Loading…
Impact of radiation therapy on perineal urethrostomy for penile cancer
•Penile cancer impacts numerous quality of life aspects for patients.•Perienal urethrostomy is a reliable mechanism of urinary diversion for many patients with penile cancer.•This study describes that receipt of radiotherapy was not associated with increased risk of stenosis. A lack of demonstrated...
Saved in:
Published in: | Clinical and translational radiation oncology 2021-09, Vol.30, p.84-87 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c521t-77b12b628eff222c0ef737899a2ea3a57083b9392647d684716ff5998050b3c33 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c521t-77b12b628eff222c0ef737899a2ea3a57083b9392647d684716ff5998050b3c33 |
container_end_page | 87 |
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 84 |
container_title | Clinical and translational radiation oncology |
container_volume | 30 |
creator | A. S. Johnstone, Peter de Vries, Hielke M. Chipollini, Juan Daniel Grass, G. Boyd, Franklin Korkes, Fernando Albersen, Maarten Roussel, Eduard Zhu, Yao Ye, Ding-Wei Master, Viraj Le, Thien-Linh Muneer, Asif Brouwer, Oscar R. Spiess, Philippe E. |
description | •Penile cancer impacts numerous quality of life aspects for patients.•Perienal urethrostomy is a reliable mechanism of urinary diversion for many patients with penile cancer.•This study describes that receipt of radiotherapy was not associated with increased risk of stenosis.
A lack of demonstrated clinical benefit precludes radiotherapy (RT) from being recommended for pN1/pN2 penile cancer (PeCa) lesions; but it may be recommended in case of extranodal (pN3) disease or for positive resection margins. Perineal urethrostomy (PU) is a technique of urinary diversion in patients with PeCa requiring total or subtotal penectomy as primary therapy. Prior studies suggest PU failure rates of up to 30%, without specific mention of the potential role of RT. When RT is delivered for PeCa it is usually to the pre-pubic fat, groin and lateral pelvis, and not to the region of the PU. Here we describe the role of perioperative RT in a large, multi-institutional registry of PU for PeCa.
In our cohort, 299 patients from seven international, high-volume centers in Belgium, Brazil, China, Netherlands, United Kingdom and the United States underwent PU as urinary diversion for PeCa between 2000 and 2020. Demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics were reviewed.
Median patient age was 67 years and median follow-up was 19 months. Seven patients (2.3%) received pre-operative RT; six of them with chemotherapy. 37 received RT post-operatively, 21 (57%) with chemotherapy. Stenosis of the PU occurred in 35 (12%) of the total population. The majority of these patients (74%) required surgical revision at a median of 6.1 months post-operatively. RT delivery was neither significantly related to PU stenosis (p = 0.16) or to subsequent revision (p = 0.75).
Receipt of RT was not significantly associated with increased stenosis risk in PeCa patients who underwent PU. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ctro.2021.08.005 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_7bf04c6feb194fef95fb9c4992bd0919</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S2405630821000732</els_id><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_7bf04c6feb194fef95fb9c4992bd0919</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2564493497</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c521t-77b12b628eff222c0ef737899a2ea3a57083b9392647d684716ff5998050b3c33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1r3DAQhk1paUKaP9BD8bGXdUbfEpRCCU2zEOilPQtZHmW12NZW1gb230fbTUNy6UmD5p1HYp6m-UigI0Dk1bbzJaeOAiUd6A5AvGnOKQexkgz02xf1WXO5LFsAIFoZwcT75oxxzkARfd7crKed86VNoc1uiK7ENLdlg9ntDm0td5jjjG5s9xnLJqelpOnQhpRrZ44jtt7NHvOH5l1w44KXT-dF8_vm-6_r29Xdzx_r6293Ky8oKSulekJ7STWGQCn1gEExpY1xFB1zQoFmvWGGSq4GqbkiMgRhjAYBPfOMXTTrE3dIbmt3OU4uH2xy0f69SPneulyiH9GqPgD3MmBPDA8YjAi98dwY2g9giKmsryfWbt9POHicS3bjK-jrzhw39j49WM2kUhIq4PMTIKc_e1yKneLicRzdjGm_WCok54Zxo2qUnqK-rnDJGJ6fIWCPPu3WHn3ao08L2lafdejTyw8-j_yzVwNfTgGsK3-ImO3iI1YfQ8zoS91J_B__EeQWsaU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2564493497</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Impact of radiation therapy on perineal urethrostomy for penile cancer</title><source>NCBI_PubMed Central(免费)</source><creator>A. S. Johnstone, Peter ; de Vries, Hielke M. ; Chipollini, Juan ; Daniel Grass, G. ; Boyd, Franklin ; Korkes, Fernando ; Albersen, Maarten ; Roussel, Eduard ; Zhu, Yao ; Ye, Ding-Wei ; Master, Viraj ; Le, Thien-Linh ; Muneer, Asif ; Brouwer, Oscar R. ; Spiess, Philippe E.</creator><creatorcontrib>A. S. Johnstone, Peter ; de Vries, Hielke M. ; Chipollini, Juan ; Daniel Grass, G. ; Boyd, Franklin ; Korkes, Fernando ; Albersen, Maarten ; Roussel, Eduard ; Zhu, Yao ; Ye, Ding-Wei ; Master, Viraj ; Le, Thien-Linh ; Muneer, Asif ; Brouwer, Oscar R. ; Spiess, Philippe E.</creatorcontrib><description>•Penile cancer impacts numerous quality of life aspects for patients.•Perienal urethrostomy is a reliable mechanism of urinary diversion for many patients with penile cancer.•This study describes that receipt of radiotherapy was not associated with increased risk of stenosis.
