Introduction: In countries characterized by a centralization of therapy management, patients with penile cancer (PeCa) have shown improvements in guideline adherence and ultimately, improved carcinoma-specific survival. Germany and Austria (G + A) have no state-regulated centralization of PeCa management, and the perspectives of urological university department chairs (UUDCs) in these countries, who act as drivers of professional and political developments, on this topic are currently unknown. Methods: Surveys containing 36 response options, including specific questions regarding perspectives on PeCa centralization, were sent to the 48 UUDC in G + A in January 2023. In addition to analyzing the responses, closely following the CROSS checklist, a modeling of the real healthcare situation of in-house PeCa patients in G + A was conducted. Results: The response rate was 75% (36/48). 94% and 89% of the UUDCs considered PeCa centralization meaningful and feasible in the medium term, respectively. Among the UUDCs, 72% estimated centralization within university hospitals as appropriate, while 28% favored a geographically oriented approach. Additionally, 97% of the UUDCs emphasized the importance of bridging the gap until implementation of centralization by establishing PeCa second-opinion portals. No country-specific differences were observed. The median number of in-house PeCa cases at the university hospitals in G + A was 13 (interquartile range: 9–26). A significant positive correlation was observed between the annual number of in-house PeCa cases at a given university hospital and the perspective of the UUDCs that centralization as meaningful by its UUDC (0.024). Under assumptions permissible for modeling, the average number of in-house PeCa cases in academic hospitals in G + A was approximately 30 times higher than in nonacademic hospitals. Conclusion: This study provides the first data on the perspectives of UUDCs in G + A concerning centralization of PeCa therapy management. Even without state-regulated centralization in G + A, there is currently a clear focusing of PeCa treatments in university hospitals. Further necessary steps toward a structured PeCa centralization are discussed in this manuscript.

Journal Section:
Research Article
Keywords:
Penile neoplasm, Academic centers, Nonacademic centers, Caseload, Second-opinion portal
1.
Giona S. Chapter 11 The epidemiology of penile cancer. In: Barber N, Ali A, editors. Urologic cancers (internet). Brisbane (AU): Exon Publications; 2022 Sep 12.
2.
Distler FA, Pahernik S, Gakis G, Hutterer G, Lebentrau S, Rink M, et al. Adherence to the EAU guideline recommendations for systemic chemotherapy in penile cancer: results of the E-PROPS study group survey. World J Urol. 2020 Oct;38(10):2523–30.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-03052-7
3.
Pallauf M, Hempel MC, Hupe MC, May M, Haccius M, Weckermann D, et al. Adherence to the EAU guideline recommendations for local tumor treatment in penile cancer: results of the European PROspective Penile Cancer Study Group Survey (E-PROPS). Adv Ther. 2020 Dec;37(12):4969–80.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-020-01514-8
4.
Lebentrau S, Wakileh GA, Schostak M, Schmid HP, Suarez-Ibarrola R, Merseburger AS, et al. Does the identification of a minimum number of cases correlate with better adherence to international guidelines regarding the treatment of penile cancer? Survey results of the European PROspective Penile Cancer Study (E-PROPS). Front Oncol. 2021 Nov 29;11:759362.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.759362
5.
Suarez-Ibarrola R, Zengerling F, Haccius M, Lebentrau S, Schmid HP, Bier M, et al. Adherence to European association of urology and national comprehensive cancer network guidelines criteria for inguinal and pelvic lymph node dissection in penile cancer patients-A survey assessment in German-speaking countries on behalf of the European prospective penile cancer study group. Eur Urol Focus. 2021 Jul;7(4):843–9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2020.02.005
6.
May M, Rink M, Merseburger AS, Brookman-May SD. Why is the principle of “as much radicality as needed, as much organ preservation as possible” only insufficiently implemented in daily practice in the surgical treatment of penile cancer patients?Transl Androl Urol. 2020 Oct;9(5):1901–3.
https://doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-1152
7.
Quhal F, Pradere B, Mori K, Shariat SF. Volume outcome relationship in penile cancer: a systematic review. Curr Opin Urol. 2020 Sep;30(5):696–700.
https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0000000000000803
8.
