Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations 36 (2018) 526.e1−526.e6 Original Article The role of inguinal lymph node dissection in men with urethral squamous cell carcinoma RyanD1XX P. Werntz, M.D.D2XX*, ChristopherD3XX B. Riedinger,D4RichardD5XXXX J. Fantus,D6ZacharyD7XXXX L. Smith,D8XX VigneshD9XX T. Packiam,D10MelanieD11XXXX A. Adamsky,D12NormD13XXXX Smith,D14GaryD15XX D.XX SteinbergD16XX Department of Surgery, Section of Urology, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL Received 19 April 2018; received in revised form 7 August 2018; accepted 21 September 2018 Abstract Introduction: Urethral squamous cell cancer is a rare disease with limited clinical recommendations regarding management of the inguinal lymph nodes. Despite the similarities to penile cancer in terms of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) histology and lymphatic drain- age, there is not enough evidence to recommend for or against a prophylactic inguinal lymph node dissection (ILND) in patients with clini- cally negative groins and a primary tumor stage of T1b or higher. The objective of the study was to identify the rate of prophylactic inguinal lymph node dissection, node positive rate, and overall survival in patients with clinical T1 to T4 stage. The patients were separated into clinical N stage and the rates of node positivity were compared. We hypothesize that the node positivity rate would be similar to that observed in penile cancer of similar clinical T and N stage and provide evidence for prophylactic inguinal lymph node dissection in urethral squamous cancer. We also sought to determine the value of ILND in clinically node positive (cN+) and clinically node negative (cN¡) patients. Methods: The National Cancer Database was queried for all cases of primary urethral cancer in men from 2004 to 2014. Patients with other cancer diagnoses, metastasis, nonsquamous histology, female patients, and patients with a history of radiation therapy were excluded. Male patients with urethral squamous cell cancer of the anterior urethra with T1 or higher T stage were included in this study. All-cause mortality was compared using multivariable Cox regression controlling for covariates. Results: The study included 725 men with urethral SCC with T1 or higher clinical T stage. The median age was 63 years (33−83 inter- quartile range). Of the 725 men, 536 men did not receive an ILND and 189 (26%) underwent ILND. Patients who received LND had signif- icantly higher clinical T and clinical N stage. There was no difference in age, sex, or histology between those with ILND versus no ILND. In patients with T1 to T4 and clinical N0, the ILND rate was 21.8% (89/396). The lymph node positive rate in patients with N0 and T1 to T4 primary tumor was 9%. In patients with clinically node positive disease (N1/N2), the overall ILND rate was 76%. The lymph node posi- tive rate for patients with clinical nodal disease was 84%. On multivariable analysis cox regression, lymph node positivity was associated with worse overall survival when controlling for T stage, clinical N stage, and age (HR 1.56, 95% 1.3−1.9, P = 0.000). On multivariable analysis after controlling for T stage, sex, and age, having an ILND was associated with improved OS in patients with clinical N1 or N2 dis- ease (HR 0.46, 95% 0.28−0.78 P = 0.002). Conclusion: The node positivity rate in patients with T1 to T4 and N0 is 9%, much lower than reported in penile cancer with a high-risk primary tumor but clinically negative groins. This argues against routine prophylactic inguinal ILND in patients with urethral SCC who are clinically N0, perhaps suggesting different biological behavior of urethral SCC compared to penile SCC. Performing a lymph node dissec- tion in patients with clinically N1 or N2 disease is associated with improved OS. Published by Elsevier Inc. Keywords: Squamous cell carcinoma; Urethra; Inguinal lymph node dissection Disclosures: none. *Corresponding author. Tel.: 574-855-8741. E-mail address: [email protected] (R.P. Werntz). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.09.014 1078-1439/Published by Elsevier Inc. R.P. Werntz et al. / Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations 36 (2018) 526.e1−526.e6 526.e2 1. Introduction 2.2. Study population Primary urethral carcinoma (PUC) is a rare clinical We analyzed the NCDB participant user files from 2004 entity and accounts for less than 1% of all genitourinary to 2014. During the study period, 725 male patients were malignancies [1]. This has led to a relative paucity of data diagnosed with primary urethral SCC cancer and met the where management is largely informed by small, single- below inclusion criteria (Fig. 1). Patients with other cancer institution studies. Data from several national and interna- diagnoses, female gender, nonurethral primary, non-SCC tional cohorts have been published [1−4], but important histology, history of radiation of chemotherapy (NCDB questions remain with regard to the optimal management of variables RX_SUMM_SURGRAD_SEQ and this condition. RX_SUMM_CHEMO), and metastatic disease at presenta- The optimal management of lymph nodes for PUC tion were excluded from analysis (Fig. 1). For penile cancer remains unclear. In men, lymphatics from the anterior comparative purposes, only male patients with urethral urethra and penis preferentially drain into the superficial SCC of the anterior urethra with clinical stage ≥ T1 were anddeepinguinallymphnodes[5].PUCoftheanterior included for analysis. Patients were included if they urethra presents with inguinal lymphadenopathy 18% to received ILND within 6 months of diagnosis to remove the 30% of the time; [2,3,6,7] 75% to 100% of these repre- possibility of patients being included who had salvage sent true metastatic disease [8−10]. Pathologic lymph ILND. Clinically node positive disease was defined accord- node involvement has been shown to adversely predict ing to the TNM staging system, as defined by the NCDB survival [2,6] and a benefit for inguinal lymph node dis- variable TNM_CLIN_N. Of the 725 patients, 189 under- section (ILND) has been shown when clinical or radio- went a bilateral ILND. Lymphovascular invasion data was graphic evidence of lymphadenopathy is present [9,11]. missing on most patients was not evaluated as part of this However, there is no current data to argue for or against study. This comprised the patients selected for analysis. prophylactic ILND for PUC. In penile cancer, with seemingly the same lymphatic drainage and histology, 2.3. Statistical analyses prophylactic ILND is supported in patients with high- risk primary disease (T1b or greater) [12]. Patients with cT1-4 primary lesions were separated into We hypothesize that the node positivity rate would be an ILND groups versus an observation group after surgery similar to that observed in penilecancerofsimilarclini- on the primary tumor. These patients were then stratified cal T and N stage and provide evidence for prophylactic according to their clinical N stage and descriptive analyses inguinal lymph node dissection in urethral squamous of the groups were performed using Pearson’s chi-squared cancer. We also sought to determine the value of ILND or Fisher’s exact tests for categorical variables and in clinically node positive (cN+) and clinically node Student’s t-test for continuous variables. We performed negative (cN¡) patients. To examine this issue further, propensity core weighted analysis to assess the effect of we performed a comparative effectiveness analysis using ILND on overall survival. The propensity score was deter- a large, contemporary US hospital-based cancer registry mined by logistic regression. We then ran a Cox regression to better understand outcomes associated with this was used to identify if the performance of a ILND procedure. improved OS in patients with who were cN0 and cN+ after adjusting for covariates (age, cT stage, cN status, Charlson comorbidity index). Multivariable Cox regression was used 2. Methods to identify predictors of overall survival after adjusting for 2.1. Data source cN and cT stage, age, cT stage, pN stage, Charlson comor- bidity index as covariates. All hypotheses testing was two- The National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) is a joint effort sided and a P-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically between the American Cancer Society and the American significant. All statistical analyses were performed using College of Surgeons’ Commission on Cancer (CoC). By Stata, version 13.1 (StataCorp, College Station, TX). collecting data from more than 1,500 CoC-accredited can- cer centers, it is able to capture 70% of all incident malig- 3. Results nancies in the United States. Institutional data is collected using standardized definitions in accordance with the CoC’s Seven hundred twenty five men met inclusion criteria. Facility Oncology Registry Data Standards. All demo- Median age was 63 years (IQR 33−83). Patients with a graphic and clinical patient characteristics are recorded, lower Charlson comorbidity index and higher clinical stage including, but not limited to: cancer staging, pathological were more likely to receive an ILND (Table 1). Of the 725 information, details of first-line treatment administered, men, only 189 (26%) underwent ILND. Patients who under- survival outcomes, hospital length of stay, and readmission went ILND were of significantly higher cT and cN stage. In information. Data quality undergoes routine appraisal to patients with cN0, the ILND rate was 21.8%, with 9% pN+. ensure reliability and quality. In patients with cN1-2, the ILND rate was 76%, with 84% 526.e3 R.P. Werntz et al. / Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations 36 (2018) 526.e1−526.e6 Fig. 1. Men with urethral SCC exclusion criteria diagram. SCC = squamous cell carcinoma. pN+. On multivariable Cox regression, pN+ was associated positive and pathologically node positive patients, we eval- with worse overall survival when controlling for cT stage, uated the dropout rate in each group to address the issue of cN stage, Charlson comorbidity, age, and sex (HR 1.56, selection bias (Fig.