1
|
Zemp LW, Rudzinski JK, Pettaway CA, Nicholson S, Spiess PE. Management of Bulky Inguinal and Pelvic Lymph Nodes. Urol Clin North Am 2024; 51:335-345. [PMID: 38925736 DOI: 10.1016/j.ucl.2024.03.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/28/2024]
Abstract
Penile cancer with bulky inguinal metastasis has a high probability of harboring pathologically involved lymph nodes best managed in a multidisciplinary care setting. Appropriate staging with cross-sectional imaging and fine-needle aspirate cytology of suspicious nodes guide decision-making for the use of platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by inguinal lymph node dissection. Surgical resection plays an important diagnostic, therapeutic, and guiding role in disease management. Patients with adverse pathologic features, especially those with extranodal disease extension, may derive additional benefit from adjuvant radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Logan W Zemp
- Department of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, 12902 USF Magnolia Drive, Tampa, FL 33612, USA.
| | - Jan K Rudzinski
- Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, 1975 Zonal Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA
| | - Curtis A Pettaway
- Division of Surgery, Department of Urology, The University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Unit 1373, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Steve Nicholson
- Division of Medical Oncology, Mid- & South Essex NHS Foundation Trust, Court Road, Broomfield, Chelmsford CM1 7ET, UK
| | - Philippe E Spiess
- Department of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, 12902 Magnolia Drive Office 12538, Tampa, FL 33612, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Muneer A, Bandini M, Compérat E, De Meerleer G, Fizazi K, Gietema J, Gillessen S, Kirkham A, Sangar V, Alifrangis C, Powles T. Penile cancer: ESMO-EURACAN Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. ESMO Open 2024; 9:103481. [PMID: 39089768 PMCID: PMC11360427 DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2024.103481] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2024] [Revised: 04/26/2024] [Accepted: 04/29/2024] [Indexed: 08/04/2024] Open
Abstract
•This ESMO CPG provides recommendations for diagnosis, staging, pathology, treatment and follow-up of penile cancer. •Algorithms for the management of primary penile tumours and inguinal lymph nodes are provided. •The author group encompasses a multidisciplinary group of experts from different institutions and countries in Europe. •Recommendations are based on available scientific data and the authors’ collective expert opinion. •In clinical practice, all recommendations provided need to be discussed with patients in a shared decision-making approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Muneer
- Department of Urology and NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, UK
| | - M Bandini
- Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - E Compérat
- Department of Pathology, Medical University Vienna, Austria
| | - G De Meerleer
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - K Fizazi
- Department of Cancer Medicine, Institut Gustave Roussy, University of Paris Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - J Gietema
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - S Gillessen
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland (IOSI), Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC), Bellinzona; Universita della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - A Kirkham
- Department of Radiology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London
| | - V Sangar
- Department of Urology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester
| | - C Alifrangis
- Department of Oncology and NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London
| | - T Powles
- Barts Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sachdeva A, McGuinness L, Zapala Ł, Greco I, Garcia-Perdomo HA, Kailavasan M, Antunes-Lopes T, Ayres B, Barreto L, Campi R, Crook J, Johnstone P, Kumar V, Manzie K, Marcus JD, Necchi A, Oliveira P, Osborne J, Pagliaro LC, Protzel C, Bryan Rumble R, Sánchez Martínez DF, Spiess PE, Tagawa ST, van der Heijden MS, Parnham AS, Pettaway CA, Albersen M, Sangar VK, Brouwer OR, Sakalis VI. Management of Lymph Node-positive Penile Cancer: A Systematic Review. Eur Urol 2024; 85:257-273. [PMID: 37208237 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.04.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2022] [Revised: 03/27/2023] [Accepted: 04/19/2023] [Indexed: 05/21/2023]
Abstract
CONTEXT Lymph node (LN) involvement in penile cancer is associated with poor survival. Early diagnosis and management significantly impact survival, with multimodal treatment approaches often considered in advanced disease. OBJECTIVE To assess the clinical effectiveness of treatment options available for the management of inguinal and pelvic lymphadenopathy in men with penile cancer. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and other databases were searched from 1990 to July 2022. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), nonrandomised comparative studies (NRCSs), and case series (CSs) were included. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS We identified 107 studies, involving 9582 patients from two RCTs, 28 NRCSs, and 77 CSs. The quality of evidence is considered poor. Surgery is the mainstay of LN disease management, with early inguinal LN dissection (ILND) associated with better outcomes. Videoendoscopic ILND may offer comparable survival outcomes to open ILND with lower wound-related morbidity. Ipsilateral pelvic LN dissection (PLND) in N2-3 cases improves overall survival in comparison to no pelvic surgery. