Penile

NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®)
Penile Cancer
Version 1.2023 — December 1, 2022
NCCN.org
Continue
Version 1.2023, 12/01/2022 © 2022 National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®), All rights reserved. NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN.
Printed by Cristian Díaz rojas on 1/13/2023 5:35:56 AM. For personal use only. Not approved for distribution. Copyright © 2023 National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

Table of Contents
Penile Cancer Discussion
*Thomas W. Flaig, MD †/Chair Hristos Kaimakliotis, MD ϖ Charles Peyton, MD ϖ

University of Colorado Cancer Center Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center at UAB
*Philippe E. Spiess, MD, MS ¶ ϖ/Vice Chair Comprehensive Cancer Center Elizabeth R. Plimack, MD, MS † Þ
Moffitt Cancer Center Amar U. Kishan, MD § Fox Chase Cancer Center
Michael Abern, MD ¶ ϖ UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center Kamal S. Pohar, MD ¶ ϖ
Duke Cancer Institute Shilajit Kundu, MD ϖ The Ohio State University Comprehensive
Neeraj Agarwal, MD ‡ † Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Cancer Center - James Cancer Hospital
Huntsman Cancer Institute Center of Northwestern University and Solove Research Institute
at the University of Utah Subodh M. Lele, MD ≠ Mark A. Preston, MD, MPH ϖ
Rick Bangs, MBA Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s
Patient Advocate Ronac Mamtani, MD † Cancer Center
Mark K. Buyyounouski, MD, MS § Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Kyle Richards, MD ϖ
Stanford Cancer Institute Pennsylvania University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center
Kevin Chan, MD ϖ Vitaly Margulis, MD ϖ Wade J. Sexton, MD ϖ

City of Hope National Medical Center UT Southwestern Simmons Moffitt Cancer Center
Comprehensive Cancer Center Arlene O. Siefker-Radtke, MD †
Sam Chang, MD, MBA ¶ ϖ
Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center Omar Y. Mian, MD, PhD § The University of Texas
Case Comprehensive Cancer Center/ MD Anderson Cancer Center
Terence Friedlander, MD † University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and
UCSF Helen Diller Family Tyler Stewart, MD †
Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center
Comprehensive Cancer Center
Jeff Michalski, MD, MBA § Matthew Tollefson, MD ϖ
Richard E. Greenberg, MD ϖ Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-
Fox Chase Cancer Center Mayo Clinic Cancer Center
Jewish Hospital and Washington
Khurshid A. Guru, MD ϖ ¶ University School of Medicine Jonathan Tward, MD, PhD §
Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center Huntsman Cancer Institute
Jeffrey S. Montgomery, MD, MHSA ϖ at the University of Utah
Harry W. Herr, MD ϖ University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Jonathan L. Wright, MD, MS ϖ
Mamta Parikh, MD, MS † Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center
Jean Hoffman-Censits, MD † UC Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center
The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive NCCN
Anthony Patterson, MD ϖ Lisa Gurski, PhD
Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital/ Carly J. Cassara, MSc
The University of Tennessee
Health Science Center ‡ Hematology/Hematology § Radiotherapy/Radiation
oncology oncology
NCCN Guidelines Panel Disclosures Continue Þ Internal medicine ¶ Surgery/Surgical Oncology
† Medical oncology ϖ Urology
≠ Pathology * Discussion writing
committee member

Table of Contents
NCCN Penile Cancer Panel Members Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that
Summary of the Guidelines Updates the best management for any patient
with cancer is in a clinical trial.
Primary Evaluation, Clinical Diagnosis (PN-1) Participation in clinical trials is
especially encouraged.
Primary Treatment Tis, Ta (PN-1)
Find an NCCN Member Institution:
Primary Treatment T1, T2 or Greater (PN-2) https://www.nccn.org/home/member-
Management of Non-Palpable Inguinal Lymph Nodes (PN-3) institutions.
Management of Palpable Non-Bulky Inguinal Lymph Nodes (PN-4) NCCN Categories of Evidence and
Management of Palpable Bulky Inguinal Lymph Nodes (PN-5) Consensus: All recommendations
Management of Enlarged Pelvic Lymph Nodes (PN-6) are category 2A unless otherwise
indicated.
Surveillance Schedule (PN-7)
Management of Recurrent Disease (PN-8) See NCCN Categories of Evidence
and Consensus.
Management of Metastatic Disease (PN-9)
NCCN Categories of Preference:
All recommendations are considered
Principles of Penile Organ-Sparing Approaches (PN-A) appropriate.
Principles of Surgery (PN-B) See NCCN Categories of Preference.
Principles of Radiotherapy (PN-C)
Principles of Systemic Therapy (PN-D)
Principles of Imaging (PN-E)
Staging (ST-1)
Abbreviations (ABBR-1)
The NCCN Guidelines® are a statement of evidence and consensus of the authors regarding their views of currently accepted approaches to
treatment. Any clinician seeking to apply or consult the NCCN Guidelines is expected to use independent medical judgment in the context of individual
clinical circumstances to determine any patient’s care or treatment. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®) makes no representations
or warranties of any kind regarding their content, use or application and disclaims any responsibility for their application or use in any way. The NCCN
Guidelines are copyrighted by National Comprehensive Cancer Network®. All rights reserved. The NCCN Guidelines and the illustrations herein may
not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN. ©2022.

Table of Contents
Updates in Version 1.2023 of the NCCN Guidelines for Penile Cancer from Version 2.2022 include:
PN-3
• Intermediate-/High-risk treatment modified: Bilateral inguinal lymph node dissection (ILND) or Bilateral dynamic sentinel node biopsy (DSNB)
PN-C
• Principles of Radiotherapy category added: Palliative RT, 1st bullet: Consider a palliative dose of 30 Gy in 10 fractions
PN-E
• Initial Workup, Staging, and Treatment Response Assessment, 1st sub-bullet revised: Abdominal Abdomen/pelvic pelvis CT or MRI with
contrast
• Staging and Treatment Response Assessment, 3rd sub-bullet revised: Consider: FDG-PET/CT (skull base to mid-thigh)
UPDATES

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
NCCN and the NCCN Penile Cancer Panel believe

that the best management for any patient with
cancer is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical
trials is especially encouraged.
INTRO

Table of Contents
PRIMARY EVALUATION CLINICAL PRIMARY TREATMENT

DIAGNOSIS
See
Management of
Topical therapyb Non-Palpable
or Inguinal Lymph
Wide local excisionb Nodes (PN-3)
or
• History & physical (H&P) Laser therapyb (category 2B)
Tis or Ta
Risk factors or
◊ Balanitis, chronic Complete glansectomyb (category 2B)
inflammation, penile trauma, or See
lack of neonatal circumcision, Mohs surgery in select casesb Management of
tobacco use, lichen sclerosus, (category 2B) Palpable Inguinal
poor hygiene, sexually Lymph Nodes
transmitted disease (PN-4)
Lesion characteristics
◊ Diameter, location, number of
Suspicious
lesions, morphology (papillary,
penile lesiona
nodular, ulcerous, or flat),
relationship to other structures
(submucosal, corpora
spongiosa, cavernosa, and/or
urethra)
• Histologic diagnosis
Punch, excisional, or incisional
biopsy
Assess human papillomavirus ≥T1 See Primary Treatment (PN-2)
(HPV) status
If recurrent disease, see PN-8 or
if metastatic disease, see PN-9
a These Guidelines are for treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the penis.
b See Principles of Penile Organ-Sparing Approaches (PN-A).
Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

Clinical Trials: NCCN believes that the best management of any patient with cancer is in a clinical trial. Participation in clinical trials is especially encouraged.
PN-1

Table of Contents
PATHOLOGIC DIAGNOSIS PRIMARY TREATMENT

Wide local excisionb
or
Partial penectomyc,d
or
Glansectomy in select casesb
Grade 1–2 or
Mohs surgery in select casesb (category 2B)
or
Laser therapyb (category 2B) See Management of
or Non-Palpable Inguinal
Radiation therapy (RT)d (category 2B) Lymph Nodes (PN-3)
T1
Wide local excisionb

or
or
Grade 3–4 Total penectomyc,d
or See Management of
RTd (category 2B) Palpable Inguinal Lymph
or Nodes (PN-4)
Chemo/RTd,e (category 3)
or
Total penectomyc,d
T2 or greater or
RTd (category 2B)
or
Chemo/RTd,e (category 3)
b See Principles of Penile Organ-Sparing Approaches (PN-A).

c See Principles of Surgery (PN-B).
d See Principles of Radiotherapy (PN-C).
e See Principles of Systemic Therapy (PN-D).

PN-2

Table of Contents
MANAGEMENT OF NON-PALPABLE INGUINAL LYMPH NODES

NODAL RISK STRATIFICATION IMAGING TREATMENTc
STATUS BASED ON PRIMARY
LESION
Low risk
Surveillance (See PN-7)
(Tis, Ta,f T1a)
Non-palpable
inguinal
lymph nodes
Bilateral inguinal
Intermediate/High lymph node dissection
Cross-sectional
risk (ILND)h,i See Surveillance
imaging of chest/
• T1b or (PN-7)
abdomen/pelvisg
• Any T2 or greater Bilateral dynamic
sentinel node biopsy
(DSNB)j,k

f Ta verrucous carcinoma is by definition a well-differentiated tumor. Therefore, only surveillance of the inguinal lymph nodes is required.
g Cross-sectional imaging may include CT, MRI, PET/CT, and/or chest x-ray. When appropriate, imaging should be done with contrast unless contraindicated. See
Principles of Imaging (PN-E).
h A modified/superficial inguinal dissection with intraoperative frozen section is an acceptable alternative to stage the inguinal lymph nodes.
i Consider prophylactic external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) (category 2B) to inguinal lymph nodes in patients who are not surgical candidates or who decline
surgical management.
j DSNB is recommended provided the treating physician has experience with this modality.
k If positive lymph nodes are found on DSNB, ILND is recommended.

PN-3

Table of Contents
MANAGEMENT OF PALPABLE NON-BULKY INGUINAL LYMPH NODES

NODAL IMAGING RISK STRATIFICATION TREATMENTc
STATUS BASED ON PHYSICAL/ Negative
IMAGING FINDINGS Excisional biopsy
Negative or
Surveillance Positive
Low-risk Percutaneous
primary lymph node
lesion biopsyp pN1
Unilateral
lymph • Bilateral ILND • Pelvic lymph node
node(s) Positive • Consider dissection (PLNDc
neoadjuvant ± [if pelvic nodes See
<4 cm TIP (paclitaxel,
(mobile)n High-risk positive, adjuvant RT Surveillance
d
ifosfamide, (PN-7)
primary cisplatin) or chemotherapye
lesiono chemotherapye (category 2B) or
followed by pN2–3 chemo/RTd,e (category
ILND 2B)]
or
Palpable Cross-sectional Unilateral lymph node(s) ≥4 cm (fixed or mobile) Management • Chemo/RTd,e
inguinal imaging of or of Palpable (category 2B)
lymph chest/abdomen/ Unilateral lymph node(s) <4 cm (fixed) Bulky Inguinal or
nodesl pelvisg,m or Lymph Nodes • Chemotherapye
Bilateral lymph nodes (fixed or mobile) (PN-5) (category 2B)
Management of
Enlarged pelvic lymph nodes Enlarged Pelvic
Lymph Nodes (PN-6)
l CT/MRI of pelvis with contrast for nodal evaluation if difficult to assess on physical examination.
m If M1 disease is identified, see Management of Metastatic Disease (PN-9).
n The size threshold of 4 cm represents the largest diameter of contiguous inguinal lymph node(s) tissue as measured on either physical examination and/or axial
imaging (CT or MRI) and suspected of harboring metastatic disease.
o High-risk primary lesion: T1, high-grade, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, >50% poorly undifferentiated.
p Ultrasound- or CT-guided biopsy of the most accessible node, inguinal or pelvic.

PN-4

Table of Contents
MANAGEMENT OF PALPABLE BULKY INGUINAL LYMPH NODES

NODE STATUS LYMPH NODES TREATMENT 0–1 positive nodes
Neoadjuvant TIP with viable disease
chemotherapye followed by • Adjuvant
ILND (preferred), consider chemotherapye (if not
PLNDc already given)
≥2
and/or
or positive
Positive • If pelvic nodes See
nodes or
positive, adjuvant Surveillance
ILNDc (preferred), consider extranodal
RTd (PN-7)
PLNDc (in patients not extension
or
Unilateral eligible for TIP) • Chemo/RTd,e (category
lymph Percutaneous
Palpable bulky 2B)
nodes lymph node or
inguinal lymph ≥4 cm biopsyp
node(s): (mobile)n RTd
Unilateral ≥4
or
cm (fixed or
Chemo/RTd,e
mobile)
or Negative Negative See Surveillance (PN-7)
Unilateral Excisional
lymph node(s) biopsy
Unilateral Positive
<4 cm (fixed) Negative
or lymph nodes
Percutaneous
Bilateral (fixed (fixed)n or No No Response/Disease
lymph node
or mobile) bilateral lymph response Progression (See PN-9)
biopsyp
nodes (fixed Neoadjuvant TIP ILNDc,q (preferred)
or mobile) chemotherapye and
Positive Response
PLNDc,q,r (preferred) See
Not eligible for neoadjuvant or Surveillance
chemotherapy RTc (PN-7)
or
d See Principles of Radiotherapy (PN-C). Chemo/RTd,e
e See Principles of Systemic Therapy (PN-D). p Ultrasound- or CT-guided biopsy of the most accessible node, inguinal or pelvic.
n The size threshold of 4 cm represents the largest
diameter of contiguous inguinal q Consider postoperative RT or chemo/RT (category 2B).
lymph node(s) tissue as measured on either physical examination and/or axial r Data suggest that in the setting of ≥4 positive inguinal lymph nodes, bilateral
imaging (CT or MRI) and suspected of harboring metastatic disease. PLND should be performed. Zargar-Shoshtari K, et al. J Urol 2015;194:696-701.

