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

\ua9 2022 The Authors. 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 summarise 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, contributing data for 20 570 patients. The number of patients included per study ranged 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

Semantics in active surveillance for men with localized prostate cancer - results of a modified Delphi consensus procedure

Active surveillance (AS) is broadly described as a management option for men with low-risk prostate cancer, but semantic heterogeneity exists in both the literature and in guidelines. To address this issue, a panel of leading prostate cancer specialists in the field of AS participated in a consensus-forming project using a modified Delphi method to reach international consensus on definitions of terms related to this management option. An iterative three-round sequence of online questionnaires designed to address 61 individual items was completed by each panel member. Consensus was considered to be reached if >= 70% of the experts agreed on a definition. To facilitate a common understanding among all experts involved and resolve potential ambiguities, a face-to-face consensus meeting was held between Delphi survey rounds two and three. Convenience sampling was used to construct the panel of experts. In total, 12 experts from Australia, France, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Japan, the UK, Canada and the USA participated. By the end of the Delphi process, formal consensus was achieved for 100% (n = 61) of the terms and a glossary was then developed. Agreement between international experts has been reached on relevant terms and subsequent definitions regarding AS for patients with localized prostate cancer. This standard terminology could support multidisciplinary communication, reduce the extent of variations in clinical practice and optimize clinical decision making.Peer reviewe

Validation of a contemporary prostate cancer grading system using prostate cancer death as outcome

BACKGROUND: Gleason scoring (GS) has major deficiencies and a novel system of five grade groups (GS⩽6; 3+4; 4+3; 8; ⩾9) has been recently agreed and included in the WHO 2016 classification. Although verified in radical prostatectomies using PSA relapse for outcome, it has not been validated using prostate cancer death as an outcome in biopsy series. There is debate whether an ‘overall' or ‘worst' GS in biopsies series should be used. METHODS: Nine hundred and eighty-eight prostate cancer biopsy cases were identified between 1990 and 2003, and treated conservatively. Diagnosis and grade was assigned to each core as well as an overall grade. Follow-up for prostate cancer death was until 31 December 2012. A log-rank test assessed univariable differences between the five grade groups based on overall and worst grade seen, and using univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards. Regression was used to quantify differences in outcome. RESULTS: Using both ‘worst' and ‘overall' GS yielded highly significant results on univariate and multivariate analysis with overall GS slightly but insignificantly outperforming worst GS. There was a strong correlation with the five grade groups and prostate cancer death. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest conservatively treated prostate cancer cohort with long-term follow-up and contemporary assessment of grade. It validates the formation of five grade groups and suggests that the ‘worst' grade is a valid prognostic measure

Oncological and functional outcomes following open radical prostatectomy: how patients may achieve the "trifecta"?

PURPOSE: The desirable outcomes after open radical prostatectomy (RP) for localized prostate cancer (PC) are to: a) achieve disease recurrence free, b) urinary continence (UC), and c) maintain sexual potency (SP). These 3 combined desirable outcomes we called it the "Trifecta". Our aim is to assess the likelihood of achieving the Trifecta, and to analyze the influencing the Trifecta . MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 1738 men with localized PC underwent RP from 1992-2007 by a single surgeon. The exclusion criteria for this analysis were: preoperative hormonal or radiation therapy, preoperative urinary incontinence or erectile dysfunction, follow-up less than 24 months or insufficient data. Post-operative Trifecta factors were analyzed, including biochemical recurrence (BR).. We defined: BR as PSA > 0.2 ng/mL, urinary continence as wearing no pads, and sexual potency as having erections sufficient for intercourse with or without a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor. RESULTS: A total of 831 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean age of the entire cohort was 59 years old. The median follow-up was 52 months (mean 60, range 24-202). The BR, UC and SP rates were 18.7%, 94.5%, and 71% respectively. Trifecta was achieved in 64% at 2 year follow-up, and 61% at 5 year follow-up. Multivariate analysis revealed age at time of surgery, pathologic Gleason score (PGS), pathologic stage, specimen weight, and nerve sparing (NS) were independent factors. CONCLUSIONS: Age at time of surgery, pathologic GS, pathologic stage, specimen weight and NS were independent predictors to achieve the Trifecta following radical prostatectomy. This information may help patients counseling undergoing radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer