Prognostic factors in patients with clinical stage I nonseminoma-beyond lymphovascular invasion: a systematic review
- PMID: 35906286
- PMCID: PMC9712284
- DOI: 10.1007/s00345-022-04063-7
Prognostic factors in patients with clinical stage I nonseminoma-beyond lymphovascular invasion: a systematic review
Abstract
Objective: To systematically evaluate evidence on prognostic factors for tumor recurrence in clinical stage I nonseminoma patients other than lymphovascular invasion (LVI).
Methods: We performed a systematic literature search in the biomedical databases Medline (via Ovid) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (search period January 2010 to February 2021) for full text publications in English and German language, reporting on retro- or prospectively assessed prognostic factors for tumor recurrence in patients with stage I nonseminomatous germ cell tumors.
Results: Our literature search yielded eleven studies reporting on 20 potential prognostic factors. Results are based on cohort studies of mostly moderate to low quality. Five out of eight studies found a significant association of embryonal carcinoma (EC) in the primary tumor with relapse. Among the different risk definitions of embryonal carcinoma (presence, predominance, pure), presence of EC alone seems to be sufficient for prognostification. Interesting results were found for rete testis invasion, predominant yolk sac tumor, T-stage and history of cryptorchidism, but the sparse data situation does not justify their clinical use.
Conclusions: No additional factors that meet the prognostic value of LVI, especially when determined by immunohistochemistry, could be identified through our systematic search. The presence of EC might serve as a second, subordinate prognostic factor for clinical use as the data situation is less abundant than the one of LVI. Further efforts are necessary to optimize the use of these two prognostic factors and to evaluate and validate further potential factors with promising preliminary data.
Keywords: Embryonal carcinoma; Lymphovascular invasion; Nonseminoma; Prognosis; Prognostic factor; Recurrence.
© 2022. The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Figures
References
-
- Blok JM, Pluim I, Daugaard G, Wagner T, Jozwiak K, Wilthagen EA, Looijenga LHJ, Meijer RP, Bosch J, Horenblas S. Lymphovascular invasion and presence of embryonal carcinoma as risk factors for occult metastatic disease in clinical stage I nonseminomatous germ cell tumor: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int. 2020;125(3):355–368. doi: 10.1111/bju.14967. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Laguna MP, Albers P, Algaba F, et al (2020) Guidelines on Testicular Cancer. In: EAU Guidelines. EAU Guidlines Office, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
-
- Tandstad T, Stahl O, Hakansson U, Dahl O, Haugnes HS, Klepp OH, Langberg CW, Laurell A, Oldenburg J, Solberg A, Soderstrom K, Cavallin-Stahl E, Stierner U, Wahlquist R, Wall N, Cohn-Cedermark G. One course of adjuvant BEP in clinical stage I nonseminoma mature and expanded results from the SWENOTECA group. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(11):2167–72. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu375. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Kvammen O, Myklebust TA, Solberg A, Moller B, Klepp OH, Fossa SD, Tandstad T. Causes of inferior relative survival after testicular germ cell tumor diagnosed 1953–2015: a population-based prospective cohort study. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(12):e0225942. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0225942. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
