Terbuch, Angelika

Objectives To reassess the role of primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) in patients with marker‐negative non‐seminomatous germ cell tumour (NSGCT) clinical stage (CS) 2a, to explore results in patients with CS 2b and to evaluate surgical methods, recurrence, and adjuvant chemotherapy indications. Materials and Methods Data from 17 institutions were collected, comprising 305 men who underwent primary RPLND for CS 2 NSGCT. Regression analyses were conducted to predict histology in the RPLND specimen and disease‐free survival (DFS). Results A larger retroperitoneal lymph node diameter was associated with pure teratoma in the RPLND specimen (odds ratio [OR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01–1.07; P = 0.03), but no association was observed with DFS. The 5‐year DFS rates in marker negative CS 2a and 2b were 79% and 76%. In men with non‐teratomatous viable cancer in the RPLND specimen, the 5‐year DFS rates for CS 2a and 2b were 95% and 87% with adjuvant chemotherapy, and 67% and 74% without adjuvant chemotherapy. We did not identify an association between the number of adjuvant chemotherapy cycles and DFS. Conclusions Our study suggests considering primary RPLND not only in marker‐negative CS 2a but also in CS 2b. Further research should determine the efficacy of primary RPLND in men with CS 2c and marker‐positive CS 2, as well as which patients may benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy and the optimal cycle number.

516 Background: Based on only smaller retrospective cohort studies, current guidelines recommend primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) for men with marker-negative stage 2a non-seminomatous germ cell tumor (NSGCT). We aimed to reassess the role of primary RPLND in marker negative stage 2a, explore results in stages 2b/c and/or marker-positive disease, and evaluate surgical methods, recurrence, and adjuvant chemotherapy indications. Methods: Data from 17 institutions were collected, comprising 305 men who underwent primary RPLND for stage 2 NSGCT. Regression analyses were conducted to predict histology in the RPLND specimen and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: A larger retroperitoneal lymph node diameter was associated with pure teratoma in the RPLND specimen (odds ratio [OR] 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.09, p-value = 0.02), but it did not correlate with PFS. The 5-year PFS rates were 85% for men with pure teratoma, 94% for men with viable cancer who received adjuvant chemotherapy, and 72% for men with viable cancer who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy. The number of adjuvant chemotherapy cycles did not significantly affect PFS. Conclusions: Our study suggests considering primary RPLND not only in marker negative clinical stage 2a but also marker negative clinical stage 2b. Further research should identify the efficacy in men in other stages (2C or marker positive) and which patients may benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy and the optimal cycle number.