Topical Therapy for non-invasive penile cancer (Tis)-updated results and toxicity.

Penile cancer is a rare malignancy estimated to affect 26,000 men globally each year. The association with penile cancer, in particular non-invasive disease, and human papilloma virus (HPV) is well known. Ninety-five percent of cases of penile cancer are squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), which are staged using the TNM staging system. Terminology describing the histological appearance of non-invasive penile cancer has changed with all cases grouped under the umbrella term of penile intraepithelial neoplasia (PeIN); either undifferentiated or differentiated. This replaces previous terms such as carcinoma in situ (CIS) and eponymous names such as Bowen's disease. This change is recognised by the World Health Organisation (WHO). The topical treatments most commonly used for PeIN are 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and imiquimod (IQ). Other treatments such as photodynamic therapy (PDT) are used but to a lesser degree. The evidence for all of these treatments is heterogenous with no randomised data available. Overall up to 57% complete response has been reported with a low number of serious adverse events. In this article, we aim to review the available evidence for the topical treatment of non-invasive penile cancer specifically regarding its efficacy and toxicity.

New developments in the treatment of localized penile cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the current trends in local therapy approaches in patients with penile carcinoma. METHODS: The relevant published data since 2000 were reviewed; important series published before 2000 were also included. The reports were classified according to the level of evidence. Review studies and others indirectly related to the topic were also included but not classified. RESULTS: New information has suggested that surgical margins of only a few millimeters might be adequate for most localized tumors. A trend toward the use of more conservative therapies instead of amputative surgery has been observed, especially in developed countries. Although the local recurrence rate has been greater after conservative therapies than after amputative surgery, this increased rate does not seemed to have had a negative effect on cancer-specific survival. The quality of life has been superior after conservative procedures with preservation of the penis that seems to give the best results with regard to sexual function. Reconstructive surgery can be performed in selected patients after amputative surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Although the level of evidence is low, conservative therapies can be recommended for selected patients with penile carcinoma. Despite the trend for conservative approaches, these patients need psychological support.

Lymph node metastasis in intermediate-risk penile squamous cell cancer: a two-centre experience.

BACKGROUND: The risk of lymph node (LN) metastasis in G2T1 penile cancer has been previously reported as 0-50% and is classified as "intermediate" in the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines. The management of impalpable regional nodes in this cohort of patients remains contentious and varies among treatment centres depending on tumour factors and local resources. OBJECTIVES: To establish the risk of LN metastasis in G2T1 disease. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: We interrogated the databases of two referral centres for penile cancer. MEASUREMENTS: Out of 902 patients, 117 (13%) patients were identified with G2T1 cancers. Those with palpable inguinal nodes (cN1) underwent early inguinal LN dissection (iLND). Those with clinically node negative (cN0) inguinal basins were either observed or surgically staged with iLND or by dynamic sentinel LN biopsy (DSLNB). Median follow-up was 44 mo, with minimum follow-up of 6 mo. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Fifteen of 117 (13%) patients with G2T1 cancer had LN metastasis at initial staging or during follow-up. Six of 12 (50%) cN1 patients had histologically proven LN metastasis on iLND. One hundred five patients were cN0 at presentation. Ten cN0 patients had prophylactic iLND, none of which yielded LN metastasis; 5 of 64 (8%) cN0 patients who had DSLNB had tumour-positive LNs, and 4 of 31 (13%) cN0 patients who were observed developed LN metastasis during follow-up. In cN0 patients, the risk of LN metastasis at initial staging or during surveillance was 9%. CONCLUSIONS: We consider that in cN0 patients with G2T1 penile cancer, the risk of developing metastases during surveillance warrants surgical and potentially curative staging. However, the morbidity of prophylactic bilateral iLND is too great to justify a detection rate of 9%. Less morbid alternatives such as DSLNB are advisable in G2T1 disease.