Urine Molecular Biomarkers for Detection and Follow-Up of Small Renal Masses

Žalimas, Algirdas; Kubiliūtė, Raimonda; Žukauskaitė, Kristina; Sabaliauskaitė, Rasa; Trakymas, Mantas; Letautienė, Simona; Kaubrienė, Edita Mišeikytė; Ušinskienė, Jurgita; Ulys, Albertas; Jarmalaitė, Sonata

doi:10.3390/ijms232416110

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our systematic literature review revealed 19 studies comprising 5105 patients [6,7,[21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37] (Tables 1 and 2). Five of the 19 studies had a small sample size (<50 patients) [23,25,26,33,36]. Most articles reported results from single-center retrospective databases.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most articles reported results from single-center retrospective databases. Six papers were prospective: three from the DISSRM registry [7,27,28], one from RC 4 (Renal Cell Carcinoma Consortium of Canada) [6], one reported a pooled analysis of RC 4 cohort and a single center retrospective data [34], and one from a single center cohort [33].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Instead TUNEL positive ratio, which detects DNA fragmentation due to apoptosis, correlated with GR and grade 3 tumors were found to have a higher GR compared to that of grade 2 tumors. Zalimas et al [33] analyzed urine molecular biomarkers for detection and follow-up of SRMs, finding a lower level of methylation on urines of the biomarker TFA2B.…”

Section: Immunohistochemical and Molecular Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Patient Selection for Active Surveillance for Small Renal Masses: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Distante,

Bertolo,

Campi

et al. 2024

Kidney Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: The role of active surveillance (AS) has been recognized as a management strategy for localized small renal masses (SRMs). The EAU guidelines suggest AS can be offered to frail and/or comorbid patients diagnosed with SRM due to the low cancer-specific-mortality (CSM) and higher competing-cause mortality. As specific cut-offs defining the characteristics of frail and comorbid patients who may benefit from AS remain less clear, our objective is to conduct a systematic review aiming to identify potential characteristics that could assist physicians in shared decision-making. METHODS: The systematic literature review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Two authors independently screened the literature according to the PICOs criteria previously outlined in our registered review protocol (via Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias, using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Studies that analyzed differences in patient’s tumor-related and molecular characteristics associated with any differences in growth rate (GR), overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and metastasis-free survival (MFS), were considered eligible. RESULTS: Nineteen studies comprising a total of 5105 patients were analyzed. Patient-specific factors such as age and cardiovascular index, which demonstrated a predominant impact on OS, exhibited a high degree of consistency across the analyzed studies. Less concordance was found when exploring GR, with the main predictors being ethnicity, age, sex, comorbidity, symptoms, and eGFR. The analysis of tumor-related characteristics, such as tumor size, nephrometry score, and mass histology, among others, yielded contradictory outcomes concerning their impact on GR and CSS. CONCLUSION: Age, cardiovascular index, and chronic kidney disease have shown to be reliable predictors of OS. Nonetheless, significant debates persist regarding tumor characteristics or molecular markers that may influence survival and GR. Further research is awaited to shed light on the potential to identify prognostic factors. This would aid in pinpointing the subgroup of patients who could experience additional benefits from AS, potentially leading to a reduced risk of progression. It is imperative to standardize approaches to AS and reporting of results, as this will be pivotal for future quantitative analyses.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Immunohistochemical and Molecular Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Patient Selection for Active Surveillance for Small Renal Masses: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Distante,

Bertolo,

Campi

et al. 2024

Kidney Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Detection and Validation of Organic Metabolites in Urine for Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma Diagnosis

Holbrook,

Quaye,

Noriega Landa

et al. 2024

Metabolites

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) comprises the majority, approximately 70–80%, of renal cancer cases and often remains asymptomatic until incidentally detected during unrelated abdominal imaging or at advanced stages. Currently, standardized screening tests for renal cancer are lacking, which presents challenges in disease management and improving patient outcomes. This study aimed to identify ccRCC-specific volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the urine of ccRCC-positive patients and develop a urinary VOC-based diagnostic model. Methods: This study involved 233 pretreatment ccRCC patients and 43 healthy individuals. VOC analysis utilized stir-bar sorptive extraction coupled with thermal desorption gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (SBSE-TD-GC/MS). A ccRCC diagnostic model was established via logistic regression, trained on 163 ccRCC cases versus 31 controls, and validated with 70 ccRCC cases versus 12 controls, resulting in a ccRCC diagnostic model involving 24 VOC markers. Results: The findings demonstrated promising diagnostic efficacy, with an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.94, 86% sensitivity, and 92% specificity. Conclusions: This study highlights the feasibility of using urine as a reliable biospecimen for identifying VOC biomarkers in ccRCC. While further validation in larger cohorts is necessary, this study’s capability to differentiate between ccRCC and control groups, despite sample size limitations, holds significant promise.

show abstract

Urine Molecular Biomarkers for Detection and Follow-Up of Small Renal Masses

Cited by 2 publications

References 41 publications

Patient Selection for Active Surveillance for Small Renal Masses: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Patient Selection for Active Surveillance for Small Renal Masses: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Detection and Validation of Organic Metabolites in Urine for Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma Diagnosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About