A lack of demonstrated clinical benefit precludes radiotherapy (RT) from being recommended for pN1/pN2 penile cancer (PeCa) lesions; but it may be recommended in case of extranodal (pN3) disease or for positive resection margins. Perineal urethrostomy (PU) is a technique of urinary diversion in patients with PeCa requiring total or subtotal penectomy as primary therapy. Prior studies suggest PU failure rates of up to 30%, without specific mention of the potential role of RT. When RT is delivered for PeCa it is usually to the pre-pubic fat, groin and lateral pelvis, and not to the region of the PU. Here we describe the role of perioperative RT in a large, multi-institutional registry of PU for PeCa.
In our cohort, 299 patients from seven international, high-volume centers in Belgium, Brazil, China, Netherlands, United Kingdom and the United States underwent PU as urinary diversion for PeCa between 2000 and 2020. Demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics were reviewed.
Median patient age was 67 years and median follow-up was 19 months. Seven patients (2.3%) received pre-operative RT; six of them with chemotherapy. 37 received RT post-operatively, 21 (57%) with chemotherapy. Stenosis of the PU occurred in 35 (12%) of the total population. The majority of these patients (74%) required surgical revision at a median of 6.1 months post-operatively. RT delivery was neither significantly related to PU stenosis (p = 0.16) or to subsequent revision (p = 0.75).
Receipt of RT was not significantly associated with increased stenosis risk in PeCa patients who underwent PU.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2405-6308</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2405-6308</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2021.08.005</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34430718</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ireland: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Penile cancer ; Perineal urethrostomy ; Radiotherapy ; Stenosis</subject><ispartof>Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2021-09, Vol.30, p.84-87</ispartof><rights>2021 The Authors</rights><rights>2021 The Authors.</rights><rights>2021 The Authors 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c521t-77b12b628eff222c0ef737899a2ea3a57083b9392647d684716ff5998050b3c33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c521t-77b12b628eff222c0ef737899a2ea3a57083b9392647d684716ff5998050b3c33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8367760/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8367760/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27922,27923,53789,53791</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34430718$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>A. S. Johnstone, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Vries, Hielke M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chipollini, Juan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daniel Grass, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boyd, Franklin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Korkes, Fernando</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albersen, Maarten</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roussel, Eduard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhu, Yao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ye, Ding-Wei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Master, Viraj</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Le, Thien-Linh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Muneer, Asif</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brouwer, Oscar R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spiess, Philippe E.</creatorcontrib><title>Impact of radiation therapy on perineal urethrostomy for penile cancer</title><title>Clinical and translational radiation oncology</title><addtitle>Clin Transl Radiat Oncol</addtitle><description>•Penile cancer impacts numerous quality of life aspects for patients.•Perienal urethrostomy is a reliable mechanism of urinary diversion for many patients with penile cancer.•This study describes that receipt of radiotherapy was not associated with increased risk of stenosis.