PN-5

Table of Contents
MANAGEMENT OF ENLARGED PELVIC LYMPH NODES

NODE STATUS LYMPH NODES TREATMENT
See management depending on inguinal lymph node status:

Non-Palpable Inguinal Lymph Nodes (PN-3)
or
Negative
Palpable Non-Bulky Inguinal Lymph Nodes (PN-4)
or
Palpable Bulky Inguinal Lymph Nodes (PN-5)
Percutaneous
Pelvic See
lymph node Stable or clinical Consolidation
lymph Surveillance
biopsy,p if response surgeryq,u
nodes (PN-7)
technically Cross-sectional
enlargeds
feasiblet Surgical Neoadjuvant TIP imaging of
candidate chemotherapye chest/abdomen/
pelvisg,m
Disease See No Response/Disease
progression or Progression on Management
Positive non-resectable of Metastatic Disease (PN-9)
Non-surgical
Chemo/RTd,e See Surveillance (PN-7)
candidate

m If M1 disease is identified, see Management of Metastatic Disease (PN-9).
q Consider postoperative RT or chemo/RT (category 2B).
s On CT or MRI, not pathologic stage.
t If not technically feasible, PET/CT scan can be used to evaluate lymph nodes.
u Consolidation surgery consists of bilateral superficial and deep ILND and unilateral/bilateral PLND.

PN-6

Table of Contents
SURVEILLANCE SCHEDULE
ANATOMIC SITE INITIAL TREATMENT SURVEILLANCEw
• Clinical examinationx,y
Topical or local Years 1–2: every 3 mo, then
therapy Years 3–5: every 6 mo, then
Years 5–10: every 12 mo
Primary
lesion
• Clinical examinationx,y
Partial or radical
Years 1–2: every 6 mo, then
penectomy
For patients with
recurrence at
• Clinical examinationx,y either local or
pNXv Years 1–2: every 6 mo, then distant sites, see
Years 3–4: every 12 mo Management of
Recurrent
Disease (PN-8)
• Clinical examination,x,y CT abdomen/
Lymph pelvis and chest radiograph
nodes pN0, N1
Years 1–2: every 6 mo, then
• Clinical examination,x,y CT abdomen/
pelvis, and chest CT
pN2, N3
Year 1: every 3 mo, then
x Clinical examination includes examination of the penis and inguinal region.

v Patientson active surveillance of clinically negative nodes and at low risk for y If an abnormal clinical examination, patient affected by obesity, or prior inguinal
inguinal metastases. surgery, then ultrasound, CT with contrast, or MRI with contrast of the inguinal
w See NCCN Guidelines for Survivorship. region can be considered.

PN-7

Table of Contents
MANAGEMENT OF RECURRENT DISEASE
Recurrence of
penile lesion Treat according to recurrence stage
after initial penile (See PN-1 and PN-2)
sparing treatment
Negative See
Single, Surveillance
mobile, Percutaneous pN1 (PN-7)
<4 cm lymph node PLNDc,d
lymph biopsyp ± [adjuvant
node Positive ILNDc chemotherapye or
chemo/RTd,e (category
2B)]
No prior inguinal pN2–3 or
lymphadenectomy chemo/RTd,e (category
or RT 2B)
or
Chemotherapye
(category 2B)
Local recurrence Fixed node, ≥4 cm Percutaneous See Treatment for Unilateral Lymph
in inguinal region node, or cN2/N3 lymph node Nodes (Fixed) or Bilateral Lymph
disease biopsyp Node(s) (Fixed or Mobile) (PN-5)
Chemotherapye followed by ILND
Prior inguinal or
lymphadenectomy ILNDc See Surveillance (PN-7)
or RT or
Chemo/RT (if no prior RT)d,e

PN-8

Table of Contents
MANAGEMENT OF METASTATIC DISEASE
Complete/ See
partial response Consolidation surgeryu Surveillance
or stable (PN-7)
Cross-sectional
Metastatic imaging of
Systemic chemotherapye,z
penile cancer chest/abdomen/
pelvisg
Consider subsequent-line systemic therapye
or
No response/
Consider RTd for local control
Disease
and/or
progression
Best supportive care/clinical trial
(See NCCN Guidelines for Palliative Care)

u Consolidation surgery consists of bilateral superficial and deep ILND and unilateral/bilateral PLND.
z Discuss palliative care and therapies for local control.

PN-9

Table of Contents
PRINCIPLES OF PENILE ORGAN-SPARING APPROACHES

Tis, Ta, and T1 penile cancer lesions may be amenable to conservative penile organ-sparing approaches, including topical therapy, wide local
excision, laser therapy, glansectomy, and Mohs surgery.
Topical Therapy1
• For patients with Tis or Ta disease:
Imiquimod 5%: apply at night three times per week for 4–16 weeks.
5-FU cream 5%: apply twice daily for 2–6 weeks.
Laser Therapy (category 2B)

• The use of therapeutic lasers (CO2, Nd:YAG, and KTP) to treat selected (clinical stage Tis, Ta, and T1 Grade 1–2) primary penile tumors has
been reported with acceptable outcomes.
• Perioperative application of 3%–5% acetic acid to the potentially affected genital skin can be used to identify suspected sites of (HPV)
infected skin that turns white upon exposure, making these acetowhite areas appropriately targetable for laser ablation.
• A plume (smoke) evacuator is required during penile laser treatments to minimize exposure to HPV and other viral particles as well as
combustion-related carcinogens.
• The following is a table of the therapeutic lasers commonly used to treat penile cancer including suggested settings.
CO2 Nd:YAG KTP

Type Gas Solid state Solid state
Wavelength 10,600 nm 1064 nm 532 nm
Tissue penetration 0.1 mm 3–4 mm 1–2 mm
Commonly used Spot size: 1–5 mm Spot size: 1–5 mm Fiber size: 400 or 600 um
settings Power: 5–10 W Power: 40 W Power: 5–10 W
Pulse: Continuous or Pulse duration: 1 ms Pulse duration: 10–20 ms
superpulse 100–200 Hz Pulse frequency: 10–40 Hz Repetition rate: 2 Hz
1 McGillis ST, Fein H. Topical treatment strategies for non-melanoma skin cancer and precursor lesions. Semin Cutan Med Surg 2004;23:174-183.
Continued
PN-A
Version 1.2023, 12/01/2022 © 2022 National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN ), All rights reserved. NCCN Guidelines and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN.
® ® ®
1 OF 2

Table of Contents
PRINCIPLES OF PENILE ORGAN-SPARING APPROACHES

Wide Local Excision
• This is designated for early-stage penile cancer confined to the skin with little or no invasion (clinical stage Tis, Ta, T1).
• The surgical margins for wide local excision depend on the location of the penile tumor.
Penile tumors of the shaft may be treated with wide local excision, with or without circumcision.
Circumcision alone may be reasonable for tumors of the distal prepuce.
• Complete excision of the skin with a wide negative margin is needed and may require the use of a split-thickness skin graft (STSG) or full-
thickness skin graft (FTSG) (if a primary tension-free reapproximation cannot be completed).
• If positive surgical margins, re-resection may be considered.
• Glans resurfacing may be considered in highly select patients.
Glansectomy
• Glansectomy may be considered for select patients with distal tumors (clinical stage Ta, Tis,T1) on the glans or prepuce.
For patients with Ta or Tis disease, a complete glansectomy is a category 2B recommendation.
For patients with T1 G1–2 disease, glansectomy is not recommended unless required to ensure complete tumor eradication with negative
margins.
• Negative surgical margins should be determined from frozen sections of the cavernosal bed and urethral stump.
• Treatment is followed in certain instances with an STSG or FTSG to create a neoglans.
Mohs Micrographic Surgery (category 2B)

• Mohs surgery is an alternative to wide local excision in select cases.2
Thin layers of cancerous skin are excised and viewed microscopically until a tissue layer is negative for the tumor.
Mohs surgery allows for increased precision, although the success rate declines with higher stage disease.
• This may be preferable for a small superficial lesion on the proximal shaft to avoid total penectomy for an otherwise fairly low-risk lesion.
2 Shindel AW, Mann MW, Lev RY, et al. Mohs micrographic surgery for penile cancer: management and long-term followup. J Urol 2007;178:1980-1985.

PN-A
® ® ®
2 OF 2

Table of Contents
PRINCIPLES OF SURGERY
Penectomy
• Partial penectomy should be considered the standard for high-grade primary penile tumors, provided that a functional penile stump can be
preserved and negative margins are obtained. If a partial penectomy is not possible, a total penectomy should be performed.
• Partial or total penectomy when invasion into the corpora cavernosum is necessary to achieve a negative margin.
• Intraoperative frozen sections are recommended to determine negative margins.
Surgical Management of Inguinal and Pelvic Lymph Nodes

• Standard or modified ILND or DSNB is indicated in patients with penile cancer in the absence of palpable inguinal adenopathy if high-risk
features for nodal metastasis are seen in the primary penile tumor:
Lymphovascular invasion
≥pT1G3 or ≥T2, any grade
>50% poorly differentiated
• DSNB is only recommended if the treating physician has experience with this modality.
• If positive lymph nodes are found on DSNB, ILND is recommended.
• PLND should be considered at the time or following ILND in patients with ≥2 positive inguinal nodes on the ipsilateral ILND site or in the
presence of extranodal extension on final pathologic review.
• A bilateral PLND should be considered either at the time or following ILND in patients with ≥4 positive inguinal nodes (in total among both
sides).1
• See Discussion for further details regarding ILND and PLND.
1 Zargar-Shoshtari K, Djajadiningrat R, Sharma P, et al. Establishing criteria for bilateral pelvic lymph node dissection in the management of penile cancer: lessons
learned from an international multicenter collaboration. J Urol 2015;194:696-701.

PN-B

Table of Contents
PRINCIPLES OF RADIOTHERAPY
Primary Radiation/Chemoradiation Therapy (Penile Preservation) Primary Site Margin Positive Following Penectomy
T1–2, N0 • Postsurgical EBRT: If no gross disease: 45–60 Gy to the primary site
If tumor <4 cm and scar. If gross disease remains, follow guideline for T3–4, or N+.
• Circumcision followed by either: • Treat bilateral inguinal lymph nodes and pelvic lymph nodes if no or
Brachytherapy alone1,2 (category 2B) (should be performed with inadequate lymph node dissection.
interstitial implant); • Brachytherapy may be considered in select cases.
or
EBRT (category 2B): Total dose 65–70 Gy with conventional Adjuvant Chemo/RT
fractionation using appropriate bolus to primary penile lesion with • Inguinal and/or pelvic lymph node positive
2-cm margins. Recommended for palpable bulky inguinal lymph nodes or enlarged
EBRT with concurrent chemotherapy (category 3)3: total dose pelvic lymph nodes3: consider for palpable non-bulky inguinal
65–70 Gy with conventional fractionation using appropriate bolus lymph nodes pN2–3 disease (category 2B) or for local recurrence to
to primary penile lesion with 2-cm margins. inguinal region (category 2B).
Consider prophylactic EBRT to inguinal lymph nodes in patients Inguinal and pelvic lymph node EBRT to 45–50.4 Gy.
who are not surgical candidates or who decline surgical Boost gross nodes and areas of extracapsular extension to a total
management. dose of 65–70 Gy.
If tumor ≥4 cm Treat primary site of disease if positive margin.
• Circumcision followed by either:
EBRT with concurrent chemotherapy (category 3)3: 45–50.4 Gy to Palliative RT
a portion of or whole penile shaft depending on bulk and extent of • Consider a palliative dose of 30 Gy in 10 fractions.
lesion plus pelvic/inguinal nodes, then boost primary lesion with
2-cm margins (total dose, 65–70 Gy);
or
Brachytherapy alone (category 2B) in select cases and with careful
post-treatment surveillance.
T3–4 or N+ (surgically unresectable)
• Circumcision followed by:
EBRT with concurrent chemotherapy (category 3)3: 45–50.4 Gy
to whole penile shaft, pelvic lymph nodes, and bilateral inguinal
lymph nodes, then boost primary lesion with 2-cm margins and
gross lymph nodes (total dose, 60–70 Gy).
1 Crook J, et al. World J Urol 2009;27:189-196.

2 de Crevoisier R, et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009;74:1150-1156.
3 For potential radiosensitizing agents and combinations, see Principles of Systemic Therapy (PN-D 2 of 4).

