Guidelines on Testicular Cancer: 2015 Update

CONTEXT

This is an update of the previous European Association of Urology testis cancer guidelines published in 2011, which included major changes in the diagnosis and treatment of germ cell tumours.

OBJECTIVE

To summarise latest developments in the treatment of this rare disease. Recommendations have been agreed within a multidisciplinary working group consisting of urologists, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A semi-structured literature search up to February 2015 was performed to update the recommendations. In addition, this document was subjected to double-blind peer review before publication.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

This publication focuses on the most important changes in treatment recommendations for clinical stage I disease and the updated recommendations for follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Most changes in the recommendations will lead to an overall reduction in treatment burden for patients with germ cell tumours. In advanced stages, treatment intensification is clearly defined to further improve overall survival rates.

PATIENT SUMMARY

This is an update of a previously published version of the European Association of Urology guidelines for testis cancer, and includes new recommendations for clinical stage I disease and revision of the follow-up recommendations. Patients should be fully informed of all the treatment options available to them.

[EAU guidelines on testicular cancer: 2011 update. European Association of Urology]

CONTEXT

On behalf of the European Association of Urology (EAU), guidelines for the diagnosis, therapy, and follow-up of testicular cancer were established.

OBJECTIVE

This article is a short version of the EAU testicular cancer guidelines and summarises the main conclusions from the guidelines on the management of testicular cancer.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Guidelines were compiled by a multidisciplinary guidelines working group. A systematic review was carried out using Medline and Embase, also taking Cochrane evidence and data from the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group into consideration. A panel of experts weighted the references, and a level of evidence and grade of recommendation were assigned.

RESULTS

There is a paucity of literature especially regarding longer term follow-up, and results from a number of ongoing trials are awaited. The choice of treatment centre is of the utmost importance, and treatment in reference centres within clinical trials, especially for poor-prognosis nonseminomatous germ cell tumours, provides better outcomes. For patients with clinical stage I seminoma, based on recently published data on long-term toxicity, adjuvant radiotherapy is no longer recommended as first-line adjuvant treatment. The TNM classification 2009 is recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines contain information for the standardised management of patients with testicular cancer based on the latest scientific insights. Cure rates are generally excellent, but because testicular cancer mainly affects men in their third or fourth decade of life, treatment effects on fertility require careful counselling of patients, and treatment must be tailored taking individual circumstances and patient preferences into account.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Although testicular cancer has excellent cure rates, the choice of treatment centre is of the utmost importance. Expert centres achieve better results for both early stage testicular cancer (lower relapse rates) and overall survival (higher stages within clinical trials). For patients with clinical stage I seminoma, adjuvant radiotherapy is no longer recommended as first-line adjuvant treatment.

EAU guidelines on testicular cancer: 2011 update

CONTEXT

On behalf of the European Association of Urology (EAU), guidelines for the diagnosis, therapy, and follow-up of testicular cancer were established.

OBJECTIVE

This article is a short version of the EAU testicular cancer guidelines and summarises the main conclusions from the guidelines on the management of testicular cancer.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Guidelines were compiled by a multidisciplinary guidelines working group. A systematic review was carried out using Medline and Embase, also taking Cochrane evidence and data from the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group into consideration. A panel of experts weighted the references, and a level of evidence and grade of recommendation were assigned.

RESULTS

There is a paucity of literature especially regarding longer term follow-up, and results from a number of ongoing trials are awaited. The choice of treatment centre is of the utmost importance, and treatment in reference centres within clinical trials, especially for poor-prognosis nonseminomatous germ cell tumours, provides better outcomes. For patients with clinical stage I seminoma, based on recently published data on long-term toxicity, adjuvant radiotherapy is no longer recommended as first-line adjuvant treatment. The TNM classification 2009 is recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines contain information for the standardised management of patients with testicular cancer based on the latest scientific insights. Cure rates are generally excellent, but because testicular cancer mainly affects men in their third or fourth decade of life, treatment effects on fertility require careful counselling of patients, and treatment must be tailored taking individual circumstances and patient preferences into account.

Management of stage I seminomatous testicular cancer: a systematic review

The treatment options available for the management of stage I seminoma consist of either a surveillance strategy or adjuvant therapy after orchidectomy. A systematic review was undertaken to identify the optimal management strategy. The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, in addition to the American Society of Clinical Oncology Meeting Proceedings, were searched for the period 1981 to May 2007. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they discussed at least one of survival, recurrence, second malignancy, cardiac toxicity, or quality of life for patients with stage I seminoma. A search update was carried out in June 2009. Fifty-four reports satisfied the eligibility criteria, including seven clinical practice guidelines, one systematic review, three randomised controlled trials focused on treatment options, 26 non-randomised studies of treatment options, and 15 non-randomised long-term toxicity studies. The existing data suggest that virtually all patients with stage I testicular seminoma are cured regardless of the post-orchidectomy management. The 5-year survival reported in all the studies identified in this systematic review was over 95%, regardless of the management strategy, including surveillance alone with no adjuvant therapy. In conclusion, to date, the optimal management of stage I seminoma remains to be defined. Surveillance seems to be the preferable option, as this strategy minimises the toxicity that might be associated with adjuvant treatment, while preserving high long-term cure rates. The currently available evidence should be presented to patients in order to select the most appropriate option for the individual.