Volume outcome relationship in penile cancer: a systematic review
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium print
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, systematický přehled
PubMed
32740139
DOI
10.1097/mou.0000000000000803
PII: 00042307-202009000-00013
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- MeSH
- léčba šetřící orgány MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- lymfadenektomie MeSH
- lymfatické uzliny patologie MeSH
- nádory penisu patologie terapie MeSH
- staging nádorů MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- systematický přehled MeSH
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Penile cancer is a rare disease with significant morbidity. Because of the low volume of cases, it has been suggested that its treatment should be centralized in order to improve outcomes through better management of both the primary tumor and distant disease. We reviewed and summarized the most relevant recent publications regarding centralization of penile cancer management. RECENT FINDINGS: Management of penile cancer in academic and supra-regional centers was associated with better survival outcomes. Moreover, reports from population-based studies showed more adherence to guidelines recommendations in academic centers with higher utilization of organ sparing treatments and invasive inguinal lymph node staging. SUMMARY: The optimal management of penile cancer remains a major therapeutic challenge. Patients with invasive tumors are less adequately managed in lower volume nonspecialized centers. The data convincingly support efforts to centralize penile cancer care and to promote the development of centers of expertise in order to achieve the best possible outcomes for each patient.
Department of Urology 2nd Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague Czech Republic
Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria
Department of Urology Jikei University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan
Department of Urology King Fahad Specialist Hospital Dammam Saudi Arabia
Department of Urology University Hospital of Tours Tours France
Department of Urology University of Texas Southwestern Dallas Texas USA
Department of Urology Weill Cornell Medical College New York New York
European Association of Urology research foundation Arnhem The Netherlands
Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health Sechenov University Moscow Russia
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Hakenberg OW, Comperat EM, Minhas S, et al. EAU guidelines on penile cancer: 2020. Arnhem, The Netherlands: EAU Guidelines Office; 2020.
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2020. CA Cancer J Clin 2020; 70:7–30.
National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Improving Outcomes in Urological Cancers; 2002. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/csg2.
Tang DH, Yan S, Ottenhof SR, et al. Laser ablation as monotherapy for penile squamous cell carcinoma: a multicenter cohort analysis. Urol Oncol 2018; 36:147–152.
Baumgarten A, Chipollini J, Yan S, et al. Penile sparing surgery for penile cancer: a multicenter international retrospective cohort. J Urol 2018; 199:1233–1237.
Kamel MH, Tao J, Su J, et al. Davis R: Survival outcomes of organ sparing surgery, partial penectomy, and total penectomy in pathological T1/T2 penile cancer: report from the National Cancer Data Base. Urol Oncol 2018; 36:82.e87-–82.e15.
Chipollini J, Tang DH, Sharma P, et al. Patterns of regional lymphadenectomy for clinically node-negative patients with penile carcinoma: analysis from the national cancer database from 1998 to 2012. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2017; 15:670–677.e671.
Albersen M, Parnham A, Joniau S, et al. Predictive factors for local recurrence after glansectomy and neoglans reconstruction for penile squamous cell carcinoma. Urol Oncol 2018; 36:141–146.
Sri D, Sujenthiran A, Lam W, et al. A study into the association between local recurrence rates and surgical resection margins in organ-sparing surgery for penile squamous cell cancer. BJU Int 2018; 122:576–582.
Woldu SL, Ci B, Hutchinson RC, et al. Usage and survival implications of surgical staging of inguinal lymph nodes in intermediate- to high-risk, clinical localized penile cancer: a propensity-score matched analysis. Urol Oncol 2018; 36:159.e157–159.e117.
Correa AF, Handorf E, Joshi SS, et al. Smaldone MC: differences in survival associated with performance of lymph node dissection in patients with invasive penile cancer: results from the National Cancer Database. J Urol 2018; 199:1238–1244.
Zhu Y, Gu WJ, Xiao WJ, et al. Ye DW: important therapeutic considerations in T1b penile cancer: prognostic significance and adherence to treatment guidelines. Ann Surg Oncol 2019; 26:685–691.
Soodana-Prakash N, Koru-Sengul T, Miao F, et al. Lymph node yield as a predictor of overall survival following inguinal lymphadenectomy for penile cancer. Urol Oncol 2018; 36:471.e419–471.e427.
Canter DJ, Nicholson S, Watkin N, et al. The International Penile Advanced Cancer Trial (InPACT): rationale and current status. Eur Urol Focus 2019; 5:706–709.
Joshi SS, Handorf E, Strauss D, et al. Treatment trends and outcomes for patients with lymph node-positive cancer of the penis. JAMA Oncol 2018; 4:643–649.
Necchi A, Lo Vullo S, Mariani L, et al. Nomogram-based prediction of overall survival after regional lymph node dissection and the role of perioperative chemotherapy in penile squamous cell carcinoma: A retrospective multicenter study. Urol Oncol 2019; 37:531.e537–531.e515.
Bandini M, Albersen M, Chipollini J, et al. Optimising the selection of candidates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy amongst patients with node-positive penile squamous cell carcinoma. BJU Int 2020; 125:867–875.
Bernier J, Domenge C, Ozsahin M, et al. Postoperative irradiation with or without concomitant chemotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer. New Engl J Med 2004; 350:1945–1952.
Winters BR, Kearns JT, Holt SK, et al. Wright JL: Is there a benefit to adjuvant radiation in stage III penile cancer after lymph node dissection?. Findings from the National Cancer Database. Urol Oncol 2018; 36:92.e11–92.e16.
Johnstone PAS, Boulware D, Djajadiningrat R, et al. Primary penile cancer: the role of adjuvant radiation therapy in the management of extranodal extension in lymph nodes. Eur Urol Focus 2019; 5:737–741.