Smoking prevalence and association with sociodemographic variables in cancer clinical trial participants.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco use (smoking) causes adverse clinical outcomes among patients with cancer, including increased cancer-related mortality. In participants in cancer clinical trials, the prevalence of tobacco use and the factors associated with tobacco use are not well described. METHODS: Data were examined from participants enrolled in SWOG cancer clinical treatment trials between 2016 and 2022 who reported their smoking status at trial enrollment. Baseline variables (smoking status, insurance type, zip code, and demographic factors) were obtained from patient registration forms. Bivariate and multivariable associations were examined via logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 4326 patients enrolled in 29 trials, 48.1% reported currently/previously smoking, including 12.4% currently, 4.9% recently, and 30.7% formerly. Ever smoking was more commonly reported in males, patients aged ≥65 years, patients with Medicaid or no insurance, patients from areas of high socioeconomic deprivation, and rural patients. Patients of Hispanic ethnicity and Asian and Pacific Islander patients were less likely to have ever smoked. In multivariable regression, patients with lung cancer were most likely to report ever smoking compared to patients with breast cancer (odds ratio, 4.98; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In the first comprehensive evaluation of smoking status among trial participants enrolled in National Cancer Institute network group treatment trials, nearly half reported ever smoking and one in six reported current or recent smoking. Smoking was more common among vulnerable population patients defined by demographic and socioeconomic factors. Tobacco use should be routinely assessed and reported in clinical trials to help reduce the negative cancer and overall health effects of persistent tobacco use and to address disparities among patients with cancer.

PErspective and current status of Radiotherapy Service in IRan (PERSIR)-1 study: assessment of current external beam radiotherapy facilities, staff and techniques compared to the international guidelines.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiotherapy (RT) is an essential treatment modality against cancer and becoming even more in demand due to the anticipated increase in cancer incidence. Due to the rapid development of RT technologies amid financial challenges, we aimed to assess the available RT facilities and the issues with achieving health equity based on current equipment compared to the previous reports from Iran. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey arranged by the Iran Cancer Institute's Radiation Oncology Research Center (RORC) was sent to all of the country's radiotherapy centers in 2022. Four components were retrieved: the reimbursement type, equipment, human resources, and patient load. To calculate the radiotherapy utilization rate (RUR), the Lancet Commission was used. The findings were compared with the previous national data. RESULTS: Seventy-six active radiotherapy centers with 123 Linear accelerators (LINACs) were identified. The centers have been directed in three ways. 10 (20 LINACs), 36 (50 LINACs), and 30 centers (53 LINACs) were charity-, private-, and public-based, respectively. Four provinces had no centers. There was no active intraoperative radiotherapy machine despite its availability in 4 centers. One orthovoltage X-ray machine was active and 14 brachytherapy devices were treating patients. There were 344, 252, and 419 active radiation oncologists, medical physicists, and radiation therapy technologists, respectively. The ratio of LINAC and radiation oncologists to one million populations was 1.68 and 4.10, respectively. Since 2017, 35±5 radiation oncology residents have been trained each year. CONCLUSION: There has been a notable growth in RT facilities since the previous reports and Iran's situation is currently acceptable among LMICs. However, there is an urgent need to improve the distribution of the RT infrastructure and provide more facilities that can deliver advanced techniques.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Merkel Cell Carcinoma, Version 1.2024.

The NCCN Guidelines for Merkel Cell Carcinoma (MCC) provide recommendations for diagnostic workup, clinical stage, and treatment options for patients. The panel meets annually to discuss updates to the guidelines based on comments from expert review from panel members, institutional review, as well as submissions from within NCCN and external organizations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the introduction of a new page for locally advanced disease in the setting of clinical node negative status, entitled "Clinical N0 Disease, Locally Advanced MCC." This new algorithm page addresses locally advanced disease, and the panel clarifies the meaning behind the term "nonsurgical" by further defining locally advanced disease. In addition, the guideline includes the management of in-transit disease and updates to the systemic therapy options.

Increasing clinician participation in tobacco cessation by an implementation science-based tobacco cessation champion program.