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in N2-3 disease showed a pathological complete response rate of 13% and an objective response rate of 51%. Adjuvant radiotherapy may benefit pN2-3 but not pN1 disease. Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy may provide a small survival benefit in N3 disease. Adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy improve outcomes after PLND for pelvic LN metastases. CONCLUSIONS Early LND improves survival in nodal disease in penile cancer. Multimodal treatments may provide additional benefit in pN2-3 cases; however, data are limited. Therefore, individualised management of patients with nodal disease should be discussed in a multidisciplinary team setting. PATIENT SUMMARY Spread of penile cancer to the lymph nodes is best managed with surgery, which improves survival and has curative potential. Supplementary treatment, including the use of chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy, may further improve survival in advanced disease. Patients with penile cancer with lymph node involvement should be treated by a multidisciplinary team.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ashwin Sachdeva
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; Department of Urology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
| | - Luke McGuinness
- Department of Urology, South Tyneside and Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust, Sunderland, UK
| | - Łukasz Zapala
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Isabella Greco
- Department of Urological Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery and Kidney Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Herney Andres Garcia-Perdomo
- Division of Urology/Uro-oncology, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Universidad Del Valle, Cali, Colombia
| | | | | | - Benjamin Ayres
- Department of Urology, St. George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Lenka Barreto
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Nitra, Nitra, Slovakia
| | - Riccardo Campi
- Unit of Oncologic Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - Juanita Crook
- British Columbia Cancer Agency, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, Canada
| | - Peter Johnstone
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Vivek Kumar
- Department of Urology, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, UK
| | | | | | - Andrea Necchi
- Department of Urology and Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Pedro Oliveira
- Department of Pathology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Centre for the Research and Technology of Agro-Environmental and Biological Sciences, University of Trásos-Montes and Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal; Veterinary Sciences Department, University of Trásos-Montes and Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal
| | | | | | | | - R Bryan Rumble
- American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA, USA
| | | | - Philippe E Spiess
- Department of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Scott T Tagawa
- Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Arie S Parnham
- Department of Urology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | | | - Maarten Albersen
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Vijay K Sangar
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; Department of Urology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Oscar R Brouwer
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Brouwer OR, Rumble RB, Ayres B, Sánchez Martínez DF, Oliveira P, Spiess PE, Johnstone PAS, Crook J, Pettaway CA, Tagawa ST. Penile Cancer: EAU-ASCO Collaborative Guidelines Update Q and A. JCO Oncol Pract 2024; 20:33-37. [PMID: 37956391 DOI: 10.1200/op.23.00585] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2023] [Accepted: 10/13/2023] [Indexed: 11/15/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Oscar R Brouwer
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Benjamin Ayres
- Department of Urology, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Pedro Oliveira
- Department of Pathology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Philippe E Spiess
- Department of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL
| | - Peter A S Johnstone
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
| | - Juanita Crook
- University of British Columbia, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Curtis A Pettaway
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Urology, Houston, TX
| | - Scott T Tagawa
- Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Crook J. The role of radiotherapy in the management of squamous cell cancer of the penis. World J Urol 2023; 41:3913-3920. [PMID: 37994970 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-023-04683-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2023] [Accepted: 10/08/2023] [Indexed: 11/24/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To review the evidence for radiotherapy in the management of primary penile cancer, either as brachytherapy or external beam radiation, and the role of external beam radiotherapy in node positive penile cancer. METHODS English language literature was reviewed for the past 3 decades. As penile cancer is uncommon in developed nations, high quality evidence to guide management is limited. Single institution reports often span decades during which time staging systems and treatments have evolved, reducing their relevance to current practice. Successful clinical trials require collaboration not only among disciplines but also among multiple institutions and nations. RESULTS Radiotherapy is a definitive organ-preserving option for T1-T2 penile cancers. Interstitial brachytherapy is associated with penile preservation in 85% of men at 5 years, maintained in 70% by 10 years. Results of external radiotherapy are not quite as promising but nonetheless 60% of men will have an intact penis at 5 years. Inguino-pelvic external radiotherapy has been reported to increase overall survival when delivered as adjuvant treatment for men with pN3 groin but pN0 pelvic nodes, and improve disease specific survival for those with involved pelvic nodes. InPACT (ECOG-ACRIN_8134) is investigating the role of inguino-pelvic chemo-radiotherapy for men with pN3 inguinal nodes but imaging negative pelvic nodes. CONCLUSIONS Radiotherapy has a well-defined role to play in treatment of squamous cell cancers of other sites, such as vulva, anal canal, uterine cervix and head and neck malignancies. Emerging data support the incorporation of radiotherapy into treatment paradigms for penile cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juanita Crook
- University of British Columbia, BCCancer, 399 Royal Avenue, Kelowna, BC, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Hakenberg O, Dräger DL. [Systemic treatment of penile cancer: New concepts? New achievements?]. Aktuelle Urol 2023; 54:304-312. [PMID: 37541237 DOI: 10.1055/a-2104-1418] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/06/2023]
Abstract
Systemic chemotherapy has been in use for metastatic penile carcinoma for years, but its success is limited. Its significance is largely associated with its role in multimodal treatment for lymphatic metastasis in the context of radical lymph node surgery. In cases of limited lymph node involvement, the combination of surgical treatment plus cisplatin- and taxane-based triple combinations may be curative. Advances in the understanding of molecular changes in penile cancer and the search for potential therapy targets have led to numerous studies. Although there is evidence of efficacy of immunotherapeutics, no significant therapeutic improvements have been seen in the clinical routine.
Collapse
|
7
|
European Association of Urology-American Society of Clinical Oncology Collaborative Guideline on Penile Cancer: 2023 Update. Eur Urol 2023; 83:548-560. [PMID: 36906413 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.02.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 47.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2023] [Accepted: 02/25/2023] [Indexed: 03/11/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
8
|
Patel A, Naghavi AO, Johnstone PA, Spiess PE, Grass GD. Updates in the use of radiotherapy in the management of primary and locally-advanced penile cancer. Asian J Urol 2022; 9:389-406. [PMID: 36381600 PMCID: PMC9643293 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajur.2022.05.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2021] [Revised: 02/20/2022] [Accepted: 05/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective Penile cancer is a rare malignancy in most developed countries, but may represent a significant oncologic challenge in certain African, Asian, and South American regions. Various treatment approaches have been described in penile cancer, including radiotherapy. This review aimed to provide a synopsis of radiotherapy use in penile cancer management and the associated toxicities. In addition, we aimed to discuss palliative radiation for metastases to the penis and provide a brief overview of how tumor biology may assist with treatment decision-making. Methods Peer-reviewed manuscripts related to the treatment of penile cancer with radiotherapy were evaluated by a PubMed search (1960–2021) in order to assess its role in the definitive and adjuvant settings. Selected manuscripts were also evaluated for descriptions of radiation-related toxicity. Results Though surgical resection of the primary is an excellent option for tumor control, select patients may be treated with organ-sparing radiotherapy by either external beam radiation or brachytherapy. Data from randomized controlled trials comparing radiotherapy and surgery are lacking, and thus management is frequently determined by institutional practice patterns and available expertise. Similarly, this lack of clinical trial data leads to divergence in opinion regarding lymph node management. This is further complicated in that many cited studies evaluating lymph node radiotherapy used non-modern radiotherapy delivery techniques. Groin toxicity from either surgery or radiotherapy remains a challenging problem and further risk assessment is needed to guide intensification with multi-modal therapy. Intrinsic differences in tumor biology, based on human papillomavirus infection, may help aid future prognostic and predictive models in patient risk stratification or treatment approach. Conclusion Penile cancer is a rare disease with limited clinical trial data driving the majority of treatment decisions. As a result, the goal of management is to effectively treat the disease while balancing the importance of quality of life through integrated multidisciplinary discussions. More international collaborations and interrogations of penile cancer biology are needed to better understand this disease and improve patient outcomes.
