Literature DB >> 16925747

A prospective study of 100 cases of penile cancer managed according to European Association of Urology guidelines.

Paul K Hegarty1, Oliver Kayes, Alex Freeman, Nim Christopher, David J Ralph, Suks Minhas.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively assess the outcome of patients treated according to the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on the management of penile cancer, a system originally based on retrospective series. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 2002 and 2005, 100 consecutive patients (median age 62 years) with penile cancer were treated at one institution; all were categorized and treated according to EAU guidelines. Data were analysed using the z-test, with significance defined as P < 0.05.
RESULTS: Survival curves were limited to those with >12 months of follow-up (mean 29); the survival of the whole group was 92%. Of men with palpable nodes, 72% had lymph node involvement, whereas 18% of those with impalpable nodes who had lymphadenectomy according to the guidelines had lymph node disease. The grade of the primary tumour was more predictive than T stage for lymph node involvement and survival. The 3-year disease-specific survival for N0, N1 and N2 disease was 100%, 100% and 73%, respectively, and survival at 12 months for N3 disease was 67%. The median survival for those with metastases was 3 months.
CONCLUSION: The overall survival of men with penile cancer is high, with a clear benefit for early lymphadenectomy in men with positive nodal disease. However, the current EAU guidelines are limited in predicting those patients with micrometastatic disease, with the result that 82% of patients undergo unnecessary prophylactic lymphadenectomy. There is a need to identify more accurate molecular markers for predicting lymph node disease, or the role of novel staging techniques must be assessed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16925747     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06296.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  24 in total

Review 1.  Advanced penile cancer.

Authors:  Jonathan E Heinlen; David D Buethe; Daniel Joseph Culkin
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2011-08-04       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 2.  Non-invasive and minimally invasive staging of regional lymph nodes in penile cancer.

Authors:  Ben Hughes; Joost Leijte; Majid Shabbir; Nick Watkin; Simon Horenblas
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2008-07-02       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Management of carcinoma of the penis: Consensus statement from the Canadian Association of Genitourinary Medical Oncologists (CAGMO).

Authors:  Suzanne Richter; J Dean Ruether; Lori Wood; Christina Canil; Patricia Moretto; Peter Venner; Joel Gingerich; Urban Emmenegger; Andrea Eisen; Pawel Zalewski; Anthony Joshua; Som Dave Mukherjee; Daniel Heng; Piotr Czaykowski; Denis Soulieres; Norman Blais; Ricardo Rendon; Neil Fleshner; Juanita M Crook; Srikala S Sridhar
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 4.  Penile cancer: current therapy and future directions.

Authors:  G Sonpavde; L C Pagliaro; C Buonerba; T B Dorff; R J Lee; G Di Lorenzo
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2013-01-04       Impact factor: 32.976

5.  The development of a supraregional network for the management of penile cancer.

Authors:  P Kumar; S Singh; J C Goddard; T R Terry; D J Summerton
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.891

6.  Neoadjuvant therapy combined with a BMP regimen for treating penile cancer patients with lymph node metastasis: a retrospective study in China.

Authors:  Benkui Zou; Zengchi Han; Zhendan Wang; Jiasheng Bian; Jian Xu; Huansheng Wang; Mingshan Yang; Fajun Pei; Sheng Li; Zhonghua Xu
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-06-07       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 7.  How accurate are present risk group assignment tools in penile cancer?

Authors:  Vincenzo Ficarra; G Novara; R Boscolo-Berto; W Artibani; M W Kattan
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2008-06-17       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 8.  Shortcomings of the current TNM classification for penile carcinoma: time for a change?

Authors:  Joost A P Leijte; Simon Horenblas
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2008-08-09       Impact factor: 4.226

9.  DNA replication licensing factors and aneuploidy are linked to tumor cell cycle state and clinical outcome in penile carcinoma.

Authors:  Oliver J Kayes; Marco Loddo; Nimish Patel; Pranav Patel; Suks Minhas; Gareth Ambler; Alex Freeman; Alex Wollenschlaeger; David J Ralph; Kai Stoeber; Gareth H Williams
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2009-11-17       Impact factor: 12.531

10.  Imaging in primary penile cancer: current status and future directions.

Authors:  Rohit Kochhar; Ben Taylor; Vijay Sangar
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-08-06       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.