What is it about?
EORTC 30904 is the only randomized trial comparing overall survival after radical nephrectomy vs. nephron sparing surgery for kidney cancer. For the results of a trial to be externally valid, it’s supposedly randomly selected sample must be representative of the general population seen in clinical practice. In this context, we studied localized Kidney cancer patients treated with nephron-sparing surgery or radical nephrectomy within the National Cancer Database, in an effort to test the external validity of EORTC 30904. Our analysis indicates that the patients in this trial were not significantly different from North American patients in a manner that could influence the reported trial outcomes.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
Randomized trials are often criticized for validity in external cohorts. EORTC 30904 comparing radical vs. partial nephrectomy has not been formally validated in North American cohorts. Our aim was to ascertain if the trial patients were representative of contemporary kidney cancer patients in the United States.
Perspectives
The EORTC 30904 trial reported better overall survival with radical nephrectomy, compared to nephron sparing surgery for small renal masses. Our analysis indicates that the patients in this trial were not significantly different from North American patients in a manner that could influence the reported trial outcomes.
Sohrab Arora
Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI (USA)
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Testing the external validity of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer randomized trial 30904 comparing overall survival after radical nephrectomy vs nephron-sparing surgery in contemporary North American patients with renal cell , BJU International, October 2017, Wiley,
DOI: 10.1111/bju.14039.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
