Subclassification of pN3 staging systems for penile cancer: Proposal for modification of the current TNM classification

Deep Inguinal Lymph Node Metastases Can Predict Pelvic Lymph Node Metastases and Prognosis in Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the relationship between deep inguinal lymph node metastasis (ILNM) and pelvic lymph node metastasis (PLNM) and explore the prognostic value of deep ILNM in penile squamous cell carcinoma (PSCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The records of 189 patients with ILNM treated for PSCC were analysed retrospectively. Logistic regression models were used to test for predictors of PLNM. Cox regression was performed in univariable and multivariable analyses of cancer-specific survival (CSS). CSS was compared using Kaplan-Meier analyses and log rank tests.

RESULTS

PLNM were observed in 53 cases (28.0%). According to logistic regression models, only deep ILNM (OR 9.72, p<0.001) and number (≥3) of metastatic inguinal lymph nodes (ILNs) (OR 2.36, p=0.03) were independent predictors of PLNM. The incidences of PLNM were 18% and 19% with negative deep ILNM and extranodal extension (ENE); and 76% and 42% with positive deep ILNM and ENE, respectively. The accuracy of deep ILNM, ENE, bilateral involvement and number (≥3) of ILNMs for predicting PLNM were 81.0%, 65.6%, 63.5% and 67.2%, respectively. The CSS was significantly different in patients with positive and negative deep ILNM (median 1.7 years vs not reached, p<0.01). Patients who presented with deep ILNM had worse CSS (median 3.8 years vs not reached, p<0.01) in those with negative PLNs.

CONCLUSIONS

Deep ILNM is the most accurate factor for predicting PLNM in PSCC according to our data. We recommend that patients with deep ILNM should be referred for pelvic lymph node dissection. Involvement of deep ILNs indicates poor prognosis. We propose that patients with metastases of deep ILNs may be staged as pN3.

Oncological therapy to Swedish men with metastatic penile cancer 2000-2015

BACKGROUND

Penile cancer is an uncommon disease with poor prognosis when spread to more than one inguinal lymph node. Recommendations on chemo- and radiotherapy in treatment guidelines are based on low-grade evidence. There are to our knowledge no described population-based cohort with detailed information on given oncological treatment and survival data. The aim of this study is to investigate in detail how men with metastatic penile cancer have been treated with chemotherapy and radiotherapy over time, and how survival varies with N-stage and given treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

For this observational cohort study all men in Sweden diagnosed with penile cancer with lymph node- or distant metastases 2000-2015 were identified through the Swedish National Penile Cancer Register (NPECR). Medical records were retrieved and 325 men were confirmed to have metastatic penile cancer (T_any, c or pN1-3 and/or M1). Information on treatments was collected. Causes of death were retrieved from the National Cause of Death Register (CDR).

RESULTS

Chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy were given to 172 (53%) of all men. The use of oncological treatments with curative intent increased significantly during the study period, from 30% of men with c/pN2-3 diagnosed 2000-2003 compared with 57% of men diagnosed 2012-2015. Ninety-three (29%) men received oncological treatments with curative intent of whom 85/93 (91%) had stage c/pN2-3M0. Survival decreased with higher N-stage, M1-stage, and absence of oncological treatment with curative intent. For men with c/pN3-stage, the engagement of pelvic lymph nodes was entailed with lower survival than pN3 based on extra-nodal extension (ENE).

CONCLUSION

The use of oncological treatment was below recommendations in guidelines but increased during the study period. Treatment was given predominantly to men with c/pN2-3 and M1-disease. Survival was higher among men treated with curative intent; this could be due to patient selection bias.

Management of the penile squamous cell carcinoma patient after node positive radical inguinal lymph node dissection: current evidence and future prospects

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The level of evidence for current (adjuvant) treatment strategies after node positive inguinal lymphadenectomy is relatively low because of a paucity of prospective studies and controversy exist between the two major guidelines. The present review aims to provide a review of current literature on the available treatment options of patients after a tumor positive inguinal lymph node dissection.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients without inguinal extranodal extension or less than two tumor positive inguinal nodes are at low risk of ipsilateral pelvic nodal disease. Patients with pN1 disease are unlikely to benefit from adjuvant treatment, whereas patients with pN2 disease might benefit from adjuvant radiotherapy. For patients with high risk of pelvic nodal disease, prophylactic pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is advised by current guidelines. The InPACT study investigates whether adjuvant chemoradiotherapy could be used instead of prophylactic PLND. Subgroup analyses of retrospective cohorts suggest that patients with pN3 disease based on tumor positive pelvic nodes may benefit from adjuvant radiotherapy or chemotherapy. Given the weak level of evidence and substantial toxicity associated with current regimens, adjuvant chemotherapy cannot be generally recommended.

SUMMARY

Despite current treatment strategies, patients with pN2-pN3 disease still have a poor prognosis. Prospective international multicenter studies are necessary to identify the best treatment options for patients with advanced node positive penile squamous cell carcinoma.

Updates in Staging and Reporting of Genitourinary Malignancies

CONTEXT.—

The 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manual changed the tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) classification systems of genitourinary malignancies in 2017. However, some of the changes appear not well appreciated or recognized by practicing pathologists.

OBJECTIVE.—

To review the major changes compared with the 7th edition in cancers of the prostate, penis, testis, bladder, urethra, renal pelvis/ureter, and kidney and discuss the challenges that pathologists may encounter.

DATA SOURCES.—

Peer-reviewed publications and the 8th and 7th editions of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual.

CONCLUSIONS.—

This article summarizes the updated staging of genitourinary malignancies, specifically highlighting changes from the 7th edition that are relevant to the pathologic staging system. Pathologists should be aware of the updates made in hopes of providing clarification and the remaining diagnostic challenges associated with these changes.

DaPeCa-4: outcome in penile cancer patients with N3 disease due to extra nodal extension treated with surgery and chemo-irradiation

Objective: The role of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is still debated in patients with N3 stage penile cancer. In Denmark this subgroup of patients is in general managed with an inguinal lymphadenectomy (ILND) and adjuvant chemoradiation and PLND is not offered as a standard. The objective of this study was to report treatment outcomes of this regimen and compare this with existing literature.Materials and methods: We retrospectively reviewed records of patients with pT1-T4, N3, M0 penile cancer diagnosed between 1st January 2010 and 31th December 2014 in Denmark and treated with curative intend.Results: 21 patients were identified with a median follow up of 74 months (CI 54-94). Management of the penile lesion was local resection in 5 (23.8%), partial penectomy in 10 (47.6%), and total penectomy in 6 (28.6%) of patients. Regarding the most extensive lymph node (LN) surgery: 4 patients (23,8%) went directly to oncological treatment from sentinel node biopsy with no further LN dissection, 6 patients (28.6%) were treated with unilateral ILND, 10 patients (47.6%) with bilateral ILND and a single patient (4.8%) was treated with ILND and PLND. In the adjuvant setting patients were treated with external beam therapy of involved regions and cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Median overall survival was 84 months (CI 0-176). The 5-year probability of surviving penile cancer was 57.1% (CI 36.0-78.3).Conclusion: Treatment with surgery and chemo-irradiation in this national cohort does not show inferior survival outcomes compared to historical cohorts.