Cargando…
Evaluation of Prognostic Parameters to Identify Aggressive Penile Carcinomas
SIMPLE SUMMARY: Sufficient prognostic parameters are still lacking in penile cancer. In this study, we sought to evaluate the current TNM classification in terms of its ability to estimate prognosis and to identify additional independent prognostic parameters. We found that lymph node metastasis—as...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10571727/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37835442 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers15194748 |
_version_ | 1785120069102075904 |
---|---|
author | Mink, Jan Niklas Khalmurzaev, Oybek Pryalukhin, Alexey Geppert, Carol Immanuel Lohse, Stefan Bende, Kristof Lobo, João Henrique, Rui Loertzer, Hagen Steffens, Joachim Jerónimo, Carmen Wunderlich, Heiko Heinzelbecker, Julia Bohle, Rainer M. Stöckle, Michael Matveev, Vsevolod Hartmann, Arndt Junker, Kerstin |
author_facet | Mink, Jan Niklas Khalmurzaev, Oybek Pryalukhin, Alexey Geppert, Carol Immanuel Lohse, Stefan Bende, Kristof Lobo, João Henrique, Rui Loertzer, Hagen Steffens, Joachim Jerónimo, Carmen Wunderlich, Heiko Heinzelbecker, Julia Bohle, Rainer M. Stöckle, Michael Matveev, Vsevolod Hartmann, Arndt Junker, Kerstin |
author_sort | Mink, Jan Niklas |
collection | PubMed |
description | SIMPLE SUMMARY: Sufficient prognostic parameters are still lacking in penile cancer. In this study, we sought to evaluate the current TNM classification in terms of its ability to estimate prognosis and to identify additional independent prognostic parameters. We found that lymph node metastasis—as well as lymphovascular invasion in node-negative patients—had the strongest impact on prognosis, whereas HPV did not show an influence on outcome. Furthermore, the pT1b stage seems questionable, and a revision of the current TNM classification is advised. ABSTRACT: Background: Advanced penile carcinoma is characterized by poor prognosis. Most data on prognostic factors are based on small study cohorts, and even meta-analyses are limited in patient numbers. Therefore, there is still a lack of evidence for clinical decisions. In addition, the most recent TNM classification is questionable; in line with previous studies, we found that it has not improved prognosis estimation. Methods: We evaluated 297 patients from Germany, Russia, and Portugal. Tissue samples from 233 patients were re-analyzed by two experienced pathologists. HPV status, p16, and histopathological parameters were evaluated for all patients. Results: Advanced lymph node metastases (N2, N3) were highly significantly associated with reductions in metastasis-free (MFS), cancer-specific (CS), and overall survival (OS) rates (p = <0.001), while lymphovascular invasion was a significant parameter for reduced CS and OS (p = 0.005; p = 0.007). Concerning the primary tumor stage, a significant difference in MFS was found only between pT1b and pT1a (p = 0.017), whereas CS and OS did not significantly differ between T categories. In patients without lymph node metastasis at the time of primary diagnosis, lymphovascular invasion was a significant prognostic parameter for lower MFS (p = 0.032). Histological subtypes differed in prognosis, with the worst outcome in basaloid carcinomas, but without statistical significance. HPV status was not associated with prognosis, either in the total cohort or in the usual type alone. Conclusion: Lymphatic involvement has the highest impact on prognosis in penile cancer, whereas HPV status alone is not suitable as a prognostic parameter. The pT1b stage, which includes grading, as well as lymphovascular and perineural invasion in the T stage, seems questionable; a revision of the TNM classification is therefore required. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10571727 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105717272023-10-14 Evaluation of Prognostic Parameters to Identify Aggressive Penile Carcinomas Mink, Jan Niklas Khalmurzaev, Oybek Pryalukhin, Alexey Geppert, Carol Immanuel Lohse, Stefan Bende, Kristof Lobo, João Henrique, Rui Loertzer, Hagen Steffens, Joachim Jerónimo, Carmen Wunderlich, Heiko Heinzelbecker, Julia Bohle, Rainer M. Stöckle, Michael Matveev, Vsevolod Hartmann, Arndt Junker, Kerstin Cancers (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: Sufficient prognostic parameters are still lacking in penile cancer. In this study, we sought to evaluate the current TNM classification in terms of its ability to estimate prognosis and to identify additional independent prognostic parameters. We found that lymph node metastasis—as well as lymphovascular invasion in node-negative patients—had the strongest impact on prognosis, whereas HPV