTS: Patients with clear cell RCC had poorer survival than patients with nonclear cell type in univariate analysis (hazard ratio, 2.02; P < .001). The overall survival of patients with clear cell RCC was not different from that of patients with papillary RCC in uni- and multivariate analyses. Patients with type 2 papillary RCC had a poorer outcome than patients with type 1 papillary RCC in uni- and multivariate analyses (hazard ratios, 2.91 and 1.80; P < .001 and P = .044, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis confirms that clear cell RCC and papillary RCC are not different in survival outcomes. In addition, type 2 papillary RCC shows poorer survival than type 1 papillary RCC.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77957755658&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77957755658&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.urology.2010.01.039

DO - 10.1016/j.urology.2010.01.039

M3 - Article

C2 - 20350752

AN - SCOPUS:77957755658

VL - 76

SP - 889

EP - 894

JO - Urology

JF - Urology

SN - 0090-4295

IS - 4

ER -