Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38424353›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of impotence research2025

Long-term outcomes of penile squamous cell carcinoma in men age ≤50 years old compared with men >50 years old from a single tertiary referral centre: a propensity score matched analysis.

Karl H Pang, Giuseppe Fallara, Morwarid Hemat, Akash Ghosh, Aiman Haider, Alex Freeman, Paul Hadway, Raj Nigam, Rowland Rees, Anita Mitra and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of impotence research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 2 institutions in 4 countries.

Karl H PangDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, School of Clinical Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5703-2319
Giuseppe FallaraDepartment of Urology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7872-2650
Morwarid HematInstitute of Andrology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Akash GhoshInstitute of Andrology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Aiman HaiderDepartment of Histopathology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Alex FreemanDepartment of Histopathology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Paul HadwayInstitute of Andrology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Raj NigamInstitute of Andrology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Rowland ReesInstitute of Andrology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Anita MitraDepartment of Clinical Oncology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Constantine AlifrangisDepartment of Medical Oncology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Asif MuneerInstitute of Andrology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2958-1614
Hussain M AlnajjarInstitute of Andrology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. Hussain.alnajjar@nhs.net.
University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBEuropean Institute of Oncology · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Penile cancer (PeCa) is rare, and the oncological outcomes in younger men are unclear. We aimed to analyse and compare oncological outcomes of men age ≤50 years (y) and >50 years with PeCa. A retrospective analysis of men ≤50 y with penile squamous cell carcinoma managed at a tertiary centre was performed. A propensity score matched cohort of men >50 y was identified for comparison. Matching was according to tumour, nodal stage and the types of primary surgery. Overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and metastasis-free survivals (MFS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier plots and compared using log-rank tests. Between 2005-2020, 100 men ≤50 y (median (IQR) age, 46 y (40-49)) were identified and matched with 100 men >50 y (median (IQR) age, 65 y (59-73)). 10, 24, 32, 34 men age ≤50 y were diagnosed in 2005-2007, 2008-2012, 2013-2016 and 2017-2020 respectively. Median (IQR) follow-up was 53.5 (18-96) months. OS at 2 years: ≤50 y, 86%>50 y, 80.6%; 5 years: ≤50 y, 78.1%, >50 y, 63.1%; 10 years: ≤50 y, 72.3%, >50 y, 45.6% (p = 0.01). DSS at 2 years: ≤50 y, 87.2%>50 y, 87.8%; 5 years: ≤50 y, 80.9%>50 y, 78.2%; 10 years: ≤50 y, 78%, >50 y, 70.9% (p = 0.74). RFS was 93.1% in the ≤50 y group (vs. >50 y, 96.5%) at 2 year, and 90% (vs. >50 y, 88.5%) at 5 years, p = 0.81. Within the ≤50 y group, 2 years and 5 years MFS was 93% (vs. >50 y, 96.5%), and 89.5% (vs. >50 y, 92.7%) respectively, (p = 0.40). There were no statistical significance in DFS, RFS and MFS in men age ≤50 y and >50 y. PeCa in younger patients is fatal, public awareness and patient education are crucial for early detection and management.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Squamous CellNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPenile NeoplasmsAdultAgedAge FactorsDisease-Free SurvivalEarly Detection of CancerFollow-Up StudiesHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPatient Education as Topic

Identifiers

PMID38424353
PMCPMC12474540
OpenAlexW4392287419

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.