PN-C

Table of Contents
PRINCIPLES OF SYSTEMIC THERAPY
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Prior to ILND or PLND

Preferred Regimen
• TIP (paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and cisplatin)
• Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with TIP is preferred (prior to ILND) in patients with ≥4 cm inguinal lymph nodes (fixed or mobile), if fine-needle
aspiration (FNA) is positive for metastatic penile cancer.1
Patients with initially unresectable (T4) primary tumors may be downstaged by response to chemotherapy.
�Patients not eligible to receive TIP and who are surgical candidates should undergo surgery without neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
• A TX, N2–3, M0 penile cancer can receive four courses of neoadjuvant TIP. Stable or responding disease should then undergo consolidative
surgery with curative intent. The phase II response rate was 50% in the neoadjuvant setting. The estimated rate of long-term progression-
free survival for intent to treat was 36.7%. Improved progression-free and overall survival times were associated with objective response to
chemotherapy.2
Adjuvant Chemotherapy Following ILND or PLND

Preferred Regimen
• TIP
Other Recommended Regimen
• 5-FU + cisplatin3,4
• There are no sufficient data to form conclusions about the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. By extrapolation from the neoadjuvant data, it is
reasonable to give 4 courses of TIP in the adjuvant setting if it was not given preoperatively and the pathology shows high-risk features.
5-FU plus cisplatin can be considered as an alternative to TIP in the adjuvant setting (see Management of Palpable Bulky Inguinal Lymph
Nodes, PN-5). Adjuvant EBRT or chemo/RT can also be considered for patients with high-risk features.
• High-risk features include any of the following:
Pelvic lymph node metastases
Extranodal extension
Bilateral inguinal lymph nodes involved
4-cm tumor in lymph nodes
Continued
Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated. References
PN-D
® ® ®
1 OF 4

Table of Contents

First-line Systemic Therapy for Metastatic/Recurrent Disease
Preferred Regimen
• TIP
Other Recommended Regimen
• 5-FU + cisplatin
• Not recommended: Bleomycin-containing regimens are associated with unacceptable toxicity.5
• TIP is a reasonable first-line treatment for patients with metastatic penile cancer, including palliative treatment of patients with distant
metastases.2
• 5-FU + cisplatin has been used historically for metastatic penile cancer and can be considered as an alternative to TIP.4 It appears to be
effective for some patients, although the toxicities may be limiting and may require dose reductions.3,4
• There are no randomized clinical trials due to the rarity of penile cancer in industrialized countries.
Subsequent-line Systemic Therapy for Metastatic/Recurrent Disease
Preferred Regimen
• Clinical trial
• Pembrolizumab, if unresectable or metastatic, microsatellite instability-high
(MSI-H) or mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) tumor that has progressed following
prior treatment and no satisfactory alternative treatment options,6,7,8 or if
tumor mutational burden-high (TMB-H), TMB ≥10 mut/Mb in patients who have
progressed on previously approved lines of therapy9
Useful in Certain Circumstances
• Paclitaxel
• Cetuximab
• No standard subsequent-line systemic therapy exists.
• A clinical trial is preferred. The evidence to support the palliative use of second-line therapy is limited.10
• Paclitaxel11 or cetuximab12 may be considered in select patients, especially if not previously treated with a similar class of agent.
Radiosensitizing Agents and Combinations13 (Chemo/RT)
Preferred Regimens
• Cisplatin alone, or in combination with 5-FU3,4,14
• Mitomycin C in combination with 5-FU15
Other Recommended Regimens
• Capecitabine16,17
Continued
Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated. References
PN-D
® ® ®
2 OF 4

Table of Contents

Combination Chemotherapy Regimens
TIP2 (preferred)
Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 IV over 3 hours on Day 1
Ifosfamide 1200 mg/m2 IV over 2 hours on Days 1–3
Cisplatin 25 mg/m2 IV over 2 hours on Days 1–3
Repeat every 3 to 4 weeks
5-FU + cisplatin3,4 (not recommended for neoadjuvant setting)

Continuous infusion 5-FU 800–1000 mg/m2/day IV on Days 1–4 or
Days 2–5
Cisplatin 70–80 mg/m2 IV on Day 1
Repeat every 3 to 4 weeks
References
PN-D
® ® ®
3 OF 4

Table of Contents

REFERENCES
1 Pettaway CA, Pagliaro L, Theodore C, Haas G. Treatment of visceral, unresectable, or bulky/unresectable regional metastases of penile cancer. Urology
2010;76:S58-S65.
2 Pagliaro LC, Williams DL, Daliani D, et al. Neoadjuvant paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and cisplatin chemotherapy for metastatic penile cancer: a phase II study. J Clin Oncol
2010;28:3851-3857.
3 Shammas FV, Ous S, Fossa SD. Cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil in advanced cancer of the penis. J Urol 1992;147:630-632.
4 Di Lorenzo G, Buonerba C, Federico P, et al. Cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil in inoperable, stage IV squamous cell carcinoma of the penis. BJU Int 2012;110(11 Pt
B):E661-E666.
5 Hakenberg OW, Compérat EM, Minhas S, et al. EAU guidelines on penile cancer: 2014 update. Eur Urol 2015;67:142-150.
6 Le DT, Durham JN, Smith KN, et al. Mismatch repair deficiency predicts response of solid tumors to PD-1 blockade. Science 2017;357:409-413.
7 Le DT, Uram JN, Wang H, et al. PD-1 Blockade in tumors with mismatch-repair deficiency. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2509-2520.
8 Marabelle A, Le DT, Ascierto P, et al. Efficacy of pembrolizumab in patients with noncolorectal high microsatellite instability/mismatch repair-deficient cancer: results
from the phase 2 KEYNOTE-158 study. J Clin Oncol 2020;38:1-10.
9 Marabelle A, Fakih M, Lopez J, et al. Association of tumour mutational burden with outcomes in patients with advanced solid tumours treated with pembrolizumab:
prospective biomarker analysis of the multicohort, open-label, phase 2 KEYNOTE-158 study. Lancet Oncol 2020;10:1353-1365.
10 Wang J, Pettaway CA, Pagliaro LC. Treatment for metastatic penile cancer after first-line chemotherapy failure: analysis of response and survival outcomes. Urology
2015;85:1104-1110.
11 Di Lorenzo G, Federico P, Buonerba C, et al. Paclitaxel in pretreated metastatic penile cancer: final results of a phase 2 study. Eur Urol 2011;60:1280-1284.
12 Carthon BC, Ng CS, Pettaway CA, Pagliaro LC. Epidermal growth factor receptor-targeted therapy in locally advanced or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the
penis. BJU Int 2014;113:871-877.
13 Pagliaro LC, Crook J. Multimodality therapy in penile cancer: when and which treatments? World J Urol 2009;27:221-225.
14 Taylor SG, Murthy A, Vannetzel J, et al. Randomized comparison of neoadjuvant cisplatin and fluorouracil infusion followed by radiation versus concomitant treatment
in advanced head and neck cancer. J Clin Oncol 1994;12:385-395.
15 Ajani JA, Winter K, Gunderson L, et al. Fluorouracil, mitomycin, and radiotherapy vs fluorouracil, cisplatin, and radiotherapy for carcinoma of the anal canal: a
randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2008;299:1914-1921.
16 O'Connell M, Colangelo L, Beart R, et al. Capecitabine and oxaliplatin in the preoperative multimodality treatment of rectal cancer: surgical end points from National
Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trial R-04. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:1927-1934.
17 Glynne-Jones R, Meadows H, Wan S, et al. EXTRA--a multicenter phase II study of chemoradiation using a 5 day per week oral regimen of capecitabine and
intravenous mitomycin C in anal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;72:119-126.

PN-D
® ® ®
4 OF 4

Table of Contents
PRINCIPLES OF IMAGING
Initial Workup
• Cross-sectional imaging of chest/abdomen/pelvisa:
Abdomen/pelvis CT or MRI with contrast
Chest x-ray or CT with contrast
CT/MRI of pelvis with contrast for nodal evaluation if difficult to clinically assess.
Staging
Consider: FDG-PET/CT (skull base to mid-thigh in patients with suspected inguinal lymph node-positive disease)
Treatment Response Assessment

Consider: FDG-PET/CT (skull base to mid-thigh)
◊ Imaging to assess treatment response and disease progression in patients with suspected inguinal lymph node-positive disease.
Surveillance (Staging System AJCC, 8th Edition)

• Consider imaging of the inguinal regiona:
CT with contrast
or
MRI with contrast
or
Ultrasound – Imaging at the time of clinical examination if abnormal clinical examination, patient affected by obesity, or prior inguinal
surgery.
a When appropriate, imaging should be done with contrast unless contraindicated.

PN-E

Table of Contents
American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC)

TNM Staging System for Penile Cancer (8th ed., 2017)
Table 1. Definitions for T, N, M
T Primary Tumor pN Regional Lymph Nodes (Pathologic Stage
TX Primary tumor cannot be assessed Definition)
T0 No evidence of primary tumor pNX Lymph node metastasis cannot be established
Tis Carcinoma in situ (Penile intraepithelial neoplasia [PeIN]) pN0 No lymph node metastasis
Ta Noninvasive localized squamous cell carcinoma pN1 ≤2 unilateral inguinal metastases, no ENE
T1 Glans: Tumor invades lamina propria pN2 ≥3 unilateral inguinal metastases or bilateral
Foreskin: Tumor invades dermis, lamina propria, or dartos fascia metastases
Shaft: Tumor invades connective tissue between epidermis and corpora regardless of pN3 ENE of lymph node metastases or pelvic
location lymph node metastases, no ENE
All sites with or without lymphovascular invasion or perineural invasion and is or is
not high grade
M Distant Metastasis
T1a Tumor is without lymphovascular invasion or perineural invasion and is not high
grade M0 No distant metastasis
(i.e., grade 3 or sarcomatoid) M1 Distant metastasis present
T1b Tumor exhibits lymphovascular invasion and/or perineural invasion or is high grade
(i.e., grade 3 or sarcomatoid) Table 2. AJCC Anatomic Stage/Prognostic Groups
T2 Tumor invades into corpus spongiosum (either glans or ventral shaft) with or without T N M
urethral invasion Stage 0is Tis N0 M0
T3 Tumor invades into corpora cavernosum (including tunica albuginea) with or without Stage 0a Ta N0 M0
urethral invasion
Stage I T1a N0 M0
T4 Tumor invades into adjacent structures (i.e., scrotum, prostate, pubic bone)
Stage IIA T1b N0 M0
cN Regional Lymph Nodes (Clinical Stage Definition) T2 N0 M0
cNX Regional lymph nodes cannot be assessed Stage IIB T3 N0 M0
cN0 No palpable or visibly enlarged inguinal lymph nodes Stage IIIA T1-3 N1 M0
cN1 Palpable mobile unilateral inguinal lymph node Stage IIIB T1-3 N2 M0
cN2 Palpable mobile ≥2 unilateral inguinal nodes or bilateral inguinal lymph nodes Stage IV T4 Any N M0
cN3 Palpable fixed inguinal nodal mass or pelvic lymphadenopathy unilateral or bilateral Any T N3 M0
Any T Any N M1
Used with the permission of the American College of Surgeons, Chicago, Illinois. The original and primary source for this information is the AJCC Cancer
Staging Manual, Eighth Edition (2017) published by Springer International Publishing.
® ® ®
ST-1

Table of Contents
ABBREVIATIONS
HPV human papillomavirus
ILND inguinal lymph node dissection
DSNB dynamic sentinel node biopsy
EBRT external beam radiation therapy
PLND pelvic lymph node dissection
RT radiation therapy
ABBR-1

Table of Contents
NCCN Categories of Evidence and Consensus

Category 1 Based upon high-level evidence, there is uniform NCCN consensus that the intervention is appropriate.
Category 2A Based upon lower-level evidence, there is uniform NCCN consensus that the intervention is appropriate.
Category 2B Based upon lower-level evidence, there is NCCN consensus that the intervention is appropriate.
Category 3 Based upon any level of evidence, there is major NCCN disagreement that the intervention is appropriate.
All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.
NCCN Categories of Preference

Interventions that are based on superior efficacy, safety, and evidence; and, when appropriate,
Preferred intervention affordability.
Other recommended Other interventions that may be somewhat less efficacious, more toxic, or based on less mature data;
intervention or significantly less affordable for similar outcomes.
Useful in certain
Other interventions that may be used for selected patient populations (defined with recommendation).
circumstances
All recommendations are considered appropriate.
CAT-1
NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023

Penile Cancer
Discussion This discussion corresponds to the NCCN Guidelines Metastatic Disease................................................................... MS-16
for Penile Cancer. Last updated on January 26, 2022
Summary .................................................................................. MS-17
Table of Contents
References ............................................................................... MS-19
Overview..................................................................................... MS-2
Literature Search Criteria and Guidelines Update Methodology

.................................................................................................... MS-2
Risk Factors ............................................................................... MS-2
Clinical Presentation.................................................................. MS-3
Characterization and Clinical Staging ...................................... MS-3
Management of Primary Lesions............................................... MS-4
Diagnosis ................................................................................. MS-4
Penile Organ-Sparing Approaches............................................ MS-4
NCCN Recommendations......................................................... MS-7
Management of Regional Lymph Nodes................................... MS-8
Evaluation and Risk Stratification.............................................. MS-8
Dynamic Sentinel Node Biopsy ............................................... MS-10
Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection............................................. MS-10
Pelvic Lymphadenectomy ....................................................... MS-12
Perioperative Therapy for Lymph Node Dissection ................. MS-12
NCCN Recommendations....................................................... MS-14
Surveillance.............................................................................. MS-15
Recurrence ............................................................................... MS-16

Version 1.2023 © 2022 National Comprehensive Cancer Network© (NCCN© ), All rights reserved. NCCN Guidelines® and this illustration may not be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of NCCN. MS-1

Penile Cancer
types: Clinical Trial; Guideline; Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled

Overview Trial; Systematic Reviews; and Validation Studies.
Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the penis is a rare disease,
representing 0.4% to 0.6% of all malignant neoplasms among males in The data from key PubMed articles as well as articles from additional
the United States and Europe.1 In 2021, the estimated number of new sources deemed as relevant to these guidelines and discussed by the
cases of penile and other male genital cancers in the United States was panel have been included in this version of the Discussion section (eg,
2210, with 460 predicted cancer-specific deaths.2 The incidence is e-publications ahead of print, meeting abstracts). Recommendations for
higher in the developing countries of Asia, Africa, and South America.3 which high-level evidence is lacking are based on the panel’s review of
The most common age at presentation is between 50 and 70 years.4 lower-level evidence and expert opinion. NCCN recommendations
Early diagnosis is of utmost importance, as this is a disease that can have been developed to be inclusive of individuals of all sexual and
result in devastating disfigurement and has a 5-year survival rate of gender identities to the greatest extent possible. When citing
approximately 50% (>85% for patients with negative lymph nodes and published studies and recommendations from other organizations, the
29%–40% for patients with positive nodes, with the lowest survival rates terms used (eg, male, female) reflect the cited sources.
at 0% for patients with pelvic lymph node [PLN] involvement).5 As the
The complete details of the Development and Update of the NCCN
rarity of this disease makes it difficult to perform prospective,
Guidelines are available at www.NCCN.org.
randomized trials, the NCCN Panel relied on the experience of penile
cancer experts and the best currently available evidence-based data to Risk Factors
collectively lay a foundation to help standardize the management of this
In the United States the median age at diagnosis is 68 years, with an
malignancy.
increase in risk for individuals older than 50 years.7 Early detection is
Literature Search Criteria and Guidelines Update assisted by the ability to perform a good physical examination. Phimosis
Methodology may hinder the capability to properly inspect the areas of highest
incidence—the glans, inner preputial layer, coronal sulcus, and shaft.
Prior to the update of this version of the NCCN Clinical Practice
Patients with phimosis carry an increased risk for penile cancer of 25%
Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) Penile Cancer, an
to 60%.4,8,9 A review of penile SCC in the United States showed that
electronic search of the PubMed database was performed to obtain key
34.5% of patients had the primary lesion on the glans, 13.2% on the
literature using the following search term: penile cancer. The PubMed
prepuce, and 5.3% on the shaft, with 4.5% overlapping and 42.5%
database was chosen as it remains the most widely used resource for
unspecified.7 Other risk factors include balanitis, chronic inflammation,
medical literature and indexes peer-reviewed biomedical literature.6
penile trauma, lack of neonatal circumcision, tobacco use, lichen
The search results were narrowed by selecting studies in humans sclerosus, poor hygiene, and a history of sexually transmitted
published in English. Results were confined to the following article disease(s), especially HIV and human papillomavirus (HPV).4 Overall,
approximately 45% to 80% of penile cancers are related to HPV, with a

