Active surveillance of renal masses: an analysis of growth kinetics and clinical outcomes stratified by radiological characteristics at diagnosis

Growth kinetics and predictive factors in renal angiomyolipomas

BACKGROUND

Although renal angiomyolipomas (AMLs) are benign lesions, they can grow and cause serious complications. In this study, we aimed to determine the factors affecting the growth of renal AMLs.

METHOD

Patients followed up for AMLs between January 2014 and January 2024 were screened. By accepting 2.5 mm/year as the limit for a significant growth rate, the patients were divided into two groups: those with and without significant growth. Demographic characteristics, tumor characteristics, and laboratory parameters, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and aspartate aminotransferase-to-alanine aminotransferase (De Ritis) ratio, were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

The study included a total of 98 patients. Of the entire cohort, 78.6% were women. Significant growth was detected in nine (9.2%) patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that the baseline scan tumor size, PLR, and De Ritis ratio were significant independent predictors of significant AML growth (p = 0.011, p = 0.017, and p = 0.030, respectively). In the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the cut-off value of PLR in predicting significant growth was 131.85 (sensitivity: 77.8%, specificity: 73%, area under the curve [AUC] 0754), while the cut-off value of the De Ritis ratio was 1.33 (sensitivity: 66.7%, specificity: 95.8%, AUC 0.721).

CONCLUSION

Tumor size at the time of initial diagnosis, as well as PLR and De Ritis ratio, were found to be independent predictors of AML growth rate. The use of these factors in patient follow-up has the potential to assist clinicians in predicting tumor growth and related complications.

Natural History and Management of Ultrasound-detected Small Renal Angiomyolipoma

Background

Recent advances in imaging methods increased the incidental detection of small renal angiomyolipoma (AML). However, guidelines for managing small AML are lacking, and decisions about imaging frequency and timing of intervention are made on an individual basis. This study aims to investigate the clinical behavior of small sporadic AML and propose an optimal follow-up strategy.

Methods

The study is a retrospective analysis of 168 individuals who had hyperechoic lesions, suggestive of AML detected during abdominal ultrasound as a part of their health checkup. The clinical information of the individuals, including tumor characteristics and renal function, was reviewed. Statistical analysis was performed to identify factors associated with tumor growth and renal function.

Results

Most AMLs were small (≤20 mm) and did not exhibit malignant characteristics. The tumors showed a slow growth rate, with a mean growth rate of 0.24 mm/year. Only a small proportion of cases (1.2%) required intervention due to significant enlargement. Factors such as tumor size and gender were not significantly associated with tumor growth rate or renal function. However, younger patients showed a higher tumor growth rate and a more pronounced decline in renal function.

Conclusion

Small sporadic AMLs have a slow growth rate and little risk of malignancy. Neither tumor size nor gender was predictive factors for tumor growth or renal function. Nevertheless, close monitoring of tumor growth and renal function is advised, particularly in younger patients. This study highlights the need for further research and guidelines to establish an optimal surveillance protocol for small AMLs.

Evaluation of Growth Rates for Small Renal Masses in Elderly Patients Undergoing Active Surveillance

Background

As the adoption of active surveillance (AS) for small renal masses (SRMs) grows, the number of elderly patients enrolled for a prolonged period of time will increase. However, our understanding of comparative growth rates (GRs) in aging patients with SRMs remains poor.

Objective

To examine whether particular age cutoffs are associated with an increased GR for patients undergoing AS for SRMs.

Design setting and participants

We identified all patients with SRMs enrolled in the multi-institutional, prospective Delayed Intervention and Surveillance for Small Renal Masses (DISSRM) registry since 2009 who elected for AS.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Two definitions of GR were examined: GR from the initial image (GRi) and GR from the prior image (GRp). Image measurements were dichotomized based on patient age at the time of imaging. Multiple age cutoffs were examined: 65, 70, 75, and 80 yr. Mixed-effect linear regression examined the associations between age and GR, with controlling to account for multiple measurements from the same individual.

