Oncologic outcomes and subsequent treatment following organ sparing surgery for penile carcinoma: The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center Experience

Outcomes of Intraoperative Frozen Section Examination of Surgical Resection Margins of the Penis in Penile Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Frozen section examination (FSE) of the tumor resection margins is important during penile-preserving surgery (PPS) in penile cancer. The margin status will impact on how much penile or urethral tissue is excised. We aim to evaluate the outcomes of intraoperative FSE of resection margins in PPS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients with penile squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) who underwent a FSE of resection margins between 2010 and 2022 was conducted. FSEs were compared with the final histopathological analysis and the Diagnostic Testing Accuracy (DTA): sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) were calculated.

RESULTS

Overall, 137 FSE were performed. The median (IQR) age was 65 (53-75) years. 118 (86.1%) patients had negative FSE margins, 16 (11.7%) had positive FSE margins and 3 (2.2%) had equivocal (atypical cells) results. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and diagnostic accuracy of penile FSE were 66.7%, 100%, 100%, 93.2% and 94% respectively. 18 patients underwent further resection in the same episode due to a positive or equivocal FSE and 12 (66.7%) achieved negative margins. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study and lack of control arm to compare with.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative FSE performed at our center for the assessment of penile SCC margins is 66.7% sensitive and 100% specific. FSE should be considered in PPS, as it's an essential and a reliable diagnostic tool in minimizing over-treatment.

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.

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

Context

The primary lesion in penile cancer is managed by surgery or radiation. Surgical options include penile-sparing surgery, amputative surgery, laser excision, and Moh’s micrographic surgery. Radiation is applied as external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy. The treatment aims to completely remove the primary lesion and preserve a sufficient functional penile stump.

Objective

To assess whether the 5-yr recurrence-free rate and other outcomes, such as sexual function, quality of life, urination, and penile preserving length, vary between various treatment options.

Evidence acquisition

The EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Cochrane HTA, DARE, HEED), Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for publications from 1990 through May 2021. Randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized comparative studies (NRCSs), and case series (CSs) were included.

Evidence synthesis

The systematic review included 88 studies, involving 9578 men from 16 NRCSs and 72 CSs. The cumulative mean 5-yr recurrence-free rates were 82.0% for penile-sparing surgery, 83.9% for amputative surgery, 78.6% for brachytherapy, 55.2% for EBRT, 69.4% for lasers, and 88.2% for Moh’s micrographic surgery, as reported from CSs, and 76.7% for penile-sparing surgery and 93.3% for amputative surgery, as reported from NRCSs. Penile surgery affects sexual function, but amputative surgery causes more appearance concerns. After brachytherapy, 25% of patients reported sexual dysfunction. Both penile-sparing surgery and amputative surgery affect all aspects of psychosocial well-being.

Conclusions

Despite the poor quality of evidence, data suggest that penile-sparing surgery is not inferior to amputative surgery in terms of recurrence rates in selected patients. Based on the available information, however, broadly applicable recommendations cannot be made; appropriate patient selection accounts for the relative success of all the available methods.

Patient summary

We reviewed the evidence of various techniques to treat penile tumor and assessed their effectiveness in oncologic control and their functional outcomes. Penile-sparing as well as amputative surgery is an effective treatment option, but amputative surgery has a negative impact on sexual function. Penile-sparing surgery and radiotherapy are associated with a higher risk of local recurrence, but preserve sexual function and quality of life better. Laser and Moh’s micrographic surgery could be used for smaller lesions.