Shortcomings of the current TNM classification for penile carcinoma: time for a change?

被引:26
作者
Leijte, Joost A. P. [1 ]
Horenblas, Simon [1 ]
机构
[1] Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hosp, Netherlands Canc Inst, Dept Urol, NL-1066 CX Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
Neoplasm staging; Penile carcinoma; SQUAMOUS-CELL CARCINOMA; PROGNOSTIC-FACTORS; SURVIVAL; CANCER; EXTENT; INVOLVEMENT; GUIDELINES; DISSECTION; INVASION; GRADE;
D O I
10.1007/s00345-008-0308-6
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Accurate tumor staging is essential in the management of malignancies. It provides a guide in selecting accurate treatment and gives an indication of prognosis based on the extent of disease. The current TNM classification for penile carcinoma has remained unchanged since 1987. In this article, we focus on several deficiencies of the current classification. An analysis of the current literature regarding the current classification was done, focusing on known prognostic factors for survival. Furthermore, we discuss in detail the results from a recent analysis of more than 500 patients treated at our institute to evaluate the practical and prognostic value of the TNM-classification. We found that, using the current classification system, accurate clinical staging is often difficult, because the T and N categories are defined by structures that are not easily identified using physical examination or imaging. Furthermore, the prognostic stratification of the present staging system is not optimal and there is a substantial overlap in disease-specific survival between several categories. We give an overview of modifications that could improve clinical staging and prognostic ability. The current TNM classification for penile carcinoma has several shortcomings in terms of usability in clinical staging and prognostic value. With modifications clinical staging is facilitated, while the prognostic stratification of the classification is improved.
引用
收藏
页码:151 / 154
页数:4
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]  
BAKER B H, 1975, Journal of Surgical Oncology, V7, P243, DOI 10.1002/jso.2930070310
[2]  
*CC UI, 1968, TNM CLASS MAL TUM
[3]   Advanced penile carcinoma [J].
Culkin, DJ ;
Beer, TM .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2003, 170 (02) :359-365
[4]  
DASELER EH, 1948, SURG GYNECOL OBSTET, V87, P679
[5]  
Harmer MH, 1978, TNM CLASSIFICATION M
[6]   A prospective study of 100 cases of penile cancer managed according to European Association of Urology guidelines [J].
Hegarty, Paul K. ;
Kayes, Oliver ;
Freeman, Alex ;
Christopher, Nim ;
Ralph, David J. ;
Minhas, Sliks .
BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2006, 98 (03) :526-531
[7]   SQUAMOUS-CELL CARCINOMA OF THE PENIS .3. TREATMENT OF REGIONAL LYMPH-NODES [J].
HORENBLAS, S ;
VANTINTEREN, H ;
DELEMARRE, JFM ;
MOONEN, LMF ;
LUSTIG, V ;
VANWAARDENBURG, EW .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1993, 149 (03) :492-497
[8]   TREATMENT OF CARCINOMA OF PENIS [J].
JACKSON, SM .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1966, 53 (01) :33-&
[9]  
LEIJTE JA, 2008, J UROLOGY, DOI DOI 10.1016/J.JURO.2008.05.11
[10]   Pelvic lymph node dissection for penile carcinoma: Extent of inguinal lymph node involvement as an indicator for pelvic lymph node involvement and survival [J].
Lont, Anne P. ;
Kroon, Bin K. ;
Gallee, Maarten P. W. ;
van Tinteren, Harm ;
Moonen, Luc M. F. ;
Horenblas, Simon .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2007, 177 (03) :947-952