Inessa Bjartmar, Axel Gerdtsson, Christian Torbrand, Sinja Kristiansen
{"title":"Risk of invasive penile cancer after treatment of penile intraepithelial neoplasia","authors":"Inessa Bjartmar, Axel Gerdtsson, Christian Torbrand, Sinja Kristiansen","doi":"10.1111/bju.16674","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ObjectivesTo examine the risk of progression and time to progression from penile intraepithelial neoplasia (PeIN) to invasive penile cancer in patients treated for PeIN with either surgery, laser ablation or topical treatment, and to examine recurrence risk after treatment of PeIN.Patients and MethodsData on patients diagnosed with PeIN (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 1122) between 2000 and 2020 were extracted from the Swedish National Penile Cancer Registry (NPECR). Progression was defined as a second registration of invasive penile cancer in this registry. Additionally, patient charts from the three largest cities in Sweden (Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö) were analysed with regard to both progression of PeIN to invasive cancer and recurrence risk after treatment.ResultsThe NPECR included 1122 patients with PeIN, of whom 23 were re‐registered as having invasive penile cancer. In the 927 PeIN patients for whom data on treatment were available, re‐registration of invasive cancer was seen in 13 patients after surgery, six after laser ablation, and one after topical treatment. The progression‐free probabilities at 24 months in these treatment groups were 99.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.987; 0.999), 100% (95% CI 1.000; 1.000) and 98.8% (95% CI 0.965; 1.000), respectively (log‐rank test <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = 0.192). In the Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö cohort, 253 patients with PeIN were followed and 14 developed invasive penile cancer. Of the 247 PeIN cases with data on treatment, four progressed after surgery, eight after laser ablation, and one after topical treatment. The progression‐free probabilities at 24 months in these treatment groups were 98.2% (95% CI 0.956; 1.000), 86.2% (95% CI 0.744; 0.997) and 100% (95% CI 1.000; 1.000), respectively (log‐rank test <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> < 0.001).ConclusionWe found that PeIN has a low risk of progressing into invasive penile cancer regardless of treatment modality. However, laser ablation therapy is not recommended due to a higher risk of progression after such treatment compared to surgical and topical treatment. We recommend individualised follow‐up protocols of PeIN based on treatment and lesion location.","PeriodicalId":8985,"journal":{"name":"BJU International","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJU International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.16674","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ObjectivesTo examine the risk of progression and time to progression from penile intraepithelial neoplasia (PeIN) to invasive penile cancer in patients treated for PeIN with either surgery, laser ablation or topical treatment, and to examine recurrence risk after treatment of PeIN.Patients and MethodsData on patients diagnosed with PeIN (n = 1122) between 2000 and 2020 were extracted from the Swedish National Penile Cancer Registry (NPECR). Progression was defined as a second registration of invasive penile cancer in this registry. Additionally, patient charts from the three largest cities in Sweden (Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö) were analysed with regard to both progression of PeIN to invasive cancer and recurrence risk after treatment.ResultsThe NPECR included 1122 patients with PeIN, of whom 23 were re‐registered as having invasive penile cancer. In the 927 PeIN patients for whom data on treatment were available, re‐registration of invasive cancer was seen in 13 patients after surgery, six after laser ablation, and one after topical treatment. The progression‐free probabilities at 24 months in these treatment groups were 99.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.987; 0.999), 100% (95% CI 1.000; 1.000) and 98.8% (95% CI 0.965; 1.000), respectively (log‐rank test P = 0.192). In the Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö cohort, 253 patients with PeIN were followed and 14 developed invasive penile cancer. Of the 247 PeIN cases with data on treatment, four progressed after surgery, eight after laser ablation, and one after topical treatment. The progression‐free probabilities at 24 months in these treatment groups were 98.2% (95% CI 0.956; 1.000), 86.2% (95% CI 0.744; 0.997) and 100% (95% CI 1.000; 1.000), respectively (log‐rank test P < 0.001).ConclusionWe found that PeIN has a low risk of progressing into invasive penile cancer regardless of treatment modality. However, laser ablation therapy is not recommended due to a higher risk of progression after such treatment compared to surgical and topical treatment. We recommend individualised follow‐up protocols of PeIN based on treatment and lesion location.
目的探讨阴茎上皮内瘤变(PeIN)患者通过手术、激光消融或局部治疗向浸润性阴茎癌发展的风险和时间,以及PeIN治疗后复发的风险。患者和方法2000年至2020年间诊断为PeIN的患者(n = 1122)的数据来自瑞典国家阴茎癌登记处(NPECR)。进展被定义为浸润性阴茎癌的第二次登记。此外,还分析了瑞典三个最大城市(斯德哥尔摩、哥德堡和Malmö)的患者图表,分析了PeIN进展为侵袭性癌症和治疗后复发风险。结果NPECR纳入了1122例PeIN患者,其中23例重新登记为浸润性阴茎癌。在927例可获得治疗数据的PeIN患者中,有13例患者在手术后,6例在激光消融后,1例在局部治疗后重新登记为侵袭性癌症。这些治疗组在24个月时无进展概率为99.3%(95%可信区间[CI] 0.987;0.999), 100% (95% ci 1.000;1.000)和98.8% (95% CI 0.965;1.000) (log‐rank检验P = 0.192)。在斯德哥尔摩、哥德堡和Malmö队列中,随访了253例PeIN患者,其中14例发展为浸润性阴茎癌。在247例有治疗数据的PeIN病例中,4例手术后进展,8例激光消融后进展,1例局部治疗后进展。这些治疗组在24个月时无进展概率为98.2% (95% CI 0.956;1.000), 86.2% (95% ci 0.744;0.997)和100% (95% CI 1.000;(log‐rank检验P <;0.001)。结论无论采用何种治疗方式,pin发展为浸润性阴茎癌的风险均较低。然而,不推荐激光消融治疗,因为与手术和局部治疗相比,激光消融治疗后进展的风险更高。我们推荐基于治疗和病变部位的个性化PeIN随访方案。
期刊介绍:
BJUI is one of the most highly respected medical journals in the world, with a truly international range of published papers and appeal. Every issue gives invaluable practical information in the form of original articles, reviews, comments, surgical education articles, and translational science articles in the field of urology. BJUI employs topical sections, and is in full colour, making it easier to browse or search for something specific.