Making surgery safer by centralization of care: impact of case load in penile cancer

Epidemiology of penile cancer in Poland compared to other European countries

OBJECTIVES

To examine the epidemiology of penile cancer in Poland compared to other European countries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Incidence and mortality data were acquired from the national cancer registries in Europe and WHO Mortality Database, respectively. The data are presented as age-standardised morbidity and mortality rates, calculated according to the standard population of the world. We utilised Joinpoint analysis to assess the trends in morbidity and mortality and calculated the average rate of increase or decrease (Annual Percentage Change, Average Annual Percentage Change). Additionally, we estimate the proxy survival rates for each country.

RESULTS

Our study is the first to cover the incidence of penile cancer in many European countries and estimates an approximate survival rate for large populations, which is rarely cited in the literature. The 40+ age group presented graphically in the article covered more than 90% of penile cancer cases and deaths. In the countries examined, there was an excess of deaths over incidence in the oldest age groups (75 years or older). Poland had intermediate incidence and mortality rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Unlike many European countries, Poland is witnessing an increasing trend of penile cancer mortality. The higher death toll among those aged 75 years or older may suggest a lack of recognition of cancer symptoms and inadequate attention to elderly patients by the healthcare system. There is also evidence of underreporting penile cancer cases. Establishing centralised healthcare systems for rare cancers is a commendable development that should be emulated by other European countries, including Poland.

Impact of the Standardization of Penile Cancer Care on the Quality of Care, Outcomes, and Academic-driven Centralization in a Single eUROGEN Referral Center

BACKGROUND

Penile cancer (PeCa) represents a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge given the low patient volume, which may result in inadequate physician expertise and poor guideline adherence. Since 2015, we have developed a specific care pathway for PeCa in our tertiary referral center.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of a dedicated PeCa care pathway on patient management, the adequacy of pathological reporting, and oncological outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We retrospectively queried our institutional registry (S-66482) to identify patients who were surgically treated for PeCa between January 1989 and April 2022. The patient numbers were evaluated within a broader national context.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

We compared patient, surgery, tumor, and pathological data before and after 2015. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare local and regional recurrence rates and cancer-specific survival (CSS).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Overall, 313 patients were included, of whom 204 (65.1%) were surgically treated after 2015. The median number of patients treated yearly was significantly higher after 2015 (26 vs 5; p < 0.01). Patients treated after 2015 more frequently had no palpable lymph nodes at diagnosis, despite similar primary tumor stage. After adoption of the PeCa care pathway, organ-sparing surgery (OSS) was more commonly performed (79.9% vs 57.8%; p < 0.01) despite local staging being similar and without observing a significant increase in positive margins. Surgical staging in patients with European Association of Urology intermediate- or high-risk tumors was conducted more frequently after 2015 (90% vs 41%; p < 0.01). Pathology reporting was standardized, and there was more frequent reporting of p16 staining status (81.4% vs 8.3%; p < 0.01), lymphovascular invasion (93.8% vs 44.3%; p < 0.01), and perineural invasion (92.4% vs 44.3%; p < 0.01) following implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a standardized care pathway for PeCa resulted in higher rates of OSS and pathological nodal staging and more complete pathology reports. Considering that these changes were associated with an increase in the number of patients treated, academic-driven centralization may play a role in optimizing the management of these patients.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We evaluated the impact of a care pathway for patients with penile cancer on patient management, the completeness of pathology reporting, and cancer control. We found that implementation of this pathway was associated with an increase in the number of patients treated, higher rates of organ-sparing surgery and lymph node staging, and more complete pathology reports. Centralization of care may play a role in optimizing the management of penile cancer.

Racial differences in survival for early stage (T1) penile cancer: Analysis from the SEER database

BACKGROUND

Penile cancer accounts for less than 1% of male cancers in the United States. Localized disease, particularly T1 tumors are potentially curable with local therapy. We present the racial differences in survival outcomes for T1, penile cancer from the SEER database.

METHODS

From 2004 to 2016 all men with T1, N0, M0 penile cancer in the SEER-18 database were included. Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox-Regression analysis were conducted to investigate prognostic variables for cancer specific survival (CSS).

