Impact of teratoma on survival probabilities of patients with metastatic non-seminomatous germ cell cancer: Results from the IGCCCG Update Consortium.

AIMS: To resolve the ongoing controversy surrounding the impact of teratoma (TER) in the primary among patients with metastatic testicular non-seminomatous germ-cell tumours (NSGCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using the International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (IGCCCG) Update Consortium database, we compared the survival probabilities of patients with metastatic testicular GCT with TER (TER) or without TER (NTER) in their primaries corrected for known prognostic factors. Progression-free survival (5y-PFS) and overall survival at 5 years (5y-OS) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Among 6792 patients with metastatic testicular NSGCT, 3224 (47%) had TER in their primary, and 3568 (53%) did not. In the IGCCCG good prognosis group, the 5y-PFS was 87.8% in TER versus 92.0% in NTER patients (p = 0.0001), the respective 5y-OS were 94.5% versus 96.5% (p = 0.0032). The corresponding figures in the intermediate prognosis group were 5y-PFS 76.9% versus 81.6% (p = 0.0432) in TER and NTER and 5y-OS 90.4% versus 90.9% (p = 0.8514), respectively. In the poor prognosis group, there was no difference, neither in 5y-PFS [54.3% in TER patients versus 55.4% (p = 0.7472) in NTER], nor in 5y-OS [69.4% versus 67.7% (p = 0.3841)]. NSGCT patients with TER had more residual masses (65.3% versus 51.7%, p < 0.0001), and therefore received post-chemotherapy surgery more frequently than NTER patients (46.8% versus 32.0%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Teratoma in the primary tumour of patients with metastatic NSGCT negatively impacts on survival in the good and intermediate, but not in the poor IGCCCG prognostic groups.

Contextual determinants of guideline-based family support during end-of-life cancer care and subsequent bereavement care: A cross-sectional survey of registered nurses.

PURPOSE: In end-of-life cancer care, 10-20% of bereaved family members experience adverse mental health effects, including prolonged grief disorder. Despite great efforts, evidence-based recommendations to support their grieving process and well-being are often not successfully adopted into routine clinical care. This study identified facilitators and barriers using implementation science methodology. METHODS: 81 registered nurses working in cancer care from four hospitals and three home care services in Switzerland assessed their current family support practices in end-of-life care and bereavement care. They then assessed organisational attributes of their institution and their own individual characteristics and skills regarding literature-based factors of potential relevance. Facilitators and barriers to guideline-based family support were determined using fractional logistic regression. RESULTS: Service specialisation in palliative care, a culture that supports change, the availability of family support guidelines, billing/reimbursement of bereavement support services, and individual knowledge of family support and skill were systematically associated with higher adoption of guideline-based family support practices. Lack of privacy with families and insufficient training acted as significant barriers. CONCLUSIONS: While several potentially relevant factors have emerged in the literature, certain organisational and individual determinants actually empirically predict guideline-based family support according to nurses in end-of-life cancer care, with some determinants having much stronger implications than others. This provides crucial guidance for focussing quality improvement and implementation efforts through tailored strategies, especially with scarce resources. Furthermore, adoption is lower in bereavement care than in end-of-life care, suggesting a particular need for supportive organisational cultures including specific training and billing/reimbursement options.

End-of-life and bereavement support to families in cancer care: a cross-sectional survey with bereaved family members.

BACKGROUND: Losing a close other to cancer is an incisive experience that occurs after a long course of illness and intense family caregiving. Despite an evident need for family engagement and support and guidance on this, patients and family members may not receive the attention and support they need when a family unit is experiencing a disruption by death. A clear understanding of the quality of care that is currently provided and its ability to address family needs is necessary to improve end-of-life and bereavement support to families affected by cancer. The purpose of this study is to investigate the quality of support of end-of-life and bereavement care to families, their (un)met needs, grief experiences, and self-perceived health outcomes. METHODS: A multi-center, cross-sectional observational survey study with family members (n = 35) whose close other died of cancer in a health institution or their own home in German-speaking Switzerland. RESULTS: Bereaved family members were mostly satisfied with end-of-life care. Information on the grief process and services, and acknowledgment of their grief was experienced as helpful. Most coped with their grief drawing on family resources and exhibited resilience, but they reported unmet needs in relation to family togetherness and caregiving. CONCLUSION: This study with a small number of family members indicates that support provided to families across settings and illness trajectories is perceived as helpful, with specific needs related to family support. The findings suggest that improvements should focus on ensuring care that addresses the family as a unit and enables togetherness, mutual reflection, meaningful relationships, preparedness for death, resilience, and benefit-finding. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/j4kfh .

