A Matched Analysis of Active Surveillance Versus Nephrectomy for T1a Small Renal Masses

While patients with a small renal mass (SRM) on active surveillance (AS) experience excellent metastasis-free survival (MFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS), differences in overall survival (OS) observed may be explained by selection of older/comorbid patients for AS. Few studies have evaluated AS versus primary intervention in clinically balanced groups. We identified patients aged 55-75 yr with an SRM (≤4 cm, T1a) in our institutional database (2000-2020). Patients from AS and nephrectomy subgroups were matched exactly for age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, biopsy status, and histology. The primary outcomes were OS and an event-free survival (EFS) composite that included OS, CSS, MFS, progression, or systemic therapy, which we tested in Cox proportional-hazards models. We identified 377 patients (205 AS, 172 nephrectomy). The cohort was balanced after matching (n = 110; mean age 64 yr, 77% male, and 75% ECOG score 0). In each arm, 47% were biopsied (predominantly clear-cell histology). The predicted 5-yr OS was 96% for the nephrectomy group and 95% for the AS group (hazard ratio for nephrectomy vs AS [HR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-5.32; p = 0.8), with corresponding 5-yr EFS rates of 93% and 96% (HR 1.88, 95% CI 0.35-10.15; p = 0.5). Among SRM cases well matched for age and overall health status, we observed higher 5-yr OS and EFS rates for AS than previously reported; the rates were not significantly different from those after nephrectomy. The matched characteristics of our population are similar to those for treatment arms in contemporary cohorts and the results support the safety of AS in younger, healthier patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: While it has been shown that active surveillance for small kidney tumors is safe in older and more frail patients, its safety in younger, healthier patients has not been confirmed. We compared outcomes for patients aged 55-75 yr who were managed with surgery or active surveillance, and were similar in age and overall health. The probability of death after 5 years was low overall and not significantly different between the groups, suggesting that active surveillance is safe in routine clinical practice.