Francesco A Mistretta1, Elio Mazzone2, Carlotta Palumbo3, Sophie Knipper4, Zhe Tian5, Sebastiano Nazzani6, Jean-Baptiste Lattouf7, Gennaro Musi8, Paul Perrotte7, Emanuele Montanari9, Shahrokh F Shariat10, Francesco Montorsi11, Fred Saad7, Ottavio de Cobelli12, Pierre I Karakiewicz7. 1. Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Québec, Canada; Department of Urology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy. Electronic address: francescoalessandro.mistretta@ieo.it. 2. Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Québec, Canada; Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy. 3. Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Québec, Canada; Department of Urology, Spedali Civili Hospital, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy. 4. Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Québec, Canada; Martini-Klinik, Prostate Cancer Centre, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 5. Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Québec, Canada. 6. Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Québec, Canada; Department of Urology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. 7. Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Québec, Canada; Division of Urology, University of Montreal Hospital Center (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 8. Department of Urology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy. 9. Department of Urology, IRCCS Fondazione Ca' Granda-Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. 10. Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 11. Division of Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy. 12. Department of Urology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy; Dipartimento di Emato-Oncologia ed Oncologia, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We tested contemporary surveillance and active treatment (AT) that included chemotherapy (CHT) and radiotherapy (RT) rates for stage I testicular seminoma patients, as well as cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and other-cause mortality (OCM) rates. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (1988-2015) we identified 11,206 stage I testicular seminoma patients. Surveillance versus CHT versus RT use rates were investigated using estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) analyses. After propensity score (PS) matching, cumulative incidence plots and multivariable competing risks regression models (MCRRMs) tested for CSM and OCM. RESULTS: Of all 11,206 patients, 4434 (40%), 918 (8%), and 5854 (52%), respectively, underwent surveillance, CHT, or RT after initial orchiectomy. Surveillance (EAPC: 7.5%; P < .001) and CHT (EAPC: 13.5%; P < .001) rates increased over time, whereas RT rates decreased (EAPC: -3.8%; P < .001). After PS matching, in MCRRMs surveillance was an independent predictor of CSM, relative to AT (hazard ratio [HR], 2.59; P = .04). Conversely, surveillance versus AT did not affect OCM (HR, 1.52; P = .051). All other analyses that focused on CSM and OCM, namely surveillance versus RT, surveillance versus CHT, and RT versus CHT resulted in nonsignificant differences (all P > .5). CONCLUSION: Surveillance and CHT use in stage I testicular seminoma rates increased, whereas RT rate decreased over time. A protective effect of AT defined as either RT or CHT was identified on CSM, relative to surveillance. This protective effect was not described for OCM. No differences in survival were recorded, when individual management strategies (surveillance vs. RT vs. CHT) were compared with each other.
BACKGROUND: We tested contemporary surveillance and active treatment (AT) that included chemotherapy (CHT) and radiotherapy (RT) rates for stage I testicular seminomapatients, as well as cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and other-cause mortality (OCM) rates. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (1988-2015) we identified 11,206 stage I testicular seminomapatients. Surveillance versus CHT versus RT use rates were investigated using estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) analyses. After propensity score (PS) matching, cumulative incidence plots and multivariable competing risks regression models (MCRRMs) tested for CSM and OCM. RESULTS: Of all 11,206 patients, 4434 (40%), 918 (8%), and 5854 (52%), respectively, underwent surveillance, CHT, or RT after initial orchiectomy. Surveillance (EAPC: 7.5%; P < .001) and CHT (EAPC: 13.5%; P < .001) rates increased over time, whereas RT rates decreased (EAPC: -3.8%; P < .001). After PS matching, in MCRRMs surveillance was an independent predictor of CSM, relative to AT (hazard ratio [HR], 2.59; P = .04). Conversely, surveillance versus AT did not affect OCM (HR, 1.52; P = .051). All other analyses that focused on CSM and OCM, namely surveillance versus RT, surveillance versus CHT, and RT versus CHT resulted in nonsignificant differences (all P > .5). CONCLUSION: Surveillance and CHT use in stage I testicular seminoma rates increased, whereas RT rate decreased over time. A protective effect of AT defined as either RT or CHT was identified on CSM, relative to surveillance. This protective effect was not described for OCM. No differences in survival were recorded, when individual management strategies (surveillance vs. RT vs. CHT) were compared with each other.
Authors: Robert J Hamilton; Christina Canil; Noa Shani Shrem; Kopika Kuhathaas; Maria Di Jiang; Peter Chung; Scott North; Piotr Czaykowski; Sebastien Hotte; Eric Winquist; Christian Kollmannsberger; Armen Aprikian; Denis Soulières; Scott Tyldesley; Alan I So; Nicholas Power; Ricardo A Rendon; Martin O'Malley; Lori Wood; Michael A S Jewett Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2022-06 Impact factor: 2.052