BACKGROUND: We designed a process to increase tobacco cessation in an academic center and its widely distributed network community sites using clinical champions to overcome referral barriers. METHODS: In 2020 a needs assessment was performed across the City of Hope Medical Center and its 32 community treatment sites. We reviewed information science strategies to choose elements for our expanded tobacco control plan, focusing on distributed leadership with tobacco cessation champions. We analyzed smoking patterns in patients with cancer before and following program implementation. We evaluated the champion experience and measured tobacco abstinence after 6 months of follow-up. RESULTS: Cancer center leadership committed to expanding tobacco control. Funding was obtained through a Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) grant. Multi-disciplinary leaders developed a comprehensive plan. Disease-focused clinics and community sites named cessation champions (a clinician and nurse) supported by certified tobacco treatment specialists. Patient, staff, clinician, and champion training/education were developed. Roles and responsibilities of the champions were defined. Implementation in pilot sites showed increased tobacco assessment from 80.8 to 96.6%, increased tobacco cessation referral by 367%, and moderate smoking abstinence in both academic (27.2%) and community sites (22.5%). 73% of champions had positive attitudes toward the program. CONCLUSION: An efficient process to expand smoking cessation in the City of Hope network was developed using implementation science strategies and cessation champions. This well-detailed implementation process may be helpful to other cancer centers, particularly those with a tertiary care cancer center and community network.

Basal Cell Skin Cancer, Version 2.2024, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common form of skin cancer in the United States. Due to the high frequency, BCC occurrences are not typically recorded, and annual rates of incidence can only be estimated. Current estimated rates are 2 million Americans affected annually, and this continues to rise. Exposure to radiation, from either sunlight or previous medical therapy, is a key player in BCC development. BCC is not as aggressive as other skin cancers because it is less likely to metastasize. However, surgery and radiation are prevalent treatment options, therefore disfigurement and limitation of function are significant considerations. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) outline an updated risk stratification and treatment options available for BCC.

Early Stage and Locally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Treatment from Present to Future: Where Are We and Where Are We Going?

OPINION STATEMENT: Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is a rare malignancy, endemic in China, that is commonly diagnosed in locally advanced scenarios. Its pathogenesis is strongly associated with Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), an infection for which measuring EBV plasma DNA levels has helped as a prognostic factor guiding treatment options, including a stronger treatment in those with high titers. Additionally, tobacco and alcohol are often implicated in EBV-negative patients. The local disease is treated with radiotherapy alone, preferentially intensity modulated radiotherapy. For locally advanced disease, the backbone treatment is concurrent chemoradiotherapy with the ongoing research dilemma being adding adjuvant chemotherapy or induction chemotherapy. The ongoing research is focused not only on identifying patients that will benefit from adjuvant or induction chemotherapy, but also on identifying the best chemotherapeutic regimen, regimen alternatives to diminish toxicity, the role that immune checkpoint inhibitors play, and the use of molecularly guided treatment targeting patients with NPC whether driven by EBV or tobacco and alcohol. Knowing the precise oncogenesis of NPC not only offers a better understanding of the role that EBV plays in this tumor but also helps create targeted therapies that could potentially block important pathways such as the NF-κB pathway. Much is yet to be done, but the prognosis and management of NPC patients have changed drastically, offering precise treatment methods and excellent control of the disease, even in locally advanced scenarios.

Recurrent/Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Treatment from Present to Future: Where Are We and Where Are We Heading?

OPINION STATEMENT: Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is distinct in its anatomic location and biology from other epithelial head and neck cancer (HNC). There are 3 WHO subtypes, which considers the presence of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) and other histopathology features. Despite the survival benefit obtained from modern treatment modalities and techniques specifically in the local and locally advanced setting, a number of patients with this disease will recur and subsequently die of distant metastasis, locoregional relapse, or both. In the recurrent setting, the ideal therapy approach continues to be a topic of discussion and current recommendations are platinum-based combination chemotherapy. Phase III clinical trials which led to the approval of pembrolizumab or nivolumab for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) specifically excluded NPC. No immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, to date, has been approved by the FDA to treat NPC although the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommendations do include use of these agents. Hence, this remains the major challenge for treatment options. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma is challenging as it is really 3 different diseases, and much research is required to determine best options and sequencing of those options. This article is going to address the data to date and discuss ongoing research in EBV + and EBV - inoperable recurrent/metastatic NPC patients.

