Literature DB >> 33452551

[Quality of care criteria in the treatment of penile cancer].

A Thomas1, F Kölling2, A Haferkamp2, I Tsaur2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Penile cancer is a rare malignancy and the wide range of quality of care associated with it often results in inferior oncologic and functional treatment outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: Assessment of the current healthcare situation in clinical routine and identification of the relevant key features and reference values for quality of care.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Search for relevant peer-reviewed articles and published congress abstracts in Medline, Embase and other databases as well as Google web search engine.
RESULTS: Key quality features of penile cancer management include organ-sparing surgery of the primary tumor, invasive inguinal lymph node staging and systemic treatment. Adherence to treatment guidelines is currently low. Centralization of care has already led to a considerable improvement in the quality of care in some areas and increasing conformity with the guidelines' recommendations.
CONCLUSION: Centralization of care and networks based on this can significantly improve patient outcomes. Thus, reference values for core parameters of quality cancer care can be generated and validated. Moreover, organ-sparing surgery, invasive lymph node staging and systemic therapy should be increasingly utilized. As a reference value, 90% adherence to the guidelines for these three features is recommended. However, before centralization of care can be introduced, aspects relevant to practical implementation must be addressed, such as the reimbursement of travel costs for those affected, infrastructure costs and instruments to measure quality of life and patient satisfaction after centralization.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chemotherapy; Lymphadenectomy; Lymphknotenstaging; Metastasen; Neoplasie

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33452551     DOI: 10.1007/s00120-020-01429-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urologe A        ISSN: 0340-2592            Impact factor:   0.639


  46 in total

1.  E2F1 Signalling is Predictive of Chemoresistance and Lymphogenic Metastasis in Penile Cancer: A Pilot Functional Study Reveals New Prognostic Biomarkers.

Authors:  Ferdinand Fenner; Deborah Goody; Chris Protzel; Andreas Erbersdobler; Christin Richter; Juliane M Hartz; Carsten M Naumann; Holger Kalthoff; Ottmar Herchenröder; Oliver W Hakenberg; Brigitte M Pützer
Journal:  Eur Urol Focus       Date:  2017-03-01

2.  Impact of Centralizing Care for Genitourinary Malignancies to High-volume Providers: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Stephen B Williams; Mohamed D Ray-Zack; Hogan K Hudgins; Jan Oldenburg; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Paul L Nguyen; Neal D Shore; Manfred P Wirth; Timothy O'Brien; James W F Catto
Journal:  Eur Urol Oncol       Date:  2018-11-05

3.  EAU guidelines on penile cancer: 2014 update.

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

4.  Detection and typing of human papillomavirus DNA in penile carcinoma: evidence for multiple independent pathways of penile carcinogenesis.

Authors:  M A Rubin; B Kleter; M Zhou; G Ayala; A L Cubilla; W G Quint; E C Pirog
Journal:  Am J Pathol       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 4.307

5.  The impact of Improving Outcomes Guidance on the management and outcomes of patients with carcinoma of the penis.

Authors:  Andrew C Bayles; Krishna K Sethia
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 6.  Penile carcinoma: a challenge for the developing world.

Authors:  Sanjeev Misra; Arun Chaturvedi; Naresh C Misra
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 41.316

7.  The Diagnosis and Treatment of Penile Cancer.

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

8.  Centralization of Penile Cancer Management in the United States: A Combined Analysis of the American Board of Urology and National Cancer Data Base.

Authors:  Richard S Matulewicz; Andrew S Flum; Irene Helenowski; Borko Jovanovic; Bryan Palis; Karl Y Bilimoria; Joshua J Meeks
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 9.  The Danish National Penile Cancer Quality database.

Authors:  Jakob Kristian Jakobsen; Buket Öztürk; Mette Søgaard
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2016-10-25       Impact factor: 4.790

10.  What drives centralisation in cancer care?

Authors:  Melvin J Kilsdonk; Sabine Siesling; Boukje A C van Dijk; Michel W Wouters; Wim H van Harten
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-12       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.