RESULTS

A total of 4,406 men were identified with penile cancer; 1,941 men had T1 disease. The Kaplan-Meier (KM) analysis showed those with primary site surgery had better 5-year CSS compared to those without primary site surgery (P <.0001) and a significant difference in CSS based on race (P= 0.0078). On multivariable analysis, Hispanic individuals had worse CSS (HR 1.92; P = 0.0057) compared to the White men. Black men were also found to have a poor CSS however this was not statistically significant (HR 1.53, P = 0.118). Men with penile cancer who had either penectomy (HR 0.45; P = 0.006) or penile preservation surgery (HR 0.25; P< 0.001) had improved CSS.

CONCLUSION

Racial disparities in CSS exist among men with in early-stage penile cancer. KM analysis showed significant differences in CSS by race and in those receiving primary site surgery. On multivariable analysis, the CSS is worse in Hispanic compared to White men. There is a trend towards worse CSS in Black men however this was not statistically significant.

Organ-sparing treatment for T1 and T2 penile cancer: an updated literature review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Penile cancer (PeCa) is an orphan disease due to its rare incidence in high-income countries. Traditional surgical options for clinical T1-2 disease, including partial and total penectomy, can dramatically affect patient's quality of life and mental health status. In selected patients, organ-sparing surgery (OSS) has the potential to remove the primary tumor with comparable oncologic outcomes while maintaining penile length, sexual and urinary function. In this review, we aim to discuss the indications, advantages, and outcomes of various OSSs currently available for men diagnosed with PeCa seeking an organ-preserving option.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patient survival largely depends on spotting and treating lymph node metastasis at an early stage. The required surgical and radiotherapy skill sets cannot be expected to be available in all centers. Consequently, patients should be referred to high-volume centers to receive the best available treatments for PeCa.

SUMMARY

OSS should be used for small and localized PeCa (T1-T2) as an alternative to partial penectomy to preserve patient's quality of life while maintaining sexual and urinary function and penile aesthetics. Overall, there are different techniques that can be used with different response and recurrence rates. In case of tumor recurrence, partial penectomy or radical penectomy is feasible, without impacting overall survival.

High cardiovascular disease mortality after penile squamous cell carcinomas diagnosis: Results from the United States SEER population, 2005-2016

Background

Cancer survivorship care is an emerging and necessary component of oncology management. To explore cardiovascular disease (CVD)-specific mortality and prognostic factors among patients with penile squamous cell carcinomas (PSCC). These results aid clinicians in furtherly understand this disease's prognosis.

Method

We analyzed Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program data for 2668 PSCC cases diagnosed between 2005 to 2016. We calculated standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) of CVD and all-cause mortality, comparing PSCC patients with general population men. A cumulative mortality curve and competitive risk regression model were utilized to evaluate the prognostic factors of CVD-specific death.

Results

Death distribution is as follows: PSCC (42.4%), other causes (21.3%) CVD (19%), and other cancers (17.3%). PSCC patients are more like to die from CVD (SMR=3.2, 95%CI: 3.1-3.3) and all-cause death compared with the general population. Meanwhile, patients undergoing surgery show a relatively higher CVD-specific mortality than the general population (SMR=2.7, 95%CI: 2.4-3.2). In the competitive risk model, higher CVD mortality is associated with age, region, year of diagnosis, stage, and marital status (all P<0.05). Patients with the localized stage show a higher risk of CVD-specific death than those with regional or distant stage.

Conclusion

Our study mainly reveals that cardiovascular disease was the important cause of death and higher CVD-specific mortality among PSCC patients. Several associated factors related to CVD-specific death are also identified. In the future, more work in educating health care professionals on the components of survivorship care is needed to meet the long-term and late effects cancer patients experience.

Does the Identification of a Minimum Number of Cases Correlate With Better Adherence to International Guidelines Regarding the Treatment of Penile Cancer? Survey Results of the European PROspective Penile Cancer Study (E-PROPS)

Background

Penile cancer represents a rare malignant disease, whereby a small caseload is associated with the risk of inadequate treatment expertise. Thus, we hypothesized that strict guideline adherence might be considered a potential surrogate for treatment quality. This study investigated the influence of the annual hospital caseload on guideline adherence regarding treatment recommendations for penile cancer.