Penile Cancer
strong correlation with types 16, 6, and 18.4,8,10-12 While HPV infection is Clinical Presentation
a risk factor for penile cancer, HPV- or p16-positivity have also been Most often penile SCC presents as a palpable, visible lesion on the
reported as favorable prognostic factors, in terms of better disease- penis, which may be associated with penile pain, discharge, bleeding,
specific survival (DSS).13,14 There is an increased risk of HPV infection or a foul odor if the patient delays seeking medical treatment. The lesion
and associated disease for patients with HIV. One study reported that may be characterized as nodular, ulcerative, or fungating, and may be
females who are HIV-positive have a higher risk of HPV acquisition obscured by phimosis. The patient may exhibit signs of more advanced
(relative risk, 2.64; 95% CI, 2.04–3.42) and lower HPV clearance disease, including palpable nodes and/or constitutional symptoms (eg,
(hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.62–0.84) compared to those who fatigue, weight loss).
are HIV-negative.15 Oral HPV is also reportedly common in males who
are HIV-positive (17.6%; 95% CI, 13.5–22.8%).16 Characterization and Clinical Staging
Approximately 95% of penile cancers originate in squamous epithelial
Neonatal circumcision is associated with a lower rate of penile cancer,
cells and are further categorized as either SCC or penile intraepithelial
although the protective effect is not seen in adults who have the
neoplasia (PIN).25 PIN is a premalignant condition at high risk of
foreskin removed. This reduced incidence of penile cancer in patients
who have been circumcised in infancy may reflect other known risk developing into SCC of the penis and includes the clinical entities of
factors including the elimination of phimosis and lower incidence and bowenoid papulosis, erythroplasia of Queyrat, and Bowen’s disease.25
duration of HPV infections in this population (reviewed by Morris et al17). The AJCC recognizes four subtypes of SCC: verrucous, papillary
squamous, warty, and basaloid.26 The verrucous subtype is considered
A small study suggests that the benefits of circumcision may reduce
invasive penile cancer but not carcinoma in situ (CIS, also called TIS).18 to demonstrate low malignant potential, while other variants reported—
adenosquamous and sarcomatoid variants—carry a worse
Cigarette smokers are noted to be 3 to 4.5 times more likely to develop
prognosis.27,28 The primary lesion is further characterized by its growth
penile cancer.10,19 Patients with lichen sclerosus have a 2% to 9% risk
pattern with superficial spread, nodular or vertical-phase growth, and
of developing penile carcinoma.20-22 Patients with psoriasis undergoing
verrucous pattern. In addition to the penile lesion, evaluation of lymph
psoralen plus ultraviolet A (PUVA) treatment have an increased penile
nodes is also critical, as involvement of the inguinal lymph nodes (ILNs),
cancer incidence of 286 times compared to the general population.
the number and site of positive nodes, and extracapsular nodal
Therefore, they should be shielded during treatment and any penile
involvement provide the strongest prognostic factors of survival.5,29
lesion should be closely monitored.23 A study of patients with advanced
penile SCC receiving systemic therapy identified visceral metastases The AJCC TNM (tumor, node, and metastasis) Staging System for
and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance
penile carcinoma has been used for staging, with the most recent
score greater than or equal to 1 as poor prognostic factors for both
update (eighth edition) published in 2017. It was initially introduced in
overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival.24 However, studies
1968 and was subsequently revised in 1978, 1987, 2002, and 2010.30-34
remain limited on predictive factors of prognosis in this patient
In 2010, the AJCC made the distinction between clinical and pathologic
population.
staging while eliminating the difference between superficial and deep

Penile Cancer
inguinal metastatic nodes.30 The eighth edition of the AJCC staging Management of Primary Lesions
system26 includes changes to the primary tumor (T) definitions, Diagnosis
including: 1) broadening the Ta definition to include noninvasive
Evaluation of the primary lesion, regional lymph nodes, and distant
localized squamous carcinoma; 2) describing T1 by the location of the
metastasis will dictate the appropriate and adequate management of
tumor on the penis (eg, glans, foreskin, shaft) and defining invasion for
SCC of the penis, beginning with the first evaluation at presentation and
each location; 3) adding perineural invasion as a prognostic indicator to
then throughout follow-up. Vital to the initial management is a good
define T1b from T1a; 4) including corpus spongiosum invasion within
physical examination of the penile lesion(s) that remarks on the
the T2 definition; and 5) including corpora cavernosum invasion within
diameter of the lesion(s) or suspicious areas; location(s) on the penis;
the T3 definition. In addition, the eighth edition includes changes to the
number of lesions; morphology of the lesion(s); whether the lesion(s)
regional lymph node definitions, the most notable being pN1 defined as
are papillary, nodular, ulcerous, or flat; and the relationship with other
≤2 unilateral inguinal metastases without extranodal extension and pN2
structures including submucosal, urethra, corpora spongiosa, and/or
being defined as ≥3 unilateral inguinal metastases or bilateral
corpora cavernosa. Invasion into the corpora cavernosa has been
metastases. Finally, stage II disease has been split into stage IIA and
associated with worse cancer-specific survival and higher rates of
stage IIB with T1b or T2, N0, M0 defining stage IIA and T3, N0, M0
lymph node metastasis compared to corpus spongiosum invasion.36
defining stage IIB26 (see Staging in the algorithm).
To complete the initial evaluation, a histologic diagnosis with a punch,
The AJCC recommends a grading system for SCC of the penis based
excisional, or incisional biopsy is paramount in determining the
on the 3-tiered World Health Organization (WHO)/International Society
treatment algorithm based on a pathologic diagnosis.26,37 This will
of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading system with the following
provide information on the grade of the tumor, and will assist in the risk
definitions: grade 1, well differentiated; grade 2, moderately
stratification of the patient for regional lymph node involvement.37 HPV
differentiated; and grade 3, poorly differentiated/undifferentiated. Any
status should also be assessed as part of histologic evaluation, as HPV
proportion of anaplastic cells categorizes the tumor as grade 3.26 The
positivity has prognostic significance, could prompt screening for sexual
overall degree of cellular differentiation with high-risk, poorly
partners, and may be considered in treatment decision-making.12,13 MRI
differentiated tumors is an important predictive factor for metastatic
or ultrasound can be used to evaluate the depth of tumor invasion.38
nodal involvement.35 The AJCC also recommends collection of
Imaging may also be considered for evaluation of ILNs that are difficult
site-specific factors, including: the percentage of tumor that is poorly
to assess. For the evaluation of lymph nodes, see Management of
differentiated, the depth of invasion in verrucous carcinoma, the
Regional Lymph Nodes.
presence of lymphovascular or perineural invasion, the size of the
largest lymph node metastasis, and the total number of lymph nodes Penile Organ-Sparing Approaches
removed.26
Tis, Ta, and T1 penile cancer lesions may be amenable to conservative
penile organ-sparing approaches, including topical therapy, laser
therapy, wide local excision, glansectomy, and Mohs surgery. An

Penile Cancer
analysis of the National Cancer Database reported that OS rates were Following application of 5-FU, local toxicity and AEs occurred in 10%
comparable for patients with pT1–T2 penile cancer that was treated with and 12% of patients, respectively.40 In another study, 5-FU treatment
organ-sparing surgery compared to partial or total penectomy.39 A duration ranged from 3 to 7 weeks and was determined based on
multivariable model for predictors of patient survival in this study found clinical response.41 Out of 19 patients, 14 (73.7%) had a CR and none
that organ-sparing surgery did not predict poor patient survival (HR, of the patients had recurrence at the median time of follow-up (3.5
0.88; 95% CI, 0.64–1.21). Careful consideration should be given to years).41 Topical 5-FU for 6 weeks has also been reported with good
penile-preserving techniques if the patient is reliable in terms of response rates at 5 years.42,43 A systematic review of treatment options
compliance with close follow-up. for PIN reported response rates of 40% to 100% for imiquimod and 48%
to 74% for topical 5-FU.44 Twelve percent of patients in the study
Topical Therapy
discontinued topical treatment due to side effects. Another
Topical therapy is a valuable outpatient treatment due to ease of observational study of penile CIS treated with topical 5-FU or imiquimod
administration; however, patients should be monitored for adherence to reported similar results, with CR in 65% of patients, partial response in
therapy and for toxicity or AEs. Local skin and application site reactions 25%, and no response in 10%.45 Grade 1–2 AEs were reported in 50%
may occur and are generally mild to moderate, although severe of patients and only 65% completed the full course of treatment.
reactions may occur with a higher frequency of application. Modification Discontinuation of treatment was associated with a diminished CR rate
of the application frequency can resolve these complications. Despite of 28.6%, highlighting the importance of monitoring patients for acute
significant response rates, the probability of relapse is higher following toxicity so it may be promptly addressed.
topical therapy than with other more aggressive therapies. Therefore,
patients who are eligible for topical therapy should be routinely Imiquimod has been investigated as a second-line therapy for PIN. Due
monitored for recurrence. to its ability to produce significant inflammation, initiation of imiquimod
therapy at a lower frequency (eg, 2 times per week) may be beneficial
While topical therapy for the treatment of PIN has been reported in to evaluate for toxicity or AEs before increasing the frequency of
numerous case studies and case reports, the data are limited by the application. Early studies suggested a 100% response to imiquimod
small sample sizes and variation in treatment protocols. A retrospective (n = 47; 70% CR),46 although a subsequent review identified a lower
review from a prospective database of patients diagnosed with PIN over response to therapy with 63% of patients showing a CR and 29% of
a 10-year range identified patients who received either 5-fluorouracil patients showing no response.47 The study highlighted that the
(5-FU) as first-line therapy or imiquimod as the second-line topical difference in response may be related to the frequency and duration of
agent.40 Topical chemotherapy was given to 45 patients with a mean application as well as the PIN subtype. In this study, bowenoid
follow-up of 34 months. Therapy was standardized to 12 hours every 48 papulosis and Bowen’s disease subtypes responded better to
hours for 28 days. A complete response (CR) was reported in 25 imiquimod than the erythroplasia of Queyrat subtype. Longer, less
patients (57%), while a partial response was seen in 6 patients (13.6%); frequent application (ie, fewer than 4 times per week for an average of
no response was observed in the remaining 13 patients (29.5%). 113 days) was demonstrated to have a better response than a shorter,

Penile Cancer
more frequent application (ie, 4 times or more per week for an average disease. Local recurrence was reported in 48% of patients, with
of 53 days) (81% vs. 68%, respectively). recurrence elsewhere in the glans penis occurring in 20% of cases.51
There were 10 cases of nodal metastases, of which 8 were in patients
Laser Therapy with T2 disease.51 These data emphasize the greater benefit of laser
Laser therapy in select patients with Tis, Ta, or T1 G1–2 penile cancer therapy in CIS or T1 disease. A systematic review of studies using laser
has reported acceptable outcomes (see Principles of Penile and light therapies for erythroplasia of Queyrat reported complete
Organ-Sparing Approaches in the algorithm). Four types of therapeutic remission in 81.4%, 62.5%, and 58.3% of patients treated with carbon
lasers have been used and include carbon dioxide, Nd:YAG, argon, and dioxide laser, methyl aminolevulinate photodynamic therapy, or
potassium titanyl phosphate (KTP) lasers. Nd:YAG and carbon dioxide aminolevulinic acid photodynamic therapy, respectively.52 Another
lasers are the most commonly used, although KTP laser may also be systematic review reported response rates between 52% and 100% for
considered. Nd:YAG lasers have the deepest penetration capability of 3 treatment of PIN with laser therapies, although 7% to 48% showed
to 4 mm compared with the carbon dioxide laser that penetrates to a recurrence and 50% had changes in penile sensitivity.44
depth of 0.1 mm and KTP lasers that penetrate to 1 to 2 mm.
Glansectomy
Retrospective studies of laser therapy reported local recurrence rates of Glansectomy, removal of the glans penis, may be considered for
approximately 18%, comparable to that of surgery, with good cosmetic patients with distal tumors (clinical stage Ta, Tis, T1) on the glans or
and functional results.48,49 Peniscopically controlled laser excision of TIS prepuce. Negative surgical margins should be determined from frozen
or T1 penile carcinoma in 224 patients compared outcomes based on sections of the cavernosal bed and urethral stump. Treatment in certain
primary treatment with excisional surgery for CIS or initially invasive flat instances may include a split- or full-thickness skin graft.
tumors.48 Reductive chemotherapy was given prior to surgery for
exophytic lesions to broaden the indication of laser excision. Complete A retrospective study of 177 patients with SCC of the glans who
excision with adequate lateral margins was achieved in 221 patients received glansectomy and split-thickness skin graft had a 9.3%
and with adequate deep margins in 217 patients. The 10-year incidence of local recurrence (median follow-up, 41.4 months).53 In total,
recurrence rate was 17.5% (95% CI, 16.4%–18.6%), and the 10-year 13 patients received treatment for operative complications and 18
amputation rate was 5.5% (range, 5.2%–5.7%).48 In a subsequent study patients (10.7%) died from penile cancer. An earlier retrospective study
from this group, 56 patients with pT1 disease were treated with carbon including 25 patients demonstrated a DSS of 92%.54 Taken together,
dioxide laser therapy. There were 53 patients alive and disease free at studies indicate a low level of recurrence.44,54-57
a median follow-up of 66 months.50 The 3 deaths in the study were the
result of unrelated and intercurrent disease. Among the 53 patients Wide Local Excision
evaluated at follow-up, 13 had local recurrence and 2 had positive ILNs. For wide local excision, a complete excision of the skin with a wide
The local recurrence correlated to positive margins.50 Another study negative margin with skin grafting is needed. Surgical margins depend
evaluated Nd:YAG laser treatment of patients with T1, T2, or CIS on the location of the tumor. Penile tumors of the shaft may be treated
with wide local excision, with or without circumcision. Circumcision

