Mark Schrader

European Consensus Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Germ Cell Cancer: A Report of the Second Meeting of the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): Part I

OBJECTIVES The first consensus report presented by the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG) in the year 2004 has found widespread approval by many colleagues throughout the world. In November 2006, the group met a second time under the auspices of the Department of Urology of the Amsterdam Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. METHODS Medical oncologists, urological surgeons, radiation oncologists as well as pathologists from several European countries reviewed and discussed the data that had emerged since the 2002 conference, and incorporated the new data into updated and revised guidelines. As for the first meeting, the methodology of evidence-based medicine (EBM) was applied. The results of the discussion were compiled by the writing committee. All participants have agreed to this final update. RESULTS The first part of the consensus paper describes the clinical presentation of the primary tumor, its treatment, the importance and treatment of testicular intraepithelial neoplasia (TIN), histological classification, staging and prognostic factors, and treatment of stage I seminoma and non-seminoma. CONCLUSIONS Whereas the vast majority of the recommendations made in 2004 remain valid 3 yr later, refinements in the treatment of early- and advanced-stage testicular cancer have emerged from clinical trials. Despite technical improvements, expert clinical skills will continue to be one of the major determinants for the prognosis of patients with germ cell cancer. In addition, the particular needs of testicular cancer survivors have been acknowledged.

Enzalutamide in castration-resistant prostate cancer patients progressing after docetaxel and abiraterone.

BACKGROUND Abiraterone, an androgen synthesis inhibitor, has been successfully used in the treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) for 2 yr. Enzalutamide is a second-generation nonsteroidal antiandrogen that has recently been approved for the same indication. OBJECTIVE This is the first study to evaluate the effectiveness of enzalutamide after failure of abiraterone. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Thirty-five patients were identified as having received sequential therapy with abiraterone followed by enzalutamide. All patients had undergone prior docetaxel chemotherapy, and no patient had received ketoconazole. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Posttreatment changes in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) were used to determine the activity of enzalutamide in patients who had received prior abiraterone. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS The median duration of abiraterone treatment was 9.0 mo (range: 2.0-19.0 mo). Of the 35 patients, 16 (45.7%) achieved a >50% decline in PSA, and 14 (40%) had a rising PSA as the best response. The median duration of subsequent enzalutamide treatment was 4.9 mo (Kaplan-Meier estimate; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4-7.4). Seven of 16 CRPC patients who were initially abiraterone-sensitive (43.8%) and 3 of 19 CRPC patients who were initially abiraterone-insensitive (15.8%) showed a >50% PSA decline while taking enzalutamide. Of the 35 patients, 17 (48.6%) were primarily enzalutamide-resistant and showed a rising PSA as the best response. Median time to progression was 4.0 mo (95% CI, 2.0-6.0) for 18 of 35 patients with at least one declining PSA value while taking enzalutamide (51.4%). Of the 17 patients who were assessable radiologically, only 1 (2.9%) attained a confirmed partial response. Small sample size was the major limitation. CONCLUSIONS Enzalutamide treatment achieved only a modest response rate in patients progressing after abiraterone. Although cross-resistance between abiraterone and enzalutamide was a common phenomenon, it was not inevitable, and a small but significant number of patients showed significant benefit from sequential treatment.

Maintaining success, reducing treatment burden, focusing on survivorship: highlights from the third European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer

In November 2011, the Third European Consensus Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Germ-Cell Cancer (GCC) was held in Berlin, Germany. This third conference followed similar meetings in 2003 (Essen, Germany) and 2006 (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) [Schmoll H-J, Souchon R, Krege S et al. European consensus on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG). Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 1377–1399; Krege S, Beyer J, Souchon R et al. European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the second meeting of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): part I. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 478–496; Krege S, Beyer J, Souchon R et al. European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the second meeting of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): part II. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 497–513]. A panel of 56 of 60 invited GCC experts from all across Europe discussed all aspects on diagnosis and treatment of GCC, with a particular focus on acute and late toxic effects as well as on survivorship issues. The panel consisted of oncologists, urologic surgeons, radiooncologists, pathologists and basic scientists, who are all actively involved in care of GCC patients. Panelists were chosen based on the publication activity in recent years. Before the meeting, panelists were asked to review the literature published since 2006 in 20 major areas concerning all aspects of diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of GCC patients, and to prepare an updated version of the previous recommendations to be discussed at the conference. In addition, ∼50 E-vote questions were drafted and presented at the conference to address the most controversial areas for a poll of expert opinions. Here, we present the main recommendations and controversies of this meeting. The votes of the panelists are added as online supplements.