Adoption of evidence-based end-of-life and bereavement support to families in cancer care: A contextual analysis study with health professionals.

AIMS: To investigate the level of adoption of evidence-based family engagement and support during end-of-life cancer care and subsequent bereavement and its contextual facilitators and barriers from health professionals' perspectives, and to explore differences between professional groups. DESIGN: Contextual analysis using an online cross-sectional survey. METHODS: This study was conducted in four Swiss hospitals and three home care oncology and palliative care services. Non-parametric testing was used to investigate the level of adoption and differences between nurses, physicians, occupational- and physiotherapists and psychosocial professionals (chaplains, onco-psychologists and social workers). The STROBE checklist for cross-sectional studies was followed. RESULTS: The majority of the 111 participating health professionals were nurses. Adoption was statistically significantly higher during end-of-life care than bereavement, with nurses and physicians reporting higher levels than the other professional groups. Guidance on end-of-life family care was available in about half of the cases, in contrast to a quarter for bereavement care. Self-perceived knowledge, skills and attitudes were moderate to high, with nurses and physicians reporting higher levels than others, except for general skills in working with families. Organisational structures were experienced as rather supportive, with the psychosocial group appraising the organisational context as significantly less conducive to fully implementing end-of-life and bereavement care than others, particularly during the end-of-life phase. CONCLUSION: Evidence-based family engagement and support were better adopted during end-of-life care than bereavement. Overall, nurses and physicians felt better enabled to care for families compared to other professional groups. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/j4kfh. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Implementation and quality improvement efforts should focus particularly on the bereavement phase and be tailored to professional groups. IMPACT: The findings show that evidence-based family engagement and support practices during end-of-life were rather well adopted in contrast to subsequent bereavement care, with nurses and physicians better enabled than other professionals to provide care. A better understanding of health professionals' contributions and roles in family care is important to build interprofessional capacity for evidence-based end-of-life and bereavement support. REPORTING METHOD: The STROBE checklist for reports of cross-sectional studies was followed (von Elm et al., 2007).

European Association of Urology Guidelines on Muscle-invasive and Metastatic Bladder Cancer: Summary of the 2023 Guidelines.

CONTEXT: We present an overview of the updated 2023 European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer (MMIBC). OBJECTIVE: To provide practical evidence-based recommendations and consensus statements on the clinical management of MMIBC with a focus on diagnosis and treatment. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A broad and comprehensive scoping exercise covering all areas of the MMIBC guidelines has been performed annually since 2017. Searches cover the Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Libraries databases for yearly guideline updates. A level of evidence and strength of recommendation are assigned. The evidence cutoff date for the 2023 MIBC guidelines was May 4, 2022. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Patients should be counselled regarding risk factors for bladder cancer. Pathologists should describe tumour and lymph nodes in detail, including the presence of histological subtypes. The importance of the presence or absence of urothelial carcinoma (UC) in the prostatic urethra is emphasised. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the bladder is superior to computed tomography (CT) for disease staging, specifically in differentiating T1 from T2 disease, and may lead to a change in treatment approach in patients at high risk of an invasive tumour. Imaging of the upper urinary tract, lymph nodes, and distant metastasis is performed with CT or MRI; the additional value of flurodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/CT still needs to be determined. Frail and comorbid patients should be evaluated by a multidisciplinary team. Postoperative histology remains the most important prognostic variable, while circulating tumour DNA appears to be an interesting predictive marker. Neoadjuvant systemic therapy remains cisplatin-based. In motivated and selected women and men, sexual organ-preserving cystectomy results in better functional outcomes without compromising oncological outcomes. Robotic and open cystectomy have comparable outcomes and should be combined with (extended) lymph node dissection. The diversion type is an individual choice after taking patient and tumour characteristics into account. Radical cystectomy remains a highly complex procedure with considerable morbidity and risk of mortality, although lower rates are observed for higher hospital volumes (>20 cases/yr). With proper patient selection, trimodal therapy (chemoradiation) has comparable outcomes to radical cystectomy. Adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery improves disease-specific survival and overall survival (OS) in patients with high-risk disease who did not receive neoadjuvant treatment, and is strongly recommended. There is a weak recommendation for adjuvant nivolumab, as OS data are not yet available. Health-related quality of life should be assessed using validated questionnaires at baseline and after treatment. Surveillance is needed to monitor for recurrent cancer and functional outcomes. Recurrences detected on follow-up seem to have better prognosis than symptomatic recurrences. CONCLUSIONS: This summary of the 2023 EAU guidelines provides updated information on the diagnosis and treatment of MMIBC for incorporation into clinical practice. PATIENT SUMMARY: The European Association of Urology guidelines panel on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer has released an updated version of the guideline containing information on diagnosis and treatment of this disease. Recommendations are based on studies published up to May 4, 2022. Surgical removal of the bladder and bladder preservation are discussed, as well as updates on the use of chemotherapy and immunotherapy in localised and metastatic disease.

