Purpose: Chemotherapy (CHT) or radiation therapy (RT) are first-line treatments for clinical stage II (CS-II) testicular seminoma. Historically, clinical stage I (CS-I) seminoma was also treated with CHT or RT, but in the past 2 decades practice has shifted toward active surveillance for CS-I with RT or CHT reserved for patients with progression to CS-II. Limited data exist on contemporary RT techniques and patient stratification (ie, de novo [CS-II at orchiectomy] vs relapsed [CS-II diagnosed during surveillance after orchiectomy for CS-I]). We investigated outcomes in CS-II patients treated with RT in the modern era across 2 institutions.
Methods And Materials: A retrospective review identified 73 patients treated with RT for CS-II A or B seminoma between 2001 and 2022. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method and univariate analyses were performed with log-rank or Cox proportional hazard regression. Recurrence was defined as biopsy-proven metastatic seminoma after RT completion. Second malignancies were defined as a biopsy-proven malignancy originating in the prior RT field.
Results: Thirty-eight (52%) patients presented with de novo CS-II and 35 (48%) patients had relapsed CS-II. Median follow-up was 4.8 years (IQR: 2.3-8.1). Five-year RFS was 82% overall (92% in relapsed patients and 73% in de novo patients). Relapsed CS-II disease had lower recurrence rates after RT compared with de novo CS-II disease. All recurrences occurred outside the prior RT field and were salvaged. Disease-specific survival was 100%. Two second malignancies occurred (prostate, colorectal cancer at 67 months and 119 months post-RT, respectively).
Conclusions: In patients with CS-II seminoma treated with modern RT, there were no in-field recurrences. Presentation with de novo CS-II is associated with out-of-field recurrence. Subject to further larger-scale validation, our results suggest that compared with CS-II at time of relapse, de novo CS-II may portend more aggressive or micrometastatic disease beyond the retroperitoneum, raising the possibility of benefit from CHT after radiation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2023.09.010 | DOI Listing |
Eur Urol Oncol
October 2024
Division of Urology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and the University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address:
World J Urol
December 2023
Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Purpose: Novel techniques and advances in radiation therapy (RT) have been explored to treat testicular seminoma, a highly radiosensitive and curable histology. We evaluated the historical and current indications for radiation therapy (RT) in testicular seminoma.
Methods: A narrative literature review was performed.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
March 2024
Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Broad Institute of Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Electronic address:
Purpose: Chemotherapy (CHT) or radiation therapy (RT) are first-line treatments for clinical stage II (CS-II) testicular seminoma. Historically, clinical stage I (CS-I) seminoma was also treated with CHT or RT, but in the past 2 decades practice has shifted toward active surveillance for CS-I with RT or CHT reserved for patients with progression to CS-II. Limited data exist on contemporary RT techniques and patient stratification (ie, de novo [CS-II at orchiectomy] vs relapsed [CS-II diagnosed during surveillance after orchiectomy for CS-I]).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFClin Cancer Res
December 2004
Fourth Department of Internal Medicine, Sapporo Medical University, School of Medicine, South-1, West-16, Chuo-ku, Sapporo, 060-8543, Japan.
Purpose: This study aims to investigate whether the plasma level of glutathione S-transferase P1-1 (GSTP1-1), which is a phase II detoxifying enzyme known to be a resistance factor for anticancer drugs, could be a prognostic factor of de novo non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in clinical stages (CSs) III and IV.
Experimental Design: Study population consisted of 80 NHL patients with no prior treatment: 12 patients were at CS I, 14 at CS II, 25 at CS III, and 29 at CS IV. All 54 patients at CS III or CS IV were treated with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (CHOP).
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!