Sarcosine in Urine after Digital Rectal Examination Fails as a Marker in Prostate Cancer Detection and Identification of Aggressive Tumours

BACKGROUND Sarcosine in urine was recently suggested to be a promising tool in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostics. OBJECTIVE To reevaluate sarcosine as a potential biomarker for early PCa detection and for prediction of tumour aggressiveness. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Sarcosine was measured in urine samples from 106 PCa patients and 33 patients with no evidence of malignancy (NEM), confirmed by 8-12 core prostate biopsies, after standardised digital rectal examination, as well as from 12 healthy men and women. The results were related to the clinicopathologic data on prostate volume, tumour stage, Gleason score, and prostate specific antigen (PSA). MEASUREMENTS Sarcosine in urine was determined by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry using a commercial amino acid assay and was normalised to urine creatinine. Nonparametric statistical tests and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analyses were performed to assess the diagnostic performance. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS The median sarcosine-creatinine ratio in urine was 13% lower in PCa than in NEM patients. Sarcosine values were not associated with tumour stage (pT2 vs pT3) or grade (Gleason score <7 vs > or = 7). ROC analyses proved that the discrimination between PCa and NEM patients was not improved by sarcosine in comparison with total PSA, but it was significantly worse than the percent free PSA. The higher proportion of PCa than NEM patients can be considered a limitation of this study. CONCLUSIONS Sarcosine in urine after rectal digital examination cannot be considered as a suitable marker to differentiate between patients with and without PCa.

Dna-based detection of prostate cancer in urine after prostatic massage

OBJECTIVES Promoter hypermethylation of the glutathione-S-transferase P1 (GSTP1) gene is a specific feature of prostate cancer. This epigenetic DNA alteration served as the target for molecular detection of prostate cancer cells in urine sediments after prostatic massage. METHODS Bisulfite treatment followed by methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction was used to detect GSTP1 promoter hypermethylation in DNA isolated from urine sediments obtained after prostatic massage of men with and without prostate cancer. RESULTS GSTP1 promoter hypermethylation was demonstrated in the sediments of 1 (2%) of 45 patients diagnosed with benign prostatic hyperplasia, 2 (29%) of 7 patients with prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, 15 (68%) of 22 patients with early, intracapsular cancer, and 14 (78%) of 18 patients with locally advanced or systemic prostate cancer, resulting in a specificity of 98% and an overall sensitivity of 73% for the detection of prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS Urinalysis for GSTP1 promoter hypermethylation constitutes a sensitive and highly specific DNA-based marker for molecular detection of prostate cancer, including early stages.

Quantitative analysis of survivin mRNA expression in urine and tumor tissue of bladder cancer patients and its potential relevance for disease detection and prognosis

Suppression of apoptosis may favor the onset and progression of cancer. Survivin is an inhibitor of apoptosis that has been suggested as a novel diagnostic/prognostic marker of bladder cancer. In this study, survivin mRNA expression was measured by a sensitive real‐time PCR assay in tumor tissue and urine from bladder cancer patients and assessed for its potential diagnostic and prognostic relevance. Specimens from 53 patients with bladder transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) were analyzed, the controls being normal urothelial tissues (n = 14) and urine from benign disease patients (n = 22) and healthy individuals (n = 14). Survivin transcripts were commonly detected in tumor tissues, but not in normal urothelium, and increasing mRNA levels correlate with progressing pathologic stage (p = 0.001) and grade categories (p < 0.004). Higher levels of expression were associated with a reduced time to recurrence in noninvasive TCCs (p = 0.027, log‐rank test) and a trend toward shorter disease‐free survival in muscle‐invasive tumors (p = 0.067). Urinary survivin analysis detects TCC with higher sensitivity (68.6%) and equal specificity (100%) when compared with cytology (31.4% and 97.1%). Our results indicate that tissue levels of survivin mRNA predict disease‐free survival in noninvasive TCC and may have a role in bladder cancer progression. When analyzed by RT‐PCR in urine, survivin is a highly specific biomarker for TCC detection.

“Onco-tese”: testicular sperm extraction in azoospermic cancer patients before chemotherapy—new guidelines?