Results and limitations

We examined 2542 measurements from 571 patients. The median age at enrollment was 70.9 yr (interquartile range [IQR] 63.2-77.4) with a median tumor diameter of 1.8 cm (IQR 1.4-2.5). As a continuous variable, age was not associated with GRi (-0.0001 cm/yr, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.007 to 0.007, p = 0.97) or GRp (0.008 cm/yr, 95% CI -0.004 to 0.020, p = 0.17) after adjustment. The only age thresholds associated with an increased GR were 65 yr for GRi and 70 yr for GRp. Limitations include the one-dimensional nature of the measurements used.

Conclusions

Increased age for patients on AS for SRMs is not associated with increased GRs.

Patient summary

We examined whether patients undergoing active surveillance (AS) exhibited accelerated growth of their small renal masses (SRMs) after a certain age. No demonstrable change was seen, suggesting that AS is a safe and durable management option for aging patients with SRMs.

Active Surveillance for Renal Angiomyolipoma Less Than 4 Centimeters: A Systematic Review of Cohort Studies

The aim of this review is to evaluate the current evidence regarding the best management in terms of active surveillance of angiomyolipoma (AML) cases less than 4 cm, particularly the optimal timing of active surveillance. In addition, we aimed to describe their initial size, clinical presentation, and growth rates. The present systematic review included prospective and retrospective studies that evaluated and followed up patients with AML through active surveillance. Studies were retrieved through an online bibliographic search of the Medline database via PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from their inception to January 2022. Seven studies were included in the present systematic review. Concerning the active surveillance protocol, only four studies describe the frequency of active surveillance and the utilized imaging modality. Some studies followed up lesions by ultrasound annually for two to five years, while other studies followed-up patients twice for the first year, then annually for a median follow-up period of 49 (9-89) months. The used modalities were ultrasound, CT, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Notably, the incidence of spontaneous bleeding was consistent across the included studies (ranging from 2.3 - 3.1%), except for one study which showed an incidence rate of 15.3%. In terms of the need for active treatment, the rate of active treatment was slightly higher in some studies than the others. However, this variation could not be considered clinically relevant to favor one surveillance strategy over the other. We concluded that active surveillance is the first line of management in all small asymptomatic ALMs. ALMs less than 2 cm do not require active surveillance. The current published literature suggested that active surveillance for two years may provide the same benefits as a five-year surveillance strategy, with fewer radiation hazards and less socioeconomic burden.

Intermediate- and long-term oncological outcomes of active surveillance for localized renal masses: a systematic review and quantitative analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate intermediate- and long-term oncological outcomes of active surveillance (AS) for localized renal masses (LRMs).

METHODS

This systematic literature review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021230416). Studies on AS for LRMs with at least 3 years' follow-up were eligible. Two review authors independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcomes were metastasis rate, renal cell carcinoma (RCC)-specific mortality (RCC-SM) and all-cause mortality (ACM). Pooled estimates were obtained from random-effects models. Subgroup analyses were performed for small renal masses (SRMs; ≤4 cm) and non-SRMs (>4 cm).

RESULTS

We analysed 18 unique cohorts comprising 2066 patients. The pooled initial maximum tumour size was 2.8 cm (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.7-3.0) and the percutaneous biopsy rate was 28%. The pooled mean annual growth rate was 2.8 mm (95% CI 2.1-3.4). Within a pooled mean follow-up of 53 months, 2.1% (95% CI 1.0-3.6) of patients developed metastatic disease, 1.0% (95% CI 0.3-2.1) died from RCC and 22.6% (95% CI 15.8-30.2) died from any cause. For patients with SRMs (nine studies, n = 987), the pooled metastasis rate was 1.8% (95% CI 0.5-3.7), RCC-SM was 0.6% (95% CI 0-2.1), and ACM was 28.5% (95% CI 17.4-41.4). Across five studies reporting on outcomes of 239 patients with non-SRMs, the pooled metastasis rate was 5.1% (95% CI 0-17.3), RCC-SM was 2.1% (95% CI 0-8.9) and ACM was 29.1% (95% CI 13.6-47.3). This review is limited by non-standardized inclusion criteria, definitions and follow-up, data heterogeneity, limited patient numbers in sub-analyses and absence of high-quality studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Active surveillance is a safe intermediate- and long-term management option for well-selected patients with LRMs, especially those with SRMs. Limited data are available for non-SRMs, but current evidence would support further evaluation of this approach in selected patients. It is not possible to draw definitive conclusions until more high-quality data become available.

