Outcomes and treatment patterns as a function of time in stage IS testicular seminoma: A population-based analysis

Clinical characteristics, treatment patterns and relapse in patients with clinical stage IS testicular cancer

Purpose

Clinical stage I (CSI) testicular germ cell tumors (TGCT) represents disease confined to the testis without metastasis and CSIS is defined as persistently elevated tumor markers (TM) after orchiectomy, indicating subclinical metastatic disease. This study aims at assessing clinical characteristics and oncological outcome in CSIS.

Methods

Data from five tertiary referring centers in Germany were screened. We defined correct classification of CSIS according to EAU guidelines. TM levels, treatment and relapse-free survival were assessed and differences between predefined groups (chemotherapy, correct/incorrect CSIS) were analyzed with Fisher’s exact and Chi-square test.

Results

Out of 2616 TGCT patients, 43 (1.6%) were CSIS. Thereof, 27 were correctly classified (cCSIS, 1.03%) and 16 incorrectly classified (iCSIS). TMs that defined cCSIS were in 12 (44.4%), 10 (37%), 3 (11.1%) and 2 (7.4%) patients AFP, ß-HCG, AFP plus ß-HCG and LDH, respectively. In the cCSIS group, six patients were seminoma and 21 non-seminoma. Treatment consisted of active surveillance, carboplatin-mono AUC7 and BEP (bleomycin, etoposide and cisplatin). No difference between cCSIS and iCSIS with respect to applied chemotherapy was found (p = 0.830). 5-year relapse-free survival was 88.9% and three patients (11%) in the cCSIS group relapsed. All underwent salvage treatment (3xBEP) with no documented death.

Conclusion

Around 1% of all TGCT were classified as cCSIS patients. Identification of cCSIS is of critical importance to avoid disease progression and relapses by adequate treatment. We report a high heterogeneity of treatment patterns, associated with excellent long-term survival irrespective of the initial treatment approach.

Construction and Validation of a Nomogram for Predicting Progression- Free Survival in Patients with Early-Stage Testicular Germ Cell Tumor

BACKGROUND

Testicular Germ Cell Tumor (TGCT) is the most common malignant tumor in young men, but there is a lack of a prediction model to evaluate the prognosis of patients with TGCT.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the prognostic factors for Progression-Free Survival (PFS) and construct a nomogram model for patients with early-stage TGCT after radical orchiectomy.

METHODS

Patients with TGCT from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database were used as the training cohort; univariate and multivariate cox analysis was performed. A nomogram was constructed based on the independent prognostic factors. Patients from the Nanfang Hospital affiliated with Southern Medical University were used as the cohort to validate the predictive ability using the nomogram model. Harrell's concordance index (C-index) and calibration plots were used to evaluate the nomogram.

RESULTS

A total of 110 and 62 patients with TGCT were included in the training cohort and validation cohort, respectively. Lymphatic Vascular Invasion (LVI), American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage and adjuvant therapy were independent prognostic factors in multivariate regression analyses and were included to establish a nomogram. The C-index in the training cohort for 1- , 3-, and 5-year PFS were 0.768, 0.74, and 0.689, respectively. While the C-index for 1-, 3-, and 5- year PFS in the external validation cohort were 0.853, 0.663 and 0.609, respectively. The calibration plots for 1-, 3-, and 5-year PFS in the training and validation cohort showed satisfactory consistency between predicted and actual outcomes. The nomogram revealed a better predictive ability for PFS than AJCC staging system.

CONCLUSION

The nomogram as a simple and visual tool to predict individual PFS in patients with TGCT could guide clinicians and clinical pharmacists in therapeutic strategy.

Active surveillance in stage 1 disease: standard of care independent of risk factors?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Approximately 30% of clinical stage 1 (CS1) nonseminomatous germ cell tumours (NSGCT) and 15-20% of CS1 seminoma relapse without adjuvant treatment. Despite this, the 5-year survival for CS1 is 99%. The purpose of this review is to assess if active surveillance should be standard for all patients with CS1 testis cancer independent of risk factors.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent data from Princess Margaret Cancer Centre suggest a nonrisk-adapted surveillance approach avoids treatment in ∼70% of patients. Most relapse early at a median time of 7.4 months. The majority of relapses are confined to the retroperitoneum (66%) and only one modality of treatment is required: chemotherapy only in 61% and RPLND only in 73%.

