Adherence to the EAU guidelines on Penile Cancer Treatment: European, multicentre, retrospective study.
Adherence
EAU guidelines
Lymphadenectomy
Partial amputation
Penile cancer
Total amputation
Journal
Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology
ISSN: 1432-1335
Titre abrégé: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 7902060
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2019
Apr 2019
Historique:
received:
14
06
2018
accepted:
13
02
2019
pubmed:
3
3
2019
medline:
16
4
2019
entrez:
3
3
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for penile cancer (PC) are exclusively based on retrospective studies and have low grades of recommendation. The aim of this study was to assess the adherence to guidelines by investigating the management strategies for primary tumours and inguinal lymph nodes. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical charts of 176 PC patients who underwent surgery in eight European centres from 2010 to 2016. The stage and grade were assessed according to the 2009 AJCC-UICC TNM classification system. To assess adherence rates, we compared theoretical and practical adherence to the EAU guidelines. Overall, 176 patients were enrolled. Partial amputation was the most frequent surgical approach (39%). 53.7% of tumours were stage Tis-T1b and the remaining 46.3% were stage T2-T4. Palpable lymph nodes were detected in 30.1% of patients and 45.1% underwent lymphadenectomy (LY). A sizeable group of tumours (43.2%) were N0. For primary treatment, adherence to the EAU guidelines was good (66%). In non-adherent cases, reasons for discrepancy were patient's choice (17%), surgeon's preference (36%), and other causes (47%). For LY, the guideline adherence was 70%, with either patient's or surgeon's choice or other causes accounting for discrepancy in 28, 20, and 52% of non-adherent cases, respectively. Adherence to the EAU guidelines for PC was quite high across the eight European centres involved in the study. This notwithstanding, strategies for further improvement should be developed and evenly adopted.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30825028
doi: 10.1007/s00432-019-02864-9
pii: 10.1007/s00432-019-02864-9
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
921-926Références
JAMA. 1999 Oct 20;282(15):1458-65
pubmed: 10535437
Am J Pathol. 2001 Oct;159(4):1211-8
pubmed: 11583947
J Urol. 2004 Aug;172(2):498-501; discussion 501
pubmed: 15247713
J Urol. 2005 Mar;173(3):681
pubmed: 15711242
Int J Cancer. 2005 Sep 10;116(4):606-16
pubmed: 15825185
Cancer. 2005 Jun 15;103(12):2507-16
pubmed: 15856474
J Surg Oncol. 2006 Feb 1;93(2):133-8
pubmed: 16425300
J Surg Oncol. 2008 May 1;97(6):487-95
pubmed: 18425779
Eur Urol. 2008 Jul;54(1):161-8
pubmed: 18440124
Cancer. 2008 Nov 15;113(10 Suppl):2883-91
pubmed: 18980292
BJU Int. 2009 Sep;104(6):852-6
pubmed: 19239449
Anal Quant Cytol Histol. 2009 Jun;31(3):153-60
pubmed: 19639702
Eur Urol. 2010 Apr;57(4):688-92
pubmed: 19647926
Eur Urol. 2010 Jun;57(6):1002-12
pubmed: 20163910
Ann Surg Oncol. 2011 Feb;18(2):439-46
pubmed: 20839061
Eur Urol. 2012 Nov;62(5):923-8
pubmed: 22421082
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2012 Apr;94(3):204-9
pubmed: 22507729
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2013 May 1;11(5):594-615
pubmed: 23667209
Surgeon. 2015 Aug;13(4):200-6
pubmed: 24559898
Acta Oncol. 1988;27(6b):823-4
pubmed: 2466471
J Urol. 2015 Jun;193(6):1976-80
pubmed: 25498573
Curr Probl Cancer. 2015 May-Jun;39(3):126-36
pubmed: 26076979
Eur J Public Health. 2017 Aug 1;27(4):616-620
pubmed: 28013246
Nat Rev Urol. 2017 Jun;14(6):335-347
pubmed: 28401957
J Urol. 1988 Aug;140(2):306-10
pubmed: 3398125
Br J Urol. 1995 Mar;75(3):375-7
pubmed: 7735804
Br J Urol. 1994 Nov;74(5):652-7
pubmed: 7827818
J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993 Jan 6;85(1):19-24
pubmed: 8380060