4.4 Article

The Total Number of Retroperitoneal Lymph Nodes Resected Impacts Clinical Outcome After Chemotherapy for Metastatic Testicular Cancer

Journal

UROLOGY
Volume 75, Issue 6, Pages 1431-1435

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2009.11.076

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [L30 CA169874] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVES To evaluate the prognostic significance of the total number of lymph nodes obtained at postchemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (PC-RPLND). After the multidisciplinary management of metastatic germ cell tumor, approximately 10%-15% of patients with the histologic finding of fibrosis or teratoma will suffer disease recurrence. METHODS Between 1989 and 2006, a total of 628 patients underwent PC-RPLND and were found to have either fibrosis or teratoma. After Institutional Review Board approval, complete clinical and pathologic data were obtained from our prospective testis cancer surgical database. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was constructed to evaluate the association of the total number of lymph nodes obtained at PC-RPLND on disease recurrence. RESULTS On pathologic evaluation, 248 (57%) patients had fibrosis and 184 (43%) patients had teratoma. The median number of lymph nodes resected was 25 (interquartile range, 15-37). On multivariable analysis, increasing postchemotherapy nodal size and decreasing lymph node counts were significant predictors of disease recurrence (P = .01, .04, respectively). For patients with 10 nodes removed, the predicted 2-year relapse free probability was 90%, compared with 97% when 50 nodes were removed. CONCLUSIONS Our data suggest that the total number of lymph nodes removed and analyzed is an independent predictor of disease recurrence after PC-RPLND. This has implications both for the urologist to assure completeness of resection and for the pathologist to meticulously assess the pathologic specimens. UROLOGY 75: 1431-1435, 2010. (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available