Carlotta Palumbo1, Francesco A Mistretta2, Elio Mazzone3, Sophie Knipper4, Zhe Tian5, Paul Perrotte6, Alessandro Antonelli7, Francesco Montorsi8, Shahrokh F Shariat9, Fred Saad10, Claudio Simeone7, Alberto Briganti8, Jean-Baptiste Lattouf6, Pierre I Karakiewicz10. 1. Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Urology Unit, ASST Spedali Civili of Brescia, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Science and Public Health, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy. Electronic address: palumbo.carlotta@gmail.com. 2. Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Department of Urology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy. 3. Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Martini Klinik, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 4. Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute (URI), IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy, and Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy. 5. Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 6. Division of Urology, University of Montreal Hospital Center (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 7. Urology Unit, ASST Spedali Civili of Brescia, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Science and Public Health, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy. 8. Martini Klinik, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 9. Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 10. Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Division of Urology, University of Montreal Hospital Center (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We comprehensively tested contemporary incidence and mortality rates in patients with germ cell tumor of the testis (GCTT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2004-2015), statistical analyses included estimated annual percentage changes, multivariable logistic regression (MLR) models, Kaplan-Meier curves, and multivariable Cox regression (MCR) models. RESULTS: Of 13,114 GCTT patients, 7954 (60.6%) harbored seminoma germ cell tumors of the testis (SGCTT) and 5160 (39.4%) non-SGCTT (NSGCTT). Relative to SGCTT, NSGCTT patients harbored more advanced stage (for stage III 824 [16.0%] vs. 279 patients [3.5%]; P < .001). In MLR, higher rates of stage II/III affected those with never-married status (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; P < .001) and African American ethnicity (OR, 1.5; P = .005) for SGCTT and never-married (OR, 1.3; P = .002) and Hispanic ethnicity (OR, 1.3; P < .001) for NSGCTT. Significant differences in 5-year cancer-specific mortality (CSM) distinguished SGCTT (stage I: 0.4; stage II: 3.4; stage III: 11.4%; P < .001) from NSGCTT (stage I: 1.6; stage II: 2.5; stage III: 22.2%; P < .001). In MCR, unmarried status independently predicted higher CSM for SGCTT (hazard ratio [HR], 2.1; P = .007) and NSGCTT (HR, 1.9; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Stage I and stage III NSGCTT survival is worse, than for SGCTT. Never-married, Hispanic, and African American individuals are at higher risk of more advanced stage and/or CSM in SGCTT and NSGCTT.
BACKGROUND: We comprehensively tested contemporary incidence and mortality rates in patients with germ cell tumor of the testis (GCTT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2004-2015), statistical analyses included estimated annual percentage changes, multivariable logistic regression (MLR) models, Kaplan-Meier curves, and multivariable Cox regression (MCR) models. RESULTS: Of 13,114 GCTT patients, 7954 (60.6%) harbored seminoma germ cell tumors of the testis (SGCTT) and 5160 (39.4%) non-SGCTT (NSGCTT). Relative to SGCTT, NSGCTT patients harbored more advanced stage (for stage III 824 [16.0%] vs. 279 patients [3.5%]; P < .001). In MLR, higher rates of stage II/III affected those with never-married status (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; P < .001) and African American ethnicity (OR, 1.5; P = .005) for SGCTT and never-married (OR, 1.3; P = .002) and Hispanic ethnicity (OR, 1.3; P < .001) for NSGCTT. Significant differences in 5-year cancer-specific mortality (CSM) distinguished SGCTT (stage I: 0.4; stage II: 3.4; stage III: 11.4%; P < .001) from NSGCTT (stage I: 1.6; stage II: 2.5; stage III: 22.2%; P < .001). In MCR, unmarried status independently predicted higher CSM for SGCTT (hazard ratio [HR], 2.1; P = .007) and NSGCTT (HR, 1.9; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Stage I and stage III NSGCTT survival is worse, than for SGCTT. Never-married, Hispanic, and African American individuals are at higher risk of more advanced stage and/or CSM in SGCTT and NSGCTT.
Authors: Dennis M Timmerman; Thomas F Eleveld; Ad J M Gillis; Carlijn C Friedrichs; Sanne Hillenius; Tessa L Remmers; Sruthi Sriram; Leendert H J Looijenga Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2021-10-29 Impact factor: 5.923