Non-risk-adapted Surveillance for Stage I Testicular Cancer: Critical Review and Summary

Context: Cancer-specific survival for men with clinical stage I testicular cancer (CSITC) is uniformly excellent. Non-risk-adapted active surveillance (NRAS) is a management strategy for CSITC to minimize overtreatment and avoid possible long-term side effects of adjuvant therapy. Objective: To review the evidence regarding oncologic outcomes for men with CSITC undergoing NRAS and discuss ongoing controversies in the management of CSITC. Evidence acquisition: MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from January 1, 1987 through January 1, 2017. Evidence synthesis: A total of 68 studies were included in the critical review. The rationale for NRAS, oncologic outcomes, surveillance protocols, and comparative efficacy of risk-adjusted active surveillance (AS) were reported with strength of evidence and risk of bias evaluated. Cancer-specific survival approaches 100% for men with CSITC undergoing NRAS. Active treatment is limited to 20-30% of patients who will recur; these patients will require salvage chemotherapy and possible retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Existing AS protocols include imaging and laboratory evaluations that are initially intensive but less frequent with increasing follow-up. Conclusions: NRAS is an attractive management option for men with CSITC, which maintains outstanding long-term cancer cure while sparing most patients treatment by avoiding prophylactic chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery. management strategy. (C) 2018 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved

Oncological Follow-up Strategies for Testicular Germ Cell Tumours: A Narrative Review

Context: The aim of this review is to describe the proportion of testicular germ cell tumours (tGCTs) with recurrence, and the timing and anatomical sites of relapse across different disease stages and after different treatment options. We sum-marise published follow-up protocols and discuss current and future developments to personalise follow-up for patients with tGCT. Evidence acquisition: A systematic literature search was conducted and current guidelines and selected institutional follow-up protocols were reviewed. Evidence synthesis: Of 302 publications, we screened 68 full texts and included 29 studies; 22 of these were retrospective and seven were prospective in nature, con-tributing data for 20 570 patients. The number of patients included per study ran-ged from 119 to 2483. We compared the guideline follow-up protocols of the European Society for Medical Oncology, European Association of Urology, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and American Urological Association, as well as institutional follow-up protocols. The protocols differed in terms of the number, time points, and type of follow-up investigations. Conclusions: Future research should assess how tGCT can be followed to ensure high adherence, define the role of miR-371a-3p microRNA during follow-up, and develop follow-up protocols after curative treatment in the metastatic setting. Patient summary: In this review of follow-up protocols for men with testis cancer, we observed different recommendations and discuss future research areas to improve follow-up for these patients. (c) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Association of Urology. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by/4.0/)