Penile Cancer
alone may be reasonable for tumors of the distal prepuce. Either a select cases (category 2B). Among these, topical therapy62-64 and
split-thickness skin graft or full-thickness skin graft may be considered. excisional organ-sparing surgery65 are the most widely used.
Emphasis is placed again on patient selection and close follow-up, as
the 2-year recurrence rate may reach up to 50%.58 A systematic review For topical therapy, NCCN recommends application of imiquimod 5%
that reported on wide local excision for treatment of PIN reported a cream at night 3 times per week for 4 to 16 weeks. Topical 5% 5-FU
recurrence rate of 25%.44 Studies have shown that surgical margins of 5 cream should be applied twice daily for 2 to 6 weeks. Laser therapy for
to 10 mm are as safe as 2-cm surgical margins, and 10- to 20-mm the treatment of primary penile tumors has demonstrated acceptable
margins provide adequate tumor control.59 outcomes with a perioperative application of between 3% and 5% acetic
acid. Following application of acetic acid to the affected genital skin,
Mohs Surgery suspected sites of HPV-infected skin will turn white and can be targeted
Mohs surgery is an alternative to wide local excision in select patients.60 for laser ablation. Gas and solid-state lasers may be considered (see
This technique removes thin layers of cancerous skin, which are Principles of Surgery in the algorithm).
evaluated microscopically until the tissue is negative for tumor. A
retrospective study including 33 patients with SCC of the penis, ranging T1G1–2
from TIS to T3 disease, reported outcomes for patients who were Careful consideration should be given to penile-preserving techniques if
treated with Mohs surgery.61 Follow-up data were available for 25 the patient is reliable in terms of compliance with close follow-up. These
patients, of which 8 had local recurrence. Seven patients underwent techniques include wide local excision,60 glansectomy in select cases,
repeat Mohs surgery while one patient received a penectomy. One Mohs surgery in select cases (category 2B), laser therapy (category
patient in this study died of metastatic disease. A systematic review 2B),66 and radiation therapy (RT) (category 2B) delivered as
reported a 4% recurrence rate for PIN treated with Mohs surgery.44 brachytherapy with interstitial implant (preferred) or external beam RT
Although precision is higher with Mohs surgery, the success rate (EBRT).67-71 Circumcision should always precede RT to prevent
declines with higher stage of disease. Therefore, Mohs surgery may radiation-related complications. In cases where a penile-preserving
have the greatest benefit for patients with a small superficial lesion on technique is not feasible based on the size or location of the tumor,
the proximal shaft to avoid penectomy for an otherwise fairly low-risk partial penectomy may be appropriate.
lesion.
T1G3–4 or T≥2
NCCN Recommendations These lesions typically require more extensive surgical intervention with
partial or total penectomy depending on the characteristics of the tumor
Tis or Ta
and depth of invasion.72 Intraoperative frozen sectioning is
For patients with penile CIS or noninvasive verrucous carcinoma,
recommended to achieve negative surgical margins. If the tumor
penis-preserving techniques may be used, including topical imiquimod
encompasses less than half of the glans and the patient agrees to very
(5%) or 5-FU cream, circumcision and wide local excision, laser therapy
close observation, then a more conservative approach such as wide
(category 2B), complete glansectomy (category 2B), or Mohs surgery in
local excision or glansectomy may be considered for patients with

Penile Cancer
T1G3–4 diagnosis. The patient should understand that there is an 0.64–0.98), although patients who underwent penectomy had higher 5-
increased risk for recurrence and potential for a repeat wide local year local control rates (85% vs. 80%; OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.58–0.90)
excision should a local recurrence be noted, provided there is no and 5-year disease-free survival rates (77% vs. 72%; OR, 0.77; 95% CI,
invasion of the corpora cavernosa.49,57 A clear and frank discussion 0.63–0.93).75 However, one must be cautious in interpreting from this
should be had with the patient in whom a partial or total penectomy will that brachytherapy and penectomy offer equally effective oncologic
likely be required should a larger or more invasive lesion be present. outcomes since selection criteria can affect the efficacy and suitability of
these primary treatment options for the individual patients.
The tumor size is an important factor when choosing RT as treatment. Brachytherapy is not recommended following penectomy or partial
As the average length of the glans is approximately 4 cm, this serves as penectomy but may be considered following wide local excision or
a cutpoint to reduce the risk of undertreating cavernosal lesions. In a excisional biopsy of small lesions. Brachytherapy should only be
study of 144 patients with penile cancer restricted to the glans treated performed in centers with significant experience using this treatment
by brachytherapy, larger tumors, especially those larger than 4 cm, modality.
were associated with higher risk of recurrence.73 A high, 10-year,
cancer-specific survival rate of 92% was achieved in this series. Post-surgical RT to the primary tumor site may be considered for
positive margins.
There was nonuniform consensus among NCCN panelists on the use of
RT as primary therapy due to scant data. For T1G3–4 or T2 tumors Management of Regional Lymph Nodes
smaller than 4 cm with negative nodes, brachytherapy with interstitial Evaluation and Risk Stratification
implant, EBRT alone (category 2B), or EBRT with chemotherapy
The presence and extent of regional ILN metastases has been
(category 3) are treatment options after circumcision. Consider
identified as the single most important prognostic indicator in
prophylactic ILN irradiation if selecting EBRT.
determining long-term survival in patients with invasive penile SCC.29
For tumors 4 cm or larger or if there is node-positive disease that is Evaluation of the groin and pelvis is an essential component of the
surgically unresectable, circumcision should be performed followed by metastatic workup of a patient. The involvement of the ILN can be
EBRT combined with chemotherapy. Brachytherapy following clinically evident (ie, palpable vs. nonpalpable), adding to the difficulty in
circumcision may be appropriate in select cases of tumors 4 cm or management. Clinical examination for ILN involvement should attempt
larger, but careful monitoring is necessary as the risks of complications to evaluate and assess for palpability, number of inguinal masses,
and failures increase.74 Crook and colleagues reported a 10-year unilateral or bilateral localization, dimensions, mobility or fixation of
cause-specific survival of 84% in 67 patients with T1–2 (select cases of nodes or masses, relationship to other structures (eg, skin, Cooper’s
T3) penile lesions treated with primary brachytherapy.71 A meta-analysis ligaments), and edema of the penis, scrotum, and/or legs.37,76
comparing the efficacy of brachytherapy and penectomy reported Crossover drainage from left to right and vice versa occurs and is
similar 5-year OS rates between these two treatments (76% for reproducible with lymphoscintigraphy.5,77 The physical examination
penectomy vs. 74% for brachytherapy; odds ratio [OR], 0.79; 95% CI, should describe the diameter of node(s) or mass(es), unilateral or

Penile Cancer
bilateral localization, number of nodes identified in each inguinal region, evaluated for their ability to identify the presence of occult lymph node
and the relationship to other structures, particularly with respect to the metastasis.58,92 Slaton et al91 concluded that patients with pathologic
mobility or fixation of the node(s) or mass(es) to adjacent structures stage T2 or greater disease were at significant risk (42%–80%) of nodal
and/or involvement of the overlying skin. metastases if they exhibited greater than 50% poorly differentiated
cancer and/or vascular invasion, and therefore should be recommended
Cross-sectional imaging of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis by CT or to undergo an inguinal lymph node dissection (ILND).5,91 These factors
MRI may be used to assess the size, extent, location, and structures can then further define patients into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk
that are in close proximity to the ILN, as well as the presence of pelvic groups for lymph node metastasis.27,93,94 The European Association of
and retroperitoneal lymph nodes and distant metastasis.78,79 Imaging is Urology determined risk stratification groups for patients with
an important addition to bilateral palpation as 13% to 16% of patients nonpalpable ILNs, and validated this in both uni- and multivariate
without palpable lymph nodes still have occult metastases and 20% to analyses of prognostic factors. Patients can be stratified based on stage
40% of patients with palpable lymph nodes are found to be non- and/or grade into risk groups based on the likelihood of harboring occult
metastatic.78,80 When considering one imaging modality to evaluate the node-positive disease, with the low-risk group defined as patients with
stage of the primary lesion and lymph node status, MRI appears to be Tis, Ta, or T1a disease; the intermediate group as those with T1b
the best choice to enhance the physical examination in patients where disease (lymphovascular invasion); and the high-risk group as those
the inguinal region is difficult to assess (eg, morbidity, previous with T2 or G3/G4 disease.37,93 Another systematic review identified
chemotherapy/RT).81-83 18F fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET/CT is best lymphovascular invasion, higher grade tumors, higher stage tumors
used as a diagnostic modality in those patients with cN+ penile cancer (both clinical and pathological), infiltrative and reticular invasion,
following other imaging studies showing concern for more extensive increased depth of invasion, perineural invasion, and younger age at
burden of metastatic disease.84-89 A systematic review and meta- diagnosis as clinical risk factors predictive of inguinal lymph node
analysis evaluating the accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT for diagnosing metastases in penile SCC.95 Of these risk factors, lymphovascular
ILN involvement in penile cancer found that PET/CT had a relatively low invasion and tumor grade were most strongly associated with lymph
pooled sensitivity for detection of ILN metastasis in patients with cN0 node metastasis.
disease (56.5%) but a higher pooled sensitivity for patients with cN+
disease (96.4%), supporting the use of PET/CT as an imaging modality There is a paucity of data regarding the predictive value of lymph node
only in patients with clinically node-positive disease.90 removal. A singular study suggests that DSS following radical
lymphadenectomy can be predicted by the lymph node count and lymph
Consideration needs to be given to whether or not the primary lesion node density.96 Removal of greater than or equal to 16 lymph nodes in
demonstrated any adverse prognostic factors. If one or more of these patients with pathologic negative nodes was associated with a
high-risk features is present, then pathologic ILN staging must be significantly longer DSS rate (P < .05). Furthermore, the 5-year
performed. Up to 25% of patients with nonpalpable lymph nodes harbor disease-free survival rate in patients with pathologic positive nodes was
micrometastases.91 Therefore, several predictive factors have been 81.2% in patients with lymph node density (defined as the number of

Penile Cancer
positive nodes divided by the total number of lymph nodes removed) (the year DSNB was incorporated into treatment) had an 82% 5-year
greater than 16% compared to 24.4% in patients with less than 16% survival compared to the 91% 5-year survival seen in patients treated
lymph node density (P < .001).96 Although this study suggests that between 1994 and 2012 (P = .021). However, there are several
lymph node count and density may be useful in predicting DSS, a larger limitations of this study, including the possibility that improved staging
validation study is necessary to support these preliminary data. resulted in more patients being grouped into a higher risk group.
Therefore, incorporation of DSNB into treatment should be limited to
Dynamic Sentinel Node Biopsy centers with experience. Secondary to the technical challenges
The work by Cabanas used lymphangiograms and anatomic dissections associated with DSNB, to be accurate and reliable, it is recommended
to evaluate the sentinel lymph node drainage for penile cancer with that DSNB be performed at tertiary care referral centers where at least
nonpalpable ILNs.97 This technique has been shown to have 20 procedures are done per year.99,111 It should be noted that DSNB is
false-negative rates as high as 25%; therefore, it is no longer not recommended in patients with palpable ILNs.76
recommended.37,98 Advancements have been made with the dynamic
sentinel node biopsy (DSNB) technique developed for penile cancer by Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection
the Netherlands Cancer Institute using lymphoscintigraphy and The most frequent sites of metastasis from penile cancer are the ILNs,
performed with technetium-99m–labeled nanocolloid and patent blue typically presenting as palpable inguinal lymphadenopathy. The
dye isosulfan blue.99,100 Initially, this technique was associated with a management of ILNs by ILND has been fraught with concerns of
low sensitivity and high false-negative rate (16%–43%).101-104 surgical morbidity.37,112 Early treatment of lymph node involvement has
Refinement of the technique to include serial sectioning and been shown to have a positive impact on survival, except if the patient
immunohistochemical staining of pathologic specimens, preoperative has bulky nodal spread or other sites of metastases.113,114 Palpable
ultrasonography with and without fine-needle aspiration (FNA) cytology, lymphadenopathy at the time of diagnosis does not warrant an
and exploration of groins in which no sentinel node is visualized on immediate ILND. Of the patients with palpable disease, 30% to 50% will
intraoperative assessment decreased the false-negative rate from 19% be secondary to inflammatory lymph node swelling instead of metastatic
to only 5%.99,105,106 Using FNA with ultrasound can increase the disease.92 Although the distinction between reactive lymph nodes and
diagnostic yield in metastases greater than 2 mm in diameter.80,107 metastatic disease has traditionally been done with a 6-week course of
Crashaw et al108 used ultrasound with DSNB and noted improved antibiotics, percutaneous lymph node biopsy is the favored approach
accuracy in identifying patients with occult lymph node metastases. among penile cancer experts for patients with palpable nodes.5,76 An
With modification of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) protocol, antibiotic course may still be used but is limited to the setting of an
Hadway et al109 were able to achieve a similar false-negative rate (5%) overlying infection.5,76,115 Data on robotic ILND are limited, although a
with an 11-month follow-up. An observational cohort study of 1000 systematic review has reported that the robotic approach is safe and
patients treated between 1956 and 2012 suggests that DSNB can effective, with lower morbidity than open surgery when carefully
improve 5-year survival in patients with clinically node-negative selecting for patients with non-palpable or non-bulky inguinal nodes.116
groins.110 Data in this study showed that patients treated prior to 1994

Penile Cancer
The boundaries of the standard, full-template ILND (ie, Daseler’s standard full-template lymphadenectomy should be considered in all
quadrilateral area) are: superiorly, the inguinal ligament; inferiorly, the patients who have resectable inguinal lymphadenopathy. However,
fossa ovalis; laterally, the medical border of sartorius muscle; and studies would favor neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to proceeding with
medially, the lateral edge of adductor longus muscle.115 Historically, it surgery, particularly in patients with bulky ILN metastases (ie, fixed
has been recommended to keep the patient on bed rest for 48 to 72 nodes or nodal diameter >3 cm).121-123 Generally, ILND is performed
hours, especially after myocutaneous flaps or repair of large skin within 4 to 6 weeks following the completion of systemic chemotherapy
defects, although the necessity for this is debatable and not to allow patient recovery while minimizing the risk of cancer progression
corroborated with rigorous scientific data. Closed suction drains are post-chemotherapy.
placed at surgery and are typically removed when drainage is less than
Delayed Inguinal Lymphadenectomy
50 to 100 mL per day.115,117 Consideration should be given to keeping
the patient on a suppressive dose of an oral cephalosporin (or other Since data exist that suggest patients with clinically negative groins
gram-positive, broad-spectrum antibiotic) for several days to weeks undergoing immediate ILND have better survival outcomes than
postoperatively in an attempt to decrease the risk of wound-related patients undergoing delayed ILND once their groins are clinically
issues and minimize the risk of overall complications. However, the data positive, it is recommended that in most circumstances, patients with
supporting this treatment approach are very limited.115 high-risk penile tumors should undergo immediate ILND. However,
patients with lower-risk tumors who are undergoing active surveillance
Modified Template Lymphadenectomy or patients with high-risk tumors who refuse immediate ILND may
In attempts to decrease the morbidity associated with standard ILND, a experience an inguinal nodal recurrence at some time point during
modified template lymphadenectomy has been proposed that uses a follow-up. The median time to inguinal recurrence after treatment of the
shorter skin incision, limiting the field of inguinal dissection by excluding primary penile tumor is approximately 6 months, with 90% occurring by
the area lateral to the femoral artery and caudal to the fossa ovalis, with year 3 and 100% by year 5.124-126
preservation of the saphenous vein and elimination of the need to
transpose the sartorius muscle while providing an adequate therapeutic Unilateral Versus Bilateral Lymphadenectomy
effect. This technique is commonly reserved for patients with a primary In patients with intermediate- or high-risk features who do not have
tumor that places them at increased risk for inguinal metastasis but with palpable lymph nodes, bilateral lymphadenectomy is generally
clinically negative groins on examination.115,118 The modified technique performed, because it is not possible to predict the laterality of inguinal
has shown a decrease in complications. Contemporary modified ILND nodal metastasis based on the location of the tumor on the penis.
should include the central and superior zones of the inguinal region, as Similarly, in patients who have a unilateral palpable node,
these sections were not included in the dissection leading to a approximately 30% will have contralateral positive nodes that are not
false-negative rate of 15%.119,120 It is important to note that if nodal palpable.127 Therefore, bilateral lymphadenectomy is recommended in
involvement is detected on frozen section, the surgical procedure patients undergoing immediate ILND for high-risk penile tumors or
should be converted to a standard, full-template lymphadenectomy. A because of palpable nodes. When there is a delayed (>1 year after

Penile Cancer
treatment of the primary penile tumor) inguinal recurrence of cancer, it imaging or intraoperatively. Crossover (right to left or left to right) of
is usually unilateral, and some authors have suggested that ipsilateral inguinal to pelvic nodes has not been well-studied; hence, both
ILND is adequate while others have advocated for bilateral ILND in this approaches are feasible and left at the discretion of the surgeon based
circumstance.5 on case-specific characteristics.
Pelvic Lymphadenectomy Perioperative Therapy for Lymph Node Dissection

Approximately 20% to 30% of patients with positive ILNs will also have Patients with penile cancer that has metastasized to the lymph nodes
cancer within PLNs. Interestingly, penile tumors do not appear to often have a poor prognosis, with a 5-year survival rate of 70% or less
metastasize to the PLNs without first affecting the inguinal node echelon following lymph node dissection, depending on the presence of adverse
(ie, no skip lesions).97,126 Patients who have only one positive inguinal features.131-133 While it is clear that lymph node dissection alone is
node have a risk of pelvic nodal involvement of less than 5% as inadequate for many patients with node-positive penile cancer, there is
reported by the Netherlands Cancer Institute.128 The presence of cancer a lack of prospective data to inform optimal strategies for perioperative
within the PLN is associated with a very poor 5-year survival rate that is therapy in this situation. The phase III International Penile Advanced
typically less than 10%. Based on these prior reports, pelvic Cancer Trial (InPACT) seeks to provide data on potential strategies for
lymphadenectomy (resection of external iliac, internal iliac, and perioperative therapy by incorporating two sequential randomizations.134
obturator lymph nodes) is recommended in patients with three or more The InPACT-Neoadjuvant randomization randomizes patients to ILND
positive ILNs and in the clinical context of high-grade cancer within the (no neoadjuvant therapy), neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by ILND,
ILN pathologic specimen. Pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) can be or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by ILND. The
conducted during the same operative session as the ILND if the InPACT-Pelvic randomization randomizes patients with pathologically
intraoperative frozen section is positive in three or more of the inguinal high-risk disease from ILND to prophylactic PLND or no prophylactic
nodes (raising the importance of obtaining a lymph node count surgery with both arms receiving adjuvant chemoradiotherapy if the
intraoperatively) or in a delayed staged fashion based on the pathologic patient did not receive neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
features of the ILND specimen.129,130
Chemotherapy
One area of controversy is whether the PLND should be performed A patient who presents with resectable bulky disease will rarely be
ipsilaterally or bilaterally in patients with unilateral positive ILNs. Data cured with a single treatment modality; therefore, consideration should
suggest that the number of positive ILNs identified at the time of be given to neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to ILND. Patients who may
dissection may direct clinicians to unilateral or bilateral dissection. In a benefit from surgical consolidation would be those who had stable,
single retrospective study, the presence of four or more positive ILNs partial, or CR following systemic chemotherapy, thus increasing their
supported bilateral PLND.106 Unilateral PLND was recommended if potential for disease-free survival.121,122 Pagliaro et al135 performed a
three or fewer ILN metastases were identified and if there was no phase II clinical trial in 30 patients, with stage N2 or N3 (stage III or
suspicion of contralateral pelvic lymphadenopathy on preoperative stage IV) penile cancer without distant metastases, receiving

Penile Cancer
neoadjuvant chemotherapy with paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and cisplatin. In Radiotherapy

this series, 50% of patients were noted to have a clinically meaningful A multicenter, retrospective analysis evaluated the benefit of adjuvant
response, and 22 patients (73.3%) subsequently underwent surgery. pelvic RT on OS and disease recurrence in 92 patients with positive
There was an improved time to progression and OS associated with PLNs following PLND. Patients who received adjuvant pelvic RT (n =
chemotherapy responsiveness (P < .001 and P = .001, respectively), 40) had a longer median DSS than those who did not receive RT (14.4
absence of bilateral residual tumor (P = .002 and P = .017, vs. 8 months; P = .023). Additionally, patients who did not undergo
respectively), and absence of extranodal extension (P = .001 and adjuvant RT had worse OS (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.01–2.92; P = .04) and
P = .004, respectively) or skin involvement (P = .009 and P = .012, DSS (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.09–3.36, P = .02).137
respectively). A systematic review and meta-analysis of 10 studies of
patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced Studies investigating the role of adjuvant RT for positive lymph nodes
penile SCC reported similar results, with an objective response rate following ILND have been mixed. A retrospective analysis of National
(ORR) of 53% (95% CI, 42–64) and 16% showing pathologic complete Cancer Database records showed improved OS with adjuvant RT
response.123 This review favored platinum-based neoadjuvant following ILND for stage III penile cancer (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39–
0.86). Patients with higher nodal burden of disease showed greater
chemotherapy over taxane-based due to higher response rates and
benefit from adjuvant RT.138 However, a systematic review by the
lower rates of grade three or higher AEs for platinum-based
chemotherapy in the stratified subanalysis. European Association of Urology Penile Cancer Guidelines Panel
reported that the few studies comparing recurrence and survival
A retrospective analysis evaluated the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy between patients who did or did not receive adjuvant RT after ILND for
on OS of patients with positive PLN following lymph node dissection. lymph-node positive disease received no significant benefit from the
Less than half of the patients in this multi-institutional study received adjuvant RT.139 Therefore, adjuvant RT is recommended following a
adjuvant chemotherapy (36 out of 84). These patients were younger, PLND after a positive result on ILND.
had a less aggressive pathology, were less inclined to receive adjuvant
Chemoradiotherapy
RT, and demonstrated less bilateral inguinal disease and more inguinal
extranodal extension. The median OS was higher for these patients Chemoradiotherapy has demonstrated improved responses in patients
compared to patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy (21.7 with other SCCs, specifically patients with vulvar and anal cancer.140-143
vs. 10.1 months; P = .021). Adjuvant chemotherapy was further shown Anecdotal data for the use of chemoradiotherapy in patients with penile
to be an independent factor in the improved OS based on multivariate cancer have been reported with mixed results.144-147 Based on the
analysis (HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.19–0.87; P = .021).136 Therefore, patients limited data, chemoradiotherapy is a treatment option in select patients.
with positive PLNs following surgical resection may benefit from For patients with T1 or T2 disease, EBRT with concurrent
adjuvant RT or systemic chemotherapy. chemotherapy may be considered although brachytherapy is preferred
for tumors smaller than 4 cm. Similarly, EBRT with concurrent
chemotherapy can be used for T3 or T4 disease or in patients with

Penile Cancer
nodal involvement. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy is currently not widely practiced in the United States, this technique should
recommended in patients who have ILN-positive disease. be performed in tertiary care referral centers with substantial
Chemoradiotherapy can be considered for patients with high-risk experience. DSNB is not recommended for low-risk (Tis, Ta, or T1a)
features including PLN metastases, extranodal extension, bilateral ILN tumors, as observation alone is sufficient in the absence of palpable
involvement, and tumors in lymph nodes larger than 4 cm. adenopathy.
Chemoradiotherapy is a recommended strategy for patients with Unilateral Palpable Nodes <4 cm (mobile)
resistant disease. The use of chemoradiotherapy as primary treatment Percutaneous lymph node biopsy is considered standard for these
is a category 3 recommendation due to the limited studies that have patients if no risk feature is present in the primary lesion. Risk features
investigated its role for treatment of penile cancer. For patients with include T1 tumors; high grade; lymphovascular or perineural invasion;
palpable, non-bulky pN2 or pN3 disease, treatment may entail adjuvant and poor differentiation in more than half of the tumor cells. The NCCN
RT, chemoradiotherapy, or chemotherapy following ILND or PLND. Panel recommends omitting the procedure for patients with high-risk
Chemoradiotherapy is recommended for the management of enlarged primary lesions to avoid delay of lymphadenectomy. A negative lymph
PLNs in non-surgical candidates or for local recurrence in the inguinal node biopsy may be confirmed with an excisional biopsy. Alternatively,
region or metastatic penile cancer. careful surveillance may be considered following a negative lymph node
biopsy. Positive findings from either procedure warrant an immediate
NCCN Recommendations bilateral ILND or consideration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed
Nonpalpable Nodes by ILND. Additionally, in cases of pN2–3 disease, a PLND with or
Most patients with low-risk disease(Tis, Ta, T1a) are followed with a without adjuvant RT, chemotherapy (category 2B), or
surveillance protocol, as the probability of occult micrometastases in chemoradiotherapy (category 2B) is recommended. Alternatively,
ILNs is less than 17%.93,125 For patients at intermediate (T1b,G1–2) or chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy alone may be given (both are
high (T1b,G3–4; T2 or greater) risk, a modified or radical bilateral category 2B recommendations). Following treatment, all patients should
inguinal lymphadenectomy is strongly recommended as occult enter active surveillance.
metastatic disease ranges between 68% and 73%.58,93,125 If positive
nodes are present on the frozen section, then a superficial and deep Unilateral Palpable Nodes ≥4 cm (mobile)
inguinal lymphadenectomy should be performed (with consideration of a Large, unilateral, mobile nodes should first be confirmed by
PLND). Prophylactic EBRT (category 2B) to the ILNs should be percutaneous lymph node biopsy. A negative biopsy should be
considered in patients who are unable or unwilling to undergo surgical confirmed by an excisional biopsy. If results are negative again, the
management. patient should be closely followed. It is preferred that patients with
confirmed nodes receive a standard or modified ILND, with
Alternatively, DSNB may be done for intermediate or high-risk lesions if consideration of PLND. Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is
the treating physician has experience with this modality. As DSNB is recommended before surgery, although ILND and/or PLND can be

