Aykut Demirci1, Halil Başar2. 1. Department of Urology, Dr. Abdurrahman Yurtaslan Ankara Oncology Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey. draykutdemirci@hotmail.com. 2. Department of Urology, Dr. Abdurrahman Yurtaslan Ankara Oncology Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Testicular cancer is frequently seen, especially in young males, and constitutes 1% of all male cancers. Family history, testicular dysgenesis syndrome, and the presence of tumour in the contralateral testis are each well-defined epidemiological risk factors. The aim of the current study was to determine the distribution of these risk factors according to tumour stage and to evaluate the effects on progression. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 71 patients diagnosed with testicular cancer in our clinic between January 2018 and December 2021 were classified according to tumour stage (Group 1: Early, n = 29; Group 2: Advanced, n = 42). The presence of risk factors, and demographic and pathological data were recorded. RESULTS: No significant difference was determined between the groups in respect of age, comorbidities, and tumour type (p > 0.05). There was no difference between Group 1 and Group 2 in terms of median follow-up time [15.5 (17.5), 16.5(26.5) months, respectively, p = 0.4]. Epidemiological risk factors were seen more in Group 2 than in Group 1 (p = 0.03). Progression-free survival was determined to be shorter in patients with risk factors compared to those without (7.95 ± 1.3 vs. 29.4 ± 2.06 months, p < 0.001, respectively). Family history and testicular dysgenesis syndrome were determined to be independent risk factors for progression [HR:0.046 (0.004-0.485); HR:0.101 (0.03-0.347), p < 0.05, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: More advanced-stage tumours are seen in patients with testicular cancer when epidemiological risk factors are also present. Of these risk factors, family history and testicular dysgenesis syndrome have a negative effect on progression.
PURPOSE: Testicular cancer is frequently seen, especially in young males, and constitutes 1% of all male cancers. Family history, testicular dysgenesis syndrome, and the presence of tumour in the contralateral testis are each well-defined epidemiological risk factors. The aim of the current study was to determine the distribution of these risk factors according to tumour stage and to evaluate the effects on progression. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 71 patients diagnosed with testicular cancer in our clinic between January 2018 and December 2021 were classified according to tumour stage (Group 1: Early, n = 29; Group 2: Advanced, n = 42). The presence of risk factors, and demographic and pathological data were recorded. RESULTS: No significant difference was determined between the groups in respect of age, comorbidities, and tumour type (p > 0.05). There was no difference between Group 1 and Group 2 in terms of median follow-up time [15.5 (17.5), 16.5(26.5) months, respectively, p = 0.4]. Epidemiological risk factors were seen more in Group 2 than in Group 1 (p = 0.03). Progression-free survival was determined to be shorter in patients with risk factors compared to those without (7.95 ± 1.3 vs. 29.4 ± 2.06 months, p < 0.001, respectively). Family history and testicular dysgenesis syndrome were determined to be independent risk factors for progression [HR:0.046 (0.004-0.485); HR:0.101 (0.03-0.347), p < 0.05, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: More advanced-stage tumours are seen in patients with testicular cancer when epidemiological risk factors are also present. Of these risk factors, family history and testicular dysgenesis syndrome have a negative effect on progression.
Authors: Ragnhild Hellesnes; Tor Åge Myklebust; Roy M Bremnes; Ása Karlsdottir; Øivind Kvammen; Helene F S Negaard; Torgrim Tandstad; Tom Wilsgaard; Sophie D Fosså; Hege S Haugnes Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2020-12-23 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Sabine Kliesch; Stefanie Schmidt; Doris Wilborn; Clemens Aigner; Walter Albrecht; Jens Bedke; Matthias Beintker; Dirk Beyersdorff; Carsten Bokemeyer; Jonas Busch; Johannes Classen; Maike de Wit; Klaus-Peter Dieckmann; Thorsten Diemer; Anette Dieing; Matthias Gockel; Bernt Göckel-Beining; Oliver W Hakenberg; Axel Heidenreich; Julia Heinzelbecker; Kathleen Herkommer; Thomas Hermanns; Sascha Kaufmann; Marko Kornmann; Jörg Kotzerke; Susanne Krege; Glen Kristiansen; Anja Lorch; Arndt-Christian Müller; Karin Oechsle; Timur Ohloff; Christoph Oing; Ulrich Otto; David Pfister; Renate Pichler; Heinrich Recken; Oliver Rick; Yvonne Rudolph; Christian Ruf; Joachim Schirren; Hans Schmelz; Heinz Schmidberger; Mark Schrader; Stefan Schweyer; Stefanie Seeling; Rainer Souchon; Christian Winter; Christian Wittekind; Friedemann Zengerling; Dirk-Henrik Zermann; Roger Zillmann; Peter Albers Journal: Urol Int Date: 2021-01-07 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Giorgio Gandaglia; Riccardo Leni; Freddie Bray; Neil Fleshner; Stephen J Freedland; Adam Kibel; Pär Stattin; Hendrick Van Poppel; Carlo La Vecchia Journal: Eur Urol Oncol Date: 2021-10-26
Authors: A Osterlind; J G Berthelsen; N Abildgaard; S O Hansen; H Hjalgrim; B Johansen; J Munck-Hansen; L H Rasmussen Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1991-10-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Chey Loveday; Philip Law; Kevin Litchfield; Max Levy; Amy Holroyd; Peter Broderick; Zsofia Kote-Jarai; Alison M Dunning; Kenneth Muir; Julian Peto; Rosalind Eeles; Douglas F Easton; Darshna Dudakia; Nick Orr; Nora Pashayan; Alison Reid; Robert A Huddart; Richard S Houlston; Clare Turnbull Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2018-06-21 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: John Lewis Etter; Kevin Eng; Rikki Cannioto; Jasmine Kaur; Hani Almohanna; Emad Alqassim; J Brian Szender; Janine M Joseph; Shashikant Lele; Kunle Odunsi; Kirsten B Moysich Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Date: 2018-02-27 Impact factor: 2.890