What Is the Most Effective Management of the Primary Tumor in Men with Invasive Penile Cancer: A Systematic Review of the Available Treatment Options and Their Outcomes

Follow Up Care After Penile Sparing Surgery for Penile Cancer: Current Perspectives

Penile cancer (PeCa) is a rare urologic tumor worldwide. In 2024, 2100 new cases and 500 deaths are estimated in the United States. Radical surgery via total penectomy has historically been the cornerstone of treatment, since it provides excellent long-term oncological control. The rationale of surgery for penile cancer was to achieve a 2 cm macroscopic surgical margin that is historically advocated to reduce recurrences. Over time, numerous studies have demonstrated that resection margin status does not affect patients' survival. Different penile-sparing techniques are currently recommended in the European Association of Urology-American Society of Clinical Oncology (EAU-ASCO) guidelines for the treatment of localized primary PeCa. Centralization of care could yield multiple benefits, including improved disease awareness, higher rates of penile-sparing surgery, enhanced detection rates, increased utilization of less invasive lymph node staging techniques, enhanced quality of specialized histopathological examinations, and the establishment of specialized multidisciplinary teams. Compared to more aggressive treatments, the higher recurrence rates after penile-sparing surgery do not hamper neither the metastasis-free survival nor the overall survival. Repeated penile-sparing surgery could be considered for selected cases. The psychological impact of penile cancer is not negligible since the perceived loss of masculinity might adversely affect mental health and overall well-being. Quality of life may be compromised by sexual and urinary dysfunction which may be the result either of the loss of penile tissue or the psychological status of the patient. It is of utmost importance to offer rehabilitative treatment as sexual therapy, physical therapy, occupational therapy, family and peer counseling.

The Development and Feasibility of a Novel Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (Eproms) Questionnaire in patients with penile cancer

BACKGROUND

Penile cancer (PeCa) is a rare cancer with surgical options that affect patients' quality-of-life. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are uncommonly utilized in this cohort despite their several patient-centered benefits and there are recommendations to further digitalize PROMs. This prospective, population-based study aimed to report the development and feasibility of a novel electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) questionnaire for patients with PeCa.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A novel ePROMs questionnaire was developed and sent to patients 3 days before outpatient clinic appointments. The questionnaire included up to 30 items on patient symptomology and quality-of-life, including a self-reported quality-of-life score (rated 0 being worst and 100 being best). Data were collected for patients followed up between August 2021 and May 2022. The primary feasibility outcomes, adherence and engagement, were measured by response and drop-out rates. Differences in responders and nonresponders were also ascertained. Secondary outcomes explored the clinical utility of the questionnaire. Responders were subcategorized into 3 groups: circumcision (Ci), partial penectomy (PP) or total penectomy (TP) and differences were analyzed. This study was approved by the local Trust Governance Panel, including for ethical considerations.

RESULTS

220 adult males were sent ePROMs questionnaires, and 141 (64%) responded initially. The mean dropout rate of subsequent questionnaires was 56%. The maximum number of questionnaires sent to and completed by a patient was 8 (n = 1). Nonresponders were older (P < .0001), with poorer performance status (P < .0001) and lower body mass index (P = .0288). TP patients reported the lowest median quality-of-life score 68.50 (8-99), followed by the Ci group (72.0, 37-94) and the PP group (76.0, 10-99).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients initially engaged and adhered to the ePROMs questionnaire but struggled to maintain this over time. Clinical data gathered by the questionnaire may be utilized to inform patient care. The questionnaire requires additional validation, research, and education.

Brachytherapy and external beam radiation in the management of primary penile cancer - Game changer for organ preservation?

OBJECTIVE

In squamous cell carcinoma of the penis (PeCa), treatment options for primary tumors vary by disease stage and may include surgery, radiation, topical chemotherapy, or laser excision. This review aims to highlight the current evidence on the value of radiotherapy as an organ-preserving strategy in primary PeCa.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Manuscripts on primary PeCa treatment with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy were evaluated via Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Web of ScienceTM (2013-2023) to assess their efficacy and safety. Animal studies, studies with <5 patients, and case reports were excluded.

