Excellent survival in relapsed stage I testicular cancer.

BACKGROUND: Two thirds of patients with germ-cell cancer (GCC) present as clinical stage I (CSI). Following orchiectomy, active surveillance (AS) has become their standard management. However, 15-50% of patients eventually relapse with metastatic disease after AS. Relapses need to be detected early in order to achieve cure and avoid overtreatment. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed consecutive GCC patients treated at two Swiss academic centers between 2010 and 2020. Patients with stage IS and extragonadal primaries were excluded. We compared disease characteristics and survival outcomes of patients relapsed from initial CSI to patients with de novo metastatic disease. Primary endpoint was the IGCCCG category at the time of relapse. Main secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: We identified 360 GCC patients with initial CSI and 245 de novo metastatic patients. After a median follow-up of 47 months, 81 of 360 (22.5%) CSI patients relapsed: 41 seminoma (Sem) and 40 non-seminoma (NSem) patients. All Sems relapsed in the IGCCCG good prognosis group. NSem relapsed with good 29/40 (72.5%) and intermediate 11/40 (27.5%) prognostic features; 95.1% of relapses occurred within five years post-orchiectomy. Only 3 relapsed NSem patients died from metastatic disease. Five-year OS for relapsed CSI patients was 100% for Sem and 87% (95% CI: 61-96%) for NSem patients; five-year PFS was 92% (95% CI: 77-97) and 78% (95% CI: 56-90) for Sem and NSem, respectively. When stratified by IGCCCG prognostic groups, good risk relapsed patients had a trend towards better OS and PFS as compared to de novo metastatic patients. CONCLUSIONS: GCC patients who relapse after initial CSI can be detected early by active surveillance and have an excellent survival.

Is conservative management safe in patients with acute ureterolithiasis and perirenal stranding?

In patients presenting with ureterolithiasis, perirenal stranding is frequently observed in non-contrast computed tomography. Because perirenal stranding may be caused by tears in the collecting system, previous studies have described an increased risk of infectious complications and suggested broad empiric antibiotic therapy and immediate decompressing of the upper urinary tract. We hypothesized that these patients can also be managed conservatively. Therefore, we retrospectively identified patients with ureterolithiasis and perirenal stranding and compared diagnostic and treatment characteristics as well as treatment outcomes between patients undergoing conservative versus interventional management by ureteral stenting, percutaneous drainage or primary ureteroscopic stone removal. We classified perirenal stranding as mild, moderate or severe based on its radiological extent. Of 211 patients, 98 were managed conservatively. Patients in the interventional group had larger ureteral stones, more proximal ureteral stone location, more severe perirenal stranding, higher systemic and urinary infectious parameters, higher creatinine levels, and received more frequent antibiotic therapy. The conservatively managed group experienced a spontaneous stone passage rate of 77%, while 23% required delayed intervention. In the interventional and conservative groups, 4% and 2% of patients, respectively, developed sepsis. None of the patients in either group developed a perirenal abscess. Comparison of perirenal stranding grade between mild, moderate and severe in the conservatively treated group showed no difference in the spontaneous stone passage and infectious complications. In conclusion, conservative management without prophylactic antibiotics for ureterolithiasis and perirenal stranding is a valid treatment option as long as no clinical or laboratory signs of renal failure or infections are observed.

Perioperative complications and oncological outcomes of post-chemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in patients with germ cell cancer at two high-volume university centres in Switzerland - a retrospective chart review.

BACKGROUND: Post-chemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (PC-RPLND) is an integral part of the management of patients with metastatic non-seminoma and residual masses >1 cm after chemotherapy. AIMS: To assess perioperative complications and oncological outcomes at two major referral centres in Switzerland. METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review of 136 patients with non-seminoma who underwent PC-RPLND between 2010 and 2020 at the university hospitals of Bern and Zürich. Patient, treatment and tumour characteristics as well as the types and frequencies of intra- and postoperative complications were registered and compared using the chi-square test. Oncological outcomes consisted of the time and location of relapses as well as progression-free and overall survival, which were compared using the log-rank test. RESULTS: Overall, 70 patients from Bern and 66 patients from Zürich were included; 5 patients had a previous retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) (2 Bern, 3 Zürich). Vascular injuries were the most frequent intraoperative complication, occurring in 27/136 (19.9%) patients. Postoperative complications were observed in 42/136 (30.9%) patients, ileus being the most common. Perioperative mortality was 2.2%. A retroperitoneal mass ≥50 mm was significantly associated with intraoperative complications (p = 0.004) and increased resource demands (p = 0.021). Postoperative morbidity was higher according to age at post-chemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection ≥40 years (p = 0.028) and retroperitoneal mass ≥20 mm (p = 0.005). The median follow-up time was 37 months (interquartile range [IQR] 18-64 months). The median progression-free survival at 5 years was 76% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 64-85%) in Bern and 69% (95% CI: 54-80%) in Zürich (p = 0.464). The median overall survival at 5 years was 88% (95% CI: 76-94%) in Bern and 77% (95% CI: 60-87%) in Zürich (p = 0.335). Patients with progressive disease or a tumour marker increase before retroperitoneal lymph node dissection had significantly inferior progression-free and overall survival compared to non-progressing patients. The presence of teratoma in resected specimens did not confer inferior survival probabilities compared to necrosis only, whereas the presence of vital undifferentiated tumour conferred inferior progression-free and overall survival. Patients with a previous retroperitoneal lymph node dissection and patients operated for late relapses >2 years after chemotherapy also had significantly inferior progression-free and overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: We found a relevant rate of severe perioperative complications at PC-RPLND at even experienced high-volume centres. The oncological outcomes at two major university urological centres in Switzerland were similar and determined by preoperative risk factors and intraoperative histology.

