Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Influence of border-age on survival of sporadic renal cell carcinoma: young adults versus octogenarians

  • Urology - Original Paper
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the effects of two border-age groups: young adults and octogenarians on survival of sporadic renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

Methods

We reviewed the records of 1619 patients that underwent radical or partial nephrectomy due to RCC between January 2004 and December 2018 in two high-volume centers. Patients were divided into two groups based on their age: ≤ 40 years old (group 1) and ≥ 80 years old (group 2). We analyzed the demographic, clinical and histological features of the groups and performed univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses to evaluate predictors associated with survival.

Results

Median ages of patients were 35.5 years and 82 years in group 1 (n = 90) and group 2 (n = 55), respectively. Radical nephrectomy rate was statistically higher in group 2 (p = 0.004). Median follow-up was 72 (11–192) months in group 1 and 30 months (5–103) in group 2 (p < 0.001). The 5-year (90.2% vs. 80.2%) and 8-year (84.8% vs. 60.2%) overall survivals (OS) of the groups were statistically different (p < 0.001). Patients in group 1 demonstrated a 5 and 10-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) of 90.2% and 84.7%, whereas these rates were 82.4% and 54.9% for group 2 (p < 0.05). We found that higher hemoglobin drop (HR: 1.497), presence of sarcomatoid differentiation (HR: 4.307), high-stage disease (HR: 2.704), and metastasis detected in the follow-up (HR: 12.805) were independent risk factors that shortened OS (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Sporadic RCC was associated with a more favorable CSS and OS in young adults compared to the octogenarians. Although two border-age groups had similar pathologies, they have different prognosis and survival rates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Corcoran AT, Russo P, Lowrance WT et al (2013) A review of contemporary data on surgically resected renal masses–benign or malignant? Urology 81:707–713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. SEER Stat Fact Sheets: Kidney and Renal Pelvis Cancer. https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/kidrp.html. Accessed 20 Jan 2015

  3. Smith-Bindman R, Miglioretti DL, Johnson E et al (2012) Use of diagnostic imaging studies and associated radiation exposure for patients enrolled in large integrated health care systems 1996–2010. JAMA 307:2400–2409

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Senior adult oncology (version 2.2011) 2011. https://www.nccn.org. Accessed Dec 2011

  5. Chow WH, Devesa SS, Warren JL, Fraumeni JF Jr (1999) Rising incidence of renal cell cancer in the United States. JAMA 281:1628–1631

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Rodriguez A, Patard JJ, Lobel B (2002) Renal cell carcinoma in young adults: incidence, disease outcome and review of the literature. Arch Esp Urol 55:969–975

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Goetzl MA, Desai M, Mansukhani M et al (2004) Natural history and clinical outcome of sporadic renal cortical tumors diagnosed in the young adult. Urology 63:41–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Rainwater LM, Zincke H, Farrow GM, Gonchoroff NJ (1991) Renal cell carcinoma in young and old patients. Comparison of prognostic pathologic variables (cell type, tumor grade and stage, and DNA ploidy pattern) and their impact on disease outcome. Urology 38:1–5

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Sanchez-Ortiz RF, Rosser CJ, Madsen LT et al (2004) Young age is an independent prognostic factor for survival of sporadic renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 171:2160–2165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gillett MD, Cheville JC, Karnes RJ et al (2005) Comparison of presentation and outcome for patients 18 to 40 and 60 to 70 years old with solid renal masses. J Urol 173:1893–1896

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Thompson RH, Ordonez MA, Iasonos A et al (2008) Renal cell carcinoma in young and old patients—is there a difference? J Urol 180:1262–1266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Taccoen X, Valeri A, Descotes JL et al (2007) Renal cell carcinoma in adults 40 years old or less: young age is an independent prognostic factor for cancer-specific survival. Eur Urol 51:980–987

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. World Health Organization (2015) Health in older age. In: Bustreo F, Beard J, Officer A, Cassels A (eds) World report on ageing and health. World Health Organization, Geneva, pp 43–88

