Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Long-term oncological results in penile cancer treated by inguinal lymphadenectomy

  • Original Article
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

In 95% of cases, penile cancer is a squamous cell carcinoma whose specificity is lymphatic spread with the inguinal lymph nodes as the first relay route. Inguinal lymph node dissection is a primordial part of the treatment. The objective was to assess the oncological results of inguinal lymph node dissection in penile cancer at our centre.

Methods

We retrospectively included all patients having undergone inguinal lymph node dissection at our centre between 1 January 2004 and 1 January 2020 for the treatment of penile cancer. Patients for whom lymphadenopathy was palliative were excluded. Depending on indications, the procedures consisted in either dynamic sentinel node biopsy, modified lymphadenectomy or radical lymphadenectomy. All cancers were reclassified using the 2016 TNM classification system. Survival was analysed according to the Kaplan–Meier method.

Results

242 inguinal lymph node dissections were performed in 122 patients. There were 71 pN0 (58%), 9 pN1 (7%), 4 pN2 (3%) and 38 pN3 (31%). Mean follow-up was 51 ± 45 months. The 3-year recurrence-free survival rate was 76% in pN0 patients and 17% in pN3 patients. The 5-year specific and overall survival rates were, respectively, 82% and 73% for pN0 stages, and 14% and 17% for pN3 stages. Extracapsular extension on an inguinal lymphadenopathy appeared as a highly negative prognostic factor.

Conclusion

Inguinal lymph node dissection is essential in the treatment of penile cancer. Recurrence-free, specific and overall survival are closely linked to the lymph node stage. Extracapsular extension and pelvic lymph node invasion are highly negative prognostic factors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data (data transparency)

Data are available from the corresponding author on request.

References

  1. Moch H, Cubilla AL, Humphrey PA, Reuter VE, Ulbright TM (2016) The 2016 WHO classification of tumours of the urinary system and male genital organs-part a: renal, penile, and testicular tumours. Eur Urol 70(1):93–105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Olesen TB, Sand FL, Rasmussen CL, Albieri V, Toft BG, Norrild B et al (2019) Prevalence of human papillomavirus DNA and p16INK4a in penile cancer and penile intraepithelial neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 20(1):145–158

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Leijte JAP, Valdés Olmos RA, Nieweg OE, Horenblas S (2008) Anatomical mapping of lymphatic drainage in penile carcinoma with SPECT-CT: implications for the extent of inguinal lymph node dissection. Eur Urol 54(4):885–890

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jakobsen JK, Høyer S, Bouchelouche K, Jensen JB (2021) DaPeCa-8: drawing the map of lymphatic drainage in patients with invasive penile cancer-evidence from SPECT/CT and sentinel node surgery. Scand J Urol 55(383):387

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wood HM, Angermeier KW (2010) Anatomic considerations of the penis, lymphatic drainage, and biopsy of the sentinel node. Urol Clin N Am 37(3):327–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Marconnet L, Rigaud J, Bouchot O (2010) Long-term followup of penile carcinoma with high risk for lymph node invasion treated with inguinal lymphadenectomy. J Urol 183(6):2227–2232

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Correa AF, Handorf E, Joshi SS, Geynisman DM, Kutikov A, Chen DY et al (2018) Differences in survival associated with performance of lymph node dissection in patients with invasive penile cancer: results from the national cancer database. J Urol 199(5):1238–1244

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Woldu SL, Ci B, Hutchinson RC, Krabbe LM, Singla N, Passoni NM et al (2018) Usage and survival implications of surgical staging of inguinal lymph nodes in intermediate- to high-risk, clinical localized penile cancer: a propensity-score matched analysis. Urol Oncol 36(4):159.e7-159.e17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kroon BK, Horenblas S, Lont AP, Tanis PJ, Gallee MPW, Nieweg OE (2005) Patients with penile carcinoma benefit from immediate resection of clinically occult lymph node metastases. J Urol 173(3):816–819

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Johnson TV, Hsiao W, Delman KA, Jani AB, Brawley OW, Master VA (2010) Extensive inguinal lymphadenectomy improves overall 5-year survival in penile cancer patients: results from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. Cancer 116(12):2960–2966

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wen S, Ren W, Xue B, Fan Y, Jiang Y, Zeng C et al (2018) Prognostic factors in patients with penile cancer after surgical management. World J Urol 36(3):435–440

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. O’Brien JS, Perera M, Manning T, Bozin M, Cabarkapa S, Chen E et al (2017) Penile cancer: contemporary lymph node management. J Urol 197(6):1387–1395

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Protzel C, Alcaraz A, Horenblas S, Pizzocaro G, Zlotta A, Hakenberg OW (2009) Lymphadenectomy in the surgical management of penile cancer. Eur Urol mai 55(5):1075–1088