RESULTS

Radiotherapy offers the potential for organ preservation with tumor control rates comparable to radical surgery, while disease-specific survival rates up to 70 % were experienced with EBRT. Brachytherapy (BT) is the preferred method of irradiation for glans-limited tumors, whereas a higher relapse risk is expected for tumors >4 cm. BT shows 73 % amputation-free survival at 8-10 years and 81 % progression-free survival at 5-10 years. Compared with BT, total amputation significantly improves 5-year disease-free survival rate. BT offers a superior 5-year local control and penile preservation rates compared to EBRT. Common acute toxicities of brachytherapy include radiodermatitis, sterile urethritis, and urethral adhesions. The primary late adverse events of BT are soft tissue necrosis (0-31 %) and meatal stenosis (0-43 %).

CONCLUSION

BT is a favorable radiation modality, offering an efficient and conservative approach. HDR BT is favored for its enhanced dose distribution and radiation protection. Collaboration between radiation oncologists and urologists is essential in order to provide an optimal patient selection and manage toxicities thus optimizing patient outcomes.

Psychosocial Impact of Penile Cancer: An Unmet Need

Penile cancer is a rare cancer, where patients not only need to deal with the anxiety around a cancer diagnosis, but also manage the consequences of treatment on their self-esteem, body image, and intimate relationships. Many find it embarrassing and difficult to talk to family and friends. Due to this, changes in urination and other physical effects of treatment, many will withdraw from social activities too. Patients need psychosocial support and more needs to be done to address this unmet need. Holistic and multidisciplinary approaches in clinic, with access to counseling, may help patients adjust to their new situation.

Local Therapy and Reconstruction in Penile Cancer: A Review

Local therapy for penile cancer provides robust survival and can preserve the penis functionally and cosmetically. Interventions must target the appropriate clinical stage. We reviewed studies regarding the primary therapy in penile cancer, from topical therapy to radical penectomy, and reconstructive techniques. Topical therapy (5-FU or Imiquimod) provides a robust oncologic response in patients with Ta or Tis disease. Multiple laser therapies are available for localized patients and those with low-grade T1 disease. There is a non-trivial risk of progression and nodal metastases in poorly selected patients. Wide local excision provides an oncologically sound option in patient with up to T1 disease; less evidence exists for Mohs microsurgery in the setting of penile cancer. Increasingly aggressive approaches include glansectomy and partial/radical penectomy, which provide 5- and 10-year cancer-specific survival rates of over 80%. Meticulous reconstruction is necessary for the durable function of the remaining penis. Preservation of voiding and sexual function occurs via penile skin grafting, glans resurfacing, creation of a functional penile stump, and phalloplasty with a penile implant. Perineal urethrostomy provides an alternative in pathology demanding extensive partial or radical penectomy, and a durable option for seated voiding. Clinical suspicion and timely diagnosis are paramount in terms of management as less-invasive options for earlier-stage disease develop.

Improving Quality of Life and Psychosocial Health for Penile Cancer Survivors: A Narrative Review

Treatment of penile cancer (PC) focuses on organ preservation, employing various surgical and non-surgical approaches. These interventions may lead to disfigurement, impacting patients' functional outcomes and psychosocial well-being. We reviewed studies related to penile health and PC up to February 2024, limited to studies published in English. Studies employing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessments have identified a detrimental association between aggressive treatment and overall health status, physical functioning, and relationships. In contrast, organ-sparing demonstrates improved measures related to HRQoL and sexual function. Assessment through validated questionnaires reveals diverse voiding outcomes, and varying impacts on QoL and sexual activity, emphasizing the necessity for multidisciplinary personalized care. Studies highlight substantial variations in sexual function, with patients reporting adaptations, reduced satisfaction, and concerns about body image and sexual well-being. Furthermore, unmet needs include challenges in patient-clinician communication, obtaining information, and accessing psychosocial support. Patient experiences underscore the importance of timely diagnosis, treatment access, and addressing psychological consequences. Organ-sparing approaches have higher QoL preservation and sexual function. Individualized support, including sexual therapy, support groups, and family counseling, is essential for post-treatment rehabilitation. Timely diagnosis and comprehensive care are paramount in addressing the multifaceted impact of PC on patients and families.