Nivolumab Switch Maintenance Therapy After Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Induction in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial by the Interdisciplinary Working Group on Renal Tumors of the German Cancer Society (NIVOSWITCH; AIO-NZK-0116ass).

BACKGROUND: The role of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) maintenance therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is undefined. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether switch maintenance therapy with nivolumab improves clinical outcomes in patients with mRCC with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) sensitivity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This open-label phase 2 trial randomized patients with a partial response or stable disease after 10-12-wk TKI induction therapy to either TKI or nivolumab maintenance. Key inclusion criteria were measurable disease, clear cell histology, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0-2, and adequate organ function. INTERVENTION: Intravenous nivolumab 8 × 240 mg every 2 wk, followed by 480 mg every 4 wk or sunitinib 50 mg (4-2 regimen) or pazopanib 800 mg once daily orally. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were the objective response rate (ORR; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1), progression-free survival (PFS), safety (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.03), and patient-reported outcomes (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Kidney Symptom Index). The Kaplan-Meier method, two-sided log-rank tests, and Cox regression models were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Maintenance therapy was nivolumab for 25 patients (51.0%) and TKI for 24 (48.9%). The median age was 65 yr (range 35-79). Nine patients (18.4%) were female, 31 (63.3%) had ECOG PS of 0, and 15 (30.6%) had favorable risk. OS data are immature (17 deaths, 34.7%). The ORR was 20.0% (n = 5) for nivolumab and 52.2% (n = 12) for TKI. PFS was worse with nivolumab (hazard ratio 2.57, 95% confidence interval 1.36-4.89; p = 0.003). Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 14 patients (56.0%) with nivolumab and 17 (70.8%) with TKI. A major limitation is early termination of our study. CONCLUSIONS: TKI treatment achieved superior ORR and PFS in comparison to nivolumab maintenance therapy. Our data do not indicate a role for nivolumab switch maintenance in mRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with metastatic kidney cancer who experienced a tumor response or disease stabilization after a short period of targeted treatment with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor did not benefit from a switch to the immunotherapy drug nivolumab. Patients who continued their original treatment achieved better responses and a longer time without disease progression. This trial is registered on EudraCT as 2016-002170-13 and on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02959554.

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.

Interdisciplinary Swiss consensus recommendations on staging and treatment of advanced prostate cancer.

The management of prostate cancer is undergoing rapid changes in all disease settings. Novel imaging tools for diagnosis have been introduced, and the treatment of high-risk localized, locally advanced and metastatic disease has changed considerably in recent years. From clinical and health-economic perspectives, a rational and optimal use of the available options is of the utmost importance. While international guidelines list relevant pivotal trials and give recommendations for a variety of clinical scenarios, there is much room for interpretation, and several important questions remain highly debated. The goal of developing a national consensus on the use of these novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies in order to improve disease management and eventually patient outcomes has prompted a Swiss consensus meeting. Experts from several specialties, including urology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, pathology and nuclear medicine, discussed and voted on questions of the current most important areas of uncertainty, including the staging and treatment of high-risk localized disease, treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) and use of new options to treat metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

No Survival Differences among Germ-Cell Cancer Patients from Urban and Rural Areas.