OBJECTIVES To examine the usefulness of pretreatment testicular sperm extraction because some patients have tumor-induced azoospermia. In view of the high cure rates for testicular germ cell tumors and malignant lymphomas, increasing clinical importance is attached to protecting fertility. High-dose cytostatic therapy may be expected to cause long-term infertility. Thus, the standard procedure for fertility protection is cryopreservation of ejaculated spermatozoa before therapy. METHODS Contralateral testicular biopsies were taken from 14 azoospermic patients with malignant testicular germ cell tumors. In addition, 17 patients with malignant lymphomas underwent unilateral (n = 6) or bilateral (n = 11) testicular biopsy. The tissue specimens were cryopreserved, and the histologic workup was performed at the same time. RESULTS Of the 14 patients with malignant testicular germ cell tumors, 6 had spermatozoa in their testicular biopsies. Sertoli cell-only syndrome was found in 5 patients, and 3 had maturation arrest without detection of spermatozoa. Successful sperm recovery was possible in 8 of the 17 patients with malignant lymphoma, 4 had Sertoli cell-only syndrome, and 5 had maturation arrest. None of the patients had evidence of secondary wound healing or treatment delay because of the testicular biopsy. CONCLUSIONS Our results show that testicular sperm extraction is a useful technique for obtaining spermatozoa before cytotoxic therapy in azoospermic cancer patients. This procedure should be considered as an option for fertility preservation in azoospermic cancer patients, because high cumulative cytostatic doses can cause irreversible fertility alterations.

A [-2]proPSA-based artificial neural network significantly improves differentiation between prostate cancer and benign prostatic diseases

The aim of this study was to combine the new automated Access [‐2]proPSA (p2PSA) assay with a percent free PSA (%fPSA) based artificial neural network (ANN) or logistic regression (LR) model to enhance discrimination between patients with prostate cancer (PCa) and with no evidence of malignancy (NEM) and to detect aggressive PCa.

The impact of chemotherapy on male fertility: a survey of the biologic basis and clinical aspects

The introduction of cisplatin-based polychemotherapy has led to cure rates of up to 90% for the most frequent malignant diseases seen in young men. In view of these high cure rates, increasing clinical importance is now being attached to chemotherapy-induced fertility disorders. Comparative studies examining the impact of cytotoxic chemotherapy on gametogenesis demonstrate significant cytostatic- and dose-specific differences. The extensive literature on possible teratogenic effects of chemotherapy provides no evidence suggesting that offspring of patients with a history of chemotherapy have an increased risk of malformations. However, these studies, the scope and follow-up of which may still be inadequate, have failed to eliminate the fear of such risk. Hormonal protection from chemotherapy-induced testicular damage has thus far succeeded only in animal models pretreated by application of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists combined with nonsteroidal antiandrogens or testosterone plus 17 beta-estradiol. The same holds true for hormone therapy aimed at stimulating the recovery of spermatogenesis after chemotherapy-induced testicular damage. Cryopreservation of germ cells can be suggested to patients undergoing cytostatic therapy. In some cases, testicular extraction of spermatozoa can also be offered as a novel approach.

The Role of Positron Emission Tomography in the Evaluation of Residual Masses After Chemotherapy for Advanced Stage Seminoma

PURPOSE Treatment in patients with seminoma who have residual or recurrent masses following chemotherapy is still a matter of debate. Surgical resection is currently the most common recommendation for masses greater than 3 cm, resulting in overtreatment in up to 70% of those affected. We analyzed the accuracy of preoperative positron emission tomography for predicting viable tumor residuals in patients with seminoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS In a prospective, multicenter trial computerized tomography and FDG (2-(F-18)-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose) positron emission tomography were performed before surgical resection for residual or recurrent masses in 20 patients who had undergone chemotherapy for stage IIb, IIc or III seminoma. Histopathological findings were directly correlated with positron emission tomography results. RESULTS Of the patients 18 presented with residual masses and 2 had recurrent masses following chemotherapy. Histopathological assessment revealed viable tumor in 3 patients and benign lesions in 17. All patients with viable tumor were identified correctly by positron emission tomography. No false-negative results were observed but 9 patients had false-positive positron emission tomography results. This resulted in a negative predictive value of 1 (95% CI 0.63-1) and a positive predictive value of 0.25 (95% CI 0.05-0.57) for FDG-positron emission tomography in our patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS Our data indicate that FDG-positron emission tomography is capable of excluding viable disease in residual masses, even those exceeding 3 cm. Therefore, it may be considered an additional tool to improve patient counseling. However, the decision to perform surgical resection of the residual mass should not be based exclusively on a positive positron emission tomography image since false-positive results appear to be common.