Contemporary role of radiotherapy in the management of penile cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Penile cancer is a rare clinical entity that contributes to significant patient morbidity and mortality. Human papilloma virus (HPV) plays an important role in the carcinogenesis of penile squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), is associated with improved clinical outcomes, and is predictive for response to treatment with chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Historically, treatment consisted of radical surgery with partial or total penectomy. While effective for local control, surgical resection can impart significant physical, psychological and sexual dysfunction for afflicted men. Organ preservation strategies offer significant quality of life advantages over standard surgery and can be utilized without compromising oncological control. As an alternative or adjunct to surgical resection, radiation therapy can be used for organ preservation strategies successfully in up to 70% of patients. A variety of treatment techniques can be employed depending on the location and burden of disease. Limited disease can be amenable to treatment with interstitial brachytherapy, surface mold plesiotherapy or external beam radiotherapy. For locally advanced presentations, or for patients not amenable to surgical resection, excellent clinical outcomes can be achieved using a combination of chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Here, we discuss the management of penile SCC using modern radiation therapy treatment techniques, the expected clinical outcomes for organ preservation, as well as the management of side-effects and toxicities. While large randomized trials are being developed, the management of penile cancer is informed from the management of other of other anogenital malignancies, which we also review.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".