Post chemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (PC-RPLND) for metastatic pure seminoma.
Abstract
639 Background: Surgical resection of post-chemotherapy residual masses for metastatic seminoma is discussed controversially with regard to oncological and functional outcome. Furthermore, the role of FDG-PET/CT to detect vital seminoma is still unclear. It is the aim of this study is to report the outcomes of patients with pure seminoma who underwent PC-RPLND. Methods: In this retrospective international, multi-institutional study, pure seminoma patients whounderwent PC-RPLND for marker negative, FDG-PET/CT positive residual masses > 3cm or a marker negative retroperitoneal relapse following first line chemotherapy between 2000 and 2023 were included. Patients with residual masses with stable disease, negative FDG-PET/CT findings, inadequate systemic chemotherapy, insufficient clinical data, positive markers, or with residual or relapsing masses following salvage chemotherapy were excluded. Perioperative and long-term outcomes of the patients were reviewed. Results: A total of 142 patients with a median (IQR) age of 39 (31 – 68) years were included. All patients received first-line cisplatin-based chemotherapy. 93% of PC-RPLNDs were performed via an open transperitoneal approach, and 7% underwent robotic surgery. 86 (61%) and 56 (39%) patients underwent a unilateral and a full bilateral resection, respectively. A nerve sparing procedure was performed in 29 (20%). Adjunctive surgery was performed in 53 (37%) patients, the most common of which were ureteral resection/repair in 19 (13%) pts, and vascular resection/repair 18 (13%) pts followed by nephrectomy in 12 (8.4%). Median (IQR) blood loss and length of hospital stay were 550 (300 – 5800) mL and 4 (2 – 18) days, respectively. Clavien - Dindo complications ≥ 3a developed in 16 (11.3%). Final pathology revealed necrosis/fibrosis in 98 (64%) and seminoma in 44 (36%). FDG-PET/CT for residual masses > 3cm was performed in 56 patients with a positive predictive value of only 23%. On multivariate analysis (MVA) IGCCCG good risk (OR: 5.86, 95% CI 1.9-18.09, p<0.001), solitary metastases (OR 4.77, 95% CI 1.29-17.68, p=0.017) and RPLND for non-relapsing seminoma (OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.02-0,21, p< 0.001) were associated with necrosis. Adjunctive surgery (OR 4.56, 95% CI 0.39-53.5, p=0.04), and FDG-PET/CT SUV > liver (OR 31, 95% CI 2.54 – 45.6, p=0.004) and marker negative progression (OR 19, 95% CI 5.6 – 31.2, p<0.001) correlated with the presence of viable seminoma. With a median (IQR) follow-up of 65 (3 – 175) months, 20 (14%) patients relapsed (9/44 seminoma, 10/98 necrosis). 3 (3%) patients died of disease. Conclusions: One third of patients with progressive or > 3cm FDG-PET-CT positive residual retroperitoneal masses following first-line chemotherapy for metastatic seminoma may have viable tumor. 80% of patients with viable seminoma can be cured by surgery alone.In selected cases, PC-RPLND may be a valuable option if performed in high-volume centers with expertise in testicular cancer management.
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (12)
Axel Heidenreich
Uro-Oncology, Robot-Assisted and Specialized Urologic Surgery, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
David Pfister
Department of Urology, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
Pia Paffenholz
Department of Urology, Uro-Oncology, Robot Assisted and Reconstructive Urologic Surgery, University of Cologne Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
Julian Heidenreich
Department of Urology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
Stefanie Zschaebitz
National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
Yu Che
Institute of Resources and Environmental Engineering Shanxi University Taiyuan 030006 China
Clint Cary
Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Indianapolis, IN
Prof. Marcus Hentrich
Redcross Hospital, München, Germany
Axel Gerdtsson
Department of Urology, Skane University, Malmoe, Sweden
Helene F. S. Negaard
Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
Anders Kjellman
Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
Peter Albers