Welcome to South Grandville Christian Reformed Church! 4130

Document technical information

Format pdf
Size 1.2 MB
First found Jun 9, 2017

Document content analysis

not defined
no text concepts found


Andrea Jung
Andrea Jung

wikipedia, lookup




Guidelines for
Urological Cancers
Vol IX
Part A
Dr. Ganesh Bakshi MS, MCH, DNB
Assistant Professor & Assistant Surgeon
Dr. Kumar Prabhash MD, DM
Associate Professor & Assistant Medical Oncologist
Dr. Umesh Mahantshetty DMRT, MD, DNBR
Assistant Professor & Assistant Radiation Oncologist
Published by
Tata Memorial Hospital
Tata Memorial Hospital
Dr. Ernest Borges Road, Parel
Mumbai 400 012. INDIA.
Tel.: +91-22-2417 7000 Fax: +91-22-2414 6937
Email: [email protected]
Website: http: //tmc.gov.in
Evidence Based Management of Cancers in India Guidelines
Two Parts
Set ISBN: 978-93-80251-01-1
Guidelines for Urological Cancers
Part A ISBN: 978-93-80251-02-8
Guidelines for Aggressive Non Hodgkin’s Lymphomas
Part B ISBN: 978-93-80251-03-5
Set ISBN: 978-93-80251-01-1
Part A ISBN : 978-93-80251-02-8
Published by the Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai,
Printed at the Sundaram Art Printing Press, Mumbai.
© 2010 Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai.
All rights reserved.
Dedicated to
all our patients at
The Tata Memorial Hospital
Renal Cell Carcinoma
Carcinoma of the Urinary Bladder
Urothelial Tumors of Upper Urinary Tract
Testicular Germ Cell Tumours
Penile Cancer: Management Guidelines
Carcinoma Prostate
The Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) defines
EBM as “the conscientious, explicit and judicious of
current best evidence in making decisions about the
care of individual patients”. EBM has percolated into
all fields and levels of medical practice and this has
been particularly exemplified in current oncology
practice. There is an increasing need to update our
knowledge and be guided by EBM, especially in an era
where there have been rapid developments and
innovations in oncology.
Important innovations have been made in diagnostic
methods and surgical management of various urological
cancers especially renal and prostatic cancers.
Minimally invasive surgery and robotic surgery have
been embraced by uro oncologists the world over. Major
progress has also been made in the treatment
paradigms of cancers of the urinary bladder, testes and
prostate. The role of neoadjuvant and adjuvant
treatment in urological oncology continues to be
redefined. Targeted therapy has revolutionized the way
we treat several solid cancers and inroads have been
made in renal cancers too with anti VEGF drugs and
mTOR inhibitors.
Separating evidence from opinions is especially difficult
in this era of information overload; the EBM meeting and
guidelines book on urological cancers is planned to do
precisely this. As always, in addition to collating the best
available evidence, the meeting and book also highlight
areas where strong evidence is lacking. Exciting new
research is ongoing in dendritic cell therapy for prostatic
cancer, mini-transplant for renal cell carcinoma,
Gemcitabine instillation for superficial bladder cancer,
autologous transplant in refractory germ cell testicular
tumors, chemotherapy for penile cancers and many other
areas. I hope that in addition to updating practicing
urologists, surgical, medical and radiation oncologists,
this book and meeting serves as a stimulus for
investigators to actively participate in clinical research.
Controversies in management exist in a number of areas
and we have a responsibility to address them by well
conducted clinical trials.
February, 2010
Mumbai, India
R. A. Badwe
Director, Tata Memorial Centre
Dr. Dulhan Ajit
Dr. P. Amare
Dr. K. Amin
Dr. G. Bakshi
Dr. S. V. Chiplunkar
Dr. Sangeeta Desai
Dr. R. Dikshit
Dr. B. Ganesh
Dr. Nikhil S. Ghadyalpatil
Dr. S. Kulkarni
Dr. U. Mahantshetty
Dr. Santosh Menon
Dr. Vedang Murthy
Dr. Vanita Noronha
Dr. V. R. Pai
Dr. Kumar Prabhash
Dr. Ritesh Pruthy
Dr. Nilendu Purandare
Dr. V. Rangarajan
Dr. S. K. Shrivastava
Dr. M.H. Thakur
Dr. H. B. Tongaonkar
Renal Cell Carcinoma
Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the third most common
and the most lethal of all genitourinary malignancies. (13). It accounts for 1.5% of all malignancies in India.
Annually there are approximately 209000 new cases and
102000 deaths secondary to RCC in the world. There
has been a steady rise in the incidence of RCC at the
rate of 2.3 -4.3% annually over the past 30 years (4-6),
partly due to a general increase in life expectancy and
increased detection consequent upon the widespread
use of abdominal imaging. This has been associated
with an increased detection of localized incidentally
detected tumours and an improved 5 year survival rates
(1, 7, 8). However, despite this increasing incidence, the
mortality from RCC has decreased only marginally.
The peak incidence of RCC is in the 7th decade (1); and
there is a male preponderance in the ratio of 1.5:1. RCCs
are extremely uncommon in children and constitute 2.36.6% of all childhood renal tumours. In children, the mean
age at diagnosis is 8-9 years with an equal incidence in
both sexes (9, 10). RCCs in children are more likely to
be of papillary histology, often have locally advanced high
grade features, and can have unfavorable histological
variants. Hence, aggressive surgery is recommended
for RCC in children and young adults (9,11,12).
The exact etiology of RCC remains unclear. A number
of environmental, hormonal, cellular and genetic factors
have been studied for their association with RCC.
Obesity and smoking appear to be risk factors, with
relative risks of 3.6 & 2.3 respectively (13-17).
II. Chow et al (2000) found a significant correlation
between hypertension and renal cell
carcinoma (18).
III. Endogenous genetic risk factors include hereditary
familial forms of kidney cancer such as the Von
Hippel-Lindau disease (VHL), familial papillary renal
cell carcinoma (HPRCC), hereditary leiomyoma
RCC (HLRCC), the Birt-Hogg-Dube Syndrome
(BHD), and Tuberous Sclerosis (TS).
IV. Other genetic alterations in clear cell R.C.C include
frequent LOH of chromosomes 8p, 14q and 9p
(p16) among others suggesting other unknown
tumour suppressors may be important in renal cell
V. The most common genetic events associated with
papillary R.C.C are trisomy of chromosomes 7 and
17 and loss of Y.
VI. Analgesic abuse, exposure to industrial solvents,
antihypertensive medication, cadmium exposure,
long term exposure to petroleum, tar and pitch
products. (Evidence of association inconsistent and
effect probably low).
VII. Patients of ESRD on long term dialysis.
The majority of RCCs are sporadic and only 4% are
estimated to be familial. Most RCCs are unilateral and
unifocal. Bilateral RCCs are uncommon (2-4%) in
sporadic forms but much more common in familial forms.
Multicentricity is seen in 10-20% of patients, mainly with
familial forms or papillary histology. Specific genotyping
alterations have been associated with different
histological subtypes of RCC:
Mutations in the VHL gene (a tumour suppressor
gene) are responsible for most cases of
conventional (clear cell) carcinoma. The VHL gene
has been mapped to 3p25 and contains three axons
with 852 coding nucleotides. Somatic mutations of
the VHL gene are seen in approximately 50-75%
of cases of sporadic clear cell renal carcinoma and
are mostly point mutations, hypermethylation or
rearrangement of the gene. RCC develops in about
50% patients with VHL disease and is associated
with early age of presentation and bilateral or
multifocal involvement.
Other genetic alterations in clear cell RCC are LOH
of chromosomes 8p, 14q, 9p suggesting possible
role of tumour –suppressors in the tumourigenesis.
Papillary RCC: Trisomy of chromosomes 7, 17 and
loss of Y chromosome in male patients.
Chromophobe RCC: Multiple chromosome losses
and hyperploidy. Associated with Brit – Hogg – Dube
RCC originates from the renal tubular epithelium, as
evidenced by electron microscopy (19) and
immunohistochemical analysis (20). RCCs form a fibrous
pseudocapsule when they grow and are usually not
infiltrative except the collecting duct carcinomas. Renal
cell carcinoma has a number of distinct subtypes, each
with a unique genetic basis and tumour biology (21). On
the basis of distinct histological and infrastructural
features, RCCs are now classified into the following
histological subtypes (21, 22):
Conventional clear cell - 70%
Papillary, chromophobe
Collecting duct (including medullary)
Unclassified (6%) those which cannot be a part of
any of the above categories.
Though earlier RCC was thought to arise primarily from
the proximal convoluted tubules, some histological
subtypes like chromophobe and collecting duct RCC are
derived from the more distal parts of the nephron (23,
24). Conventional clear cell RCCs are the commonest
and have characteristic golden yellow appearance due
to the abundance of lipids in the tumour cells. Cystic
degeneration is seen in about 10-25% of RCCs and
signifies a favourable biological behavior while
calcification is seen in about 10-20% of RCCs (25,26).
Papillary carcinoma (10-15%) may be multiple in up to
45% of cases (27-29) and have a variegated appearance
with cystic and solid yellow and brown black areas.
Microscopically, presence of foam cells in the stalks is a
useful diagnostic feature. Chromophobe RCC (3-5%)
may have a characteristic central scar on cut surface
and may resemble an oncocytoma. Binucleate cells,
nuclear border crumpling and perinuclaer halo are
important distinguishing microscopic features of
chromophobe RCC. This subtype is usually associated
with a favourable prognosis in most patients. Collecting
duct carcinomas are high grade cancers and are
invariably associated with aggressive biological
behaviour and poor outcome. Medullary carcinoma
occurs almost exclusively in association with the sickle
cell trait and closely resembles the collecting duct variety.
Sarcomatoid change can occur in any histological type
and is associated with poor prognosis.
Nuclear grading is done by using the Fuhrman criteria
and is an independent prognostic parameter affecting
survival (1, 30).
The methods of spread of RCC are –
By direct invasion through the renal capsule into
perinephric fat and adjacent visceral structures or
in about 10% patients.
By direct extension into the renal vein and inferior
vena cava.
Hematogenous – About 25-30% of patients have
evidence of metastatic disease at presentation; the
common metastatic sites being the lung, liver,
bones. Other sites such as adrenal gland, brain,
the opposite kidney, and subcutaneous tissue are
frequent sites of disease spread.
Lymphatic – commonly to the hilar lymph nodes
and further dissemination can be lymphatic or
Diagnosis and Staging:
Currently, more than 50% of RCCs are detected
incidentally due to increased use of non-invasive imaging
to evaluate a variety of non-specific symptom complexes
(31). Incidentally detected RCCs are generally smaller
and of lower stage than symptomatic RCCs. The classic
triad of flank pain, gross haematuria and palpable
abdominal mass is now rare (6-10%), but when present,
signifies an advanced stage of the disease (32-34).
The commonest symptoms associated with RCC are as
Flank pain or backache
Palpable mass in the abdomen or flank.
Symptoms due to metastatic disease (25-30%
patients present with metastatic disease) such as
bone pains, chronic cough, etc.
Non-reducing varicocoele or bilateral lower
extremity oedema, both of which suggest venous
Paraneoplastic syndromes (35) are seen in about
20-30% of patients with symptomatic RCC, such
a. hypertension due to increased rennin
b. cachexia,
c. weight loss,
d. pyrexia,
e. neuromyopathy,
g. elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate,
h. anaemia,
non-metastatic hepatic dysfunction (3-20%)
(Stauffer’s syndrome).
k. polycythemia due to increased erythropoietin
secretion etc.
Most of these are reversible after Nephrectomy but are
usually not corrected by medical therapy.
Laboratory tests:
Apart from routine hematological tests, biochemical
investigations such as estimation of serum creatinine,
erythrocyte sedimentation rate, alkaline phosphatase,
LDH and serum calcium are advised. Estimation of renal
function is especially important in patients having with
tumour in solitary kidney or bilateral tumours as well as
in patients with diabetes, chronic pyelonephritis,
renovascular, stone or renal polycystic disease where
the function of the contralateral kidney may be
compromised. Preoperative hypercalcemia, anemia, and
elevated ESR and few other abnormal laboratory values
are independently associated with increased risk of
cancer-specific death from clinically confined clear cell
RCC (36).
Ultrasonography - noninvasive, accurate, and
relatively inexpensive and hence is usually the first
investigation. It can differentiate between solid and
cystic masses and also identify the need for further
radiological investigations. (37).
CT scan – A high quality contrast enhanced spiral
thin slice CT scan remains the single most important
radiographic test for assessment of a renal mass.
A solid mass with significant heterogenous postcontrast enhancement (due to characteristic high
vascularity) less than of the normal renal
parenchyma is virtually diagnostic of RCC (37-39),
and any renal mass that enhances with contrast
administration by more than 15 HU should be
considered as RCC unless proved otherwise. CT
also assesses primary tumour extension with
extrarenal spread, venous involvement,
enlargement of locoregional lymph nodes, the
adrenal and the liver, while also providing
information about the function of contralateral
kidney. CT can help rule out angiomyolipomas by
demonstrating areas of negative CT attenuation
indicative of the presence of fat in the tumour. (40)
Gadolinium contrast - enhanced MRI: It is useful in
certain patients, e.g., those with renal insufficiency,
allergy to iodinated contrast agents or those with
probable venous extension. MRI has better
sensitivity than CT scan in evaluating the presence
and extent of venous extension, differentiating a
tumour thrombus from a bland one and invasion of
surrounding tissue and organs.
Venacavography - is indicated in presence of
ambiguous MRI findings in cases with venous
extension or in patients who cannot have MRI for
some reason.
Doppler ultrasonography has limited sensitivity but
a transoesophageal echocardiography is a useful
tool for evaluating the cephalad extent of the
Arteriography - Has a limited role and can be done
prior to embolization.
Fine needle aspiration cytology/ biopsy (FNAC/
FNAB) is rarely indicated only when a renal abscess
or infected cyst is suspected and when RCC must
be differentiated from metastatic malignant disease
or renal lymphoma (41, 42). FNAB has excellent
accuracy for detecting malignant masses especially
when combined with molecular analysis (43, 44)
but has a suboptimal predictive value for detecting
benign masses (44). Although the risk of
complications is low, its impact on improving
diagnostic accuracy or influencing clinical
management is limited.
It is still difficult at times to distinguish RCC, adenoma,
and oncocytoma with current diagnostic techniques and
approximately 10% to 30% of small, solid, CT-enhancing
renal masses with features suggestive of RCC prove to
be benign after surgical excision (45). Oncocytoma
although being a benign tumour, is associated RCC in
the same or the opposite kidney has been found in as
many as 30% of patients (46).
Metastatic work up:
This includes
X-ray chest or CT scan of the chest.
Isotope bone scans and targeted skeletal
radiographs or scans, if indicated by clinical
symptoms or raised serum alkaline phosphatase.
CT / MRI of brain is advised only if indicated by
PET scan – investigational.
Currently, the AJCC TNM classification system (2002),
is recommended due to better differentiation of different
prognostic groups.
AJCC TNM Staging (2002)
Primary Tumour (T)
TX Primary tumour cannot be assessed
T0 No evidence of primary tumour
T1 Tumour 7cm or less in greatest dimension confined
to the kidney
T1a Tumour 4 cm or less in greatest dimension,
confined to the kidney
T1b Tumour more than 4 cm but not more than 7
cm in greatest dimension, confined to the
T2 Tumour more than 7cm in greatest dimension,
limited to the kidney
T3 Tumour extends into major veins or invades adrenal
gland or perinephric tissues but not beyond Gerota’s
T3a Tumour directly invades adrenal gland or
perirenal and/or renal sinus fat but not beyond
Gerota’s fascia
T3b Tumour grossly extends into the renal vein or
its segmental branches, or vena cava
below the diaphragm
T3c Tumour grossly extends into vena cava above
diaphragm or invades the wall of the vena cava
T4 Tumour invades beyond Gerota’s fascia
Regional Lymph Nodes (N)
Nx Regional lymph nodes cannot be assessed
N0 No regional lymph node metastasis
N1 Metastasis in a single regional lymph node
N2 Metastasis in more than one regional lymph node
Distant Metastasis (M)
MX Distant metastasis cannot be assessed
M0 No distant metastasis
M1 Distant metastasis
The estimated 5-year survival rates for renal cell
carcinoma is as follows: 96% for stage I, 82% for stage
II, 64% for stage III and 23% for stage IV (47).
Prognostic factors:
Pathological stage is probably the most important
factor affecting outcome. Patients with systemic
metastases are further assessed with performance
status and classified in to risk groups.
Symptomatic presentation, poor performance
status and weight loss of more than 10% body
weight indicate poor prognosis.
Presence of para neoplastic signs.
Tumour size – Exact correlation is debatable.
Nuclear grade and histologic subtype Sarcomatoid, collecting duct and medullary
histology indicate a very poor prognosis.
Prognostic scoring systems - Kattan et al proposed
a prognostic system incorporating symptoms,
histology, tumour size and pathologic stage to
predict probability of cancer free survival after
nephrectomy in which they have incorporated
tumour necrosis, tumour grade and vascular
invasion to predict the outcome in patients with
conventional RCC (48). Parker et al (2009)
evaluated a biomarker panel (BioScore) to enhance
prognostic algorithms for clear cell renal cell
carcinoma (49).
Surgery is the mainstay of treatment of localized RCC.
Radical nephrectomy as described by Robson (1969)
still remains the gold standard for patients with localized
RCC and has a cure rate of 70-92% (50).
The principles of radical nephrectomy include –
Early ligation of renal artery and vein,,
Removal of kidney and ipsilateral adrenal gland
surrounded by the Gerota’s fascia
Regional lymphadenectomy from the crus of the
diaphragm to the bifurcation of aorta or inferior vena
The erstwhile dogma of routine adrenalectomy and
classical lymphadenectomy is now being questioned. In
patients without radiological abnormality of the adrenal
gland, routine adrenalectomy is not indicated except in
patients with T3-T4 disease, locally advanced tumours
and upper pole tumours (51, 52). There remains a lack
of consensus regarding the indications and extent of
lymphadenectomy. Current evidence suggests that
lymphadenectomy should be restricted to staging, as
extended lymphadenectomy does not improve survival.
Consequently, it is recommended to perform a hilar and
immediate adjacent paraaortic or paracaval nodal
dissection during a routine radical nephrectomy, for
staging purpose. Numerous studies have identified risk
factors for lymph node metastasis such as large tumour
size >10 cm, T 3-T 4 tumours, high tumour grade,
sarcomatoid component and histological tumour necrosis
(53, 54). If more than 2 factors are present the risk of
lymph node metastasis is around 10% vs 0.6% when
less than two factors are present. In the higher risk group
a complete lymph node dissection may be warranted.
Radical nephrectomy can be done by following methods
Laparoscopic - transperitoneal, extraperitoneal or
hand assisted.
Presently, there is no evidence favouring a specific
surgical approach. In open approach, the choice of
incision depends on the size and location of the tumour
and the comfort of the surgeon. There is no impact of a
specific incision on the final outcome.
Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is indicated for
localized renal cell carcinoma with tumour size <10 cm
with no renal vein thrombus or lymph node metastases.
The surgical and oncological outcomes after
laparoscopic surgery have been reported to be equivalent
to those after open surgery, with equivalent cancer
specific survival rates and post-operative morbidity rates.
However, there have been no randomized trials
comparing laparoscopic with the open radical
nephrectomy. Nevertheless, at the present time,
laparoscopic radical nephrectomy should be considered
the standard of care for T1-2N0M0 tumours. Appropriate
patient selection as well as experience and expertise of
surgeon remain vital to success of laparoscopic radical
Nephron sparing surgery (NSS):
NSS was first described by Czerny in 1890 but later
popularized by Vermooten in 1950. The absolute
indication for NSS has been tumour in an anatomically
or functionally solitary kidney where removal of the whole
kidney would make the patient anephric with subsequent
high risk of dialysis or transplant.
Relative indications for NSS are:
Patients with unilateral cancer and the contralateral
functioning kidney affected by a condition that might
threaten its future function such as renal artery
stenosis, nephrosclerosis, hydronephrosis,
diabetes, calculus disease, hypertension.
2. Hereditary forms of RCC with a high chance of
developing a contralateral renal tumour.
NSS can be done in patients with unilateral localized RCC
with normal contralateral kidney as an elective indication.
A number of centers have reported excellent cancer
specific survivals of 90-100% following NSS (55-58). NSS
can be safely offered to patients with tumours <4 cm in
size, unilateral, unifocal and with low pathological tumour
stage as recurrence – free and long term survival rates
are similar to those reported with radical nephrectomy.
The indications of NSS have been extended to include
tumours up to 7 cm size and reports suggest no
significant difference for tumour recurrence, cancer
specific survival and renal function when compared to 4
cm size (59-65). There seems to be no difference in
outcome irrespective of the tumour is polar or central/
hilar in location. Another issue in NSS is the thickness of
the tumour free margin. The thickness of negative margin
does not correlate with recurrence so long as the
resection margin is cancer free and even 1 mm margin
all around has been reported to be adequate (66, 67).
Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy is an alternative in
suitable patients in the hands of an experienced
laparoscopic surgeon. Small, peripheral renal tumours
are optimum indications for LPN. Although some centres
have reported equivalent oncological outcomes after
LPN, long term reliable data is yet not available from
large studies. Besides, LPN is associated with longer
warm ischemia time and increased intra and post
operative complications and hence its use should be
limited to high volume centres with surgeons experienced
in laparoscopic surgery.
Ablative surgical procedures:
May be used as alternatives to surgery.
patients with small, incidental renal tumours,
patients with genetic predisposition to multiple
patients with tumours in solitary kidney or with
bilateral tumours;
Elderly patients with significant co-morbidities who
are not fit for an open surgical approach etc.
The various ablative techniques e.g. radiofrequency
ablation (RFA), cyrotherapy, microwave and highintensity focused ultrasonic ablation (HIFU) have been
tried in patients with RCC. These can be instituted by
open surgical route, by laparoscopic or even a
percutaneous route.
The potential advantages of these procedures are that
they are less morbid, can be done at outpatient
procedures and can be offered to unfit patients. The main
disadvantages of these procedures are that there is no
tissue available for histological confirmation of the lesion
and that there is no histological proof of completeness
of ablation. This is indirectly assumed by a set CT
criterion. In a recent population-based comparison of
survival after nephrectomy vs nonsurgical management
for small renal masses, these modalities have been found
to be inferior to nephrectomy. (68) The Oncological
outcomes and morbidity of these procedures have not
been tested in clinical trials and hence these must be
considered experimental at present.
Close observation or Active surveillance:
In view of an extremely slow growth rate of small renal
masses (0.01-0.86 cm/year in retrospective analysis from
numerous studies), close observation of these masses
is being investigated, especially once nearly one third to
one fourth of these masses are benign on histological
examination. There may be a place for close observation
with serial renal imaging in elderly or moribund patients
who are poor risk for surgery or ablative procedures.
This approach is not advocated for young, fit patients
with small renal masses if radiological features suggest
Tumour thrombus extension to renal vein or inferior vena
This is seen in 4-10% patients of RCC. Tumour thrombus
should be suspected in patients with –
Lower extremity oedema,
Unilateral right sided varicocoele or one which does
not collapse on recumbency,
Dilated veins on anterior abdominal wall,
Non-functioning involved kidney,
Prior history of pulmonary embolism or a right atrial
mass on imaging.
An accurate assessment of the presence and extent of
thrombus especially its cephalad limit is mandatory for
planning appropriate treatment. MRI is probably the best
modality for accurate demonstration of the thrombus and
for differentiating between a tumour thrombus and a
bland thrombus by demonstrating post-contrast
enhancement of the thrombus. Inferior venacavography
is generally reserved for patients in whom the MRI
findings are equivocal or in whom MRI is contraindicated.
Transoesophageal ultrasonography and abdominal
colour flow Doppler may also be employed to accurate
assess the cephalad extent of thrombus. The venous
thrombus extension is classified by its level as follows:
adjacent to renal vein ostium
extending up to lower border of liver (infrahepatic)
involving intrahepatic portion of IVC but below the
IV: extending above the diaphragm
Presence and extent of tumour thrombus have no
adverse impact on survival. Many types III/IV thrombi
are however associated with advanced locoregional
disease and hence have a poorer prognosis (69-71).
Excellent survivals of 40-70% at 5 years have been
reported with complete excision of the primary tumour
and its extension into the renal vein or IVC (72) and in
the absence of metastatic disease, surgical excision of
thrombus along with radical nephrectomy is
Adjuvant therapy:
Presently, there is no evidence that any adjuvant
treatment after radical or partial nephrectomy improves
survival. The use of autologous tumour vaccine in
adjuvant setting showed some advantage in progression
free survival, but did not affect the overall survival. In
patients with high risk factors and locally advanced
disease undergoing radical nephrectomy targeted
therapy agents are being investigated for their role in
the adjuvant setting.
Surveillance following surgery for RCC:
Follow up is necessary to monitor
Post-operative complications.
Renal function.
Local recurrence.
Recurrence in the contralateral kidney.
Development of metastases.
However, there are no evidence based surveillance
guidelines. The patients may be classified into different
risk groups according to one of the risk assignment
systems based on clinicopathological factors and
histological subtypes; and then the surveillance strategy
may be individualized depending on the risk of relapse.
Although early detection of relapse is desirable, actually
only a small percentage of patients with relapse can be
salvaged by curative therapy. One of the commonly
employed follow up surveillance schemes is as follows:
Low risk: Clinical examination, X-ray chest, ultrasonography of abdomen every 6 months. CT scan not
routinely advised.
Intermediate risk: Clinical examination, X-ray chest or
CT thorax, CT abdomen every 6 months for 2 years and
then annually upto 5 years.
High risk: Clinical examination, CT thorax and CT
abdomen at 3 months, then every 6 months for 5 years
and annually thereafter.
Local recurrence after radical nephrectomy
or NSS:
Local recurrence after radical nephrectomy is rare (14%) and seen in patients with node positive or locally
advanced disease at presentation. (73-75). Nearly two
thirds of these will have associated systemic disease. In
documented absence of distant relapse, surgery may
be offered to remove the disease. Patients not suitable
for surgery may be managed with local radiation therapy
or oral targeted therapy.
Relapse after NSS is also rare (1-10%) and is seen in
patients with higher T stage. Recurrence may be seen
at the same site or at a different site (due to multifocality
of disease). If metastatic work up reveals no abnormality,
either a repeat partial nephrectomy or a radical
nephrectomy is recommended (76). In patients
unsuitable for surgery, local ablative therapies may be
Local recurrences after local ablative therapies are
usually at the site of the original tumour and are
suspected by persistent enhancement within the tumour
bed or in rest of the kidney. Treatment can be re-ablative
therapy or total nephrectomy.
Metastatic renal cell carcinoma:
Approximately one third of patients with RCC present
with metastatic disease and another 40-50% will develop
distant metastases some time during their natural history
(77). Majority of these patients will die of disease within
12-24 months if left untreated.
However, there is a small subset of patients (1-4%) with
solitary metastasis, who may have a better biological
behavior than those with multiple metastases. These may
benefit with an aggressive therapeutic approach with
intent of cure. Many centers have reported excellent
survival rates of 33-60% five year survivals after complete
excision of the primary renal tumour and the metastatic
The following factors indicate a better prognosis: (7880).
Lung only metastasis
Solitary vs. multiple sites of metastases (54% vs.
29%5-year overall survival)
Metachronous metastases.
Long relapse-free interval – greater than 12 months
(55% vs. 9% 5 year survival)
Complete resection of metastatic disease possible.
Good performance status
Age less than 60 years (49% vs. 35% 5-year overall
Metastatectomy can also be considered in patients with
residual metastatic lesions responding to immunotherapy
or target therapy, provided the metastasis is resectable.
The aim of treatment in patients with multiple metastases
is palliative. Patients with multiple metastases may be
classified into different prognostic groups for
prognostication and planning optimum therapy. (81)
Two prospective randomized trials have examined the
value of cytoreductive nephrectomy prior to
immunotherapy (82,83). The results of both these trials
as well as their combined analysis have shown survival
advantage in the nephrectomy arm (13.6 vs. 7.8 months)
(84). In view of this, cytoreductive nephrectomy followed
by systemic treatment should be considered in patients
of metastatic RCC. Patients have to be properly selected
as few will be unable to take systemic treatment due to
post-operative complications or rapid disease
progression. Patients most likely to benefit from
cytoreductive nephrectomy are those with:
Good performance status with no/minimum comorbidities.
Preferably lung only metastasis.
Absence of CNS or liver metastasis.
Easily resectable tumour with minimal morbidity.
Possibility of more than 75% tumour reduction with
In some patients with unresectable disease, systemic /
targeted therapy can be started and then assessed for
nephrectomy. This may allow selection of betters with
biologically more responsive tumours, reserving
aggressive treatment for the patients most likely to benefit
from it. Pantuck et al in a retrospective analysis,
recommended complete regional lymphadenectomy in
patients undergoing cytoreductive nephrectomy for
advanced disease and demonstrated a survival benefit
in those undergoing lymphadenectomy in a retrospective
analysis (85). The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy has
not been studied in non-clear cell histology.
Radiotherapy may be given for selected patients with
brain metastases or painful skeletal metastases, for
symptomatic relief.
Systemic therapy for metastatic RCC:
Hormonal therapy in the form of progestational agents
(86,87) and chemotherapy (88) have not been found to
be effective in RCC. In non-clear cell histology or in
patients with sarcomatoid differentiation, chemotherapy
may have a role and the preferred agents are doxorubicin
and gemcitabine (89)
Immunotherapeutic approaches to RCC include
treatment with alpha interferon (IFN-a) or interleukin-2
(IL-2) or a combination of the two. Several trials have
shown 10-15% partial response to IFN-a (90). The benefit
to immunotherapy is limited to patients with good
performance status, lung only metastasis, long
metastasis free interval following nephrectomy and clear
cell histology. High dose IL-2 has been shown to be
superior to conventional dose IL-2 and has given durable
complete responses in some patients but its use is limited
due to associated high toxicity.
Combination of immunotherapy and chemotherapy has
not been shown to be beneficial.
Targeted therapy: Better understanding of the molecular
pathways has led to the development of targeted agents
with robust clinical effects. Vascular endothelial growth
factor (VEGF) inhibitors and tyrosine kinase inhibitors
(TKI) have shown efficacy in clear cell RCC.
Sunnitinib - tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) of VEGF
receptor; Platelet derived growth factor, c-KIT and
FLT-3. In a phase III double blind RCT comparing
sunitinib with IFN-a, sunitinib achieved a longer
progression free survival (11 months vs. 5 months)
in low and intermediate risk patients. This difference
was larger in patients who did not receive any poststudy treatment (28.1 vs 14.1 months). The median
overall survival was also longer in sunitinib arm
(26.4 months vs. 21.8 months), as also the
response rate (47% vs. 12%). In view of this,
sunitinib is recommended as first line drug of choice
in good and intermediate risk criteria patients.(91)
Sorafenib - oral multikinase inhibitor. It is
recommended as second line therapy. A
randomized trial comparing sorafenib with placebo
demonstrated improved progression free survival
(5.5 months vs. 2.8 months) with sorafenib in
patients who had failed cytokine therapy. However,
this effect was not seen in previously untreated
Bevacizumab + IFN – is also recommended as first
line therapy in good and intermediate risk patients
with mRCC. This recommendation is based on the
results of 2 RCTs – AVOREN and CALGB, both of
which showed improved progression free survival
with combination of bevacizumab and IFN-a vs.
IFN-a alone.(93, 94)
Temsirolimus (m-TOR inhibitor) – is recommended
in poor risk patients as a first line therapy, based
on a RCT which showed improved progression- free
and overall survival with temsirolimus as compared
to IFN-a or a combination of the two.(95)
Everolimus – is an oral m-TOR inhibitor and used
in patients of metastatic RCC refractory to
sorafenib, sunitinib as well as cytokines (96). A
recent phase III trial in patients who had failed
previous anti VEGF-R treatment showed better
progression free survival with everolimus as
compared to placebo (4 months vs. 1.9 months).
Surgical resection of renal cell carcinoma after targeted
therapy is feasible with low morbidity in most patients.
However, significant complications can occur, raising
concern for possible compromise of tissue and/or
vascular integrity associated with surgery in this setting.
In this group of patients, careful patient selection,
preoperative patient optimization and meticulous
perioperative care can lead to a better outcome. (97)
Pantuck AJ, Zisman A, Belldegrun AS.The changing
natural history of renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 2001
Nov; 166(5):1611-23.
Landis SH, Murray T, Bolden S, Wingo PA. Cancer
statistics, 1999. CA Cancer J Clin1999 Jan-Feb;
49(1):8-31, 1.
Novick AC, Campbell SC. Renal tumours. In: Walsh
PC, Retik, AB, Vaughan ED, Wein AJ, eds.
Campbell’s Urology. Philadelphia: WB Saunders,
2002, pp. 2672-2731.
LucianiLG, Cestari R, Tallarigo C: Incidental renal
cell carcinoma: Age and stage characterization and
clinical implications: study of 1092 patients (19821997). Urology 2000, 56, 58-62.
Lindblad P. Epidemiology of renal cell carcinoma.
Scand J Surg 2004; 93(2):88-96.
Escudier B, Kataja V; ESMO Guidelines Working
Group. Renal cell carcinoma: ESMO clinical
recommendations for diagnosis, treatment and
follow-up. Ann Oncol 2009 May;20 Suppl 4:81-2.
Parsons JK, Schoenberg MS, Carter HB. Incidental
renal tumours: casting doubt on the efficacy of early
intervention. Urology. 2001, 57(6):1013-5.
Hock LM, Lynch J and Balaji CK: Increasing
incidence of all stages of kidney cancer in the last
2 decades in the United States: An analysis of
Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results
program data. J Urol 2002, 167, 57-60.
Asanuma H, Nakai H, Takeda M, Shishido S, Tajima
E, Kawamura T, Hara H, Morikawa Y, Kawamura T.
Renal cell carcinoma in children: experience at a
single institution in Japan. J Urol. 1999 Oct;
162(4):1402-5. Review
10. Broecker B. Non-Wilms’ renal tumours in children.
Urol Clin North Am. 2000 Aug; 27(3):463-9, ix.
11. Geller JI, Dome JS. Local lymph node involvement
does not predict poor outcome in pediatric renal
cell carcinoma. Cancer. 2004 Oct 1; 101(7):157583. Review
12. Freedman AL, Vates TS, Stewart T, Padiyar N,
Perlmutter AD, Smith CA. Renal cell carcinoma in
children: the Detroit experience.J Urol. 1996
13. Bergström A, Hsieh CC, Lindblad P, Lu CM, Cook
NR, Wolk A. Obesity and renal cell cancer—a
quantitative review. Br J Cancer. 2001 Sep
14. Pischon T, Lahmann PH, Boeing H, Tjønneland A,
Halkjaer J, Overvad K et al: Body size and risk of
renal cell carcinoma in the European Prospective
Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). Int
J Cancer. 2006 Feb 1;118(3):728-38
15. Lowrance WT, Thompson RH, Yee DS, Kaag M,
Donat SM, Russo P. Obesity is associated with a
higher risk of clear-cell renal cell carcinoma than
with other histologies. BJU Int. 2009 Jul 6. [Epub
ahead of print]
16. Theis RP, Dolwick Grieb SM, Burr D, Siddiqui T,
Asal NR. Smoking, environmental tobacco smoke
and risk of renal cell cancer: a population-based
case-control study. BMC Cancer. 2008 Dec
17. Parker AS, Cerhan JR, Janney CA, Lynch CF,
Cantor KP. Smoking cessation and renal cell
carcinoma. Ann Epidemiol. 2003 Apr; 13(4):
18. Chow WH, Gridley G, Fraumeni JF Jr, Järvholm B.
Obesity, hypertension, and the risk of kidney cancer
in men. N Engl J Med. 2000, 343(18):1305-11
19. Makay B, Ordonez NG, Khoursand J and
Bennington JL: The ultrastructure and
immunocytochemistry of renal cell carcinoma.
Ultrastruct Pathol 1987, 11 (5-6), 483-502.
20. Holthöfer H. Immunohistology of renal carcinomas.
Eur Urol. 1990; 18 Suppl 2:15-6. Review.
21. Linehan WM, Walther MM, Zbar B. The genetic
basis of cancer of the kidney. J Urol. 2003, 170(6
Pt 1):2163-72..
22. Pavlovich CP, Schmidt LS. Searching for the
hereditary causes of renal-cell carcinoma. Nat Rev
Cancer. 2004 May;4(5):381-93.
23. Pantuck AJ, Zisman A, Belldegrun A.Biology of renal
cell carcinoma: changing concepts in classification
and staging. Semin Urol Oncol 2001 May; 19(2):
24. Oyasu B, Lloreta J, Gelabert-Mas A: Cystic renal
cell carcinoma: Pathologicla features, survival and
implications for treatment. Br J Urol 1998, 82(1),
25. Imura J, Ichikawa K, Takeda J, Tomita S, Yamamoto
H, Nakazono M, Takimoto T, Ueda Y, Fujimori T.
Multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma: a
clinicopathological, immuno- and lectin
histochemical study of nine cases. APMIS. 2004
26. Nassir A, Jollimore J, Gupta R, Bell D, Norman R.
Multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma: a series of
12 cases and review of the literature. Urology. 2002
Sep; 60(3):421-7.
27. Chow GK, Myles J, Novick AC. The Cleveland Clinic
experience with papillary (chromophil) renal cell
carcinoma: clinical outcome with histopathological
correlation.Can J Urol. 2001;8(2):1223-8.
28. Blataci S, Orhan D, Soyupek S, Beduk Y, Tulunay
O, Gogus O: Influence of tumour stage, size, grade,
vascular involvement, histological cell type and
histological pattern on multifocality of renal cell
carcinoma. J Urol 2000, 164(1), 36-39
29. Campbell SC, Fichtner J, Novick AC, Steinbach F,
Stöckle M, Klein EA, Filipas D, Levin HS, Störkel
S, Schweden F, Obuchowski NA, Hale J.
Intraoperative evaluation of renal cell carcinoma: a
prospective study of the role of ultrasonography and
histopathological frozen sections. J Urol. 1996
30. Fuhrman SA, Lasky LC, Limas C. Prognostic
significance of morphologic parameters in renal cell
carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 1982 Oct; 6(7):
31. Pantuck AJ, Zisman A, Rauch MK, Belldegrun A.
Incidental renal tumours: Urology.2000 1; 56(2):
32. Lee CT, Katz J, Fearn PA, Russo P. Mode of
presentation of renal cell carcinoma provides
prognostic information. Urol Oncol 2002; 7(4):
33. Patard JJ, Leray E, Rodriguez A, Rioux-Leclercq
N, Guille F, Lobel B. Correlation between symptom
gradation, tumour characteristics and survival in
renal cell carcinoma . Eur Urol 2003; 44(2):226-32.
34. Jayson M and Sanders H: Increased incidence of
serendipitously discovered renal cell carcinoma.
Urology 1998, 51, 203-05
35. Rosenblum SL: Paraneoplastic syndromes
associated with renal cell carcinoma. J Scand Med
Assoc 1987, 83, 347-78.
36. Magera JS Jr, Leibovich BC, Lohse CM, Sengupta
S, Cheville JC, Kwon ED, Blute ML. Association of
abnormal preoperative laboratory values with
survival after radical nephrectomy for clinically
confined clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Urology.
2008, 71(2):278-82.
37. Davidson AJ, Hartman DS, Choyke PL, Wagner
BJ. Radiologic assessment of renal masses:
implications for patient care. Radiology 1997;202:
38. Bosniak MA. Renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med.
1997 Mar 13; 336(11):810;.
39. Zagoria RJ: Imaging of Small Renal Masses: A
Medical Success Story. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000,
175, 945–955,
40. Nelson CP, Sanda MG. “Contemporary diagnosis
and management of renal angiomyolipoma”. J Urol
2002; 168: 1315-1325.
41. Herts BR & Remer EM: Role of percutaneous
biopsy in the evaluation of renal and adrenal mass.
AUA Update Series 2000, Vol 19, Lesson 36.
42. Schatz SM, Lieber MM. Update on oncocytoma.
Curr Urol Rep. 2003; 4(1):30-5.
43. Li G, Culleron M, Gentil-Perret A, Tostain J:
Characteristics of image-detected small renal
masses: Implications for optimal treatment. Int J
Urol 2004, 11, 63-67.
44. Vasudevan A, Davies RJ, Shannon BA, Cohen RJ:
Incidental renal tumours: the frequency of benign
lesions and the role of preoperative core biopsy.
BJU Int 2006, 97, 946-49.
45. Silver DA, Morash A and. Brenner P et al.,
Pathologic findings at the time of nephrectomy for
renal mass. Ann Surg Oncol 1997, 4. 570–574.
46. Licht MR. Renal adenoma and oncocytoma. Semin
Urol Oncol 1995; 13: 262–6.
47. Linehan WM, Rini BI, Yang JC: Cancer of the
kidney. In: DeVita, Hellman & Rosenberg;s Cancer:
Principles and Practice of Oncology 8th Ed. Ed:
DeVita VT Jr, Lawrence TS, Rosenberg SA. Publ:
Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins 2008, 1331-1358.
48. Kattan MW, Reuter V, Motzer RJ, Katz J, Russo P:
A postoperative prognostic nomogram for renal cell
carcinoma. J Urol 2001, 166, 63.
49. Parker AS, Leibovich BC, Lohse CM, Sheinin Y,
Kuntz SM, Eckel-Passow JE, Blute ML, Kwon ED.