Thoughts and Consideration Regarding Immigrant Clinicians: Is Cultural Preservation Influencing Providers' Practice in HPV Vaccination?

Immigrant clinicians are vital to population healthcare delivery and therefore population health. One in four physicians in the United States are foreign-born and notably represented in family and pediatric medicine - specialties charged with administering childhood/adolescent vaccines, such as Human Papillomavirus vaccine (HPVV). Our examination suggests there may be unique cultural and socialization factors that influence clinician HPVV recommendation practice; however, immigrant clinicians have not been adequately engaged within the national HPVV agenda. Given the volume and significance of immigrant clinicians, engagement of these clinicians, in both community and nation-wide efforts to increase HPVV, is a necessary step for improving and achieving the national health goal of optimizing HPVV for cancer prevention.

Characterizing impact of positive lymph node number in endometrial cancer using machine-learning: A better prognostic indicator than FIGO staging?

BACKGROUND: Number of involved lymph nodes (LNs) is a crucial stratification factor in staging of numerous disease sites, but has not been incorporated for endometrial cancer. We evaluated whether number of involved LNs provide improved prognostic value. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed with node-positive endometrial adenocarcinoma without distant metastasis were identified in the National Cancer Database. We trained a machine-learning based model of overall survival. Shapley additive explanation values (SHAP) based on the model were used to identify cutoffs of number of LNs involved. Results were validated using a Cox proportional hazards regression model. RESULTS: We identified 11,381 patients with endometrial cancer meeting the inclusion criteria. Using the SHAP values, we selected the following thresholds: 1-3 LNs, 4-5 LNs, and 6+ LNs. The 3-year OS was 82.0% for 1-3 LNs, 74.3% for 4-5 LNs (hazard ratio [HR] 1.38; p < 0.001), and 59.9% for 6+ LNs (HR 2.23; p < 0.001). On univariate Cox regression, PA nodal involvement was a significant predictor of OS (HR 1.20; p < 0.001) but was not significant on multivariate analysis when number of LNs was included (HR 1.05; p = 0.273). Additionally, we identified an interaction between adjuvant therapy and number of involved LNs. Patients with 1-3 involved LNs had 3-year OS of 85.2%, 78.7% and 74.2% with chemoradiation (CRT), chemotherapy, and radiation, respectively. Patients with 6+ involved LNs had 3-yr OS of 67.8%, 49.6%, and 48.9% with CRT, chemotherapy, and radiation, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Number of involved LNs is a stronger prognostic and predictive factor compared to PA node involvement.

Comparison of intrafractional motion with two frameless immobilization systems in surface-guided intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to compare intrafractional motion using two commercial non-invasive immobilization systems for linac-based intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) under guidance with a surface-guided radiotherapy (SGRT) system. MATERIALS/METHODS: Twenty-one patients who received intracranial SRS were retrospectively selected. Ten patients were immobilized with a vacuum fixation biteplate system, while 11 patients were immobilized with an open-face mask system. A setup margin of 1 mm was used in treatment planning. Real-time surface motion data in 37 treatment fractions using the vacuum fixation system and 44 fractions using the open-face mask were recorded by an SGRT system. Variances of intrafractional motion along three translational directions and three rotational directions were compared between the two immobilization techniques with Levene's tests. Intrafractional motion variation over time during treatments was also evaluated. RESULTS: Using the vacuum fixation system, the average and standard deviations of the shifts were 0.01 ± 0.18 mm, -0.06 ± 0.30 mm, and  0.02 ± 0.26 mm in the anterior-posterior (AP), superior-inferior (SI), and left-right (LR) directions, and -0.02 ± 0.19°, -0.01 ± 0.13°, and 0.01 ± 0.13° for rotations in yaw, roll, and pitch, respectively; using the open-face mask system, the average and standard deviations of the shifts were -0.06 ± 0.20 mm, -0.02 ± 0.35 mm, and 0.01 ± 0.40 mm in the AP, SI, and LR directions, and were 0.05 ± 0.23°, 0.02 ± 0.21°, and 0.00 ± 0.16° for rotations in yaw, roll, and pitch, respectively. There was a significant increase in intrafractional motion variance over time during treatments. CONCLUSION: Patients with the vacuum fixation system had significantly smaller intrafractional motion variation compared to those with the open-face mask system. Using intrafractional motion techniques such as surface imaging system is recommended to minimize dose deviation due to intrafractional motion. The increase in intrafractional motion over time indicates clinical benefits with shorter treatment time.

