Decision analysis defining optimal management of clinical stage 1 high-risk nonseminomatous germ cell testicular cancer with lymphovascular invasion

Abstract

Background: Risk of recurrent disease for men with clinical stage 1 high-risk nonseminomatous germ cell testicular cancer (CS1 NSGCT) with lymphovascular invasion (LVI) after orchiectomy is 50% and current treatment options (surveillance [S], retroperitoneal lymph node dissection [RPLND], or 1 cycle of BEP [BEP ×1]) are associated with a 99% disease specific survival, therefore practice patterns vary. We performed a decision analysis using updated data of long-term complications for men with CS1 NSGCT with LVI to quantify and assess relative treatment values.

Methods: Decision analysis included previously defined utilities (via standard gamble) for posttreatment states of living from 0 (death from disease) to 1 (alive in perfect health) and updated morbidity probabilities. We quantified the values of S, RPLND, and BEP ×1 via the rollback method. Sensitivity analyses including a range of orchiectomy cure rates and utility values were performed.

Results: Estimated probabilities favoring treatment with RPLND (0.97) or BEP ×1 (0.97) were equivalent and superior to surveillance (0.88). Sensitivity analysis of orchiectomy cure rates (50%-100%) failed to find a cure rate that favored S over BEP ×1 or RPLND. Varying utility values for cure after S from 0.92 (previously defined utility) to 1 (perfect health), failed to find a viable utility state favoring S over BEP ×1 or RPLND. An orchiectomy cure rate of ≥82% would be required for S to equal treatment of either type.

Conclusions: We demonstrate that for surveillance to be superior to treatment with BEP ×1 or RPLND, the orchiectomy cure rate must be at least 82%, which is not expected in a patient population with high-risk CS1 NSGCT.

Keywords: Decision analysis; High-risk CS1 NSGCTs; Patient utilities; Treatment algorithm; Treatment value.

Fig. 1.

Standard gamble decision tree. (A) Time of treatment decision for a patient with CS1 NSGCT following orchiectomy. (B) Surveillance. (C) RPLND. (D) BEP ×1.

Fig. 2.

Sensitivity analysis varying orchiectomy cure rate.

Fig. 3.

Sensitivity analysis varying utility value.

Fig. 4.

Sensitivity analysis varying orchiectomy cure rate at utility of 1.