This review highlights the significant advances made in the diagnosis and management of penile cancer. This often-aggressive tumor phenotype has been characterized by its poor prognosis, mostly attributable to its late presentation and heterogeneity of surgical care because of the paucity of cases treated at most centers. Recent advances in understanding of the risk factors predisposing to penile cancer, including its association with the human papilloma virus (HPV), have brought forth the socioepidemiologic concept of HPV vaccination in certain high-risk populations and countries, which remains highly debated. The management of penile cancer has evolved in recent years with the adoption of penile-sparing and minimally invasive surgical approaches to the inguinal lymph nodes, which are a frequent site of regional spread for this malignancy. Lastly, this review highlights the importance of adopting a multimodal approach consisting of neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy followed by consolidative surgical resection in patients presenting with bulky/locally advanced nodal metastases from penile cancer.
Philippe E. Spiess, Simon Horenblas, Lance C. Pagliaro, Matthew C. Biagioli, Juanita Crook, Peter E. Clark, Richard E. Greenberg and Cesar E. Ercole
Jeffrey M. Martin, Tianyu Li, Matthew E. Johnson, Colin T. Murphy, Alan G. Howald, Marc C. Smaldone, Alexander Kutikov, David Y.T. Chen, Rosalia Viterbo, Richard E. Greenberg, Robert G. Uzzo and Eric M. Horwitz
Purpose: Characterize use of postprostatectomy radiation (PPRT) for patients with prostate cancer at an NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center. Methods: We queried our prospective prostate cancer database for patients treated with 60 to 68 Gy of radiation therapy (RT) to the prostate bed after prostatectomy from 2003 to 2011. Prostatectomy cases were obtained from billing records. Patients with an intact prostate treated with definitive RT served as a control for the change in volume of patients with prostate cancer treated in the department. Chi-square analysis assessed differences between adjuvant and salvage RT cohorts. Spearman correlation assessed yearly trends in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level at the time of referral for RT. Linear regression models tested trends for number of PPRT cases, prostatectomies, and patients with intact prostate receiving radiation across years. Results: PPRT was used to treat 475 men at Fox Chase Cancer Center from 2003 to 2011 (83 adjuvant and 392 salvage). Over time, an increased proportion of patients receiving RT to the prostate were treated with PPRT. No increase was seen in the proportion of patients treated with adjuvant RT compared with salvage RT (P=.5). Patients receiving adjuvant RT were younger, had higher pathologic Gleason score, pathologic T stage, and rates of positive margins than those receiving salvage RT. Pre-RT PSA values were inversely correlated with year (P=.005). The number of patients referred for salvage RT with a PSA of 0.5 ng/mL or less increased significantly from 7.9% in 2003 to 26.6% in 2011 (P=.002). Conclusions: A larger proportion of patients treated with RT for localized prostate cancer are now receiving PPRT. No increase was seen in the proportion of patients treated with adjuvant RT. Over time, patients with lower PSAs were referred for salvage RT.
Peter L. Greenberg, Eyal Attar, John M. Bennett, Clara D. Bloomfield, Carlos M. De Castro, H. Joachim Deeg, James M. Foran, Karin Gaensler, Guillermo Garcia-Manero, Steven D. Gore, David Head, Rami Komrokji, Lori J. Maness, Michael Millenson, Stephen D. Nimer, Margaret R. O'Donnell, Mark A. Schroeder, Paul J. Shami, Richard M. Stone, James E. Thompson and Peter Westervelt
Peter E. Clark, Neeraj Agarwal, Matthew C. Biagioli, Mario A. Eisenberger, Richard E. Greenberg, Harry W. Herr, Brant A. Inman, Deborah A. Kuban, Timothy M. Kuzel, Subodh M. Lele, Jeff Michalski, Lance C. Pagliaro, Sumanta K. Pal, Anthony Patterson, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Kamal S. Pohar, Michael P. Porter, Jerome P. Richie, Wade J. Sexton, William U. Shipley, Eric J. Small, Philippe E. Spiess, Donald L. Trump, Geoffrey Wile, Timothy G. Wilson, Mary Dwyer and Maria Ho
Bladder cancer is the fourth most common cancer in the United States. Urothelial carcinoma that originates from the urinary bladder is the most common subtype. These NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) provide recommendations on the diagnosis and management of non–muscle-invasive and muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. This version of the guidelines provides extensive reorganization and updates on the principles of chemotherapy management.
James E. Montie, Peter E. Clark, Mario A. Eisenberger, Rizk El-Galley, Richard E. Greenberg, Harry W. Herr, Gary R. Hudes, Deborah A. Kuban, Timothy M. Kuzel, Paul H. Lange, Subodh M. Lele, Jeffrey Michalski, Anthony Patterson, Kamal S. Pohar, Jerome P. Richie, Wade J. Sexton, William U. Shipley, Eric J. Small, Donald L. Trump, Phillip J. Walther and Timothy G. Wilson
Peter E. Clark, Philippe E. Spiess, Neeraj Agarwal, Matthew C. Biagioli, Mario A. Eisenberger, Richard E. Greenberg, Harry W. Herr, Brant A. Inman, Deborah A. Kuban, Timothy M. Kuzel, Subodh M. Lele, Jeff Michalski, Lance Pagliaro, Sumanta K. Pal, Anthony Patterson, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Kamal S. Pohar, Michael P. Porter, Jerome P. Richie, Wade J. Sexton, William U. Shipley, Eric J. Small, Donald L. Trump, Geoffrey Wile, Timothy G. Wilson, Mary Dwyer and Maria Ho
Squamous cell carcinoma of the penis represents approximately 0.5% of all cancers among men in the United States and other developed countries. Although rare, it is associated with significant disfigurement, and only half of the patients survive beyond 5 years. Proper evaluation of both the primary lesion and lymph nodes is critical, because nodal involvement is the most important factor of survival. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for Penile Cancer provide recommendations on the diagnosis and management of this devastating disease based on evidence and expert consensus.