Bandini M, Ahmed M, Basile G, Watkin N, Master V, Zhu Y, et al. A global approach to improving penile cancer care. Nat Rev Urol. 2022;19(4):231–9.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41585-021-00557-y
9.
Ulvskog E, Persson EK, Kirrander P, Fall K, Ahlgren J. Nationwide data support centralised decision-making in penile cancer care: a before-and-after study on guideline adherence and disease-specific survival for patients with an indication for perioperative oncological treatment. Eur Urol Open Sci. 2023;51:70–7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2023.03.005
10.
Vreeburg M, Vries H-M, Poel H, Brouwer O. MP33-08 penile cancer care in The Netherlands over three decades: increased INCIDENCE, centralisation of care, and overall survival. J Urol. 2023;(Suppl 4):209.
11.
Bayles AC, Sethia KK. The impact of improving Outcomes Guidance on the management and outcomes of patients with carcinoma of the penis. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2010;92(1):44–5.
https://doi.org/10.1308/003588410X12518836439047
12.
May M, Lebentrau S, Ayres B, Spiess PE, Watkin N, Albersen M, et al. Initial presentation of the Pentafecta score as a quality instrument for outcome evaluation of primary surgical treatment in patients with penile cancer. Aktuelle Urol. 2023 Jun 20;54(04):292–8.
https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2065-8256
13.
Anderson S, Breen KJ, Davis NF, Deady S, Sweeney P. Penile cancer in Ireland: a national review. Surgeon. 2022;20(3):187–93.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surge.2021.04.004
14.
Sharma A, Minh Duc NT, Luu Lam Thang T, Nam NH, Ng SJ, Abbas KS, et al. A consensus-based checklist for reporting of survey studies (CROSS). J Gen Intern Med. 2021;36(10):3179–87.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-021-06737-1
15.
Zentrum_für_Krebsregisterdaten. Datenbankabfrage. In: Robert Koch Institut; 2023. Available from: https://www.krebsdaten.de/Krebs/DE/Datenbankabfrage/datenbankabfrage_stufe1_node.html. (The last access occurred on July 10, 2023).
16.
Statistik_Austria. Datenbankabfrage. In: Bundesanstalt Statistik Österreich; 2023. Available from: https://statcube.at/statistik.at/ext/statcube/jsf/tableView/tableView.xhtml. (The last access occurred on July 10, 2023).
17.
Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF): S3-Leitlinie Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge des Peniskarzinoms, Kurzversion 1.0, 2020, AWMF Registernummer: 043-042OL. Available from: https://www.leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/leitlinien/peniskarzinom. (The last access occurred on July 10, 2023).
18.
EAU-ASCO Penile Cancer Guidelines. Edn. presented at the EAU annual congress milan 2023. https://uroweb.org/guidelines/compilations-of-all-guidelines/penilecancer (The last access occurred on July 10, 2023).
19.
Groeben C, Koch R, Kraywinkel K, Buttmann-Schweiger N, Baunacke M, Borkowetz A, et al. Development of incidence and surgical treatment of penile cancer in Germany from 2006 to 2016: potential implications for future management. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28(13):9190–8.
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-10189-6
20.
Boehm WD, Piontek D, Latarius S, Schoffer O, Borkowetz A, Klug SJ, et al. The clinical complexity of penile cancer: current clinical-epidemiological data from the database of the free state of saxony/Germany. Urol Int. 2022;106(7):706–15.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000519210
21.
Lebentrau S, Wolff I, Hempel MC, Haccius M, Kluth LA, Pycha A, et al. Knowledge of German-speaking urologists regarding the association between penile cancer an human papilloma viurs: results of a survery of the Europenan PROspective Penile Cancer Study (E-PROPS). Aktuelle Urol. 2022;53(05):461–7.
https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1032-8086
22.
Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/conditions-and-diseases/cancer/penile-and-testicular-cancer (The last access occurred on July 10, 2023).
23.
Available from: https://www.krebsgesellschaft.de/gcs/german-cancer-society/certification.html (The last access occurred on July 10, 2023).
© 2023 S. Karger AG, Basel
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
2023
You do not currently have access to this content.