Open Access
REVIEW
Treatment options for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a review
Uzma Athar, Teresa C. Gentile
Division of Hematology Oncology, Regional Oncology Center, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, New York, USA
Address correspondence to Dr. Uzma Athar, Department
of Medicine, Division of Hematology Oncology, Regional
Oncology Center, 750 East Adams Street, Syracuse, New
York 13210 USA
Canadian Journal of Urology 2008, 15(2), 3954-3966.
Abstract
Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has a poor overall
survival. Localized RCC remains a surgical disease.
About 20%-30% patients who present with limited
disease at the time of nephrectomy develop metastasis.
The median time to relapse after nephrectomy is 15-18
months. The maximum numbers of relapses are within
the first 3 years. In metastatic RCC, immunotherapy is
effective in a relatively small percentage of patients but
is very toxic. In recent years, there has been an improved
understanding of the biology of RCC. This has lead to
the development of various agents that target ligands at
the molecular level. The hypoxia inducible factor-alfa
(HIF-α)/ vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)
pathway and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR)
signal transduction pathway are targets for some of these
novel agents. Recent randomized phase III trials have
shown an improved outcome in patients with metastatic
disease who received these targeted agents. This review
deals with management of advanced and metastatic renal
cell cancer with an emphasis on recently developed
targeted therapies.
Keywords
RCC, metastatic renal cell carcinoma, targeted therapy, treatment
Cite This Article
APA Style
Athar, U., Gentile, T.C. (2008). Treatment options for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a review. Canadian Journal of Urology, 15(2), 3954–3966.
Vancouver Style
Athar U, Gentile TC. Treatment options for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a review. Can J Urology. 2008;15(2):3954–3966.
IEEE Style
U. Athar and T.C. Gentile, “Treatment options for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a review,” Can. J. Urology, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 3954–3966, 2008.
Copyright © 2008 The Canadian Journal of Urology.