Development and evaluation of BioScore: a
biomarker panel to enhance prognostic algorithms
for clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Cancer. 2009
May 15;115(10):2092-103
50. Robson CJ, Churchill BM, Anderson W. The results
of radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. J
Urol 1969; 101 : 297–301
51. Siemer S, Lehmann J, Kamradt J, Loch T,
Remberger K, Humke U, Ziegler M, Stöckle M.
Adrenal metastases in 1635 patients with renal cell
carcinoma: outcome and indication for
adrenalectomy. J Urol. 2004 Jun;171(6 Pt 1):
52. O’Malley RL, Godoy G, Kanofsky JA, Taneja SS.
The necessity of adrenalectomy at the time of
radical nephrectomy: a systematic review.J Urol.
2009, 181(5):2009-17.
53. Blute ML, Leibovich BC, Cheville JC, Lohse CM,
Zincke HA protocol for performing extended lymph
node dissection using primary tumour pathological
features for patients treated with radical
nephrectomy for clear cell renal cell carcinoma. J
Urol. 2004; 172(2):465-9.
54. Leibovich BC and Blute ML: Lymph node dissection
in the management of renal cell carcinoma. UCNA
2008, 35, 673-78.
55. P Fergany AF, Hafez KS, Novick AC: Long-term
results of nephron sparing surgery for localized
renal cell carcinoma: 10 year follow up. J Urol 2000,
163, 442.
56. Lau WK, Blute ML, Waver AL, Torres VE, Zincke
H: Matched comparison of radical nephrectomy
versus nephron sparing surgery in patients with
unilateral renal cell carcinoma and a normal
contralateral kidney. Mayo Clin Proc 2000, 75,
57. Nieder AM and Taneja SS: The role of partial
nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma in
contemporary practice. Urol Clin North Am 2003,
30, 529-42.
58. Lerner SE, Hawkins CA, Blute ML, Grabner A,
Wollan PC, Eickholt JT et al: Disease outcome in
patients with low stage renal cell carcinoma treated
with nephron sparing or radical surgery. J Urol 2002,
167, 884-89
59. Thompson RH, Siddiqui S, Lohse CM, Leibovich
BC, Russo P, Blute ML. Partial versus radical
nephrectomy for 4 to 7 cm renal cortical tumours. J
Urol. 2009, 182(6):2601-6.
Hafez KS, Fergnay AF, Novick AC: Nephron sparing
surgery for localized renal cell carcinoma: impact
of tumour size on patient survival, tumour
recurrence and TNM staging. J Urol 1999, 162,
Leibovich BC, Blute ML, Cheville JC, Lohse CM,
Weaver AL, Zincke H: Nephron sparing surgery for
appropriately selected renal cell carcinoma between
4 and 7 cm results in outcome similar to radical
nephrectomy. J Urol 2004, 171, 1066-70.
Patard JJ, Shvarts O, Lam JS, Pantuck AJ, Kim
HL, Ficarra V et al: Safety and efficacy of partial
nephrectomy for all T1 tumours based on an
international multicenter experience. J Urol 2004,
171, 2181-85.
Dash A, Vickers AJ, Schachter LR, Bach AM,
Snyder ME, Russo: Comparison of outcomes in
elective partial vs. radical nephrectomy for clear cell
renal cell carcinoma of 4-7 cm. BJU Int2006, 97,
Lam JS, Shvarts O, Pantuck AJ. Changing concepts
in the surgical management of renal cell
carcinoma.Eur Urol. 2004 Jun; 45(6):692-705.
Crépel M, Jeldres C, Perrotte P, Capitanio U, Isbarn
H, Shariat SF, Liberman D, Sun M, Lughezzani G,
Arjane P, Widmer H, Graefen M, Montorsi F, Patard
JJ, Karakiewicz PI. Nephron-sparing Surgery Is
Equally Effective to Radical Nephrectomy for
T1BN0M0 Renal Cell Carcinoma: A PopulationBased Assessment. Urology. 2009 Dec 3. [Epub
ahead of print]
66. Castilla EA, Liou LS, Abrahms NA, Fergany A,
Rybicki LA, Myles J et al: Prognostic importance of
resection margin width alter nephron sparing
surgery for renal cell carcinoma. Urology 2002, 60,
67. Sutherland SE, Resnik MI, Maclenanan GT,
Goldman HB: Does the size of the surgical margin
in partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma really
matter? J Urol 2002, 167, 61-64.
68. Zini L, Perrotte P, Jeldres C, Capitanio U, Duclos
A, Jolivet-Tremblay M, et al: A population-based
comparison of survival after nephrectomy vs
nonsurgical management for small renal masses.
BJU Int. 2009 Apr;103(7):899-904;
69. Leibovich BC, Cheville JC, Lohse CM, Zincke H,
Kwon ED, Frank I, Thompson RH, Blute ML. Cancer
specific survival for patients with pT3 renal cell
carcinoma-can the 2002 primary tumour
classification be improved?J Urol. 2005
70. Kim HL, Zisman A, Han KR, Figlin RA, Belldegrun
AS. Prognostic significance of venous thrombus in
renal cell carcinoma. Are renal vein and inferior vena
cava involvement different? J Urol. 2004 Feb;171(2
Pt 1):588-91
71. Zisman A, Wieder JA, Pantuck AJ, Chao DH, Dorey
F, Said JW, Gitlitz BJ, deKernion JB, Figlin RA,
Belldegrun AS. Renal cell carcinoma with tumour
thrombus extension: biology, role of nephrectomy
and response to immunotherapy. J Urol. 2003
72. Blute ML, Leibovich BC, Lohse CM, Cheville JC,
Zincke H: The Mayo Clinic experience with surgical
management, complications, and outcome for
patients with renal cell carcinoma and venous
tumour thrombus. BJU Int 2004, 94, 33-41.
Stephenson AJ, Chetner MP, Rourke K, Gleave ME,
Signaevsky M, Palmer B, Kuan J, Brock GB,
Tanguay S. Guidelines for the surveillance of
localized renal cell carcinoma based on the patterns
of relapse after nephrectomy. J Urol. 2004
Dimarco DS, Lohse CM, Zincke H et al: Long term
survival of patients with unilateral sporadic
multifocal renal cell carcinoma according to
histological subtype compared with patients with
solitary tumour after radical nephrectomy. Urology
2004, 64, 462-67.
Levy DA, Slaton JW, Swanson DA, Dinney CP.
Stage specific guidelines for surveillance after
radical nephrectomy for local renal cell carcinoma.J
Urol. 1998 Apr;159(4):1163-7
Bruno JJ 2nd, Snyder ME, Motzer RJ, Russo P.
Renal cell carcinoma local recurrences: impact of
surgical treatment and concomitant metastasis on
survival. BJU Int. 2006 May; 97(5):933-8.
Bukowski RM. Natural history and therapy of
metastatic renal cell carcinoma: the role of
interleukin-2. Cancer. 1997 Oct 1; 80(7):1198-220.
Friedel G, Hürtgen M, Penzenstadler M, Kyriss T,
Toomes H. Resection of pulmonary metastases
from renal cell carcinoma. Anticancer Res. 1999
Kavolius JP, Mastorakos DP, Pavlovich C et al:
Resection of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Clin
Oncol 1998, 16, 2261-66.,
80. Murthy SC, Kim K, Rice TW, Rajeswaran J,
Bukowski R, DeCamp MM, Blackstone EH. Can
we predict long-term survival after pulmonary
metastasectomy for renal cell carcinoma? Ann
Thorac Surg. 2005 Mar; 79(3):996-1003.
81. WaltherMM, Yang JC, Pass HI et al: Cytoreductive
surgery before high dose interleukin-2 based
therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell
carcinoma. J Urol 1997, 158, 1675-78.
82. Flanigan RC, Salmon SE, Blumenstein BA et al:
Nephrectomy followed by interferon alpha 2b
compared with interferon alpha 2b alone for
metastatic renal cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med
2001,345, 1655-59.
83. Mickish GH, von Poppel H, De Prijck L et al: Radical
nephrectomy plus interferon alpha based
immunotherapy compared with interferon alpha
alone in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a
randomized trial. Lancet 2001, 358, 966-70.et al
84. Flanigan RC, Mickisch G, Sylevester R et al:
Cytoreductive nephrectomy in patients with
metastatic renal cancer: a combined analysis. J Urol
2004, 171, 1071-76.
85. Pantuck AJ, Zisman A, Dorey F, Chao DH, Han KR,
Said J, Gitlitz BJ, Figlin RA, Belldegrun AS Renal
cell carcinoma with retroperitoneal lymph nodes:
role of lymph node dissection. J Urol 2003, Jun;
86. MRC Renal Cancer Collaborators : Interferon alfa
and survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: early
results of a randomized controlled trial: Lancet 1999,
353 (9146), 14-17.: Hormonal therapy
87. Negrier S, Perd D, Ravaud A et al: Do cytokines
improve survival in patients with metastatic renal
cell carcinoma of intermediate prognosis? Results
of prospective randomized Percy Quattro trial. J Clin
Oncol 2005, 23 (165 Suppl Pt 1).
88. Yagoda A, Petrylak D, Thompson S: Cytotoxic
chemotherapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma.
Urol Clin North Am 1993, 20(2), 303-21.
89. Nanus DM, Garino A, Milowsky MI et al: Active
chemotherapy for Sarcomatoid and rapidly
progressing renal cell carcinoma. Cancer 2004,
101(7), 1545-51
90. Rini BI, Campbell SC, Escudier B. Renal cell
carcinoma.Lancet. 2009 Mar 28; 373(9669):111932.
91. Motzer RJ, Hutson TE, Tomczak P et al: Sunitinib
versus interferon alfa in metastatic renal cell
carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2007, 356(2), 115-24
92. Escudier B, Eisen T, Stadler Wm et al: TARGET
Study Group. Sorafenib in advanced clear cell renal
cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2007, 356(2), 12534.
93. Escudier B, Pluzanska A, Koralewski P et al:
AVOREN Trial Investigators. Bevacizumab plus
interferon alfa 2a for treatment of metastatic renal
cell carcinoma: a randomized double blind phase
III trial. Lancet 2007, 370(9605), 2103-11
94. Rini BI, Halabi S, Rosenberg JE et al: Bevacizumab
plus inferno alfa compared with interferon alfa
monotherapy in patients with metastatic renal cell
carcinoma: CALGB 90206. J Clin Oncol 2008, 26,
95. Hudes G, Carducci M, Tomczak P et al:
Temsirolimus, interferon alfa or both for advanced
renal cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2007, 356(22),
96. Motzer RJ, Escudier B, Oudard S et al: Efficacy of
everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma: a
double blind randomized placebo controlled phase
III trial. Lancet 2008, 372, 449-56.
97. Thomas AA, Rini BI, Stephenson AJ, Garcia JA,
Fergany A, Krishnamurthi V, Novick AC, Gill IS, Klein
EA, Zhou M, Campbell SC. Surgical resection of
renal cell carcinoma after targeted therapy. J Urol.
2009 Sep;182(3):881-6.
Carcinoma of the Urinary Bladder
Carcinoma of bladder is a heterogeneous disease which
presents as superficial, muscle invasive or metastatic
disease. These different presentations of bladder cancer
have different clinical behaviour, management protocols
and outcome. Bladder cancer is the commonest
urological malignancy in India and the second most
common genitourinary malignant disease in the USA,
with an expected 69,000 newly diagnosed cases in 2008,
and 14 000 deaths in the USA. Males are commonly
affected (M: F= 2.4:1) and occurs mostly in the elderly
(median age of presentation 60 to 70 years). In the SEER
data, from 2002-2006, median age at diagnosis of urinary
bladder cancer was 73 years and nearly 90% of the
diagnosis is made in patients over the age of 55 years.
Aetiology: (level of evidence 3)
Cigarette smoking is the single most important
environmental etiological factor associated with bladder
cancer and triples the risk of bladder cancer. The risk of
bladder cancer directly relates to duration of smoking
and number of cigarettes smoked per day and an
immediate reduction in the risk of bladder cancer is
observed with cessation of smoking.
The other associated aetiological factors are:
Chemical exposure
Chemical agents: Exposure to aromatic amines as
seen in workers of dye, rubber, leather industry, gas
and tar manufacturing, industrial painting etc.
( median latent period between exposure and
disease is 18 year)
Dietary habits: less fluid intake, fried meat & fat
intake, Low vitamin A
Drugs— phenacetin, cyclophosphamide,
Chronic irritation
Chronic urinary tract Infection, schistosomiasis,
long term use of catheter, pelvic irradiation.
Genetic abnormality
17p deletion, p53 expression; RB gene expression,
9q aberration.
Clinical presentations
At presentation a majority (70%) are superficial (nonmuscle invasive) tumours, 30% are invasive, of which
about 5-10% are metastatic (5). Patients usually present
with painless haematuria (80-90%) or with unexplained
urinary frequency or irritative voiding symptoms. Lower
urinary irritative and obstructive symptoms may be the
sole presenting symptoms in the absence of haematuria.
Pelvic pain and obstructive symptoms are seen in
patients with advanced invasive disease.
The degree of haematuria does not correlate with the
extent of disease – it may be gross or microscopic. Even
a single episode of haematuria needs to be investigated
from the point of view of bladder cancer, even if another
potential cause for haematuria is found. All patients over
40 years old, smokers and those with exposure to
industrial carcinogens with painless haematuria should
be investigated with urinary cytology, cystoscopy and
imaging (IVP or CT-scan) for urinary tract malignancy.
Investigations :
The aims of investigations in bladder cancer are
diagnosis and staging to guide therapy. The main factor
that decides the treatment is the presence or absence
of muscle invasion. The diagnostic and staging
investigations in a case of bladder cancer are as follows:
Routine haematological & biochemical
investigations including renal chemistry.
Freshly voided urine cytology of exfoliated cancer
cells is particularly useful in the presence of a highgrade malignancy or CIS. Urine specimens for
cytology should not be obtained from the first voided
morning specimens. Positive cytology in the
absence of any lesion on imaging may indicate a
lesion anywhere in the urinary tract. Negative voided
cytology does not necessarily exclude the presence
of a low-grade bladder tumour. Overall urinary
cytology examination is promising but with low
sensitivity (sensitivity 40-60%, specificity 90%).
However, in high grade tumors the sensitivity is high
(~90%) (level of evidence 2a).
Intravenous urogram is indicated in all patients with
haematuria or cystoscopic evidence of bladder
cancer. It is not a sensitive means of detecting
bladder cancer alone but useful in examining the
upper urinary tracts for associated urothelial
tumours. Retrograde pyelogram should be
performed if the upper tracts are not adequately
visualized on the intravenous urogram. The
necessity to perform routine IVU at initial diagnosis
is now questioned because of the low incidence of
important findings obtained with this method
(incidence of upper tract tumours is about 1.8%)
and the easy availability of cross sectional imaging
(see below) (Level of evidence 3).
Ultrasonography of the abdomen and pelvis to
document status of upper tracts and for associated
upper tract urothelial tumours, besides
demonstrating the bladder tumour. . Combined with
plain abdominal film, it can be as accurate as IVU
in the diagnosis of the cause of haematuria.
Cystoscopic examination of the bladder and
pathological evaluation of the resected lesion form
the cornerstone of diagnosis. During cystoscopy,
the characteristics of bladder tumour(s) are noted
and a biopsy from the bladder tumour taken.
Bladder washings for cytology should be taken as
studies have demonstrated superiority of bladder
washing over voided urine cytology. The first
treatment decision based on tumour stage is
whether the patient has a superficial or muscle
invasive bladder cancer. Transurethral resection of
the bladder tumour (TURBT) is the most important
test for judging the depth of tumour penetration.
Inclusion of muscle in biopsy is essential. During
resection, the following are recommended:
1. Resect the tumour down to muscle and send
superficial and deep components of the
tumour separately to the pathologist
If the cancer is muscle invasive, complete
debulking is preferable
3. Biopsy of the base of the tumour
4. Random biopsies from apparently uninvolved
normal areas of bladder are indicated in the
presence of positive cytology, in the absence
of a tumour or in any non-papillary tumour.
Random biopsies in a patient with a solitary
papillary lesion are contraindicated due to the
perceived hazard of implantation of tumour
cells, low likelihood of detection of CIS (<2%)
and absence of any additional information.
Biopsies from the prostatic urethra are
indicated in the case of bladder neck tumour,
when bladder CIS is present or suspected, in
the case of positive cytology without evidence
of tumour in the bladder or when abnormalities
of prostatic urethra are visible (level of
evidence 3). The biopsy is taken using
resection loop from the precolicular area.
Bimanual examination under anaesthesia may be
done in case of invasive tumours for local staging
of the tumour. It may be performed both before and
after the TUR. The presence of a palpable mass
after TUR implies an extravesical disease. It can
also indicate fixity to the pelvic side walls.
Urinary markers: Various tests for bladder tumour
antigen, NMP 22, FDP etc are now available. These
have a better sensitivity for detecting bladder cancer
but the specificity is much lower. Sensitivity of
nuclear matrix protein (NMP-22) and bladder
tumour antigen (BTA) is 50-70%. Higher false
positive tests can lead to unnecessary imaging and
bladder biopsies. It is not clear whether these tests
can offer additional information, which is useful for
decision making, treatment and prognosis of
superficial bladder cancer.
Fluorescence cystoscopy is a promising tool using
violet light after intravesical instillation of a
photosensitizer e.g. 5-aminolaevulinic acid or
hexaminolaevulinate. Fluorescence-guided biopsy
and resection are more sensitive than conventional
procedures in detecting malignant tumour,
particularly CIS (level of evidence 2a). If urinary
cytology is persistently positive without any
demonstrable bladder lesion, ALA installation and
use of specific wavelengths yields higher positive
biopsies. The technique is still evolving.
Imaging: The purpose of imaging for staging is to
assess extent of local tumour invasion, detect lymph
node spread and to detect distant metastases. For
invasive cancers, it is essential to document the
extent of the disease by doing cross sectional
imaging. Both computed tomography (CT) and MRI
scans can be used for assessment of local invasion,
but they are unable to detect microscopic invasion
of perivesical fat (T3a). The aim of CT and MRI
scanning is therefore to detect T3b disease or
higher. Multidetector contrast enhanced CT scan
has a lower sensitivity (89% vs 100%) and higher
specificity (95% vs 73%) compared to MRI scanning
for diagnosis of perivesical invasion, whereas the
cancer-detection rate and overall accuracy for
perivesical invasion are similar.
Imaging is also used to assess the presence of
pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenopathy and the
possible presence of liver or adrenal metastases.
However, it has limitations in recognizing minimal
pelvic nodal disease or microscopic invasion of
adjacent organs. Pelvic nodes >8 mm and
abdominal nodes >10 mm in maximum short axis
diameter should be regarded as enlarged on CT
and MRI scans.
For optimal staging, either MRI with fast dynamic
contrast enhancement or MDCT with contrast
enhancement are recommended.
Metastatic work up:
Chest radiographs are performed to rule out
pulmonary metastases, however, CT scan is the
most sensitive means of detecting pulmonary
Isotope bone scan is done to detect bony
metastasis and also useful as a baseline for future
reference, particularly in patients with bone pains
or increased alkaline phosphatase.
CT or MRI of brain is done if clinically indicated.
Natural History and pathology
Bladder cancer is multicentric and asynchronous.
Morphologically a majority (70%) are exophytic papillary
tumor confined to mucosa (Ta) or invade submucosa
(T1). About 50-70% of superficial tumours recur and 520% of them progress to invasive disease.
Histopathologically, majority of bladder cancers are
transitional cell carcinoma (90-95%). Pure squmous cell
tumor with keratinisation (3%) occurs in schistosomia
infestation and chronic irritation. Adenocarcinoma (2%)
occurs in the embryonal ramnants of urachus. Low grade
tumours (G1) have high local recurrence rate but usually
do not invade muscularis. High grade superficial tumours
have high propensity to transform to invasive tumour. All
invasive tumours are high grade.
Histological grading:
1973 WHO grading
Urothelial papilloma
Grade 1: well differentiated
Grade 2: moderately differentiated
Grade 3: poorly differentiated
2004 WHO ISUP grading
Urothelial papilloma
Papillary urothelial neoplasm of low malignant
potential (PUNLMP)
Low-grade papillary urothelial carcinoma
High-grade papillary urothelial carcinoma
The use of the 2004 WHO/ISUP grading is advocated,
as this should result in a uniform diagnosis of tumours,
which is better classified according to risk potential.
However, until the 2004 WHO classification has been
validated by more clinical trials, tumours should be
graded using both the 1973 and the 2004 WHO
The 2002 UICC TNM system is widely accepted.
Primary tumour (T)
Tx Primary tumour cannot be assessed
T0 No evidence of primary tumour
Ta Non-invasive papillary tumour
Tis In-situ flat tumour
T1 Tumour invades subepithelial connective tissue
(lamina propria)
Tumour invades muscle
T2a Inner half (superficial muscle)
T2b Outer half (deep muscle)
Tumour invades perivesical tissues
T3a Microscopically
T3b Macroscopically (Extravesical mass)
Tumour invades adjacent structures e.g. prostate,
uterus, vagina, pelvic wall, abdominal wall
T4a Tumour invades prostate, uterus or vagina
T4b ITumour invades pelvic wall, abdominal wall
Lymph nodes (N)
Nx Regional nodes cannot be assessed
N0 No lymph node metastases
N1 Metastasis to a single node 2cm or less in the
greatest dimension
N2 Metastasis to a single node >2cm but <5 cm in the
greatest dimension or multiple lymph nodes, none
>5 cm in the greatest dimension
N3 Metastasis in a lymph node >5cm in the greatest
Distant metastases (M)
Mx Distant metastases cannot be assessed
M0 No evidence of distant metastases
M1 Distant metastases present
Management of non-muscle invasive
bladder cancer:
The objective in managing non-muscle invasive bladder
cancer is in the prevention and detection of recurrences
and progression.
Transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT):
Transurethral resection of the bladder tumour(s) is the
standard of care for superficial bladder cancers. Goal of
TURBT in Ta/T1 bladder tumours is to make correct
diagnosis and remove all visible lesions.
Small tumours (less than 1 cm) can be resected en bloc.
Specimen should contain a part of the underlying bladder
wall. Larger tumours should be resected separately in
fractions, which include the exophytic part of the tumour,
the underlying bladder wall with the detrusor muscle and
edges of the resection area. Cauterization should be
avoided during resection to prevent tissue destruction.
Re-TURBT: There is a significant risk of understaging
after initial resection of TaT1 tumours (level of evidence
1), with residual disease detected at second resection in
33-53% of patients. Nearly 20% T1 patients are upstaged
to muscle invasive disease, the likelihood being more if
the initial resection specimen contained no muscle tissue.
Accurate staging of disease is important for optimum
treatment and understaging may lead to inadequate
treatment and poor outcome. Second TURBT should be
considered if there is a suspicion of incomplete initial
resection (multiple or large tumours present with no
muscle invasion on pathology) and after diagnosis of
high-grade non-muscle-invasive tumour. It has been
shown that the second TURBT can increase recurrencefree and progression-free survival (level of evidence 2a).
There is no consensus regarding the timing of the second
TUR but is generally recommended 2–6 weeks after the
initial TURBT and should always include resection of the
primary tumour site.
Prognostic factors for recurrence and progression:
Numerous prognostic factors have been shown to be
associated with recurrence and progression of non
muscle invasive bladder cancer viz.:
high grade or poorly differentiated tumours (G3)
co-existent CIS or dysplasia in random mucosal
multiple or multicentric tumours
multiple recurrences within a short period of time
(rapidly recurrent tumours)
lamina propria invasion (T1)
tumour size more than 3 cm
prostatic urethral involvement
Based on these prognostic factors, superficial bladder
cancers can be divided into the following risk groups:
Low risk : Single, Ta, G1, <3 cm in diameter
High risk : T1, G3, multifocal or highly recurrent,
Intermediate risk : All other tumours, Ta-T1, G1G2, >3 cm in diameter
The risk of recurrence and progression can be separately
predicted in individual patients, using EORTC scoring
system and risk tables, developed from a database of
more than 2500 patients.
Despite an adequate transurethral resection, nearly 7080% of patients will have relapse within the bladder while
20-25% will progress to muscle invasion. Bladder cancer
with low risk of recurrence or progression can be
managed by close surveillance and regular check
cystoscopy, while those with high risk of relapse need
intravesical chemotherapy or immunoprophylaxis.
Intravesical therapy is indicated in patients who are at
high risk for tumour recurrence and progression. The
aim of intravesical therapy is to reduce invasion and
recurrence after initial TURBT.
Single post TURBT instillation:
In a meta-analysis of 7 randomized trials, a single
immediate instillation of chemotherapy after TURBT
decreased recurrence rate by 12% and odds of
recurrence by 39% in both single and multiple tumours
(level of evidence 1a). Mitomycin C (MMC), epirubicin,
and doxorubicin have all shown a comparable beneficial
effect level of evidence 1b). The timing of the instillation
is crucial and the single instillation is recommended within
24 hours (preferably within 6 hours) of TURBT and a
delay increases in the relative risk of recurrence twofold
(level of evidence 2a). The effect of single post-operative
instillation is mainly seen in the first 2 years. A single
immediate post-operative instillation of chemotherapy is
recommended in all patients irrespective of the risk
group, provided there is no perforation or bleeding.
Low risk group patients with papillary tumours require
no further treatment as the recurrence rate in this group
is very low after single instillation immediately after
TURBT (level of evidence 1a). Intermediate and highrisk patients require a further 4-8 weeks course of
intravesical therapy.
Additional adjuvant intravesical therapy:
The need for further adjuvant chemotherapy or BCG
immunotherapy largely depends on the risk of recurrence
or progression. A meta-analysis of the MRC and EORTC
data comparing intravesical chemotherapy to TURBT
alone demonstrated that chemotherapy prevents
recurrence but not progression (level of evidence 1a). It
is still controversial how long and how frequently
intravesical chemotherapy instillations have to be given.
From a systematic review of the literature of randomized
clinical trials, which compared different schedules of
intravesical chemotherapy, it can be seen that the ideal
duration and intensity of the schedule remains undefined
because of conflicting data. Four meta-analyses have
confirmed that BCG after TURBT is superior to TURBT
alone or TURBT and chemotherapy in preventing
recurrences of TaT1 tumours (level of evidence 1a). The
efficacy of intravesical chemotherapy in reducing the risk
of recurrence was demonstrated in the primary as well
as recurrent settings by 2 meta-analyses by Huntcharek
in 2000 and 2001. To increase the efficacy of intravesical
chemotherapy, optimized schedules have been tried. The
studies demonstrated that adapting the urinary pH,
decreasing the urine formation and excretion, buffering
the intravesical solution and increasing the relative
concentration of the drug in the instilled solution may
lead to improvement in efficacy. (level of evidence 1a).
Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) is used as intravesical
immunotherapy and has been shown to be effective in
reducing tumour recurrence rate and presently is the only
agent, which has been shown to reduce the progression
rate to muscle invasion, reduce the need for cystectomy,
increase the time to cystectomy and improve survival. In
an EORTC meta-analysis, only patients receiving
maintenance BCG were benefited (level of evidence 1a).
Two meta-analyses demonstrated that BCG therapy
prevents, or at least delays, the risk of tumour
progression. The EORTC meta-analysis of nearly 5000
patients demonstrated that there is 27% reduction in rate
of progression after intravesical BCG treatment in both
TaT1 and CIS disease (level of evidence 1a). In the 20
trials in which some form of BCG maintenance was given,
a reduction of 37% in the odds of progression was
observed. The most optimal BCG maintenance schedule
is not known. Although weekly instillations for 6 weeks
are a commonly used schedule empirical schedule, a
meta-analysis concluded that at least 1 year of
maintenance BCG was required to show the superiority
of BCG over MMC in preventing recurrence or
progression (level of evidence 1a). Hence, in patients
with intermediate and high risk patients, maintenance
BCG is advised to achieve best results, provided patients
can tolerate it. Various schedules of maintenance BCG
have been described but to date, there is no optimum
schedule based on high level of evidence. Most centres,
however, follow the schedule described by Lamm.
The optimal dose of BCG is yet undefined. To reduce
BCG toxicity, several authors have proposed dose
reduction of BCG to one third to one fourth of the standard
dose. The Spanish Oncology Group (CUETO) compared
the standard dose with one third dose of BCG in a
randomized trial and did not find any difference in efficacy,
except in patients with high risk prognostic group.
Treatment of failure of intravesical therapy:
Failure of intravesical chemotherapy: Patients with non
muscle invasive recurrences after intravesical
chemotherapy may benefit from intravesical BCG
Failure of intravesical BCG immunotherapy: The
response to BCG is assessed at 6 months after TUR,
since the disease status at this point of time has been
shown to best correlate with subsequent progression and
survival. Patients with BCG failure may be classified into:
BCG resistant, BCG refractory, BCG relapsing and BCG
intolerant. This classification helps in identifying optimum
treatment for patients in each subgroup.
Treatment with BCG is considered to have failed in case
development of muscle invasive tumour
presence of high grade non-muscle invasive tumour
present at 3 and 6 months. In patients with such
tumour at 3 months, an additional course of BCG
is indicated and 50% of these patients respond to
this additional course of BCG.
Worsening of disease such as increased number
of recurrences, higher stage or grade, appearance
of CIS in spite of initial response to BCG
Various strategies have been recommended for
treatment of BCG failure:
Intravesical chemotherapy, especially device
assisted one
Newer intravesical chemotherapeutic agents such
as gemcitabine
Second line immunotherapeutic agents such as
interferons with or without BCG
Cystectomy for non-muscle invasive
bladder cancer:
Despite intravesical adjuvant therapies, there is a
substantial group of patients with initial high-grade stage
T1 tumor who have progression and are at risk of dying
from urothelial cancer. It is reasonable to propose
immediate cystectomy to those patients who are at high
risk of progression (multiple recurrent high-grade
tumours, high-grade T1 tumours, high-grade tumours
with concomitant CIS). Cystectomy is advocated in
patients with BCG failure and delaying cystectomy in
these patients may lead to decreased disease specific
Management of carcinoma-in-situ:
Carcinoma-in-situ of bladder may exist alone (primary
CIS) or in combination with a bladder tumour. Primary
CIS confined to bladder is treated with intravesical BCG,
with excellent complete response rates of 82-93% (level
of evidence 2). Recurrence of primary CIS despite first
course of BCG may be treated with a second course of
BCG with response seen in 40-50% of patients.
CIS associated with an overt tumour is treated according
to the merits of the tumour. Approximately 50% patients
develop recurrent disease with muscle invasion or
extravesical tumour (level of evidence 2), and 10-20%
die of their disease within 5-7 years after an initial
complete response. Non-responders or incomplete
responders have a significant risk of tumour progression
and cystectomy is recommended in such patients.
Patients with an incomplete response at 9 months,
recurrent tumours or extravesical disease also need
Follow up schedules in superficial tumours:
Prompt detection of muscle-invasive and high-grade nonmuscle-invasive recurrences is critical and delay in
diagnosis and therapy could compromise survival.
Tumour recurrence in low-risk group is nearly always
low stage and low grade and does not pose a threat to
life. High risk patients may present as muscle invasive
disease on recurrence and need immediate diagnosis
and treatment. The result of first cystoscopy after TUR
at 3 months is an important prognostic factor for
recurrence and progression (level of evidence 1a) and
hence cystoscopy at 3 months post-TUR is
recommended in all patients.
Patients with low risk of recurrence/progression:
Cystoscopy at 3 month post-TURBT. If negative,
following cystoscopy is advised at 9 month and
consequently yearly for 5 yr. First cystoscopy finding
(at 3 months) is significant prognostic factor for
recurrence and for progression
Patients with high risk of progression: Cystoscopy
and urinary cytology at 3 month post-TURBT. If
negative, following cystocopies and cytologies
should be repeated every 3 mo for a period of 2 yr,
every 4 months in the third year, every 6 month
thereafter until 5 yr, and yearly thereafter. A yearly
exploration of the upper tract is recommended
Intermediate risk: should have an in-between followup scheme using cystoscopy and cytology, adapted
according to individual factors.
Cytological surveillance should accompany every
cystoscopic examination. During cystoscopy, directed
biopsy should be taken if there is any suspicious area.
The risk of upper tract urothelial cancer in bladder cancer
is about 4%. Intravenous urogram is therefore
recommended at least once in two years, or in the
presence of positive cytology and negative cystscopy.
Ultrasonography is recommended once a year. The role
of urinary markers like NMP22, urine cytology or
multitarget FISH study on exfoliated urine cells to replace
cystoscopic evaluation or to postpone it is under
evaluation but till the time the results of these studies
are available, cystoscopic evaluation remains the gold
standard for follow up in a patient with superficial bladder
Management of Muscle-Invasive Bladder
Approximately 30% of newly diagnosed bladder cancers
have muscle invasion. Besides, 20-25% of superficial
bladder cancers progress to muscle invasion some time
during their natural history. Approximately 30% of patients
diagnosed with muscle-invasive bladder cancer have
undetected metastasis at the time of treatment of the
primary tumour, while 25% of patients submitted to radical
cystectomy present with lymph node involvement at the
time of surgery.
Radical cystectomy is the preferred treatment for invasive
bladder cancers in patients whose medical condition
allows major surgical procedure (Level of evidence 2a).
Pelvic lymphadenectomy is routinely performed as part
of radical cystectomy for bladder cancers; however, there
is lack of consensus on the intent (therapeutic or staging/
prognostic) and extent of lymph node dissection. There
is evidence from retrospective studies that extended
lymphadenectomy improves outcome in patients with
tumours confined to the bladder. However, no controlled
studies support extended lymphadenectomy as curative
treatment. Thus limited or regional lymph node dissection
is the recommended standard surgical method (Level of
evidence 3). Removal of more than 15 lymph nodes has
been postulated to be both sufficient for the evaluation
of the lymph node status as well as beneficial for overall
survival in retrospective studies In the presence of gross
nodal disease; 5-year survival rates are poor.
Radical cystectomy is recommended for non-transitional
cell carcinomas, which generally respond less to radiation
and chemotherapy. However, despite an adequate
surgery, approximately 50% patients will develop
metastatic disease within 2 years, emphasizing the need
for augmenting treatment in these patients. The 5-year
survival rates after radical cystectomy alone in T2, T3a,
T3b and T4 disease are 63%, 57%, 31% and 18%
respectively. Partial cystectomy may be indicated in only
selected patients with 1) Transitional cell tumour 2)
solitary muscle invasive tumour location at dome, 3) no
extravesical spread 4) random mucosal biopsies are
negative and 5) intra-operative frozen section surgical
margins negative.
Laparoscopic or robot assisted radical cystectomy may
be an option for the future. Current data, however, is
insufficient to support its routine use at present.
Urethrectomy has been recommended if the tumour
involves the bladder neck in women or the prostatic
urethra in men. A positive urethral cut margin at the end
of cystectomy also signifies the need for urethrectomy.
Extensive involvement of the prostate also necessitates
urethrectomy. Recently, there is a trend towards
preservation of urethra to make orthotopic neobladder
possible as well as preservation of intrapelvic autonomic
nerves to improve potency and continence. Urethrectomy
may be done at the time of cystectomy or subsequently
as a separate procedure. Contra-indications to orthotopic
neobladder include prostatic urethral involvement,
positive urethral margins, multiple bladder tumours or
multicentric involvement of the urinary tract.
Urinary diversion or reconstruction: The various options
available are incontinent conduit with an external stoma,
continent catheterizable reservoirs with an abdominal
stoma and bladder substitution (neobladder) procedures.
The type of urinary diversion does not affect oncological
outcome (Level of evidence 3). Orthotopic neobladder
is the reconstruction of choice undergoing radical
cystectomy and is recommended in suitable male and
female patients. However, the advantage of orthotopic
neobladder over other diversions in terms of quality of
life remains a matter of debate. Terminal ileum and colon
are the intestinal segments of choice for urinary diversion.
The morbidity of orthotopic neobladder reconstruction is
appreciable in terms of major complications and
reoperation rates. The contra-indications to orthotopic
neobladder include prostatic urethral involvement,
positive urethral margins, multiple bladder tumours or
multicentric involvement of the urinary tract (i.e in the
presence of significant risk of urethral recurrence.
Orthotopic neobladder reconstruction should be advised
to suitable patients after cystectomy for organ-confined
muscle-invasive bladder tumour. While discussing this
option with the patient, the morbidity must be addressed.
The longer recovery period after orthotopic neobladder
may delay the subsequent adjuvant therapy in patients
with locally advanced disease and in these patients, this
option may not be advisable.
Definitive radiation therapy alone:
External beam radiation therapy should only be
considered a therapeutic option when the patient is unfit
for cystectomy for a multimodality bladder sparing
approach (level of evidence 3). Based on available data,
a Cochrane analysis has demonstrated that radical
cystectomy has an overall survival benefit over radiation
therapy alone.
Chemotherapy alone:
Chemotherapy alone is not recommended as primary
therapy of muscle invasive bladder cancer, despite nearly
30% patients achieving CR following chemotherapy.
Pre-operative Radiotherapy
Pre-operative radiotherapy for operable muscle-invasive
bladder cancer, using a dose of 45 to 50 Gy in fractions
of 1.8 to 2 Gy has been used for down-staging after 4 to
6 weeks (Level of evidence 2). It does not significantly
increase toxicity after surgery and may result in a
decrease in local recurrence of muscle-invasive bladder
cancer (Level of evidence 3). Pre-operative radiotherapy
in above dose for operable muscle-invasive bladder
cancer does not increase survival and cannot be
recommended as standard practice as the data may not
be applicable to modern surgical and radiotherapeutic
procedures (Level of evidence 2).
Multimodality treatment and Bladder
preservation approaches:
The use of organ-preservation therapy for bladder cancer
is a valid alternative to radical cystectomy in selected
patients (Level of evidence 3). Contemporary protocols
utilize a combination of aggressive TUR, concurrent
radiation and chemotherapy, and often adjuvant
chemotherapy. These approaches require close coordination among all disciplines involved. Application of
systemic chemotherapy, most commonly CMV or M-VAC
aims at eradiation of micrometastases. Cisplatin based
chemotherapy in combination with radiation therapy,
following TUR-BT, results in a CR of 60-80%. For
preventing poor outcome in non-responders, early
cystectomy is recommended in individuals who do not
achieve complete response following combination
treatment. This will allow about 40-45% patients to
survive with an intact bladder at 4-5 years. Successful
long-term survival rates have been observed in select
non-randomized trials with this approach. Approximately
50% of patients with bladder preservation treatment are
expected to survive with their intact bladder and rest need
salvage cystectomy due to loco-regional recurrence.
Non-invasive relapses may be treated with TUR followed
by intravesical therapy. In view of the high local
recurrence rate, a long-term follow up with cystoscopy,
exfoliative urine cytology and other investigations to rule
out disseminated disease is warranted. Although it has
not been compared with radical surgery in randomized
controlled trials, from historical series, 5 years control
rate of 24-45% with a 5 years overall survival of 26-40%
is achieved with radiotherapy for muscle invasive bladder
cancer. In the best hands, overall survival rates with
bladder preservation are comparable to radical
cystectomy (Level of evidence 3).
Clinical criteria helpful in determining patients for bladder
preservation include such variables a small tumour size
(<5 cm), early stage, a visibly and microscopically
complete TURBT, absence of CIS, ureteral obstruction
and hydronephrosis and no evidence of pelvic lymph
node metastases. On multivariate analysis, the
completeness of TURBT has been found to be one of
the strongest prognostic factors for overall survival.
With standard fractionation (1.8-2 Gy/fraction), the total
radiation dose is typically in the range of 45-50 Gy to
treat the pelvic lymph nodes and between 55 and 70 Gy
to the bladder. There is a suggestion of a dose response
relationship and retrospective analyses have suggested
improved local control with doses greater than 55-60 Gy
(Level of evidence 3). Prophylactic irradiation of pelvic
nodes is debated with no consensus on its utility. Use of
altered fractionation has been reported to induce a higher
local control rate but this modality is still investigational.
Overall, the available data indicate that differences in
local control between different radiation fractionation
schedules are more related to the total dose than to the
fractionation regimens. A reduction in overall treatment
time and large fraction sizes should be avoided,
especially when radiotherapy is combined with
concomitant chemotherapy. New treatment techniques,
such as image-guided and intensity-modulated
radiotherapy, may allow dose escalation with the
expectation to further improve tumour response and longterm local control.
It is important to understand that despite a complete
response to multimodality bladder preservation
strategies, the bladder remains a potential source of
recurrence and hence, lifelong monitoring of disease
status – both in the bladder and extravesical is
Neodajuvant Chemotherapy before radical
Although radical cystectomy is the standard treatment
for patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer, it leads
to long-term cure in only 50% of patients. In order to
improve these results, use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy
has been explored. The rationale for chemotherapy prior
to cystectomy or radical radiation therapy is based on
the intent to treat micrometastatic disease that is present
at diagnosis. There is level 1 evidence of a survival benefit
conferred by neoadjuvant chemotherapy administered
before definitive local treatment (surgery or radiotherapy).
A recent IPD meta-analysis of 3005 patients from 11
randomized trials found that neoadjuvant chemotherapy
decreased the risk of death by 14%, improved the
absolute disease-specific survival by 9%, and improved
overall survival by 5% at 5 years (p = 0.003). This
advantage in survival was seen for all muscle-invasive
tumours, and only patients who received a cisplatin
containing regimen benefited. While the available data
support the use of M-VAC (methotrexate, vinblastine,
doxorubicin and cisplatin) or CMV (cisplatin,
methotrexate, vinblastine) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy,
these regimens are less frequently used because phase
3 data in the metastatic setting suggested that a less
toxic regimen of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) has
similar efficacy to M-VAC. The efficacy of the GC
combination in the neoadjuvant setting, however, has
not yet been proven, suggesting that M-VAC or CMV
should still be used, based purely on the available data.