Methods

In a 2018 survey study, 681 urologists from 45 hospitals in four European countries were queried about six hypothetical case scenarios (CS): local treatment of the primary tumor pTis (CS1) and pT1b (CS2); lymph node surgery inguinal (CS3) and pelvic (CS4); and chemotherapy neoadjuvant (CS5) and adjuvant (CS6). Only the responses from 206 head and senior physicians, as decision makers, were evaluated. The answers were assessed based on the applicable European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines regarding their correctness. The real hospital caseload was analyzed based on multivariate logistic regression models regarding its effect on guideline adherence.

Results

The median annual hospital caseload was 6 (interquartile range (IQR) 3–9). Recommendations for CS1–6 were correct in 79%, 66%, 39%, 27%, 28%, and 28%, respectively. The probability of a guideline-adherent recommendation increased with each patient treated per year in a clinic for CS1, CS2, CS3, and CS6 by 16%, 7.8%, 7.2%, and 9.5%, respectively (each p < 0.05); CS4 and CS5 were not influenced by caseload. A caseload threshold with a higher guideline adherence for all endpoints could not be perceived. The type of hospital care (academic vs. non-academic) did not affect guideline adherence in any scenario.

Conclusions

Guideline adherence for most treatment recommendations increases with growing annual penile cancer caseload. Thus, the results of our study call for a stronger centralization of diagnosis and treatment strategies regarding penile cancer.

Systemic treatment of penile squamous cell carcinoma-hurdles and hopes of preclinical models and clinical regimens: a narrative review

Despite contemporary research efforts, the prognosis of penile squamous cell carcinoma (PeSCC) has not significantly improved over the past decade. Despite frequently encountered patient-related delayed medical consultations impairing outcomes, several other aspects contribute to the lack of advancement in the treatment of this condition. One essential reason is that translational research, a prerequisite for the clinically successful disease management, is still at an early stage in PeSCC as compared to many other malignancies. Preclinical experimental models are indispensable for the evaluation of tumor biology and identification of genomic alterations. However, since neither commercial PeSCC cell lines are available nor xenograft models sustainably established, such analyses are challenging in this field of research. In addition, systemic therapies are less effective and toxic without decisive breakthroughs over recent years. Current systemic management of PeSCC is based on protocols that have been investigated in small series of only up to 30 patients. Thus, there is an unmet medical need for new approaches necessitating research efforts to develop more efficacious systemic strategies. This review aims to highlight the current state of knowledge in the molecular alterations involved in the etiology and ensuing steps for cancer progression, existing preclinical models of translational research, clinically relevant systemic protocols, and ongoing clinical trials.

Clinical performance in ERN eUROGEN for penile, testicular, adrenal and soft tissue cancers

BACKGROUND

European Reference Network (ERN) eUROGEN is a cross-border collaboration set up by the European Commission in 2017 aimed at tackling rare urogenital conditions, including cancers.

OBJECTIVE

This report aims to assess ERN eUROGEN's operational activity with a focus on rare urogenital cancers.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Data for descriptive analyses were collected retrospectively between 2013 and 2017, and prospectively between 2018 and 2020.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Operational indicators were set by the European Commission from 2018. Additionally, in 2019/20 centres self-assessed clinical service provision and provided clinical metrics for rare cancer specialist centres as established by experts.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Results revealed that the cumulative rare urogenital cancer population increased 519.8% from 1,631 in 2013 to 10,109 in 2020. This may provide opportunities for research and creation of a large cancer registry. In total, ten centres met the clinical requirements for rare cancer specialist centres providing evidence of high-volume. Differences in data collection methods between centres limit further analyses. Other rare cancer data identified 39 panel discussions, three webinars, and eight publications.

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst limitations to data analysis remain, ERN eUROGEN has demonstrated excellent operational performance with promising opportunities for rare cancer research.

A 25-year perspective on advances in an understanding of the biology, evaluation, treatment and future directions/challenges of penile cancer

Squamous cell carcinoma of the penis (SCCP) is uncommon in some countries (including the U.S.), but is an important malignancy elsewhere. As a rare disease, progress has been slow compared to more common tumor types discussed in this anniversary issue and most often limited to single-center or retrospective datasets.  In this section we describe developments leading to the current standard approach with current research questions.

