Long-term causes of relative excess mortality after diagnosis of testicular germ cell tumor.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4553-4553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oivind Kvammen ◽  
Myklebust Åge Tor ◽  
Arne Solberg ◽  
Bjørn Møller ◽  
Olbjørn Harald Klepp ◽  
...  

4553 Background: Despite today’s excellent cure rates among testicular germ cell tumor (TGCT) patients, reduced long-term relative survival (RS) is an increasing concern. We recently reported a continuing decline in RS among TGCT patients diagnosed in Norway, even beyond 30 years of follow-up. Late effects of treatment is the main culprit. Although several reports describe increased mortality from second cancer (SC), cardiovascular disease (CVD), and other causes (OC) among TGCT survivors, data beyond 20 years of follow-up are scarce. The study aim was to analyze long-term relative risks (RR) and causes of death (CD) among TGCT patients diagnosed in Norway, 1953-2014. Methods: Data sources were the Cancer Registry of Norway and the Norwegian Cause of Death Registry. All men diagnosed with TGCT in Norway during 1953-2014 were included, except spermatocytic seminomas. End of follow-up was December 31st, 2014. Patients were classified by CD, histology, disease extent and age at diagnosis, as well as by decade of diagnosis and follow-up time. Standardized mortality ratios (SMR), compared with the general Norwegian male population, were computed. Results: At end of follow-up, 2359 of 9390 patients were deceased. CD was obtained for 2320 patients; 37.6 % TGCT, 24.5 % SC, 19.1 % CVD and 18.8 % OC. SMR for all SC were significant particularly after 20 years of follow-up (1.8 – 3.1), with similar findings in localized disease at diagnosis. SMR were most consistently elevated beyond 20-30 years for SC of the pancreas, large intestine and bladder. By contrast, SMR for CVD were significant among patients diagnosed 2000-14, both before and after one year of follow-up (2.6). There were no significant SMR for CVD beyond 20 years of follow-up. Several OC SMR were elevated, such as for digestive and genitourinary diseases beyond 20-30 years (2.2 – 5.1). Conclusions: TGCT patients have increased RR of SC and OC death even beyond 20-30 years of follow-up, while the increased RR of CVD death is mostly confined to the first decade. CVD deaths in patients diagnosed 2000-14 are a particular concern. Continuing optimization of TGCT treatment and follow-up schemes is required, including further research on toxicity mechanisms.

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 773-779 ◽  
Author(s):  
Øivind Kvammen ◽  
Tor Å. Myklebust ◽  
Arne Solberg ◽  
Bjørn Møller ◽  
Olbjørn H. Klepp ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e22107-e22107
Author(s):  
Michal Chovanec ◽  
Lucia Vasilkova ◽  
Lucia Petrikova ◽  
Katarina Rejlekova ◽  
Jana Obertova ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e22104-e22104
Author(s):  
Michal Chovanec ◽  
Lucia Vasilkova ◽  
Lucia Petrikova ◽  
Jana Obertova ◽  
Patrik Palacka ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 617-623 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michal Chovanec ◽  
Lucia Vasilkova ◽  
Lucia Setteyova ◽  
Jana Obertova ◽  
Patrik Palacka ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 38 ◽  
pp. 21-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Vehling ◽  
A. Mehnert ◽  
M. Hartmann ◽  
C. Oing ◽  
C. Bokemeyer ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e17060-e17060
Author(s):  
Angélique DA Silva ◽  
Aude Flechon ◽  
Stephane Culine ◽  
François Planchamp ◽  
Thibaut Murez ◽  
...  

e17060 Background: Stage I testicular germ cell tumor (TGCT) has excellent cure rates and surveillance is fully included in patient’s management, particularly during the first years of follow-up. Surveillance guidelines differ between the scientific societies, with different recommendations concerning clinical and imaging frequency de-escalation and long term follow-up. We evaluated surveillance practice and schedules followed by French specialists and set up a DELPHI method to obtain a consensual surveillance program with an optimal schedule for patients with localized TGCT. Methods: An online survey on surveillance practice of stage I TGCT based on clinical-cases was conducted among urologists, radiotherapists and oncologists. Results were compared to AFU, ESMO and EAU guidelines. Then a panel of experts assessed surveillance proposals following a formal consensus method (DELPHI method). Statements were drafted after analysis of the previous survey and systematic literature review, with 2 successive rounds to reach a consensus. Results: Survey and DELPHI method were conducted between July 2018 and May 2019. 61 participated to the survey (69% oncologists, 15% urologists, 16% radiotherapists). About 65% of practitioners followed clinico-biological guidelines concerning 1 to 5 years of follow-up, only 25% discontinued surveillance after the 5th year, as recommended. No physician followed the ESMO guidelines of de-escalation chest imaging. A panel of 32 experts (78% oncologists, 16% urologists, 6% radiotherapists) was asked about 38 statements. Consensus was reached for 26 statements concerning clinico-biological surveillance modalities and end of surveillance after the 5th year of follow-up. For seminoma, abdominal ultrasound was proposed as an option to the abdominopelvic (AP) scan for the 4th year of follow-up. No consensus was reached regarding de-escalation of chest imaging. Conclusions: The survey proved that French TGCT specialists do not follow current guidelines. With DELPHI method, a consensus was obtained for frequency of clinico-biological surveillance, discontinuation of surveillance after the 5th year and discontinuation of AP scan on the 4th year of follow-up for seminoma. Questions remains concerning type and frequency of chest imaging.


2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 258-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thierry Gil ◽  
Spyridon Sideris ◽  
Fouad Aoun ◽  
Roland van Velthoven ◽  
Nicolas Sirtaine ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
Yuki Takai ◽  
Sei Naito ◽  
Hidenori Kanno ◽  
Atsushi Yamagishi ◽  
Mayu Yagi ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (12) ◽  
pp. e0225942 ◽  
Author(s):  
Øivind Kvammen ◽  
Tor Åge Myklebust ◽  
Arne Solberg ◽  
Bjørn Møller ◽  
Olbjørn Harald Klepp ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document