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is not recommended in
patients with poor performance score and impaired renal
G. Adjuvant therapy
Till date, there have been five published randomized trials
of adjuvant chemotherapy and one meta-analysis, with
updated individual patient data from six trials and a total
of only 491 patients for survival analysis. Neither
randomized trials nor the meta-analysis have provided
sufficient data to support the routine use of adjuvant
chemotherapy (Level of evidence 1a). The commonest
regimens used are MVAC/CMV or CISCA. Although not
convincingly shown to improve survival, it may be useful
in patients with pT3-4 and/or N+ patients.
Adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy has been studied
in retrospective series have shown improved locoregional control (particularly for squamous cell
carcinomas), but no survival benefit. Toxicity has been a
concern with postoperative RT but with modern
techniques like IMRT, this can be addressed adequately.
Adjuvant RT may be useful in subgroup of patients with
LN + ve and close/ positive margin of resection (Level of
evidence 3).
Chemotherapy for Metastatic Bladder Cancer
Approximately 5-10% of bladder cancers are metastatic
at presentation and another 40% of patients will develop
metastatic disease during their clinical course, typically
appearing in lymph nodes, lung, liver or bone.
Chemotherapy is the standard therapy for patients with
metastatic bladder cancer. Urothelial carcinoma is a
chemosensitive tumour. Performance status and
presence or absence of visceral metastases are
important prognostic factors for survival. Patients with
lymph node metastases only, good PS, and adequate
renal function may be the best candidates for
chemotherapy, with about 15% long-term survival.
Methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin (Adriamycin), and
cisplatin (M-VAC) and gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC) have
prolonged survival up to 14.8 and 13.8 months
respectively (Level of evidence 1b). Single-agent
chemotherapy provides low response rates of typically
short duration. Combination M-VAC chemotherapy is
superior to single agent chemotherapy (Level of evidence
1b). Carboplatin combination chemotherapy is less
effective than cisplatin-based chemotherapy in terms of
CR and survival (Level of evidence: 2a). Either MVAC or
CMV has been considered standard combination for
metastatic bladder cancer. In an international randomized
trial, M-VAC was compared with gemcitabine & cisplatin
(GC). Both the arms were found to be equivalent in terms
of response rates, time to treatment failure, time to
progressive disease and overall survival. GC appeared
to have reduced toxicity profile as compared to M-VAC,
making GC a new standard chemotherapeutic option in
patients with metastatic bladder cancer (Level of
evidence 1b). There is insufficient data to provide a
recommendation on standard second-line chemotherapy.
Therefore, second-line therapy should be provided within
a clinical trial setting. Single agents or paclitaxel/
gemcitabine, if the patient has a good PS, may be
considered. Quality of life issues are very important
considerations while deciding further chemotherapy.
Suggested reading:
Jemal A, Siegal R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics.
CA: Cancer J Clin 2008; 58: 71–76.
Ries LA, Kosary CL, Hankey BF, Miller BA, Clegg
L, Edward BK (1998) SEER cancer statistics review
1973–1996. NCI
Van der Meijden A, Sylvester R, Collette L, et al.
The role and impact of pathology review on stage
and grade assessment of stages Ta and T1 bladder
tumors: a combined analysis of 5 European
Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer
trials. J Urol. 2000; 164: 1533-7.
Oosterlinck W, Lobel B, Jakse G, et al. Guidelines
on Bladder carcinoma. Eur Urol. 2002; 41: 105-12.
Kurth K, Dennis R, Sylvester R, et al. The natural
history and the prognosis of treated superficial
bladder cancer. EORTC GU Group: Prog Clin Res.
1992; 378
Pasin P, Josephson DY, Mitra AP, et al. Superficial
Bladder Cancer: An Update on Etiology, Molecular
Development, Classification, and Natural History.
Reviews in Urology 2008; 10: 31-43.
Mostofi FK, Sobin LH, Tortone H. Histological typing
of urinary bladder tumors. International classification
of tumors. World Health Organization, Geneva:
Epstein JI, Amin MB, Reuter VR, et al. The World
Health Organization/International Society of
Urological Pathology consensus classification of
urothelial (transitional cell) neoplasms of the urinary
bladder. Bladder Consensus Conference
Committee. Am J Surg Pathol. 1998; 22: 1435-48.
Ch Wittekind. TNM supplement- A commentary on
uniform use. 4th edition, 2009 www.uicc.org
M. Brausi, L. Collette, K. Kurth et al. and EORTC
Genito-Urinary Tract Cancer Collaborative Group,
Variability in the recurrence rate at first follow-up
cystoscopy after TUR in stage Ta T1 transitional
cell carcinoma of the bladder: a combined analysis
of seven EORTC studies, Eur Urol 41 (2002), pp.
Van der Meijden A, Oosterlinck W, Brausi M, Kurth
KH, Sylvester R, de Balincourt C. Significance of
bladder biopsies in Ta,T1 bladder tumours: a report
of the EORTC Genito-Urinary Tract Cancer
Cooperative Group. EORTC-GU Group Superficial
Bladder Committee. Eur Urol 1999; 35:267–71.
S. Denziger, M. Burger and B. Walter, Clinically
relevant risk of reduction in risk of recurrence of
superficial bladder cancer using 5-aminolevulinic
acid-induced fluorescence diagnosis: 8-year results
of prospective randomized study, Urology 69 (2007),
pp. 675–679.
Kundra V, Silverman PM. Imaging in oncology from
the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer
Center. Imaging in the diagnosis, staging, and
follow-up of cancer of the urinary bladder. AJR Am
J Roentgenol 2003;180:1045–54.
Cowan NC, Turney BW, Taylor NJ, McCarthy CL,
Crew JP. Multidetector computed tomography
urography for diagnosing upper urinary tract
urothelial tumour. BJU Int 2007;99:1363–70.
G. Jakse, F. Algaba, P.-U. Malmström and W.
Oosterlinck, A second-look TUR in T1 transitional
cell carcinoma: why?, Eur Urol 45 (2004),
pp. 539–546.
16. R.T. Divrik, Ü. Yildirim, F. Zorlu and H. Özen, The
effect of repeat transurethral resection on
recurrence and progression rates in patients with
T1 tumours of the bladder who received intravesical
mitomycin: a prospective, randomized clinical trial,
J Urol 175 (2006), pp. 1641–1644
17. R.J. Sylvester, A.P.M. van der Meijden and W.
Oosterlinck et al., Predicting recurrence and
progression in individual patients with stage Ta T1
bladder cancer using EORTC risk tables: a
combined analysis of 2596 patients from seven
EORTC trials, Eur Urol 49 (2006), pp. 466–477.
18. R. Sylvester, W. Oosterlinck and A. van der Meijden,
A single immediate postoperative instillation of
chemotherapy decreases the risk of recurrence in
patients with stage Ta T1 bladder cancer: a metaanalysis of published results of randomized clinical
trials, J Urol 171 (2004), pp. 2186–2190.
19. E. Kaasinen, E. Rintala, P. Hellström et al. and The
FinnBladder Group, Factors explaining recurrence
in patients undergoing chemoimmunotherapy
regimens for frequently recurring superficial bladder
carcinoma, Eur Urol 42 (2002), pp. 167–174.
20. E. Solsona, I. Iborra, J.V. Ricos, J.L. Monros, J.
Casanova and R. Dumont, Effectiveness of a single
immediate mitomycin C instillation in patients with
low risk superficial bladder cancer: short and longterm follow-up, J Urol 161 (1999), pp. 1120–1123.
21. Pawinski A, Sylvester R, Kurth KH, et al. A combined
analysis of European Organization for Research
and Treatment of Cancer, and Medical Research
Council randomized clinical trials for the
prophylactic treatment of Ta T1 bladder cancer.
European Organization for Research and
Treatment of Cancer Genitourinary Tract Cancer
Cooperative Group and the Medical Research
Council Working Part on Superficial Bladder
Cancer. J Urol 1996; 156:1934–41.
M. Huncharek, J.-F. Geschwind, B. Witherspoon,
R. McGarry and D. Adcock, Intravesical
chemotherapy prophylaxis in primary superficial
bladder cancer: a meta-analysis of 3703 patients
from 11 randomized trials, J Clin Epid 53 (2000),
pp. 676–680
R.J. Sylvester, W. Oosterlinck and J.A. Witjes, The
schedule and duration of intravesical chemotherapy
in patients with non–muscle-invasive bladder
cancer: a systematic review of the published results
of randomized clinical trials, Eur Urol 53 (2008),
pp. 709–719.
J.L. Au, R.A. Badalament and M.G. Wientjes et al.,
International Mitomycin C Consortium. Methods to
improve efficacy of intravesical mitomycin C: results
of a randomized phase III trial, J Natl Cancer Inst
93 (2001), pp. 597–604.
Kuroda M, Niijima T, Kotake T, Akaza H, Hinotsu S.
Effect of prophylactic treatment with intravesical
epirubicin on recurrence of superficial bladder
cancer—The 6th Trial of the Japanese Urological
Cancer Research Group (JUCRG): a randomized
trial of intravesical epirubicin at dose of 20 mg/40
ml, 30 mg/40 ml, 40 mg/40 ml. Eur Urol 2004;
R.F. Han and J.G. Pan, Can intravesical bacillus
Calmette-Guérin reduce recurrence in patients with
superficial bladder cancer? A meta-analysis of
randomized trials, Urology 67 (2006), pp. 1216–
27. M.D. Shelley, T.J. Wilt, J. Court, B. Coles, H.
Kynaston and M.D. Mason, Intravesical bacillus
Calmette-Guerin is superior to mitomycin C in
reducing tumour recurrence in high-risk superficial
bladder cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized
trials, BJU International 93 (2004), pp. 485–490.
28. Böhle A, D. Jocham and P.R. Bock, Intravesical
bacillus Calmette-Guerin versus mitomycin C for
superficial bladder cancer: a formal meta-analysis
of comparative studies on recurrence and toxicity,
J Urol 169 (2003), pp. 90–95.
29. Böhle A and P.R. Bock, Intravesical bacillus
Calmette-Guerin versus mitomycin C in superficial
bladder cancer: formal meta-analysis of
comparative studies on tumor progression, Urology
63 (2004), pp. 682–687.
30. R.J. Sylvester, van der Meijden and D.L. Lamm,
Intravesical bacillus Calmette-Guerin reduces the
risk of progression in patients with superficial
bladder cancer: a combined analysis of the
published results of randomized clinical trials, J Urol
168 (2002), pp. 1964–1970.
31. M. Huncharek and B. Kupelnick, The influence of
intravesical therapy on progression of superficial
transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: a metaanalytic comparison of chemotherapy versus bacilli
Calmette-Guerin immunotherapy, Am J Clin Oncol
27 (2004), pp. 522–528.
32. D.L. Lamm, B.A. Blumenstein and J.D. Crissman
et al., Maintenance bacillus Calmette-Guerin
immunotherapy for recurrent Ta, T1 and carcinoma
in situ transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: a
randomized Southwest Oncology Group Study, J
Urol 163 (2000), pp. 1124–1129.
33. A.R. Zlotta, J.P. van Vooren and K. Huygen et al.,
What is the optimal regimen for BCG intravesical
therapy?, Eur Urol 37 (2000), pp. 470–477.
34. Martinez-Pineiro JA, Martinez-Pineiro L, Solsona
E, et al. Club Urologico Espanol de Tratamiento
Oncologico (CUETO). Has a 3-fold decreased dose
of bacillus Calmette-Guerin the same efficacy
against recurrences and progression of T1G3 and
Tis bladder tumours than the standard dose?
Results of a prospective randomized trial. J Urol
2005; 174:1242–7.
35. Ojea A, J.L. Nogueira and E. Solsona et al., A
multicentre, randomised prospective trial comparing
three intravesical adjuvant therapies for
intermediate-risk superficial bladder cancer: lowdose bacillus Calmette-Guerin (27 mg) versus very
low-dose bacillus Calmette-Guerin (13.5 mg)
versus mitomycin C, Eur Urol 52 (2007), pp. 1398–
36. A.P.M. Van der Meijden, R.J. Sylvester, W.
Oosterlinck, W. Hoeltl and A.V. Bono, for the
EORTC Genito-Urinary Tract Cancer Group.
Maintenance bacillus Calmette-Guerin for Ta, T1
bladder tumors is not associated with increased
toxicity: results from a European Organisation for
Research and Treatment of Cancer Genito-Urinary
Group Phase III Trial, Eur Urol 44 (2003), pp. 429–
37. E. Solsona, I. Iborra, R. Dumont, J. Rubio-Briones,
J. Casanova and S. Almenar, The 3-month clinical
response to intravesical therapy as a predictive
factor for progression in patients with high risk
superficial bladder cancer, J Urol 164 (2000), pp.
38. S. Holmang and S.L. Johansson, Stage Ta-T1
bladder cancer: the relationship between findings
at first followup cystoscopy and subsequent
recurrence and progression, J Urol 176 (2002), pp.
39. Lokeshwar VB, Habuchi T, Grossman HB, et al.
Bladder tumor markers beyond cytology:
International Consensus Panel on bladder tumor
markers. Urology 2005;66 (Suppl 1):35–63.
40. Babjuk M, Oosterlinck W, Sylvester R, Kaasinen
E, Bohle A, Palou-Redorta J. EAU guidelines on
non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the
bladder. Eur Urol 2008;54: 303–14.
41. Stein JP, Lieskovsky G, Cote R, et al. Radical
cystectomy in the treatment of invasive bladder
cancer: long-term results in 1,054 patients. J Clin
Oncol 2001;19:666-675.
42. Dalbagni G, Genega E, Hashibe M, et al.
Cystectomy for bladder cancer: a contemporary
series. J Urol 2001;165:1111-1116.
43. Stenzl A, Nagele U, Kuczyk M, et al. Cystectomy:
technical considerations in male and female
patients. EAU Update Series 2005;3:138–46.
44. Gschwend JE, Dahm P, Fair WR. Disease speciûc
survival as endpoint of outcome for bladder cancer
patients following radical cystectomy. Eur Urol
45. Hollenbeck BK, Miller DC, Taub D, et al. Aggressive
treatment for bladder cancer is associated with
improved overall survival among patients 80 years
old or older. Urology 2004;64:292–7.
46. Hautmann RE, Gschwend JE, de Petriconi RC, et
al. Cystectomy for transitional cell carcinoma of the
bladder: results of a surgery only series in the
neobladder era. J Urol 2006;176: 486-492.
discussion 491-492.
47. Shariat SF, Karakiewicz PI, Palapattu GS, et al.
Outcomes of radical cystectomy for transitional cell
carcinoma of the bladder: a contemporary series
from the Bladder Cancer Research Consortium. J
Urol 2006;176:2414-2422.
48. Herr HW. Transurethral resection of muscleinvasive bladder cancer: 10-year outcome. J Clin
Oncol 2001;19: 89–93.
49. Zietman AL, Grocela J, Zehr E, et al. Selective
bladder conservation using transurethral resection,
chemotherapy, and radiation: management and
consequences of Ta, T1, and Tis recurrence within
the retained bladder. Urology 2001;58:380–5.
50. Rodel C, Grabenbauer GG, Kuhn R, et al.
Combined-modality treatment and selective organ
preservation in invasive bladder cancer: long-term
results. J Clin Oncol 2002;20: 3061-3071.
51. Shipley WU, Kaufman DS, Zehr E, et al. Selective
bladder preservation by combined modality protocol
treatment: long-term outcomes of 190 patients with
invasive bladder cancer. Urology 2002;60:62–7.
52. Stuschke M, Thames HD. Hyperfractionated
radiotherapy of human tumors: overview of the
randomized clinical trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol
Phys 1997;37:259-267.
53. Sanchez-Ortiz RF, Huang WC, Mick R, Van
Arsdalen KN, Wein AJ, Malkowicz SB. An interval
longer than 12 weeks between the diagnosis of
muscle invasion and cystectomy is associated with
worse outcome in bladder carcinoma. J Urol
Grossman HB, Natale RB, Tangen CM, et al.
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus cystectomy
compared with cystectomy alone for locally
advanced bladder cancer. N Engl J Med
Vale CA, Advanced Bladder Cancer (ABC) Metaanalysis Collaboration. Adjuvant chemotherapy in
invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and
meta-analysis of individual patient data. Eur Urol
2005;48:189–201, discussion 199–201.
Neoadjuvant cisplatin, methotrexate, and
vinblastine chemotherapy for muscle-invasive
bladder cancer: a randomised controlled trial.
International collaboration of trialists. Lancet 1999;
Sherif A, Holmberg L, Rintala E, et al. Neoadjuvant
cisplatinum based combination chemotherapy in
patients with invasive bladder cancer: a combined
analysis of two Nordic studies. Eur Urol
Sternberg CN, de Mulder PH, Schornagel JH, et
al., European Organization for Research, Treatment
of Cancer Genitourinary Tract Cancer Cooperative
Group. Randomized phase III trial of high-doseintensity methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and
cisplatin (MVAC) chemotherapy and recombinant
human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor versus
classic MVAC in advanced urothelial tract tumors:
European Organization for Research and
Treatment of Cancer Protocol no. 30924. J Clin
Oncol 2001;19:2638–46.
59. Herr HW, Bajorin DF, Scher HI. Neoadjuvant
chemotherapy and bladder-sparing surgery for
invasive bladder cancer: ten-year outcome. J Clin
Oncol 1998;16:1298–301.
60. Widmark A, Flodgren P, Damber JE, Hellsten S,
Cavallin Stahl E. A systematic overview of radiation
therapy effects in urinary bladder cancer. Acta Oncol
61. Advanced Bladder Cancer Meta-analysis
Collaboration. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in
invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and
meta-analysis. Lancet 2003; 361:1927–34.
62. Sternberg CN, Collette L. What has been learned
from meta-analyses of neo-adjuvant and adjuvant
chemotherapy in bladder cancer? BJU Int 2006;
63. von der Maase H, Sengelov L, Roberts JT, et al.
Long-term survival results of a randomized trial
comparing gemcitabine plus cisplatin, with
methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, plus
cisplatin in patients with bladder cancer. J Clin Oncol
64. Donald S Kaufman, William U Shipley, Adam S
Feldman. Bladder cancer. Lancet 2009; 374:
Urothelial Tumors of
Upper Urinary Tract
Upper urinary tract transitional cell carcinoma (TCC)
refers to malignant changes of the transitional epithelial
cells lining the urinary tract from the renal calyces to the
ureteral orifice. Although over 60,000 new cases of
bladder cancer are diagnosed annually in the US, uppertract TCC is much less common, accounting for
approximately 5% of urothelial malignancies, and less
than 10% of all renal tumors. (1). Ureteral tumors are
even more uncommon, occurring with one quarter the
frequency of renal pelvis TCC’s. The frequency of uppertract TCC is increasing over the last 2 decades.
Fortunately, this has been associated with a slight
improvement in the overall and disease-specific survival
of patients with upper tract malignant neoplasms. (2)
Proposed etiologies for developing upper-tract TCC are
similar to that of bladder cancer and include
environmental factors (cigarette smoking), occupational
exposures (aniline dyes), and treatment with antiinflammatory (phenacetin) or chemotherapeutic
(cyclophophamide, ifosfamide) agents and heredity may
play a part in the development of TCC (Balkan
nephropathy, Lynch syndrome type II,etc). (3,4,5) Men
are about twice as likely to develop upper tract tumors
as are women. In addition, whites are about twice as
likely as African Americans to develop upper tract
tumors (6).
Types of upper urinary tract tumors
TCC is the most common histology accounting for greater
than 90% of upper urinary tract urothelial tumors.
Morphologically, TCC of the renal pelvis and ureter, like
bladder TCC, can be papillary or solid and associated
with carcinoma in situ.
Squamous cell carcinoma comprises 1-7% of upper tract
urothelial tumors.
Adenocarcinoma accounts for less than 1% of upper tract
Inverted papilloma is an unusual lesion that is generally
considered a benign histologic lesion.
Molecular mechanisms
Studies have proved that losses of p53, p19, and p16
tumor suppressor genes are associated with low-grade
cancers, while a loss of tumor suppressor gene RB1
has been associated with higher-grade, more aggressive
Tumor microsatellite instability (MSI) has been studied
as a favorable prognostic indicator for upper tract tumors,
particularly in younger patients with T2 or T3/N0 disease.
Patterns of spread
Contiguous spread – renal parenchyma. Also,
approximately 30%-75% of patients with upper tract
urothelial tumors develop bladder tumors at some
point during their cancer course.
Lymphatic spread – First station area from crus of
diaphragm to bifurcation of aorta.
Hematogenous spread to liver, lung, bone, etc.
Distribution of upper tract transitional cell
Renal pelvis - 58%
Ureter - 35% (73% of which are located in the distal
Ipsilateral renal pelvis and ureter - 7%
Bilateral involvement - 2-5%
Gross or microscopic hematuria
Flank pain and dysuria
Constitutional symptoms - Weight loss, anorexia,
and flank mass, or bone pain are symptoms of
advanced disease.
Patients should undergo routine tests and some specific
investigations. These include
Urinalysis is done to look for microscopic haematuria
and rule out urinary tract infection.
Urine cytology - Higher grade tumors including
carcinoma in situ tend to shed more tumor cells and
hence can be picked up by cytopathology with a sensitivity
of almost 80% whereas for well-differentiated tumors the
accuracy rate is only 10% to 40%.(9,10)
Imaging studies:
1. Intravenous pyelography (IVP)
IVP may show a radiolucent filling defect that is
characteristically irregular and in continuity with the wall
of the collecting system.
2. CT scan/CT - IVU scan:
CT scan usually shows a centrally located, minimally
enhancing, hypovascular, irregular filling defect. More
recently, CT urography has been performed to obtain a
three-dimensional image of the upper tracts. With CT
urography, the sensitivity for detecting upper tract
malignant disease has been reported to approach 100%,
with a specificity of 60% and a negative predictive value
of 100% (11)
3. MRI/ MR Urography:
MRI scan provides the information regarding the extent
of invasion, an associated mass lesion outside the
collecting system, and the presence of lymph node or
distant metastases, and is especially useful in patients
in which a contrast CT is contraindicated.
Cystoscopy and Retrograde Ureteropyelography:
Cystoscopy is mandatory to rule out coexistent bladder
lesions. It is also essential for postoperative surveillance
to monitor the bladder tumor development. RGU allows
better visualization of the collecting system than excretory
urography and is preferable in patients with azotemia
and/or contrast allergy. Overall, retrograde urography is
more than 75% accurate in establishing a diagnosis of
urothelial cancer. Uretero-pyeloscopy is used increasingly
for the diagnosis of upper tract urothelial tumors. Biopsy
forceps or cytology brushings can be used to collect
tissue. It may also help in collecting urine sample from
either ureter/renal system separately. This procedure
yields an accuracy of 86% in diagnosing renal pelvis
tumors and 90% in diagnosing ureteral tumors.
5. Role of PET Scan:
In urothelial cancer, the role of PET is still being defined,
but it has a high positive predictive value and can be
used for problem solving in patients with indeterminate
findings on conventional imaging (12)
Clinical staging is same as for TCC bladder. Routine
staging includes chest radiograph and/or
thoracoabdominal CT. Radionuclide bone scan is
recommended in symptomatic patients or those having
advanced disease.
The management of urothelial carcinoma can be divided
Standard radical nephrouretrectomy.
Conservative techniques:
Nephron sparing surgery for renal pelvis
tumors: pyelotomy and tumor ablation and
partial nephrectomy.
Segmental ureterectomy.
Minimally invasive approaches:
Endoscopic procedures.
Laproscopic approach.
Combination approach.
Radical Nephroureterectomy
Radical nephroureterectomy with excision of an ipsilateral
bladder cuff is the gold-standard therapy for patients with
a normal contralateral kidney (13) particularly in cases
of high-grade, invasive tumors or low–moderate-grade
lesions that are large, bulky, or multifocal. The entire
kidney, along with all the perinephric fat and Gerota’s
fascia, with the ipsilateral adrenal gland and the whole
of ureter, including the intramural portion and the ureteral
orifice with a cuff of bladder is removed.
Nephroureterectomy can be performed by an open,
laparoscopic, or hand-assisted laparoscopic technique.
Ipsilateral adrenalectomy is generally unnecessary
unless the tumor is a superior lesion with suspected direct
adrenal invasion. (14)
Management of the Distal Ureteric lesion.
The entire distal ureter including the intramural portion
and ipsilateral ureteral orifice must be removed
regardless of the surgical modality for extirpation of the
kidney and upper ureter. Either open or laparoscopic
techniques could be used for this surgery. (15)
Open technique.
The intravesical method involves creating an anterior
cystotomy and circumscribing one cm cuff of the bladder
surrounding the ipsilateral ureter.
The extravesical technique involves dissection of the
ureter through the detrusor hiatus to ensure a complete
dissection of the intramural portion of the ureter. With
gentle traction on the ureter, a right angle clamp or an
endoscopic gastrointestinal anastomosis (GIA) stapler
can be used to transect the ureter with a cuff of bladder.
Transurethral resection of the ureteral orifice: ‘pluck’
Endoscopic resection of the ureteral orifice and the
intramural ureter is done till perivesical fat is seen so as
to achieve complete detachment of the ureter from the
bladder, allowing for it to be ‘plucked’ during the antegrade
dissection. Potential complications associated with this
technique include fluid and electrolyte disturbances,
pelvic or peritoneal seeding of tumor cells from bladder
extravasation, and failure to adequately address tumors
of the intramural ureter. (16,17)
Intussusception (stripping) technique.
A ureteral catheter is inserted at the start of the
procedure, and the ureter is dissected as distally as
possible during the nephrectomy portion of the operation.
The ureter is ligated and transected with the ureteral
catheter secured to the proximal portion of the distal
ureter. The patient is repositioned in the lithotomy
position, and the distal ureter is intussuscepted into the
bladder by traction on the ureteral catheter. A
resectoscope is then used to excise the bladder cuff,
thus releasing the distal ureter.
Segmental Resection
Nephron-sparing Surgery for Renal Pelvis Tumors
Historically, open nephron-sparing surgery for upper-tract
TCC was used in patients with a large renal pelvis tumor
in a solitary kidney or synchronous bilateral tumors. With
the advances in endourologic techniques, the
conservative management of renal pelvis tumors is
further supplanted. . A flank incision is used for kidney
exposure, followed by a pyelotomy and excision or
resection of the renal pelvis tumor. The base of the lesion
is cauterized, the pyelotomy defect is repaired, and
postoperative drainage is accomplished by ureteral
stenting or via a percutaneous nephrostomy tube.
The cumulative risk of tumor recurrence within the
ipsilateral renal pelvis following pyelotomy or partial
nephrectomy ranges from 7% to 70%. (18, 19)The high
recurrence rates are secondary to the inherent field
change defect observed with upper tract TCC.
Partial Ureterectomy
Distal ureterectomy with reimplantation is a reasonable
alternative for patients with high-grade, invasive, or bulky
tumors of the distal ureter that are not amenable to
endoscopic ablation. Distal ureterectomy is also being
done with both the laparoscopic and robotic techniques
with promising results. (20, 21)
Segmental ureterectomy of the proximal or mid-ureter
with primary ureterostomy is rarely indicated. Exceptions
to this would be proximal tumors not amenable to
endoscopic ablation in a functional solitary kidney.
Mazeman et al found that the local recurrence rates after
subtotal ureterectomy are similar to that of radical
nephroureterectomy in patients with solitary ureteral
lesions. (22)
Endoscopic procedures:
The basic principles for treatment of transitional cell
carcinoma of the upper urinary tract are similar to those
for the bladder counterpart. Tumors of the upper urinary
tract can be approached in a retrograde or antegrade
fashion. The approach chosen depends largely on the
tumor location and size. In general, a retrograde
ureteroscopic approach is used for low-volume ureteral
and renal tumors. With the improvement in the
endoscopic instruments (flexible scopes, etc), tumor
biopsy and ablation by various energy sources
(electrocautery, neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet
(Nd:YAG) or holmium:YAG are possible even through
the smallest instruments.
Percutaneous Management:
Preferred for larger tumors of the renal pelvis and
proximal ureter.
Better visualization of the renal pelvis.
Superior access to the lower pole calyces, as well
as to renal units with complicated calyceal anatomy.
Violation of urothelial integrity with reports of tumor
seeding of nonurothelial surfaces around the kidney
or in the nephrostomy tract.
Bleeding, infection, electrolyte abnormalities,
adjacent organ injury, and pleural injury.
Adjuvant Topical Therapy:
Adjuvant topical immunotherapy or chemotherapy can
be used to reduce recurrence rates.The same agents
used to treat urothelial carcinoma of the bladder can be
used to treat tumors of the upper tracts. The most
common agents instilled are BCG or mitomycin-C.
Role of Lymphadenectomy
There are no definitive data supporting the use of lymph
node dissection. However since the TCC bladder data
has shown that the number of positive lymph nodes
removed and the lymph node density are important
prognostic variables in patients undergoing cystectomy,
therapeutic regional lymphadenectomy is advisable in
TCC upper tract. (23) Extent of this dissection is from
crus of diaphragm to the aortic bifurcation.
Role of Chemotherapy
Urothelial tumors of the upper urinary tract are
chemosensitive tumors. (3, 24, 25)
Neo adjuvant chemotherapy: The advantage of
chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting includes
eradication of subclinical metastatic disease, better
tolerability before surgical extirpation, and the ability to
deliver higher doses than in the adjuvant setting.(3)
Studies have presented compelling data for the use of
neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy regimens
before radical cystectomy.(26, 27) Regimens comprised
of gemcitabine and cisplatin that provide a similar survival
advantage to methotrexate–vinblastine–doxorubicin–
cisplatin (MVAC), with a better safety profile and
tolerability, increase the attractiveness of neoadjuvant
Adjuvant chemotherapy
The role of adjuvant chemotherapy is poorly defined with
no randomized studies for bladder TCC available for
comparison. Consensus opinion is that patients with pT3
disease or worse or pathologic lymph node involvement
would be likely to benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy (3)
Role of radiotherapy:
Various studies have proved that adjuvant radiation for
high-stage disease does not decrease local relapse or
protect against a high rate of distant failure.
Bladder Cancer Following Upper-tract TCC
Transitional epithelial cells line the whole urinary tract;
consequently, it has been suggested that in cases of TCC
the entire urothelium is at risk of developing subsequent
tumors. Bladder tumors reportedly occur in 15–50% of
patients following upper-tract TCC. (29, 30, 31) Hence,
close surveillance with cystoscopy and cytology following
surgical management of upper-tract TCC is essential.
Surveillance and Follow up:
The recommended follow-up for patients treated for
upper-tract TCC should consist of interval history and
physical examination, urinary cytology, and surveillance
cystoscopy every 3 months for the first 2 years after
treatment, every 6 months for the next 2 years, and yearly
thereafter if the patient is free from disease
recurrence.(25, 32)
Squamous Cell Cancers
Squamous cell cancers make up 0.7% to 7% of upper
tract cancers (Babaian and Johnson, 1980; Blacker et
al, 1985). Squamous cancers are frequently associated
with a condition of chronic inflammation, stone disease,
infection or with analgesic abuse (Stewart et al, 1999).
These tumors occur six times more frequently in th erenal
pelvis than in the ureter and are generally moderately to
poorly differentiated and more likely to be invasive at the
time of presentation, however distant metastasis is
infrequent. Squamous cell cancers occur as pure SCC
or TCC with squamoid differentiation. The presenting
symptoms are painless gross hematuria, frequencyurgency, and sometimes obstructive urinary symptoms.
nephroureterectomy. Addition of RT either in neoadjuvant
or adjuvant setting improves the survival. Although distant
metastsasis is infrequent (8-10%), the prognosis is grave
and most patients die after failure of even loco-regional
Adenocarcinomas account for less than 1% of all renal
pelvic tumors and are typically associated with long-term
obstruction, inflammation, or urinarycalculi (Stein et al,
1988; Spires et al, 1993). The process is assumed to
begin with an urothelial metaplasia resulting from a
reaction to chronic irritation, leading to dedifferentiation,
dysplasis and, in the end, to a squamous cell carcinoma
or adenocarcinoma. The relevant medical histories
include chronic episodes of pyelonephritis or
nephrolithiasis. These tumors typically present at
advanced stage and display a poor prognosis.
Jemal A et al. (2005) Cancer statistics, 2005. CA
Cancer J Clin 55: 10–30
Munoz JJ et al. (2000) Upper tract urothelial
neoplasms: incidence and survival during the last
decades. J Urol 164: 1523–1525 Houston RH et
al. (2005)
Management of Upper Tract Tumors. In
Comprehensive Textbook of Genitourinary
Oncology, edn 3 vol. 1, 435–442 (Eds Vogelzang
NJ et al.) Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Palvio DH et al. (1987) Transitional cell tumors of
the renal pelvis and ureter associated with
capillarosclerosis indicating analgesic abuse.
Cancer 59: 972–976
Jensen OM et al. (1988) The Copenhagen
casecontrol study of renal pelvis and ureter cancer:
role of smoking and occupational exposures. Int J
Cancer 41: 557–561
Campbell- Walsh textbook of Urology; 9th edition.
Raman JD, Scherr DS. Management of patients
with upper urinary tract transitional cell
carcinoma. Nat Clin Pract Urol. Aug 2007;4(8):
Rouprêt M, Fromont G, Azzouzi AR, Catto JW,
Vallancien G, Hamdy FC, et al. Microsatellite
instability as predictor of survival in patients with
invasive upper urinary tract transitional cell
carcinoma. Urology. Jun 2005;65(6):1233-7
Zincke H et al. (1976) Significance of urinary
cytology in the early detection of transitional cell
cancer of the upper urinary tract. J Urol 116:
10. Grace DA et al. (1967) Carcinoma of the renal
pelvis: a 15-year review. J Urol 98: 566–569
11. Caoili EM, Cohan RH, Korobkin M, et al. Urinary
tract abnormalities: initial experience with multi–
detector row CT urography. Radiology 2002;
12. Shvarts O, Han KR, Seltzer M, Pantuck AJ,
Belldegrun AS. Positron emission tomography in
urologic oncology. Cancer Control 2002; 9(4):335342.
13. Flanigan RC (2007) Urothelial tumors of the upper
urinary tract. In Campbell-Walsh Urology, edn 9 vol.
2, 1638–1652 (Eds Wein A et al.) Philadelphia: WB
14. Sagalowsky A et al. (2007) Management of
Urothelial Tumors of the Renal Pelvis and Ureter.
In: Campbell- Walsh Urology, edn 9 vol. 2, 1653–
1687 (Eds Wein A et al.) Philadelphia: WB Saunders
15. Weise ES et al. (2005) Laparoscopic management
of upper tract tumors. In Comprehensive Textbook
of Genitourinary Oncology vol. 1, 442–447 (Eds
Vogelzang NJ et al.) Philadelphia: Lippincott
Williams & Wilkins
16. Arango O et al. (1997) Massive tumor implantation
in the endoscopic resected area in modified
nephroureterectomy. J Urol 157: 1839
17. Palou J et al. (2000) Management of superficial
transitional cell carcinoma in the intramural ureter:
what to do? J Urol 163: 744–747
18. Zincke H et al. (1984) Feasibility of conservative
surgery for transitional cell cancer of the upper
urinary tract. Urol Clin North Am 11: 717–724
19. Ziegelbaum M et al. (1987) Conservative surgery
for transitional cell carcinoma of the renal pelvis. J
Urol 138: 1146–1149
20. Roupret M et al. (2007) Laparoscopic distal
ureterectomy and anastomosis for management of
low-risk upper urinary tract transitional cell
carcinoma: preliminary results. BJU Int 99:
21. Uberoi J et al. (2007) Robot-assisted laparoscopic
distal ureterectomy and ureteral reimplantation with
psoas hitch. J Endourol 21: 368–373.
22. Mazeman E (1976) Tumours of the upper urinary
tract calyces, renal pelvis and ureter. Eur Urol 2:
23. Catto JW et al. (2007) Behavior of urothelial
carcinoma with respect to anatomical location. J
Urol 177: 1715–1720
24. Flanigan RC (2007) Urothelial tumors of the upper
urinary tract. In Campbell-Walsh Urology, edn 9 vol.
2, 1638–1652 (Eds Wein A et al.) Philadelphia: WB
25. Sagalowsky A et al. (2007) Management of
Urothelial Tumors of the Renal Pelvis and Ureter.
In: Campbell- Walsh Urology, edn 9 vol. 2, 1653–
1687 (Eds Wein A et al.) Philadelphia: WB Saunders
26. Grossman HB et al. (2003) Neoadjuvant
chemotherapy plus cystectomy compared with
cystectomy alone for locally advanced bladder
cancer. N Engl J Med 349: 859–866
27. [No authors listed] (1999) Neoadjuvant cisplatin,
methotrexate, and vinblastine chemotherapy for
muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a randomised
controlled trial. International collaboration of trialists.
Lancet 354: 533–540
28. Roberts JT et al. (2006) Long-term survival results
of a randomized trial comparing gemcitabine/
cisplatin and methotrexate/vinblastine/doxorubicin/
cisplatin in patients with locally advanced and
metastatic bladder cancer. Ann Oncol 17 (Suppl 5):
29. Raman JD et al. (2005) Bladder cancer after
managing upper urinary tract transitional cell
carcinoma: predictive factors and pathology. BJU
Int 96: 1031–1035
30. Koga F et al. (2001) Risk factors for the
development of bladder transitional cell carcinoma
following surgery for transitional cell carcinoma of
the upper urinary tract. Urol Int 67: 135–141
31. Kang CH et al. (2003) The development of bladder
tumors and contralateral upper urinary tract tumors
after primary transitional cell carcinoma of the upper
urinary tract. Cancer 98: 1620–1626
32. Canfield SE et al. (2003) Surveillance and
management of recurrence for upper tract
transitional cell carcinoma. Urol Clin North Am 30:
Testicular Germ
Cell Tumours
Testicular cancer forms about 1% of all malignancies in
males in India. Germ cell tumors comprise of 95 % of
malignant tumors arising from testis. These tumors
predominantly affect young males in the prime of their
life. Besides, the disease as well as the treatment can
affect the fertility of these patients and affect their quality
of life. Testicular tumors are the models of the success
of multimodality approach to cancer, boasting of high
cure rates even in the presence of metastatic disease.
About 40% of all testicular tumors are pure seminomas.
2-3% percent of the patients present as bilateral tumors.
Other histological varieties like yolk sac tumor
(endodermal sinus tumour), teratoma, embryonal
carcinoma etc are considered together for management
due to similar biological behaviour and natural history
and are collectively called “non-seminomatous germ cell
tumors of testis” (NSGCT).
Predisposing factors:
Germ cell tumors (GCT) can develop in an inguinal
cryptorchid testis in approximately 2% of cases. Another
5%-10% of cases will develop in the normally descended
testis. If orchiopexy is to reduce the likelihood of GCT, it
should be performed prior to puberty. If the cryptorchid
testis is inguinal, hormonally functioning, and easily
examined, surveillance is recommended. If the
cryptorchid testis is abdominal, nonfunctioning and not
amenable to orchiopexy, orchiectomy is recommended.
Klinefelter Syndrome
Klinefelter syndrome is diagnosed by a 47, XXY
karyotype and is characterized by testicular atrophy,
absence of spermatogenesis, a eunuchoid habitus, and
gynecomastia,. Patients with Klinefelter syndrome are
at increased risk for mediastinal GCT.
Other Risk Factors for Testicular Cancer:
Family history
Presence of tumour or testicular intraepithelial neoplasia
(Iin) in contralateral testis
Altered intrauterine hormonal environment
Low fertility
Abnormal sperm analysis
Histological classification: GCT is classified into two
major subgroups: seminoma and nonseminoma. The
classification of the World Health Organization, derived
from Mostofi and Sesterhenn’s adaptation of the Dixon/
Moore classification, is the system most commonly used
in western as well as asian countries.
World Health Organization
Classification of Testis Tumors
Germ cell tumors (intratubular germ cell neoplasia,
A. Tumors of one histological type (pure forms)
Seminoma with syncytiotrophoblastic cells
Spermatocytic seminoma
Spermatocytic seminoma with sarcoma
Embryonal carcinoma
Yolk sac tumors
Trophoblastic tumors
Trophoblastic neoplasms other than
Monophasic choriocarcinoma
Placental site trophoblastic tumors
Dermoid cyst
Monodermal teratoma
Teratoma with somatic type malignancies
B. Tumors of more than one histologic type (mixed
Mixed embryonal carcinoma and teratoma
Mixed teratoma and seminoma
Choriocarcinoma and teratoma/embryonal
Intratubular Germ-Cell Neoplasia
IGCN is the precursor lesion of most types of GCTs.
Abnormal germ cells within the seminal tubules are found
adjacent to invasive germ-cell tumors. Although initially
termed carcinoma in situ (CIS), these cells are not of
epithelial origin and are better termed intratubular germcell neoplasia or testicular intraepithelial neoplasia (TIN).
IGCN is found adjacent to testicular germ-cell tumors in
over 95% of cases. It is also found in all clinical groups
known to be at high risk for testicular cancer
development: Cryptorchidism (2% to 4%), infertility (1%),
ambiguous genitalia (25%), and contralateral testes of
patients with testicular cancer (5%).
ICGN is characterized by seminiferous tubules showing
decreased spermatogenesis in which the normal
constituents of the tubules are replaced by abnormal
germ cells with the appearance of seminoma cells. These
cells stain strongly for placental alkaline phosphatase
(PLAP), whereas normal germ cells are negative.
IGCN has a 50% risk of developing into an invasive germcell tumor within 5 years. That risk probably approaches
100% by 8 years. There is strong evidence that IGCN is
a precursor lesion of all types of germ-cell tumors except
spermatocytic seminoma and infantile testicular tumors.
Classical Type
Seminoma is the most frequent germ-cell tumor,
comprising over 50% of all germ-cell neoplasms. Serum
level of human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) is elevated
in 15% to 30% of men at presentation, related to the
presence of syncytiotrophoblastic cells. These may be
identified in 7% of tumors on routine hematoxylin and
eosin sections or by immunoperoxidase stains in 24%.
Serum alpha-fetoprotein is not elevated in pure
Grossly, seminoma is a soft tan-colored diffused multinodular mass. Focal necrosis is sometimes present. A
prominent lymphocytic infiltrate is commonly seen within
the fibrous stroma. Over 90% of seminomas will stain
positive for placental alkaline phosphatase. (PLAP).
Spermatocytic Seminoma
Spermatocytic seminoma is a rare variant seen generally
in older men. Its relationship to other GCTs is not clear
because it is not associated with ITGCN or bilaterality, it
does not express placental alkaline phosphatase (PLAP)
and it has not been shown to have the same genetic
abnormalities as other GCTs. Metastatic potential is
Nonseminomatous Germ-Cell Tumours
Embryonal Carcinoma
Pure embryonal carcinoma makes up about 3% of all
testicular germ-cell tumours and is a component of
almost 50% of mixed germ-cell tumours. Over 80% of
these tumours occur between the ages of 15 and 34
Grossly, the tumour often exhibits a large area of
hemorrhage and necrosis. Almost all embryonal
carcinomas are PLAP positive and alpha-fetoprotein and
HCG-positive cells are present in 33% and 21%,
Yolk Sac (Endodermal Sinus Tumour)
Pure yolk sac tumour makes up <2% of testicular tumors
in adults but forms a component of 40% of mixed germcell tumours. It makes up 60% of germ-cell tumours in
children. Eighty percent of pure yolk sac tumours occur
in the first 2 years of life. It is associated with elevated
serum levels of alpha-fetoprotein. Grossly, yolk sac
tumours contain cystic spaces containing a gelatinous
material. There is a variable amount of hemorrhage and
necrosis. Microscopically, Schiller-Duval bodies are a
characteristic feature.
Pure teratoma makes up 5% of all testicular germ-cell
tumours. Teratomatous component may be seen in about
50% of mixed germ-cell tumours. In pure teratoma serum
HCG and alpha-fetoprotein are normal. Mature teratoma
consists of mature well-differentiated somatic tissues.
Despite their benign appearance, metastases can occur.
Immature teratoma contains immature elements in
addition to varying amounts of well-differentiated tissue.
Both mature and immature teratomas have a similar
behavior. Teratoma with malignant transformation results
from the development of a somatic carcinoma or
sarcoma within the teratoma.
Pure choriocarcinoma is the rarest type of germ-cell
tumour, accounting for less that 0.05% of lesions but
present in about 4% of mixed germ-cell tumours. It is a
highly aggressive neoplasm and often presents with
metastatic disease, the primary lesion being occult. The
serum HCG is elevated.
Mixed Germ-Cell Tumors
Mixed germ-cell tumors account for up to 50% of germcell tumours. Any of the above elements can be present
in combination. Serum markers are elevated depending
on the proportion of different elements present within.
Clinical presentation and patterns of
A testicular tumour usually presents as a painless scrotal
swelling, heaviness, tenderness and loss of testicular
sensation. Contrary to common belief, pain is a
presenting feature in as many as 46% of cases (due to
torsion, infection, bleeding or infarction).
Involvement of retroperitoneal lymph nodes may produce
back pain or abdominal swelling. Widely disseminated
parenchymal disease in lungs, liver, bone, or brain is
uncommon but, if present, may produce systemic
symptoms. Gynecomastia is a rare presentation of
embryonal carcinoma and may be seen in association
with the very uncommon sex cord-stromal tumors.
Occasionally, patients present with metastatic germ-cell
malignancies diagnosed by biopsy or elevated levels of
serum tumor markers without evidence of a palpable
mass in the testis. Occult primary disease in the testis is
often detected by testicular ultrasound. If there is no
evidence of a primary tumor in the testis, a diagnosis of
an extratesticular germ-cell tumor, usually mediastinal,
retroperitoneal, or pineal, may be made.
Some of the uncommon presentations of GCTs are
hematemesis due to lymph node eroding duodenum,
spinal cord compression due to paraspinal mass or
painless swelling in the neck.
The pattern of spread in NSGCT is distinct from that
seen in Seminomas. In NSGCT, 60% of cases will
present with extensive disease. The spread is usually to
the retroperitoneal lymph nodes first and then
hematogenously to other parts. The exception is pure
choriocarcinoma – which rapidly spreads to lungs, brain
and other soft tissues early in the disease. Pattern of
retroperitoneal lymph nodal involvement in germ cell
tumors has important treatment implications. Donohue
et al have shown that a right sided primary will usually
involve the interaortocaval, precaval and preaortic nodes.
The left testicular mass will involve the left paraaortic,
preaortic and interaortocaval nodes. Suprahilar LN
involvement is uncommon and external iliac/ obturator
nodes are only rarely the sites of metastasis.
Pretreatment Evaluation:
When an intratesticuler mass is identified, further
evaluation includes the following.
Serum tumour markers: AFP, b HCG, LDH. Pure
seminomas do not produce any tumor markers
(90% cases, 10% may have mildly raised b-HCG).
Pure choriocarcinomas produce only b-HCG.
Embryonal and yolk sac tumors usually have
elevated AFP alone. NSGCTs will usually show
elevation of both b-HCG and AFP. Elevated tumors
markers are used to support the diagnosis, assess
prognosis, indicate residual tumour following
orchidectomy, evaluate response to chemotherapy
and detect early relapse. Elevated values of b-HCG,
AFP and LDH should be followed up closely so as
to determine accurate staging.
AFP is increased in 50-70% of patients with NSGCT
and a rise in b-HCG is seen in 40-60% patients
with NSGCT. About 90% of NSGCT present with a
rise in one or two of the markers. Upto 30% of
seminomas can present or develop an elevated bHCG level during the course of the disease. LDH
is a less specific marker and its level may be
elevated in 80% of patients with advanced testicular
Imaging of the testis: Ultrasound of the testicular
mass performed mostly to define the lesion though,
it is not mandatory when the diagnosis is obvious
on physical examination. It can determine whether
the mass is intratesticular or extratesticular and
helps to monitor the status of contralateral testis in
high risk patients. It may be useful to identify small
non-palpable tumour in patients with metastatic
X-ray chest
Abdominopelvic CT scan or MRI: Have a sensitivity
of 70-80% in determination of retroperitoneal and
mediastinal lymph nodes.
Chest CT may be indicated only if abdominal CT
scan confirms retroperitoneal adenopathy or the
chest X ray is abnormal. This is especially important
in patients with NSGCT.
Open inguinal biopsy of the contralateral testis is
not routinely performed , but can be considered if
cryptorchid testis or atrophic testis is
present.(Biopsy to be considered if suspicious
intratesticuler mass or macrocalcification but not
CBC, Biochemistry including renal chemistry and
liver function tests.
MRI Brain and bone scan if clinically indicated or in
patients of NSGCT with extensive widespread lung
Patients should be counseled for sperm banking
and same should be done before any therapeutic
intervention. (See appendix I)
Role of PET scan as an imaging modality
Studies comparing FDG PET with CT in primary staging
of GCT show that FDG PET is useful for detecting viable
tumor in lesions that are visible on CT and may prevent
false-positive diagnosis on CT in clinical stage II disease
.However, FDG PET does not improve staging in patients
with clinical stage I disease because, similar to CT, it is
poor at detecting small-volume (i.e. subcentimeter)
disease [1-2] Furthermore, FDG PET is not able to
identify mature teratoma. Presently, there is not sufficient
evidence to support the use of FDG-PET scan in staging
and hence not recommended in the primary staging of
testicular GCT [3] (Level III). It however has a role in
characterization of post-chemotherapy residual mass in
patients with seminoma and may direct therapy
(intervention vs. observation).
Primary (Initial) Treatment :
High Inguinal Radical Orchidectomy.
The diagnosis of testicular germ cell tumour is based on
the histology of the testicular mass removed by inguinal
orchidectomy. A thorough histopathological review
including histological subtype, tumor size and extent,
presence or absence of lymphatic or vascular emboli,
tumor necrosis etc. is essential. In cases of disseminated
disease and life-threatening metastases, it may be
recommended to start chemotherapy upfront and
orchidectomy may be done after stabilization of the
clinical status of the patient.
Orchidectomy is not required in patients with
extragonadal GCT with normal testicular examination
(clinical and sonographical).
Patients sometimes present with scrotal orchidectomy
being done if malignancy is not suspected and especially
if a patient presents to a non-oncological centre. In such
circumstances, aggressive local therapy (resection of
inguinal portion of spermatic cord and hemi-scrotectomy)
will ensure that the survival of the patient is not
Testis-sparing surgery: This is not routinely
recommended in patients with normal contralateral testis.
However, in synchronous bilateral tumours,
metachronous contralateral tumours or in patients with
a tumour in a solitary testis, testis-preserving surgery
may be indicated when the tumour volume is less than
30% of the total testicular volume and the tumour is
completely removed. There is a high risk of associated
Tin and many patients require local radiation therapy (20
Gy) to control primary disease. This option may be carried
out after thorough consultation with the patient.
Post Primary Treatment Work-up:
Post primary treatment markers: AFP, beta HCG
and LDH (Markers used for risk classification are
post orchidectomy).
Staging: (Post Primary Surgery) UICC Staging &
Classification of Testis Tumours 2002
Staging shall be done by the TNM system and the
prognostic group assignment is done as per the
International Germ Cell Consensus Classification.
Primary tumour
Primary tumour cannot be assessed
No evidence of primary tumour
Intratubular germ cell neoplasia
Tumour limited to the testis and epididymis
No vascular/lymphatic invasion
May invade the tunica albuginea
No invasion of the tunica vaginalis
pT2 Tumour limited to the testis and epididymis
Vascular/lymphatic invasion or tumour extending
through the tunica albuginea with involvement of
the tunica vaginalis
pT3 Tumour invades the spermatic cord with or without
vascular/lymphatic invasion
pT4 Tumour invades the spermatic cord with or without
vascular/lymphatic invasion
pT4 Tumour invades the scrotum with or without
vascular/lymphatic invasion
Regional nodes: Clinical
NX Nodes not assessed
N0 No regional lymph node metastasis
N1 Lymph node mass or multiple lymph node masses
<2 cm in greatest dimension
N2 Lymph node mass or multiple lymph node masses
>2 cm but <5 cm in greatest dimension
N3 Lymph node mass >5 cm in greatest dimension
pN0 No evidence of tumor in lymph nodes
pN1 Lymph node mass < 2 cm in greatest dimension
5 nodes positive
pN2 Lymph node mass >2 cm but <5 cm in greatest
>5 nodes positive
Evidence of extranodal extension of tumor
pN3 Lymph node mass >5 cm in greatest dimension
M Distant metastases
M0 No evidence of distant metastases
M1 Distant metastases
M1a Nonregional nodal or pulmonary metastases
M2b Nonpulmonary visceral metastases
S: Serum tumour markers
hCG† (mIU/mL)
Not assessed
<1.5 x N
1.5-10 x N
>10 x N
AFP (ng/mL)
Not assessed
Not assessed
> 50,000
> 10,000
N = upper limit of normal for the LDH assay
Stage Grouping
Stage grouping
Stage 0
PT is
Stage I
Stage IA
Stage IB
Stage IS
Any T
Stage II
Any T
Any N
Stage IIA
Any T
Stage IIB
Any T
Stage IIC
Any T
Stage III
Any T
Any N
Stage IIIA
Any T
Any N
Stage IIIB
Any T
Any N
Stage IIIC
Any T
Any N
Any T
Any N
Any T
Any N
Any S
International Germ Cell
Classification for Seminoma:
In 1997, IGCCCC defined a staging system for metastatic
disease based on some independent clinical prognostic
factors. This system has now been incorporated into the
TNM classification and categorizes patients into good,
intermediate and poor prognostic groups.
Good Risk (90%)
Normal alpha fetoprotein, any b-HCG, any LDH
Any primary site and
No non-pulmonary visceral metastases present
Intermediate Risk: (10%)
Non-pulmonary visceral metastases present
Any primary site and
Normal alpha fetoprotein, any b-HCG, any LDH
Seminomas are never included in the Poor prognostic
group, irrespective of stage.
International Consensus Advanced Germ Cell
Tumor Prognosis Classification Scheme
Good Risk
Testicular or retroperitoneal primary tumor.
No non-pulmonary visceral metastases present
Post orchiectomy AFP <1000 ng/ml and b-hCG
<5000 IU/l and LDH <1.5 X upper limit of normal
Intermediate Prognosis:
Testicular or retroperitoneal primary tumour.
No non-pulmonary visceral metastases present.
AFP 1000-10000 ng/ml or â-hCG 5000-50000 IU/l
or LDH 1.5-10 X ULN
Poor prognosis:
Mediastinal primary site
Non-pulmonary visceral metastases present.
AFP >10000 ng/ml or b-hCG >50000 IU/l or LDH
10 X ULN
Management of Seminoma:
Stage I:
The DFS and OAS for Stage I seminoma testis is 9599% at 10 years with excellent salvage rates even at
relapses [4]. About 15-20% patients with stage I
seminoma have subclinical metastatic disease, usually
in the retroperitoneum and will relapse after orchidectomy
Options of treatment for stage I seminoma are as follows:
Prophylactic (adjuvant) radiation therapy (5)
Adjuvant chemotherapy (6,7)
There is no role of retroperitoneal lymph node dissection
in stage I seminoma.
Prophylactic (Adjuvant) Para-aortic +/-Pelvic Nodes
Radiation: Around 15-20% of the patients under
surveillance will relapse if they do not receive adjuvant
radiotherapy post orchiectomy [8]. External beam
radiation therapy to para-aortic area either alone or with
ipsilateral iliac nodal region (hockey stick field) to a dose
of 20-25Gy with 6-15 MV photons @1.5 -1.8 Gy/# in 2-3
weeks, from lower border of D10 vertebra (retrocrural
nodes) to lower border of L5 vertebra (with shielding of
contralateral testis) is recommended with a relapse rate
of 1-3%[5,8-9]. In patients with undisturbed lymphatic
drainage, para-aortic radiation therapy alone has been
shown to be adequate but with slightly higher rate (2%
vs 0%) in the iliac region as compared to the traditional
hockey stick field. A RCT conducted by MRC comparing
20 Gy to 30 Gy paraaortic radiation therapy in stage I
seminoma showed equivalence of both doses in terms
of recurrence rate. Most relapses after radiation therapy
are outside the radiation field. If previous scrotal surgery,
field of radiation therapy to be extended to include
ipsilateral inguinal nodes (dog-leg radiotherapy). [Level I]
Presently, there is no evidence suggest the necessity of
prophylactic mediastinal radiation therapy in patients with
stage I seminoma.
The main disadvantage of radiation therapy is the
gastrointestinal toxicity and risk of second malignancy
in the radiated field.
Adjuvant chemotherapy: A single dose of carboplatin
has also been recommended as an alternative to
radiotherapy or surveillance in patients with stage I
seminoma. In the MRC TE 19 study, which compared
one cycle of carboplatin (AUC 7) to adjuvant radiotherapy,
there was no significant difference in the recurrence rate,
time to recurrence and survival rate after a median follow
up of 4 years[6][Level 1]. Updated results of the same
study were reported in ASCO 2008 annual meeting which
confirmed non inferiority of single agent carboplatin AUC
7 as compared to radiotherapy with reduced risk of 2nd
GCT in carboplatin arm with lesser toxicity.[7] [Level I].
Two courses of adjuvant carboplatin seem to reduce the
relapse rate further to 1-3% but long term results of these
studies are awaited.
Surveillance: This option is considered in select cases
of T1, T2 disease with committed for long-term follow up
[Level II]. It is a recommended option for horse shoe
kidney, patients suffering from inflammatory bowel
disease and prior abdominal radiation. [Level I]
Surveillance policy has been evaluated in several
randomized studies. A meta-analysis of 4 studies showed
an actuarial 5 years relapse free rate of 82.3%. A large
single institutional study from Princess Margaret Hospital,
Canada with more than 1500 patients reported an overall
relapse rate of 16.8%, with most relapses in the
retroperitoneum. The overall cancer specific survival with
surveillance reported from major centres is 97-100%.
The main drawback of surveillance strategy is the need
for more intensive follow up with repeated imaging
studies for a prolonged period of time since about 20%
of relapses in seminoma occur beyond 4 years after
orchidectomy. This translates into cost escalation and
need for strict compliance to surveillance schedule.
Risk based approach: Patients with stage I seminoma
may be divided into high and low risk groups depending
on the presence or absence of poor prognostic factors
eg tumour size >4 cm and rete testis invasion. Low risk
patients (risk of relapse 12%) may be kept on surveillance
while the high risk patients (risk of relapse 32%) may be
treated with radiation therapy or chemotherapy.
Post-treatment follow up: Strict follow up is mandatory.
For patients not undergoing radiation therapy, more
intense follow up is required .This is done with history,
physical examination, serial tumor markers every 3-4
months for first 3 years, 6 months for next 3 years and
annually thereafter. CT scan abdomen + pelvis is
recommended, for first 3 years for patients who had
received RT whereas in patients on surveillance, it is
required at every visit. X ray chest is advised every
alternate visit for upto 10 years for those who are under
surveillance or have received single agent carboplatin.
Treatment of metastatic seminoma:
Low volume metastatic disease (II A/B)
Treatment options:
Radical Radiation Therapy
Radical Radiation Therapy : Radical radiation therapy
to Para-aortic and ipsilateral pelvic region (dog-leg) to a
dose of 30-40 Gy @1.5-1.8 Gy/# in 3-4 weeks with
reducing fields, with a boost to the involved site [10-11].
The role of prophylactic mediastinal irradiation is not
clear. [Level I]. This gives excellent relapse free survival
of 95% and 89% at 5 years and most relapses can be
successfully salvaged with chemotherapy.
Chemotherapy: In patients of stage IIB seminoma not
willing for radiation therapy or in those where it is
contraindicated, 3 cycles of BEP or 4 cycles of cisplatin
and etoposide [EP] is an alternative. (See appendix II)
Advanced metastatic seminoma: Stage IIC-III:
This group can be divided into good risk or intermediate
risk depending upon the absence or presence of non
pulmonary visceral metastases respectively.
For good risk seminomas, 3 cycles of bleomycin,
etoposide and cisplatin (BEP) regimen or 4 cycles of EP
are recommended. Four cycles of BEP should be given
for the patients with intermediate risk group. [12-15]
[Level I].
Following chemotherapy, tumor markers and imaging
studies are repeated to assess the response. Patients
are then stratified according to the presence or absence
of mass and the status of tumor markers. If complete
response, no further treatment required. If there is a
residual mass, a PET-CT scan is recommended to
assess the viability of the tumor [16]. To reduce false
positive rates, PET is typically done after 6 weeks of
chemotherapy. No further treatment is recommended in
PET negative patients; however, these patients need to
be observed closely. If the PET scan is positive, biopsy
is recommended followed by surgical excision or
radiotherapy to a dose of 30 – 40 Gy @1.8 Gy / # in 3-4
weeks [17-18].[Level II].
If the PET scan is not available, the evaluation should
be done by CT scan. Residual mass of the size 3cm or
more can be treated by surgery [Category 2B] or radiation
[Level II].Surgery in metastatic seminoma postchemotherapy is extremely difficult and morbid due to
extensive fibrosis in the treated area. Patients with mass
less than 3 cm should be observed. (See appendix III)
Management of stage INSGCT:
If untreated, 30% of stage I NSGCT will relapse.
Following high orchiectomy, the treatment options
Surveillance: Based on availability of accurate tumour
markers for monitoring of disease3 status and effective
chemotherapy for salvage of relapse, surveillance
protocols have been studied in stage I NSGCT. The
relapse rates are approximately 30% - 80% of them
occurring in the first year, 12% in the second, 6% in the
third and 1% each in the fourth and the fifth year. About
60% of the relapses are in the retroperitoneum. Although
has the potential to avoid major surgery with its morbidity,
it requires a very intensive follow up with tumour markers,
X-ray chest and CT scan abdomen at very frequent
intervals. Thus it requires excellent compliance from the
patients which may not be possible in India. Besides,
there is an anxiety about the nearly 30% chance of
relapse, some of which may be advanced and
unsalvageable if the patient does not comply with the
surveillance schedule.
Nerve sparing retroperitoneal lymph node
dissection: This is usually the preferred option since it
identifies the high risk patients with occult retroperitoneal
lymph node metastases (approximately 30%) who will
need chemotherapy, has a very low (<2%) chance of
relapse in the retroperitoneum and a very high cure rate.
It preserves antegrade ejaculation in more than 90% of
patients. Extensive follow up with CT scan as in
surveillance is not mandatory which brings down the cost
and patient anxiety is allayed. [Level I] (See appendix
IV). A laparoscopic RPLND may become a suitable
alternative to open nerve sparing RPLND in future but
cannot be presently recommended as the standard of
Chemotherapy: Several studies using 2 course of BEP
chemotherapy as the primary treatment for high risk
stage I NSGCT have reported a relapse rate of only 2.7%
at a median follow up of 8 years, with very little longterm toxicity and with little adverse impact on fertility or
sexual activity. However, the concern about primary
chemotherapy is the emergence of chemoresistant
relapse and possibility of slow growing retroperitoneal
teratomas necessitating intensive monitoring of
retroperitoneum in the follow up period. This has
considerable cost implications.
Risk based treatment: Various prognostic factors in the
primary affecting risk of relapse have been identified viz.
presence of vascular invasion, predominance of
embryonal carcinoma, absence of yolk sac elements or
>T2 disease. Patients with no risk factors may be offered
surveillance while those with high risk factors may be
offered nerve sparing RPLND or chemotherapy. Patients
with vascular invasion should be offered chemotherapy.
Management of clinical stage I with persistently
elevated serum tumour markers (CS1S):
These patients should be followed up with serial serum
tumour markers if the marker levels are falling at the
expected rate as per their half life values. If the marker
levels remain persistently high or increase during follow
up, the patient certainly has residual disease. Ultrasound
examination of the contralateral testis must be done to
rule out another primary lesion there. The treatment of
these patients is controversial – they may be treated with
RPLND or primary chemotherapy. Nearly 87% patients
undergoing RPLND for CS1S disease have metastatic
retroperitoneal nodes. Patients with associated vascular
invasion may be treated with 4 cycles of EP or 3 cycles
of BEP. [19-20]
Management of low volume metastatic NSGCT
(II A/B)
This group of patients is divided as per tumour marker
levels. Patients with persistent elevation of tumour marker
levels are treated with chemotherapy with 3-4 cycles of
BEP followed by open nerve sparing RPLND for residual
mass, if any. [Level I] Patients not willing for
chemotherapy may be given the option of primary
RPLND and 2 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy in case
of metastatic disease. [Level II] The cure rates with either
approach are about 98% but the spectrum of toxicity is
Patients with negative tumour markers probably have
metastatic differentiated teratoma or pure embryonal
carcinoma and may be treated with either open nerve
sparing RPLND or surveillance.
Management of advanced metastatic NSGCT (Stage
Good risk (IIC and IIIA): Primary chemotherapy with 3
cycles of BEP or 4 cycles of EP is recommended [2122]. [Level I]This group can be expected to have more
than 90% chance of responding to chemotherapy [23]
and more than 85% will be long term survivors. Hence
the focus in this subset is to reduce toxicity. [Level II].
For the patients in the intermediate prognosis group (IIB),
the cure rate is approximately 80% with chemotherapy
with 4 cycles of BEP. [Level I]
For patients in poor prognosis group (IIIC), 4 cycles of
BEP are recommended although the durable responses
are seen in less than half the patients and 5 year
progression free survival is only 45-50%. [Level I].
For patients with brain metastases, primary
chemotherapy and consolidation radiotherapy is the
standard of care. Surgical intervention is recommended
in selected cases with solitary residual lesions depending
on the status of the systemic relapse, site of metastasis
and histology of the primary tumour. Certain sites of
metastasis confer a distinct disadvantage in patients with
NSGCT. These include liver, bone and brain. Metastasis
to any of these sites reduces the 3-year OS rates
In patients of extragonadal GCTs, as in mediastinal GCT,
which are considered as high risk, treatment essentially
consists of 4 cycles of BEP chemotherapy followed by
the excision of residual disease.
Post chemotherapy management:
Response to primary chemotherapy is assessed 2-3
weeks after completion of the planned course of
chemotherapy. Clinical evaluation, CT scan of the
abdomen + pelvis, X-ray or CT scan of chest and serum
biomarkers estimation are advised for evaluation of
response. In patients with complete response (clinical,
radiological and serological), surgery is not
recommended and patients are kept under surveillance.
In patients with residual masses, decision regarding
adjuvant surgery is based on whether the tumor markers
remain elevated or have normalized. In patients with
normal post-chemotherapy markers and any residual
mass > 1 cm in size, complete surgical resection is
warranted to document the histology of the residual mass
and for disease control. All areas of residual disease need
to be resected, since histology may be divergent at
different metastatic sites. Complete resections should
be done aggressively for retroperitoneal and pulmonary
masses. If technically feasible, nerve sparing RPLND
should be done. If necrotic tissue or teratoma is
encountered, then no further therapy is warranted.
In the 15 % of patients who have viable residual disease,
2 cycles of chemotherapy as EP or VeIP [vinblastine,
ifosfamide and cisplatin] or TIP [paclitaxel, ifosfamide
and cisplatin] are reecommended. [Level III] (See
appendix II).
Systemic salvage treatment for relapsed or refractory
disease:Salvage chemotherapy:
Standard salvage chemotherapy regimen after first line
chemotherapy consists of either 4 cycles of VeIP or 4
cycles of TIP. Conventionally dosed salvage regimens
may achieve long term remission in 15-40% of patients.
Increasing the number of chemotherapy agents does
not improve the response rates but increases toxicity.
The prognostic indicators of response to salvage therapy
are location and histology of the primary tumour,
response to first line treatment, duration of remission
and levels of tumour markers at relapse.
In good risk patients, a RCT failed to show advantage of
high dose salvage regimen over the conventionally dosed
one and hence the latter is recommended in these
patients. Patients treated with VeIP regimen will have
50% CR rate and 25% durable CR rate. Those treated
with TIP regimen have 70 % CR rates and 63 % durable
CR rates. [25] [Level III]
In poor risk patients, early intensification of dose followed
by autologous stem cell transplantation is the preferred
option. [Level II] Testicular tumors are potentially curable
by means of high-dose chemotherapy plus hematopoietic
stem-cell rescue, even when this regimen is used as
third-line or later therapy or in patients with platinumrefractory disease. [26]
Another second line palliative therapy for intensively
pretreated cisplatin resistant or refractory germ cell tumor
is the use of GEMOX (gemcitabine and oxaliplatin).[2728] . This combination is safe and can offer long term
survival in select group of patients. [Level II]. Rarely,
patient with metastatic disease with elevated tumor
marker levels at a solitary site can be offered surgical
resection with curative intent.[29]
Residual tumours after salvage chemotherapy should
be resected after normalization or plateuing of markers.
In case the markers are elevated during the course of
salvage chemotherapy, the prognosis is extremely poor
and resection of residual disease (desperation surgery)
should be considered if complete resection of all tumour
seems feasible. With this approach, about 25% long term
survivals may be achieved.
Appendix I.
Sperm Banking
In patients with testicular cancer, overall condition of the
patient and the sperm quality may be poor even before
start of therapy. Many patients have to start
chemotherapy immediately or soon enough to limit the
number of ejaculates to one or two samples. Even in
these instances, it is reasonable to make every effort to
bank sperm since recent progress in andrology
laboratories and the use of assisted reproductive
techniques, particularly the technique of intracytoplasmic
sperm injection (ICSI) allows the successful freezing and
future use of a very limited amount of sperm. Oncologists
should make every effort to discuss sperm banking with
appropriate patients.
Appendix II: Chemotherapy regimens:
BEP (1st line) Repeat cycle every 21 days
Bleomycin: 30 U IV on days 2, 9, and 16
Etoposide: 100 mg/m2 IV on days 1–5
Cisplatin: 20 mg/m2 IV on days 1–5
EP (1st line) Repeat cycle every 21 days
Etoposide: 100 mg/m2 IV on days 1–5
Cisplatin: 20 mg/m2 IV on days 1–5
VeIP (salvage regimen) Repeat cycle every 21 days
Vinblastine: 0.11 mg/kg IV on days 1 and 2
Ifosfamide: 1,200 mg/m2 IV on days 1–5
Cisplatin: 20 mg/m2 IV on days 1–5
Mesna: 400 mg/m2 IV, given 15 minutes before first
ifosfamide dose, then 1,200 mg/m2/day IV continuous
infusion for 5 days
VIP (salvage regimen) Repeat cycle every 21 days
Etoposide (VP-16): 75 mg/m2 IV on days 1–5
Ifosfamide: 1,200 mg/m2 IV on days 1–5
Cisplatin: 20 mg/m2 IV on days 1–5
Mesna: 400 mg/m2 IV, given 15 minutes before first
ifosfamide dose, then 1,200 mg/m2/day IV continuous
infusion for 5 days
TIP regimen (Salvage regimen)
Repeat cycle every 21 days
Paclitaxel 250mg /m2 24 hour infusion Day 1
Ifosfamide 1500 mg/m2 Day 2 to day 5
Mesna 500 mg/m2 just before Ifosfamide and at 4 and 8
hours Day2 to day 5.
Cisplatin 25 mg/m2 Day2 to day 5
Appendix III: Follow up
History, physical examination and chest X ray
AFP,  HCG and LDH
Every 2 months for 1 year.
Every 3 months for 2nd year.
Every 4 months for 3rd year.
Every 6 months for 4th year.
Abdominopelvic CT 4 months post surgery, and
subsequently as and when indicated.
IA and IB tumors
Months between visits,
tumor markers, and
chest X rays
Months between
abdominopelvic CT
Surveillance after complete response to RPLND and
Months between visits,
tumor markers, and
chest X rays
Months between
abdominopelvic CT
As clinically
Appendix IV: Retroperitoneal Lymph Node
Dissection (RPLND)
RPLND provides critical staging information and must
always be performed with a curative intent. Adequate
exposure for RPLND can be achieved through either a
thoracoabdominal or a transabdominal approach. The
bilateral infrahilar RPLND template has replaced the
suprahilar dissection and is the standard against which
therapeutic alternatives are judged. (See Figure 1). A
bilateral infrahilar RPLND includes the precaval,
retrocaval, paracaval, interaortocaval, retroaortic,
preaortic, para-aortic, and common iliac lymph nodes
bilaterally. Since the gonadal vessel itself or the adjacent
tissue may harbor disease, the ipsilateral gonadal vein
and surrounding fibroadipose tissue from its insertion to
the internal ring must be completely excised to minimize
the possibility of a late paracolic recurrence.The
procedure is associated with a mortality rate of less than
1%, and major complications such as hemorrhage,
ureteral injury, bowel obstruction, pulmonary embolus,
and wound dehiscence are rare. Minor complications
include lymphocele, atelectasis, wound infection, and
prolonged ileus.
Modified RPLND templates maximize rates of ejaculation
by limiting dissection in areas thought to be at reduced
risk of metastatic spread based on surgical mapping
studies. These templates do not identify specific nerve
fibers, but should include resection of all interaortocaval
and ipsilateral lymph nodes between the level of the renal
vessels and the bifurcation of the common iliac artery.
This approach minimizes contralateral dissection,
thereby reducing trauma to the hypogastric plexus and
contralateral postganglionic sympathetic fibers.
Preservation of antegrade ejaculation with this approach
ranges from 50% to 80%.
Nerve-sparing techniques can be used in the primary or
postchemotherapy setting. In a nerve-sparing RPLND,
both sympathetic chains, the postganglionic sympathetic
fibers, and hypogastric plexus are prospectively
identified, dissected, and preserved. With prospective
nerve-sparing techniques, antegrade ejaculation is
preserved in over 95% of all patients. Therefore, the
original value of templates to prevent loss of ejaculatory
function is diminished. Whatever the approach, margins
of resection should not be compromised in an attempt
to preserve ejaculation.
Standard modified bilateral retroperitoneal
lymph node dissection.
Photograph from Devita Text Book of Cancer 2008.
Testicular Germs Cell Tumors
Albers P, Bender H, Positron emission
tomography in the clinical staging of patients
with Stage I and II testicular germ cell
tumors.Urology. 1999 Apr; 53(4):808-11.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of
fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET)
compared with computed tomography (CT) staging in
patients with Stage I and II testicular germ cell tumors
(GCTs). METHODS: From January 1995 to July 1997,
in 37 patients with clinical Stage (CS) I (n = 25) and CS
II (n = 12) GCT (24 nonseminomas, 13 seminomas),
PET and CT were compared in the initial staging. After
PET, the patients with nonseminomatous GCT were
staged surgically by retroperitoneal lymph node
dissection and the patients with seminomatous GCT were
followed up clinically. RESULTS: Correct staging by PET
was achieved in 34 of 37 patients compared with correct
CT staging in 29 of 37 patients. Of 10 metastatic lesions,
7 and 4 were detected by PET and CT, respectively. PET
did not show false-positive signals. PET was unable to
detect vital cancer with a maximal diameter less than
0.5 cm or teratoma at any size. CONCLUSIONS: PET
was useful for detecting viable tumor in lesions that are
visible on CT scan and, thus, it may omit false-positive
CS II lesions. However, PET was not able to identify
mature teratoma. In this study, PET did not improve the
staging in patients with CS I tumor.
Spermon JR, De Geus-Oei LF, The role of
(18)fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission
tomography in initial staging and re-staging
after chemotherapy for testicular germ cell
tumours. BJU Int. 2002 Apr;89(6):549-56.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of 18fluoro-2deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET)
in the initial staging of clinical stage I and II
nonseminomatous germ cell tumours (NSGCTs) and in
re-staging (non)seminomatous GCTs after
studies were undertaken in 50 patients. FDG uptake was
interpreted visually and when possible the standardized
uptake value was determined. A FDG-PET scan was
taken in five patients with clinical stage I and in seven
with stage II NSGCT. The scans were validated by
histology. Stage I patients underwent a retroperitoneal
lymph node dissection because of vascular invasion in
the primary tumour. Thirty-eight scans were taken after
completing chemotherapy (28 NSGCTs and 10
seminomatous GCTs), and validated by histology or
clinical follow-up. RESULTS: In stage I NSGCT, FDGPET staging was equivalent to computed tomography
(CT) staging. One small lesion, consisting of mature
teratoma, was missed by both FDG-PET and CT. In stage
II NSGCT, FDG-PET missed two lesions (mature
teratoma and retroperitoneal mass with a small
component of embryonal cell carcinoma) whereas CT
correctly classified all. In 20 of 28 patients with NSGCT,
histology was obtained after chemotherapy. In one of
three patients with viable tumorous residual mass the
FDG-PET scan was clearly positive; in four of 12 with
mature teratoma and inflammation components
retroperitoneally, the FDG-PET was also positive. In
contrast, eight patients with solitary mature teratoma had
a negative PET result. In four of five patients with necrosis
after chemotherapy the PET result was correctly
negative. All eight patients on surveillance had a negative
PET scan and were free of disease at median (range) of
14 (8-18) months. Interestingly, of the 12 patients with a
correct negative PET result, 11 had no mature teratoma
in their primary tumour. Nine of 10 patients with SGCT
were correctly staged. Two FDG-PET studies showed
increased uptake; in one, a viable seminomatous mass
was found and in the other there was inflammation in
the residual mass. In all other patients the FDG-PET
scan correctly predicted absence of viability in the
residual mass. CONCLUSIONS: In primary staging,
FDG-PET has no benefit over CT. In re-staging, a
negative FDG-PET result predicts fibrotic residual mass
in seminomatous GCT. Moreover, it could be useful to
predict fibrotic residual mass in NSGCT in those patients
with no teratoma component in their primary tumour.
Krege S, Beyer J, Souchon R,Eur Urol.
European consensus conference on diagnosis
and treatment of germ cell cancer: a report of
the second meeting of the European Germ Cell
Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): part I.
2008 Mar;53(3):478-96.
OBJECTIVES: The first consensus report presented by
the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group
(EGCCCG) in the year 2004 has found widespread
approval by many colleagues throughout the world. In
November 2006, the group met a second time under the
auspices of the Department of Urology of the Amsterdam
Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
METHODS: Medical oncologists, urological surgeons,
radiation oncologists as well as pathologists from several
European countries reviewed and discussed the data
that had emerged since the 2002 conference, and
incorporated the new data into updated and revised
guidelines. As for the first meeting, the methodology of
evidence-based medicine (EBM) was applied. The
results of the discussion were compiled by the writing
committee. All participants have agreed to this final
update. RESULTS: The first part of the consensus paper
describes the clinical presentation of the primary tumor,
its treatment, the importance and treatment of testicular
intraepithelial neoplasia (TIN), histological classification,
staging and prognostic factors, and treatment of stage I
seminoma and non-seminoma. CONCLUSIONS:
Whereas the vast majority of the recommendations made
in 2004 remain valid 3 yr later, refinements in the
treatment of early- and advanced-stage testicular cancer
have emerged from clinical trials. Despite technical
improvements, expert clinical skills will continue to be
one of the major determinants for the prognosis of
patients with germ cell cancer. In addition, the particular
needs of testicular cancer survivors have been
Padraig Warde, Lena Specht. Prognostic
Factors for Relapse in Stage I Seminomas
Managed by Surveillance: A Pooled Analysis: J
Clin Oncol 2002; 20:4448-4452.
Purpose: Several management options are available to
patients with stage I seminoma, including adjuvant
radiotherapy, surveillance, and adjuvant chemotherapy.
We performed a pooled analysis of patients from the
four largest surveillance studies to better delineate
prognostic factors associated with disease progression.
Patients and Methods : Individual patient data were
obtained from each center (Princess Margaret Hospital,
Danish Testicular Cancer Study Group, Royal Marsden
Hospital, and Royal London Hospital) for 638 patients.
Tumor characteristics (size, histologic subtype, invasion
of rete testis, and tumor invasion into small vessels [SVI])
as well as age at diagnosis were analyzed for prognostic
importance for relapse. Results: With a median followup of 7.0 years (range, 0.02 to 17.5 years), 121 relapses
were observed for an actuarial 5-year relapse-free rate
(RFR) of 82.3%. On univariate analysis, tumor size (RFR:
< 4 cm, 87%; > 4 cm, 76%; P_.003), rete testis invasion
(RFR: 86% [absent] v 77% [present], P_.003), and the
presence of SVI (RFR: 86% [absent] v 77% [present],
P_.038) were predictive of relapse. On multivariate
analysis, tumor size (< 4 cmv > 4 cm, hazard ratio 2.0;
95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 3.2) and invasion of
the rete testis (hazard ratio 1.7; 95% CI,1.1 to 2.6)
remained as important predictors for relapse. Conclusion:
We have identified size of primary tumor and rete testis
invasion as important prognostic factors for relapse in
patients with stage I seminoma managed with
surveillance. This information will allow patients and
clinicians to choose management based on a more
accurate assessment of an individual patient’s risk of
relapse. In addition, it will allow clinicians to tailor followup protocols based on risk of occult disease.
Jones WG, Fossa SD. Randomized trial of 30
versus 20 Gy in the adjuvant treatment of stage
I Testicular Seminoma: a report on Medical
Research Council Trial TE18, European
Organisation for the Research and Treatment
of Cancer Trial 30942 (ISRCTN18525328). J Clin
Oncol. 2005 Feb 20; 23(6):1200-8.
PURPOSE: To assess the possibility of reducing
radiotherapy doses without compromising efficacy in the
management of patients with stage I seminoma.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly
assigned 20 Gy/10 fractions over 2 weeks or 30 Gy/15
fractions during 3 weeks after orchidectomy. They
completed a symptom diary card during treatment and
quality-of-life forms pre- and post-treatment. The trial was
powered to exclude absolute differences in 2-year
relapse rates of 3% to 4% (alpha = .05 [one sided]; 90%
RESULTS: From 1995 to 1998, 625 patients were
randomly assigned to treatment. Four weeks after
starting radiotherapy, significantly more patients receiving
30 Gy reported moderate or severe lethargy (20% v 5%)
and an inability to carry out their normal work (46% v
28%). However, by 12 weeks, levels in both groups were
similar. With a median follow-up of 61 months, 10 and
11 relapses, respectively, have been reported in the 30and 20-Gy groups (hazard ratio, 1.11; 90% CI, 0.54 to
2.28). The absolute difference in 2-year relapse rates is
0.7%; the lower 90% confidence limit is 2.9%. Only one
patient has died from seminoma (allocated to the 20-Gy
treatment group).
CONCLUSION: Treatment with 20 Gy in 10 fractions is
unlikely to produce relapse rates more than 3% higher
than for standard 30 Gy radiation therapy, and data on
an additional 469 patients randomly assigned in a
subsequent trial support and strengthen these results.
Reductions in morbidity enable patients to return to work
more rapidly. Prolonged follow-up is required before any
inference can be made about any impact of allocated
treatment on new primary cancer diagnoses.
Oliver RT, Mason MD. Radiotherapy versus
single-dose carboplatin in adjuvant treatment
of stage I seminoma: a randomized trial, MRC
TE19 collaborators and the EORTC 30982
collaborators. Lancet. 2005 Jul 23-29;
BACKGROUND: Adjuvant radiotherapy is effective
treatment for stage I seminoma, but is associated with a
risk of late non-germ-cell cancer and cardiovascular
events. After good results in initial studies with one
injection of carboplatin, we undertook a large randomised
trial to compare the approaches of radiotherapy with
chemotherapy in seminoma treatment.
METHODS: Between 1996 and 2001, 1477 patients from
70 hospitals in 14 countries were randomly assigned to
receive radiotherapy (para-aortic strip or dog-leg field;
n=904) or one injection of carboplatin (n=573; dose based
on the formula 7x[glomerular filtration rate+25] mg), at
two trial centres in the UK and Belgium. The primary
outcome measure was the relapse-free rate, with the
trial powered to exclude absolute differences in 2-year
rates of more than 3%. Analysis was by intention to treat
and per protocol. This trial has been assigned the
International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial
Number ISRCTN27163214.
FINDINGS: 885 and 560 patients received radiotherapy
and carboplatin, respectively. With a median follow-up
of 4 years (IQR 3.0-4.9), relapse-free survival rates for
radiotherapy and carboplatin were similar (96.7% [95%
CI 95.3-97.7] vs 97.7% [96.0-98.6] at 2 years; 95.9%
[94.4-97.1] vs 94.8% [92.5-96.4] at 3 years, respectively;
hazard ratio 1.28 [90% CI 0.85-1.93], p=0.32). At 2 years’
follow-up, the absolute differences in relapse-free rates
(radiotherapy-chemotherapy) were -1.0% (90% CI -2.5
to 0.5) by direct comparison of proportions, and 0.9% (0.5 to 3.0) by a hazard-ratio-based approach. Patients
given carboplatin were less lethargic and less likely to
take time off work than those given radiotherapy. New,
second primary testicular germ-cell tumours were
reported in ten patients allocated irradiation (all after paraaortic strip field) and two allocated carboplatin (5-year
event rate 1.96% [95% CI 1.0-3.8] vs 0.54% [0.1-2.1],
p=0.04). One seminoma-related death occurred after
radiotherapy and none after carboplatin.
INTERPRETATION: This trial has shown the noninferiority of carboplatin to radiotherapy in the treatment
of stage I seminoma. Although the absence of diseaserelated deaths and preliminary data indicating fewer
second primary testicular germ-cell tumours favour
carboplatin use, these findings need to be confirmed
beyond 4 years’ follow-up.
R. T. Oliver, G. M. Mead Radiotherapy versus
carboplatin for stage I seminoma: Updated
analysis of the MRC/EORTC randomized trial
(ISRCTN27163214). J Ciln Oncol 2005; 23:12001208.
Background: At ASCO 2004 we reported a randomised
trial (MRC TE19, EORTC 30982) comparing 1 course
carboplatin (C) at AUCx7 with adjuvant radiotherapy (RT)
for stage I seminoma. With median follow-up (FU) of 4
yrs, C was shown to be non-inferior for relapse free rate
(1o outcome) and there was a reduction in contralateral
testicular gem cell cancers (GCT). Because late relapses
and 2nd GCT can occur beyond 5 and 10 yrs we have
continued FU of these patients (pts). We report the
updated results, and further analysis of C dose and
outcome in relation to method of assessing renal function.
Methods: The 1o randomisation was RT versus one
injection of C dosed at 7x (GFR+25) based on EDTA
(n=357) and 90% of this dose if based on creatinine
clearance (n=202). The trial was powered to exclude
absolute differences in the 2 yr relapse-free rates (RFR)
of > 3%. RFR were determined by the Kaplan-Meier
method, and hazard ratios (HR) from the Cox regression
model; HR>1 favors RT. Results: Between 1996-2001,
1,447 pts were randomised in a 3:5 ratio (C=573,
RT=904). Median FU is now 6.5 yrs with documented
minimum 5 yr FU on 1,148 pts. RFRs at 5 yrs are 95%
(C) and 96% (RT) (HR 1.25, 90% CI 0.83, 1.89); an
increase in 5yr RFR of >3.6% can be excluded with 95%
confidence. Only one death from seminoma (RT) has
been reported. There was a significant difference in the
rate of new GCTs (2 on C vs 15 on RT), giving a HR of
0.22 (95% CI 0.05, 0.95 p=0.03). High levels of pretreatment FSH (>12 iu/L) were associated with an
increased risk of developing a 2nd GCT (HR: 8.57 (95%
CI 1.82 - 40.38)). Analysing the variation in dose received
in the C group, showed that those who received at least
99% of the 7AUC dose (n=347) ignoring GFR method
had 5 yr RFR of 96.1% (95% CI 93.4-97.7) compared
with 92.6% (88.0-95.5) in those who received lower doses
(n=212, HR: 0.51 (0.24 - 1.07) p=0.08)). Analysis of the
available data on pathological risk factors demonstrated
that larger tumours (>4cm) had poorer RFR (HR: 3.68
(1.49 - 9.13)). Conclusions: With prolonged FU this trial
confirms the non-inferiority of single dose C (AUC7) vs
RT in terms of RFR but with a reduced risk of 2nd GCT in
the C arm. The observation on the impact of C dosage,
though not significant in its own right,
John P. Logue, Margaret A. Harris Short course
para-aortic radiation for Stage I Seminoma of
the testis. Int. J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;
Purpose : To determine the outcome in men with Stage
I seminoma treated with low-dose para-aortic radiation.
Methods and Materials: Between January 1988 and
December 2000, 431 men with Stage I seminoma were
treated with para-aortic radiation to a midplane dose of
20 Gy in 8 fractions over 10 days. Results: At a median
follow-up of 62 months, 15 patients (3.5%) had relapsed,
with a median time to relapse of 13 months (range: 9 to
39 months). Nine patients had pelvic nodal relapse; in
addition, 1 patient had para-aortic involvement, and 2
had distant disease. Four had metastatic disease only
(mediastinum 2, lung 2). One patient had scrotal
recurrence, and 1 was treated for progressive rise in
human chorionic gonadotrophin without identifiable
disease. Initial treatment at relapse was chemotherapy
(12), radiation (2), and surgery (1). One patient died from
progressive disease. Thirteen men (3%) have developed
second malignancies, including 7 contralateral testicular
tumors, 5 solid malignancies, and 1 leukemia. The overall
5-year survival was 98%, and the estimated recurrencefree survival at 5 years was 96.3%. On log–rank
univariate analysis, lymphovascular invasion,
involvement of the tunica, and a preoperative human
chorionic gonadotrophin level of greater than 5 were
found to be of prognostic significance for recurrence.
Conclusions : These data support short-duration, limitedfield radiation as an optimal safe and effective protocol
in the management of Stage I seminoma patients.
Fossa S.D., Horwich A. Optimal Planning Target
Volume for Stage I Testicular Seminoma: A
Medical Research Council Randomized Trial, J
Clin Oncol. 1999; 17; 1146 - 1154.
Purpose : To compare relapse rates and toxicity
associated with para-aortic (PA) strip or PA and ipsilateral
iliac lymph node irradiation (dogleg [DL] field) (30 Gy/15
fractions/3 weeks) for stage I testicular seminoma.
Patients and Methods: Between July 1989 and May 1993,
478 men with testicular seminoma stage I (T1 to T3; no
ipsilateral inguinoscrotal operation before orchiectomy)
were randomized (PA, 236 patients; DL, 242 patients).
Results: Median follow-up time is 4.5 years. Eighteen
relapses, nine in each treatment group, have occurred 4
to 35 months after radiotherapy; among these, four were
pelvic relapses, all occurring after PA radiotherapy.
However, the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the
difference in pelvic relapse rates excludes differences
of more than 4%. The 3-year relapse-free survival was
96% (95% CI, 94% to 99%) after PA radiotherapy and
96.6% (95% CI, 94% to 99%) after DL (difference, 0.6%;
95% confidence limits, 23.4%, 14.6%). One patient (PA
field) has died from seminoma. Survival at 3 years was
99.3% for PA and 100% for DL radiotherapy. Acute toxicity
(nausea, vomiting, leukopenia) was less frequent and
less pronounced in patients in the PA arm. Within the
first 18 months of follow-up, the sperm counts were
significantly higher after PA than after DL irradiation.
Conclusion: In patients with testicular seminoma stage I
(T1 to T3) and with undisturbed lymphatic drainage,
adjuvant radiotherapy confined to the PA lymph nodes is
associated with reduced hematologic, gastrointestinal,
and gonadal toxicity, but with a higher risk of pelvic
recurrence, compared with DL radiotherapy. The
recurrence rate is low with either treatment. PA
radiotherapy is recommended as standard treatment in
these patients.
10. Schmidberger H, Bamberg M. Treatment
options in early-stage testicular seminoma.
Review of the literature with initial results of a
prospective multicenter study on radiotherapy
of clinical-stage I, IIA and IIB seminomas.
Strahlenther Onkol. 1995 Mar; 171(3):125 39.
BACKGROUND: Testicular seminoma in the early stages
is treated with orchiectomy and radiotherapy to the
retroperitoneal nodes. Despite the high cure rates of this
treatment, there is an ongoing controversy concerning
the extent of the radiation fields and the radiation doses
to be given in the clinical stages I, IIA and IIB. In the
following literature review, these controversial issues are
discussed. Recent reports emphasize, that the irradiation
of the paraaortic nodes seems to be adequate in stage I
disease. The “wait and see” strategy avoids an
overtreatment in 80% of the patients in stage I. The
application of 1 or 2 cycles of carboplatinum
chemotherapy induced comparable results to adjuvant
radiotherapy. In the stages IIA and IIB radiotherapy to
the paraaortal and ipsilateral iliacal nodes, with a
prescribed dose of 30 Gy and 36 Gy respectively, has
been the standard treatment. The treatment of the upper
contralateral iliacal nodes has been a matter of
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four hundred and ninetyone patients in stage I testicular seminoma received
adjuvant paraaortic irradiation with a total dose of 26 Gy.
Forty-one patients in stage IIA, and 19 patients in stage
IIB received 30 Gy or 36 Gy respectively to the paraaortic
and ipsilateral iliacal nodes.
RESULTS : Paraaortic radiotherapy in stage I disease
was associated with low acute side effects and a diseasefree survival in 97.1% of the patients after a median
observation of 13 months. In stage IIA the disease-free
survival was 100%, in stage IIB 94.7%.
CONCLUSIONS : The literature review and preliminary
results of the reported ongoing trial are indicating that
paraaortic irradiation in stage I and paraaortic with
ipsilateral iliacal irradiation in stages IIA and IIB seem to
be a sufficient treatment in early stage testicular
seminoma with low treatment associated morbidity.
11. P Warde, M Gospodarowicz. Management of
stage II seminoma : J Clin Oncol. 1998; 16:290294.
PURPOSE : To assess the results of treatment, patterns
of failure, and prognostic factors for relapse in a
contemporary cohort of patients with stage II seminoma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS : From January 1981 and
December 1993, 99 patients (median age, 35 years) with
stage II seminoma (IIA, 41; IIB, 28; IIC, 24; IID, six) were
managed at our institution. Eighty were treated with
radiation therapy (RT) and 19 with chemotherapy (ChT).
RESULTS : With a median follow-up of 6.7 years, the
five-year overall actuarial survival was 94%, the 5-year
cause-specific survival was 94%, and the 5-year relapsefree rate was 83%. Sixteen (20%) of the 80 patients
treated with RT relapsed (median time to relapse, 9
months). Relapse occurred outside the irradiated area
in all but two patients. Distant relapse sites included the
supraclavicular fossa, bone (four patients, three with
spinal cord compression), and lung/mediastinum. All 19
patients treated primarily with ChT achieved disease
control and none has relapsed. The relapse rate at 5
years for patients with stage IIA to IIB was 11% (seven
of 64), and 56% (nine of 16) for those with stage IIC to
IID disease (P<.0001). No patient with IIC or IID disease
treated with ChT relapsed as compared with 56% of
patients treated with RT (0 of 14 v nine of 16, P=.002).
CONCLUSION : Radiation therapy is highly effective in
patients with stage IIA or IIB seminoma (89% were
relapse free). In stage IIC or IID disease, although local
control with RT is excellent, a 50% risk of distant relapse
is unacceptable, and not all patients who relapse can be
salvaged. Chemotherapy should clearly be the primary
treatment in patients with stage IIC or IID seminoma.
12. de Wit R, Roberts JT, Wilkinson PM.
Equivalence of three or four cycles of
bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin
chemotherapy and of a 3- or 5-day schedule in
good-prognosis germ cell cancer: a randomized
study of the European Organization for
Research and Treatment of Cancer
Genitourinary Tract Cancer Cooperative Group
and the Medical Research Council. J Clin Oncol.
2001 Mar 15; 19(6):1629-40.
PURPOSE: To test the equivalence of three versus four
cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) and
of the 5-day schedule versus 3 days per cycle in goodprognosis germ cell cancer.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was designed
as a 2 x 2 factorial trial. The aim was to rule out a 5%
decrease in the 2-year progression-free survival (PFS)
rate. The study included the assessment of patient quality
of life. A cycle of BEP consisted of etoposide 500 mg/
m(2), administered at either 100 mg/m(2) days 1 through
5 or 165 mg/m(2) days 1 through 3, cisplatin 100 mg/
m(2), administered at either 20 mg/m(2) days 1 through
5 or 50 mg/m(2) days 1 and 2. Bleomycin 30 mg was
administered on days 1, 8, and 15 during cycles 1 through
3. The randomization procedure allowed some
investigators to participate only in the comparison of three
versus four cycles.
RESULTS: From March 1995 until April 1998, 812
patients were randomly assigned to receive three or four
cycles: of these, 681 were also randomly assigned to
the 5-day or the 3-day schedule. Histology, marker
values, and disease extent are well balanced in the
treatment arms of the two comparisons. The projected
2-year PFS is 90.4% on three cycles and 89.4% on four
cycles. The difference in PFS between three and four
cycles is -1.0% (80% confidence limit [CL], -3.8%,
+1.8%). Equivalence for three versus four cycles is
claimed because both the upper and lower bounds of
the 80% CL are less than 5%. In the 5- versus 3-day
comparison, the projected 2-year PFS is 88.8% and
89.7%, respectively (difference, -0.9%, (80% CL, -4.1%,
+2.2%). Hence, equivalence is claimed in this
comparison also. Frequencies of hematologic and
nonhematologic toxicities were essentially similar. Quality
of life was maintained better in patients receiving three
cycles; no differences were detected between 3 and 5
days of treatment.
CONCLUSION: We conclude that three cycles of BEP,
with etoposide at 500 mg/m(2), is sufficient therapy in
good-prognosis germ cell cancer and that the
administration of the chemotherapy in 3 days has no
detrimental effect on the effectiveness of the BEP
Loehrer PJ Sr, Johnson D Importance of
bleomycin in favorable-prognosis disseminated
germ cell tumors: an Eastern Cooperative
Oncology Group trial: J Clin Oncol. 1995
PURPOSE: This prospective, randomized trial was
designed to determine if three cycles of cisplatin plus
etoposide (PVP16) can produce therapeutic results
comparable to three cycles of cisplatin, etoposide, and
bleomycin (PVP16B) in patients with disseminated germ
cell tumors.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred seventy-eight
patients with minimal- or moderate-stage disease
(Indiana staging system) were randomized to receive
cisplatin (20 mg/m2 on days 1 to 5) plus etoposide (100
mg/m2 on days 1 to 5) with or without weekly bleomycin
(30 IU/wk for 9 consecutive weeks). Following three
cycles of chemotherapy over 9 weeks, patients with
residual radiographic disease underwent surgical
resection. If persistent carcinoma was noted, two
additional 3-week courses of chemotherapy were
RESULTS: One hundred seventy-one patients were fully
assessable for response and survival. The two treatment
groups were similar with respect to patient
characteristics. The toxicities were comparable between
the two arms. No clinically significant incidence of
pulmonary toxicity occurred with PVP16B. Overall, 81 of
86 patients (94%) who received PVP16B and 75 of 85
patients (88%) who received PVP16 achieved a diseasefree status with chemotherapy and/or surgery. However,
greater numbers of treatment failures, including
persistent carcinoma in postchemotherapy resected
residual disease and relapses from complete remission,
occurred on the arm without bleomycin (overall adverse
outcome, P = .004). The failure-free (86% v 69%; P =
.01) and overall survival (95% v 86%; P = .01) rates were
inferior on the PVP16 arm.
CONCLUSION: Bleomycin is an essential component
of PVP16B therapy in patients who receive three cycles
of treatment for minimal- or moderate-stage
disseminated germ cell tumors.
14. Bajorin DF, Sarosdy MF. Randomized trial of
etoposide and cisplatin versus etoposide and
carboplatin in patients with good-risk germ cell
tumors: a multiinstitutional study. J Clin Oncol.
1993 Apr; 11(4):598-606.
PURPOSE: This multicenter, randomized phase III
clinical trial evaluated the efficacy of etoposide plus
carboplatin (EC) versus etoposide plus cisplatin (EP) in
good-risk germ cell tumor (GCT) patients.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between October 1986 and
December 1990, 270 patients with good-risk GCTs were
randomized to receive four cycles of either EP or EC.
The etoposide dose in all patients was 100 mg/m2 on
days 1 through 5. EP patients received cisplatin at 20
mg/m2 on days 1 through 5 and therapy was recycled at
21-day intervals. For EC patients, the carboplatin dose
was 500 mg/m2 on day 1 of each cycle and the EC
recycling interval was 28 days.
RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-five patients were
assessable: 131 patients treated with EC and 134 treated
with EP. One hundred fifteen of 131 assessable patients
(88%) treated with EC achieved a complete response
(CR) versus 121 of 134 patients (90%) treated with EP
(P = .32). Sixteen patients (12%) treated with EC relapsed
from CR versus four patients (3%) treated with EP.
Therefore, 32 patients (24%) who received carboplatin
experienced an event (incomplete response [IR] or
relapse) compared with 17 of 134 patients (13%) who
received cisplatin (P = .02). At a median follow-up of
22.4 months, event-free and relapse-free survival were
inferior for patients treated with EC (P = .02 and P =
.005, respectively). No difference in overall survival was
evident (P = .52).
CONCLUSION: Two-drug therapy with EC using this
dose and schedule was inferior to therapy with EP.
Cisplatin remains as the standard platinum analog in the
treatment of patients with good-risk GCTs. Carboplatin
should be restricted to investigational trials in GCT.
15. Kondagunta GV, Bacik J. Etoposide and
cisplatin chemotherapy for metastatic good-risk
germ cell tumors: J Clin Oncol. 2005 Dec
PURPOSE: To assess response, overall survival, and
relapse-free survival of patients with good-risk metastatic
germ cell tumor (GCT) by International Germ Cell
Consensus Classification Group (IGCCCG) criteria
treated with four cycles of etoposide and cisplatin (EP).
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred eighty-nine
patients with IGCCCG good-risk GCT were treated with
four cycles of EP. EP consisted of four cycles of etoposide
100 mg/m2 and cisplatin 20 mg/m2 on days 1 to 5 every
21 days. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-two of 289
patients (98%) achieved a complete response; 269 (93%)
responded to chemotherapy alone and 13 (5%)
responded to chemotherapy plus surgical resection of
viable disease (GCT other than mature teratoma).
Seventeen (6%) experienced relapse, and nine (3%) died
as a result of disease at a median follow-up of 7.7 years
(range, 0.4 to 21.1 years). Sixty-two of 204 patients (30%)
with nonseminoma had findings of teratoma or viable
GCT at postchemotherapy surgery.
CONCLUSION: Four cycles of EP is a highly effective
therapy for patients with good-risk GCT, with a high cure
rate, low relapse rate, and little evidence of late relapse.
Postchemotherapy surgery resection of residual disease
remains an important aspect of treatment for these
patients. Four cycles of EP is acceptable as a standard
regimen for the treatment of good-risk metastatic GCT,
and serves as an alternative to three cycles of bleomycin
and etoposide before cisplatin.
16. Becherer A, De Santis M. FDG PET is superior
to CT in the prediction of viable tumour in postchemotherapy seminoma residuals: Eur J
Radiol. 2005 May;54(2):284-8.
AIM: In advanced seminoma the management of
residuals after completion of chemotherapy is
controversial. Some centres routinely perform surgery
for lesions > or =3 cm diameter, others recommend
surgery solely if the residual fail to shrink or show even
growth. This study prospectively investigates whether
FDG PET can improve the prediction of viable tumour in
post-chemotherapy seminoma residuals.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: After an expansion of a
previous study population, 54 patients from eight centres
with metastatic seminoma and a CT-documented mass
after chemotherapy were included in the study. Six
patients were excluded from evaluation because of
protocol violations. After PET, the patients underwent
either surgery or were followed clinically. On follow-up
the lesions were considered to be non-viable when there
was unequivocal shrinking, or when the lesion remained
morphologically stable for at least 24 months. Any lesion
growth was assumed to be malignant. PET results were
compared to CT discrimination (< or > or =3 cm) of the
residual masses.
RESULTS: Fifty-two PET scans were evaluable. After
adequate chemotherapy, there were 74 CT-documented
residual masses ranging in size from 1 to 11 cm (median,
2.2 cm). Their dignities were confirmed histologically in
13 lesions, or by follow-up CT in 61 lesions. Four of fortyseven lesions <3 cm and 11/27 lesions > or =3 cm were
viable. PET was true positive in one lesion <3 cm and in
11 lesions > or =3 cm, false negative in three lesions <3
cm, and true negative in 59 lesions (43 lesions <3 cm).
No PET scan was false positive. In detecting viability the
sensitivity and specificity was 73% (95% CI, 44-88), and
73% (59-83), respectively, for CT (< or > or =3 cm); and
80% (51-95), and 100% (93-100), respectively, for PET
(specificity, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: In post-chemotherapy seminoma
residuals, a positive PET is highly predictive for the
presence of viable tumour. The specificity of PET is
significantly higher than that of CT when using a > or =3
cm cut-off. A negative PET scan is excellent for the
exclusion of disease in lesions > or =3 cm, with a
somewhat higher sensitivity than CT (n.s.). PET can
contribute to the management of residual seminoma
lesions, especially in terms of avoiding unnecessary
additional treatment for patients with lesions > or =3 cm.
17. HS Puc, R Heelan. Management of residual
mass in advanced seminoma: results and
recommendations from the Memorial SloanKettering Cancer Center: J Clin Oncol. 1998;
PURPOSE : Guidelines for management of
postchemotherapy residual mass in patients with
advanced seminoma remain controversial. We sought
to characterize independent prognostic factor(s) for
persistence of tumor to identify patients with a high risk
of residual carcinoma.
PATIENTS AND METHODS : One hundred four patients
with advanced seminoma were assessed. All had
achieved a complete response or partial response with
normal markers to induction cisplatin-based
chemotherapy and had radiographs available for review.
Selected prechemotherapy and postchemotherapy
characteristics were compared for patients who had
either germ cell tumor histology at surgery or relapsed
at the assessed site (defined as site failure) versus those
who had only necrosis or fibrosis found at surgery and
did not relapse at the assessed site (defined as site
RESULTS : At a median follow-up time of 47 months
(range, 5 to 153), 94 patients (90%) were designated as
site nonfailures and 10 (10%) as site failures. Site failure
correlated only with size of the residual mass (< 3 cm or
normal v > or = 3 cm; P=.0006). Two of 74 patients (3%)
with residual masses less than 3 cm were considered
site failures, compared with eight of 30 (27%) with
residual masses > or = 3 cm.
CONCLUSION : Patients with advanced seminoma who
have normal radiographs or residual masses less than
3 cm after chemotherapy can be observed without further
intervention. The following three options exist for patients
with a residual mass > or = 3 cm: observation,
radiotherapy, or surgical intervention. We prefer the latter
to define response, resect viable tumor when possible,
and direct further treatment.
18. BR Mason and JH Kearsley. Radiotherapy for
stage II testicular seminoma: the prognostic
influence of tumor bulk: J Clin Oncol.
Forty-nine consecutive patients with stage 2 testicular
seminoma were treated with primary radiotherapy from
1968 to 1985. Overall diseases- free survival (DFS) for
patients with 36 months minimum follow-up was 82% at
3 years. This figure did not decline further with time.
Infradiaphragmatic bulk disease was found to be a
significant prognostic factor for local and distant relapse
as well as for ultimate survival. Patients with either stage
2A or 2B disease (infradiaphragmatic bulk less than or
equal to 10 cm size) had a 3-year DFS of 89% compared
with a 64% 3-year DFS rate for patients with stage 2C
disease (infradiaphragmatic bulk greater than or equal
to 10 cm size). The (local plus distant) relapse rate was
4.0% for patients with stage 2A disease, 16.7% for
patients with stage 2B disease, and 33.3% for patients
with stage 2C disease. The majority of distant relapses
were multifocal and prophylactic mediastinal irradiation
did not appear to influence either relapse rate nor overall
survival. Of seven patients who relapsed, four died of
progressive malignancy, two deaths were related to
salvage chemotherapy, and only one patient is alive and
well following successful chemotherapeutic salvage. On
the basis of our experience, we recommend radiotherapy
with the use of modern imaging techniques as initial
treatment for patients with retroperitoneal masses less
than 10 cm size. Aggressive cisplatin-based
chemotherapy should be seriously considered for
patients with retroperitoneal masses greater than or equal
to 10 cm size, or for patients who relapse following
19. Davis BE, Herr HW. The management of patients
with nonseminomatous germ cell tumors of the testis
with serologic disease only after orchiectomy :J Urol.
1994 Jul;152(1):111-3.
Management of patients with nonseminomatous germ
cell tumors of the testis who have persistently elevated
serum tumor marker levels (alpha-fetoprotein and/or
human chorionic gonadotropin) following orchiectomy
and no clinical evidence of disease is controversial. We
reviewed our experience with 15 such patients at our
cancer center between March 1977 and November 1991.
Group 1 (11 patients) underwent initial retroperitoneal
lymph node dissection and group 2 (4 patients) received
primary chemotherapy. All group 1 patients required
subsequent chemotherapy for retroperitoneal disease or
persistent marker elevation, whereas only 1 of the 4 who
received primary chemotherapy required later surgery.
We conclude that tumor marker elevation in this setting
is usually indicative of systemic tumor, which is best
treated primarily by initial chemotherapy.
20. Culine S, Theodore C. Primary chemotherapy
in patients with nonseminomatous germ cell
tumors of the testis and biological disease only
after orchiectomy: J Urol. 1996 Apr;155(4):
Purpose: We assessed the efficacy of primary
chemotherapy in patients with nonseminomatous germ
cell tumors of the testis and elevated serum tumor
markers as the only evidence of disease after
orchiectomy. Materials and Methods: We analyzed the
outcome of 20 patients with biological disease only who
received cisplatin-based (16) or carboplatin-based (4)
chemotherapy as primary treatment following
orchiectomy. Results: Serum tumor markers returned to
normal levels in all 20 patients. One patient required
subsequent surgery for recurrent retroperitoneal mature
teratoma. Two patients experienced a relapse with active
disease, 1 of whom died of progressive germ cell tumor.
Of the patients 19 remained free of disease 18 to 116
months after the end of treatment. Conclusions: Since
results with primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection
suggest that elevated serum tumor markers usually
reflect systemic metastases rather than retroperitoneal
disease, primary chemotherapy seems to be the most
appropriate strategy to consider in patients with biological
disease only following orchiectomy.
21. Horwich A, Sleijfer DT . Randomized trial of
bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin compared
with bleomycin, etoposide, and carboplatin in
good-prognosis metastatic nonseminomatous
germ cell cancer : a Multiinstitutional Medical
Research Council/European Organization for
Research and Treatment of Cancer Trial: J Clin
Oncol. 1997 May;15(5):1844-52.
PURPOSE : This prospective randomized multicenter
trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy of carboplatin
plus etoposide and bleomycin (CEB) versus cisplatin plus
etoposide and bleomycin (BEP) in first-line chemotherapy
of patients with good-risk nonseminomatous germ cell
PATIENTS AND METHODS : Between September 1989
and May 1993, a total of 598 patients with good-risk
nonseminomatous germ cell tumors were randomized
to receive four cycles of either BEP or CEB. In each
cycle, the etoposide dose was 120 mg/m2 on days 1, 2,
and 3, and the bleomycin dose was 30 U on day 2. BEP
patients received cisplatin at 20 mg/m2/d on days 1 to 5
or 50 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2. For CEB patients, the
carboplatin dose was calculated from the glomerular
filtration rate to achieve a serum concentration x time of
5 mg/mL x minutes. Chemotherapy was recycled at 21day intervals to a total of four cycles.
RESULTS : Of patients assessable for response, 253 of
268 (94.4%) of those allocated to receive BEP achieved
a complete response, compared with 227 of 260 (87.3%)
allocated to receive CEB (P=.009). There were 30
treatment failures in the 300 patients allocated to BEP
and 79 in the 298 allocated to CEB (log-rank chi 2=26.9;
P<.001), which led to failure-free rates at 1 year of 91%
(95% confidence interval [CI], 88% to 94%) and 77%
(95% CI, 72% to 82%), respectively. There were 10
deaths in patients allocated to BEP and 27 in patients
allocated to CEB (log-rank chi 2=8.77; P=.003), which
led to 3-year survival rates of 97% (95% CI, 95% to 99%)
and 90% (95% CI, 86% to 94%), respectively.
CONCLUSION : With these drug doses and schedules,
combination chemotherapy based on carboplatin was
inferior to that based on cisplatin. This BEP regimen that
contains moderate doses of etoposide and bleomycin is
effective in the treatment of patients with good-prognosis
metastatic nonseminoma.
International Germ Cell Consensus
Classification: a prognostic factor-based
staging system for metastatic germ cell
cancers. International Germ Cell Cancer
Collaborative Group: J Clin Oncol. 1997
PURPOSE : Cisplatin-containing chemotherapy has
dramatically improved the outlook for patients with
metastatic germ cell tumors (GCT), and overall cure rates
now exceed 80%. To make appropriate risk-based
decisions about therapy and to facilitate collaborative
trials, a simple prognostic factor-based staging
classification is required.
MATERIALS : Collaborative groups from 10 countries
provided clinical data on patients with metastatic GCT
treated with cisplatin-containing chemotherapy.
Multivariate analyses of prognostic factors for
progression and survival were performed and models
were validated on an independent data set.
RESULTS : Data were available on 5,202 patients with
nonseminomatous GCT (NSGCT) and 660 patients with
seminoma. Median follow-up time was 5 years. For
NSGCT the following independent adverse factors were
identified: mediastinal primary site; degree of elevation
of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), human chorionic
gonadotropin (HCG), and lactic dehydrogenase (LDH);
and presence of nonpulmonary visceral metastases
(NPVM), such as liver, bone, and brain. For seminoma,
the predominant adverse feature was the presence of
NPVM. Integration of these factors produced the
following groupings: good prognosis, comprising 60%
of GCT with a 91% (89% to 93%) 5-year survival rate;
intermediate prognosis, comprising 26% of GCT with a
79% (75% to 83%) 5-year survival rate; and poor
prognosis, comprising 14% of GCT (all with NSGCT)
with a 48% (42% to 54%) 5-year survival rate.
CONCLUSION : An easily applicable, clinically based,
prognostic classification for GCT has been agreed on
between all the major clinical trial groups who are
presently active worldwide. This should be used in clinical
practice and in the design and reporting of clinical trials
to aid international collaboration and understanding.
23. Jones RH, Vasey PA. PART II: Testicular cancer
management of advanced disease. Lancet
oncol 2003;4:738-747.
Up to 80% of metastatic germ-cell tumours are curable
with conventional chemotherapy. The combination of
cisplatin, bleomycin, and etoposide has become the gold
standard in this disease. Patients can be divided into
good, intermediate, and poor prognosis groups. For those
patients with good prognostic features, cure rates reach
90% and attempts have been made to reduce toxic
effects of treatment while maintaining efficacy. Patients
that relapse require salvage treatment. This can involve
the incorporation of drugs such as ifosfamide and taxol
into conventional protocols or the use of high-dose
chemotherapy with stem-cell transplants. Patients with
poor prognosis disease are much more likely to fail
conventional chemotherapy and are candidates for doseintensive protocols or transplants as first-line treatment.
Although the results obtained in treating metastatic germcell tumours are superior to those with other solid tumour
types, there are still many areas that require further
24. Motzer RJ, Geller NL. Salvage chemotherapy
for patients with germ cell tumors. The
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
experience (1979-1989): Cancer. 1991 Mar
Twenty-eight of 124 (23%) advanced germ cell tumor
(GCT) patients who were treated on four successive
platin-based induction regimens and who failed to
achieve a durable complete response (CR) remain alive
(median follow-up, 50 months). An analysis of prognostic
factors for response and survival was conducted on the
94 patients who received salvage chemotherapy. Survival
and/or response to salvage therapy were significantly
enhanced for patients with a prior CR to induction
chemotherapy, treatment with a cisplatin-based salvage
regimen, a testis primary site, a normal serum human
chorionic gonadotropin level, a normal serum lactate
dehydrogenase level, one site of metastasis, and an
Indiana Class of 6 or less. Patients with a prior incomplete
response (IR) had a particularly poor prognosis (P =
0.00007) with only 4 of 52 (9%) patients alive (median
follow-up, 37 months) compared with 15 of 42 (36%)
patients with a prior best response of a CR (median
follow-up, 35 months). The poor survival of patients who
fail to achieve a durable CR to induction chemotherapy
warrants the continued investigation of new salvage
therapy. The identification of prognostic features may
direct salvage therapy and aid in the interpretation of
clinical trials of salvage regimens.
25. Kondagunta GV, Bacik J, Donadio A, et al.
Combination of paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and
cisplatin is an effective second-line therapy for
patients with relapsed testicular germ cell
tumors: J Clin Oncol 2005;23:6549.
PURPOSE: The efficacy of paclitaxel was evaluated in
combination with ifosfamide and cisplatin as second-line
chemotherapy for patients with relapsed testicular germ
cell tumors (GCTs).
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-six patients with
progressive metastatic GCTs were treated with paclitaxel
and ifosfamide plus cisplatin (TIP) as second-line therapy.
Eligibility required that patients have both a testis primary
tumor site and a prior complete response (CR) to a firstline chemotherapy program, which had been identified
previously as favorable prognostic factors to
conventional-dose salvage chemotherapy.
RESULTS: Thirty-two (70%) of 46 patients achieved a
CR to treatment. Three patients (7%) who achieved a
CR relapsed after TIP chemotherapy. Twenty-nine
patients are continuously disease free at a median followup time of 69 months, resulting in a 63% durable CR
rate and a 2-year progression-free survival rate of 65%
(95% CI, 51% to 79%).
CONCLUSION: Four cycles of TIP as second-line
therapy achieved a durable CR rate in a high proportion
of patients with relapsed testicular GCT. The high CR
rate emphasizes the importance of patient selection
according to prognostic factors to achieve a favorable
outcome to conventional-dose salvage therapy.
26. Einhorn LH, Williams SD. High-dose
chemotherapy and stem-cell rescue for
metastatic germ-cell tumors.New Engl J Med.
2007 Jul 26;357(4):340-8.
BACKGROUND: Metastatic testicular tumors that have
not been successfully treated by means of initial
chemotherapy are potentially curable with salvage
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 184
consecutive patients with metastatic testicular cancer that
had progressed after they received cisplatin-containing
combination chemotherapy. We gave 173 patients two
consecutive courses of high-dose chemotherapy
consisting of 700 mg of carboplatin per square meter of
body-surface area and 750 mg of etoposide per square
meter, each for 3 consecutive days, and each followed
by an infusion of autologous peripheral-blood
hematopoietic stem cells; the other 11 patients received
a single course of this treatment. In 110 patients,
cytoreduction with one or two courses of vinblastine plus
ifosfamide plus cisplatin preceded the high-dose
RESULTS: Of the 184 patients, 116 had complete
remission of disease without relapse during a median
follow-up of 48 months (range, 14 to 118). Of the 135
patients who received the treatment as second-line
therapy, 94 were disease-free during follow-up; 22 of 49
patients who received treatment as third-line or later
therapy were disease-free. Of 40 patients with cancer
that was refractory to standard-dose platinum, 18 were
disease-free. A total of 98 of 144 patients who had
platinum-sensitive disease were disease-free, and 26 of
35 patients with seminoma and 90 of 149 patients with
nonseminomatous germ-cell tumors were disease-free.
Among the 184 patients, there were three drug-related
deaths during therapy. Acute leukemia developed in three
additional patients after therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Testicular tumors are potentially
curable by means of high-dose chemotherapy plus
hematopoietic stem-cell rescue, even when this regimen
is used as third-line or later therapy or in patients with
platinum-refractory disease.
27. Pectasides D, Pectasides M. Gemcitabine and
oxaliplatin (GEMOX) in patients with cisplatinrefractory germ cell tumors: a phase II study.
Ann Oncol 2004;15:493-497.
BACKGROUND: To investigate the efficacy and toxicity
of the combination of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin
(GEMOX) in patients with relapsed or cisplatin-refractory
non-seminomatous germ cell tumors (NSGCT).
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with
relapsed or cisplatin-refractory NSGCT were treated with
gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 followed by
oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks for a
maximum of six cycles. Twenty-four patients (83%) were
considered refractory and five (17%) absolutely refractory
to cisplatin.
RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients were assessable for
response. Overall, nine patients (32%) achieved a
favourable response (complete response, four; partial
response, five). One of the complete responders
relapsed after 7 months and went into disease-free status
lasting for 11+ months after resection of lung metastases.
The rest of the complete responders are continuously
disease-free at 14+, 19+ and 28+ months with the study
regimen plus or minus surgery. One of the complete
responders had absolutely cisplatin-refractory disease
and another one presented with a late relapse. Toxicity
was primarily hematological and generally manageable:
62% of patients experienced grade 3/4 neutropenia, 10%
neutropenic fever and 41% grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia.
Non-hematological toxicity consisted mainly of nausea/
vomiting. Three patients (10%) developed grade 3
neurotoxicity and discontinued treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: The combination of GEMOX is an
active, moderately toxic and easily administered regimen
in patients with relapsed or cisplatin-refractory NSGCT.
The 14% long-term disease-free status accomplished
in this heavily pretreated patient population is quite
28. De Giorgi U, Rosti G. Phase II study of
oxaliplatin and gemcitabine salvage
chemotherapy in patients with cisplatinrefractory nonseminomatous germ cell tumor:
Eur Urol. 2006 Nov;50(5):1032-8; discussion
OBJECTIVE: Cisplatin-refractory germ cell tumors
(GCTs) represent a subset of germinal neoplasms with
a poor prognosis. Conventional-dose chemotherapy
induces objective response in 10-20% of these patients
with rare durable complete remissions. We investigated
the activity and tolerance of a chemotherapeutic regimen
with oxaliplatin and gemcitabine.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Treatment consisted of
oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) day 1, and gemcitabine 1,250
mg/m(2), days 1 and 8, every three weeks.
RESULTS: Eighteen patients were enrolled and were
assessable for response and toxicity. Primary site was
testis in twelve cases, retroperitoneum in four, and
mediastinum in two. Seven patients (39%) were cisplatinrefractory, while eleven (61%) absolutely cisplatinrefractory. A median of three cycles (range, 1-6) per
patient were given. One patient achieved a clinical
complete remission, one a partial remission with negative
marker in whom complete surgical resection of residual
masses yielded mature teratoma only, and one a partial
remission with positive marker in whom complete surgical
resection of residual masses yielded viable tumor cells.
These three cases were characterized by testicular
primary embryonal carcinoma. They remained diseasefree at 44+, 20+, and 18+ months of follow-up.
CONCLUSION: The oxaliplatin-gemcitabine combination
is a safe and active standard-dose regimen for patients
with cisplatin-refractory testicular primary GCT.
29. Wood DP Jr, Herr HW. Surgical resection of
solitary metastases after chemotherapy in
patients with nonseminomatous germ cell
tumors and elevated serum tumor markers.
Cancer. 1992 Nov 1;70(9):2354-7.
BACKGROUND. Chemorefractory metastatic germ cell
tumors and elevated tumor markers generally indicate
inoperable disease.
METHODS. Solitary metastases were resected in 15
patients who had a nonseminomatous germ cell tumor
and an elevated alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and/or human
chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) serum level after
treatment with cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Patients
underwent resection for a residual mass after
chemotherapy or for a new solitary metastasis after
achieving a complete response (CR) to salvage
RESULTS. Seven patients were disease-free after
surgical resection alone. All five patients with an elevated
HCG level had a relapse after surgery compared with 3
of 10 patients with only an elevated AFP level. Only 4 of
10 patients with a retroperitoneal metastasis had a
relapse after surgery compared with 4 of 5 patients with
visceral disease. Eleven of 15 patients overall were
disease-free after surgery and subsequent
chemotherapy after a relapse.
CONCLUSIONS. Surgical resection of a solitary
metastasis despite elevated serum tumor markers
should be considered in patients who have not had a
durable CR to cisplatin-based chemotherapy.
Penile Cancer:
Management Guidelines
Penile cancer is an uncommon malignancy and
constitutes approximately 1% of all malignancies in males
in India. It is commonly seen in the 5th and 6th decade [1,
2, 3] with 19% patients less than 40 years of age [6] and
7% less than 30 years [2,5,6]. A high incidence of penile
cancer has been recorded in Barshi and Chennai
registries. High incidence is seen in north eastern districts
of Tamil Nadu and especially Villupuram had an AAR of
3.1/100,000 [4].