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Pandey D, Mahajan V, Kannan RR (2006) Prognostic factors in node-positive carcinoma of the penis. J Surg Oncol 93(2):133–138

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Dimopoulos P, Christopoulos P, Shilito S, Gall Z, Murby B, Ashworth D et al (2016) Dynamic sentinel lymph node biopsy for penile cancer: a comparison between 1- and 2-day protocols. BJU Int 117(6):890–896

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dell’Oglio P, de Vries HM, Mazzone E, KleinJan GH, Donswijk ML, van der Poel HG et al (2020) Hybrid indocyanine green-99mTc-nanocolloid for Single-photon emission computed tomography and combined radio- and fluorescence-guided sentinel node biopsy in penile cancer: results of 740 inguinal basins assessed at a single institution. Eur Urol 78(6):865–872

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Chipollini J, Azizi M, Lo Vullo S, Mariani L, Zhu Y, Ye DW et al (2020) Identifying an optimal lymph node yield for penile squamous cell carcinoma: prognostic impact of surgical dissection. BJU Int 125(1):82–88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Djajadiningrat RS, Graafland NM, van Werkhoven E, Meinhardt W, Bex A, van der Poel HG et al (2014) Contemporary management of regional nodes in penile cancer-improvement of survival? J Urol 191(1):68–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Li ZS, Yao K, Chen P, Zou ZJ, Qin ZK, Liu ZW et al (2014) Disease-specific survival after radical lymphadenectomy for penile cancer: prediction by lymph node count and density. Urol Oncol 32(6):893–900

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ager M, Njoku K, Serra M, Robinson A, Pickering L, Afshar M et al (2020) Long-term multicentre experience of adjuvant radiotherapy for pN3 squamous cell carcinoma of the penis. BJU Int 31:e12

    Google Scholar 

  21. Veeratterapillay R, Teo L, Asterling S, Greene D (2015) Oncologic outcomes of penile cancer treatment at a UK supraregional center. Urology 85(5):1097–1103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Roussel E, Peeters E, Vanthoor J, Bozzini G, Muneer A, Ayres B et al (2021) Predictors of local recurrence and its impact on survival after glansectomy for penile cancer: time to challenge the dogma? BJU Int 127(5):606–613

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Robinson R, Marconi L, MacPepple E, Hakenberg OW, Watkin N, Yuan Y et al (2018) Risks and benefits of adjuvant radiotherapy after inguinal lymphadenectomy in node-positive penile cancer: a systematic review by the European Association of Urology penile cancer guidelines panel. Eur Urol 74(1):76–83

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Li ZS, Li XY, Wang B, Chen P, Li X, Augusto OA et al (2021) Radiotherapy plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in penile cancer patients with extracapsular nodal extension after inguinal lymph node surgery: a multi-institutional study. World J Urol 39(1):113–119

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bandini M, Ross JS, Zhu Y, Ye DW, Ornellas AA, Watkin N et al (2020) Association between human papillomavirus infection and outcome of perioperative nodal radiotherapy for penile carcinoma. Eur Urol Oncol 4:802

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Azizi M, Aydin AM, Hajiran A, Lai A, Kumar A, Peyton CC et al (2020) Systematic review and meta-analysis-is there a benefit in using neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy for locally advanced penile squamous cell carcinoma? J Urol 203(6):1147–1155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Bandini M, Albersen M, Chipollini J, Pederzoli F, Zhu Y, Ye DW et al (2020) Optimising the selection of candidates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy amongst patients with node-positive penile squamous cell carcinoma. BJU Int 125(6):867–875

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clinique Urologique, Hôpital Hôtel Dieu, CHU de Nantes, 1 Place Alexis Ricordeau, 44093, Nantes, France

    Antoine Jeanne-Julien, Olivier Bouchot, Stéphane De Vergie, Julien Branchereau, Marie-Aimée Perrouin-Verbe & Jérôme Rigaud

Authors
  1. Antoine Jeanne-Julien
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Olivier Bouchot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stéphane De Vergie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Julien Branchereau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marie-Aimée Perrouin-Verbe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jérôme Rigaud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AJ-J: Project development, Data collection, Data analysis, Manuscript writing. OB: Data collection. SV: Data collection. JB: Data collection. MAP-V: Data collection. JR: Project development, Data collection, Data analysis, Manuscript writing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antoine Jeanne-Julien.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Ethical approval

This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the Local Ethics Committee (Groupe Nantais d’Ethique dans le Domaine de la Santé, 2021).

Consent to participate

For this type of study, an approval or informed consent is not required (retrospective study). Analyzed data were completely anonymized.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jeanne-Julien, A., Bouchot, O., De Vergie, S. et al. Long-term oncological results in penile cancer treated by inguinal lymphadenectomy. World J Urol 41, 1589–1595 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-023-04390-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-023-04390-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation