Cargando…
A Review in Management of Testicular Cancer: Single Center Review
BACKGROUND: Testicular cancer is one of the few solid cancers that can be cured even when it is metastasized with overall survival rate of more than 90%. The aim of this study was to establish the age adjusted incidence of testicular cancer and to critically assess the management of testicular tumor...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elmer Press
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5649662/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29147233 http://dx.doi.org/10.4021/wjon258w |
_version_ | 1783272577041432576 |
---|---|
author | Hameed, Ammar White, Bob Chinegwundoh, Frank Thwaini, Ali Pahuja, Ajay |
author_facet | Hameed, Ammar White, Bob Chinegwundoh, Frank Thwaini, Ali Pahuja, Ajay |
author_sort | Hameed, Ammar |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Testicular cancer is one of the few solid cancers that can be cured even when it is metastasized with overall survival rate of more than 90%. The aim of this study was to establish the age adjusted incidence of testicular cancer and to critically assess the management of testicular tumor. METHODS: This is a quantitative retrospective study utilizing a review of clinical notes for patients who underwent testicular orchidectomy. The number of cancer cases, types of pathology and cancer staging were examined. RESULTS: There is no substantial difference between the crude and the age-standardized incidence, moreover no difference from the reported crude incidence by the Scottish intercollegiate guidelines. We found 55.1% of seminoma, 14.28% of non-seminoma and 30.61% of combined (seminoma and non-seminoma), and stage I disease in 61.22% of cases, stage II in 36.73% of cases, and stage IV in 2.04% of cases. Most of the cancers were in the age group 20 - 50 with the majority (48.97%) in the age group 31 - 40. About 42.85% of cases were identified with high tumor markers; higher percentage of seminoma at stage II (40.74%). CONCLUSIONS: There is no substantial difference between the crude and the age-standardized incidence, moreover no difference from the reported crude incidence. Most of the cancers were in the age group 20 - 50 with the majority (48.97%) in the age group 31 - 40. Only 25% of seminomas had elevated tumor markers. Moreover, it is important to re-enforce strict adaptation to the IGCCCG prognostic factor-based classifications. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5649662 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | Elmer Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56496622017-11-16 A Review in Management of Testicular Cancer: Single Center Review Hameed, Ammar White, Bob Chinegwundoh, Frank Thwaini, Ali Pahuja, Ajay World J Oncol Original Article BACKGROUND: Testicular cancer is one of the few solid cancers that can be cured even when it is metastasized with overall survival rate of more than 90%. The aim of this study was to establish the age adjusted incidence of testicular cancer and to critically assess the management of testicular tumor. METHODS: This is a quantitative retrospective study utilizing a review of clinical notes for patients who underwent testicular orchidectomy. The number of cancer cases, types of pathology and cancer staging were examined. RESULTS: There is no substantial difference between the crude and the age-standardized incidence, moreover no difference from the reported crude incidence by the Scottish intercollegiate guidelines. We found 55.1% of seminoma, 14.28% of non-seminoma and 30.61% of combined (seminoma and non-seminoma), and stage I disease in 61.22% of cases, stage II in 36.73% of cases, and stage IV in 2.04% of cases. Most of the cancers were in the age group 20 - 50 with the majority (48.97%) in the age group 31 - 40. About 42.85% of cases were identified with high tumor markers; higher percentage of seminoma at stage II (40.74%). CONCLUSIONS: There is no substantial difference between the crude and the age-standardized incidence, moreover no difference from the reported crude incidence. Most of the cancers were in the age group 20 - 50 with the majority (48.97%) in the age group 31 - 40. Only 25% of seminomas had elevated tumor markers. Moreover, it is important to re-enforce strict adaptation to the IGCCCG prognostic factor-based classifications. Elmer Press 2011-06 2011-06-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5649662/ /pubmed/29147233 http://dx.doi.org/10.4021/wjon258w Text en Copyright 2011, Hameed et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Hameed, Ammar White, Bob Chinegwundoh, Frank Thwaini, Ali Pahuja, Ajay A Review in Management of Testicular Cancer: Single Center Review |
title | A Review in Management of Testicular Cancer: Single Center Review |
title_full | A Review in Management of Testicular Cancer: Single Center Review |
title_fullStr | A Review in Management of Testicular Cancer: Single Center Review |
title_full_unstemmed | A Review in Management of Testicular Cancer: Single Center Review |
title_short | A Review in Management of Testicular Cancer: Single Center Review |
title_sort | review in management of testicular cancer: single center review |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5649662/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29147233 http://dx.doi.org/10.4021/wjon258w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hameedammar areviewinmanagementoftesticularcancersinglecenterreview AT whitebob areviewinmanagementoftesticularcancersinglecenterreview AT chinegwundohfrank areviewinmanagementoftesticularcancersinglecenterreview AT thwainiali areviewinmanagementoftesticularcancersinglecenterreview AT pahujaajay areviewinmanagementoftesticularcancersinglecenterreview AT hameedammar reviewinmanagementoftesticularcancersinglecenterreview AT whitebob reviewinmanagementoftesticularcancersinglecenterreview AT chinegwundohfrank reviewinmanagementoftesticularcancersinglecenterreview AT thwainiali reviewinmanagementoftesticularcancersinglecenterreview AT pahujaajay reviewinmanagementoftesticularcancersinglecenterreview |