Penile cancer is more common in a population
associated with poor socioeconomic status, across the
world. Consequently, a high incidence rate is also seen
in underdeveloped countries such as Uganda (2.8/
100,000) and in certain areas of Brazil (1.5-3.7 / 100,000),
whereas the incidence in developed countries is
decreasing and varies from 0.3-1.8/ 100,000. The lowest
reported incidence rate is in Israeli Jew community, that
of 0.1/100,000 [7] and is probably due to the religious
practice of neonatal circumcision among the Jews. A
report from Sweden has documented familial association
of penile cancer. The risk of cancer in any familial proband
(sibling, mother, or father) is 7.54. [8]. [L E 4]
Risk factors:
The risk factors causal to invasive carcinoma have been
brought out in several case control studies. Phimosis
and chronic irritative and inflammatory conditions as well
as high risk oncogenic HPV 16 and 18 are commonly
associated with penile cancer. There is strong evidence
that HPV 16 and 18 are associated with penile cancer in
more than 50% cases as well as with penile carcinoma
in situ, basaloid and verrucous lesions ( LE 2A). Penile
Lichen sclerosis, also called as Balanitis Xerotica
obliterans (BXO) is associated with penile cancer,
particularly those not related to HPV strains [9]. [LE 3]
Balanoposthitis of glans is the other chronic disease
seen, but it is detected more in diabetics.
Some studies suggest that circumcision done in the
neonatal period decreased the risk of penile cancer [10,
Phimosis is a known risk factor (OR =11.4%; 95% CI
5.0 – 25.9). The old time view that smegma is or contains
a carcinogen has been debunked [12]. [LE 3]
Cigarette smoking is associated with a risk of 4.5 fold
increase in the risk of penile cancer (95% CI 2.0 – 10.1).
Tseng et al. found that the incidence of penile cancer
(CIS and invasive combined) among men who had ever
smoked cigarettes was 2.4 times that of men who had
never smoked (95% CI = 0.86 – 7.3) [13]. The rate was
higher among current smokers (OR = 3.1; 95% CI = 0.93
– 11) than among ex-smokers (OR = 1.6; 95% CI = 0.44
– 6.9), and it was appreciably higher for men who
currently smoked more than 20 cigarettes per day (OR
= 5.9; 95% CI = 1.4 – 24) than among men who smoked
fewer than 20 cigarettes per day (OR = 1.2; 95% CI =
0.33 – 4.1).Hellberg et al found that smoking had a
significant effect on the occurrence of penile cancer even
when the amount of smoking was not considered [14].
It has also been noted that the male partners of women
with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia have a significantly
higher incidence of penile intraepithelial neoplasia [15].
Early age at first intercourse and multiple sexual partners
are associated with 3-5 fold increased risk. However
there is no consistent association of penile cancer with
presence of cervical cancer in the wife or partner. In a
recent study done by Lont et al, the 5 year survival has
been better in those penile cancers with high risk HPV
DNA positive(78% versus 93%;log rank test p=0.03),
indicating a survival advantage [16]. HPV strains interact
with the genomes altering the balance of oncogenes
versus the tumor suppressor genes (Rb and P 53). There
is an increased risk of penile cancer in persons who suffer
from condyloma acuminata [17].
Pre malignant conditions:
Erythroplasia of Queyrat, Bowen’s disease and Bowenoid
papulosis are histologically the same and are actually
“intraepithelial neoplasia” or “carcinoma in situ” and can
progress towards higher stages of disease. Cutaneous
horn of penis, hyperkeratotic dysplasia, giant condyloma
(Bushke Lowenstein), pseudoepitheliomatous
Micaceous and Keratotic Balanitis, leukoplakia and
Balanitis Xerotica Obliterans are the other pre malignant
lesions less sporadically associated with penile cancer
[18, 19].
Penile cancer essentially metastasizes by lymphatic
embolisation to inguinal lymph nodes, with a stepwise
spread to pelvic and para aortic nodes. Distant
metastases are rare. The occurrence of lymph node
metastasis is dependent upon depth of invasion, tumour
grade, lymphovascular embolisation, corporal
involvement, and the growth pattern. (LE 2a). Pelvic
lymph node metastases are common with involvement
of 2 or more inguinal nodes (LE 2b) and bilateral
involvement is common. The vast majority (95%) of
penile malignancies are squamous cell carcinomas.
Malignant melanomas and basal cell carcinomas are less
common. Mesenchymal tumours and metastatic tumours
of penis are rare [20].
The pathological variants of squamous carcinoma
include classic squamous carcinoma, verrucous
(papillary, warty, mixed), sarcomatoid, basaloid and
adenosquamous. Higher histological grade, deeper
anatomical infiltration (lamina, corpus spongiosum,
corpora cavernosa etc), and vascular and perineural
invasion are common findings in sarcomatoid, basaloid
and adenosquamous carcinoma cases, correlating with
a higher rate of nodal metastasis and mortality. These
features are unusual in verrucous, papillary and warty
carcinoma cases [21].High grade tumors (basaloid and
sarcomatoid) tend to be significantly associated with
recurrent tumors, whereas low grade variants (papillary,
warty and verrucous) are usually non-recurrent. The
incidence of inguinal lymph node metastasis is higher in
recurrent tumors (79% vs. 49%, P=0.0272) [20].
Histological grade, depth of tumor infiltration, and
perineural invasion (PNI) are considered important
pathologic prognostic parameters in penile cancer, for
development of lymph node metastasis as well as for
A Prognostic Index combining these 3 factors has been
devised [22]. The Prognostic Index score (ranging from
2 to 7) consisted in the addition of numerical values given
to histologic grade (1 to 3), deepest anatomic level
involved by cancer (1 to 3), and presence of PNI (0 or
1). On logistic regression analysis evaluating various
pathologic factors, prognostic Index scores were found
as the best predictors of inguinal node metastasis and
patients’ survival. Inguinal node dissections might not
be necessary for patients with low indices (2 and 3). Nodal
dissections might be formally indicated for high-grade
indexes (5 to 7). Patients with index 4 should be
individually assessed for nodal dissection. In a recent
study, lymph node density proved to be a significantly
better prognosticator of disease specific survival than
the current TNM nodal staging system in patients with
penile cancer and nodal involvement [23]. Further
independent validation is required to determine the
clinical usefulness of lymph node density.
Pathology report: The final pathology report of the primary
carcinoma is based on information obtained from
resected specimens and should contain the following
Histological type and subtype;
Tumor site;
Size (in cm);
Pattern of growth;
Histological grade (1-3);
Anatomic levels of invasion;
Depth of invasion (in mm);
Vascular invasion;
Perineural invasion;
Margins of resection;
Associated precancerous lesions;
Other lesions associated (lichen sclerosus,
dermatitides, etc).
Correct histological diagnosis and staging are essential
for appropriate treatment of penile cancer. [24].
Primary tumour: Physical examination should precede
histological confirmation and is often sufficient for staging
and planning therapy. Primary lesion needs to be
described with respect to the site, size, morphology
(papillary, flat, ulcerative or nodular), number, and
invasion of corpora, invasion of urethra, etc and the extent
of induration in shaft of penis. An adequate biopsy from
the representative area to confirm histological diagnosis
is mandatory before proceeding to treatment. MRI gives
good resolution and interpretation of soft tissues and in
combination with alprostadil induced artificial erection is
helpful in gauging the depth of corporal invasion.
However, it is rarely required and is expensive.
Inguinal nodes: Careful clinical examination of the
inguinal lymph nodes is recommended. The note should
be made of the size, number, laterality, consistency and
fixity to skin and underlying tissues as well as presence
of oedema of leg or scrotum.
In patients with non-palpable nodes, routine imaging
or histological evaluation is not recommended.
Inguinal ultrasound with a guided biopsy/ FNA if
required has been recommended by some but the
evidence to its efficacy is lacking. Sentinel node
biopsy has been reported to have false negative
rates of about 25% and hence is not recommended
[26]. Recently, dynamic sentinel node biopsy using
isosulfan blue or 99m-Tc-colloid sulphur has been
reported, with a sensitivity of 85-90% and specificity
of 100%. This new procedure, although validated
in a prospective study, has not been tested in
randomized trials and hence is not incorporated in
routine clinical practice [27, 28]. It is advisable to
perform a surgical staging with prophylactic groin
node dissection in presence of adverse prognostic
factors [29].
In patients with palpable nodes, a note should be
made of the size, number, laterality, consistency of
the nodes and fixity to skin and/or underlying
tissues, as well as presence of oedema of the lower
extremity or scrotum. Approximately 50% of patients
with palpable nodes at diagnosis will be negative
for metastasis whereas almost 100% patients with
such nodes at follow up will be positive [30] {LE2A}.
Hence, it is recommended that regional nodes
should be evaluated 4-6 weeks after treatment of
the primary lesion and after a course of antibiotics.
Histological confirmation of malignancy in enlarged
palpable nodes needs to be done with fine needle
aspiration cytology or an appropriate biopsy procedure.
Distant metastases: Imaging techniques are used to
detect the locoregional spread and the distant
metastases. In patients with palpable or USG detected
nodes a CECT abdomen and pelvis is done to find status
of pelvic and retroperitoneal nodes. Although lung
metastases are rare, an X ray chest is recommended.
Bone scan should be considered only in symptomatic
patients. 18F-FDG PET/CT is of value in the penile
cancer staging and its implementation might lead to an
increase in diagnostic efficacy and hence to more precise
and stage-appropriate therapeutic regimens [32] {LE 3b}.
Classification & Staging: The 2002 UICC Tumor, Node,
and Metastasis (TNM) classification is as follows [33].
T - Primary tumour
TX Primary tumor cannot be assessed
T0 No evidence of primary tumor
Tis Carcinoma in situ
Ta Non-invasive verrucous carcinoma
T1 Tumor invades subepithelial connective tissue
T2 Tumor invades corpus spongiosum or cavernosum
T3 Tumor invades urethra or prostate
T4 Tumor invades other adjacent structures
N - Regional lymph nodes
NX Regional lymph nodes cannot be assessed
N0 No evidence of lymph node metastasis
N1 Metastasis in a single inguinal lymph node
N2 Metastasis in multiple or bilateral superficial lymph
N3 Metastasis in deep inguinal or pelvic lymph nodes,
unilateral or bilateral
M - Distant metastases
MX Distant metastases cannot be assessed
M0 No evidence of distant metastases
M1 Distant metastases
The increasing stage corresponds with the overall cancer
morbidity and mortality [35].
Treatment of primary:
The modality of treating the primary site depends upon
the T stage.
Penile intraepithelial neoplasia (Tis): Penis preserving
strategies recommended (LE 3). This may be achieved
by one of the following depending on the experience and
personal preference of the treating clinician:
Wide surgical excision
Laser excision
Moh’s surgery
Topical 5-fluorouracil cream
Photodynamic therapy
Topical 5% imiquimod therapy
Ta G1-2 lesions may also be treated with these
conservative techniques [36, 37, 38, 39, and 40].
A wide local excision with circumcision may be done for
T1G1 tumors in the coronal sulcus and foreskin; tumor
free margin required here is 3-4 mm [41] {LE 2a}. T1
lesions in glans can be treated with CO2 laser or glans
resurfacing [42].
In patients with T1 G2-3, who are wiling to follow on time,
a penis preserving approach in the form of either laser
excision with reconstruction or glansectomy [43] {LE 2A}.
Glansectomy has the lowest recurrence rate of 2%. Other
modalities such as external radiation therapy, interstitial
brachytherapy, laser therapy and wide excision have
comparable recurrences of around15-25% [44]. In view
of this, intraoperative careful pathological assessment
of negative surgical margins is essential to reduce the
local recurrence rate and a meticulous follow up is
recommended to detect local relapses early for
successful salvage (LE 2b). In general, local relapse does
not impact upon survival (LE 3). In patients who are
unlikely to comply with regular follow up, partial
penectomy is recommended.
Patients with local relapse after conservative surgery may
be treated with repeat conservative surgery in cases of
small, non-infiltrating relapse (LE 2b). However, a salvage
partial or total penectomy is recommended if the relapse
is large or deeply infiltrating.
In T1G3 or T2 lesions of glans either a partial or total
glansectomy is done [45]{LE 2a}. In corporal T2 lesions,
a partial amputation or a total penectomy should be done
depending on the involvement of the shaft length [25].
Earlier a margin free of 2 cm was recommended but
now a surgical margin of 5-10 mm is considered safe
[46]. Partial penectomy is recommended when after
adequate excision of the primary, the residual stump is
adequate for upright micturition without scrotal soiling
and for sexual intercourse.
In T3 lesions either a partial amputation or total
penectomy is recommended.
Tumors infiltrating other organs generally have a poorer
prognosis and may be treated with palliative care. A
urethral neo meatal stenosis is seen in about 7-10 % of
patients post surgery.
Treatment of Lymph nodes:
Patients with non-palpable nodes need to be classified
into various risk groups based on predictive and
prognostic factors identified in uni- and multivariate
analyses in numerous studies and also adopted by EAU
in its guidelines in 2004 [47, 48].
Low risk patients: Tis, TaG1-2, T1G1: Risk of occult
lymph node metastases low (<15%)
a. Surveillance strategy recommended
b. If patient unreliable for surveillance:
lymphadenectomy LE 2a
Intermediate risk patients: T1G2: Risk of occult
lymph node metastases 30-35%
a. Absence of vascular or lymphatic invasion and
superficial growth pattern: Surveillance
b. Presence of vascular or lymphatic invasion
and /or infiltrative growth pattern: prophylactic
modified inguinal lymphadenectomy
c. Uncompliant patient: prophylactic modified
inguinal lymphadenectomy
d. Dynamic sentinel node biopsy may be most
applicable in this category in the future, if found
to be consistently reliable and may replace
dependence on high risk features LE 2a
High risk patients: T2 or more and/or G3: Risk of
occult lymph node metastases high (>60%)
a. Radical inguinal lymphadenectomy
b. Prophylactic
lymphadenectomy, with extension to complete
lymphadenectomy if nodes positive on frozen
section examination.
c. Improvement in this context was attempted
by Ficarra et al, 2006 who formatted
nomograms and by Kroon et al (2005) who
applied the technique of dynamic sentinel
node biopsy [49, 50].
In all categories, pelvic lymphadenectomy recommended
as per criteria mentioned in the section on palpable
In patients with histologically proven positive inguinal
lymph nodes, a complete bilateral radical inguinal and
pelvic lymphadenectomy is highly effective and is strongly
recommended (LE 2a).
The incidence of positive pelvic lymph-nodes in patients
with inguinal disease ranges from 15-35%. The number
of positive inguinal lymph nodes and extra capsular extent
of metastatic disease are important pathological
predictors of pelvic node involvement in patients with
positive inguinal nodes [51] {LE2a}. The rate of pelvic
node positivity in 2 and > 2 inguinal node positive patients
is 23% and 56%. The latter is also associated with one
or more inguinal node with extra capsular extension [52].
Pelvic lymphadenectomy is recommended when the risk
of pelvic lymph node involvement is high (2 or more
positive nodes, extranodal extension, grade III tumours
etc.) The pelvic lymph node metastases are often
microscopic and pelvic lymphadenectomy in such cases
may lead to cure in 14-50% of patients (LE 2b). If there
is no involvement of inguinal nodes, pelvic
lymphadenectomy is not warranted.
If there are no palpable nodes in the contralateral groin,
modified inguinal lymphadenectomy may be considered
and may be extended to a complete lymphadenectomy
if the nodes are metastatic on frozen section examination.
Video endoscopic inguinal and pelvic lymph node
dissection (VEIL) has been described. However the
reliability of this technique has yet to be established.
[53]{LE 4}.
Inguinal lymphadenectomy is associated with significant
morbidity which includes lymphorrhoea, wound infection,
skin necrosis, wound dehiscence, lymphoedema and
lymphocoele in approximately 30% of patients. Good skin
handling and proper skin flaps is the secret to prevent or
reduce the above. Rotation and pedicle based flaps
should be used as a primary cover in appropriate cases.
Inguinopelvic lymphadenectomy may be done at the time
of surgery for the primary tumour or as an interval
procedure 2-3 weeks after surgery for the primary. There
is no difference in the oncological outcome as well as
morbidity with the 2 approaches.
Adjuvant chemotherapy – taxane based is recommended
in patients with pN2-3 patients, those with 2 or more
positive nodes and in those with extranodal extension of
disease.[54] {LE2a}. The results of phase II trials suggest
that adjuvant chemotherapy is beneficial in these
patients. Very little data is available for use and efficacy
of adjuvant radiation therapy (LE 3).
In patients with relapsed groin nodes wide excision of
the nodal area should be done.
Patients with fixed inguinal node mass or clinically
palpable pelvic nodes may be offered neoadjuvant
chemotherapy and in case of good response (25-60%
partial or complete responses), complete radical surgery
is recommended (LE 2b). Pre-operative radiation therapy
may also be tried instead of chemotherapy (LE 3) –
however, the morbidity of lymphadenectomy after
radiation therapy is substantial.
Role of Radiation therapy:
External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and Brachytherapy
(BRT) are both used in the primary treatment of T1-2
penile cancers <4 cm in size. They can be used
separately or together. EBRT is delivered by megavoltage
telecobalt gamma rays or 6MV photons from Linear
accelerators. The different types of BRT used are
external isotope mould, low dose rate BRT, pulse dose
rate BRT or high dose BRT [55]. The type of radiotherapy
best suited for a patient depends upon the tumor location,
size, thickness and its proximity to the urethra. In well
selected patients with T1-2 tumors, (lesser than 4 cm)
organ preservation can be achieved with primary tumor
RT {LE 2A}. But there are no prospective or randomized
trials within the radiation modalities. EBRT has universal
applicability and can be used in all RT departments,
whereas BRT needs expertise. A variety of fractionation
schedules have been described in the literature with
variable results. At the Tata Memorial Hospital we
traditionally use a hypo fractionated accelerated regimen
of 54Gy in 18 daily fractions over 3 weeks. This provides
excellent local control in early cancers without any
symptomatic late sequelae. However, the acute radiation
muco-cutaneous reaction over the glans and penile shaft
heals after a median period of 6 weeks. The main
advantage of the accelerated 3-4 weeks regimen over
the more protracted 6 weeks regimen is that it allows
the completion of radiotherapy before the onset of the
inevitable brisk radiation reaction.
The local control rates reported for EBRT and BRT are
60% and 70 to 90% respectively.[56,57,58]. The radiated
patients have higher local failure rates, but salvage
surgery can regain local control [59]. Certain iatrogenic
complications are attributed to the high doses of radiation
needed to achieve local control. These include glans
necrosis (10-20%), urethral stenosis (20-35%) and late
fibrosis and can lead to loss of function [60]. The actuarial
penile preservation rate after BRT was 87% at 5 years
[60]. All these patients need a close follow up as some
radiation related changes are difficult to be differentiated
from recurrence. In metastatic disease, palliative local
EBRT (40-50GY) has been described.
There is no role of prophylactic RT in clinically N0 patients
of penile cancer as RT fails to prevent metastatic lymph
nodes [61], there are related severe complications [62]
and further even the fibrotic change makes the follow up
Adjuvant radiation therapy may improve local control in
patients with extensive nodal metastases and /or extra
nodal spread, but severe side effects may occur.
Role of Chemotherapy:
In spite of improvement in awareness leading to early
diagnosis, patients present with unresectable disease
in the form of local disease extension and/or fixed ilioinguinal nodes encasing vessels. These patients have a
dismal prognosis, with an estimated 3-years survival of
less than 10% [63,64]. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy can
help achieve downsizing of initially inoperable lymph node
masses and primary lesions, to make them suitable for
surgery. Many chemotherapeutic agents have been used
over the years. Some of those found effective having a
best response rate of 20% [64] are 5-FU, methotrexate,
ifosfamide, cisplatin, paclitaxel and docetaxel. A better
response is seen with combination agents, ranging from
25 to 72% with a complete response of 17% [64]. Until
this era of combination therapy, cisplatin (CDDP) and 5
FU have represented the standard therapy for this
disease. A combination of taxanes with CDDP and 5 FU
has been used as this has demonstrated a benefit in
squamous cancers in the head and neck region [65].
Corral et al have reported promising results with BMP
(Bleomycin, Methotrexate, Cisplatin), with median
survival of 34 months in responders [66]. In patients with
multiple, bilateral or unilateral pelvic nodes or those with
extranodal spread, adjuvant chemotherapy with 3 drugs
is recommended. Patients chosen for chemotherapy
have to be assessed well as in most instances they will
be elderly patients.
Patients with juxtaregional lymph node metastases or
those with distant metastases may be offered palliative
Follow up:
In penile cancer, follow up helps to assess the results of
surgery, complications associated with it, and note early
or late, local and loco-regional recurrences. If we can
detect recurrence early, the chances of cure are greater.
It also helps patients treated with penile conservation
techniques with an opportunity to discuss their sexual
problems. In follow up, patients are evaluated with a
thorough physical examination, appropriate imaging of
abdomen and pelvis in selected patients, and X-ray chest.
The need for any other investigation is dictated by
symptoms or the results of these primary tests. Leitje et
al (2008) found that 74.3% of all recurrences, 66.4% of
local recurrences, 86.1% of regional recurrences and
100% of distant recurrences occur during the first 2 years
and that 92.2% of all recurrences occurred in the first 5
years [67]. Oncologists should keep in mind that patients
require an intensive follow up for first 2 years; every 3
months and a less intensive follow up from 3-5 years; at
every 6 months. Kroon et al (2005), also documented
occurrence of late local recurrences but found it
reasonable to stop the follow up at 5 years, provided
patient would report back if needed later [68].
Management of local relapse: Local recurrences are
more seen in patients with penile preserving therapies.
However, they do not impact upon survival. They may
be treated with re-penile preserving surgery if feasible
or with salvage partial or total penectomy in other cases.
Patients should be taught and encouraged to do penile
self examination.
Management of inguinal nodal relapse in the follow up
period: It is mandatory to get histological confirmation of
metastasis in the palpable inguinal node by fine needle
aspiration cytology or by an appropriate biopsy
In patients with short relapse free interval, a complete
bilateral inguinopelvic lymphadenectomy is
recommended, as the risk of occult metastases in
contralateral groin is significant.
In patients with long (>2 years) relapse free interval, a
unilateral lymphadenectomy on the involved side is
recommended and the contralateral side may be kept
under surveillance since in these patients, the risk of
occult contralateral node metastasis is only about 10%.
However, if the involved side has more than 1 metastatic
node or there is evidence of extranodal extension, a
modified prophylactic groin dissection should be done
on the contralateral side, since the risk of occult
metastases on the contralateral side is approximately
Barnholtz-Sloan JS, Maldonado J, Pow-Sang J, et
al. Incidence trends in primary malignant penile
cancer. Urol Oncol. 2007;25(5):361-7,
Favorito LA, Nardi A, Ronalsa M, et al.
Epidemiologic study on penile cancer in Brazil. Int
Braz J Urol. 2008;34(5):587-93
3. Persson B, Sjödin JG, Holmberg L, et al. The
National Penile Cancer Register in Sweden 20002003. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2007;41(4):278-82
4. Lynch DFJ, Pettaway C. Tumors of the Penis. In
Campbell’s Urology, Walsh PC, Retik AB, Vaughan
ED, Wein AJ (Eds). 2002, Saunders: Philadelphia,
PA. p. 2945-81
5. Development of an atlas of cancer in India, first all
India report. ICMR project, supported by World
Health Organization.
6. Burgers JK, Badalement RA, Drago JR; Penile
cancer presentation, diagnosis and staging. Urol
Clin North Am 1992;19:247-56
7. Curado MP, Edwards B, Shin HR, et al. (Ed.) Cancer
Incidence in Five Continents. Vol. IX 2007, IARC
Scientific Publications, Lyon. No. 160
8. Hussain SK, Sundquist J, Hemminki K. Familial
clustering of cancer at human papillomavirus
associated sites according to the Swedish FamilyCancer Database. Int J Cancer. 2008; 122(8):18738.
9. Velazquez EF, Cubilla AL, Lichen sclerosus in 68
patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the penis:
Frequent atypias and correlation with special
carcinoma variants suggests a precancerous role.
Am J Surg Pathol 2003; 27:1448-53?
10. Schoen EJ, Oehrli M, Colby C et al.: Male
circumcision, penile human papilloma virus infection
and cervical cancer in female partners. N Engl J
Med 346 (15): 1105-12, 2002.
11. Neonatal circumcision revisited. Fetus and newborn
committee, Canadian Pediatric Society. CMAJ,
12. Van Howe RS, Hodges FM. The carcinogenicity of
smegma: debunking a myth. Eur Acad Dermatol
Venereol 2006; 20(9):1046-54.
13. Tseng H-F, Morgenstern H, Mack T, et al. Risk
factors for penile cancer: results of a population
based case-control study in Los Angeles County
(United States). Cancer Causes Control. 2001;
14. Hellberg D, Valentin J, Eklund T, Nilsson S: Penile
cancer: Is there an epidemiological role for smoking
and sexual behavior? BMJ 1987; 295:1306–1308.
15. Barrasso R, DeBrux J, Croissant O, Orth G: High
prevalence of papillomavirus-associated penile
intraepithelial neoplasia in sexual partners of
women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. N
Engl J Med 1987; 317:916–923].
16. Lont AP, Kroon BK, Horenblas S, Gallee MP,
Berkhof J, Meijer CJ, Snijders PJ. Presence of high
risk human papilllomavirus DNA in penile carcinoma
predicts favorable outcome in survival. Int J Cancer
2006; 119(5):1078-81.
17. Kayes O, Ahmed HU, Arya M, Minhas S. Molecular
and genetic pathways in penile cancer. Lancet
Oncol 2007; 8(5):420-9.
18. Velazquez EF, Barreto JE, Rodriguez I, Piris A,
Cubilla AL. Limitations in the interpretation of
biopsies in patients with penile squamous cell
carcinoma. Int J Surg Pathol 2004; 12(2):139-46.
19. Cubilla AL, Barreto J, Caballero C, Ayala G, Riveros
M. Pathologic features of epidermoid carcinoma
of the penis. A prospective study of 66 cases. Am J
Surg Pathol 1993; 7(8):753-63.
Chaux A, Reuter V, Lezcano C, Velazquez EF,
Torres J, Cubilla AL. Comparison of morphologic
features and outcome of resected recurrent and
nonrecurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the penis:
a study of 81 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;
Guimarães GC, Cunha IW, Soares FA, Lopes A,
Torres J, Chaux A, Velazquez EF, Ayala G, Cubilla
AL. Penile squamous cell carcinoma
clinicopathological features, nodal metastasis and
outcome in 333 cases. J Urol. 2009 ;182:528-34.
Chaux A, Caballero C, Soares F, Guimarães GC,
Cunha IW, Reuter V, Barreto J, Rodríguez I, Cubilla
AL. The Prognostic Index: A Useful Pathologic
Guide for Prediction of Nodal Metastases and
Survival in Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Am
J Surg Pathol. 2009
Svatek RS, Munsell M, Kincaid JM, Hegarty P,
Slaton JW, Busby JE, Gaston KE, Spiess PE,
Pagliaro LC, Tamboli P, Pettaway CA.Association
between lymph node density and disease specific
survival in patients with penile cancer. J Urol. 2009;
Solsona E, Iborra I, Rubio J, Casanova JL, Ricós
JV, Calabuig C. Prospective validation of the
association of local tumor stage grade as a
predictive factor for occult lymph node
micrometastasis in patients with penile carcinoma
and clinically negative inguinal lymph nodes. J Urol
2001;165(5): 1506-9.
Leijte JA, Valdés Olmos RA, Nieweg OE, Horenblas
S. Anatomical mapping of lymphatic drainage in
penile carcinoma with SPECT-CT: implications for
the extent of inguinal lymph node dissection. Eur
Urol 2008;54(4):885-90.
Kroon BK, Horenblas S, Deurloo EE, Nieweg OE,
Teertstra HJ. Ultrasonography-guided fine needle
aspiration cytology before sentinel node biopsy in
patients with penile carcinoma. BJU Int A
Perdonà S, Gallo L, Claudio L, Marra L, Gentile M,
Gallo A. [Role of crural inguinal lymphadenectomy
and dynamic sentinel lymph node biopsy in lymph
node staging in squamous-cell carcinoma of the
penis. Our experience.] Tumori 2003;89(4
Tanis PJ, Lont AP, Meinhardt W, Olmos RA, Nieweg
OE, Horenblas S. Dynamic sentinel node biopsy
for penile cancer: reliability of a staging technique.
J Urol 2002;168(1):76-80.
Cubilla AL. The role of pathologic prognostic factors
in squamous cell carcinoma of the penis. World J
Urol. 2009 Apr;27(2):169-77. Epub 2008 Sep 3.
Ornellas AA, Seixas AL, Marota A, Wisnescky A,
Campos F, de Moraes JR. Surgical treatment of
invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the penis:
retrospective analysis of 350 cases. J Urol
Kayes O, Minhas S, Allen C, Harc C, Freeman A,
Ralph D. The role of magnetic resonance imaging
in the local staging of penile cancer. Eur Urol
Bernhard Scher, MD1; Michael Seitz, MD2; Martin
Reiser, BS1; Edwin Hungerhuber, MD2; Klaus Hahn
et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT for Staging of Penile
Cancer. J Nucl Med 2005; 46:1460–1465.
33. Sobin LH, Wittekind C. TNM Classification of
malignant tumors. Philadelphia: Wiley-Liss, 2002
34. Leijte JA, Gallee M, Antonini N, Horenblas S.
Evaluation of current TNM classification of penile
carcinoma. J Urol 2008; 180(3):933-8; discussion
35. Jackson SM. The treatment of carcinoma of the
penis. Br J Surg 1966; 53:33–5.
36. Goette DK, Carson TE. Erythroplasia of Queyrat:
treatment with topical 5-fluorouracil. Cancer 1976;
37. Taliaferro SJ, Cohen GF. Bowen’s disease of the
penis treated with topical imiquimod 5% cream. J
Drugs Dermatol 2008; 7(5):483-5.
38. Van Bezooijen BP, Horenblas S, Meinhardt W,
Newling DW. Laser therapy for carcinoma in situ of
the penis. J Urol 2001; 166(5):1670-1.
39. Paoli J, Ternesten Bratel A, Löwhagen GB,
Stenquist B, Forslund O, Wennberg AM. Penile
intraepithelial neoplasia: results of photodynamic
therapy. Acta Derm Venereol 2006;86(5):418-21.
40. Shindel AW, Mann MW, Lev RY, Sengelmann R,
Petersen J, Hruza GJ, Brandes SB. Mohs
micrographic surgery for penile cancer:
management and long-term followup. J Urol
2007; 178(5):1980-5.
41. Penile Cancer Treatment (PDQ®) Health
Professional Version. National Cancer Institute, US
National Institutes of Health, 2008, pp. 6-7.
42. Hadway P, Corbishley CM, Watkin NA. Total glans
resurfacing for premalignant lesions of the penis:
initial outcome data. BJU Int 2006; 98(3):532-6.
43. Bissada NK, Yakout HH, Fahmy WE, Gayed MS,
Touijer AK, Greene GF, Hanash KA. Multi
institutional long-term experience with conservative
surgery for invasive penile carcinoma. J Urol 2003;
169(2): 500-2.
44. Smith Y, Hadway P, Biedrzycki, Perry MJA,
Corbishley C, Watkin NA. Reconstructive surgery
for invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the glans
penis. Eur Urol 2007; 52(4):1179-85.
45. Davis JW, Schellhammer PF, Schlossberg SM.
Conservative surgical therapy for penile and urethral
carcinoma. Urology 1999; 53(2):386-92.
46. Algaba F, Arce Y, López-Beltán A, Montironi R,
Mikuz G, Bono AV. Intraoperative frozen section
diagnosis in Urological Oncology. Eur Urol
47. Solsona E, Algaba F, Horenblas S, Pizzocaro G,
Windahl T. EAU Guidelines on Penile Cancer. Eur
Urol 2004;46(1):1-8.
48. Solsona E, Iborra I, Rubio J, et al: Prospective
validation of the association of local tumour stage
and grade as a predictive factor for occult lymph
node micrometastasis inpatients with penile
carcinoma and clinically negative inguinal lymph
nodes. J Urol 2001, 165(5), 1506-1509.
49. Ficarra V, Zattoni F, Artilian W, et al. Nomogram
predictive of pathological inguinal lymph-node
involvement in patients with squamous cell
carcinoma of the penis. J Urol 2006; 175:1700–4.
50. Kroon BK, Horenblas S, Meinhardt W, et al.
Dynamic sentinel node biopsy in penile carcinoma:
Evaluation of 10 years experience. Eur Urol
2005;47:601– 6.
51. Lont AP, Kroon BK, Gallee MP, van Tinteren H,
Moonen LM, Horenblas S. Pelvic lymph node
dissection for penile carcinoma: extent of inguinal
lymph node involvement as an indicator for pelvic
lymph node involvement and survival. J Urol 2007;
177(3):947-52; discussion 952.
52. Lopes A, Bezerra AL, Serrano SV, Hidalgo GS. Iliac
nodal metastases from carcinoma of the penis
treated surgically. BJU Int 2000; 86(6):690-3.
53. Sotelo R, Sanchez-Salas R, Carmona O, Garcia
A, Mariano M, Neiva G, Trujillo G, Novoa J, Cornejo
F, Finelli A. Endoscopic lymphadenectomy for penile
carcinoma. J Endourol
2007;21(4):364-7;discussion 367.
54. Lijte JA, Kerst JM, Bais E, Antonini N, Horenblas
S. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced penile
carcinoma. Eur Urol 2007;52(2):488-94.
55. Rozan R, Albuisson E, Giraud B et al. Interstitial
brachytherapy for penile carcinoma: a multicentric
survey (259 patients). Radiotherapy and Oncology
1995; 36: 83-93.
56. Sarin R, Norman AR, Steel GG. Treatment results
and prognostic factors in 101 men treated for
squamous carcinoma of the penis. Int J Radiat
Oncol Biol Phys 1997;38(4):713-22.
57. Azrif M, Logue GP, Swindell R, Cowan RA, Wylie
JP, Livsey JE. External-beam radiotherapy in T1-2
N0 penile carcinoma. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)
58. Kiltie AE, Elwell C, Close A, Ash DV. Iridium-192
implantation for node-negative carcinoma of the
penis: The Cookridge Hospital Experience. Clin
Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2000;12(1):25-31.
59. Zouhair A, Coucke PA, Jeanneret W, Douglas P,
Do HP, Jichilinski P, Mirimanoff RO, Ozsahin M.
Radiation therapy alone or combined surgery and
radiation therapy in squamous-cell carcinoma of the
penis? Eur J Cancer 2001;37(2):198-203.
60. Pizzocaro G (Chairman), Algaba F, Horenblas S,
Solsona E, Tana S, Van Der Poel H, Watkin N.
Guidelines on penile cancer. European association
of Urology, 2009.
61. Crook JM, Grimard L, Esche B, Pond G. Penile
brachytherapy: results for 60 patients.
Brachytherapy 2007;6:82
62. Kulkarni JN, Kamat MR. Prophylactic bilateral groin
node dissection versus prophylactic radiotherapy
and surveillance in patients with N0 and N1-2A
carcinoma of the penis. Eur Urol 1994;26(2):
63. Ravi R, Chaturvedi HK, Sastry DV. Role of radiation
therapy in the treatment of carcinoma of the penis.
Br J Urol 1994;74(5):646-51.
64. Pizzocaro G, Nicolai N, Piva L. Chemotherapy for
Cancer of the Penis.In: Raghavan D, Leibel SA,
Scher HI, et al, editors: Principles and Practice of
Genitourinary Oncology. Philadelphia (PA):
Lippincot-Raven Publishers, 1997. p. 9737.
65. Culkin DJ, Beer TM. Advanced penile carcinoma.
J Urol 2003; 170:359–65.
66. Schrijvers D, Vermorken JB. Taxanes in the
treatment of head and neck cancer. Curr Opin Oncol
2005; 17:218 –24.
67. Corral DA, Sella A, Pettaway CA, et al. Combination
chemotherapy for metastatic or locally advanced
genitourinary squamous cell carcinoma: A phase II
study of methotrexate, cisplatin and bleomycin. J
Urol 1998; 160:1770–4.
68. Leijte JA, 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(1):161-8.
69. Kroon BK, Horenblas S, Lont 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(3):
Carcinoma Prostate
Introduction and Epidemiology: The prostate cancer
is the most common male malignancy. One in six
American men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer
during his lifetime, usually at the age of over 60 years. In
Europe, the annual incidence rates were 214 per 1000
men in 2005. The established risk factors include race,
age, and family history. About 15% of male cancers are
prostate cancers in developed countries compared to
4% of male cancers in developing countries At the Tata
Memorial Hospital, prostate cancer constitutes only 2.4%
of all cancers in males.
There are three well-established risk factors: increasing
age, ethnical origin and heredity. If one first-line relative
has prostate cancer, the risk is at least doubled. If two or
more first-line relatives are affected, the risk increases
5- to 11-fold. Patients with hereditary prostate cancer
usually have an onset 6-7 years prior to spontaneous
cases, but do not differ in other ways. Factors such as
food consumption like saturated/animal fat, red meat,
pattern of sexual behavior, alcohol consumption,
exposure to ultraviolet radiation and occupational
exposure have all been discussed as being of etiological
Staging of prostate cancer: TNM 2002 Staging (AJCC
Cancer Staging Manual. 6thed. New York, NY: Springer,
2002, 309-316)
The primary extension assessment of prostate cancer
is usually made by digital rectal examination (DRE),
prostate-specific antigen (PSA) measurement and bone
scan, supplemented with computed tomography (CT) or
magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and chest X-ray in
specific situations.
Primary Tumor (T)
Primary tumor cannot be assessed
No evidence of primary tumor
Clinically in-apparent tumor not palpable nor
visible by imaging
T1a Tumor incidental histologic finding in <5% of
tissue resected
T1b Tumor incidental histologic finding in >5% of
tissue resected
T1c Tumor identified by needle biopsy (because
of elevated PSA)
Tumor confined within prostate*
T2a involves one half of 1 lobe or less
T2b Tumor involves more than one half of 1 lobe
but not both lobes
T2c Tumor involves both lobes
extends through the prostate capsule**
T3a Extracapsular extension (unilateral or
T3b Tumor invades seminal vesicle(s)
Tumor is fixed or invades adjacent structures
other than seminal vesicles: bladder neck,
external sphincter, rectum, levator muscles, and/
or pelvic wall
Regional lymph nodes (N)$
Nx Regional lymph nodes were not assessed
No No regional lymph node metastasis
N1 Metastasis in regional lymph node (s)
Distant Metastasis (M)
Mx Distant metastasis cannot be assessed (not
evaluated by any modality)
Mo No distant metastasis
M1 Distant metastasis
M1a Non-regional lymph node(s)
M1b Bone(s)
M1c Other site(s) with or without bone disease
* Tumor found in 1 or both lobes by needle biopsy, but not
palpable or reliably visible by imaging is classified as T1c.
** Invasion into the prostatic apex or into (but not beyond) the
prostatic capsule is not classified as T3, but as T2.
$ Regional lymph nodes are the nodes of the true pelvis, which
essentially are the pelvic nodes below the bifurcation of the
common iliac arteries. They include the following groups
(laterality does not affect the N classification): pelvic (not
otherwise specified [NOS]), hypogastric, obturator, iliac (i.e.,
internal, external, or NOS), and sacral (lateral, presacral,
promontory [e.g., Gerota], or NOS). Distant lymph nodes are
outside the confines of the true pelvis.
Histopathologic grade (G)
GX: Grade cannot be assessed
G1: Well differentiated (slight anaplasia) (GS of
G2: Moderately differentiated (moderate anaplasia)
(GS of 5–6)
G3-4: Poorly differentiated or undifferentiated
(marked anaplasia) (GS of 7–10)
Histology: More than 95% of primary prostate cancers
are adenocarcinomas and remaining 5% constitutes of
other histologies like transitional cell carcinoma,
sarcoma, lymphoma etc.
Diagnosis and staging methods:
The main diagnostic tools used to look for evidence of
prostate cancer include DRE, serum concentration of
PSA and trans-rectal ultrasonography (TRUS) apart from
getting a histological confirmation of prostate cancer. The
local stage of the disease (organ confined vs. non-organ
confined) is the most important factor which decides
therapy as well as prognosis.
Digital Rectal Examination (DRE): It is a simple
and cost effective method having a positive
predictive value (from 21% to 53%). It is a good
staging method with a sensitivity of 52% and
specificity of 80%. It can, however, underestimate
(common) or overestimate the actual pathological
stage. [1] (level of evidence: 2a)
Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA): The normal
values of PSA are <4 ng/ml. The appropriate
threshold PSA level for detection of cancer of the
prostate is 4.0 ng/ml. As yet, there is no long-term
data to help determine the optimal PSA threshold
value for detecting non-palpable, but clinically
significant, Prostate Cancer (level of evidence: 3).
Clinically significant cancers are detected by PSA
testing. If the PSA level is high, biopsy of the
prostate may be recommended. Some men with
prostate cancer have PSA results less than 10.
About 25% of men with cancer will have a normal
or low PSA. Therefore a combination of PSA & DRE
as complementary investigations to guide biopsy
is recommended. (level of evidence 3, Grade B
PSA estimation can also help as a guide to stage
of prostate cancer. Serum PSA <10 ng/ml indicates
a low risk of peri-prostatic spread and metastases.