Peter L. Greenberg, Eyal Attar, John M. Bennett, Clara D. Bloomfield, Uma Borate, Carlos M. De Castro, H. Joachim Deeg, Olga Frankfurt, Karin Gaensler, Guillermo Garcia-Manero, Steven D. Gore, David Head, Rami Komrokji, Lori J. Maness, Michael Millenson, Margaret R. O’Donnell, Paul J. Shami, Brady L. Stein, Richard M. Stone, James E. Thompson, Peter Westervelt, Benton Wheeler, Dorothy A. Shead and Maoko Naganuma
The myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) represent a heterogeneous group of clonal hematopoietic disorders characterized by cytopenias, dysplasia in one or more myeloid lineages, and the potential for development of acute myeloid leukemia. These disorders primarily affect older adults. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for MDS provide recommendations on the diagnostic evaluation and classification of MDS, risk evaluation according to established prognostic assessment tools (including the new revised International Prognostic Scoring System), treatment options according to risk categories, and management of related anemia.
Philippe E. Spiess, Neeraj Agarwal, Rick Bangs, Stephen A. Boorjian, Mark K. Buyyounouski, Peter E. Clark, Tracy M. Downs, Jason A. Efstathiou, Thomas W. Flaig, Terence Friedlander, Richard E. Greenberg, Khurshid A. Guru, Noah Hahn, Harry W. Herr, Christopher Hoimes, Brant A. Inman, Masahito Jimbo, A. Karim Kader, Subodh M. Lele, Joshua J. Meeks, Jeff Michalski, Jeffrey S. Montgomery, Lance C. Pagliaro, Sumanta K. Pal, Anthony Patterson, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Kamal S. Pohar, Michael P. Porter, Mark A. Preston, Wade J. Sexton, Arlene O. Siefker-Radtke, Guru Sonpavde, Jonathan Tward, Geoffrey Wile, Mary A. Dwyer and Lisa A. Gurski
This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Bladder Cancer focuses on systemic therapy for muscle-invasive urothelial bladder cancer, as substantial revisions were made in the 2017 updates, such as new recommendations for nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, and avelumab. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Bladder Cancer addresses additional aspects of the management of bladder cancer, including non–muscle-invasive urothelial bladder cancer and nonurothelial histologies, as well as staging, evaluation, and follow-up.
Therese B. Bevers, Mark Helvie, Ermelinda Bonaccio, Kristine E. Calhoun, Mary B. Daly, William B. Farrar, Judy E. Garber, Richard Gray, Caprice C. Greenberg, Rachel Greenup, Nora M. Hansen, Randall E. Harris, Alexandra S. Heerdt, Teresa Helsten, Linda Hodgkiss, Tamarya L. Hoyt, John G. Huff, Lisa Jacobs, Constance Dobbins Lehman, Barbara Monsees, Bethany L. Niell, Catherine C. Parker, Mark Pearlman, Liane Philpotts, Laura B. Shepardson, Mary Lou Smith, Matthew Stein, Lusine Tumyan, Cheryl Williams, Mary Anne Bergman and Rashmi Kumar
The NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis have been developed to facilitate clinical decision making. This manuscript discusses the diagnostic evaluation of individuals with suspected breast cancer due to either abnormal imaging and/or physical findings. For breast cancer screening recommendations, please see the full guidelines on NCCN.org.
Peter L. Greenberg, Richard M. Stone, Rafael Bejar, John M. Bennett, Clara D. Bloomfield, Uma Borate, Carlos M. De Castro, H. Joachim Deeg, Amy E. DeZern, Amir T. Fathi, Olga Frankfurt, Karin Gaensler, Guillermo Garcia-Manero, Elizabeth A. Griffiths, David Head, Virginia Klimek, Rami Komrokji, Lisa A. Kujawski, Lori J. Maness, Margaret R. O’Donnell, Daniel A. Pollyea, Bart Scott, Paul J. Shami, Brady L. Stein, Peter Westervelt, Benton Wheeler, Dorothy A. Shead and Courtney Smith
The NCCN Guidelines for Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS) comprise a heterogeneous group of myeloid disorders with a highly variable disease course that depends largely on risk factors. Risk evaluation is therefore a critical component of decision-making in the treatment of MDS. The development of newer treatments and the refinement of current treatment modalities are designed to improve patient outcomes and reduce side effects. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the recent updates to the guidelines, which include the incorporation of a revised prognostic scoring system, addition of molecular abnormalities associated with MDS, and refinement of treatment options involving a discussion of cost of care.