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sacher AG, Dahlberg SE, Heng J et al (2016) Association between younger age and targetable genomic alterations and prognosis in non-small-cell lung cancer. JAMA Oncol 2:313–320. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.4482

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Brandt J, Garne JP, Tengrup I et al (2015) Age at diagnosis in relation to survival following breast cancer: a cohort study. World J Surg Oncol 13:33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Sun M, Abdollah F, Bianchi M et al (2011) A stage-for-stage and grade-for-grade analysis of cancer-specific mortality rates in renal cell carcinoma according to age: a competing-risks regression analysis. Eur Urol 60:1152–1159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Komai Y, Fujii Y, Iimura Y et al (2011) Young age as favourable prognostic factor for cancer-specific survival in localized renal cell carcinoma. Urology 77:842–847

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cancer Research UK (2020) Kidney cancer incidence statistics 2020. https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/kidney-cancer/incidence#heading-One. Accessed June 2020

  19. Turkish Statistical Institute. Main Statistics, Population and Demography, Life Tables. \\PreIstatistikTablo.do?istab_id=2296"\t "_blank"Life expectancy at birth in European countries by sex 2017. https://www.turkstat.gov.tr/UstMenu.do?metod=temelist. Accessed June 2020

  20. Bandini M, Marchioni M, Pompe RS, Tian Z, Martel T, Chun FK et al (2018) The effect of age on cancer-specific mortality in patients with small renal masses: a population-based analysis. Can Urol Assoc J. 12:E325–E330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Glassock RJ, Winearls C (2009) Ageing and the glomerular filtration rate: truths and consequences. Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc 120:419–428

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Yusim I, Mermershtain W, Neulander E et al (2002) Influence of age on the prognosis of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Onkologie 25:548–550

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Siemer S, Hack M, Lehmann J et al (2006) Outcome of renal tumors in young adults. J Urol. 175:1240–1243

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Maher ER (2018) Hereditary renal cell carcinoma syndromes: diagnosis, surveillance and management. World J Urol 36:1891–1898

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Shuch B, Vourganti S, Ricketts CJ et al (2014) Defining early-onset kidney cancer: implications for germline and somatic mutation testing and clinical management. J Clin Oncol 32:431–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lubensky IA, Schmidt L, Zhuang Z et al (1999) Hereditary and sporadic papillary renal carcinomas with c-met mutations share a distinct morphological phenotype. Am J Pathol 155:517–526

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Schmidt LS, Warren MB, Nickerson ML et al (2001) Birt–Hogg–Dube´ syndrome, a genodermatosis associated with spontaneous pneumothorax and kidney neoplasia, maps to chromosome 17p11.2. Am J Hum Genet 69:876–882

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Duffey BG, Choyke PL, Glenn G et al (2004) The relationship between renal tumor size and metastases in patients with von Hippel-Lindau disease. J Urol 172:63–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Duffey BG, Choyke PL, Glenn G et al (2006) Novel mutations in FH and expansion of the spectrum of phenotypes expressed in families with hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer. J Med Genet 43:18–27

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors declared that this study has received no financial support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Istanbul Medeniyet University Goztepe Training and Research Hospital, Eğitim Mahallesi, Dr. Erkin Cd., Kadıköy, 34722, Istanbul, Turkey

    Mehmet Çağlar Çakıcı, Özgür Efiloğlu, Gökhan Atış & Asıf Yıldırım

  2. Department of Urology, Health Sciences University, Izmir Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkey

    Erdem Kısa, Mehmet Yiğit Yalçın, Cem Yücel & Yusuf Özlem İlbey

Authors
  1. Mehmet Çağlar Çakıcı
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erdem Kısa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mehmet Yiğit Yalçın
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Özgür Efiloğlu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Cem Yücel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Gökhan Atış
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yusuf Özlem İlbey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Asıf Yıldırım
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehmet Çağlar Çakıcı.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Çakıcı, M.Ç., Kısa, E., Yalçın, M.Y. et al. Influence of border-age on survival of sporadic renal cell carcinoma: young adults versus octogenarians. Int Urol Nephrol 52, 2087–2095 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-020-02552-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-020-02552-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation