Clinical Profile and Predictors of Survival in Carcinoma Penis Patients

• Published in: Current oncology (Toronto) Vol. 30; no. 5; pp. 4563 - 4574
• Main Authors: Garg, Vikas, Ray, Mukurdipi, Haresh, K P, Sahoo, Ranjit Kumar, Sharma, Atul, Kaushal, Seema, Batra, Atul
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland MDPI AG 28-04-2023; MDPI
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Cancer; Carcinoma; Carcinoma - pathology; carcinoma penis; chemotherapy; education; Humans; Lymph Nodes - pathology; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local - pathology; Patient outcomes; penile cancer; Penis; Penis - pathology; predictors; Prognosis; India; predictors; education; penile cancer; urban; rural; overall survival; carcinoma penis; chemotherapy; prognosis
• DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30050345
• EISSN: 1718-7729
• ISSN: 1718-7729; 1198-0052

Carcinoma penis is a rare neoplasm, and the literature is scarce on long-term survival and its predictors. The aim of the study was to determine the clinical profile and management patterns, identify predictors of survival, and the impact of education and rural/urban dwelling on survival.
Patients with a histological diagnosis of carcinoma penis from January 2015 to December 2019 were included in the study. Demographics, clinical profile, education status, primary residence address, and outcomes were obtained from the case records. Distance from the treatment centre was obtained from the postal code. The primary objectives were to assess relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). The secondary objectives were to identify the predictors of RFS and OS and to determine the clinical profile and treatment patterns in patients with carcinoma penis in India. Time-to-event was calculated by Kaplan-Meir analysis and survival was compared by the log-rank test. Univariate and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to find independent predictors of relapse and mortality. Logistic regression analyses to examine the associations of rural residence, education status, and distance from the treatment centre with the relapse adjusting for measured confounding variables.
Case records of 102 patients treated during the above period were retrieved. The median age was 55.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 42-65 years). Ulcero-proliferative growth (65%), pain (57%), and dysuria (36%) were the most common presenting features. Clinical examination or imaging revealed inguinal lymphadenopathy in 70.6% of patients, however, only 42% of these lesions were pathologically involved. A total of 58.8% of patients were from rural areas, 46.9% had no formal education, and 50.9% had a primary residence ≥100 km from the hospital. Patients with lower education and rural households had higher TNM stages and nodal involvement. Median RFS and OS were 57.6 months (15.8 months to not reached) and 83.9 months (32.5 months to not reached), respectively. On univariate analysis tumor stage, involvement of lymph nodes, T stage, performance status, and albumin was predictive for relapse and survival. However, on multivariate analysis, the stage remained the only predictor of RFS and nodal involvement, and metastatic disease was a predictor of OS. Education status, rural habitation, and distance from the treatment centre were not predictors for relapse or survival.
Patients with carcinoma have locally advanced disease at presentation. Rural dwellings and lower education were associated with the advanced stage but did not have a significant bearing on the survival outcomes. The stage at diagnosis and nodal involvement is the most important predictor of RFS and OS.