Primary renal lymphoma: report of three new cases and literature review.

OBJECTIVES We report the cases of three patients with primary renal lymphoma. Diagnosis and subsequent treatment are discussed. METHODS The literature on the origin, epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of primary renal lymphoma was reviewed. RESULTS The first patient was diagnosed after radical nephrectomy and subsequently was given six cycles of CVP (cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone). The diagnosis of the second patient was established by renal biopsy, and the patient received six cycles of CHOP (cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, vincristine and predisone). The last patient had a lymphoma, secondary to immunosuppression, in a transplanted kidney. In this case transplant nephrectomy sufficed to cure the patient's lymphoma. All patients had B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (an extrarenal origin was ruled out by bone marrow biopsy), and were disease-free 15 months, 7 months, and 6.5 years after diagnosis, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Primary renal lymphoma is rare. Diagnosis is established by renal biopsy, although it often presents as a mass simulating renal cell cancer and diagnosis is obtained after radical nephrectomy. Treatment consists of chemotherapy (CHOP). associated with rituximab.

Study of the effectiveness of first-line treatment in renal cell carcinoma.

The emergence of novel drugs corresponds with the determination of the effectiveness of the current treatments used in clinical practice. A retrospective observational study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of first-line treatments and to test the influence of the prognostic factors established using the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and the analysis of Mekhail's study for two or more metastatic sites. The primary endpoints were median progression-free survival (mPFS) and median overall survival (mOS) times. A total of 65 patients were enrolled and the mPFS and mOS of the patients treated with sunitinib (n=51) were 9.0 and 20.1 months, respectively, and for the patients treated with temsirolimus (n=14) these were 3.0 and 6.2 months, respectively. In the poor-prognosis (PP) group, a difference of 1.2 months (P=0.049) was found in mPFS depending on the first-line treatment. A difference of 4.1 months (P=0.023) was also found in mPFS when classified by histology (clear verses non-clear cell) in the sunitinib-treatment group. When stratified by the prognostic group, differences of >7 months (P<0.001) were found between the groups. Therefore, it was concluded that the effectiveness of the treatments was reduced compared to previous studies and differences were found in the PP group when classified by first-line drug and histology. Additionally, the influence of prognostic factors on OS and the value of stratifying patients using these factors have been confirmed.