Active surveillance of small renal masses

Most renal masses incidentally detected by cross-sectional images are benign, being mainly cysts, and if they are malignant, they are indolent in nature with limited metastatic potential. Enhanced renal masses less than 4 cm in size are known as small renal masses (SRMs), and their growth rate (GR) and the possibility of developing metastasis are extremely low. Delayed intervention of SRMs by closed and routine imaging follow-up known as active surveillance (AS) is now an option according to urological guidelines. Radiologists have a key position in AS management of SRMs even unifocal and multifocal (sporadic or associated with genetic syndromes) and also in the follow-up of complex renal cysts by Bosniak cyst classification system. Radiologists play a key role in the AS of both unifocal and multifocal (sporadic or associated with genetic syndromes) SRMs as well as in the follow-up of complex renal cysts using the Bosniak cyst classification system. Indeed, radiologists must determine which patients with SRMs or complex renal cysts can be included in AS, establish the follow-up radiological test algorithm to be used in different scenarios, perform measurements in follow-up tests, and decide when AS should be discontinued. The purpose of this article is to review the indications and management of AS in SRMs, especially focused on specific scenarios, such as complex renal cysts and multifocal renal tumors (sporadic or hereditary). In this work, the authors aimed to provide a thorough review of imaging in the context of active surveillance of renal masses.

Role of Active Surveillance for Localized Small Renal Masses

CONTEXT

Stage migration of organ-confined renal masses is occurring as a result of incidental diagnosis, especially in the elderly. Active surveillance (AS) is gaining clinical traction as a treatment alternative to surgery and focal therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To assess contemporary data and evaluate AS risk trade-offs in the treatment of organ-confined kidney cancer.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A comprehensive search of the Embase, Medline and Cochrane databases was carried out. A systematic review of the role of AS for organ-confined renal masses was performed. A total of 28 studies were included in the systematic review.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The median linear tumor growth rate for clinically localized renal masses (CLRMs) was 0.37cm/yr (interquartile range 0.15-0.7), with 0.22cm/yr in the cT1a subgroup and 0.45cm/yr in the cT1b--2 subgroup. The metastatic progression rate was 1-6% and was similar for cT1a (1-6%) and cT1b (0-5%); other-cause mortality for patients with CLRMs was 0-45% (1-25% for cT1a vs 11-13% for cT1b-2); cancer-specific mortality ranged between 0% and 18%. According to the 2011 Oxford scale, AS as a treatment option for CLRMs remains supported by level 3 evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Although no randomized clinical data are available, current data support oncologic safety for AS in the management of CLRMs, particularly for small renal masses and among elderly and/or comorbid patients.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this review we looked at the outcomes for patients with small kidney masses managed with surveillance. We found that surveillance is a safe initial option for tumors of less than 2cm, especially in elderly and sick patients.

Active Surveillance for Localized Renal Masses: Tumor Growth, Delayed Intervention Rates, and >5-yr Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Active surveillance (AS) has gained acceptance as a management strategy for localized renal masses.

