Gastrıc cancer surgery in elderly patients: promising results from a mid-western population

BACKGROUNDS

Extended resection for gastric cancer in elderly patients is still challenging for surgeons. This study aimed to evaluate the prognosis and the postoperative outcomes of elderly patients underwent gastric cancer surgery in a high-volume center.

METHODS

The medical records of patients with gastric cancer surgery at Marmara University Hospital's General Surgery Department were examined retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups: Age ≤ 70 and Age > 70. The clinicopathological data of the patients were compared. The prognostic factors regarding gastric cancer surgery were analyzed with Cox proportional regression models. Kaplan Meier analysis and log-rank test were used to compare Overall Survival (OS) and Cancer-Specific Survival (CSS) among the groups. Competing risk regression analysis was used to examine cause-specific hazards among elderly patients.

RESULTS

The number of eligible patients was 250. Age > 70 group was 68 patients, and Age ≤ 70 group was 182 patients. There is no significant difference between the patient's demographics or pathological outcomes. Neoadjuvant therapies performed less in elderly patients [40 (22%) vs. 7 (10%), p: 0.03, respectively]. There was no significant difference in severe complication (≥ Grade III) rates in both groups. Multivariate analysis showed that advanced T stage and adjacent organ invasion were the independent risk factors for OS. No significant difference was observed between the groups regarding OS (Log Rank (Mantel-Cox): 0.102). Younger patients have worse CSS than those who are older. Cause-specific hazard model demonstrated a not increased hazard ratio [HR: 1.04(0.78-1.38)] for elderly patients for OS and CSS.

CONCLUSION

Gastric resections can be safely performed for elderly patients diagnosed with gastric cancer. This study showed that growing age is no longer a factor that will affect the clinician's decision in performing surgery in gastric cancer patients.

[Penile carcinoma: Practical issues, from the biopsy to surgery]

The management of a penile carcinoma is complex, a collaboration between radiologist, pathologist and urologist is necessary to obtain a correct staging. In this review we try to demonstrate step by step how to achieve a complete pathology report, how to manage the patient (imaging, biopsy, fresh frozen section and surgery).

Penile cancer

Penile squamous cell carcinoma (PSCC) is a rare cancer with orphan disease designation and a prevalence of 0.1-1 per 100,000 men in high-income countries, but it constitutes up to 10% of malignancies in men in some African, Asian and South American regions. Risk factors for PSCC include the absence of childhood circumcision, phimosis, chronic inflammation, poor penile hygiene, smoking, immunosuppression and infection with human papillomavirus (HPV). Several different subtypes of HPV-related and non-HPV-related penile cancers have been described, which also have different prognostic profiles. Localized disease can be effectively managed by topical therapy, surgery or radiotherapy. As PSCC is characterized by early lymphatic spread and imaging is inadequate for the detection of micrometastatic disease, correct and upfront surgical staging of the inguinal lymph nodes is crucial in disease management. Advanced stages of disease require multimodal management. Optimal sequencing of treatments and patient selection are still being investigated. Cisplatin-based chemotherapy regimens are the mainstay of systemic therapy for advanced PSCC, but they have poor and non-durable responses and high rates of toxic effects, indicating a need for the development of more effective and less toxic therapeutic options. Localized and advanced penile cancers and their treatment have profound physical and psychosexual effects on the quality of life of patients and survivors by altering sexual and urinary function and causing lymphoedema.

Human papillomavirus vaccination and prevention of intraepithelial neoplasia and penile cancer: review article

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The objective of the current article is to promote a literature revision of the relationship between the prevention of intraepithelial neoplasms (PeIN) and invasive penile cancer, and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, aiming to enumerate the pros and cons of immunization.

RECENT FINDINGS

The immunization against the HPV is sufficiently safe and many countries have incorporated the vaccine to their immunization calendar. Compared with men, the sampling size and the evidence quality of scientific researches among the female population are more robust. Some randomized and nonrandomized studies suggest that vaccination reduces the incidence of genital warts and no PeIN and penile cancer cases were developed in the vaccinal group. However, 70% of patients can evolve with the neoplasia despite having been immunized and even among HPV infected patients, only 1% will develop cancer.

SUMMARY

The studies about vaccination against HPV and prevention on penile cancer are conflicting and the main academic urology societies still have not incorporated vaccination of men in their guidelines. Future studies are necessary to confirm the efficiency and cost-benefit of the vaccine in men to prevent intraepithelial neoplasms and invasive penile cancer.