Financial relationships between industry and principal investigators of US cooperative group randomized cancer clinical trials.

Financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) could bias the potentially practice-changing oncologic randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of tomorrow. This investigation characterized the FCOIs of the principal investigators (PIs) of all currently accruing trials of the four (adult) cooperative groups of the National Clinical Trials Network. For our study, the PI list was first compiled, and each name was then searched in the CMS Open Payments database. For each transaction (general payments (GPs) or research funding (RF)), the amount/number/source of payments was recorded. Results showed that from 2014 to 2019, the 91 PIs collectively accepted nearly one-third of a billion dollars ($10 477 023 GPs and $320 096 233 RF). The mean and median GP was $6505 and $945, respectively, and $301 693 and $49 824 RF, respectively. Multivariable Gamma regression analysis revealed that higher GP sums were associated with RCTs involving any type of systemic therapy, and higher RF sums with medical oncologist PIs, trials with phase III components, and RCTs involving radiotherapy (P < .05 for all). Both higher-volume GPs and RF were predicted by PIs having accepted payment(s) from the manufacturer of the drug utilized in their RCT (P < .001 GP, P = .008 RF). Taken together, the main message of this investigation is that FCOIs may be particularly high in PIs of phase III systemic therapy trials, especially if the PI accepted payments from the manufacturer of the drug utilized in their trial. Such RCTs should be thoroughly scrutinized by medical journals, the FDA, and insurance companies for potential "industry bias" that could influence the integrity of their conclusions.

Comparative effectiveness of posttreatment imaging modalities for Medicare patients with advanced head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: Persistent controversy exists with regard to how and when patients with head and neck cancer should undergo imaging after definitive therapy. The current study was conducted to evaluate whether the type of imaging modality used in posttreatment imaging impacts cancer-specific survival for patients with advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: A retrospective study of National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program-Medicare-linked data in patients with an advanced stage of the 3 most common head and neck malignancies (oral cavity, oropharynx, and larynx) was conducted. Hazard ratios and 95% CIs for cancer-specific survival were estimated for patients diagnosed with any of these cancers between 2006 and 2015. RESULTS: Significant improvement with regard to cancer-specific survival was observed among patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III and stage IVA laryngeal cancer who underwent positron emission tomography (PET) and/or computed tomography (CT) imaging during the first 6 months after receipt of definitive treatment (hazard ratio, 0.517; 95% CI, 0.33-0.811) compared with those who underwent CT. There was a trend toward an improvement in cancer-specific survival among patients with oral cavity or oropharyngeal malignancies who underwent PET/CT imaging, but it did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with CT imaging, posttreatment imaging with PET was associated with improved survival in patients with advanced laryngeal carcinoma.

Thoughts and consideration regarding immigrant clinicians: is cultural preservation influencing providers' practice in HPV vaccination.

Immigrant clinicians are vital to population healthcare delivery and therefore population health. One in four physicians in the USA is foreign-born and notably represented in family and pediatric medicine-specialties charged with administering childhood/adolescent vaccines, such as human papillomavirus vaccine (HPVV). Our examination suggests there may be unique cultural and socialization factors that influence clinician HPVV recommendation practice; however, immigrant clinicians have not been adequately engaged within the national HPVV agenda. Given the volume and significance of immigrant clinicians, engagement of these clinicians, in both community and nation-wide efforts to increase HPVV, is a necessary step for improving and achieving the national health goal of optimizing HPVV for cancer prevention.