did not show an influence on outcome. Furthermore, the pT1b stage seems questionable, and a revision of the current TNM classification is advised. ABSTRACT: Background: Advanced penile carcinoma is characterized by poor prognosis. Most data on prognostic factors are based on small study cohorts, and even meta-analyses are limited in patient numbers. Therefore, there is still a lack of evidence for clinical decisions. In addition, the most recent TNM classification is questionable; in line with previous studies, we found that it has not improved prognosis estimation. Methods: We evaluated 297 patients from Germany, Russia, and Portugal. Tissue samples from 233 patients were re-analyzed by two experienced pathologists. HPV status, p16, and histopathological parameters were evaluated for all patients. Results: Advanced lymph node metastases (N2, N3) were highly significantly associated with reductions in metastasis-free (MFS), cancer-specific (CS), and overall survival (OS) rates (p = <0.001), while lymphovascular invasion was a significant parameter for reduced CS and OS (p = 0.005; p = 0.007). Concerning the primary tumor stage, a significant difference in MFS was found only between pT1b and pT1a (p = 0.017), whereas CS and OS did not significantly differ between T categories. In patients without lymph node metastasis at the time of primary diagnosis, lymphovascular invasion was a significant prognostic parameter for lower MFS (p = 0.032). Histological subtypes differed in prognosis, with the worst outcome in basaloid carcinomas, but without statistical significance. HPV status was not associated with prognosis, either in the total cohort or in the usual type alone. Conclusion: Lymphatic involvement has the highest impact on prognosis in penile cancer, whereas HPV status alone is not suitable as a prognostic parameter. The pT1b stage, which includes grading, as well as lymphovascular and perineural invasion in the T stage, seems questionable; a revision of the TNM classification is therefore required. MDPI 2023-09-27 /pmc/articles/PMC10571727/ /pubmed/37835442 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers15194748 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Mink, Jan Niklas Khalmurzaev, Oybek Pryalukhin, Alexey Geppert, Carol Immanuel Lohse, Stefan Bende, Kristof Lobo, João Henrique, Rui Loertzer, Hagen Steffens, Joachim Jerónimo, Carmen Wunderlich, Heiko Heinzelbecker, Julia Bohle, Rainer M. Stöckle, Michael Matveev, Vsevolod Hartmann, Arndt Junker, Kerstin Evaluation of Prognostic Parameters to Identify Aggressive Penile Carcinomas |
title | Evaluation of Prognostic Parameters to Identify Aggressive Penile Carcinomas |
title_full | Evaluation of Prognostic Parameters to Identify Aggressive Penile Carcinomas |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of Prognostic Parameters to Identify Aggressive Penile Carcinomas |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of Prognostic Parameters to Identify Aggressive Penile Carcinomas |
title_short | Evaluation of Prognostic Parameters to Identify Aggressive Penile Carcinomas |
title_sort | evaluation of prognostic parameters to identify aggressive penile carcinomas |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10571727/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37835442 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers15194748 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT minkjanniklas evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT khalmurzaevoybek evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT pryalukhinalexey evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT geppertcarolimmanuel evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT lohsestefan evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT bendekristof evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT lobojoao evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT henriquerui evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT loertzerhagen evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT steffensjoachim evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT jeronimocarmen evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT wunderlichheiko evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT heinzelbeckerjulia evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT bohlerainerm evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT stocklemichael evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT matveevvsevolod evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT hartmannarndt evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas AT junkerkerstin evaluationofprognosticparameterstoidentifyaggressivepenilecarcinomas |