Risk Factors for Relapse in Nonseminomatous Testicular Cancer After Postchemotherapy Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection With Viable Residual Cancer.

PURPOSE: No consensus exists on the management of men with nonseminoma and viable nonteratomatous germ cell tumor in the postchemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (pcRPLND) specimen after first-line chemotherapy. We analyzed surveillance versus different adjuvant chemotherapy regimens and the influence of time to pcRPLND on oncologic outcomes. METHODS: Data on 117 men treated with cisplatin-based first-line chemotherapy between 1990 and 2018 were collected from 13 institutions. All patients had viable nonteratomatous germ cell tumor in the pcRPLND specimen. Surgery was performed after a median of 57 days, followed by either surveillance (n = 64) or adjuvant chemotherapy (n = 53). Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: After controlling for International Germ Cell Cancer Cooperative Group risk group and percent of viable malignant cells found at RPLND, no difference was observed between men managed with surveillance or adjuvant chemotherapy regarding PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72 [95% CI, 0.32 to 1.6]; P = .4), CSS (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.20 to 2.39; P = .6), and OS (HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.25 to 2.44]; P = .7). No statistically significant differences for PFS, CSS, or OS were observed on the basis of chemotherapy regimen or in men treated with pcRPLND ≤57 versus >57 days after first-line chemotherapy. Residual disease with <10% versus ≥10% viable cancer cells were associated with a longer PFS (HR, 3.22 [95% CI, 1.29 to 8]; P = .012). Relapse in the retroperitoneum was observed in 34 (29%) men. CONCLUSION: Men with a complete resection at pcRPLND and <10% viable cells have favorable outcomes without further treatment. Complete retroperitoneal resection seems more important than early pcRPLND.

Risk of residual cancer after complete response following first-line chemotherapy in men with metastatic non-seminomatous germ cell tumour and International Germ Cell Cancer Cooperative Group intermediate/poor prognosis: A multi-institutional retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Current guidelines recommend surveillance in metastatic non-seminomatous germ cell tumour patients treated with first-line-chemotherapy and a complete clinical response (normalisation of serum tumour markers and residual masses <1 cm). However, this recommendation is based on a series including patients with good prognosis according to International Germ Cell Cancer Cooperative Group prognostic group (IGCCCG-PG). The aim of this study was to analyse the proportion of residual teratoma and survival among patients with intermediate/poor IGCCCG-PG and a complete clinical response after first-line-chemotherapy. MATERIAL & METHODS: This is a retrospective study of men with intermediate/poor IGCCCG-PG, who had a complete clinical response after first-line chemotherapy. Patients were either followed by surveillance or treated with post-chemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (pcRPLND). RESULTS: Between 2009 and 2018, 143 men with intermediate (n = 83) or poor (n = 60) IGCCCG-PG were treated at 11 international centres. Among 33 patients treated with pcRPLND, the specimen showed teratoma and viable cancer in 16 (48%) and 4 (12%). During a median a 7-year follow-up, 20/110 (18%) patients managed with surveillance relapsed, of whom seven (6%) had a retroperitoneal-only relapse versus 2/33 patients managed with pcRPLND relapsed. No difference was observed regarding overall survival (OS) among men treated with pcRPLND or surveillance (5-year OS, 93% and 89%, p-value = 0.35). The median time-to-recurrence among men on surveillance was 1.3 years (range: 0.3-9.1), and the most common sites of relapses included retroperitoneum (11%), chest (5%), and bones (4%). CONCLUSIONS: While most men with intermediate/poor IGCCCG-PG harbour teratoma/cancer in the retroperitoneum despite a complete response to first-line-chemotherapy, only 6% managed with surveillance relapsed in the retroperitoneum. There was no significant difference in OS between the two groups.