An increased risk of peri-prostatic spread, seminal
vesicle involvement and even distant metastases
exists when serum PSA >20 ng/ml. As a general
guide, PSA >10 ng/ml indicates capsular
penetration in more than 50% patients while PSA
>50 ng/ml is usually associated with metastatic
PSA is prostate specific and not cancer specific
and may be raised in non-cancerous conditions like
BPH, prostatitis, tuberculosis etc, especially when
the PSA is in the normal or borderline zone of 4-10
ng/ml. A ratio of free to total PSA of <0.1 is most
likely associated with prostate cancer, and with
higher percentages with benign prostatic
hypertrophy [2] (level of evidence: 2a). A ratio of
< 0.15 was associated with a higher Gleason score
and poorer prognosis PSA density is calculated by
dividing the serum PSA concentration by the volume
of the prostate gland measured by TRUS. A higher
PSA density is associated with malignancy.
Trans-rectal Ultrasound (TRUS) gives excellent
resolution for detection of prostatic nodules. It gives
about 60% sensitivity for differentiation between
organ confined disease and extraprostatic
extension. In the absence of MRI, it can be used
for local staging of prostate cancer. TRUS is useful
in performing tissue biopsies, prostate volume
assessment, PSA density calculation and in
prostate brachytherapy. Limitations of this imaging
modality include the difficulty in characterizing the
integrity of prostatic capsule and visualizing early
extracapsular extension or seminal vesicle
involvement. (Grade C recommendation)
Computed Tomography is done mainly to
document the retroperitoneal or pelvic
lymphadenopathy, especially in patients with high
risk of nodal metastasis i. e. T3, T4 disease, PSA >
20 ng/ml, high Gleason score etc and may identify
advanced disease. Routine preoperative CT
scanning may not always be justified in patients
with a PSA <25 ng/mL. Although the histologic
incidence of positive pelvic lymph nodes is
substantial when PSA levels exceed 25 ng/mL,
however the sensitivity of CT for detecting positive
nodes is only approximately 30% to 35% even at
these levels.
MR Imaging currently offers the most accurate and
complete assessment of local disease and its
spread. MRI with endo-rectal coil and MR
spectroscopy (higher choline-citrate ratio) can give
an excellent delineation of the prostate gland. It has
a reported accuracy of 85-90% for differentiating
between organ-confined disease and extraprostatic
spread. It gives excellent information about seminal
vesicles involvement and retroperitoneal
lymphadenopathy. MRI is clearly superior to CT in
defining the prostate apex, neurovascular bundles,
and anterior rectal wall. Comparing prostate
volumes defined by MRI and CT there is 32%
increase in prostate volume when defined by noncontrast CT scan.
When compared with DRE and TRUS prostate
biopsy findings, endo-rectal MRI contributes
significant incremental value for local staging [3],
particularly in the pre-operative identification of extra
capsular extension (ECE) and seminal vesicle
invasion (SVI). MR spectroscopic imaging (MRSI)
allows for the assessment of tumor metabolism by
displaying the relative concentrations of citrate,
choline, creatinine and polyamines. Differences in
the concentrations of these chemical metabolites
between normal and malignant prostate tissues
allow for better tumor localization within the
peripheral zone, increasing the accuracy of ECE
detection. Furthermore, correlations have been
demonstrated between the metabolic signal pattern
and a pathological Gleason score, suggesting the
potential for a non-invasive assessment of
aggressiveness [4]. (Grade C recommendation)
Isotope Bone Scan : The present evidence
suggests that it may not be mandatory to perform
an isotope bone scan if the PSA is less than 20 ng/
ml and there is absence of bone pain, since the
positive yield in such cases is extremely low (1%).
(Grade B recommendations)
Prostatic biopsy: Trans-rectal ultrasonography
(TRUS) guided biopsy of the prostate is the most
widely accepted method to diagnose prostate
cancer. The indications for prostate biopsy include
an abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) or
serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) level. Sextant
biopsy is no longer considered adequate. At a
glandular volume of 30-40 mL, at least eight cores
should be sampled. More than 12 cores are not
significantly more conclusive [5] (level of evidence:
1a). Seminal Vesicle and transition zone biopsies
are not routinely recommended, as the yield is low
and moreover, it does not add significantly to the
combination of clinical staging, PSA and Gleason
score. A minimum of 10 systemic, laterally directed,
cores are recommended, with perhaps more cores
in larger volumes. (Grade B recommendation)
Histological diagnosis of prostate cancer is mandatory
before starting therapy, even if there is overriding
evidence of advanced carcinoma of the prostate.
Targeted, sextant or extended biopsies may be
done, usually by the trans-rectal route and the
biopsies should be separately labeled and sent to
the pathologist.
The biopsy specimens should be reported as per
the published standard reporting guidelines for
reporting prostatic specimens.
Extensive sampling of all biopsy cores or TUR chips
will yield a higher proportion of unsuspected cancers
than restricted sampling.
Before processing, record the number of cores per
vial and length of each core. There is a significant
correlation between the length of prostate biopsy
tissue on the histological slide and the detection
rate of [6].
The number of cores involved by tumor and the
percentage of each core involved may influence
treatment and should be carefully recorded.
Gleason Score: Five distinct patterns of growth from
well to poorly differentiated has been described in
the original Gleason scale [7]. Pattern 1 tumors are
the most differentiated, with discrete glandular
formation, whereas pattern 5 lesions are the most
undifferentiated, with loss of the glandular
architecture. The final Gleason score is the sum of
the grades of the most common, and second most
common growth patterns; the Gleason score can
range from 2 (1 + 1) to 10 (5 + 5). Among patients
with Gleason score 7, primary Gleason grade 4
indicates a likelihood of higher tumor stage and
higher probability of PSA recurrence than does
primary pattern 3. Some investigators have
advocated that the percentage of Gleason 4/5 tumor
be reported more precisely as the percentage of
high grade is not adequately described by
conventional Gleason sums [8]. Where more than
two patterns are present, and the worst grade is
neither the predominant nor the secondary grade,
the predominant and highest grade should be
chosen to arrive at a score (e.g, 60%,grade 3; 35%,
grade 4; 5%, grade 5 is scored as 3+ 5 = 8).
Histopathology of radical prostatectomy
The histo-pathological examination of radical
prostatectomy (RP) specimens aims to provide
information about the actual pathological stage, grade
and surgical margin status of the prostate cancer. The
weight and dimensions of the specimen are recorded
before embedding it for histological processing. It is
generally recommended that RP specimens are totally
embedded to enable the best assessment of location,
multifocality and heterogeneity of the cancer. However,
for cost-efficiency purposes, partial embedding using a
standard method may also be considered, particularly
for large-sized prostates (> 60 g).
The pathology report provides essential information on
the prognostic characteristics relevant for making clinical
decisions. The report should include:
typing (> 95% represent conventional (acinic)
grading according to the Gleason score and
presence of HG PIN
(sub) staging and surgical margin status of the
if appropriate, location and extent of extra-prostatic
extension, sidedness of extra-prostatic extension
or seminal vesicle invasion, location and extent of
positive surgical margins
additional information may be provided on multifocality, diameter of the dominant tumor and the
zonal location (transition zone, peripheral zone,
anterior horn) of the dominant tumor.
Regional lymph nodes
Pelvic lymph node dissection: This remains the
most accurate method of assessing nodal
metastasis. However, patients with low risk disease
(PSA < 10ng/ml, Gleason’s score < 7 and stage
T1c disease) have less than 5% chance of having
positive lymph nodes. As such, only high-risk
patients with stage T3c, PSA>20ng/dl or Gleason>8
or node-positive disease should be recommended
for pelvic lymph nodes dissection before definitive
treatment for localized prostate cancer. Based on
pathologic findings in prostatectomy specimens, the
probability of lymph node involvement can be
estimated by Roach’s formula i.e Nodes+ = 2/3 PSA
+ (Gleason score - 6) x 10, If more than 15% than
pelvic irradiation for nodes or laparoscopic pelvic
node dissection is warranted (level of evidence:
1b). When deciding on pelvic lymph node
dissection, extended lymphadenectomy should be
considered, despite its disadvantages: it requires
surgical experience; it is time-consuming; and it
often leads to more complications than the limited
procedures [9].
PET scan: PET scanning is being increasingly used
to detect recurrences post treatment. Methionine
PET of the prostate with short dynamic scanning
and multicore biopsy is a useful method to ensure
a high detection rate of prostate cancer in patients
with increased PSA and repeat negative
biopsies. [10]
Treatment Guidelines:
Management of high grade prostatic intraepithelial
neoplasia (PIN)
The presence of high grade PIN on biopsy is in itself not
an indication for treatment but requires careful follow-up
and early re-biopsy to rule out invasive cancer. With the
increase in prostatic biopsies in recent years, the
presence of PIN is being more frequently reported.
Although high grade PIN indicates a higher predisposition
to the development of invasive cancer, the natural history
of PIN is uncertain and hence the evidence at the present
time does not warrant early treatment of high grade PIN.
Management of invasive prostatic adenocarcinoma
After initial work-up of DRE, S. PSA, TRUS and biopsy
with GS score, invasive prostate carcinoma depending
on the recurrence risk has been divided into:
Localized prostate cancer (T1 – T3a N0)
Low risk (cT1-T2a and Gleason score 2-6 and PSA
< 10)
Intermediate risk (cT2b-T2c or Gleason score = 7
or PSA 10-20)
High Risk (cT3a or Gleason score 8-10 or
PSA > 20)
Locally advanced disease (T3b-T4 N0)
Metastatic disease: Any T, N+ or Any T, Any N &
distant metastasis (M+)
Treatment of localized prostate cancer
(T1 – T3a N0):
Depending on the risk the options include
Active Surveillance
Radical prostatectomy +/-Pelvic lymph node
dissection +/-Adj RT / HT
Radical radiotherapy in the form of either
External beam: 3D Conformal / IMRT or
Brachytherapy Permanent seeds or HDR
All patients considered fit for radical therapy must be
counseled regarding the above options. The choice of
treatment should be made on the basis of clinical efficacy
(there is no evidence of superiority of one modality over
the other), biological behaviour, morbidity of treatment,
age and life expectancy of the patient and finally patient’s
own perceptions and choice.
Active Surveillance (AS) assumes that the risk posed
by a given cancer can be assessed with some degree of
certainty and that delayed treatment will be as curative
as immediate treatment. With active surveillance, we
attempt to avoid over-treatment in the majority of patients,
but also to administer curative therapy to selected cases.
AS is beneficial in patients with low-volume, low-grade
prostatic carcinoma and elderly patients or medical comorbidities with limited life expectancy and comply for
regular follow up. Most series have shown a 80-90% 10year survival rates after excluding deaths from intercurrent diseases (level of evidence: 2a). Follow-up
assessment includes 6 monthly consultations with routine
DRE and serum PSA with repeat imaging and biopsy 12
to 18 months after the baseline evaluation, then every 2
to 3 years. The goal is to detect progression of the cancer
while cure is still possible Prostatic biopsy and bone
scans may be done as indicated. In patients with low
grade tumors selected for surveillance, the rate of
development of metastases during surveillance is 2.1%/
year as opposed to 14% with high grade tumors [11].
Only data from non-mature randomized clinical trials of
AS with follow-up < 10 years are currently available. A
multicentre clinical trial of AS versus immediate treatment
was opened in the USA in 2006. Its results are expected
in 2025.
Radical prostatectomy (RP) : RP which involves
removal of the entire prostate gland between the urethra
and the bladder, with resection of both seminal vesicles
is recommended at most centres for the management
of organ confined prostate cancer in men with life
expectancy of >10 years. Besides being curative due to
complete removal of cancer, it gives a more accurate
pathological staging and allows better planning for
adjuvant therapy. Currently, radical prostatectomy is the
only treatment for localized disease that has shown a
cancer-specific survival benefit when compared with
conservative management in a prospective, randomized
trial [12]. The retropubic approach is more commonly
performed, as it enables simultaneous pelvic lymph node
assessment to be carried out which is an advantage over
the perineal approach.
In the past 5-10 years, several centres have acquired
considerable experience with laparoscopic radical
prostatectomy. More recently, the robotic-assisted
laparoscopic RP has been developed. It is likely that
prostatectomies have lower morbidity than the retropubic
operation, but randomized studies are as yet unavailable.
Functional and short-term oncological outcomes of
laparoscopic and robot-assisted RP with the open
technique in high-volume centres seem comparable.
However, long-term oncological outcomes are still
unavailable [13].
Although the risk of disease progression of untreated
T1a Prostate Cancer after five years is only 5%, these
cancers can progress in about 50% of cases after 10-13
years [14]. Thus, in younger patients with a lifeexpectancy of 15 years or more, the chance of disease
progression is real. An RP may be offered when the
Gleason score is > 6. In contrast, most patients with T1b
tumours are expected to show disease progression after
five years, and aggressive treatment is often warranted
[14]. Patients with T1b lesions are offered RP when they
have a life expectancy of 10 years or more. For patients
with T1c tumours, RP should be advocated, bearing in
mind that significant tumors will be found in most of these
individuals. T2a patients with a 10-year life expectancy
should be offered RP since 35-55% of them will have
disease progression after five years if not treated. An
extended pelvic lymph node dissection is not necessary
in low-risk, localized Prostate Cancer, as the risk for
positive lymph nodes does not exceed 7% [15].
RP is one of the recommended standard treatments for
patients with intermediate-risk Prostate Cancer and a
life expectancy of more than 10 years. The prognosis is
excellent when the tumor is confined to the prostate
based on pathological examination. As a rule of thumb,
an elective pelvic lymph nodal dissection should be
performed if the estimated risk for positive lymph nodes
exceeds 7% [15] (level of evidence 1b).
There is no consensus regarding the optimal treatment
of men with high-risk localized disease. Surgical
treatment of clinical stage T3 has traditionally been
discouraged, mainly because patients have an increased
risk of positive surgical margins and lymph node
metastases and/or distant relapse [16]. RP for clinical
T3 cancer requires sufficient surgical expertise to keep
the level of morbidity acceptable (level of evidence: 3).
Increased overall surgical experience must contribute
to a decreased operative morbidity and to better
functional results after RP for clinical T3 cancer [17]. An
elective pelvic lymph nodal dissection should be
performed in all high-risk cases, as the estimated risk
for positive lymph nodes will be in the range 15-40%
In cases of positive lymph nodes at final histopathology,
adjuvant ADT may be considered. Messing et al.
examined the role of immediate ADT Vs observation in
patients with positive lymph nodes found at initial surgery.
At a median follow-up of 11.9 years, those receiving
immediate ADT had a significant improvement in OS over
those managed with observation [18].
Neo-adjuvant HT followed by RP: As prostate cancer is
an androgen-dependent tumor, neo-adjuvant hormonal
therapy (NHT) is an appealing concept. Following is the
summary of the findings from Cochrane review [19]
(level of evidence: 1a)
Neo-adjuvant hormonal therapy before RP does not
provide a significant OS advantage over
prostatectomy alone.
Neo-adjuvant hormonal therapy before RP does not
provide a significant advantage in disease-free
survival over prostatectomy alone.
Neo-adjuvant hormonal therapy before RP does
substantially improve local pathological variables
such as organ-confined rates, pathological downstaging, positive surgical margins and rate of lymph
node involvement.
Adjuvant hormonal therapy following RP shows no
survival advantage at 10 years.
Complications of RP: The mortality rate is 0-1.5%;
urinary fistulas are seen in 1.2-4% of patients; and urinary
incontinence persists after one year in 7.7%. In men
undergoing prostatectomy, the rates of post-operative
and late urinary complications are significantly reduced
if the procedure is performed in a high-volume hospital
and by a surgeon who performs a large number of such
procedures. Erectile dysfunction used to occur in nearly
all patients, but nerve-sparing techniques can be applied
in early-stage disease [20]. Patients who benefit from
nerve-sparing RP may have a higher chance of local
disease recurrence and should therefore be selected
carefully. [21]
Radical Radiotherapy (RT): There are no randomized
studies comparing radical prostatectomy with either
external beam therapy or brachytherapy for localized
prostate cancer, but the National Institutes of Health (NIH)
consensus set up in 1988 remains available: external
irradiation offers the same long-term survival results as
surgery; moreover, external irradiation provides a quality
of life at least as good as that provided by surgery. Threedimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) is the gold
standard and, at the beginning of the third millennium,
intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), an optimized
form of 3D-CRT, is gradually gaining ground in centres
of excellence. [22] (level of evidence : 2) In addition to
external irradiation, there has been continued and
growing interest in trans-perineal low dose or high dose
Whatever the technique, the choice of treatment after
the appropriate assessment of tumor extension must be
based on a multidisciplinary approach taking account
Tumor Node Metastasis (TNM-2002) classification
Gleason score defined on a sufficient number of
core biopsies (at least 12)
Baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA)
Age of the patient
Co-morbidities, life expectancy and quality of life
For patients with low risk localized disease retrospective,
non-randomized studies have shown that biochemical
disease-free survival is significantly higher with a radiation
dose  72 Gy compared with < 72 Gy (p = 0.04). Also,
two randomized trials focusing on clinical stages T1-3
N0 M0 paved the way for dose escalation:
The MD Anderson study compared 78 Gy with 70
Gy conventional radiotherapy (n =305 T1-3 pts &
pre-treatment PSA level of more than 10 ng/mL.
With a median follow-up of 8.7 years, showed a
significant increase in freedom from biochemical
and/or clinical failure for low-risk patients (p = 0.04)
The PROG 95-09 evaluated 393 T1b-T2b patients,
of whom 75% had a Gleason score < 6 and a PSA
< 15 ng/mL. Patients were randomized to receive
an initial boost to the prostate alone, using
conformal protons of either 19.8 Gy or 28.8 Gy, and
then 50.4 Gy to a larger volume. With a median
follow-up of 5.5 years, there was a significant
increase in five-year freedom from biochemical
failure (p < 0.001) in favour of low-risk patients, who
were given a higher dose (79.2 Gy), compared with
those receiving a conventional dose (70.2 Gy) [24].
Hence in daily practice, a minimum dose of 70 - 74 Gy is
recommended for low risk group (external with / without
brachytherapy). (level of evidence : 2)
For intermediate risk localized disease, many nonrandomized studies have shown dose escalation to have
a significant impact on five-year survival without
biochemical relapse for patients classified as cT1– cT3,
with a dose ranging from 76-81 Gy. Randomized trials
(Dutch : 68 Gy Vs 78 Gy) showed a significant increase
in five-year freedom from clinical or biochemical failure
for patients in an intermediate-risk group [25] and French
study (70 Gy Vs 80 Gy) has shown a better five-year
biological outcome in intermediate-risk patients so
Hence in daily practice, a minimum dose of 74 - 76 Gy is
recommended for Int risk group (external with / without
brachytherapy). (level of evidence : 2)
For high risk group, external irradiation with dose
escalation is mandatory since it improves the five-year
biochemical disease-free survival, as shown in several
phase III randomized trials namely, Dutch study (68 Gy
Vs 78 Gy) [25], MRC study (64 Gy Vs 74 Gy with neoadjuvant HT) [27], PROG 95-09 study (79.2 Gy Vs 70.2
Gy) [24], and MD Anderson study [23]. EORTC trial
22991, comparing 3D-CRT +/- IMRT with a choice of
three levels of dose (70 Gy, 74 Gy and 78 Gy), with or
without six months of neo-adjuvant and concomitant
hormonal therapy, was closed in April 2008 after recruiting
800 patients, and its results are awaited [28].
In daily practice, a combination of external irradiation
with short-term androgen deprivation is recommended,
based on the results of a phase III randomized trial. This
trial, which included 206 patients with a PSA of at least
10 ng/mL (maximum 40 ng/mL), a Gleason score of at
least 7 (range 5-10), or radiographic evidence of extraprostatic disease, compared 3D-CRT alone or in
combination with six months of ADT. After a median
follow-up of 7.6 years, intermediate- or high-risk patients
without moderate or severe co-morbidity randomized to
receive 3D-CRT plus ADT had a 13% improvement in
overall survival rate ( p < 0.001) [29]. (level of
evidence : 1b)
Further, meta-analysis of data obtained exclusively from
RCT’s provides evidence that high dose RT is superior
to conventional dose RT in terms of preventing
biochemical failure in low-, intermediate-, and high-risk
prostate cancer patients, high dose RT should be offered
to all patients regardless of their risk status. Between
the doses of 70 and 80 Gy, there was a significant
increase in the 5-year Biochemical control rate of 14%,
17.8%, and 19.2% in low-, intermediate, and high-risk
patients, respectively. [30, 31] (Level of evidence :1a
Grade A recommendation)
Hence in daily practice, a minimum dose of 74 - 80 Gy is
recommended for high risk group with a component of
newer highly conformal radiation techniques (external
with / without brachytherapy). (level of evidence : 1a)
Prophylactic irradiation of pelvic lymph nodes in highrisk localized prostate cancer
Invasion of the pelvic lymph nodes is a poor prognostic
factor and mandates systemic medical treatment
because radiotherapy alone is insufficient. Prophylactic
whole pelvis irradiation has been abandoned since
randomized trials failed to show that patients benefited
from prophylactic irradiation of the pelvic lymph nodes
in high-risk cases (46-50 Gy) [32 – 36]. Studies
demonstrated that patients with a risk of LN involvement
of 15% to 35% benefited the most from pelvic nodal RT,
whereas those with a risk of less than 15% or more than
35%(higher distant metastasis) did not benefit from pelvic
nodal RT [37] (level of evidence 2b ; Grade B
Interstitial brachytherapy: Tumors, which can be
completely encompassed by the implant high-dose
volume may be treated with brachytherapy alone. Ideal
patients for permanent interstitial implantation as
monotherapy are those with favorable risk prognostic
features who have a high likelihood of organ-confined
disease. This group includes those with PSA levels 10
ng/mL or less, Gleason scores less than 6-7, and clinical
stages T1b- T2a, and prostate volume of < 50 cm3 and
good International Prostatic Symptom Score (IPSS) [38].
It is not recommended for patients with locally advanced
disease. (level of evidence : 2b)
Combination of brachytherapy and EBRT is generally
considered a more suitable treatment option than
implantation alone for patients with intermediate and highrisk patients with localized prostate cancer. Usually
ultrasound guided implantation with 125I seeds or 103Pd
implants is done. In general, 45 to 50 Gy of EBRT is
delivered using conventional or conformal-based
techniques to the prostate and peri-prostatic tissues. If
a low-dose-rate boost is used, the brachytherapy
prescription dose has been 90-100 Gy for 103Pd implants
and 110 Gy for 125I implants. For HDR brachytherapy
approach patients undergo trans-perineal placement of
after-loading catheters in the prostate under ultrasound
guidance. After CT-based treatment planning, several
high-dose fractions, ranging from 4 to 6 Gy each, are
administered during an interval of 24 to 36 hours using
Ir. This treatment is followed by supplemental EBRT
directed to the prostate and peri-prostatic tissues to a
dose of 45 to 50.4 Gy using conventional fractionation.
Advantage with HDR being the radiation oncologist and
physicist can more easily optimize the delivery of RT to
the prostate, reducing the potential for under-dosage ,
reduces radiation exposure to the radiation oncologist
and others involved in the procedure compared with
permanent interstitial implantation , radiobiologically more
efficacious in terms of tumor cell kill for patients with
increased tumor bulk or adverse prognostic features
compared with low-dose-rate boosts such as 125I or 103Pd.
Results of permanent implants have been reported from
different institutions, with a median follow-up ranging
between 36 and 120 months. Recurrence-free survival
after five and 10 years was reported to range from 7193% and from 65-85%, respectively [39].
Dose escalation with HDR brachy vs Radioactive
seeds.The combination of external beam radiotherapy
with HDR appeared to give better biochemical control
and better overall survival as compared to external beam
radiotherapy alone. Though the biochemical control rates
with radioactive seeds was comparable to that of HDR
brachytherapy, the overall survival was better with HDR
brachytherapy. [30] (Level of evidence: 1a, Grade A
Brachytherapy Related Toxicity: Patients must be
informed about the potential late genitourinary or
gastrointestinal toxicity that may occur, as well as the
impact of irradiation on erectile function. Radiotherapy
affects erectile function to a lesser degree than surgery
according to retrospective surveys of patients. A recent
meta-analysis has shown that the one-year rate of
probability for maintaining erectile function was 0.76 after
brachytherapy, 0.60 after brachytherapy plus external
irradiation, 0.55 after external irradiation, 0.34 after nervesparing radical prostatectomy, and 0.25 after standard
radical prostatectomy. When studies with more than two
years of follow-up were selected (i.e. excluding
brachytherapy), the rates became 0.60, 0.52, 0.25, and
0.25, respectively, with a greater spread between the
radiation techniques and surgical approaches [40].
Post operative Adjuvant therapy: The Early Prostate
Cancer Program randomized trial of adjuvant
bicalutamide Vs no adjuvant treatment in patients with
localized prostate cancer managed by radical
prostatectomy, radiation therapy or surveillance
demonstrated a significant reduction in the risk of
recurrence and progression. These results need to be
confirmed in other trials before incorporating into routine
clinical practice.
Extracapsular invasion (pT3) is associated with a risk of
local recurrence, which can be as high as 30%. In a
multifactorial analysis, the predictors of biochemical
relapse are:
PSA level (p = 0.005)
Gleason score of the surgical specimen (p = 0.002)
Positive surgical margins (p < 0.001)
Three prospective randomized trials have assessed the
role of immediate post-operative radiotherapy. The
EORTC study 22911, with a target sample size of 1005
patients, compared immediate post-operative
radiotherapy (60 Gy) with radiotherapy delayed until local
recurrence (70 Gy) in patients classified as pT3 pN0 after
retropubic radical prostatectomy. Immediate postoperative radiotherapy proved to be well tolerated, with
a risk of grade 3-4 urinary toxicity of less than 3.5%,
without significant differences regarding the rate of
incontinence and/or stricture of anastomosis. The study
concludes that immediate post-operative radiotherapy
after surgery significantly improves five-year clinical or
biological survival: 72.2% vs 51.8% (p < 0.0001) [41].
However, the EORTC study has not yet demonstrated
improved metastasis-free and cancer-specific survival
in this cohort of patients. The most suitable candidates
for immediate radiation therapy might be those with
multifocal positive surgical margins and a Gleason score
> 7. The conclusions of the ARO trial 96-02 – based on
a cohort of 385 patients – echoed those of EORTC since
after a median follow-up of 54 months, biochemical
progression-free survival was significantly improved in
the radiotherapy group: 72% vs 54% (p = 0.0015) [42].
In the same way, the SWOG 8794 trial randomised 425
pT3 patients, and the updated results [43], with a median
follow-up of 11.5 years, show that adjuvant radiation
significantly improved metastasis-free survival, with a 15year metastasis-free survival of 46% vs 38% (p = 0.036)
and a 15-year overall survival of 47% vs 37% (p = 0.053).
Thus, for patients classified as T1-2 N0 (or T3 N0 with
selected prognostic factors), pT3 pN0 with a high risk of
local failure after radical prostatectomy due to capsular
rupture, positive margins and/or invasion of the seminal
vesicles, who present with a PSA level of < 0.1 ng/mL
one month after surgery, two options can be offered within
the frame of an informed consent:
either an immediate radiotherapy to the surgical bed
[44] upon recovery of urinary function (level of
or clinical and biological monitoring followed by
salvage radiotherapy when the PSA exceeds 0.5
ng/ mL [45]; 1.0 ng/mL seems to be a breakpoint
above which the likelihood of local control is
significantly reduced. (level of evidence:3)
Treatment of locally advance Prostate Cancer
(T3b-T4): The incidence of locally advanced
prostate cancer has declined as a result of individual
or mass screening. Pelvic lymph node irradiation
is optional for N0 patients, but the results of
radiotherapy alone are very poor. Because of the
hormonal dependence of prostate cancer, ADT has
been combined with external irradiation.
Treatment options include,
Neo-adjuvant hormone therapy followed by Radical
radiation therapy
Neo-adjuvant hormone therapy followed by Radical
Hormonal therapy alone
Watchful waiting - Elderly patients with limited life
Neo-adjuvant and adjuvant hormone therapy followed
by Radiation therapy: This treatment option should be
considered for patients with locally advanced disease
who are to be treated with a local therapy.
Neoadjuvant and concomitant HT [46], concomitant and
long term adjuvant HT [47], long term adjuvant HT [48]
approaches have shown significant benefit in terms of
progression free survival and overall survival. Also, neoadjuvant, concomitant and long term Adj HT shows better
outcome as shown by RTOG 92-02 trial [49]. The RTOG
92-02 trial closed in 1995 after accruing 1554 patients.
Statistically significant improvements were observed in
actuarial biochemical freedom from disease (bNED)
control, distant metastatic failure, local control, and
disease-free survival in patients receiving long-term ADT
(LDAT) (before, during, and two years after radiotherapy),
compared with short-term androgen deprivation (STAD)
(two months before and during radiotherapy). With a
median follow-up of 5.8 years, the LTAD treatment arm
showed significant improvement over the STAD arm in
all efficacy end-points except five-year overall survival,
which was 80% Vs 78.5% (p = 0.73), respectively. In a
subset of patients that was not part of the original study
design, with Gleason score 8-10 tumors, the LTAD arm
showed significantly better overall survival after five years
than the STAD arm, with 81% vs 70.7% (p = 0.04) [49].
(level of evidence:1b)
Neo-adjuvant hormone therapy followed by radical
prostatectomy: Neo-adjuvant hormone therapy followed
by radical prostatectomy has been attempted. This
approach, though technically feasible in patients with
minimal peri-prostatic spread, causes downsizing of the
tumor, higher resectability and reduction in positive
surgical margins. Efficacy of hormone therapy when used
as neo-adjuvant with prostatectomy has no improvement
in overall, disease-specific survival or biochemical free
survival despite improvements in outcomes such as
margin free positive status (level of evidence: Ib).
Hormonal therapy Alone: ADT upfront is beneficial in
terms of cancer specific survival. ADT alone still needs
to be tested. Further results of CAB alone Vs CAB +RT
have shown benefit with addition of RT while other trials
results are awaited [50, 51]. (level of evidence:1b)
Watchful waiting (WW) is offered to asymptomatic
patients with well or moderately differentiated cancer and
a short life expectancy (level of evidence: 3) or PSA <
50 ng/mL and PSA doubling time > 12 months (level of
evidence: 1) In a recent prospective randomized clinical
phase III trial (EORTC 30981), 985 patients with
T0-4 N0-2 M0 prostate cancer were randomly assigned
to immediate androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) or
received ADT only on symptomatic disease progression
or occurrence of serious complications. After a median
follow-up of 7.8 years, the overall survival hazard ratio
was 1.25 (95% CI, 1.05-1.48; non-inferiority p > 0.1)
favoring immediate treatment, seemingly due to fewer
deaths of non-prostatic cancer causes (p = 0.06). The
time from randomization to progression of hormone
refractory disease did not differ significantly, nor did
prostate cancer-specific survival. The median time to the
start of deferred treatment after study entry was seven
years. In this group, 126 patients (25.6%) died without
ever needing treatment (44% of the deaths in this arm).
The conclusion drawn from this study is that immediate
ADT resulted in a modest but statistically significant
increase in overall survival but no significant difference
in prostate cancer mortality or symptom free survival.
Furthermore, the authors identified significant risk factors
associated with a significantly worse outcome: in both
arms, patients with a baseline PSA > 50 ng/mL were at a
> 3.5-fold higher risk of dying of prostate cancer than
patients with a baseline PSA d” 8 ng/mL. If the baseline
PSA was between 8 ng/mL and 50 ng/ mL, the risk of
death was approximately 7.5-fold higher in patients with
a PSA doubling time < 12 months than in patients with a
PSA doubling time > 12 months. However, when early
and delayed treatments were compared in a large
randomized trial carried out by the Medical Research
Council (MRC), a survival benefit for immediate hormone
therapy was demonstrated [52], comparable with the
results of the Lundgren et al. study mentioned above
[53] (level of evidence: 1b).
Treatment of Metastatic Disease:
3a) Metastatic nodal (N+) disease
3b) Distant Metastatic (M+) disease
3a) Metastatic nodal (N+) disease:
Treatment Options include:
Hormanet therapy
Watchful waiting (WW)
Radiation therapy
Hormonal therapy: is the mainstay of treatment in the
form of long term hormonal therapy followed by local
therapy, with radiation therapy preferred.
WW: The literature reporting on deferred treatment for
locally advanced Prostate Cancer is sparse. There are
no randomized studies that compare more aggressive
treatments, such as radiotherapy or surgery, with or
without hormones. Most patients whose disease
progresses after deferred treatment of locally advanced
Prostate Cancer will be candidates for hormone therapy.
Surgery: Lymph node-positive (N+) disease will mostly
be followed by systemic disease progression, and all
patients with significant N+ disease will ultimately fail
treatment. Nevertheless, the combination of RP and
simultaneous hormonal treatment has been shown to
achieve a 10-year CSS rate of 80% [54]. However, it is
questionable whether or not these results could also have
been obtained with hormonal treatment alone. Most
urologists are reluctant to perform RP for clinical N+
disease, or will cancel surgery if a frozen section shows
lymph node invasion.
Radiation therapy: Patients with a pelvic lymph node
involvement lower than the iliac regional nodes, younger
than 80 years old with WHO performance status 0-1 and
no severe co-morbidity may be candidates for external
beam irradiation plus immediate long-term hormonal
manipulation. The RTOG 85-31 randomised phase III
trial has shown, with a median follow-up of 6.5 years,
that 95 patients out of the 173 pN1 patients who received
pelvic radiotherapy with immediate hormonal therapy had
better five and nine-year progression-free survival (PSA
< 1.5 ng/mL), with 54% and 10% respectively versus
33% and 4% with radiation alone and hormonal
manipulation instituted at the time of relapse (p < 0.0001).
Multivariate analysis revealed this combination as having
a statistically significant impact on overall survival,
disease-specific failure, metastatic failure and
biochemical control [55]. (level of evidence : 1b)
3b) Distant Metastatic (M+) Disease:
Immediate hormone therapy is indicated in all patients
with metastatic prostate cancer and should be offered
early to all patients with metastatic disease (symptomatic
and asymptomatic) [56] (level of evidence:1). The
response rate to hormone therapy in patients with
metastatic disease is 85%, with median duration of
response of 18 months and median survival of 36
months. In M1 cases, the median OS ranges between
28 and 53 months; only 7% of patients with metastatic
cancer treated with hormonal therapy are reported to
live 10 years or more [57]. Survival is likely to depend on
the PSA level at diagnosis, the Gleason score, the volume
of metastatic disease, and the presence of bony
Treatment of osseous metastases:
Surgical Intervention
Pathological fracture of weight bearing bones in
patients with reasonable life-expectancy
Decompressive surgery in spinal cord compression
Radiation therapy
External beam radiation therapy for painful or
unstable skeletal metastases: A single fraction of 8
Gy will relieve pain in over 70% of patients [58,59]
(Level of evidence: 1b). Fractionated RT for bone
metastases may be considered in patients with
spinal cord compression or bone-only disease.
Hemibody radiation in patients with multiple
symptomatic skeletal metastases (8 Gy for UHBI
& 6 Gy for LHBI).
Systemic radionuclide therapy : Radioisotopes like
Strontium89 and Samarium153 may improve bone
pains in upto 70% patients
Bisphosphonates (Zoledronic Acid): Has been
shown to reduce bone pains and skeletal-related
events including fractures in randomized trials.
(Grade A recommendation) Recently,
bisphosphonates have been used to inhibit
osteoclast-mediated bone resorption and osteoclast
precursors in HRPC to provide effective treatment
of skeletal complications and to reduce pain or
provide total pain relief. In the largest single phase
III trial, 643 patients who had HRPC with bone
metastases were randomized to receive zoledronic
acid, 8 mg or 4 mg every 3 weeks for 15 consecutive
months, or placebo. At 15 and 24 months of followup, patients treated with only 4 mg of zoledronic
acid had fewer skeletal related events compared
to the placebo group (44% vs 33%, p = 0.021) and
fewer pathological fractures (13.1% vs 22.1%, p =
0.015). Furthermore, the time to first skeletal-related
event was longer in the zoledronate group, so
improving QoL. Patients were initially randomised
to 4 or 8 mg of zoledronic acid, but the 8 mg dosage
was later modified to 4 mg because of toxicity. [60]
Currently, bisphosphonates could be proposed to
patients with HRPC bone metastases to prevent
skeletal complications, even if the best dosing
interval is unclear, but at present is every 3 weeks
or less. The toxicity, e.g. jaw necrosis, of these
drugs, especially amino bisphosphonate, must
always be kept in mind.
In summary, pain due to osseous metastases is one of
the most debilitating complications of prostate cancer.
Bisphosphonates have been highly effective with a
response rate of 70-80% in small, open trials, which,
associated with a low frequency of side-effects, makes
bisphosphonates an ideal medication for palliative
therapy. Bisphosphonates should be considered early in
the management of symptomatic bone metastasis.
(Grade A recommendation) Critical issues of palliation
must be addressed when considering additional systemic
treatment, including management of pain, constipation,
anorexia, nausea, fatigue and depression, which often
occur (i.e. palliative external beam radiation, cortisone,
analgesics and antiemetics).
Hormonal therapy: Androgen deprivation can be
achieved either by suppressing the secretion of testicular
androgens by means of surgical or medical castration,
or by inhibiting the action of the circulating androgens at
the level of their receptor in prostate cells using
competing compounds known as anti-androgens.
Alternatively, these two modalities can be combined to
achieve what is commonly known as complete (or
maximal or total) androgen blockade (CAB).
Bilateral orchiectomy, either total or by means of a
subcapsular technique (i.e. with preservation of tunica
albuginea and epididymis), is a simple and virtually
complication-free surgical procedure that can easily be
performed under local anaesthesia. It is the quickest way
to achieve a castration level, which is usually obtained in
less than 12 hours. The main drawback of orchiectomy
is that it may have a negative psychological effect: some
men consider it to be an unacceptable assault on their
manhood. In addition, it is irreversible and does not allow
for intermittent treatment. The use of bilateral
orchiectomy has declined recently, which can be
attributed to the effects of stage migration towards earlier
disease, and the introduction of equally effective
pharmacological modalities of castration.
Long-acting LHRH agonists (buserelin, goserelin,
leuprorelin and triptorelin) have been used in advanced
Prostate Cancer for more than 15 years and are currently
the predominant forms of ADT [61]. They are synthetic
analogues of LHRH, generally delivered as depot
injections on a one-, two-, three-, or six-monthly basis,
that interfere with the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal
axis. They initially stimulate pituitary LHRH receptors,
inducing a transient rise in LH and FSH release, and
consequently elevate testosterone production (known as
‘testosterone surge’ or ‘flare up’ phenomenon), which
begins within approximately two or three days of the first
injection and lasts through approximately the first week
of therapy.
In a recent meta-analysis evaluating single-therapy ADT
for advanced Prostate Cancer, LHRH agonists were
shown to have comparable efficacy to orchiectomy and
DES [62] (level of evidence: 1a). This observation
questions the clinical impact of changing the castrate
testosterone level definition from 50 ng/dL to 20 ng/dL.
In addition, although only based on an indirect
comparison, all seemed equally effective whatever their
formulation [62] (level of evidence: 3).
Today, LHRH agonists have become the ‘standard of
care’ in hormonal therapy because they avoid the physical
and psychological discomfort associated with
orchiectomy, and lack the potential cardiotoxicity
associated with DES. However, the main concerns
associated with the administration of LHRH agonists are
the potentially detrimental effects associated with the
‘flare phenomenon’ in advanced disease, namely
increased bone pain, acute bladder outlet obstruction,
obstructive renal failure, spinal cord compression, and
fatal cardiovascular events due to hyper-coagulation
status. A recent review addressing these issues
concluded that clinical flare needs to be distinguished
from the more common biochemical flare (i.e. increasing
levels of PSA), and even from asymptomatic radiographic
evidence of progression, and that patients at risk for
clinical flare are overwhelmingly those with high volume,
symptomatic, bony disease, accounting for only 4-10%
of M1 patients.
Anti-androgens compete with testosterone and DHT for
binding sites on their receptors in the prostate cell
nucleus, thus promoting apoptosis and inhibiting Prostate
Cancer growth. These orally administered compounds
are classified according to their chemical structure as
steroidal (e.g. cyproterone acetate [CPA], megestrol
acetate and medroxyprogesterone acetate) and nonsteroidal or pure (e.g. nilutamide, flutamide and
bicalutamide). Both classes compete with androgens at
the receptor level, but while this is the sole action of nonsteroidalanti-androgens, steroidal anti-androgens
additionally have progestational properties with central
inhibition ofthe pituitary gland. As a consequence, nonsteroidal anti-androgens do not lower testosterone levels,
which remain normal or, conversely, slightly elevated.
As primary monotherapy, bicalutamide 150 mg/day has
been compared with medical or surgical castration in
two large prospective randomised trials with identical
study designs, including a total of 1435 patients with
locally advanced M0 or M1 Prostate Cancer [63]. A
pooled analysis showed:
In M1 patients, an improvement in OS with
castration, although the difference in median
survival between the groups was only six weeks; a
further post hoc analysis showed a survival benefit
only for patients with higher PSA levels (> 400 ng/
mL) at study entry.
In M0 patients (N = 480), no significant difference
was noted in OS based on the Kaplan Meier test,
with median survival being 63.5 months in the
bicalutamide arm compared with 69.9 months in
the castration one.