Profile of patients with penile cancer in the region with the highest worldwide incidence

To determine the epidemiological, histopathological, and clinical characteristics of patients diagnosed with penile cancer in the Brazilian state of Maranhão, the region with the highest incidence worldwide. One hundred and sixteen penile cancer patients were interviewed from July 2016 to October 2018. The majority of patients lived in a rural area (57%), worked in farming (58%), had a low level of schooling or no schooling (90%), and were married or in a stable relationship (74%). The mean age was 60.4 ± 16.51 years (range, 23–93 years). Phimosis (66%), poor/moderate genital hygiene (73%), history of sexually transmitted infections (55%), and zoophilia (60%) were found in the majority of patients. Most patients had their first sexual encounter at 16.2 ± 2.8 years (range, 10–25 years), and 75% had >6 sexual partners. The most common initial symptom was pruritus (37%), and most patients waited to seek treatment (average time to treatment, 18.9 months; range, 2–84 months). Human papillomavirus (HPV)-related histologies were observed in 62% of patients. Most patients had histological grades II or III (87%), stage ≥T2 disease (84%), and lymphadenopathy at admission (42%). Penectomy was performed in 96% of patients. The population with penile cancer in the region of highest incidence in the world is marked by low socioeconomic status, high prevalence of HPV infection, and phimosis. The delay in seeking treatment is related to a very high rate of advanced cancer and aggressive surgical treatment. The high prevalence of young patients was also a striking feature.

Whole-mount evaluation of penectomies for penile cancer: feasibility, cost and comparison to routine sectioning

AIMS

Pathological staging in penectomies may be difficult due to the anatomical complexity of penile anatomy, and may be additionally challenging due to the low volume at most institutions. Our study aimed to assess the feasibility of whole-mount processing for penectomy specimens.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A 7-year retrospective search for partial or radical penectomies identified 55 specimens, which were processed routinely (n = 31) from 2006 to 2009 and whole-mounted (n = 24) from 2010 to 2012. Routine cases used more slides per case compared to whole mounts (mean 10.4 versus 7.2). Recuts occurred more often in routine cases (12.9% versus 0%). More routine cases had additional blocks grossed (19.4% versus 4.2%). Upon review, five discrepancies that impacted pT staging were identified in the routine group, with none in the whole-mount group. The average estimated additional cost for each whole-mount case compared to routine processing was $40.74, with an increased turnaround time of 1 day.

CONCLUSIONS

Whole-mounting is a feasible technique for penectomy that can be utilized with minimal increased cost and turnaround time, and may improve staging. Institutions in which whole-mounting is already established for other organs, such as prostate, may wish to consider utilizing this format for penectomy specimens.

Advances in the pathology of penile carcinomas

The incidence of penile cancer varies from country to country, with the highest figures reported for countries in Africa, South America, and Asia and lowest in the United States and Europe. Causes of this variation are not clear, but they are thought to be related to human papillomavirus infection, smoking, lack of circumcision, chronic inflammation, and poor genital hygiene. Most penile tumors are squamous cell carcinomas, and a variegated spectrum of distinct morphologies is currently recognized. Each one of these subtypes has distinctive pathologic and clinical features. About half of penile carcinomas are usual squamous cell carcinomas, and the rest corresponds to verrucous, warty, basaloid, warty-basaloid, papillary, pseudohyperplastic, pseudoglandular, adenosquamous, sarcomatoid, and cuniculatum carcinomas. Previous studies have found a consistent association of tumor cell morphology and human papillomavirus presence in penile carcinomas. Those tumors composed of small- to intermediate-sized, basaloid ("blue") cells are often human papillomavirus positive, whereas human papillomavirus prevalence is lower in tumors showing large, keratinizing, maturing eosinophilic ("pink") cells. Human papillomavirus-related tumors affect younger patients, whereas human papillomavirus-unrelated tumors are seen in older patients with phimosis, lichen sclerosus, or squamous hyperplasia. This morphologic distinctiveness is also observed in penile intraepithelial neoplasia. The specific aim of this review is to provide a detailed discussion on the macroscopic and microscopic features of all major subtypes of penile cancer. We also discuss the role of pathologic features in the prognosis of penile cancer, the characteristics of penile precursor lesions, and the use of immunohistochemistry for the diagnosis of invasive and precursor lesions.