Article

Penile cancer: Optimal management of T1G2 penile cancer remains unclear.

Norte University, Gral Santos e/ 25 de Mayo, Asunción, Paraguay.
Nature Reviews Urology (Impact Factor: 4.52). 12/2012; DOI: 10.1038/nrurol.2012.238
Source: PubMed
0 Followers
 · 
75 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this retrospective study we compared the clinical outcome of early vs delayed excision of lymph node metastases in patients with penile squamous cell carcinoma. A total of 40 patients with a T2-3 penile carcinoma with lymph node metastases were included in this study. All patients initially presented with bilateral impalpable lymph nodes. In 20 patients (50%) metastases were removed when they became clinically apparent during meticulous followup (median interval 6 months, range 1 to 24). There were 20 patients (50%) who underwent resection of inguinal metastases detected on dynamic sentinel node biopsy before they became palpable. The histopathological characteristics of the tumors and lymph nodes were reevaluated. The 2 populations were similar in terms of patient age, T-stage, pathological tumor grade, vascular invasion and infiltration depth. Disease specific 3-year survival of patients with positive lymph nodes detected during surveillance was 35% and in those who underwent early resection, 84% (log rank p = 0.0017). In multivariate analysis early resection of occult inguinal metastases detected on dynamic sentinel node biopsy was an independent prognostic factor for disease specific survival (p = 0.006). Early resection of lymph node metastases in patients with penile carcinoma improves survival.
    The Journal of Urology 04/2005; 173(3):816-9. DOI:10.1097/01.ju.0000154565.37397.4d · 3.75 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Survival analysis encompasses investigation of time to event data. In most clinical studies, estimating the cumulative incidence function (or the probability of experiencing an event by a given time) is of primary interest. When the data consist of patients who experience an event and censored individuals, a nonparametric estimate of the cumulative incidence can be obtained using the Kaplan-Meier method. Under this approach, the censoring mechanism is assumed to be noninformative. In other words, the survival time of an individual (or the time at which a subject experiences an event) is assumed to be independent of a mechanism that would cause the patient to be censored. Often times, a patient may experience an event other than the one of interest which alters the probability of experiencing the event of interest. Such events are known as competing risk events. In this setting, it would often be of interest to calculate the cumulative incidence of a specific event of interest. Any subject who does not experience the event of interest can be treated as censored. However, a patient experiencing a competing risk event is censored in an informative manner. Hence, the Kaplan-Meier estimation procedure may not be directly applicable. The cumulative incidence function for an event of interest must be calculated by appropriately accounting for the presence of competing risk events. In this paper, we illustrate nonparametric estimation of the cumulative incidence function for an event of interest in the presence of competing risk events using two published data sets. We compare the resulting estimates with those obtained using the Kaplan-Meier approach to demonstrate the importance of appropriately estimating the cumulative incidence of an event of interest in the presence of competing risk events.
    British Journal of Cancer 11/2004; 91(7):1229-35. DOI:10.1038/sj.bjc.6602102 · 4.82 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The incidence of penile cancer varies from country to country, with the highest figures reported for countries in Africa, South America, and Asia and lowest in the United States and Europe. Causes of this variation are not clear, but they are thought to be related to human papillomavirus infection, smoking, lack of circumcision, chronic inflammation, and poor genital hygiene. Most penile tumors are squamous cell carcinomas, and a variegated spectrum of distinct morphologies is currently recognized. Each one of these subtypes has distinctive pathologic and clinical features. About half of penile carcinomas are usual squamous cell carcinomas, and the rest corresponds to verrucous, warty, basaloid, warty-basaloid, papillary, pseudohyperplastic, pseudoglandular, adenosquamous, sarcomatoid, and cuniculatum carcinomas. Previous studies have found a consistent association of tumor cell morphology and human papillomavirus presence in penile carcinomas. Those tumors composed of small- to intermediate-sized, basaloid ("blue") cells are often human papillomavirus positive, whereas human papillomavirus prevalence is lower in tumors showing large, keratinizing, maturing eosinophilic ("pink") cells. Human papillomavirus-related tumors affect younger patients, whereas human papillomavirus-unrelated tumors are seen in older patients with phimosis, lichen sclerosus, or squamous hyperplasia. This morphologic distinctiveness is also observed in penile intraepithelial neoplasia. The specific aim of this review is to provide a detailed discussion on the macroscopic and microscopic features of all major subtypes of penile cancer. We also discuss the role of pathologic features in the prognosis of penile cancer, the characteristics of penile precursor lesions, and the use of immunohistochemistry for the diagnosis of invasive and precursor lesions.
    Human pathology 06/2012; 43(6):771-89. DOI:10.1016/j.humpath.2012.01.014 · 2.81 Impact Factor