Penile cancer

Penile squamous cell carcinoma (PSCC) is a rare cancer with orphan disease designation and a prevalence of 0.1-1 per 100,000 men in high-income countries, but it constitutes up to 10% of malignancies in men in some African, Asian and South American regions. Risk factors for PSCC include the absence of childhood circumcision, phimosis, chronic inflammation, poor penile hygiene, smoking, immunosuppression and infection with human papillomavirus (HPV). Several different subtypes of HPV-related and non-HPV-related penile cancers have been described, which also have different prognostic profiles. Localized disease can be effectively managed by topical therapy, surgery or radiotherapy. As PSCC is characterized by early lymphatic spread and imaging is inadequate for the detection of micrometastatic disease, correct and upfront surgical staging of the inguinal lymph nodes is crucial in disease management. Advanced stages of disease require multimodal management. Optimal sequencing of treatments and patient selection are still being investigated. Cisplatin-based chemotherapy regimens are the mainstay of systemic therapy for advanced PSCC, but they have poor and non-durable responses and high rates of toxic effects, indicating a need for the development of more effective and less toxic therapeutic options. Localized and advanced penile cancers and their treatment have profound physical and psychosexual effects on the quality of life of patients and survivors by altering sexual and urinary function and causing lymphoedema.

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

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.

Adherence to the EAU Guideline Recommendations for Local Tumor Treatment in Penile Cancer: Results of the European PROspective Penile Cancer Study Group Survey (E-PROPS)

Introduction

Penile cancer (PeCa) is an orphan disease in European countries. The current guidelines are predominantly based on retrospective studies with a low level of evidence. In our study, we aimed to identify predictors for guideline-conform treatment and hypothesize that reference centers for PeCa and physicians' experience promote guideline compliance and therefore correct local tumor therapy.

Methods

This study is part of the European PROspective Penile Cancer Study (E-PROPS), an international collaboration group evaluating therapeutic management for PeCa in Central Europe. For this module, a 14-item-survey was developed and sent to 681 urologists in 45 European centers. Three questions focused on therapeutic decisions for PeCa in clinical stage Tis, Ta-T1a, and T1b. Four questions addressed potential personal confounders. Survey results were analyzed by bootstrap-adjusted stepwise multivariate linear regression analysis to identify predictors for EAU guideline-conform local treatment of PeCa.

Results

For local therapy of cTis 80.4% recommended guideline-conform treatment, for cTa-cT1a 87.3% and for cT1b 59.1%. In total, 42.4% chose a correct approach in all tumor stages. The number of PeCa patients treated at the hospital, a higher level of training of the physicians, resource-based answering and the option of penile-sparing surgery offered at the hospital matched with giving guideline-conform recommendations and thus accurate local tumor treatment.

Conclusion

Patients with PeCa are best treated by experienced physicians, in centers with a high number of cases, which also offer a wide range of local tumor therapy. This could be offered in reference centers.

Long-term outcomes of pelvic organ prolapse repair using a mesh-capturing device when comparing single- versus multicenter use

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare long-term effects of high-volume surgery at a single-center to multicenter use when using a mesh-capturing device for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair.

Methods

Five years after surgery 101 (88%) at the single center were compared with 164 (81.2%) in the multicenter trial. Outcome measurements included clinical examination, prolapse-specific symptom questionnaires [Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 (PFDI-20), Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire—short form (PFIQ-7), Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12)] and pain estimation by VAS (0–10).

Results

Optimal apical segment outcome was 95% in the single- compared to 83.3% in the multicenter study (p < 0.001). POP recurrence in the anterior and posterior walls (POP-Q, Ba and Bp ≥ 0) was more common at the multicenter as compared to the single center [(19.8% vs 5.4%) and (26% vs 2.7%), (p < 0.001)]. Reoperations for POP and mesh-related complications were more frequent in the multicenter study [31/202 (15.3%) vs 7/116 (6.1%), p < 0.001]. Total PFDI-20, PFIQ-7 and PISQ-12 scores were comparable between the cohorts. There were no significant differences in overall pain scores in-between the cohorts during follow-up. At the single center, 1/81 patients (1.2%) had VAS 7/10, i.e. severe pain, as compared to 3/131 (2.3%) in the multicenter study (p = 0.277).

Conclusions

Despite the high objective and subjective long-term effectiveness of the procedure in both regular use, and at a high-volume center, centralizing the use of a standardized capturing-device guided transvaginal mesh for POP repair reduced secondary interventions by more than half.