% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Wagener:128703,
author = {N. Wagener and D. Edelmann$^*$ and A. Benner$^*$ and R.
Zigeuner and H. Borgmann and I. Wolff and L. M. Krabbe and
M. Musquera and P. Dell'Oglio and U. Capitanio and T. Klatte
and L. Cindolo and M. May and S. D. Brookman-May},
collaboration = {E. A. o. Urology},
title = {{O}utcome of papillary versus clear cell renal cell
carcinoma varies significantly in non-metastatic disease.},
journal = {PLoS one},
volume = {12},
number = {9},
issn = {1932-6203},
address = {Lawrence, Kan.},
publisher = {PLoS},
reportid = {DKFZ-2017-04718},
pages = {e0184173 -},
year = {2017},
abstract = {Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) comprises a heterogenous group
of tumors. Traditionally, papillary RCC (pRCC) is associated
with a favorable outcome compared to clear cell RCC (ccRCC),
while other series report equivalent or worse prognosis. In
this paper we comparatively evaluate outcome of pRCC versus
ccRCC in two large multi-institutional databases (cohort
study), including distribution of pRCC subtypes 1 and 2.
Retrospective data of 1,943 surgically treated pRCC patients
from 17 European/ North American centers between 1984-2015
were compared to 5,600 ccRCC patients from a database
comprising 11 European/ North American centers (1984-2011).
Median follow-up was 64.6 months. Differences between pRCC,
subtypes, and ccRCC were compared with t-tests,
$Chi^2-tests,$ and exact Fisher tests. Cancer-specific
mortality was analyzed with cumulative incidence curves and
Cox cause-specific hazard models. The robustness of our
results was examined with sensitivity analyses. We present
that cancer-specific mortality rates and variables as stage,
lymph node, and distant metastasis differ significantly
between groups. Furthermore, we demonstrate that patients
with non-metastatic pRCC had a significantly better
cancer-specific mortality (HR 0.76, p = 0.007), when
compared to ccRCC. Additionally, pRCC type 2 versus ccRCC
exhibited no difference in cancer-specific mortality (HR
0.9, p = 0.722), whereas pRCC type 1 versus ccRCC displayed
a risk of death reduced by $69\%$ (p = 0.044). Taken
together, outcome of pRCC versus ccRCC varies significantly
in non-metastatic disease. Furthermore, pRCC type 2
exhibited no difference in cancer-specific mortality,
whereas pRCC type 1 displayed a significantly reduced risk
of death. Consequently, there is urgent need to respect
histopathological entities and their subtypes, when
assigning follow-up or targeted therapy to RCC patients.},
cin = {C060},
ddc = {500},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)C060-20160331},
pnm = {313 - Cancer risk factors and prevention (POF3-313)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-313},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:28934212},
pmc = {pmc:PMC5608215},
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0184173},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/128703},
}