OBJECTIVE

To review our large single-center experience with AS.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

From 2000 to 2016, we identified 457 patients with 544 lesions managed with AS from our prospectively maintained kidney cancer database. A subset analysis was performed for patients with ≥5-yr follow-up without delayed intervention (DI).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Linear growth rates (LGRs) were estimated using linear regression for the initial LGR (iLGR) AS interval and the entire AS period. Overall survival (OS) and cumulative incidence of DI were estimated with Kaplan-Meier methods utilizing iLGR groups, adjusting for covariates. DI was evaluated for association with OS in Cox models.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Median follow-up was 67 mo (interquartile range [IQR] 41-94 mo) for surviving patients. Cumulative incidence of DI (n=153) after 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 yr was 9%, 22%, 29%, 35%, and 42%, respectively. Median initial maximum tumor dimension was 2.1cm (IQR 1.5-3.1cm). Median iLGR and overall LGR were 1.9 (IQR 0-7) and 1.9 (IQR 0.3-4.2) mm/yr, respectively. Compared with the no growth group, low iLGR (hazard ratio [HR] 1.25, 95% cumulative incidence [CI] 0.82-1.91), moderate iLGR (HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.31-3.36), and high iLGR (HR 1.87, 95% CI 1.23-2.84) were associated with DI (p=0.003). The iLGR was not associated with OS (p=0.8). DI was not associated with OS (HR 1.34, 95% CI 0.79-2.29, p=0.3). Five-year cancer-specific mortality (CSM) was 1.2% (95% CI 0.4-2.8%). Of 99 patients on AS without DI for >5 yr, one patient metastasized.

CONCLUSIONS

At >5 yr, AS±DI is a successful strategy in carefully managed patients. DI often occurs in the first 2-3 yr, becoming less likely over time. Rare metastasis and low CSM rates should reassure physicians that AS is safe in the intermediate to long term.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this report, we looked at the outcomes of patients with kidney masses who elected to enroll in active surveillance rather than immediate surgery. We found that patients who need surgery are often identified early and those who remain on active surveillance become less likely to need surgery over time. We concluded that active surveillance with or without delayed surgery is a safe practice and that, when properly managed and followed, patients are unlikely to metastasize or die from kidney cancer.

Active Surveillance for Small Renal Masses: When Less is More

CONTEXT

A marked increase in incidentally detected small renal masses (SRMs) has occurred over the past decade. Active surveillance (AS) has emerged as an initial management option for these patients.

OBJECTIVE

(1) To determine selection criteria, assess appropriate imaging modalities and surveillance frequencies, and define triggers for delayed intervention (DI) for patients on AS. (2) To describe oncologic outcomes for patients on AS protocols.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The PubMed database was queried for English language articles using the keywords "surveillance" and "renal mass" or "renal cell carcinoma" or "kidney cancer." The level of evidence, sample size, study design, and relevance to the review were considered as inclusion criteria.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 69 manuscripts were included in the review. Selection criteria at initial evaluation for patients interested in AS include patient-related factors (eg, age, baseline renal function, other comorbidities), tumor-related factors (size, complexity, history of growth, possible renal mass biopsy), and patient preferences (illness uncertainty, quality of life). Cross-sectional imaging is the preferred initial imaging modality. Surveillance imaging should be performed at frequent intervals (3-4 mo) up front; intervals can be reduced over time if favorable growth kinetics are demonstrated. Delayed intervention (DI) should be considered for rapid tumor growth (eg,>0.5cm/yr), an increase in maximum tumor diameter >3-4cm, malignant renal mass biopsy results, development of symptoms, or patient preferences. Oncologic outcomes in well-controlled studies demonstrate a metastatic rate of 1-2%. Most patients who undergo DI remain eligible for nephron-sparing approaches; oncologic outcomes are not compromised by DI strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

A period of initial AS is safe for most patients with SRMs. Management decisions should focus on a thorough assessment of risk-benefit trade-offs, judiciously integrating patient-related factors, tumor-related factors, and patient preferences.

