Influence of Clinical Risk Factors on Outcomes in Men with Stage I Non-Seminomatous Germ Cell Tumor Undergoing Robot-Assisted Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection

Dora Jericevic, Jacob Taylor, William C. Huang
{"title":"Influence of Clinical Risk Factors on Outcomes in Men with Stage I Non-Seminomatous Germ Cell Tumor Undergoing Robot-Assisted Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection","authors":"Dora Jericevic, Jacob Taylor, William C. Huang","doi":"10.33696/cancerbiology.1.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: We recently published our multi-institutional experience performing primary robot-assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RA-RPLND) for men with non-seminomatous germ cell tumor (NSGCT). We concluded that primary RA-RPLND for NSGCT can be performed safely with low complication rates, acceptable early oncologic outcomes, and lower overall theoretical chemotherapy burden. In this commentary, we explore outcomes in clinical stage I patients stratified by clinical risk factors (RF) and estimate reductions in chemotherapy burden. Methods: In our original study, we included clinical stage I and highly select clinical stage II patients. Clinical risk factors were defined as lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and/or predominance of embryonal carcinoma (EC) (>40%) in the orchiectomy specimen. Results: 72% (28/39) of stage I patients that underwent RA-RPLND could be classified as belonging to the RF+ group (Figure 1). Among the RF+ group, 36% (10/28) had both LVI and EC (LVI+EC+). Of the LVI+EC+ patients, 70% had positive nodes (N+), whereas the rate was much lower in the LVI only (LVI+EC-) and EC only (LVI-EC+) groups (17% for both). Primary RA-RPLND allowed for accurate pathologic staging and avoidance of chemotherapy in the 90% and 64% of pN0 patients in the RF-and RF+ groups, respectively. Overall node positive rates were 36% and 9% for men with and without clinical risk factors, respectively. The majority of these node positive patients had pN1 disease and were thus candidates for post RPLND surveillance, thus reducing therapeutic burden and exposure to long-term toxicity. Conclusion : Primary RA-RPLND can be safely performed with low complication rates and acceptable short term oncologic outcomes. Assessing clinical risk factors when deciding on treatment may further improve outcomes by helping to identify clinical stage I patients who are more likely to be stage II and thus benefit most from adjuvant treatment with RPLND.","PeriodicalId":92985,"journal":{"name":"Archives of cancer biology and therapy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of cancer biology and therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33696/cancerbiology.1.014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: We recently published our multi-institutional experience performing primary robot-assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RA-RPLND) for men with non-seminomatous germ cell tumor (NSGCT). We concluded that primary RA-RPLND for NSGCT can be performed safely with low complication rates, acceptable early oncologic outcomes, and lower overall theoretical chemotherapy burden. In this commentary, we explore outcomes in clinical stage I patients stratified by clinical risk factors (RF) and estimate reductions in chemotherapy burden. Methods: In our original study, we included clinical stage I and highly select clinical stage II patients. Clinical risk factors were defined as lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and/or predominance of embryonal carcinoma (EC) (>40%) in the orchiectomy specimen. Results: 72% (28/39) of stage I patients that underwent RA-RPLND could be classified as belonging to the RF+ group (Figure 1). Among the RF+ group, 36% (10/28) had both LVI and EC (LVI+EC+). Of the LVI+EC+ patients, 70% had positive nodes (N+), whereas the rate was much lower in the LVI only (LVI+EC-) and EC only (LVI-EC+) groups (17% for both). Primary RA-RPLND allowed for accurate pathologic staging and avoidance of chemotherapy in the 90% and 64% of pN0 patients in the RF-and RF+ groups, respectively. Overall node positive rates were 36% and 9% for men with and without clinical risk factors, respectively. The majority of these node positive patients had pN1 disease and were thus candidates for post RPLND surveillance, thus reducing therapeutic burden and exposure to long-term toxicity. Conclusion : Primary RA-RPLND can be safely performed with low complication rates and acceptable short term oncologic outcomes. Assessing clinical risk factors when deciding on treatment may further improve outcomes by helping to identify clinical stage I patients who are more likely to be stage II and thus benefit most from adjuvant treatment with RPLND.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
临床危险因素对接受机器人辅助腹膜后淋巴结清扫的I期非半细胞性生殖细胞肿瘤患者预后的影响
腹膜后淋巴结通常是男性睾丸癌转移的第一个着落点。原发性腹膜后淋巴结清扫术(RPLND)治疗临床I期NSGCT可以准确地对可能存在淋巴结微转移的患者进行手术分期,在某些情况下,可以作为转移量小的主要治疗方法。化疗耐药肿瘤和畸胎瘤复发的风险降低手术控制腹膜后。此外,原发性RPLND阴性后的复发是罕见的(<1%),如果确实发生复发,通常可以通过化疗治愈。此外,监测复发的随访方案通常可以简化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Molecular Biology for BCR-ABL1 Quantification for Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Monitorization and Evaluation The Impact of Dido on the Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition SorLA Targeting - A Method to Overcome Therapy Resistance in Breast Cancer Genetic Predisposition of Breast Cancer in the United Arab Emirates Forces, Chromosomal Configurations, and Carcinogenesis: Towards Another Therapeutic Approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1