BACKGROUND: The prognosis of patients with locally advanced penile squamous-cell carcinoma is primarily related to the extent of lymph node metastases. Surgery alone yields suboptimal results, and there is a paucity of data on these patients' outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated patients who received neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy from 1990 onward at 12 centers. Cox models were used to investigate prognostic factors for relapse-free survival and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Among the 201 included patients, 39 (19.4%) had disease of T3-4 and N0 clinical stage; the remaining patients had clinical lymph node involvement (cN+). Ninety-four patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (group 1), 78 received adjuvant chemotherapy (group 2), and 21 received both (group 3). Eight patients for whom the timing of perioperative chemotherapy administration was unavailable were included in the Cox analyses. Forty-three patients (21.4%) received chemoradiation. Multivariate analysis for OS (n = 172) revealed bilateral disease (P = .035) as a negative prognostic factor, while pelvic cN+ tended to be nonsignificantly associated with decreased OS (P = .076). One-year relapse-free survival was 35.6%, 60.6%, and 45.1% in the 3 groups, respectively. One-year OS was 61.3%, 82.2%, and 75%, respectively. No significant differences were seen on univariable analyses for OS between the groups (P = .45). Platinum type of chemotherapy and chemoradiation were not significantly associated with any outcome analyzed. CONCLUSION: Benchmark survival estimates for patients receiving perioperative chemotherapy for locally advanced penile squamous-cell carcinoma have been provided, with no substantial differences observed between neoadjuvant and adjuvant administration. This analysis may result in improved patient information, although prospective studies are warranted.
BACKGROUND: The prognosis of patients with locally advanced penile squamous-cell carcinoma is primarily related to the extent of lymph node metastases. Surgery alone yields suboptimal results, and there is a paucity of data on these patients' outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated patients who received neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy from 1990 onward at 12 centers. Cox models were used to investigate prognostic factors for relapse-free survival and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Among the 201 included patients, 39 (19.4%) had disease of T3-4 and N0 clinical stage; the remaining patients had clinical lymph node involvement (cN+). Ninety-four patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (group 1), 78 received adjuvant chemotherapy (group 2), and 21 received both (group 3). Eight patients for whom the timing of perioperative chemotherapy administration was unavailable were included in the Cox analyses. Forty-three patients (21.4%) received chemoradiation. Multivariate analysis for OS (n = 172) revealed bilateral disease (P = .035) as a negative prognostic factor, while pelvic cN+ tended to be nonsignificantly associated with decreased OS (P = .076). One-year relapse-free survival was 35.6%, 60.6%, and 45.1% in the 3 groups, respectively. One-year OS was 61.3%, 82.2%, and 75%, respectively. No significant differences were seen on univariable analyses for OS between the groups (P = .45). Platinum type of chemotherapy and chemoradiation were not significantly associated with any outcome analyzed. CONCLUSION: Benchmark survival estimates for patients receiving perioperative chemotherapy for locally advanced penile squamous-cell carcinoma have been provided, with no substantial differences observed between neoadjuvant and adjuvant administration. This analysis may result in improved patient information, although prospective studies are warranted.
Authors: Lance C Pagliaro; Dallas L Williams; Danai Daliani; Michael B Williams; William Osai; Michael Kincaid; Sijin Wen; Peter F Thall; Curtis A Pettaway Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-07-12 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kevin N Franks; Kiran Kancherla; Brinda Sethugavalar; Peter Whelan; Ian Eardley; Anne E Kiltie Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-06-22 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Oliver W Hakenberg; Eva M Compérat; Suks Minhas; Andrea Necchi; Chris Protzel; Nick Watkin Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-11-01 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Pranav Sharma; Rosa Djajadiningrat; Kamran Zargar-Shoshtari; Mario Catanzaro; Yao Zhu; Nicola Nicolai; Simon Horenblas; Philippe E Spiess Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2015-06-10 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Kamran Zargar-Shoshtari; Pranav Sharma; Rosa Djajadiningrat; Mario Catanzaro; Ding-Wei Ye; Yao Zhu; Nicola Nicolai; Simon Horenblas; Philippe E Spiess Journal: World J Urol Date: 2015-05-31 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Nicola Nicolai; Laura Maria Sangalli; Andrea Necchi; Patrizia Giannatempo; Anna Maria Paganoni; Maurizio Colecchia; Luigi Piva; Mario Achille Catanzaro; Davide Biasoni; Silvia Stagni; Tullio Torelli; Daniele Raggi; Elena Faré; Giorgio Pizzocaro; Roberto Salvioni Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2015-08-06 Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Shreyas S Joshi; Elizabeth Handorf; David Strauss; Andres F Correa; Alexander Kutikov; David Y T Chen; Rosalia Viterbo; Richard E Greenberg; Robert G Uzzo; Marc C Smaldone; Daniel M Geynisman Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2018-05-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Zhigang Yuan; Arash O Naghavi; Dominic Tang; Youngchul Kim; Kamran A Ahmed; Jasreman Dhillon; Anna R Giuliano; Philippe E Spiess; Peter A Johnstone Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-03-27 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Oliver Walther Hakenberg; Desiree Louise Dräger; Andreas Erbersdobler; Carsten Maik Naumann; Klaus-Peter Jünemann; Chris Protzel Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2018-09-28 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: Peter A S Johnstone; David Boulware; Rosa Djajadiningrat; Sarah Ottenhof; Andrea Necchi; Mario Catanzaro; Dingwei Ye; Yao Zhu; Nicola Nicolai; Simon Horenblas; Philippe E Spiess Journal: Eur Urol Focus Date: 2018-10-14