PATIENT SUMMARY

A period of initial active surveillance for kidney masses of ≤4cm in diameter is safe in most patients. Frequent imaging and follow-up are necessary to determine if the tumor grows. If delayed intervention becomes necessary, cancer outcomes are not compromised by the initial choice of active surveillance when patients adhere to close follow-up regimens.

Active Surveillance for the Small Renal Mass: Growth Kinetics and Oncologic Outcomes

Active surveillance for small renal masses (SRMs) is an accepted management strategy for patients with prohibitive surgical risk. Emerging prospectively collected data support the concept that a period of initial active surveillance in an adherent patient population with well-defined criteria for delayed intervention is safe. This article summarizes the literature describing growth kinetics of SRMs managed initially with observation and oncologic outcomes for patients managed with active surveillance. Existing clinical tools to determine and contextualize competing risks to mortality are explored. Finally, current prospective clinical trials with defined eligibility criteria, surveillance schema, and triggers for delayed intervention are highlighted.

Management of Small Renal Masses: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

Purpose To provide recommendations for the management options for patients with small renal masses (SRMs). Methods By using a literature search and prospectively defined study selection, we sought systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized clinical trials, prospective comparative observational studies, and retrospective studies published from 2000 through 2015. Outcomes included recurrence-free survival, disease-specific survival, and overall survival. Results Eighty-three studies, including 20 systematic reviews and 63 primary studies, met the eligibility criteria and form the evidentiary basis for the guideline recommendations. Recommendations On the basis of tumor-specific findings and competing risks of mortality, all patients with an SRM should be considered for a biopsy when the results may alter management. Active surveillance should be an initial management option for patients who have significant comorbidities and limited life expectancy. Partial nephrectomy (PN) for SRMs is the standard treatment that should be offered to all patients for whom an intervention is indicated and who possess a tumor that is amenable to this approach. Percutaneous thermal ablation should be considered an option if complete ablation can reliably be achieved. Radical nephrectomy for SRMs should only be reserved for patients who possess a tumor of significant complexity that is not amenable to PN or for whom PN may result in unacceptable morbidity even when performed at centers with expertise. Referral to a nephrologist should be considered if chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate < 45 mL/min/1.73 m²) or progressive chronic kidney disease occurs after treatment, especially if associated with proteinuria.

The role of active surveillance of small renal masses

INTRODUCTION

The use of modern abdominal imaging modalities have led in recent years to an increased incidental diagnosis of small renal masses (SRMs), especially in elderly patients. The natural history of SRMs has been historically poorly understood because most have been traditionally surgically removed soon after diagnosis. However, several studies of active surveillance (AS) of SRMs have been published in the last decade.

METHODS

A review of English-language publications on AS of SRMs was performed from 1995 to 2015 using the Medline, Embase and Web of Science databases. Fifty-six articles were selected based on their scientific relevance and critically analysed.

RESULTS

When followed conservatively with serial imaging, SRMs have variable growth rates with an average of 0.31 cm/year in the largest multicenter analysis. A significant number of SRMs have a slow growth and some have zero growth under surveillance. The risk of progression to metastatic disease during AS is rare (1-2%). Population-based analyses in older patient populations (>75 years) fail to show a benefit in cancer-specific mortality for surgical treatment of SRMs.

DISCUSSION

The standard of care for localized renal tumors is surgery. In elderly or unfit patients with decreased life expectancy, it is reasonable to propose an initial period of AS, with delayed intervention for those tumors which exhibit a fast growth during follow-up. At present AS is not recommended in younger and fit patients and for masses >4 cm at diagnosis outside clinical trials. Percutaneous needle biopsies of renal tumors have the potential to characterize histologically SRMs at diagnosis, thereby providing useful information for the selection of the best suited patients for AS.

CONCLUSIONS

Most SRMs are benign tumors or RCCs with a relatively indolent clinical behaviour. AS can be offered to patients with SRMs and decreased life expectancy. Prospective series of AS of histologically confirmed RCCs are needed to confirm the long term safety of this conservative approach.