Collapse
|
9
|
Khurud P, Krishnatry R, Telkhade T, Patil A, Prakash G, Joshi A, Pal M, Noronha V, Menon S, Bakshi G, Prabhash K, Murthy V. Impact of Adjuvant Treatment in pN3 Penile Cancer. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2021; 34:172-178. [PMID: 34732295 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2021.10.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2021] [Revised: 08/17/2021] [Accepted: 10/12/2021] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
AIMS Due to the lack of high-quality evidence and consensus on adjuvant treatment for locoregionally advanced penile cancer, we reviewed the outcomes of pN3 patients to determine the suitable adjuvant treatment options. PATIENTS AND METHODS All consecutive pN3 penile cancer patients treated at our institution between January 2010 and December 2018 were reviewed to assess the impact of demographical, pathological and treatment factors on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival. The DFS and overall survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and association was tested using the Cox regression model (two-sided test with P < 0.05 considered significant). RESULTS Of 128 patients, 31 (24%) had pelvic nodal involvement. Twenty-six patients (20.3%) received no adjuvant treatment, 40 (31.3%) received single modality adjuvant treatment and 62 (48.4%) received multimodality adjuvant treatment (a combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy). At a median follow-up of 22 months, the DFS and overall survival were 55.4 and 62%, respectively. The best DFS and overall survival was noted with chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiation (C-CTRT; 93% each). On multivariate analysis, both DFS and overall survival were worse with pelvic node involvement (2.2 [1.3-4], P = 0.027 and 2.2 [1.3-4], P = 0.027, respectively) and better with any adjuvant treatment (single modality: 3 [1.5-5.5], P < 0.001; multimodality: 3.1 [1.6-6], P < 0.001). C-CTRT was associated with improved DFS over chemotherapy alone (0.17 [0.4-0.78], P = 0.02) but not over radiotherapy alone (0.35 [0.07-1.6], P = 0.19). In patients with no pelvic nodes involved, chemotherapy and radiotherapy as single modalities were associated with similar DFS and overall survival. In patients with pelvic nodes, multimodality treatment was associated with better DFS than single modality treatment (0.3 [0.1-1], P = 0.05). CONCLUSION pN3 penile cancer is a diverse prognostic group with poorer outcomes associated with pelvic nodes. Single modality adjuvant treatment may be adequate in inguinal nodes with extranodal extension, but multimodality treatment should be given in patients with pelvic nodal involvement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P Khurud
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India; Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - R Krishnatry
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India; Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
| | - T Telkhade
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India; Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - A Patil
- Clinical Research Secretarial, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - G Prakash
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India; Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - A Joshi
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India; Department of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - M Pal
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India; Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - V Noronha
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India; Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - S Menon
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India; Department of Pathology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - G Bakshi
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India; Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - K Prabhash
- Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India; Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - V Murthy
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India; Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| |
Collapse
|