INTRODUCTION: Germ-cell cancer (GCC) is curable in the majority of men. However, previous reports have described inferior outcomes in men living in rural as compared to urban residential areas. METHODS: We identified all GCC patients treated at two large university hospitals in Zürich and Bern, both in Switzerland, between 2010 and 2020 by retrospective chart review. In 400 patients from Zürich and 274 patients from Bern, details on presentation, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes were abstracted from medical records. For follow-up, we contacted referring centers or private physicians. Residential region was allocated according to the Federal Statistical Office of Switzerland. RESULTS: We found no differences in initial presentation (clinical stage I [CSI] versus de novo metastatic), relapse rate in CSI patients, response in metastatic patients (favorable vs. unfavorable), progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) between patients from urban as compared to suburban or rural residential areas. PFS at 3 years for CSI patients was 78% (95% confidence interval 72-82%) and OS at 5 years was 98% (95% confidence interval 96-99%). PFS at 3 years for de novo metastatic patients was 74% (95% confidence interval 68-79%) and OS at 5 years was 86% (95% confidence interval 80-90%). CONCLUSION: Treatment outcomes in GCC patients were excellent and comparable to international standards at both centers irrespective of the residential area of patients documenting equal access to high-level oncological care at both centers.

Patient and General Population Preferences Regarding the Benefits and Harms of Treatment for Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Background: Patient preferences for treatment outcomes are important to guide decision-making in clinical practice, but little is known about the preferences of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Objective: To evaluate patient preferences regarding the attributed benefits and harms of systemic treatments for mHSPC and preference heterogeneity between individuals and specific subgroups. Design setting and participants: We conducted an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) preference survey among 77 patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) and 311 men from the general population in Switzerland between November 2021 and August 2022. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: We evaluated preferences and preference heterogeneity related to survival benefits and treatment-related adverse effects using mixed multinomial logit models and estimated the maximum survival time participants were willing to trade to avert specific adverse effects. We further assessed characteristics associated with different preference patterns via subgroup and latent class analyses. Results and limitations: Patients with mPC showed an overall stronger preference for survival benefits in comparison to men from the general population (p = 0.004), with substantial preference heterogeneity between individuals within the two samples (both p < 0.001). There was no evidence of differences in preferences for men aged 45-65 yr versus ≥65 yr, patients with mPC in different disease stages or with different adverse effect experiences, or general population participants with and without experiences with cancer. Latent class analyses suggested the presence of two groups strongly preferring either survival or the absence of adverse effects, with no specific characteristic clearly associated with belonging to either group. Potential biases due to participant selection, cognitive burden, and hypothetical choice scenarios may limit the study results. Conclusions: Given the relevant heterogeneity in participant preferences regarding the benefits and harms of treatment for mHSPC, patient preferences should be explicitly discussed during decision-making in clinical practice and reflected in clinical practice guidelines and regulatory assessment regarding treatment for mHSPC. Patient summary: We examined the preferences (values and perceptions) of patients and men from the general population regarding the benefits and harms of treatment for metastatic prostate cancer. There were large differences between men in how they balanced the expected survival benefits and potential adverse effects. While some men strongly valued survival, others more strongly valued the absence of adverse effects. Therefore, it is important to discuss patient preferences in clinical practice.

Complication rates of peripherally inserted central catheters vs implanted ports in patients receiving systemic anticancer therapy: A retrospective cohort study.

While implanted port catheters ("PORTs") have historically been the standard device for intravenous systemic anticancer therapy, the use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) has increased continuously and reliable catheter selection guidelines are lacking. We compare complication rates of PORTs and PICCs in cancer treatment in a retrospective study of 3365 patients with both solid organ (n = 2612) and hematologic (n = 753) malignancies, between 2001 and 2021. 26.4% (n = 890) of all patients were treated via PICCs and 73.6% (2475) via PORTs. 20.7% (578) experienced a major catheter-related complication with a higher rate in PICCs than in PORTs (23.5% vs 14.9%, P < .001). Among major complications, infections and mechanical complications were more common in PICCs than in PORTs (11.9% vs 6.4%, P = .001, 7.3% vs 4.2%, P = .002), whereas the rate of thrombosis was similar (3.4% vs 3.0%, P = .9). While PORTs had a higher rate of periprocedural complications (2.7% vs 1.1%, P < .05), PICCs overall complication rate exceeded PORTs within 3 days from implantation. Median follow-up was 49 (PICC) and 60 weeks (PORT). PORTs are safer and therefore should be preferred in this setting regardless of catheter dwell time.

