Risk-adapted management for patients with clinical stage I non-seminomatous germ cell tumour of the testis

Case report: remedial microdissection testicular sperm extraction after onco-microdissection testicular sperm extraction failure

BACKGROUND

Testicular cancer (TC) mostly occurs in men aged 14 to 44. Studies have shown that TC seriously damages male fertility, and 6% to 24% of patients with TC were even found to suffer from azoospermia when they are diagnosed. At present, some studies have pointed out that onco-microdissection testicular sperm extraction (mTESE) can extract sperm from tumor testicles. However, there are almost no reports on remedial measures after onco-mTESE failure. Given the valuable opportunity for fertility preservation in patients with TC and azoospermia, it is necessary to provide effective remedial methods for patients with failed onco-mTESE.

METHODS

Two young men, who were diagnosed with TC and also found to have azoospermia, tried onco-mTESE while undergoing radical orchiectomy for fertility preservation. However, sperm extraction failed in both patients. Subsequently, the isolated testicular tissue of the patient in case 1 suffered from TC again, and the patient in case 2 was scheduled to receive multiple cycles of gonadotoxic chemotherapy. Because both had a plan to have a birth in the future, we performed remedial mTESE.

RESULTS

Sperm was successfully extracted from both patients. The patient recovered well, without complications. The patient couple in case 1 underwent 1 intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycle but did not achieve clinical pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

There is still an opportunity to extract sperm successfully using onco-mTESE, despite the difficulty of fertility preservation in TC patients with azoospermia. If sperm extraction from the tumor testis fails, implementing remedial mTESE as early as possible would likely preserve the last chance of fertility for these patients.

A Systematic Review Investigating the Difference between 1 Cycle versus 2 Cycles of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Stage I Testicular Germ Cell Cancers

Standard care for stage I testicular germ cell cancers (seminomatous-STC or non-seminomatous-NSTC) is orchiectomy followed by active surveillance, 1 or 2 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy, surgery or radiotherapy. The decision on the adjuvant therapeutic approach is guided by the associated risk factors of the patient and the potential related toxicity of the treatment. Currently, there is no consensus regarding the optimal number of adjuvant chemotherapy cycles. Although in terms of overall survival, there is no proven inconsistency regarding the number of cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy, and the rate of relapse may vary.

Testicular Cancer, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Testicular cancer is relatively uncommon and accounts for <1% of all male tumors. However, it is the most common solid tumor in men between the ages of 20 and 34 years, and the global incidence has been steadily rising over the past several decades. Several risk factors for testicular cancer have been identified, including personal or family history of testicular cancer and cryptorchidism. Testicular germ cell tumors (GCTs) comprise 95% of malignant tumors arising in the testes and are categorized into 2 main histologic subtypes: seminoma and nonseminoma. Although nonseminoma is the more clinically aggressive tumor subtype, 5-year survival rates exceed 70% with current treatment options, even in patients with advanced or metastatic disease. Radical inguinal orchiectomy is the primary treatment for most patients with testicular GCTs. Postorchiectomy management is dictated by stage, histology, and risk classification; treatment options for nonseminoma include surveillance, systemic therapy, and nerve-sparing retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Although rarely occurring, prognosis for patients with brain metastases remains poor, with >50% of patients dying within 1 year of diagnosis. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer focuses on recommendations for the management of adult patients with nonseminomatous GCTs.

Imaging of scrotal masses

Testicular cancer is responsible for approximately 0.1% of all cancer deaths in the USA, and seminoma is the most common type of testicular tumor. Ultrasonography is the primary imaging modality for accessing testicular and extratesticular lesions, while magnetic resonance imaging can be used for problem solving in lesion characterization in certain cases. CT imaging is usually performed for retroperitoneal staging of testicular cancer metastasis and follow-up after treatment. Extratesticular masses are common, yet rarely malignant. Imaging plays an important role in primary diagnosis of testicular cancer and differentiating it from common non-neoplastic findings. The purpose of this article is to review various imaging findings in testicular and extratesticular masses.

Systemic therapy for primary and extragonadal germ cell tumors: prognosis and nuances of treatment

Testicular germ cell tumors are the most common solid tumors in young men. These cancers represent a success story of modern medicine in our ability to cure young patients and offer decades of life, with a 5-year survival rate of approximately 95%. This review outlines the staging and risk classification of testicular cancers, and reviews the current state of knowledge and standard of care for the systemic treatment of testicular germ cell tumors with chemotherapy, focusing on the relevant clinical data supporting each treatment regimen. This review also briefly highlights current areas of active investigation, notably in the relapsed and refractory setting, including ongoing clinical trials.

