RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To update French oncology guidelines concerning penile cancer. METHODS: Comprehensive Medline search between 2020 and 2022 upon diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of testicular germ cell cancer to update previous guidelines. Level of evidence was evaluated according to AGREE-II. RESULTS: Epidermoid carcinoma is the most common penile cancer histology. Physical examination is mandatory to define local and inguinal nodal cancer stage. MRI with artificial erection can help to assess deep infiltration in cases of organsparing intention. Node negative patients (defined by palpation and imaging) will present micro nodal metastases in up to 25% of cases. Invasive lymph node assessment is thus advocated except for low risk patients. Sentinel node dynamic biopsy is the first line technique. Modified bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy is an option with higher morbidity. 18-FDG-PET is recommended in patients with palpable nodes. Chest, abdominal and pelvis computerized tomography is an option. Fine needle aspiration (when positive) is an easy way to assess inguinal palpable node pathological involvement. Its results determine the type of lymphadenectomy to be performed (for diagnostic or curative purposes). Treatment is mostly surgical. Free margins status is essential, but it also has to be organ-sparing when possible. Brachytherapy and topic agents can cure in selected cases. Lymph node assessment should be synchronous to the removal of the tumour when possible. Limited inguinal lymph node involvement (pN1 stage) can be cured with the only lymphadenectomy. In case of larger lymph node stage, one should consider multidisciplinary treatment including chemotherapy and inclusion in a trial. CONCLUSIONS: Penile cancer needs demanding surgery to be cured, surrounded by chemotherapy in node positive patients. Lymph nodes involvement is a major prognostic factor. Thus, inguinal node assessment cannot be neglected.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Penianas , Humanos , Masculino , Neoplasias Penianas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Penianas/terapia , Neoplasias Penianas/patologia , Biópsia de Linfonodo Sentinela , Oncologia , Excisão de Linfonodo/métodos , Estadiamento de NeoplasiasRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The objective of this publication is to recall the initial work-up when faced with an adrenal incidentaloma and, if necessary, to establish the oncological management of an adrenal malignant tumor. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The multidisciplinary working group updated French urological guidelines about oncological assessment of the adrenal incidentaloma, established by the CCAFU in 2020, based on an exhaustive literature review carried out on PubMed. RESULTS: Although the majority of the adrenal masses are benign and non-functional, it is important to investigate them, as a percentage of these can cause serious endocrine diseases or be cancers. Malignant adrenal tumors are mainly represented by adrenocortical carcinomas (ACC), malignant pheochromocytomas (MPC) and adrenal metastases (AM). The malignancy assessment of an adrenal incident includes a complete history, a physical examination, a biochemical/hormonal assessment to look for subclinical hormonal secretion. Diagnostic hypotheses are sometimes available at this stage, but it is the morphological and functional imaging and the histological analysis, which will make it possible to close the malignancy assessment and make the oncological diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: ACC and MPC are mainly sporadic but a hereditary origin is always possible. ACC is suspected preoperatively but the diagnosis of certainty is histological. The diagnosis of MPC is more delicate and is based on clinic, biology and imagery. The diagnosis of certainty of AM requires a percutaneous biopsy. At the end, the files must be discussed within the COMETE - adrenal cancer network (Appendix 1).
Assuntos
Neoplasias das Glândulas Suprarrenais , Feocromocitoma , Humanos , Neoplasias das Glândulas Suprarrenais/diagnóstico , Neoplasias das Glândulas Suprarrenais/terapia , Feocromocitoma/diagnóstico , OncologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Updated Recommendations for the management of testicular germ cell cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Comprehensive review of the literature on PubMed since 2020 concerning the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of testicular germ cell cancer (TGCT), and the safety of treatments. The level of evidence of the references was evaluated. RESULTS: The initial work-up for patients with testicular germ cell cancer is based on a clinical examination, biochemical (AFP, total hCG and LDH serum markers) and radiological assessment (scrotal ultrasound and thoracic-abdominal-pelvic [TAP] CT). Inguinal orchiectomy is the first therapeutic step whereby the histological diagnosis can be made, and the local stage and risk factors for stage I non-seminomatous germ cell tumours (NSGCT) can be determined. For patients with pure stage-I seminoma, the risk of progression is 15 to 20%. Therefore, surveillance in compliant patients is preferable; adjuvant chemotherapy with carboplatin AUC 7 is an option; and indications for para-aortic radiotherapy are limited. For patients with stage I NSGCT, there are various options between surveillance and a risk-adapted strategy (surveillance or 1 cycle of BEP [Bleomycin Etoposide Cisplatin] depending on the absence or presence of vascular emboli within the tumour). Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for staging has a very limited role. The treatment for metastatic TGCT is BEP chemotherapy in the absence of any contraindication to bleomycin, for which the number of cycles is determined according to the prognostic risk group of the International Germ Cell Cancer Consortium Group (IGCCCG). Para-aortic radiotherapy is still a standard in stage IIA seminomatous germ cell tumours (SGCT). After chemotherapy, the size of residual masses should be assessed by TAP scan for NSGCT: retroperitoneal lymph node dissection is recommended for any residual mass of more than 1 cm, and all other metastatic sites should be excised. For SGCT, reassessment by 18F-FDG PET is required to specify the surgical indication for residual masses>3cm. Surgery is still rare in these situations. CONCLUSION: By adhering to TGCT management recommendations, excellent disease-specific survival rates are achieved; 99% for stage I and over 85% for metastatic stages.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Embrionárias de Células Germinativas , Neoplasias Testiculares , Humanos , Masculino , Neoplasias Embrionárias de Células Germinativas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Embrionárias de Células Germinativas/terapia , Neoplasias Testiculares/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Testiculares/terapia , Orquiectomia , Bleomicina/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: There is increasing evidence that Hyperthermic Intravesical Chemotherapy is an effective treatment for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). HIVEC (COMBAT BRS system) is an innovative hyperthermia delivering device. The aim of our study is to evaluate tolerance and safety of HIVEC in patients with BCG-refractory NMIBC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, we included 22 patients between January 2017 and April 2018. The treatment consisted in a weekly instillation of Hyperthermic Mitomycin for a total of 6 weeks, with a follow-up every 3 months. In order to evaluate the tolerance, patients filled a questionnaire before each instillation. We analyzed collected data to evaluate safety and efficiency of the treatment after one year. RESULTS: Among 22 patients included, no patient suffered from severe side effects. The minor side effects reported were : urinary urgency (40,1 %), urinary pain (40,1%), macroscopic hematuria (4,5%). The IPSS score didn't significantly varied before and after instillations (mean IPSS: 10.8 versus 10.1, p=0.77). The mean follow-up was 11.2 months. The recurrence rate was 27,3% with an average time to recurrence of 7.36 months. Two patients (9.1%) presented a progression to muscle-invasive disease. Four patients (18,2%) had a radical cystectomy. CONCLUSION: Hyperthermic Mitomycin using the HIVEC® device is a rather safe and well tolerated treatment. Efficiency remains partial as 27.3% of patients experienced recurrence during the first year. These data should be confirmed by prospective multicentric studies.
Assuntos
Antibióticos Antineoplásicos/administração & dosagem , Vacina BCG/administração & dosagem , Mitomicina/administração & dosagem , Neoplasias da Bexiga Urinária/tratamento farmacológico , Administração Intravesical , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Antibióticos Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Progressão da Doença , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Hipertermia Induzida , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mitomicina/efeitos adversos , Estudos Prospectivos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Neoplasias da Bexiga Urinária/patologiaRESUMO
Juxtaglomerular cell tumors are rare and benign tumors, occurring in young patients. The standard treatment is partial nephrectomy. We report the case of a young 22-year-old patient with a renin-secreting tumor diagnosed during an exploration of severe hypertension associated with hypokalemia that we treated by radiofrequency ablation.
Assuntos
Ablação por Cateter , Hipertensão/etiologia , Sistema Justaglomerular , Neoplasias Renais/metabolismo , Neoplasias Renais/cirurgia , Renina/efeitos adversos , Renina/metabolismo , Adulto , Humanos , Hipopotassemia/etiologia , Neoplasias Renais/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias Renais/patologia , Masculino , Radiografia , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of the degree of extraprostatic extension (EPE) on biochemical recurrence (BCR) and utility of the original Epstein's criteria to define EPE in a cohort of pT3aN0 without positive surgical margin (PSM). METHODS: A two-center retrospective analysis was performed on data from 490 pT3aN0 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy between 2000 and 2012. Patients with neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant therapy, detectable PSA and PSM were excluded. Our pathologists used Epstein's criteria to report the degree of EPE. When pathology reports did not reflect the terms 'focal' or 'established' (non-focal), slides were analyzed by a single genitourinary pathologist for final evaluation. The end point was defined by BCR. RESULTS: Selection criteria yielded 247 patients. Mean follow-up was 56.3±4.6 months; mean age at surgery was 62.5 years. Sixty-one (24.7%) patients experienced BCR during follow-up. Patients with focal extension had a 5-year recurrence-free survival of 89% versus 80% for those with non-focal extension (P=0.0018). In multivariate analysis, both pathologic Gleason score (hazard ratio 2.5; 95% confidence interval 1.4-4.5; P=0.002) and the extent of EPE (hazard ratio 1.8; 95% confidence interval 1.1-3.5; P=0.029) were significant predictors of BCR. CONCLUSIONS: The extent of EPE is an independent predictor of BCR in pT3aN0 prostate cancer without PSM. This study reinforces the utility of the subjective Epstein approach already adopted by most pathologists for quantification of the extent of EPE.