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.

Randomized Phase II Cabazitaxel Dose Individualization and Neutropenia Prevention Trial in Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: There is ongoing controversy about the recommended dose of cabazitaxel in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter phase II open-label, randomized, parallel-group study compared 3-weekly cabazitaxel at 25 mg/m2 (conventional arm A) with cabazitaxel therapeutic drug monitoring (experimental arm B) in mCRPC. The primary objective was to improve the clinical feasibility rate (CFR), defined as the absence of grade 4 neutropenia or thrombocytopenia, any thrombocytopenia with bleeding, febrile neutropenia, severe nonhematologic toxicity, withdrawal for cabazitaxel-related toxicity, or death. A total of 60 patients had to be randomized to detect a difference in CFR of 35% (power 80%, two-sided alpha 10%). RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were randomized to arm A and 33 patients to arm B. CFR was 69.4% in arm A and 64.3% in arm B (P = 0.79). Week-12 PSA response was 38.5% in both arms. A radiological response by RECIST v.1.1 was seen in 3 (9.7%) patients in arm A versus 6 (23.1%) patients in arm B (P = 0.28), disease progression was higher in arm A compared with arm B (61.3% vs. 30.8%, P = 0.05). Median progression-free survival was longer in arm B compared with arm A (9.5 vs. 4.4 months; HR = 0.46; P = 0.005). Median overall survival was higher in arm B compared with arm A (16.2 vs. 7.3 months; HR = 0.33; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacokinetic-guided dosing of cabazitaxel in patients with mCRPC is feasible and improves clinical outcome due to individual dose escalations in 55% of patients.

Treatment Outcomes for Men with Clinical Stage II Nonseminomatous Germ Cell Tumours Treated with Primary Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: Guidelines recommend primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) as a treatment option for tumour marker-negative stage II nonseminomatous germ cell tumour (NSGCT). OBJECTIVE: To review the literature on oncological outcomes for men with stage II NSGCT treated with RPLND. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review of studies describing clinicopathological outcomes following primary RPLND in stage II NSGCT was conducted in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) statement. Baseline data, perioperative and postoperative parameters, and oncological outcomes were collected. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: In total, 12 of 4387 studies were included, from which we collected data for 835 men. Among men with clinical stage II NSGCT, pathological stage II was confirmed in 615 of 790 patients (78%). Most studies administered adjuvant chemotherapy in cases with large lymph nodes, multiple affected lymph nodes, or persistently elevated tumour markers. Recurrence was observed in 12-40% of patients without adjuvant chemotherapy and 0-4% of patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The literature describing RPLND in clinical stage II NSGCT is heterogeneous and no meta-analysis was possible, but RPLND can provide accurate staging and may be curative in selected patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed the literature to summarise results after surgical removal of enlarged lymph nodes in the back of the abdomen in men with testis cancer. This procedure provides accurate information on how far the cancer has spread and may provide a cure in selected patients.

Phase 2 Single-arm Trial of Primary Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection in Patients with Seminomatous Testicular Germ Cell Tumors with Clinical Stage IIA/B (PRIMETEST).

