Urs E. Studer

Testis cancer is the most frequent solid malignancy in young men. The majority of patients present with clinical stage I disease and about 50% of them are nonseminomatous germ cell tumors. In this initial stage of disease there is a subgroup of patients at high risk with a likelihood of more than 50% for relapse. Treatment options for these patients include: retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND), albeit 6-10% of patients will relapse outside the field of RPLND, active surveillance with even higher relapse rates and adjuvant chemotherapy. As most of these patients have the chance to become long-term survivors, avoidance of long-term side effects is of utmost importance. This review provides information on the potential of chemotherapy to achieve a higher chance of cure for patients with high-risk clinical stage I disease than its therapeutic alternatives and addresses toxicity and dose dependency.

Lymph node status is an important determinant for the management of patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. Given the significant limitations of cross-sectional and functional preoperative imaging in the detection of small metastases, pelvic lymph node dissection remains the only reliable staging method in clinically localized prostate cancer. Although lymph node dissection is a well-established form of staging in prostate cancer, controversy remains about indications and the surgical extent of the procedure. Reported practices vary from omitting pelvic lymph node dissection in low-risk disease to routine pelvic lymph node dissection in all radical prostatectomy patients. This review highlights the recent literature concerning pelvic lymphadenectomy in prostate cancer with respect to anatomical extent and oncologic outcome.

There has been considerable debate about the utility of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) when performing a radical prostatectomy. Reported practices vary from those who always perform an extended PLND to those who employ a predictive nomogram in their decision making to those who are increasingly not performing a PLND in low-risk disease. A Medline search was used to identify relevant manuscripts dealing with the role of lymphadenectomy in clinically organ-confined prostate cancer. A greater number of lymph nodes (LN) removed and examined at prostatectomy for prostate cancer appears to increase the likelihood of finding LN metastases and increase prostate cancer-specific survival even in patients who have histologically uninvolved LN. This survival benefit may result from more accurate staging and possible removal of occult metastases. The need for and extent of PLND in prostate cancer, especially in low-risk disease, however, is unlikely.

Background The origin of extragonadal retroperitoneal germ cell tumors remains controversial. Whether they develop primarily in the retroperitoneum or whether they are metastases of a primary testicular tumor has long been debated. Patients and methods We retrospectively analyzed 26 patients treated as having primary extragonadal retroperitoneal germ cell tumors based upon the findings of testicular palpation by the referring physician. Testicular evaluation was then extended with ultrasonographical and histological examinations. Results Biopsy of the extragonadal tumor was performed in 25 patients, confirming diagnosis of extragonadal retroperitoneal germ cell tumor. Prior to treatment patients were clinically evaluated by several physicians and the testes were not considered suspicious for testicular cancer. At urological workup, testes were found to be atrophic and/or indurated in 14 (54%) patients, enlarged in one (4%) and unremarkable in 11 (42%). Ultrasound examination of the testes in 20 patients showed pathological findings in all of them. Histology of the testis was available in 25 of 26 patients and revealed active tumor in three, intratubular germ cell neoplasia in four, scar tissue in 12, sclerosis in three, sclerosis and fibrosis in one, and fibrosis alone in two. Conclusions So-called primary extragonadal germ cell tumors in the retroperitoneum are very likely a rare or non-existing entity and should be considered as metastases of a viable or burned-out testicular cancer until proven otherwise. All of our patients with histologically examined testes had pathological finding, 76% of which were either viable tumor or scars.