Palliative Radiation for Cancer Pain Management.

Bone metastases are the most common cause of cancer-related pain. Radiation therapy (RT) is a very common and effective treatment to relieve pain. Conventionally fractionated RT typically consists of the following regimens: 8 Gy in a single treatment, 20 Gy in five fractions, 24 Gy in six fractions, or 30 Gy in ten fractions. All treatment regimens have similar rates of pain relief (range 50-80%), with single-fraction treatment often requiring retreatment. While many painful bony metastases can be managed with RT alone, some may be more complex, often requiring multidisciplinary management, including the need for surgical stabilization or augmentation prior to RT. There are multiple assessment tools including the neurologic, oncologic, mechanical, and systemic (NOMS) decision framework, which allows clinicians to assess the proper course of treatment for these patients. For patients with good prognosis, oligometastatic disease, or those presenting with more radioresistant tumors, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) may be another option, which offers ablative doses of radiation delivered over several treatments. This chapter reviews the fundamentals of RT for palliation.

Multidisciplinary management of locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Biology is King.

The annual incidence of pancreatic cancer is nearly 50,000 patients. The 5-year overall survival is only 9%, and there remains a great need for better therapy. A subset of these patients presents with locally advanced disease. Multidisciplinary therapy has evolved to include some combination of systemic chemotherapy, locoregional radiation, and surgery in select patients with excellent biology. This review will address the thoughtful evidence-based and individualized approach to these patients.

Radiation oncologist perceptions of therapeutic cannabis use among cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer patients are increasingly incorporating medical marijuana into the management of treatment-related side effects. Currently however, data is limited regarding the risks and benefits of therapeutic cannabis for cancer patients. We sought to characterize radiation oncologists' practices and opinions regarding therapeutic cannabis via a nationwide survey. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An anonymous survey was distributed via email to 873 radiation oncologists in the American Society for Radiation Oncology member database. Radiation oncologists were asked their opinions and practices regarding the use of therapeutic cannabis for their patients. Bivariate analyses of potential predictors for responses were conducted using standard statistical techniques. RESULTS: One hundred seven radiation oncologists completed the survey. According to the survey, 36% of respondents would recommend therapeutic cannabis to their patients to mitigate treatment toxicity. Physicians practicing in states where medical marijuana is legal were more likely to recommend it compared to physicians working in states that have not legalized medical marijuana (OR = 3.79, 1.19-12.1, p = 0.01). Seventy-one percent of respondents reported therapeutic cannabis as being effective at least some of the time for managing treatment-related toxicities. Fifty-eight percent of physicians reported lacking sufficient knowledge to advise patients regarding therapeutic cannabis, while 86% of respondents were interested in learning more about therapeutic cannabis for cancer patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although a majority of radiation oncologists believe there are benefits to therapeutic cannabis, many are hesitant to recommend for or against its use. Radiation oncologists appear to be interested in learning more about how therapeutic cannabis may play a role in their patients' care.

Multidisciplinary Care for Melanoma of Unknown Primary: Experience in the Era of Molecular Profiling.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma of unknown primary (MUP) accounts for approximately 3% of melanoma diagnoses. This study sought to evaluate treatment and outcomes for a modern MUP cohort. METHODS: A retrospective review of MUP was performed at a tertiary referral cancer center. RESULTS: Of 815 melanoma patients, 67 (8.2%) had MUP. Men were more likely to have MUP than women (67% vs. 55%; p = 0.04). The most common sites of MUP were lymph nodes (28%), visceral solid organs (25%), brain (16%), and skin/subcutaneous tissues (10%). Of the patients who underwent tumor genomic profiling, 52% harbored pathogenic BRAF mutations. Of the 24 patients who underwent multi-gene panel testing, all had pathogenic mutations and 21 (88%) had mutations in addition to or exclusive of BRAF, including 11 patients (46%) with telomerase reverse transcriptase promoter mutations. Checkpoint inhibitors (39%) and BRAF-MEK inhibitors (7%) were the most common first-line treatments. Upfront surgical resection was used for 25% of the MUP patients, and 12 of these resections were for curative intent. During a median follow-up period of 22.1 months, the median overall survival (OS) was not met for the patients with MUP isolated to lymph nodes. At 56.8 months, 75% of these patients were alive. The median OS was 37.4 months for skin/soft tissue MUP, 33.3 months for single solid organ viscera MUP, and 29.8 months for metastatic brain MUP. CONCLUSION: Multigene panel testing identified pathogenic mutations in all tested MUP patients and frequently identified targets outside BRAF. Despite advanced stage, aggressive multimodal therapy for MUP can be associated with 5-year OS and should be pursued for appropriate candidates.

