Urologic oncology · 2024
Survival outcomes and molecular drivers of testicular cancer in hispanic men.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rezaee Michael E, Elias Roy, Li Howard L, Agrawal Pranjal, Pallauf Maximilian, Enikeev Dmitry, Ged Yasser, Eggener Scott, Singla Nirmish
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To examine survival outcomes and molecular drivers in testis cancer among Hispanic men using a large national sample and molecular database.
METHODS: We reviewed the SEER registry for testicular cancer from 2000 to 2020. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the relationship between race/ethnicity and cancer-specific survival (CSS) by tumor type (seminoma vs. nonseminomatous germ cell tumors [NSGCT]). All models were adjusted for demographic, socioeconomic, and treatment variables. We accessed somatic mutations for testicular cancers through AACR Project GENIE v13.1 and compared mutational frequencies by ethnicity.
RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of 43,709 patients (23.3% Hispanic) with median follow-up 106 months (interquartile range: 45-172). Compared to Non-Hispanic Whites (NWH), Hispanics presented at a younger age but with more advanced disease. Hispanics experienced worse CSS for NSGCT (HR 1.7, 95% CI: 1.5-2.0, P < 0.01) but not seminoma. Somatic mutation data was available for 699 patients. KIT and KRAS mutations occurred in 24.2% and 16.9% of seminoma patients (n = 178), respectively. TP53 and KRAS mutations occurred in 12.1% and 7.9% of NSGCT patients (n = 521), respectively. No differences in mutational frequencies were observed between ethnic groups. There was significant heterogeneity in primary ancestral group for Hispanic patients with available data (n = 53); 14 (26.4%) patients had primary Native American ancestry and 30 (56.6%) had primary European ancestry.
CONCLUSIONS: Cancer-specific survival is worse for Hispanic men with non-seminoma of the testicle. Somatic mutation analysis suggests no differences by ethnicity, though genetic ancestry is heterogeneous among patients identifying as Hispanic.
METHODS: We reviewed the SEER registry for testicular cancer from 2000 to 2020. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the relationship between race/ethnicity and cancer-specific survival (CSS) by tumor type (seminoma vs. nonseminomatous germ cell tumors [NSGCT]). All models were adjusted for demographic, socioeconomic, and treatment variables. We accessed somatic mutations for testicular cancers through AACR Project GENIE v13.1 and compared mutational frequencies by ethnicity.
RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of 43,709 patients (23.3% Hispanic) with median follow-up 106 months (interquartile range: 45-172). Compared to Non-Hispanic Whites (NWH), Hispanics presented at a younger age but with more advanced disease. Hispanics experienced worse CSS for NSGCT (HR 1.7, 95% CI: 1.5-2.0, P < 0.01) but not seminoma. Somatic mutation data was available for 699 patients. KIT and KRAS mutations occurred in 24.2% and 16.9% of seminoma patients (n = 178), respectively. TP53 and KRAS mutations occurred in 12.1% and 7.9% of NSGCT patients (n = 521), respectively. No differences in mutational frequencies were observed between ethnic groups. There was significant heterogeneity in primary ancestral group for Hispanic patients with available data (n = 53); 14 (26.4%) patients had primary Native American ancestry and 30 (56.6%) had primary European ancestry.
CONCLUSIONS: Cancer-specific survival is worse for Hispanic men with non-seminoma of the testicle. Somatic mutation analysis suggests no differences by ethnicity, though genetic ancestry is heterogeneous among patients identifying as Hispanic.