Management of Clinical Stage I Germ Cell Tumors

Experience demonstrates multiple paths to cure for patients with clinical stage I testicular cancer. Because all options should provide a long-term disease-free rate near 100%, overall survival is no longer relevant in decision making, allowing practitioners to factor in quality of life, toxicity, cost, and impact on compliance. Surveillance for clinical stage I seminoma and clinical stage I nonseminoma has become the preferred option. The contrarian view is that a risk-adapted approach should persist, with surveillance for low-risk individuals and active therapy high-risk individuals. However, results obtained in unselected patients provide a strong argument against the need for such an approach.

Adjuvant Therapy for Stage IB Germ Cell Tumors: One versus Two Cycles of BEP

Testicular germ cell tumours are the commonest tumours of young men and are broadly managed either as pure seminomas or as 'nonseminomas'. The management of Stage 1 nonseminomatous germ cell tumours (NSGCTs), beyond surgical removal of the primary tumour at orchidectomy, is somewhat controversial. Cancer-specific survival rates in these patients are in the order of 99% regardless of whether surveillance, retroperitoneal lymph node dissection, or adjuvant chemotherapy is employed. However, the toxicities of these treatment modalities differ. Undertreating those destined to relapse exposes them to the potentially significant toxicities of 3-4 cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) chemotherapy. Conversely, giving adjuvant chemotherapy to all patients following orchidectomy results in overtreatment of a significant proportion. Therefore, the challenge lies in delineating the patient population who require adjuvant chemotherapy and in determining how much chemotherapy to give to adequately reduce relapse risk. This chapter reviews the factors to be considered when adopting a risk-adapted strategy for giving adjuvant chemotherapy in Stage 1B NSGCT sand discusses the data regarding the number of BEP cycles to administer.

Dimethyl sulfoxide induces chemotherapeutic resistance in the treatment of testicular embryonal carcinomas

Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) is an amphipathic molecule that is used as a solvent in biological studies and as a vehicle for drug therapy. The present study was designed to evaluate the potential effects of DMSO as a solvent in the treatment of testicular embryonal carcinomas (ECs). DMSO was applied to two human EC cell lines (NEC8 and NEC14), with the treated cells evaluated in relation to cisplatin (CDDP) resistance, differentiation (using Vimentin, Fibronectin, TRA-1-60, and SSEA-1 and -3 as markers) and stemness (denoted by expression of SOX2 and OCT3/4). Furthermore, DNA methyltransferase (DNMT-1, -3A and -3L) expression and methylation status were analyzed. DMSO induced resistance to CDDP, aberrant differentiation and reduction of stemness-related markers in each of the EC cell lines. The expression levels of DNMT-3L and -3A were reduced in response to DMSO, while this treatment also affected DNA methylation. The data demonstrated that DMSO perturbed differentiation, reduced stemness and induced resistance to CDDP in human EC cells. Therefore, DMSO could reduce drug efficacy against EC cells and its use should be carefully managed in the clinical application of chemotherapy.

During twenty years of Cisplatin-based therapy the face of nonseminomatous testicular germ cell tumors is still changing: an evaluation of presentation, management, predictive factors and survival

PURPOSE

To assess the changing presentation and treatment of nonseminomatous testicular germ cell tumors (NSGCT) and to investigate predictive factors for the status of metastasis at diagnosis and on relapse and death.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective record review of 147 patients that underwent inguinal orchiectomy from 1987-2007. Follow-up data was available for 102 patients (median follow-up: 80 months (0-243); 96 patients alive).

RESULTS

Mean patients age increased (p = 0.015) and more patients were diagnosed in clinical stage I (CSI) (p = 0.040). The fraction of yolk sac (YS) elements inclined (p = 0.030) and pT2 tumors increased (p < 0.001). Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) declined whereas more patients were treated with chemotherapy (p < 0.001; p = 0.004). There was an increase in relapse free (RFS) and cancer specific survival (CSS) due to an improvement in patients with disseminated disease (p = 0.014; p < 0.001). The presence of YS and teratoma elements showed a reduction in the odds ratio (OR) for metastasis at diagnosis (p = 0.002, OR: 0.262; p = 0.009, OR: 0.428) whereas higher pT-stage was associated to their presence (p = 0.039). Patients with disseminated disease (CS > I) showed a declined CSS compared to CSI patients (p = 0.055). The presence of YS elements was associated to an improved RFS (p = 0.038).

CONCLUSIONS

In our single institution study the face of NSGCT markedly changed over 20 years even after the introduction of Cisplatin-based chemotherapy. These changes were accompanied by an improvement in RFS and CSS. When dealing with NSGCT patients such observations now and in the future should be taken into account.