Elderly Black Non-Hispanic Patients With Head and Neck Squamous Cell Cancer Have the Worst Survival Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In this population study, we compared head and neck cancer (HNC) prognosis and risk factors in 2 underserved minority groups (Hispanic and Black non-Hispanic patients) with those in other racial/ethnicity groups. METHODS: In this SEER-Medicare database study in patients with HNC diagnosed in 2006 through 2015, we evaluated cancer-specific survival (CSS) between different racial/ethnic cohorts as the main outcome. Patient demographics, tumor factors, socioeconomic status, and treatments were analyzed in relation to the primary outcomes between racial/ethnic groups. RESULTS: Black non-Hispanic patients had significantly worse CSS than all other racial/ethnic groups, including Hispanic patients, in unadjusted univariate analysis (Black non-Hispanic patients: hazard ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.33-1.65; Hispanic patients: hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.99-1.28). To investigate the association of several variables with CSS, data were stratified for multivariate analysis using forward Cox regression. This identified socioeconomic status, cancer stage, and receipt of treatment as predictive factors for the survival differences. Black non-Hispanic patients were most likely to present at a later stage (odds ratio, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.38-1.90) and to receive less treatment (odds ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.55-0.81). Unmarried status, high poverty areas, increased emergency department visits, and receipt of healthcare at non-NCI/nonteaching hospitals also significantly impacted stage and treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Black non-Hispanic patients have a worse HNC prognosis than patients in all other racial/ethnic groups, including Hispanic patients. Modifiable risk factors include access to nonemergent care and prevention measures, such as tobacco cessation; presence of social support; communication barriers; and access to tertiary centers for appropriate treatment of their cancers.

Management and outcomes of primary anorectal melanoma in the United States.

Aims: To analyze outcomes in primary anorectal melanoma, a rare disease with limited data and treatment guidelines. Materials & methods: We analyzed 305 subjects in the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2015. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Results: Surgery was predictive of OS (median 2.24 vs 1.18 years; p = 0.009) with no survival difference between local and transabdominal approaches (p = 0.77). No OS benefit was seen with chemotherapy (p = 0.16), radiotherapy (p = 0.31) or adjuvant therapy post surgery (p > 0.05 for all groups). Targeted therapy trended toward higher survival in metastatic patients (1.33 vs 0.55 years; p = 0.06). Conclusion: In nonmetastatic patients, surgery of any method is associated with a survival benefit. The trend for improved survival following targeted therapy in metastatic patients merits further exploration.

Local management of preinvasive and clinical T1-3 penile cancer: utilization of diverse treatment modalities.

Aim: To explore management trends in preinvasive and cT1-T3 penile cancer. Materials & methods: The National Cancer Database was queried (2004-2013) for cT1-T3 M0 penile cancer with specified nonpalliative surgical techniques and histologies (n = 5,728). Results: Local excision (39%) and partial penectomy (38%) were most commonly utilized. Patients with cTis/Ta or cT1 disease more often received nonpenectomy approaches (p < 0.05); cT2-T3 cases more likely underwent penectomy (p < 0.001). No survival differences were observed between penectomy (49.3 months) and nonpenectomy approaches (50.3 months) in the overall cohort (p = 0.107) and when stratifying by T-stage (p > 0.20 for all). Conclusion: This study provides contemporary insight into the landscape for management of this rare disease and can serve as a benchmark for future evaluation of treatment trends.