Penile Cancer
performed without neoadjuvant therapy in patients who are not eligible cisplatin ineligibility), the recommended surgical (preferred) or
for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Alternatively, RT or radiotherapy options may be performed without neoadjuvant
chemoradiotherapy may be administered following a positive chemotherapy.
percutaneous lymph node biopsy.
Enlarged Pelvic Lymph Nodes
No further treatment is necessary if no viable tumor elements are Patients with abnormal PLNs on imaging (CT or MRI) should undergo a
detected in the surgical specimen or if only one node is positive. If two percutaneous lymph node biopsy if technically feasible. If positive,
or more positive nodes or extranodal extension is detected, adjuvant patients are stratified by resectability. Nonsurgical candidates should be
chemotherapy (if not already given) and/or adjuvant RT (if PLNs are treated with chemoradiotherapy. Surgical candidates should receive
positive) is recommended. Alternatively, adjuvant chemoradiotherapy neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy followed by cross-sectional
may be given (category 2B). Data suggest that in the setting of four or imaging of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis to assess for response.
more positive ILNs, a bilateral PLND should be performed, if not already Patients with disease that responds to therapy or that becomes stable
done.148 Postoperative RT or chemoradiotherapy may be considered in should undergo bilateral superficial and deep ILND and
patients after PLND, particularly in the setting of a positive surgical unilateral/bilateral PLND if deemed resectable. Postoperative RT or
margin, if there is viable cancer in multiple ILNs or PLNs, and/or if there chemoradiotherapy should be considered (category 2B). Patients with
is a presence of extranodal extension on the final pathologic specimen. disease that progresses may receive additional systemic chemotherapy
with consideration of local-field RT or participation in a clinical trial.
Unilateral Fixed Lymph Nodes or Bilateral Palpable Nodes (fixed or
mobile) Surveillance
For large, unilateral, fixed nodes or bilateral ILNs, patients should
Initial treatment of the primary tumor and lymph nodes dictates the
undergo a percutaneous lymph node biopsy of the lymph nodes. A
follow-up schedule (see Surveillance Schedule in the algorithm). A large
negative result should be confirmed with excisional biopsy. If results are
retrospective review of 700 patients found that penile-sparing therapies
again negative, the patient should be closely followed. Patients with a
carry a significantly higher risk of local recurrence (28%) than partial or
positive aspiration or biopsy should receive neoadjuvant systemic
total penectomy (5%) and thus require closer surveillance.126 Patients
chemotherapy followed by ILND and PLND if there is a response to the
without nodal involvement had a regional recurrence rate of 2%
chemotherapy. Postoperative RT or chemoradiotherapy may be
compared to 19% for patients with node-positive disease. Of all
considered (category 2B). As previously mentioned, in the setting of
recurrences, 92% were detected within 5 years of primary treatment.
four or more positive ILNs, a bilateral PLND should be performed.148
Alternatively, radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy may be done instead A retrospective analysis of 551 patients with penile cancer who were
of ILND/PLND, although this is not the preferred option for most treated with ILND found that recurrence occurred in 31.9% of
patients. If the patient’s disease does not respond to neoadjuvant patients.149 Median time to recurrence was 10 months for distant
chemotherapy, treatment may follow options for progressive metastatic recurrence, 12 months for inguinal recurrence, 10.5 months for pelvic
disease. If the patient is not eligible for neoadjuvant chemotherapy (eg,

Penile Cancer
recurrence, and 44.5 months for local recurrence. Greater than 95% of Metastatic Disease
distant, inguinal, and pelvic recurrence occurred within 48 months of Imaging of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis should be obtained when
ILND, compared to 127 months for local recurrences, supporting a metastasis is suspected to evaluate for pelvic and/or retroperitoneal
shorter imaging surveillance schedule for detection of regional or distant lymph nodes and more distant metastases. PLN metastasis is an
recurrences. However, it took 127 months for 95% of local recurrences ominous finding, with a 5-year survival rate of 0% to 66% for all cases
to be detected, supporting long-term surveillance of the primary site by and 17% to 54% for microscopic invasion only, with a mean 5-year
clinical examination. survival of approximately 10%.5,154-158 In patients with ILN metastases,
Follow-up for all patients includes a clinical examination of the penis 20% to 30% will have PLN metastases.5 This can be further
and inguinal region. Imaging is not routinely indicated for early disease characterized such that if two to three ILNs are involved, there is a 23%
(except for patients who have obesity or who have undergone inguinal probability of PLN involvement. With involvement of three or more ILNs,
surgery since a physical examination may be challenging), but may be this probability increases to 56%.159
used on abnormal findings. For patients with N2 or N3 disease, imaging Lughezzani et al129 identified three independent predictors of PLN
of the chest, abdomen, and pelvic area is recommended. metastases that included the number of inguinal metastases (OR, 1.92;
P < .001), the diameter of the metastases (OR, 1.03; P = .001), and
Recurrence
extranodal extension (OR, 8.01; P < .001). Similar to previous studies,
Invasive disease is an adverse finding after initial organ-sparing patients with three or more ILN metastases had a 4.77-fold higher risk
treatment and should be treated according to the stage of the of PLN metastasis. An ILN metastasis diameter of 30 mm or greater
recurrence.150,151 For noninvasive primary tumor recurrences, treatment correlated with a 2.53-fold higher risk of PLN metastasis. Patients who
should also be based on the stage of recurrence. showed no risk factors had a 0% risk of metastasis, suggesting that this
group may not require PLND.129
A recurrence in the inguinal region carries a poor prognosis (median
survival, <6 months) and optimal management remains elusive. If no Pettaway et al160 evaluated the treatment options for stage IV penile
prior inguinal lymphadenectomy or RT was given, primary treatment for cancer—clinical stage N3 (deep inguinal nodes or pelvic nodes) or M1
the management of ILNs can be followed. If the patient previously disease (distant metastases)—including chemotherapy, RT, and
received lymphadenectomy or RT, subsequent-line therapies include inguinal lymphadenectomy and concluded that treatment with cisplatin-
chemotherapy followed by ILND, ILND alone, or chemoradiotherapy (if based chemotherapy should be considered and might facilitate curative
no prior RT).76,152 A recent study suggests that ILND may be beneficial resection. The role of RT was considered to be mostly palliative.
in patients with penile cancer with locally recurrent ILN metastases.153 Cisplatin-based regimens (paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and cisplatin [TIP] or
While potentially curative, patients must be advised of the high alternatively 5-FU plus cisplatin) are the most active first-line systemic
incidence of postoperative complications.153 chemotherapy regimens.37,135,161 Therefore, the NCCN panel
recommends first-line chemotherapy using either TIP or 5-FU plus

Penile Cancer
cisplatin for metastatic penile cancer. The panel does not recommend advanced non-colorectal cancer.165 After a median follow-up of 13.4
regimens containing bleomycin because of high pulmonary-related months, ORR was 34.3%, median PFS was 4.1 months, and median
toxicity.162 A retrospective analysis of 30 patients with non-metastatic OS was 23.5 months. Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 14.6% of
N2 or N3 penile cancer who received neoadjuvant cisplatin-based patients, with one treatment-related fatality from pneumonia. An earlier
chemotherapy as first-line treatment demonstrated a poor response to phase II trial that also investigated use of pembrolizumab for dMMR
treatment when disease progressed (median OS, <6 months).163 disease across several tumor types reported similar results.166 The
Patients with a proven objective response to systemic chemotherapy phase II KEYNOTE-158 study evaluated the use of pembrolizumab
are amenable to consolidative ILND with curative potential or palliation. based on TMB status of advanced solid tumors.167 The ORR in the
However, surgical consolidation should not be performed on patients TMB-H group was 29% and only 6% in the non-TMB-H group. 15% of
with disease that progresses during systemic chemotherapy except for patients experienced an AE of grade three or higher, with colitis being
local symptomatic control. Preoperative RT may also be given to most common. One treatment-related death due to pneumonia was
patients who have lymph nodes greater than or equal to 4 cm without reported. In addition to these trial results, small case reports have also
skin fixation to improve surgical resectability and decrease local suggested that pembrolizumab is effective and well-tolerated as
recurrence. subsequent-line therapy for metastatic penile cancer.168,169
If there is no response or disease progression following first-line Due to the paucity of data on subsequent-line systemic therapy for
chemotherapy, subsequent therapy options include subsequent-line metastatic penile cancer, the NCCN Panel recommends a clinical trial
systemic therapy, RT for local control, and/or best supportive care. For or pembrolizumab (if tumor is dMMR/MSI-H or TMB-H) as preferred
patients with unresectable inguinal or bone metastases, RT may treatment options in this setting. Paclitaxel170 or cetuximab171 may also
provide a palliative benefit after chemotherapy. The NCCN Panel be considered as subsequent-line treatment, especially if previous
strongly recommends consideration of clinical trial participation as data treatments did not include a similar class of agent. Best supportive care
are limited in the second-line setting. remains an option for advanced cases or cases refractory to systemic
therapy, RT, or chemoradiotherapy.
The immune checkpoint inhibitor, pembrolizumab, has received two
tumor-agnostic indications, one for unresectable or metastatic Summary
microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) or mismatch repair-deficient SCC of the penis is a disease that mandates prompt medical/surgical
(dMMR) solid tumors; and the second is for unresectable or metastatic intervention and patient adherence to therapy to obtain the most
tumor mutational burden-high (TMB-H) solid tumors.164 Both of these favorable outcomes. A thorough history and physical examination is the
indications are for patients with disease that has progressed following initial step in this process, followed by a biopsy of the primary lesion to
prior treatment and who have no satisfactory alternative treatment establish a pathologic diagnosis. Accurate clinical staging allows for a
options. The phase II KEYNOTE-158 study evaluated the efficacy of comprehensive treatment approach to be devised, thus optimizing
pembrolizumab in patients with MSI-H/dMMR previously treated, therapeutic efficacy and minimizing treatment-related morbidity.

Penile Cancer
Prognostic factors help predict if lymph node metastases are suspected

in the absence of any palpable inguinal lymphadenopathy. When
clinically indicated, an ILND has curative potential, particularly when
performed early, with contemporary surgical series demonstrating its
reduced morbidity.

Penile Cancer
References 10. Daling JR, Madeleine MM, Johnson LG, et al. Penile cancer:
importance of circumcision, human papillomavirus and smoking in in
1. Pettaway CA, Lynch D, Jr, Davis D. Tumors of the Penis. In: Wein situ and invasive disease. Int J Cancer 2005;116:606-616. Available at:
AJ, Kavoussi L, Novick AC, et al., eds. Campbell-Walsh Urology (ed 9).
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15825185.
Philadelphia: Saunders; 2007:959-992.
11. Sarkar FH, Miles BJ, Plieth DH, Crissman JD. Detection of human
2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer Statistics, 2021. papillomavirus in squamous neoplasm of the penis. J Urol
CA Cancer J Clin 2021;71:7-33. Available at: 1992;147:389-392. Available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33433946. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1310122.
3. Bray F, Colombet M, Mery L, et al. Cancer Incidence in Five
12. Olesen TB, Sand FL, Rasmussen CL, et al. Prevalence of human
Continents. Vol. XI. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on papillomavirus DNA and p16(INK4a) in penile cancer and penile
Cancer; 2017. Available at: https://ci5.iarc.fr. Accessed January 04, intraepithelial neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet
2022. Oncol 2019;20:145-158. Available at:
4. Pow-Sang MR, Ferreira U, Pow-Sang JM, et al. Epidemiology and
natural history of penile cancer. Urology 2010;76:S2-6. Available at: 13. Sand FL, Rasmussen CL, Frederiksen MH, et al. Prognostic
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20691882. Significance of HPV and p16 Status in Men Diagnosed with Penile
5. Horenblas S. Lymphadenectomy for squamous cell carcinoma of the Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol
penis. Part 2: the role and technique of lymph node dissection. BJU Int Biomarkers Prev 2018;27:1123-1132. Available at:
2001;88:473-483. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29987099.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11589660. 14. Zhang J, Zhang H, Xiu Y, et al. Prognostic Significance of
6. PubMed Overview. Available at: P16(INK4a) Expression in Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Meta-
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/about/. Accessed November 8, 2021. Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis. Biomed Res Int
2018;2018:8345893. Available at:
7. Hernandez BY, Barnholtz-Sloan J, German RR, et al. Burden of https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30105253.
invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the penis in the United States,
1998-2003. Cancer 2008;113:2883-2891. Available at: 15. Liu G, Sharma M, Tan N, Barnabas RV. HIV-positive women have
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18980292. higher risk of human papilloma virus infection, precancerous lesions,
and cervical cancer. AIDS 2018;32:795-808. Available at:
8. Dillner J, von Krogh G, Horenblas S, Meijer CJ. Etiology of squamous https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29369827.
cell carcinoma of the penis. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl 2000:189-193.
Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11144896. 16. Goncalves HM, Silva J, Pintado Maury I, et al. The prevalence and
risk-factors of oral HPV DNA detection among HIV-infected men
9. Sufrin G, Huben R. Benign and malignant lesions of the penis. In: JY between men who have sex with men and heterosexual men. Infect Dis
G, ed. Adult and Pediatric Urology (ed 2). Chicago: Year Book Medical (Lond) 2021;53:19-30. Available at:
Publisher; 1991:1643. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32915107.

