Literature DB >> 20800339

Prognostic factors for occult inguinal lymph node involvement in penile carcinoma and assessment of the high-risk EAU subgroup: a two-institution analysis of 342 clinically node-negative patients.

Niels M Graafland1, Wayne Lam, Joost A P Leijte, Tet Yap, Maarten P W Gallee, Cathy Corbishley, Erik van Werkhoven, Nick Watkin, Simon Horenblas.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines advise an elective bilateral lymphadenectomy in clinically node-negative (cN0) patients with high-risk penile carcinoma (≥pT2, G3, or lymphovascular invasion [LVI]).
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to assess prognostic factors for occult metastasis and to determine whether current EAU guidelines accurately stratify patients at high risk. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data of 342 cN0 patients with histologically proven invasive penile squamous cell carcinoma who had undergone the current dynamic sentinel node biopsy (DSNB) protocol were analysed. A complete ipsilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy was only done if the sentinel node was tumour positive. MEASUREMENTS: The presence of occult metastasis was established by preoperative ultrasound and tumour-positive fine-needle aspiration cytology, tumour-positive sentinel nodes, and groin metastases during follow-up after a negative DSNB procedure. Median follow-up was 31 mo. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Sixty-eight of 342 patients (20%) and 87 of 684 groins (13%) had occult nodal involvement including 6 patients (2%) with a groin metastasis after negative DSNB. Corpus spongiosum invasion, corpus cavernosum invasion, histologic grade, and LVI were each significant prognosticators for occult metastasis on univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis, grade (odds ratio [OR]: 3.3 for intermediate and 4.9 for poor, respectively) and LVI (OR: 2.2) remained predictive factors. In total, 245 patients (72%) were classified high risk according to EAU guidelines. Among them, the incidence of occult metastasis was 23% (57 of 245). A potential limitation of this study is the lack of external review.
CONCLUSIONS: Histologic grade and LVI are independent prognostic factors for occult metastasis in penile carcinoma. Although both predictors are incorporated into the current EAU guidelines, the stratification of patients needing a lymph node dissection is inaccurate. Approximately 77% of high-risk patients (188 of 245) would have had a negative bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy. For the time being, DSNB is considered a more suitable staging method than EAU risk stratification for an accurate determination of patients who require lymph node dissection.
Copyright © 2010 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20800339     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.08.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  21 in total

1.  Surgery: Is lymphadenectomy necessary for high-risk penile cancer?

Authors:  Rebecca Drake
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 2.  Contemporary management of patients with penile cancer and lymph node metastasis.

Authors:  Andrew Leone; Gregory J Diorio; Curtis Pettaway; Viraj Master; Philippe E Spiess
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2017-04-11       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 3.  Current Management Strategy for Penile Cancer and Future Directions.

Authors:  Tanya B Dorff; Leslie K Ballas; Anne K Schuckman
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 4.  Making surgery safer by centralization of care: impact of case load in penile cancer.

Authors:  Joren Vanthoor; Anita Thomas; Igor Tsaur; Maarten Albersen
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-07-10       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Penile preserving and reconstructive surgery in the management of penile cancer.

Authors:  Arthur L Burnett
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2016-03-22       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 6.  Challenges and controversies in the management of penile cancer.

Authors:  Majid Shabbir; Oliver Kayes; Suks Minhas
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2014-11-18       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 7.  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

8.  Reproducibility of histopathologic tumor grading in penile cancer--results of a European project.

Authors:  Ch Kakies; A Lopez-Beltran; E Comperat; A Erbersdobler; R Grobholz; O W Hakenberg; A Hartmann; L-C Horn; A K Höhn; J Köllermann; G Kristiansen; R Montironi; M Scarpelli; Ch Protzel
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 4.064

9.  The role of lymph node fine-needle aspiration in penile cancer in the sentinel node era.

Authors:  Maria Carmen Mir; Olivia Herdiman; Damien M Bolton; Nathan Lawrentschuk
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2011-03-30

10.  Correlation Between the Evolution of Somatic Alterations During Lymphatic Metastasis and Clinical Outcome in Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Jian Cao; Chun-He Yang; Wei-Qing Han; Yu Xie; Zhi-Zhong Liu; Shu-Suan Jiang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-06-02       Impact factor: 6.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.