Farhang Rabbani1. 1. Department of Urology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York. frabbani@montefiore.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Male urethral cancer is a rare neoplasm, with the published literature consisting of small single-institution retrospective series. As such, there is no objective analysis of prognostic factors and treatment outcome. The author sought to use the population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to evaluate prognostic factors in male urethral cancer. METHODS: From 1988 to 2006, 2065 men were identified in the SEER database as having primary urethral cancer. Median follow-up was 2.5 years. Cancer-specific and overall survival was computed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to evaluate patient age at diagnosis, year of diagnosis, race, histologic type, grade, T stage, nodal status, M stage, extent of surgery, and type of radiation as potential significant independent predictors of survival. RESULTS: Overall survival at 5 and 10 years was 46.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.9-48.6%) and 29.3% (95% CI, 26.6-32.0%), respectively, whereas cancer-specific survival at 5 and 10 years was 68.0% (95% CI, 65.5-70.5%) and 60.1% (95% CI, 57.0-63.2%), respectively. Advanced age, higher grade, higher T stage, systemic metastases, other histology versus transitional cell carcinoma (TCC), and no surgery versus radical resection were predictors of death and death from disease, whereas adenocarcinoma was associated with a lower likelihood of death and death from disease as compared with TCC. In addition, nodal metastasis was a predictor of death. Surgery had a better outcome than radiation for stage T2 -T4 nonmetastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: Age, grade, TNM stage, histology, and extent of surgery were predictive of overall and cancer-specific survival.
BACKGROUND:Male urethral cancer is a rare neoplasm, with the published literature consisting of small single-institution retrospective series. As such, there is no objective analysis of prognostic factors and treatment outcome. The author sought to use the population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to evaluate prognostic factors in male urethral cancer. METHODS: From 1988 to 2006, 2065 men were identified in the SEER database as having primary urethral cancer. Median follow-up was 2.5 years. Cancer-specific and overall survival was computed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to evaluate patient age at diagnosis, year of diagnosis, race, histologic type, grade, T stage, nodal status, M stage, extent of surgery, and type of radiation as potential significant independent predictors of survival. RESULTS: Overall survival at 5 and 10 years was 46.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.9-48.6%) and 29.3% (95% CI, 26.6-32.0%), respectively, whereas cancer-specific survival at 5 and 10 years was 68.0% (95% CI, 65.5-70.5%) and 60.1% (95% CI, 57.0-63.2%), respectively. Advanced age, higher grade, higher T stage, systemic metastases, other histology versus transitional cell carcinoma (TCC), and no surgery versus radical resection were predictors of death and death from disease, whereas adenocarcinoma was associated with a lower likelihood of death and death from disease as compared with TCC. In addition, nodal metastasis was a predictor of death. Surgery had a better outcome than radiation for stage T2 -T4 nonmetastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: Age, grade, TNM stage, histology, and extent of surgery were predictive of overall and cancer-specific survival.
Authors: Georgios Gakis; Todd M Morgan; Jason A Efstathiou; Kirk A Keegan; Johannes Mischinger; Tilman Todenhoefer; Tina Schubert; Harras B Zaid; Jan Hrbacek; Bedeir Ali-El-Dein; Rebecca H Clayman; Sigolene Galland; Kola Olugbade; Michael Rink; Hans-Martin Fritsche; Maximilian Burger; Sam S Chang; Marko Babjuk; George N Thalmann; Arnulf Stenzl; Siamak Daneshmand Journal: World J Urol Date: 2015-05-17 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Giuseppe Lucarelli; Marco Spilotros; Antonio Vavallo; Silvano Palazzo; Carlos Miacola; Saverio Forte; Matteo Matera; Marcello Campagna; Ottavio Colamonico; Francesco Schiralli; Francesco Sebastiani; Federica Di Cosmo; Carlo Bettocchi; Giuseppe Di Lorenzo; Carlo Buonerba; Leonardo Vincenti; Giuseppe Ludovico; Pasquale Ditonno; Michele Battaglia Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 1.889