BACKGROUND: Primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) for clinical stage (CS) IIA/B seminoma without adjuvant treatment is an experimental treatment to avoid radiotherapy- or chemotherapy-related toxicity from standard treatment. OBJECTIVE: The PRIMETEST trial aimed to prospectively evaluate the oncological efficacy and surgical safety of primary RPLND. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: PRIMETEST is a single-arm, single-center prospective phase 2 trial. Patients with seminoma, unilateral retroperitoneal lymph node metastases <5 cm, and human chorionic gonadotropin levels <5 mU/ml were included. Patients with CS IIA/B seminoma at initial diagnosis, and recurrence under active surveillance or following adjuvant carboplatin for CS I disease were eligible. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Unilateral open or robot-assisted primary RPLND was performed. The primary endpoint of the study was progression-free survival (PFS) after 36 mo. The trial was considered positive if <30% of patients experienced a recurrence. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Between 2016 and 2021, 33 patients were accrued (nine with primary CS IIA/B, 19 recurrences during active surveillance, and five recurrences following adjuvant carboplatin). Thirteen and 20 patients had CS IIA and IIB, respectively. Open and robot-assisted RPLND procedures were performed in 14 (42%) and 19 (58%) patients, respectively. After a median follow-up of 32 mo (interquartile range 23-46), ten recurrences were detected (30%, 95% confidence interval: 16-49%); thus, the primary endpoint was not met. Infield recurrences occurred in three of ten patients. The current analysis of risk factors could not identify the predictors of recurrence. Three of 33 patients (9%) presented with pN0. CONCLUSIONS: The PRIMETEST trial did not meet its primary endpoint. Nevertheless, PFS of 70% after a median follow-up of 32 mo suggests this approach to be of interest for highly selected patients. Selection criteria, however, need to be defined and validated in a larger prospective cohort of patients. Until then, surgery alone for the treatment of patients with CS IIA/B seminoma cannot be recommended outside of a clinical trial setting. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we investigated primary surgery as an alternative to conventional treatment (chemotherapy or radiation therapy) in patients with metastatic seminoma. The primary objective of the study, to prevent at least 30% of patients from recurrence, was not met. However, certain patients may benefit from this approach and thereby avoid chemotherapy or radiation therapy. Predictive factors need to be analyzed to better select patients for this surgery-only approach.

Impact of differing methodologies for serum miRNA-371a-3p assessment in stage I testicular germ cell cancer recurrence.

Introduction: Current evidence shows that serum miR-371a-3p can identify disease recurrence in testicular germ cell tumour (TGCT) patients and correlates with tumour load. Despite convincing evidence showing the advantages of including miR-371a-3p testing to complement and overcome the classical serum tumour markers limitations, the successful introduction of a serum miRNA based test into clinical practice has been impeded by a lack of consensus regarding optimal methodologies and lack of a universal protocol and thresholds. Herein, we investigate two quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) based pipelines in detecting disease recurrence in stage I TGCT patients under active surveillance, and compare the sensitivity and specificity for each method. Methods: Sequential serum samples collected from 33 stage I TGCT patients undergoing active surveillance were analysed for miR-371a-3p via qRT-PCR with and without an amplification step included. Results: Using a pre-amplified protocol, all known recurrences were detected via elevated miR-371a-3p expression, while without pre-amplification, we failed to detect recurrence in 3/10 known recurrence patients. For pre-amplified analysis, sensitivity and specificity was 90% and 94.4% respectively. Without amplification, sensitivity dropped to 60%, but exhibited 100% specificity. Discussion: We conclude that incorporating pre-amplification increases sensitivity of miR-371a-3p detection, but produces more false positive results. The ideal protocol for quantification of miR-371a-3p still needs to be determined. TGCT patients undergoing active surveillance may benefit from serum miR-371a-3p quantification with earlier detection of recurrences compared to current standard methods. However, larger cross-institutional studies where samples are processed and data is analysed in a standardised manner are required prior to its routine clinical implementation.