SUMMARY

Surveillance is the preferred option and a safe proven strategy for the management of CS1 disease independent of risk factors. The prognosis for CS1 disease is excellent and the decision to offer surveillance or adjuvant treatment needs to highlight the treatment-related morbidity in an otherwise fit and healthy young man.

Contemporary Assessment of Long-Term Survival Rates in Patients With Stage I Nonseminoma Germ-Cell Tumor of the Testis: Population-Based Comparison Between Surveillance and Active Treatment After Initial Orchiectomy

BACKGROUND

Historical data demonstrated similar survival outcomes in patients with stage I nonseminoma germ-cell tumor of the testis (NSGCTT) subjected to either surveillance or active treatment (AT) after orchiectomy. However, data with long-term follow-up are unavailable. We tested contemporary treatment rates and their effect on cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and other-cause mortality (OCM) relative to surveillance, as well as after stratification between chemotherapy (CHT) versus retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We identified patients with stage I NSGCTT with initial orchiectomy within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (1988-2015). Subsequent surveillance versus CHT versus RPLND use rates were reported. Cumulative incidence plots and multivariable competing-risks regression (CRR) models were used after propensity score (PS) matching. These tests first compared surveillance versus AT (CHT vs. RPLND) and subsequently CHT versus RPLND.

RESULTS

Of 5034 patients with stage I NSGCTT, 61.2%, 24.9%, and 13.9%, respectively, underwent surveillance, CHT, and RPLND. Between 1988 and 2015, surveillance (estimated annual percentage change [EAPC]: +1.1%, P < .001) and CHT (EAPC: +2.3%, P < .001) rates increased. RPLND rates decreased (EAPC: -5.7%; P < .001). After PS matching, CRR models failed to identify AT as an independent predictor of lower mortality relative to surveillance. However, after PS matching, CRR models identified RPLND as an independent predictor of lower CSM (hazard ratio, 0.26; P = .002) relative to CHT. No difference in OCM rates was recorded (hazard ratio, 1.25; P = .2).

CONCLUSION

Surveillance and CHT use rates increased while RPLND decreased in the last two decades. Virtually the same outcomes were recorded between surveillance and AT. However, within AT, RPLND was associated with lower CSM than CHT.

On thin ice: barriers to adoption of surveillance for patients with stage I testicular seminoma. Survey of US radiation oncologists

Purpose:

Most men with stage I testicular seminoma are cured with surgery alone, which is a preferred strategy per national guidelines. The current pattern of practice among US radiation oncologists (ROs) is unknown.

Materials and Methods:

We surveyed practicing US ROs via an online questionnaire. Respondent's characteristics, self-rated knowledge, perceived patient compliance rates with observation were analyzed for association with treatment recommendations.

Results:

We received 353 responses from ROs, of whom 23% considered themselves experts. A vast majority (84%) recommend observation as a default strategy, however this rate drops to 3% if the patient is believed to be noncompliant. 33% of respondents believe that survival is jeopardized in case of disease recurrence, and among these respondents only 5% support observation. 22% of respondents over-estimate the likelihood of noncompliance with observation to be in the 50-80% range. Responders with a higher perceived noncompliance rate are more likely to recommend adjuvant therapy (Fisher's exact p<0.01). Only 7% of respondents recommend observation for stage IS seminoma and 45% administer adjuvant RT in patients with elevated pre-orchiectomy alpha-fetal protein levels.

Conclusions:

Many US ROs over-estimate the likelihood that stage I testicular seminoma patients will be noncompliant with surveillance and incorrectly believe that overall survival is jeopardized if disease recurs on surveillance. Observation is quickly dismissed for patients who are not deemed to be compliant with observation, and is generally not accepted for patients with stage IS disease. There is clearly an opportunity for improved physician education on evidence-based management of stage I testicular seminoma.