» Articles » PMID: 35638085

Safety of Minimizing Intensity of Follow-up on Active Surveillance for Clinical Stage I Testicular Germ Cell Tumors

Abstract

Background: We have recommended active surveillance as the preferred management option for clinical stage I (CSI) testicular germ cell tumors (GCTs) since 1980. Over time, the recommended intensity of surveillance has decreased; however, the impact on relapse detection has not been investigated.

Objective: To examine relapse rate, time to relapse, extent of disease, and burden of treatment at relapse across decreasing surveillance intensity over time.

Design Setting And Participants: CSI GCT patients under active surveillance from 1981 to 2021 were included in this study.

Outcome Measurements And Statistical Analysis: Through four major iterations in both nonseminomatous (NSGCT) and seminoma surveillance schedules, visit frequency, blood testing, and imaging have been decreased successively. Low-dose, noncontrast computed tomography (CT) scans were adopted in 2011. Categorical variables and time to relapse were compared using chi-square and Fisher's exact or Kruskal-Wallis test, respectively.

Results And Limitations: A total of 1583 consecutive patients (942 with seminoma and 641 with NSGCT) were included. In seminoma, chest x-rays were reduced from 13 to one and CT scans were reduced from 20 to ten. Relapse rate, time to relapse, N or M category, and International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (IGCCCG) classification did not change. In NSGCT, chest x-rays were reduced from 27 to zero and CT scans were reduced from 11 to five. Relapse rate (from 46.2% to 21.2%,  = 0.002) and the median time to relapse (from 6.54 to 4.47 mo,  = 0.025) decreased. No difference in relapsed disease burden was identified by N, M, and S category or IGCCCG classification. Treatment burden at relapse and GCT cancer deaths remained similar for seminoma and NSGCT. Limitations include the retrospective design and large time period covered.

Conclusions: Despite considerable reductions in surveillance intensity, we did not observe an increase in disease extent, treatment burden, or GCT cancer deaths upon relapse. These results support that our current lower-intensity active surveillance schedules are safe for managing CSI GCT.

Patient Summary: Our current reduced-intensity surveillance schedules for clinical stage I germ cell tumors appear to be safe.

Citing Articles

First Indicator of Relapse in Testicular Cancer and Implications for Follow-up: Analysis of the Swiss Austrian German Testicular Cancer Cohort Study (SAG TCCS).

Fischer S, Gillessen S, Stalder O, Terbuch A, Cathomas R, Schmid F Eur Urol Open Sci. 2024; 68:68-74.

PMID: 39308640 PMC: 11416594. DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.08.008.


SEOM-GG clinical guidelines for the management of germ-cell testicular cancer (2023).

Arranz Arija J, Garcia Del Muro X, Caro R, Mendez-Vidal M, Perez-Valderrama B, Aparicio J Clin Transl Oncol. 2024; 26(11):2783-2799.

PMID: 38958901 PMC: 11467073. DOI: 10.1007/s12094-024-03532-2.


Redefining surveillance strategies: innovations in testicular cancer care.

Chavarriaga J, Sayyid R, Bernardino R, Kumar R, Al-Rumayyan M, Hamilton R Transl Androl Urol. 2023; 12(9):1368-1370.

PMID: 37814697 PMC: 10560341. DOI: 10.21037/tau-23-391.


Excellent survival in relapsed stage I testicular cancer.

Speicher P, Fankhauser C, Lorch A, Ardizzone D, Helnwein S, Hoch D BMC Cancer. 2023; 23(1):870.

PMID: 37715132 PMC: 10503206. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-11388-y.


Novel approaches to redesign surveillance strategies following orchiectomy for localized testicular cancer: a narrative review.

Matulewicz R, Fankhauser C, Sheinfeld J, Bagrodia A Transl Androl Urol. 2023; 12(6):1016-1022.

PMID: 37426604 PMC: 10323446. DOI: 10.21037/tau-22-855.


References
1.
Gilbert S, Sexton W . Optimal Management of High-risk Stage I Nonseminoma Germ Cell Tumor: Active Intervention is the Preferred Option. Eur Urol Focus. 2019; 5(5):704-705. DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2019.09.009. View

2.
Motzer R, Jonasch E, Agarwal N, Beard C, Bhayani S, Bolger G . Testicular Cancer, Version 2.2015. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2015; 13(6):772-99. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2015.0092. View

3.
Lieng H, Warde P, Bedard P, Hamilton R, Hansen A, Jewett M . Recommendations for followup of stage I and II seminoma: The Princess Margaret Cancer Centre approach. Can Urol Assoc J. 2018; 12(2):59-66. PMC: 5937398. DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.4531. View

4.
Sturgeon J, Moore M, Kakiashvili D, Duran I, Anson-Cartwright L, Berthold D . Non-risk-adapted surveillance in clinical stage I nonseminomatous germ cell tumors: the Princess Margaret Hospital's experience. Eur Urol. 2010; 59(4):556-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.12.010. View

5.
Vesprini D, Chung P, Tolan S, Gospodarowicz M, Jewett M, OMalley M . Utility of serum tumor markers during surveillance for stage I seminoma. Cancer. 2012; 118(21):5245-50. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.27539. View