Abstract
Background
The adherence rate to National Cancer Institute (NCI) recommendations regarding inguinal lymph nodes dissection (ILND) in high grade T1 (G3T1) and T2-4 squamous cell carcinoma of the penis (SCCP) is not known. We assessed ILND rates in a North American cohort.
Materials and Methods
The 17 registries of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database included 868 patients with SCCP, diagnosed between 1988 and 2006. Analyses consisted of univariable and multivariable logistic regression models.
Results
Overall, 27.6% of patients underwent an ILND. ILND rates were directly proportional with T stage: 19.0%, 30.5%, 30.6%, and 32.6% for, respectively, G3T1, T2, T3, and T4 SCCP (chi-square trend, P = 0.01). ILND rates also increased over time and were 19.3, 27.3, 30.7, and 30.8% for respectively, 1988–1995, 1996–2000, 2001–2003, and 2004–2006 periods (chi-square trend, P = 0.03). Finally, ILND rates decreased with patient age and were 42.6, 33.2, 24.7, and 7.3% for, respectively, patients aged ≤57, 58–68, 69–78 and ≥79 years of age (chi-square trend, P < 0.001). All 3 variables (T-stage, year of primary tumor excision and patient age) achieved independent predictor status in multivariable analyses.
Conclusions
The overall rate of ILND is low. Nonetheless, there is an upward trend over time. Our data indicate that the adherence to the NCI ILND guidelines is suboptimal. In consequence, ILNDs should be more strongly encouraged.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
National Cancer Institute. Penile Cancer Treatment. Available from: http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/treatment/penile/healthprofessional/allpages#Section_17 [accessed March 2010].
Ficarra V, Zattoni F, Cunico CSC, Galetti TP, Luciani L, Fandella A, et al. Lymphatic and vascular embolizations are independent predictive variables of inguinal lymph node involvement in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the penis. Cancer. 2005;103:2507–16.
Hegarty PK, Kayes O, Freeman A, Christopher N, Ralph DJ, Minhas S. A prospective study of 100 cases of penile cancer managed according to European Association of Urology guidelines. BJU Int. 2006;98:526–31.
Ornellas AA, Kinchin EW, Nobrega BL, Wisnescky A, Koifman N, Quirino R. Surgical treatment of invasive squamous carcinoma of the penis: Brazilian National Cancer Institute long-term experience. J Surg Oncol. 2008;97:487–95.
Persky L, de Kernion J. Carcinoma of the penis. CA Cancer J Clin. 1986;36:258–73.
Ornellas AA, Seixas AL, Marota A, Wisnescky A, Campos F, de Moraes JR. Surgical treatment of invasive squamous carcinoma of the penis: retrospective analysis of 350 cases. J Urol. 1994;151:1244–9.
Horenblas S, Van Tinteren H, Delemarre JF, Moonen LM, Lustig V, van Waardenburg EW. Squamous cell carcinoma of the penis. III. Treatment of regional lymph nodes. J Urol. 1993;149:492–7.
Lopes A, Hidalgo GS, Kowalski LP, Torloni H, Rossi BM, Fonseca FP. Prognostic factors in carcinoma of the penis: multivariate analysis of 145 patients treated with amputation and lymphadenectomy. J Urol. 1996;156:1637–42.
McDougal WS, Kirchner Jr. FK, Edwards RH, Killion LT. Treatment of carcinoma of the penis: the case for primary lymphadenectomy. J Urol. 1986;136:38–41.
Kroon BK, Horenblas S, Long AP, Tanis PJ, Gallee MP, Nieweg OE. Patients with penile carcinoma benefit from immediate resection of clinically occult lymph node metastases. J Urol. 2005;173:816–19.
Ries LA. SEER Cancer Statistics Review. Available from: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975-2004/ [accessed March 2010].
Sobin LH, Wittekind CH. TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours. 6th ed. 2002.
US Census bureau. US Census Bureau Table Files. Available from: http://www.census.gov/main/www/cen2000.html [accessed March 2010].
Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database. SEER*Stat Case Listing: County Attributes. Available from: http://seer.cancer.gov/seerstat/tutorials/case2/webprint/ [Accessed march 2010].
Du XL, Fang S, Coker AL, Sanderson M, Aragaki C, Cormier JN, et al. Racial disparity and socioeconomic status in association with survival in older men with local/regional stage prostate carcinoma. Cancer. 2005;106:1276–85.
Robert SA, Strombom I, Trentham-Dietz A, Hampton JM, McElroy JA, Newcomb PA, et al. Socioeconomic risk factors for breast cancer—distinguishing individual- community-level effects. Epidemiology. 2004;14:442–50.
Persson B, Sjodin JG, Holmberg L, Windahl T, Steering Committee of the National Penile Cancer Register in Sweden. The national penile cancer register in Sweden 2000-2003. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2007;41:278–82.
Leijte JAP, Kirrander P, Antonini N, Windahl, T, Horenblas S. Recurrence patterns of squamous cell carcinoma of the penis: Recommendations for follow-up based on a two-centre analysis of 700 patients. Eur Urol. 2008;54:161–8.
Protzel C, Alcaraz A, Horenblas S, Pizzocaro G, Zlotta A, Hakenberg OW. Lymphadenectomy in the surgical management of penile cancer. Eur Urol. 2009;55:1075–88.
Acknowledgment
Pierre I. Karakiewicz is partially supported by the University of Montreal Health Center Urology Specialists, Fonds de la Recherche en Santé du Quebec, the University of Montreal Department of Surgery and the University of Montreal Health Center (CHUM) Foundation. Rodolphe Thuret is partially supported by the Association Française d’Urologie (AFU).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
R. Thuret and M. Sun contributed equally to this work.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Thuret, R., Sun, M., Lughezzani, G. et al. A Contemporary Population-Based Assessment of the Rate of Lymph Node Dissection for Penile Carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 18, 439–446 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1315-6
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1315-6