A lack of demonstrated clinical benefit precludes radiotherapy (RT) from being recommended for pN1/pN2 penile cancer (PeCa) lesions; but it may be recommended in case of extranodal (pN3) disease or for positive resection margins. Perineal urethrostomy (PU) is a technique of urinary diversion in patients with PeCa requiring total or subtotal penectomy as primary therapy. Prior studies suggest PU failure rates of up to 30%, without specific mention of the potential role of RT. When RT is delivered for PeCa it is usually to the pre-pubic fat, groin and lateral pelvis, and not to the region of the PU. Here we describe the role of perioperative RT in a large, multi-institutional registry of PU for PeCa.
In our cohort, 299 patients from seven international, high-volume centers in Belgium, Brazil, China, Netherlands, United Kingdom and the United States underwent PU as urinary diversion for PeCa between 2000 and 2020. Demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics were reviewed.
Median patient age was 67 years and median follow-up was 19 months. Seven patients (2.3%) received pre-operative RT; six of them with chemotherapy. 37 received RT post-operatively, 21 (57%) with chemotherapy. Stenosis of the PU occurred in 35 (12%) of the total population. The majority of these patients (74%) required surgical revision at a median of 6.1 months post-operatively. RT delivery was neither significantly related to PU stenosis (p = 0.16) or to subsequent revision (p = 0.75).
Receipt of RT was not significantly associated with increased stenosis risk in PeCa patients who underwent PU.</description><subject>Penile cancer</subject><subject>Perineal urethrostomy</subject><subject>Radiotherapy</subject><subject>Stenosis</subject><issn>2405-6308</issn><issn>2405-6308</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1r3DAQhk1paUKaP9BD8bGXdUbfEpRCCU2zEOilPQtZHmW12NZW1gb230fbTUNy6UmD5p1HYp6m-UigI0Dk1bbzJaeOAiUd6A5AvGnOKQexkgz02xf1WXO5LFsAIFoZwcT75oxxzkARfd7crKed86VNoc1uiK7ENLdlg9ntDm0td5jjjG5s9xnLJqelpOnQhpRrZ44jtt7NHvOH5l1w44KXT-dF8_vm-6_r29Xdzx_r6293Ky8oKSulekJ7STWGQCn1gEExpY1xFB1zQoFmvWGGSq4GqbkiMgRhjAYBPfOMXTTrE3dIbmt3OU4uH2xy0f69SPneulyiH9GqPgD3MmBPDA8YjAi98dwY2g9giKmsryfWbt9POHicS3bjK-jrzhw39j49WM2kUhIq4PMTIKc_e1yKneLicRzdjGm_WCok54Zxo2qUnqK-rnDJGJ6fIWCPPu3WHn3ao08L2lafdejTyw8-j_yzVwNfTgGsK3-ImO3iI1YfQ8zoS91J_B__EeQWsaU</recordid><startdate>20210901</startdate><enddate>20210901</enddate><creator>A. S. Johnstone, Peter</creator><creator>de Vries, Hielke M.</creator><creator>Chipollini, Juan</creator><creator>Daniel Grass, G.</creator><creator>Boyd, Franklin</creator><creator>Korkes, Fernando</creator><creator>Albersen, Maarten</creator><creator>Roussel, Eduard</creator><creator>Zhu, Yao</creator><creator>Ye, Ding-Wei</creator><creator>Master, Viraj</creator><creator>Le, Thien-Linh</creator><creator>Muneer, Asif</creator><creator>Brouwer, Oscar R.</creator><creator>Spiess, Philippe E.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20210901</creationdate><title>Impact of radiation therapy on perineal urethrostomy for penile cancer</title><author>A. S. Johnstone, Peter ; de Vries, Hielke M. ; Chipollini, Juan ; Daniel Grass, G. ; Boyd, Franklin ; Korkes, Fernando ; Albersen, Maarten ; Roussel, Eduard ; Zhu, Yao ; Ye, Ding-Wei ; Master, Viraj ; Le, Thien-Linh ; Muneer, Asif ; Brouwer, Oscar R. ; Spiess, Philippe E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c521t-77b12b628eff222c0ef737899a2ea3a57083b9392647d684716ff5998050b3c33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Penile cancer</topic><topic>Perineal urethrostomy</topic><topic>Radiotherapy</topic><topic>Stenosis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>A. S. Johnstone, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Vries, Hielke M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chipollini, Juan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daniel Grass, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boyd, Franklin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Korkes, Fernando</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albersen, Maarten</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roussel, Eduard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhu, Yao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ye, Ding-Wei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Master, Viraj</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Le, Thien-Linh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Muneer, Asif</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brouwer, Oscar R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spiess, Philippe E.