RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: This is the first German evidence- and consensus-based clinical guideline on diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up on germ cell tumours (GCTs) of the testis in adult patients. We present the guideline content in two publications. Part I covers the topic's background, methods, epidemiology, classification systems, diagnostics, prognosis, and treatment recommendations for the localized stages. METHODS: An interdisciplinary panel of 42 experts including 1 patient representative developed the guideline content. Clinical recommendations and statements were based on scientific evidence and expert consensus. For this purpose, evidence tables for several review questions, which were based on systematic literature searches (last search was in March 2018) were provided. Thirty-one experts entitled to vote, rated the final clinical recommendations and statements. RESULTS: We provide 161 clinical recommendations and statements. We present information on the quality of cancer care and epidemiology and give recommendations for staging and classification as well as for diagnostic procedures. The diagnostic recommendations encompass measures for assessing the primary tumour as well as procedures for the detection of metastases. One chapter addresses prognostic factors. In part I, we separately present the treatment recommendations for germ cell neoplasia in situ, and the organ-confined stages (clinical stage I) of both seminoma and nonseminoma. CONCLUSION: Although GCT is a rare tumour entity with excellent survival rates for the localized stages, its management requires an interdisciplinary approach, including several clinical experts. Quality of care is highly related to institutional expertise and can be reassured by established online-based second-opinion boards. There are very few studies on diagnostics with good level of evidence. Treatment of metastatic GCTs must be tailored to the risk according to the International Germ Cell Cancer Collaboration Group classification after careful diagnostic evaluation. An interdisciplinary approach as well as the referral of selected patients to centres with proven experience can help achieve favourable clinical outcomes.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Embrionárias de Células Germinativas , Neoplasias Testiculares , Adulto , Preservação da Fertilidade , Humanos , Masculino , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Neoplasias Embrionárias de Células Germinativas/classificação , Neoplasias Embrionárias de Células Germinativas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Embrionárias de Células Germinativas/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Embrionárias de Células Germinativas/terapia , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Prognóstico , Neoplasias Testiculares/classificação , Neoplasias Testiculares/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Testiculares/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Testiculares/terapiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of assessment of neurovascular bundle (NVB) infiltration using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and PI-RADS V2 prior to prostatectomy. METHODS: The ethics committee approved this retrospective study with waiver of informed consent. N=198 consecutive patients with biopsy proved cancer underwent standardized mpMRI at 3T prior to surgery. NVB infiltration was assessed for each side (a total of 396). Maximum PI-RADS V2 scores were determined for the posterolateral areas adjacent to the NVBs. Imaging results were correlated with postoperative pathology and standard descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: Overall T-staging sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy of mpMRI were 64.4%, 89.2%, 82.4%, 76.2% and 78.3%, respectively. In 396 cases NVB infiltration was predicted with 75.3%, 94.0%, 80.2%, 92.1 % and 89.4 % sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy, respectively. Analyses of 396 NVB and their adjacent PI-RADS V2 scores with pathology revealed significantly more NVB-infiltrations in suspect scores of 5 and 4 vs. uncertain scores of 3-1 (81/264 vs. 16/132, p=0.0001). Considering scores higher than 3 as a criterion of infiltration demonstrated moderate sensitivity and poor specificity (83.5% and 38.8%, respectively). Interobserver agreement of a second reading of a random sample was good (κ=0.64) for NVB infiltrations and moderate (κ=0.59) for PI-RADS V2. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of infiltration of the neurovascular bundles using mpMRI has valuable diagnostic performance, yet PI-RADS V2 Scores demonstrate limited eligibility. Combined findings offer crucial information for the planning of prostatectomy.