Intermittent Vs Continuous Androgen Deprivation
For reasons that as yet remain unclear, long-term CAB,
which stimulates prostate cell apoptosis, fails to eliminate
the entire malignant cell population, so that after a
variable period (averaging 24 months) the tumor
inevitably relapses, being characterized by an androgenindependent state of growth. Experimental data indicate
that androgen-independent progression may begin early
after the administration of hormonal therapy, coinciding
with the cessation of androgen-induced differentiation
of stem cells. It is therefore theoretically possible that if
androgen deprivation is stopped prior to the progression
of androgen-independent cells, any subsequent tumour
growth would then be solely sustained by the proliferation
of androgen-dependent stem cells, which should be
susceptible once again to androgen withdrawal. In this
way, cyclical ADT would delay the emergence of the
androgen-independent clone. Thus, intermittent ADT may
result in two other benefits: namely the preservation of
QoL in the off-therapy periods and the reduction of cost.
Several phase II trials have demonstrated the feasibility
of intermittent androgen blockade (IAB) in metastatic or
biochemically recurrent disease, with PSA response rates
and symptom improvement similar to that of CAB, but
phase III prospective, randomized controlled trials are
still underway, and data on survival endpoints and QoL
are not mature. Preliminary results of clinical phase III
trials have demonstrated not significantly different
efficacy for intermittent vs continuous ADT in men with
PSA progression following radical prostatectomy and in
advanced metastatic prostate cancer [64,65, 66].
The South West Oncology Group (SWOG) trial 9346
randomized 1134 men with stage D2 Prostate Cancer to
intermittent and continuous ADT after seven months’
induction ADT with PSA reduction < 4 ng/mL. No
significant differences with regard to survival in a very
preliminary analysis were identified between treatment
groups [62]. A PSA reduction to < 0.2 ng/mL, < 4 ng/mL
and > 4 ng/mL was identified as a significant prognostic
factor with regard to survival, achieving 13 months, 44
months and 75 months, respectively. In some other trials,
75 patients were considered for IAD if they had achieved
PSA serum levels < 4 ng/mL or at least 90% reduction of
pre-treatment levels after 9 months of ADT [65]. Patients
went on when PSA values rose > 20 ng/mL at which the
9-month cycle of ADT was repeated. 86% of the men
are alive at a median of 134 months, with a median
survival of 95 months from the initial ADT cycle. A 100%
and 70% survival at 5 years was calculated for those
presenting with locally advanced disease and metastases
at initial presentation, respectively. (level of evidence:2)
Follow-up Protocol: PSA measurement, diseasespecific history and DRE are recommended at the
following intervals: 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively,
every 6 months thereafter until 3 years, and then annually.
(Grade B recommendation) The purpose of the first
clinic visit is mainly to detect treatment-related
complications and to assist patients in coping with the
new situation. Tumor or patient characteristics may allow
alterations to this schedule. After initiation of hormonal
treatment, it is recommended that patients be followedup at three and six months. These guidelines must be
individualized, and each patient should be told to contact
his physician in the event of troublesome symptoms.
Management of biochemical relapses after
radical local therapy:
PSA monitoring after radical prostatectomy
PSA is expected to be undetectable within 3 weeks after
a successful radical prostatectomy [67]. A persistently
elevated PSA level means that PSA-producing tissue
remains in the body. In patients treated with radical
prostatectomy, this is generally thought to be residual
cancer due to either micro-metastases that were not
detected or undetectable beforehand, or residual disease
in the pelvis possibly due to positive surgical margins. A
rapidly increasing PSA level (high PSA velocity, short PSA
doubling time) indicates distant metastases, while a later
and slowly increasing concentration of PSA is most likely
to indicate local disease recurrence. The time to PSA
recurrence and tumor differentiation are also important
predictive factors distinguishing between local and
systemic recurrence [68 69]. Both local treatment failure
and distant metastases have been shown to occur with
undetectable PSA levels. This is very rare and occurs
almost only in patients with unfavourable pathology
(undifferentiated tumors) [70 71]. This means that, in
patients with a relatively favorable pathology (< pT3, pN0,
Gleason score < 8), PSA measurement, together with
the disease-specific history, could stand as the single
test in follow-up after radical prostatectomy
PSA monitoring after radiation therapy
The PSA level falls slowly after radiotherapy compared
with radical prostatectomy. The optimal cut-off value for
a favourable PSA nadir after radiotherapy is somewhat
controversial. Achieving a PSA nadir of less than 0.5 ng/
mL seems to be associated with a favourable outcome
[72]. The interval before reaching the nadir PSA may be
very long and can sometimes take up to 3 years or more.
A PSA rising more than 2 ng/mL above the nadir PSA is
the current definition of biochemical failure after
radiotherapy. Also, after radiotherapy, the PSA doubling
time has been shown to correlate to the site of
recurrence; patients with local recurrence had a doubling
time of 13 months compared to 3 months for those with
distant failure [73].
PSA Failure Definitions:
The level of PSA at which to define treatment failure
differs between radical prostatectomy cases and
radiation treated cases. Following radical retropubic
prostatectomy, two consecutive values of 0.2 ng/mL or
greater appear to represent an international consensus
defining recurrent cancer [74, 75]. At the 2006 RTOGASTRO Consensus conference a new definition of
radiation failure was established with as the main aim to
establish a better correlation between the definition and
clinical outcome. The new definition of radiation failure
is a rise of 2 ng/mL above the post-treatment PSA-nadir
(lowest value) [76]. This definition is applicable for
patients treated with or without hormonal therapy.
With regard to further management once PSA relapse
has been diagnosed, it is of major importance to
determine whether the recurrence has developed at local
or distant sites. About 50% of patients who underwent
radical retropubic prostatectomy will have local disease,
and the remainder will have either distant disease alone,
or distant and local disease.
Important parameters to help differentiate between local
or distant relapse include:
Timing of the PSA increase after surgery
PSA velocity
PSA doubling time (PSADT)
Pathohistological stage
Gleason score of the prostatectomy specimen
PSA elevations developing within the first two years
following surgery are associated with distant recurrences.
It has been shown that a median PSADT of 4.3 months
is associated with distant relapse, whereas a median
PSADT of 11.7 months predicts local failure. According
to a recent study, PSA velocity of < 0.75 ng/mL/y was
observed in 94% of patients with local recurrence,
whereas 56% of patients with distant metastases
demonstrated a PSA velocity of > 0.75 ng/mL/y.
With radiotherapy, any continuously rising PSA following
a nadir after radiation is an indicator for local recurrence,
systemic metastatic spread or a combination of both.
However, due to the well known PSA bounce
phenomenon, biochemical recurrence is defined by three
consecutive PSA rises above the nadir level according
to ASTRO guidelines. After radiotherapy, a late and slowly
rising PSA is a sign of local failure only.
Local recurrence is defined by:
a prostatic biopsy demonstrating malignant cells
18 months or longer after initial radiotherapy
plus an associated rise in PSA
plus no evidence of metastatic spread documented
by computed tomography (CT) or magnetic
resonance imaging (MRI) and bone scintigraphy.
Following radical prostatectomy,
CT scans of the pelvis and abdomen are of low
sensitivity and specificity in patients with PSA levels
< 20 ng/mL or a PSA velocity of < 20 ng/mL/y
Endorectal MRI or PET scans may help to detect
local recurrences if PSA is > 1-2.0 ng/mL, but is
not yet routine clinical practice
If available, a capromab pendetide scan shows a
diagnostic yield of 60-80% independent of the PSA
serum level
Treatment of PSA only failures: The timing and mode of
treatment of PSA-only recurrence after radical
prostatectomy or radiation therapy remains controversial.
After radical retropubic prostatectomy observation,
radiation therapy to the prostatic bed, (complete)
androgen blockade, intermittent androgen deprivation
(IAD), a combination of anti-androgens with 5 alpha
reductase inhibitors, and even early chemo-hormonal
approaches are therapeutic options. The same
therapeutic options may be applied for PSA recurrences
following radiation therapy. In addition, salvage
prostatectomy, cryotherapy and brachytherapy might be
indicated in carefully selected patients. (Grade B
Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer (HRPC)
Definition of HRPC
Serum castration levels of testosterone
(testosterone < 50 ng/dL, or < 1.7 nmol/L)
Three consecutive rises of PSA, 1 week apart,
resulting in two 50% increases over the nadir, with
a PSA > 2 ng/mL
Anti-androgen withdrawal for at least 4 weeks*
PSA progression, despite secondary hormonal
Progression of osseous lesions: progression or
appearance of two or more lesions on bone scan
or soft tissue lesions using the RECIST criteria**
and with nodes e” >2 cm in diameter
Either anti-androgen withdrawal or one secondary hormonal
manipulation should have been done in order to fulfil the criteria
for HRPC.
(From Therasse et al., 2000).]
Androgen deprivation in androgen-independent
Prostate Cancer
The existence of androgen-independent Prostate Cancer
demonstrates that disease progression occurs despite
castration. The castration levels of testosterone must
therefore be documented and a serum testosterone level
< 50 ng/mL (1.7 nmol/L) should be documented at initial
relapse on hormonal therapy [77]. The overall effect of
continued testicular androgen suppression in HRPC is
minimal. Two recent trials have challenged these data
by showing only a marginal survival benefit for patients
remaining on LHRH analogues during second- and thirdline therapies. However, in the absence of prospective
data, the modest potential benefits outweigh the minimal
risk of treatment and androgen suppression should be
continued indefinitely in these patients. (Grade C
For the patient with progressive disease after androgen
deprivation, there are many therapeutic options. They
include anti-androgen withdrawal, addition of antiandrogens, anti-androgen replacement, oestrogenic
compounds, adrenolytic agents and novel
approaches [78].
Androgen withdrawal should be systematically
considered as a first-line modality in relapsing patients,
even if its efficacy is limited (level of evidence: 2).
Approximately one-third of patients respond to antiandrogen withdrawal, as indicated by a > 50% PSA
decrease, for a median duration of approximately 4
Switching to an alternative anti-androgen therapy: There
has been recent interest in another simple modality: the
alternative anti-androgen therapy. After CAB in 232
progressing patients (76% being M1b), a withdrawal
effect was observed in 31 men (15.1%). A second line
hormonal treatment was performed by giving an
alternative non-steroidal drug (i.e. initial flutamide was
replaced by bicalutamide and vice versa). An overall >
50% decline in PSA was observed in 83 men (35.8%),
irrespective of any previous withdrawal effect, and lasting
more than 6 months. The higher the PSA at the start of
second-line therapy, the shorter the efficacy.
Aminoglutethimide, ketoconazole and corticosteroids act
mainly via this mechanism to produce a PSA response
in about 25% of patients for about 4 months [79].
However, the simultaneous addition of ketoconazole to
anti-androgen withdrawal, produced a significantly
increased PSA response (32% Vs 11%) and a longer
time to PSA progression (8.6 Vs 5.9 months) compared
to anti-androgen withdrawal alone [80].
Oestrogens: Recently, DES [81] achieved a positive PSA
response between 24% and 80%, with an overall
estimated survival of 63% at 2 years. However, even at
low doses of DES, about one-third (31%) of patients
developed deep venous thrombosis and 7% experienced
myocardial infarction.
Cytotoxic Chemotherapy in HRPC: Several proven
chemotherapeutic options are available for metastatic
disease in HRPC. Potential benefits of cytotoxic therapy
and expected side-effects should be discussed with each
individual patient. (Grade C recommendation) A
significant improvement in median survival of about 2
months occurred with docetaxel-based chemotherapy
compared to mitoxantrone + prednisone therapy [82, 83]
(Grade A recommendation). Currently, the only
indication for chemotherapy in HRPC non-metastatic
patients is inside clinical trials and patients should be
advised to participate. A recent phase III trial in HRPC
patients confirmed the potential interest of thalidomide
compared to placebo in non-metastatic patients with a
progression-free survival of 15 months versus 9.6 months
(p = 0.0002) [84]. In the CALGB 9182 study , 244 patients
with symptomatic metastatic HRPC were randomized to
receive either mitoxantrone + hydrocortisone, 12 mg/m2
every 3 weeks, or hydrocortisone alone. No differences
were observed with regard to survival, PSA response,
and median time to progression. However, the QoL was
significantly improved in the combination arm.
Encouraging results have been seen with alternative
treatments evaluated in prospective clinical phase II trials,
including pegylated doxorubicin, vinorelbine, a
combination of paclitaxel, carboplatin and estramustine,
a combination of vinblastine, doxorubicin and
radionuclides, and a combination of docetaxel and
mitoxantrone. The lack of representative randomised
phase III trials and unknown long-term efficacy are major
problems associated with all these studies.
Salvage CT: Since all patients who receive docetaxelbased chemotherapy for HRPC will progress within 6 to
8 months, there have been many clinical trials
investigating the role of salvage chemotherapy. The
results suggest the most appropriate approaches are
intermittent docetaxel CT (Grade B recommendation),
molecular-targeted therapy like thalidomide [85] and
second-line satraplatin. Many new drugs, such as
gefitinib, bevacuzimab (phase III trial CALB 90401),
oblimersen (phase III trial EORTC 30021), and also a
vaccine, G-Vax , are being tested in phase III trials.
Palliative treatment options should be offered depending
on the symptoms as described in previous section.
Hormone-refractory prostate cancer is usually a
debilitating disease, often affecting the elderly male. A
multidisciplinary approach is required with input from
medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, urologists,
nurses, psychologists and social workers.
Screening and Early detection of Prostate Cancer:
Population or mass screening is defined as the
examination of asymptomatic men (at risk). It usually
takes place as part of a trial or study and is initiated by
the screener. In contrast, early detection or opportunistic
screening comprises individual case findings, which are
initiated by the person being screened (patient) and/or
his physician. The primary endpoint of both types of
screening has two aspects:
Reduction in mortality from Prostate Cancer. The
goal is not to detect more and more carcinomas,
nor is survival the endpoint because survival is
strongly influenced by lead-time from diagnosis.
The quality of life is important as expressed by
quality-of-life adjusted gain in life years (QUALYs).
Prostate cancer mortality trends range widely from
country to country. Decreased mortality rates due to
prostate cancer have occurred in the USA, Austria, UK
and France, while in Sweden, the 5-year survival rate
has increased from 1960 to 1988, probably due to
increased diagnostic activity and greater detection of nonlethal tumors. However, this trend was not confirmed in
a similar study from the Netherlands. The reduced
mortality seen recently in the USA is often attributed to
the widely adopted aggressive screening policy, but there
is still no absolute proof that prostate-specific antigen
(PSA) screening reduces mortality due to Prostate
Cancer (level of evidence: 2).
Prospective, preferably population-based, randomized
trials are needed to properly evaluate the efficacy of
Prostate cancer screening. Two large trials are underway,
the PLCO (Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovary) trial in
the USA [86] and the ERSPC (European Randomized
Screening for Prostate Cancer) in Europe [87]. The main
endpoint of these trials is difference in prostate cancer
The European Randomized Study of Screening for
Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) [median follow-up of 9 years
in 2009] and the US-based Prostate, Lung, Colorectal,
and Ovarian (PLCO) [follow-up ay 10 years in 2009]
Cancer Screening Trial recently reported on the mortality
benefit of prostate-specific antigen screening. However,
the decline in mortality rates are quite small compared
with the large number of men diagnosed and treated for
prostate cancer. Both studies mention the need for further
investigations that assess the relationship between
prostate cancer screening, treatment, and quality of life.
This is especially important if results continue to show
little impact on mortality and increasing stress placed on
the patient through over-diagnosis and over-treatment.
Both studies would require at-least 13 years follow-up
for final estimates to generate level of evidence: 1b. [88]
Thus, there is currently no evidence for introducing
widespread, population-based, screening programmes
for early prostate cancer detection in all men in a given
population (level of evidence: 2). A less controversial
programme, which is also recommended by most
guidelines, is using PSA with digital rectal examination
(DRE) as an aid to early diagnosis (level of evidence:
The decision to undergo early PSA testing should be a
shared decision between the patient and his physician.
PSA testing and digital rectal examination should be
offered from the age of 45 years to men with a life
expectancy of at least 10 years. The most recent
research suggests further PSA testing is unnecessary
in men >75 years and a PSA level < ng/mL at their first
screening visit. This is because these men have a very
low risk of dying from prostate cancer.
References and Suggested Reading:
Carvalhal GF, Smith DS, Mager DE, Ramos C,
Catalona WJ. Digital rectal examination for
detecting prostate cancer at prostate specific
antigen levels of 4 ng/ml or less. J Urol
Catalona WJ, Partin AW, Slawin KM, Brawer MK,
Flanigan RC, Patel A, Richie JP, deKernion JB,
Walsh PC, Scardino PT, Lange PH, Subong EN,
Parson RE, Gasior GH, Loveland KG, Southwick
PC. Use of the percentage of free prostate-specific
antigen to enhance differentiation of prostate cancer
from benign prostatic disease: a prospective
multicenter clinical trial. JAMA 1998;279(19):
Mullerad M, Hricak H, Kuroiwa K, Pucar D, Chen
HN, Kattan MW. Comparison of endorectal
magnetic resonance imaging, guided prostate
biopsy and digital rectal examination in the
preoperative anatomical localization of prostate
cancer. J Urol 2005;174(6): 2158-63.
Zakian KL, Sircar K, Hricak H, Chen HN, ShuklaDave A, Eberhardt S. Correlation of proton MR
spectroscopic imaging with Gleason score based
on step section pathologic analysis after radical
prostatectomy. Radiology 2005;234(3):804-14.
Eichler K, Hempel S, Wilby J, Myers L, Bachmann
LM, Kleijnen J. Diagnostic value of systematic
biopsy methods in the investigation of prostate
cancer: a systematic review. J Urol
2006;175(5):1605- 12.
Iczkowski KA, Casella G, Seppala RJ, Jones GL,
Mishler BA, Qian J, Bostwick DG. Needle core
length in sextant biopsy influences prostate cancer
detection rate. Urology 2002;59(5):698-703.
Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, Egevad LL;
ISUP grading committee. The 2005 International
Society of Urologic Pathology (ISUP) Consensus
Conference on Gleason grading of Prostatic
Carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2005;29:1228-42.
Billis A, Guimaraes MS, Freitas LL, Meirelles L,
Magna LA, Ferreira U. The impact of the 2005
international society of urological pathology
consensus conference on standard Gleason
grading of prostatic carcinoma in needle biopsies.
J Urol 2008;180(2):548-52; discussion 552-3.
Heidenreich A, Varga Z, Von Knobloch R. Extended
pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing
radical prostatectomy: high incidence of lymph node
metastasis. J Urol 2002;167(4):1681-6.
10. Bouchelouche K, Oehr P. Recent developments in
urologic oncology: positron emission tomography
molecular imaging. Curr Opin Oncol
11. Soloway MS, Soloway CT, Williams S, Ayyathurai
R, Kava B, Manoharan M. Active surveillance; a
reasonable management alternative for patients
with prostate cancer: the Miami experience. BJU
Int 2008;101(2):165-9.
12. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Filén F, Ruutu M,
Garmo H, Busch C, Nordling S,Häggman M,
Anderson SO, Bratell S, Spångberg A, Palmgren
J, Adami HO, Johansson JE; Scandinavian Prostate
Cancer Group Study Number 4. Radical
prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in localized
prostate cancer: the Scandinavian prostate cancer
group-4 randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst.
2008;100 (16):1144-54.
13. Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W, Cestari A, Galfano
A, Graefen M, Guazzoni G, Guillonneau B, Menon
M, Montorsi F, Patel V, Rassweiler J, Van Poppel
H. Retropubic, Laparoscopic, and Robot-Assisted
Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and
Cumulative Analysis of Comparative Studies. Eur
Urol 2009; 25 Jan.
14. Lowe BA, Listrom MB. Incidental carcinoma of the
prostate: an analysis of the predictors of
progression. J Urol 1988;140(6):1340-4.
15. Briganti A, Chun FK, Salonia A, Gallina A, Farina
E, Da Pozzo LF, Rigatti P, Montorsi F, Karakiewicz
PI. Validation of a nomogram predicting the
probability of lymph node invasion based on the
extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with
clinically localized prostate cancer. BJU Int
2006;98(4): 788-93.
16. Boccon-Gibod L, Bertaccini A, Bono AV, Dev
Sarmah B, Höltl W, Mottet N, Tunn U, Zamboglou
N. Management of locally advanced prostate
cancer: a European Consensus. Int J Clin Pract
17. Van Poppel H, Vekemans K, Da Pozzo L, Bono A,
Kliment J, Montironi R, Debois M, Collette L. Radical
prostatectomy for locally advanced prostate cancer:
results of a feasibility study (EORTC 30001). Eur J
Cancer 2006;42(8):1062-7.
18. Messing EM, Manola J, Yao J, Kiernan M, Crawford
D, Wilding G, di’SantAgnese PA, Trump D; Eastern
Cooperative Oncology Group study EST 3886.
Immediate versus deferred androgen deprivation
treatment in patients with node-positive prostate
cancer after radical prostatectomy and pelvic
lymphadenectomy. Lancet Oncol 2006;7(6):472-9.
19. Shelley M, Kumar S, Harrison C, Coles B, Wilt TJ,
Mason MD. A systematic review and meta-analysis
of randomized trials of neo-adjuvant hormone
therapy for localized and locally advanced prostate
carcinoma Cancer Treatment Reviews 2009; 35,
9– 17.
Walsh PC, Partin AW, Epstein JI. Cancer control
and quality of life following anatomical radical
retropubic prostatectomy: results at 10 years. J Urol
Gontero P, Kirby RS. Nerve-sparing radical
retropubic prostatectomy: techniques and clinical
considerations. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis
2005;8 (2):133-9.
Nilsson S, Norlen BJ, Widmarks A. A systematic
overview of radiation therapy effects in prostate
cancer. Acta Oncol 2004;43 (4):316-81.
Kuban DA, Tucker SL, Dong L, Starkshall G, Huang
EH, Cheung MR, Lee AK, and Pollack A. Long term
results of the MD Anderson randomized doseescalation trial for prostate cancer. Int J Radiat
Oncol Biol Phys 2008;70 (1):67-74.
Zietman AL, DeSilvio M, Slater JD, Rossi CJ, Miller
DW, Adams JA, Shipley WU. Comparison of
conventional-dose vs high-dose conformal radiation
therapy in clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the
prostate. A randomized controlled trial JAMA
2005;294 (10):1233-9.
Peeters ST, Heemsbergen WD, Koper PCM, van
Putten WLJ, Slot A, Dielwart MFH, Bonfrer JMG,
Incrocci L, Lebesque JV. Dose-response in
radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: results
of the Dutch multicenter randomized phase III trial
comparing 68 Gy of radiotherapy with 78 Gy. J Clin
Oncol 2006; 24 (13):1990-6.
26. Beckendorf V, Guerif S, Le Prise E, Cosset JM,
Lefloch O, Chauvet B, Salem N, Chapet O, Bourdin
S, Bachaud JM, Maingon P, Lagrange JL, Malissard
L, Simon JM, Pommier P, Hay MH, Dubray B,
Luporsi E, Bey P. The GETUG 70 Gy vs 80 Gy
randomized trial for localized prostate cancer:
feasibility and acute toxicity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol
Phys 2004;60 (4):1056-65.
27. Dearnaley DP, Sydes MR, Graham JD, Aird EG,
Bottomley D, Cowan RA, Huddart RA, Jose CC,
Matthews JH, Millar J, Moore AR, Morgan RC,
Russell JM, Scrase CD, Stephens RJ, Syndikus I,
Parmar MK; RT01 collaborators. Escalated-dose
versus standard-dose conformal radiotherapy in
prostate cancer: first results from the MRC RT01
randomized controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2007;8
28. Bolla M. Three dimensional conformal radiotherapy
alone vs three dimensional conformal therapy plus
adjuvant hormonal therapy in localized T1b-c, T2a,
N0, M0 prostatic carcinoma. A phase III randomized
study. EORTC protocol 22991, EORTC Data
Centre, Brussels, 1999.
29. D’Amico A, Renshaw AA, Loffredo M, Kantoff PW.
Androgen suppression and radiation vs radiation
alone for prostate cancer; a randomized controlled
trial. JAMA 2008;299 (3):289-95.
30. Bradley R. Pieters a,*, Djuna Z.Systematic review:
Comparison of three radiotherapy modalities on
biochemical control and overall survival for the
treatment of prostate cancer: A systematic review.
Radiotherapy and Oncology 2009; 93: 168–173.
31. Gustavo A Viani, Eduardo J Stefano, Sergio L
Afonso. Higher-than -conventional radiation doses
in localized prostate cancer treatment: a metaanalysis of randomized, controlled trials. Int. J.
Radiat. Oncol Biol. Phys, 2009; 74 (5), 1405–1418.
32. Asbell SO, Krall JM, Pilepich MV, Baerwald H,
Sause WT, Hanks GE, Perez CA. Elective
irradiation in stage A2, B carcinoma of the prostate:
analysis of RTOG 77 06. Int J Radiation Oncology
Biol Phys 1988;15 (6):1307-16.
33. Spaas PG, Bagshaw MA, Cox RS. The value of
extended field irradiation in surgically staged
carcinoma of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol
Phys 1988;15:133 (abstract 36).
34. Pommier P, Chabaud S, Lagrange JL, Richaud P,
Lesaunier F, Le Prise E, Wagner JP, Hay MH,
Beckendorf V, Suchaud JP, Pabot du Chatelard JM,
Bernier V, Voirin N, Perol D, Carrie C. Is there a
role for pelvic irradiation in localized prostate
adenocarcinoma? Preliminary results of GETUG01. J Clin Oncol 2007;25 (34):5366-73.
35. Partin AW, Kattan MW, Subong EN, Walsh PC,
Wojno KJ, Oesterling JE, Scardino PT, Pearson JD.
Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical
stage and Gleason score to predict pathological
stage of localized prostate cancer. A multiinstitutional update. JAMA 1997;277 (18):1445-51.
36. Roach M, Marquez C, Yuo H, Narayan P, Coleman
L, Nseyo UO, Navvab Z, Carroll PR. Predicting the
risk of lymph node involvement using the pretreatment prostate specific antigen and Gleason
score in men with clinically localized prostate
cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1993;28 (1):
37. M. Roach III, M. DeSilvio, C. Lawton et al. Phase III
Trial Comparing Whole-Pelvic Versus ProstateOnly Radiotherapy and Neo-adjuvant Versus
Adjuvant Combined Androgen Suppression:
Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 9413 :By
Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2003; Vol 21, No 10
(May 15), pp 1904-1911
38. Ash D, Flynn A, Batterman J, de Reijke T, Lavagnini
P, Blank L; ESTRA/EAU Urological Brachytherapy
Group; EORTC Radiotherapy Group. ESTRO/EAU/
EORTC recommendations on permanent seed
implantation for localized prostate cancer. Radiother
Oncol 2000;57 (3):315-21.
39. Zelefsky MJ, Kuban DA, Levy LB, Potters L, Beyer
DC, Blasko JC, Moran BJ, Ciezki JP, Zietman AL,
Pisansky TM, Elshaikh M, Horwitz EM. Multiinstitutional analysis of long-term outcome for
stages T1-T2 prostate cancer treated with
permanent seed implantation. Int J Radiat Oncol
Biol Phys 2007;67 (2):327-33.
40. Robinson JW, Moritz S, Fung T. Meta-analysis of
rates of erectile function after treatment of localized
prostate carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
2002;54 (4):1063-8.
41. Bolla M, van Poppel H, Collette L, van Cangh P,
Vekemans K, Da Pozzo L, de Reijke TM, Verbaeys
A, Bosset JF, van Velthoven R, Maréchal JM,
Scalliet P, Haustermans K, Piérart M; European
Organization for Research and Treatment of
Cancer. Postoperative radiotherapy after radical
prostatectomy: a randomized controlled trial
(EORTC trial 22911). Lancet 2005;366 (9485):
42. Wiegel T, Bottke D, Steiner U, Siegmann A, Golz
R, Storkel S, et al. Phase III, Post-operative adjuvant
radiotherapy in patients with pT3 prostate cancer
after radical prostatectomy with postoperative
undetectable PSA – a randomized controlled trial.
J. Clin Oncol. 2009; 27(18): 29, 4-30.
43. Swanson GP, Thompson IM, Tangen C, ParadeloJ,
Cany-Hagino E, Crawford ED, Miller G, Lucia MS,
Forman J, Chin J. Update of SWOG 8794: adjuvant
radiotherapy for pT3 prostate cancer improves
metastasis free survival. Int J Rad Oncol Biol Phys
44. Poortmans P, Bossi A, Vandeputte K, Bosset M,
Miralbell R, Maingon P, Boehmer D, Budiharto T,
Symon Z, van den Bergh A, Scrase C, Van Poppel
H, Bolla M. Guidelines for target volume definition
in post-operative radiotherapy for prostate cancer,
on behalf of the EORTC Radition Oncology Group.
Radioth Oncol 2007;84(2):121-7.
45. Cox JD, Gallagher MJ, Hammond EH, Kaplan RS,
Schellhammer PF. Consensus statements on
radiation therapy of prostate cancer: guidelines for
prostate re-biopsy after radiation and for radiation
therapy with rising prostate-specific antigen levels
after radical prostatectomy. American Society for
Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology Consensus
Panel. J Clin Oncol 1999;17(4):1155.
46. Roach M, Bae K, Speight J, Wolkov HB, Rubin P,
Lee RJ, Lawton C, Valicenti R, Grignon D, Pilepich
M. Short-term neodajuvant androgen deprivation
therapy and external-beam radiotherapy for locally
advanced prostate cancer: long term results of
RTOG 8610. J Clin Oncol 2008;26(4):585-91.
47. Bolla M, Collette L, Van Tienhoven G, Warde W,
Dubois JB, Mirimanoff RO, Storme G, Bernier J,
Kuten A, Piérart M. Ten year result of long term
adjuvant androgen deprivation with goserelin in
patients with locally advanced prostate cancer
treated with radiotherapy; a phase III EORTC study.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;72 :S30-S31.
48. Pilepich MV, Winter K, Lawton C, Krisch RE,
Wolkov H, Movsas B, Hug E, Asbell S, Grignon D.
Phase III trial of androgen suppression adjuvant to
definitive radiotherapy. Long term results of RTOG
study 85-31. Proc Am Society Clin Oncol
49. Hanks GE, Pajak TF, Porter A, Grignon D, Brereton
H, Venkatesan V, Horwitz EM, Lawton C, Rosenthal
SA, Sandler HM, Shipley WU; Radiation Therapy
Oncology Group. RTOG 92-02: Phase III trial of
long term adjuvant androgen deprivation after
neoadjuvant hormonal cytoreduction and
radiotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the
prostate. J Clin Oncol 2003;21(21):3972-8.
50. Widmark A, Klepp O, Solberg A, Damber JE,
Angelsen A, Fransson P, Lund JÅ, Tasdemir I, Hoyer
M, Wiklund F, Fosså SD for the Scandinavian
Prostate Cancer Group Study, the Swedish
Association for Urological Oncology. Endocrine
treatment, with or without radiotherapy, in locally
advanced prostate cancer (SPCG-7/SFUO-3): an
open randomized phase III trial. Lancet 2008;373
51. Warde P, Intergroup (NCIC CTG, CUOG, ECOG,
CALGB, SWOG). Phase III randomized trial
comparing total androgen blockade versus total
androgen blockade plus pelvic irradiation in clinical
stage T3-4, N0, M0 adenocarcinoma of the
prostate. National Cancer Institute of Canada,
w w w. s w o g s t a t . o r g / R O S / R O S B o o k s /
52. Mason M, Warde P, Sydes M, Cowan R, James N,
Kirkbride P, Langley R, Latham J, Moynihan C,
Anderson J, Millet J, Nutall J, Moffat L, Parulekar
W, Parmar M; The National Cancer Institute of
Canada Clinical Trials Group PR3/; Medical
Research Council PR07 Trial Management Group.
Defining the need for local therapy in locally
advanced prostate cancer: an appraisal of the MRC
PR07 study. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)
53. The Medical Research Council Prostate Cancer
Working Party Investigators Group. Immediate
versus deferred treatment for advanced prostatic
cancer: initial results of the Medical Research
Council Trial. Br J Urol 1997;79(2):235-46.
54. Lundgren R, Nordle O, Josefsson K. Immediate
estrogen or estramustine phosphate therapy versus
deferred endocrine treatment in nonmetastatic
prostate cancer: a randomized multicentre study
with15 years of followup. The South Sweden
Prostate Cancer Study Group. J Urol
55. Ghavamian R, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML, Slezak J,
Zincke H. Radical retropubic prostatectomy plus
orchiectomy versus orchiectomy alone for pTxN+
prostate cancer: a matched comparison. J Urol
56. Lawton CA, Winter K, Grignon D, Pilepich MV.
Androgen suppression plus radiation versus
radiation alone for patients with D1/pathologic nodepositive adenocarcinoma of the prostate: updated
results based on a national prospective randomized
trial, RTOG 85-31. J Clin Oncol 2005;23(4):800-7.
57. Medical Research Council Prostate Cancer
Working Party Investigators Group. Immediate
versus deferred treatment for advanced prostatic
cancer: initial results of the Medical Research
Council Trial. Br J Urol 1997;79(2):235-46.
58. Tangen CM, Faulkner JR, Crawford ED, Thompson
IM, Hirano D, Eisenberger M, Hussain M. Ten-year
survival in patients with metastatic prostate cancer.
Clin Prostate Cancer 2003;2(1):41-5.
Hartsell WF, Scott CB, Bruner DW, Scarantino CW,
Ivker RA, Roach M 3rd, et al. Randomized trial of
short- versus long-course radiotherapy for palliation
of painful bone metastases. Natl Cancer Ins 2005;
97 (11):798-804.
60. Dy SM, Asch SM, Naeim A, Sanati H, Walling A,
Lorenz KA. Evidence-based standards for cancer
pain management. J Clin Oncol 2008;26 (23):387985.
61. Saad F, Gleason DM, Murray R, Tchekmedyian S,
Venner P, Lacombe L, Chin JL, Vinholes JJ, Goad
JA, Chen B. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial
of zoledronic acid in patients with hormone
refractory metastatic prostate carcinoma. J Natl
Cancer Inst 2002; 94 (19):1458-68.
62. Oefelein MG, Resnick MI. Effective testosterone
suppression for patients with prostate cancer: is
there a best castration? Urology 2003;62 (2):
63. Seidenfeld J, Samson DJ, Hasselblad V, Aronson
N, Albertsen PC, Bennett CL, Wilt TJ. Singletherapy androgen suppression in men with
advanced prostate cancer: a systematic review and
meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2000;132 (7):
64. Tyrrell CJ, Kaisary AV, Iversen P, Anderson JB,
Baert L, Tammela T, Chamberlain M, Webster A,
Blackledge G. A randomized comparison of
‘Casodex’ (bicalutamide) 150 mg monotherapy
versus castration in the treatment of metastatic and
locally advanced prostate cancer. Eur Urol
65. Small EJ, Donnelly B, MacVicar G, Raghavan D;
Southwest Oncology Group Trial 9346 (INT-0162).
Absolute prostate-specific antigen value after
androgen deprivation is a strong independent
predictor of survival in new metastatic prostate
cancer: data from Southwest Oncology Group Trial
9346 (INT- 0162). J Clin Oncol 2006;24(24):398490.
66. Lane TM, Ansell W, Farrugia D, Wilson P, Williams
G, Chinegwundoh F, Philp T, Hines J, Oliver RT.
Long-term outcomes in patients with prostate
cancer managed with intermittent androgen
suppression. Urol Int 2004;73(2):117-22.
67. de Leval J, Boca P, Yousef E, Nicolas H, Jeukenne
M, Seidel L, Bouffioux C, Coppens L, Bonnet P,
Andrianne R, Wlatregny D. Intermittent versus
continuous total androgen blockade in the treatment
of patients with advanced hormone-naive prostate
cancer: results of a prospective randomized
multicenter trial. Clin Prostate Cancer
68. Stamey TA, Kabalin JN, McNeal JE, Johnstone IM,
Freiha F, Redwine EA, Yang N. Prostate specific
antigen in the diagnosis and treatment of
adenocarcinoma of the prostate. II. Radical
prostatectomy treated patients. J Urol
69. Partin AW, Pearson JD, Landis PK, Carter HB,
Pound CR, Clemens JQ, Epstein JI, Walsh PC.
Evaluation of serum prostate-specific antigen
velocity after radical prostatectomy to distinguish
local recurrence from distant metastases. Urology
70. Trapasso JG, deKernion JB, Smith RB, Dorey F.
The incidence and significance of detectable levels
of serum prostate specific antigen after radical
prostatectomy. J Urol 1994;152 :1821-5.
71. Oefelein MG, Smith N, Carter M, Dalton D,
Schaeffer A. The incidence of prostate cancer
progression with undetectable serum prostate
specific antigen in a series of 394 radical
prostatectomies. J Urol 1995;154(6):2128-31.
72. Leibman BD, Dilliouglugil O, Wheeler TM, Scardino
PT. Distant metastasis after radical prostatectomy
in patients without an elevated serum prostate
specific antigen level. Cancer 1995;76(12):
73. Ray ME, Thames HD, Levy LB, Horwitz EM,
Kupelian PA, Martinez AA, Michalski JM, Pisansky
TM, Shipley WU, Zelefsky MJ, Zietman AL, Kuban
DA. PSA nadir predicts biochemical and distant
failure after external beam radiotherapy for prostate
cancer: a multi-institutional analysis. Int J Radiat
Oncol Biol Phys 2006;64(4):1140-50.
74. Hancock SL, Cox RS, Bagshaw MA. Prostate
specific antigen after radiotherapy for prostate
cancer: a reevaluation of long-term biochemical
control and the kinetics of recurrence in patients
treated at Stanford University. J Urol
75. Boccon-Gibod L, Djavan WB, Hammerer P, Hoeltl
W, Kattan MW, Prayer-Galetti T, Teillac P, Tunn UW.
Management of prostate-specific antigen relapse
in prostate cancer: a European Consensus. Int J
Clin Pract 2004;58(4):382-90.
76. Moul JW. Prostate specific antigen only progression
of prostate cancer. J Urol 2000;163(6):1632-42.
77. Roach III M, Hanks G, Thames jr H, Schelhammer
P, Shipley WU, Sokol GE, Sandler H. Defining
biochemical failure following radiotherapy with or
without hormonal therapy in men with clinically
localized prostate cancer: recommendations of the
RTOG-ASTRO Phoenix consensus conference. Int
J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;65 (4):965-74.
78. Oh WK, Kantoff PW. Management of hormone
refractory prostate cancer: current standards and
future prospects. J Urol 1998;160(4):1220-9.
79. Taylor CD, Elson P, Trump DL. Importance of
continued testicular suppression in hormone238
refractory prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol
80. Suzuki H, Okihara K, Miyake H, Fujisawa M, Miyoshi
S, Matsumoto T, Fujii M, Takihana Y, Usui T,
Matsuda T, Ozono S, Kumon H, Ichikawa T, Miki T;
Nonsteroidal Antiandrogen Sequential Alternation
for Prostate Cancer Study Group. Alternative
nonsteroidal antiandrogen therapy for advanced
prostate cancer that relapsed after initial maximum
androgen blockade. J Urol 2008;180(3):921-7.
81. Small EJ, Halabi S, Dawson NA, Stadler WM, Rini
BI, Picus J, Gable P, Torti FM, Kaplan E, Vogelzang
N. Antiandrogen withdrawal alone or in combination
with ketokonazole in androgen independent
prostate cancer patients: a phase III trial (CALGB
9583). J Clin Oncol 2004;22(6):1025-33.
82. Oh WK, Kanthoff PW, Weinberg V, Jones G, Rini
BI, Derynck MK, Bok R, Smith MR, Bubley GJ,
Rosen RT, DiPaola RS, Small EJ. Prospective,
multicentre, randomized phase II trial of the herbal
supplement PC-SPES and diethylbestrol in patients
with androgen-independent prostate cancer. J Clin
Oncol 2004;22 (18):3705-12.
83. Petrylak DP, Tangen CM, Hussain MH, Lara PN Jr,
Jones JA, Taplin M, Burch PA, Berry D, Mounpour
C, Kohli M, Benson MC, Small EJ, Raghavan D,
Crawford ED. Docetaxel and estramustine
compared with mitoxantrone and prednisone for
advanced refractory prostate cancer. New Engl J
Med 2004;351 (15):1513-20.
84. Tannock IF, de Wit R, Berry WR, Horti J, Pluzanska
A, Chi KN, Ourdard S, Theodore C, James ND,
Turesson I, Rosenthal MA, Eisenberger M, and TAX
327 Investigators. Docetaxel plus prednisone or
mitoxantrone plus prednisone for advanced
prostate cancer. New Engl J Med 2004;351
85. Figg W, Aragon-Ching JB, Steinberg, Gulley JL,
Arlen PM, Sartor O, Petrylak DP, Higano CS,
Hussain MH, Dahut WL. Randomized phase III trial
of thalidomide (Th) or placebo (P) for nonmetastatic PSA recurrent prostate cancer (PCa)
treated with intermittent therapy. Abstract. ASCO
Annual Meeting Proceedings (Post-Meeting
Edition). J Clin Oncol 2008; 26 (15S): #5016.
Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL 3rd, et al.
Mortality results from a randomized prostate cancer
screening trial [published erratum in N Engl J Med.
2009; 360:1797]. N Engl J Med. 2009; 360:13101319.
Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al.
Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a
randomized European study. N Engl J Med. 2009;
Elisabeth Eckersberger, Julia Finkelstein, Helen
Sadri, et al. Screening for Prostate Cancer: A
Review of the ERSPC and PLCO Trials. Reviews
in Urology 2009; 11 (3) 127 – 133.

Similar documents


Report this document