Single-dose carboplatin followed by involved-node radiotherapy for stage IIA and stage IIB seminoma (SAKK 01/10): a single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Standard treatment options for patients with stage IIA or stage IIB seminoma include either para-aortic and pelvic radiotherapy or three to four cycles of cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy. These options result in 3-year progression free survival rates of at least 90%, but bear risks for acute and late toxic effects, including secondary malignancies. We tested a novel approach combining de-escalated chemotherapy with de-escalated involved node radiotherapy, with the aim of reducing toxicity while preserving efficacy. METHODS: In the single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 SAKK 01/10 trial, patients with stage IIA or IIB classic seminoma (either at primary diagnosis or at relapse during active surveillance for stage I) were enrolled at ten centres of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research and ten centres of the German Testicular Cancer Study Group. WHO performance status 0-2, age 18 years or older, and adequate bone marrow and kidney function were required for eligibility. Treatment comprised one cycle of carboplatin (area under the curve 7) followed by involved-node radiotherapy (30 Gy in 15 fractions for stage IIA disease and 36 Gy in 18 fractions for stage IIB disease). The primary endpoint was 3-year progression-free survival. Efficacy analyses were done on the full analysis set, which comprised all patients who signed the informed consent, were registered in the trial, initiated trial treatment, and met all medically relevant inclusion or exclusion criteria. Safety was assessed in all patients who were treated at least once with one of the trial treatments. The study is ongoing but no longer recruiting, and is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01593241. FINDINGS: Between Oct 18, 2012, and June 22, 2018, 120 patients were registered in the study. 116 patients were eligible and started treatment according to the study protocol (46 patients with stage IIA disease and 70 with stage IIB disease). After a median follow-up of 4·5 years (IQR 3·9-6·0), 3-year progression-free survival was 93·7% (90% CI 88·5-96·6). With a target progression-free survival of 95% at 3 years, the primary endpoint was not met. Acute treatment-related adverse events of any grade were noted in 58 (48%) of 116 patients, and grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in the form of neutropenia in five (4%) patients, thrombocytopenia in three (3%) patients, and vomiting in one (1%) patient. No treatment-related deaths and no late treatment-related adverse events were reported. Serious adverse events were reported in five (4%) of 116 patients (one transient creatinine increase and four second primary tumours). INTERPRETATION: Despite the fact that the primary endpoint was not met, we observed favourable 3-year progression-free survival with single-dose carboplatin area under the curve 7 and involved-node radiotherapy, with minimal toxic effects. Our findings might warrant discussion with patients about the SAKK 01/10 regimen as an alternative to standard-of-care treatment, but more research on this strategy is needed. FUNDING: Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation and Rising Tide Foundation for Clinical Cancer Research.

Detection of recurrences using serum miR-371a-3p during active surveillance in men with stage I testicular germ cell tumours.

BACKGROUND: MiR-371a-3p predicts the presence of a macroscopic non-teratomatous germ cell tumour (GCT). We hypothesised that miR-371a-3p can also detect recurrence during active surveillance (AS) of stage I GCT. METHODS: We prospectively collected serum samples of 33 men. Relative expression of serum miR-371a-3p levels was determined at each follow-up visit using real-time quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: Recurrence was detected using standard follow-up investigations in 10/33 patients (30%) after a median of 7 months. Directly after orchiectomy, miR-371a-3p levels were not elevated in any of the 15 patients with available post-orchiectomy samples. However, all ten recurring patients exhibited increasing miR-371a-3p levels during follow-up, while miR-371a-3p levels remained non-elevated in all but one patient without recurrence. MiR-371a-3p detected recurrences at a median of 2 months (range 0-5) earlier than standard follow-up investigations. CONCLUSIONS: MiR-371a-3p levels immediately post orchiectomy are not predictive for recurrences and unfortunately cannot support decision-making for AS vs. adjuvant treatment. However, miR-371a-3p detects recurrences reliably and earlier than standard follow-up investigations. If this can be confirmed in larger cohorts, monitoring miR-371a-3p could replace surveillance imaging in seminomatous GCT and reduce the amount of imaging in non-seminomatous GCT. Earlier detection of disease recurrence may also reduce the overall treatment burden.

The 2021 Updated European Association of Urology Guidelines on Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

CONTEXT: Treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma is currently undergoing a rapid evolution. OBJECTIVE: This overview presents the updated European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A comprehensive scoping exercise covering the topic of metastatic urothelial carcinoma is performed annually by the Guidelines Panel. Databases covered by the search included Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Libraries, resulting in yearly guideline updates. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Platinum-based chemotherapy is the recommended first-line standard therapy for all patients fit to receive either cisplatin or carboplatin. Patients positive for programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and ineligible for cisplatin may receive immunotherapy (atezolizumab or pembrolizumab). In case of nonprogressive disease on platinum-based chemotherapy, subsequent maintenance immunotherapy (avelumab) is recommended. For patients without maintenance therapy, the recommended second-line regimen is immunotherapy (pembrolizumab). Later-line treatment has undergone recent advances: the antibody-drug conjugate enfortumab vedotin demonstrated improved overall survival and the fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor erdafitinib appears active in case of FGFR3 alterations. CONCLUSIONS: This 2021 update of the EAU guideline provides detailed and contemporary information on the treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma for incorporation into clinical practice. PATIENT SUMMARY: In recent years, several new treatment options have been introduced for patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (including bladder cancer and cancer of the upper urinary tract and urethra). These include immunotherapy and targeted treatments. This updated guideline informs clinicians and patients about optimal tailoring of treatment of affected patients.