Total Margin Control Is Superior to Traditional Margin Assessment for Treatment of Low-Stage Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE

Penile cancer is rare, with significant morbidity and limited literature assessing utility of peripheral and deep en face margin assessment (PDEMA) vs traditional margin assessment (vertical sections) on treatment outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a 32-year retrospective multicenter cohort study at 3 academic tertiary care centers. The cohort consisted of 189 patients with histologic diagnosis of in situ or T1a cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma of the penis at Brigham and Women's, Massachusetts General Hospital (1988-2020), and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (1995-2020) treated with PDEMA surgical excision, excision/circumcision, or penectomy/glansectomy. Local recurrence, metastasis, and disease-specific death were assessed via multivariable Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 189 patients. Median age at diagnosis was 62 years. Median tumor diameter was 1.3 cm. The following outcomes of interest occurred: 30 local recurrences, 13 metastases, and 5 disease-specific deaths. Primary tumors were excised with PDEMA (N = 30), excision/circumcision (N = 110), or penectomy/glansectomy (N = 49). Of patients treated with traditional margin assessment (non-PDEMA), 12% had narrow or positive margins. Five-year proportions were as follows with respect to local recurrence-free survival, metastasis-free survival, and disease-specific survival/progression-free survival, respectively: 100%, 100%, and 100% following PDEMA; 82%, 96%, and 99% following excision/circumcision; 83%, 91%, and 95% following penectomy/glansectomy. A limitation is that this multi-institutional cohort study was not externally validated.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial results are encouraging that PDEMA surgical management effectively controls early-stage penile squamous cell carcinoma.

Surgical and Functional Outcomes of Penile Amputation and Perineal Urethrostomy Configuration in Invasive Penile Cancer

OBJECTIVE

The treatment of invasive penile cancer is based on partial or total penectomy and perineal urethrostomy configuration.1-3 To report surgical and functional outcomes of penile amputation and perineal urethrostomy configuration in a consecutive series of patients with invasive penile cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted from January 2018 to December 2022. Data were extracted from clinical records and operative notes. As primary outcomes, surgical complications were described. Oncological outcomes through cancer-specific survival and overall survival were analyzed. Patient survival was estimated by a Kaplan-Meier analysis. Functional outcomes were assessed through the administration of the International Prostatic Symptoms Score (IPSS) questionnaire at 3 months follow-up.

RESULTS

Overall 10 patients were enrolled. The median follow-up was 16 months (Interquartile range (IQR 12-18)). The median age was 71 years (IQR 63-79). Operative time was set at 195 minutes (IQR 155-275). The median hospital stay was 8 days (IQR: 6-10). Postoperative complications occurred in 20% of patients, in 1 case surgical revision was necessary. Positive surgical margins were detected only in 1 patient. The median catheterization time was 15 days (IQR: 15-32). One patient developed local recurrence. At 1 year, the cancer-specific survival was 80% and overall survival was 60%. The median preoperative IPSS was 15 (IQR 12-19). The median postoperative IPSS was 6 (IQR 5-7).

CONCLUSION

Penile amputation and perineal urethrostomy configuration was demonstrated to be a safe and effective procedure to address invasive penile cancer.

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.

Influence of Race/Ethnicity and Household Median Income on Penile Cancer Mortality

INTRODUCTION

Penile cancer, while relatively rare in developed nations, presents substantial disparities in outcomes among different demographic groups. Previous research has shown race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status, often proxied by household median income, to be critical determinants of health outcomes across various diseases.

OBJECTIVE

This study examines the association of race/ethnicity and household median income with survival among penile cancer patients in the United States.

METHODS

We utilized the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Registry to identify patients with a primary diagnosis of penile malignancies from 2000 to 2019. Our primary outcome of interest was the hazard of death following a diagnosis of penile cancer. We utilized the Cox regression model to explore the association between race/ethnicity and median household income and how this influences survival among these patients. We adjusted for patients' characteristics, disease stage at presentation, and treatment modalities.

RESULT

Of the 6,520 penile cancer patients identified, 5,242 (80.4%) had primary malignancies. The distribution of patients was as follows: 64.1% non-Hispanic Whites, 8.9% non-Hispanic Blacks, 20.8% Hispanics, and 6.2% from other racial/ethnic groups. The median diagnosis age was 66 years (interquartile range: 56-74). Survival rates at 5, 10, and 15 years showed racial disparities: 76.4%, 72.5%, and 69.7% for non-Hispanic Whites; 70.6%, 64.1%, and 61.1% for non-Hispanic Blacks; and 70.5%, 67.4%, and 65.6% for Hispanics. Multivariate Cox regression revealed worst survival for Black (HR=1.40; 95% CI=1.08-1.81, p=0.01) and Hispanic patients (HR=1.24; 95% CI=1.01-1.52, p=0.04). No association was found between median household income and survival. Interaction analysis indicated that the poorest Black men had worse outcomes than the poorest Whites did (HR=2.08; 95% CI=1.27-3.41, p=0.003).

CONCLUSION

Survival rates for non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients are significantly lower than those for non-Hispanic Whites. Furthermore, survival is worse for low-income Black patients than their White counterparts in the same income bracket.

European Association of Urology-American Society of Clinical Oncology Collaborative Guideline on Penile Cancer: 2023 Update

CONTEXT

Penile cancer is a rare disease but has a significant impact on quality of life. Its incidence is increasing, so it is important to include new and relevant evidence in clinical practice guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

To provide a collaborative guideline that offers worldwide physician and patient guidance for the management of penile cancer.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Comprehensive literature searches were performed for each section topic. In addition, three systematic reviews were conducted. Levels of evidence were assessed, and a strength rating for each recommendation was assigned according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methodology.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Penile cancer is a rare disease but its global incidence is increasing. Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the main risk factor for penile cancer and pathology should include an assessment of HPV status. The main aim of primary tumour treatment is complete tumour eradication, which has to be balanced against optimal organ preservation without compromising oncological control. Early detection and treatment of lymph node (LN) metastasis is the main determinant of survival. Surgical LN staging with sentinel node biopsy is recommended for patients with a high-risk (≥pT1b) tumour with cN0 status. While (inguinal) LN dissection remains the standard for node-positive disease, multimodal treatment is needed in patients with advanced disease. Owing to a lack of controlled trials and large series, the levels of evidence and grades of recommendation are low in comparison to those for more common diseases.

CONCLUSIONS

This collaborative penile cancer guideline provides updated information on the diagnosis and treatment of penile cancer for use in clinical practice. Organ-preserving surgery should be offered for treatment of the primary tumour when feasible. Adequate and timely LN management remains a challenge, especially in advanced disease stages. Referral to centres of expertise is recommended.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Penile cancer is a rare disease that significantly impacts quality of life. While the disease can be cured in most cases without lymph node involvement, management of advanced disease remains challenging. Many unmet needs and unanswered questions remain, underlining the importance of research collaborations and centralisation of penile cancer services.

Challenges in Organ-sparing Surgery for Penile Cancer: What Are the Limits?

Organ-sparing surgery (OSS) is endorsed by the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines as the preferred treatment for distal primary penile cancer. The recommendation states that OSS should be used whenever possible, without exactly defining what constitutes "possible". This recommendation is based on findings showing that this approach has no detrimental impact on survival. At the same time, OSS results in preservation of quality of life (QoL) and of various functions of the penis. However, while narrow tumor-free margins (>1 mm) are deemed oncologically safe, there is a higher risk of local recurrence. Recent data have emerged that question the dogma that a local recurrence does not impact survival outcomes. In this mini review, we highlight areas of discrepancy in current guidelines and describe challenges for a surgical approach with a delicate balance between oncological safety on the one hand and maximal preservation of QoL and penile functions on the other. PATIENT SUMMARY: Organ-sparing surgery has been recommended as the preferred treatment for primary cancer of the penis, as quality of life and sexual function are maximally preserved. In this review we identify challenges and limitations in routinely adopting this approach.