The treatment of penile carcinoma in situ (CIS) within a UK supra-regional network.

OBJECTIVES: To review outcomes of the treatment of carcinoma in situ (CIS) of the penis at a large supra-regional penile cancer network, where centralisation has permitted greater experience with treatment outcomes, and suggest treatment strategies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The network penile cancer database, which details presentation, treatment and complications was analysed from 2003 to 2010, identifying patients with CIS, with a minimum follow-up of 2 years, looking at treatments administered and outcomes. RESULTS: In all, 57 patients with mean (range) age of 61 (34-91) years were identified. In all, 18 were treated by circumcision only, 20 by circumcision and local excision (LE) and 19 by circumcision and 5-flurouracil (5-FU). The mean (range) follow-up was 3.5 (2-8) years. Of those treated by circumcision none subsequently developed CIS on the glans. For those who underwent circumcision + LE, five of 20 (25%) developed recurrence requiring further treatment. Of those treated by circumcision + 5-FU, 14/19 (73.7%) completely responded. Of the five incomplete responders, two had focal invasive malignancy at repeat biopsy. One incomplete responder underwent glansectomy and four grafting. No complete responders relapsed. Complications of 5-FU included significant inflammatory response in seven (36.8%), with two requiring hospital admission and one neo-phimosis (5.3%). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that patients undergoing circumcision for isolated CIS and complete responders to 5-FU may require only short-term follow-up, as recurrence is unlikely, whereas longer follow up is required for all other patients. However, numbers in this study are small and larger studies are needed to support this. An incomplete response to 5-FU dictates immediate re-biopsy, as it carries a significant chance of previously undetected invasive disease.

Should centralized histopathological review in penile cancer be the global standard?

OBJECTIVE: To assess the role of centralized pathological review in penile cancer management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Newly diagnosed squamous cell carcinomas (SCC) of the penis, including squamous cell carcinoma in situ (CIS), from biopsy specimens were referred from 15 centres to the regional supra-network multidisciplinary team (Sn-MDT) between 1 January 2008 and 30 March 2011. Biopsy histology reports and slides from the respective referring hospitals were reviewed by the Sn-MDT pathologists. The biopsy specimens' histological type, grade and stage reported by the Sn-MDT pathologist were compared with those given in the referring hospital pathology report, as well as with definitive surgery histology. Any changes in histological diagnosis were sub-divided into critical changes (i.e. those that could alter management) and non-critical changes (i.e. those that would not affect management). RESULTS: A total of 155 cases of squamous cell carcinoma or CIS of the penis were referred from 15 different centres in North-West England. After review by the Sn-MDT, the histological diagnosis was changed in 31% of cases and this difference was statistically significant. A total of 60.4% of the changes were deemed to be critical changes that resulted in a significant change in management. When comparing the biopsy histology reported by the Sn-MDT with the final histology from the definitive surgical specimens, a good correlation was generally found. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study a significant proportion of penile cancer histology reports were revised after review by the Sn-MDT. Many of these changes altered patient management. The present study shows that accurate pathological diagnosis plays a crucial role in determining the correct treatment and maximizing the potential for good clinical outcomes in penile cancer. In the case of histopathology, centralization has increased exposure to penile cancer and thereby increased diagnostic accuracy, and should therefore be considered the 'gold standard'.

Early prostate cancer--which treatment do men prefer and why?

STUDY TYPE: Preference (prospective cohort). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1b. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? In general the literature suggests that there is a need for improvement in aiding men diagnosed with early prostate cancer in their decision making about treatment options and that our understanding of this process is inadequate. There is limited data analyzing the reasons why these men decide between potentially curative or observational treatments and data evaluating patients' views before and after definitive therapy are scarce. This study begins the process of understanding the reasons underlying a patient's final treatment decision. Being a prospective study, it looks at the thought processes of these men before treatment during the time the decision is made. It also documents how satisfied patients are with their choice after their treatment and whether they would choose the same treatment again. OBJECTIVE: To identify the reasons for patients with localised prostate cancer choosing between treatments and the relationship of procedure type to patient satisfaction post-treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 768 men with prostate cancer (stage T1/2, Gleason≤7, PSA<20 ug/L) chose between four treatments: radical prostatectomy, brachytherapy, conformal radiotherapy and active surveillance. Prior to choosing, patients were counselled by a urological surgeon, clinical (radiation) oncologist and uro-oncology specialist nurse. Pre-treatment reasons for choice were recorded. Post-treatment satisfaction was examined via postal questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the 768 patients, 305 (40%) chose surgery, 237 (31%) conformal beam radiotherapy, 165 (21%) brachytherapy and 61 (8%) active surveillance. Sixty percent of men who opted for radical prostatectomy were motivated by the need for physical removal of the cancer. Conformal radiotherapy was mainly chosen by patients who feared other treatments (n=63, 27%). Most men chose brachytherapy because it was more convenient for their lifestyle (n=64, 39%). Active surveillance was chosen by patients for more varied reasons. Post-treatment satisfaction was assessed in a subgroup who took part in the QOL aspect of this study. Of the respondents to the questionnaire, 212(87.6%) stated that they were satisfied/extremely satisfied with their choice and 171(92.9%) indicated they would choose the same treatment again. CONCLUSION: Men with early prostate cancer have clear reasons for making decisions about treatment. Overall, patients were satisfied with the treatment and indicated that despite different reasons for choosing treatment, they would make the same choice again.

Male adnexal tumour of wolffian origin: the first report of metastatic disease.

The first case of a male adnexal tumour of probable wolffian duct origin to develop metastatic disease is reported. The characteristic histological appearance and immunohistochemical profiles of the primary and metastatic male tumours are discussed. The scanty experience relating to metastatic disease makes decisions about the most appropriate treatment challenging.