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Clinical and translational radiation oncology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>A. S. Johnstone, Peter</au><au>de Vries, Hielke M.</au><au>Chipollini, Juan</au><au>Daniel Grass, G.</au><au>Boyd, Franklin</au><au>Korkes, Fernando</au><au>Albersen, Maarten</au><au>Roussel, Eduard</au><au>Zhu, Yao</au><au>Ye, Ding-Wei</au><au>Master, Viraj</au><au>Le, Thien-Linh</au><au>Muneer, Asif</au><au>Brouwer, Oscar R.</au><au>Spiess, Philippe E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Impact of radiation therapy on perineal urethrostomy for penile cancer</atitle><jtitle>Clinical and translational radiation oncology</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Transl Radiat Oncol</addtitle><date>2021-09-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>30</volume><spage>84</spage><epage>87</epage><pages>84-87</pages><issn>2405-6308</issn><eissn>2405-6308</eissn><abstract>•Penile cancer impacts numerous quality of life aspects for patients.•Perienal urethrostomy is a reliable mechanism of urinary diversion for many patients with penile cancer.•This study describes that receipt of radiotherapy was not associated with increased risk of stenosis.
A lack of demonstrated clinical benefit precludes radiotherapy (RT) from being recommended for pN1/pN2 penile cancer (PeCa) lesions; but it may be recommended in case of extranodal (pN3) disease or for positive resection margins. Perineal urethrostomy (PU) is a technique of urinary diversion in patients with PeCa requiring total or subtotal penectomy as primary therapy. Prior studies suggest PU failure rates of up to 30%, without specific mention of the potential role of RT. When RT is delivered for PeCa it is usually to the pre-pubic fat, groin and lateral pelvis, and not to the region of the PU. Here we describe the role of perioperative RT in a large, multi-institutional registry of PU for PeCa.
In our cohort, 299 patients from seven international, high-volume centers in Belgium, Brazil, China, Netherlands, United Kingdom and the United States underwent PU as urinary diversion for PeCa between 2000 and 2020. Demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics were reviewed.
Median patient age was 67 years and median follow-up was 19 months. Seven patients (2.3%) received pre-operative RT; six of them with chemotherapy. 37 received RT post-operatively, 21 (57%) with chemotherapy. Stenosis of the PU occurred in 35 (12%) of the total population. The majority of these patients (74%) required surgical revision at a median of 6.1 months post-operatively. RT delivery was neither significantly related to PU stenosis (p = 0.16) or to subsequent revision (p = 0.75).
Receipt of RT was not significantly associated with increased stenosis risk in PeCa patients who underwent PU.</abstract><cop>Ireland</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>34430718</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ctro.2021.08.005</doi><tpages>4</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2405-6308 |
ispartof | Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2021-09, Vol.30, p.84-87 |
issn | 2405-6308 2405-6308 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_7bf04c6feb194fef95fb9c4992bd0919 |
source | NCBI_PubMed Central(免费) |
subjects | Penile cancer Perineal urethrostomy Radiotherapy Stenosis |
title | Impact of radiation therapy on perineal urethrostomy for penile cancer |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T13%3A17%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Impact%20of%20radiation%20therapy%20on%20perineal%20urethrostomy%20for%20penile%20cancer&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20and%20translational%20radiation%20oncology&rft.au=A.%20S.%20Johnstone,%20Peter&rft.date=2021-09-01&rft.volume=30&rft.spage=84&rft.epage=87&rft.pages=84-87&rft.issn=2405-6308&rft.eissn=2405-6308&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ctro.2021.08.005&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2564493497%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c521t-77b12b628eff222c0ef737899a2ea3a57083b9392647d684716ff5998050b3c33%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2564493497&rft_id=info:pmid/34430718&rfr_iscdi=true |