Is there a role for the development of a supra-regional network for the management of penile cancer in the Republic of Ireland?

Phallus preservation and reconstruction: 5-year outcomes of national penile cancer centralisation in the Republic of Ireland

INTRODUCTION

Penile cancer is a rare urological malignancy with an age-standardised incidence of 0.8 per 100,000 person-years [1]. Given this low incidence it has been suggested that centralised care may improve patient outcomes in relation to phallus sparing surgery and nodal assessment [2]. We aim to assess the outcomes after 5-years of national centralisation of penile cancer care.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed. All patients undergoing penile cancer surgery from January 2018 to December 2022 following centralisation of care were included. The primary outcome was proportion of phallus sparing procedures performed. Secondary outcomes were patient characteristics, histologic outcomes and procedures performed.

RESULTS

124 patients underwent surgery in the study period. Mean age was 64.49 (±13.87). Overall, 82.3% of patients underwent phallus sparing surgery. This remained stable over the 5-year period from 2018 to 2022 ​at 92%, 85%, 76%, 79% and 78% respectively (p ​= ​0.534). 62.7% had reconstruction performed, including split-thickness skin graft neoglans formation, (57.8% [n ​= ​37]), preputial flap (32.8% [n ​= ​21]), glans resurfacing (4.7% [n ​= ​3]), shaft advancement flap (1.6% [n ​= ​1]), penile shaft skin graft (1.6% [n ​= ​1]), and partial penectomy with urethral centralisation (1.6% [n ​= ​1]). Phallus preservation was not affected by positive nodal status (OR 0.75 [95% CI 0.249-2.266], p ​= ​0.564) or T-stage ≥1b (OR 0.51 [95% CI 0.153-1.711], p ​= ​0.276). There has been a significant reduction in Nx nodal status from 64% in 2017 to 15% in 2021 (p ​= ​0.009).

CONCLUSION

Centralisation of treatment for rare malignancies such as penile cancer may improve oncologic outcomes and rates of phallus preservation. This study has shown centralisation to has a high rate of phallus preservation. Further long-term analysis of outcomes in Ireland is required.

Penile cancer in Ireland - A national review

OBJECTIVE

Penile cancer is a rare malignancy, with a reported incidence of 1.5/100,000 males in the Republic of Ireland in 2015. The aim of this study was to perform the first national review and to evaluate clinicopathological factors affecting survival.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

All cases of penile cancer in Ireland between 1995 and 2010 were identified through the National Cancer Registry Ireland (NCRI) and analysed to identify factors affecting survival.

RESULTS

360 cases of penile cancer were identified, with a mean age at diagnosis of 65.5 years and 88% (n = 315) of cases occurred in those over 50. 91% (n = 328) of cases were squamous cell carcinomas (SCC). The majority of patients were treated surgically (n = 289), with 57% (n = 206) and 24% (n = 87) undergoing partial penectomy and total penectomy respectively. Only 18% (n = 65) received radiotherapy, and 8% (n = 27) received chemotherapy. Mean overall survival (OS) was 113 months, and five year disease specific survival (DSS) was 70% (95%CI: 59.1-77.8%). Age at diagnosis, nodal status and presence of metastatic disease were independent prognostic markers on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

This study represents the first national review of penile cancer in Ireland. The annual incidence and survival rates are comparable to European figures, though superior DSS has previously been reported from our institution, highlighting the role for centralisation of care in Ireland.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2b.

Inguinal lymph node dissection for penile cancer: a contemporary review

Penile cancer is an uncommon disease associated with significant psychological and physical morbidity. Penile cancer has an expectable pattern of spread in a stepwise fashion, from inguinal to pelvic lymph nodes (PLN) then distant spread. Patients with penile cancer have variable survival, with patients with a low burden of nodal metastatic disease having lasting survival with surgical management, however patients with a large amount of locoregional metastatic disease having a worse prognosis. The current management options for patients with metastatic lymph node disease in penile cancer aims to reduce the morbidity associated with radical inguinal lymph node (ILN) surgery with appropriate risk stratification to optimise oncological control of the disease. This article describes current challenges in managing the inguinal region in patients with penile squamous cell carcinoma (SCC).

Impact of Centralizing Care for Genitourinary Malignancies to High-volume Providers: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

The centralization of cancer care is associated with better clinical outcomes and may be a method for optimizing value-based health care systems.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the literature regarding the impact of centralization of care on clinical outcomes for genitourinary malignancies.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review was conducted using Ovid and MEDLINE to identify studies between 1970 and 2018 reporting on the centralization of care for genitourinary malignancies. Prospective and retrospective studies were screened.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

There were no published randomized control trials (RCTs) on the centralization of care for genitourinary malignancies. Twenty-two retrospective studies met inclusion criteria. Centralization of radical cystectomy was the most studied. Care for bladder cancer, prostate cancer, penile cancer, testicular cancer, and renal cancer was reportedly associated with better morbidity and survival outcomes for patients treated at high-volume centers. However, evidence of better outcomes for centralization of care remains limited for penile, renal, and testicular cancers owing to the paucity of data and/or the lower incidence of these genitourinary malignancies.

CONCLUSIONS

Care for genitourinary malignancies by high-volume providers was associated with greater utilization of cancer surgery, lower morbidity, and better survival outcomes. Centralization of care was most appropriate for complex procedures such as radical cystectomy when interpreted in the context of survival outcomes. Further research is needed to address the impact of centralizing care for all urologic malignancies with consideration of the associated costs and patient-reported measures, including quality of life and patient experience.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We explored the evidence for moving major operations into larger centers. We focused on surgery for cancers of the bladder, prostate, testicle, penis, and kidney, and found that larger-volume hospitals had better survival outcomes and fewer complications when compared to smaller hospitals. The difference may be greatest for complex major surgeries such as radical cystectomy.