Penile Cancer
17. Morris BJ, Gray RH, Castellsague X, et al. The Strong Protective 25. Bleeker MC, Heideman DA, Snijders PJ, et al. Penile cancer:
Effect of Circumcision against Cancer of the Penis. Adv Urol epidemiology, pathogenesis and prevention. World J Urol 2009;27:141-
2011;2011:812368. Available at: 150. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18607597.
26. Amin MB, Edge SB, Greene F, et al., eds. AJCC Cancer Staging
18. Tsen HF, Morgenstern H, Mack T, Peters RK. Risk factors for penile Manual, 8th ed. New York: Springer International Publishing; 2017.
cancer: results of a population-based case-control study in Los Angeles
County (United States). Cancer Causes Control 2001;12:267-277. 27. Cubilla AL, Reuter V, Velazquez E, et al. Histologic classification of
Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11405332. penile carcinoma and its relation to outcome in 61 patients with primary
resection. Int J Surg Pathol 2001;9:111-120. Available at:
19. Maden C, Sherman KJ, Beckmann AM, et al. History of https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11484498.
circumcision, medical conditions, and sexual activity and risk of penile
cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85:19-24. Available at: 28. Guimaraes GC, Cunha IW, Soares FA, et al. Penile squamous cell
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8380060. carcinoma clinicopathological features, nodal metastasis and outcome
in 333 cases. J Urol 2009;182:528-534; discussion 534. Available at:
20. Depasquale I, Park AJ, Bracka A. The treatment of balanitis xerotica https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19524964.
obliterans. BJU Int 2000;86:459-465. Available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10971272. 29. Ficarra V, Akduman B, Bouchot O, et al. Prognostic factors in penile
cancer. Urology 2010;76:S66-73. Available at:
21. Micali G, Nasca MR, Innocenzi D, Schwartz RA. Penile cancer. J https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20691887.
Am Acad Dermatol 2006;54:369-391; quiz 391-364. Available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16488287. 30. Penis. In: Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, et al., eds. AJCC
Cancer Staging Manual (ed 7). New York: Springer; 2010:447.
22. Barbagli G, Palminteri E, Mirri F, et al. Penile carcinoma in patients
with genital lichen sclerosus: a multicenter survey. J Urol 31. Barocas DA, Chang SS. Penile cancer: clinical presentation,
2006;175:1359-1363. Available at: diagnosis, and staging. Urol Clin North Am 2010;37:343-352. Available
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16515998. at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20674691.
23. Stern RS. Genital tumors among men with psoriasis exposed to 32. Leijte JA, Gallee M, Antonini N, Horenblas S. Evaluation of current
psoralens and ultraviolet A radiation (PUVA) and ultraviolet B radiation. TNM classification of penile carcinoma. J Urol 2008;180:933-938;
The Photochemotherapy Follow-up Study. N Engl J Med discussion 938. Available at:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2320078.
33. Leijte JA, Horenblas S. Shortcomings of the current TNM
24. Pond GR, Di Lorenzo G, Necchi A, et al. Prognostic risk classification for penile carcinoma: time for a change? World J Urol
stratification derived from individual patient level data for men with 2009;27:151-154. Available at:
advanced penile squamous cell carcinoma receiving first-line systemic https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18690458.
therapy. Urol Oncol 2014;32:501-508. Available at:

Penile Cancer
34. Sobin LH, Wittekind C, International Union against Cancer. TNM 42. Goette DK, Elgart M, DeVillez RL. Erythroplasia of Queyrat.
Classification of Malignant Tumours (ed 6). New York: Wiley-Liss; 2002. Treatment with topically applied fluorouracil. JAMA 1975;232:934-937.
Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1173631.
35. Velazquez EF, Ayala G, Liu H, et al. Histologic grade and perineural
invasion are more important than tumor thickness as predictor of nodal 43. Goette DK, Carson TE. Erythroplasia of Queyrat: treatment with
metastasis in penile squamous cell carcinoma invading 5 to 10 mm. Am topical 5-fluorouracil. Cancer 1976;38:1498-1502. Available at:
J Surg Pathol 2008;32:974-979. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/991073.
44. Issa A, Sebro K, Kwok A, et al. Treatment Options and Outcomes
36. Li Z, Li X, Lam W, et al. Corpora Cavernos invasion vs. Corpus for Men with Penile Intraepithelial Neoplasia: A Systematic Review. Eur
Spongiosum invasion in Penile Cancer: A systematic review and meta- Urol Focus 2021. Available at:
analysis. J Cancer 2021;12:1960-1966. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33994168.
45. Hajiran A, Zemp L, Aydin AM, et al. Topical chemotherapy for penile
37. European Association of Urology. EAU Guidelines Penile Cancer. carcinoma in situ: Contemporary outcomes and reported toxicity. Urol
2018. Available at: https://uroweb.org/guideline/penile-cancer/. Oncol 2021;39:72.e71-72.e5. Available at:
Accessed January 4, 2022. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33036902.
38. Lont AP, Besnard AP, Gallee MP, et al. A comparison of physical 46. Mahto M, Nathan M, O'Mahony C. More than a decade on: review
examination and imaging in determining the extent of primary penile of the use of imiquimod in lower anogenital intraepithelial neoplasia. Int
carcinoma. BJU Int 2003;91:493-495. Available at: J STD AIDS 2010;21:8-16. Available at:
39. Kamel MH, Tao J, Su J, et al. Survival outcomes of organ sparing 47. Deen K, Burdon-Jones D. Imiquimod in the treatment of penile
surgery, partial penectomy, and total penectomy in pathological T1/T2 intraepithelial neoplasia: An update. Australas J Dermatol 2017;58:86-
penile cancer: Report from the National Cancer Data Base. Urol Oncol 92. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26952903.
2018;36: 82.e7-82.e15. Available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29153943. 48. Bandieramonte G, Colecchia M, Mariani L, et al. Peniscopically
controlled CO2 laser excision for conservative treatment of in situ and
40. Alnajjar HM, Lam W, Bolgeri M, et al. Treatment of carcinoma in situ T1 penile carcinoma: report on 224 patients. Eur Urol 2008;54:875-882.
of the glans penis with topical chemotherapy agents. Eur Urol Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18243513.
2012;62:923-928. Available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22421082. 49. Horenblas S, van Tinteren H, Delemarre JF, et al. Squamous cell
carcinoma of the penis. II. Treatment of the primary tumor. J Urol
41. Lucky M, Murthy KV, Rogers B, et al. The treatment of penile 1992;147:1533-1538. Available at:
carcinoma in situ (CIS) within a UK supra-regional network. BJU Int https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1593683.
2015;115:595-598. Available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25060513. 50. Colecchia M, Nicolai N, Secchi P, et al. pT1 penile squamous cell
carcinoma: a clinicopathologic study of 56 cases treated by CO2 laser

Penile Cancer
therapy. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 2009;31:153-160. Available at: 59. Minhas S, Kayes O, Hegarty P, et al. What surgical resection
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19639702. margins are required to achieve oncological control in men with primary
penile cancer? BJU Int 2005;96:1040-1043. Available at:
51. Meijer RP, Boon TA, van Venrooij GE, Wijburg CJ. Long-term http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16225525.
follow-up after laser therapy for penile carcinoma. Urology 2007;69:759-
762. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17445665. 60. Bissada NK, Yakout HH, Fahmy WE, et al. Multi-institutional long-
term experience with conservative surgery for invasive penile
52. Maranda EL, Nguyen AH, Lim VM, et al. Erythroplasia of Queyrat carcinoma. J Urol 2003;169:500-502. Available at:
treated by laser and light modalities: a systematic review. Lasers Med https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12544296.
Sci 2016;31:1971-1976. Available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27324019. 61. Shindel AW, Mann MW, Lev RY, et al. Mohs micrographic surgery
for penile cancer: management and long-term followup. J Urol
53. Parnham AS, Albersen M, Sahdev V, et al. Glansectomy and Split- 2007;178:1980-1985. Available at:
thickness Skin Graft for Penile Cancer. Eur Urol 2018;73:284-289. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17869306.
62. Choi JW, Choi M, Cho KH. A case of erythroplasia of queyrat
54. O'Kane HF, Pahuja A, Ho KJ, et al. Outcome of glansectomy and treated with imiquimod 5% cream and excision. Ann Dermatol
skin grafting in the management of penile cancer. Adv Urol 2009;21:419-422. Available at:
2011;2011:240824. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20523838.
63. Schroeder TL, Sengelmann RD. Squamous cell carcinoma in situ of
55. Morelli G, Pagni R, Mariani C, et al. Glansectomy with split- the penis successfully treated with imiquimod 5% cream. J Am Acad
thickness skin graft for the treatment of penile carcinoma. Int J Impot Dermatol 2002;46:545-548. Available at:
Res 2009;21:311-314. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11907505.
64. Taliaferro SJ, Cohen GF. Bowen's disease of the penis treated with
56. Pietrzak P, Corbishley C, Watkin N. Organ-sparing surgery for topical imiquimod 5% cream. J Drugs Dermatol 2008;7:483-485.
invasive penile cancer: early follow-up data. BJU Int 2004;94:1253- Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18505144.
1257. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15610100.
65. Feldman AS, McDougal WS. Long-term outcome of excisional
57. Hatzichristou DG, Apostolidis A, Tzortzis V, et al. Glansectomy: an organ sparing surgery for carcinoma of the penis. J Urol
alternative surgical treatment for Buschke-Lowenstein tumors of the 2011;186:1303-1307. Available at:
penis. Urology 2001;57:966-969. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21862071.
66. Frimberger D, Hungerhuber E, Zaak D, et al. Penile carcinoma. Is
58. Horenblas S, van Tinteren H. Squamous cell carcinoma of the Nd:YAG laser therapy radical enough? J Urol 2002;168:2418-2421.
penis. IV. Prognostic factors of survival: analysis of tumor, nodes and Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12441930.
metastasis classification system. J Urol 1994;151:1239-1243. Available
at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8158767.

Penile Cancer
67. Azrif M, Logue JP, Swindell R, et al. External-beam radiotherapy in 76. Heyns CF, Fleshner N, Sangar V, et al. Management of the lymph
T1-2 N0 penile carcinoma. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2006;18:320-325. nodes in penile cancer. Urology 2010;76:S43-57. Available at:
Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16703750. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20691885.
68. Crook J, Grimard L, Tsihlias J, et al. Interstitial brachytherapy for 77. Kroon BK, Valdes Olmos RA, van Tinteren H, et al. Reproducibility
penile cancer: an alternative to amputation. J Urol 2002;167:506-511. of lymphoscintigraphy for lymphatic mapping in patients with penile
Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11792907. carcinoma. J Urol 2005;174:2214-2217. Available at:
69. Rozan R, Albuisson E, Giraud B, et al. Interstitial brachytherapy for
penile carcinoma: a multicentric survey (259 patients). Radiother Oncol 78. de Vries HM, Brouwer OR, Heijmink S, et al. Recent developments
1995;36:83-93. Available at: in penile cancer imaging. Curr Opin Urol 2019;29:150-155. Available at:
70. Zouhair A, Coucke PA, Jeanneret W, et al. Radiation therapy alone 79. Ottenhof SR, Leone AR, Horenblas S, et al. Advancements in
or combined surgery and radiation therapy in squamous-cell carcinoma staging and imaging for penile cancer. Curr Opin Urol 2017;27:612-620.
of the penis? Eur J Cancer 2001;37:198-203. Available at: Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28937510.
80. Hughes B, Leijte J, Shabbir M, et al. Non-invasive and minimally
71. Crook J, Ma C, Grimard L. Radiation therapy in the management of invasive staging of regional lymph nodes in penile cancer. World J Urol
the primary penile tumor: an update. World J Urol 2009;27:189-196. 2009;27:197-203. Available at:
72. Hegarty PK, Eardley I, Heidenreich A, et al. Penile cancer: organ- 81. Caso JR, Rodriguez AR, Correa J, Spiess PE. Update in the
sparing techniques. BJU Int 2014;114:799-805. Available at: management of penile cancer. Int Braz J Urol 2009;35:406-415.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24053403. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19719855.
73. de Crevoisier R, Slimane K, Sanfilippo N, et al. Long-term results of 82. Mueller-Lisse UG, Scher B, Scherr MK, Seitz M. Functional imaging
brachytherapy for carcinoma of the penis confined to the glans (N- or in penile cancer: PET/computed tomography, MRI, and sentinel lymph
NX). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009;74:1150-1156. Available at: node biopsy. Curr Opin Urol 2008;18:105-110. Available at:
74. Crook J, Jezioranski J, Cygler JE. Penile brachytherapy: technical 83. Hedgire SS, Pargaonkar VK, Elmi A, et al. Pelvic nodal imaging.
aspects and postimplant issues. Brachytherapy 2010;9:151-158. Radiol Clin North Am 2012;50:1111-1125. Available at:
75. Hu X, Huang J, Wen S, et al. Comparison of efficacy between 84. Scher B, Seitz M, Reiser M, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT for staging of
brachytherapy and penectomy in patients with penile cancer: a meta- penile cancer. J Nucl Med 2005;46:1460-1465. Available at:
analysis. Oncotarget 2017;8:100469-100477. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16157528.

Penile Cancer
85. Scher B, Seitz M, Albinger W, et al. Value of PET and PET/CT in 92. Pizzocaro G, Piva L, Bandieramonte G, Tana S. Up-to-date
the diagnostics of prostate and penile cancer. Recent Results Cancer management of carcinoma of the penis. Eur Urol 1997;32:5-15.
Res 2008;170:159-179. Available at: Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9266225.
93. Solsona E, Iborra I, Rubio J, et al. Prospective validation of the
86. Salazar A, Junior EP, Salles PGO, et al. (18)F-FDG PET/CT as a association of local tumor stage and grade as a predictive factor for
prognostic factor in penile cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging occult lymph node micrometastasis in patients with penile carcinoma
2019;46:855-863. Available at: and clinically negative inguinal lymph nodes. J Urol 2001;165:1506-
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30143840. 1509. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11342906.
87. Ottenhof SR, Vegt E. The role of PET/CT imaging in penile cancer. 94. Villavicencio H, Rubio-Briones J, Regalado R, et al. Grade, local
Transl Androl Urol 2017;6:833-838. Available at: stage and growth pattern as prognostic factors in carcinoma of the
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29184780. penis. Eur Urol 1997;32:442-447. Available at:
88. Graafland NM, Leijte JA, Valdes Olmos RA, et al. Scanning with
18F-FDG-PET/CT for detection of pelvic nodal involvement in inguinal 95. Zekan DS, Dahman A, Hajiran AJ, et al. Prognostic predictors of
node-positive penile carcinoma. Eur Urol 2009;56:339-345. Available at: lymph node metastasis in penile cancer: a systematic review. Int Braz J
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19477581. Urol 2021;47:943-956. Available at:
89. Drager DL, Heuschkel M, Protzel C, et al. [18F]FDG PET/CT for
assessing inguinal lymph nodes in patients with penile cancer - 96. Li ZS, Yao K, Chen P, et al. Disease-specific survival after radical
correlation with histopathology after inguinal lymphadenectomy. lymphadenectomy for penile cancer: prediction by lymph node count
Nuklearmedizin 2018;57:26-30. Available at: and density. Urol Oncol 2014;32:893-900. Available at:
90. Sadeghi R, Gholami H, Zakavi SR, et al. Accuracy of 18F-FDG 97. Cabanas RM. An approach for the treatment of penile carcinoma.
PET/CT for diagnosing inguinal lymph node involvement in penile Cancer 1977;39:456-466. Available at:
squamous cell carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of the https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/837331.
literature. Clin Nucl Med 2012;37:436-441. Available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22475891. 98. Pettaway CA, Pisters LL, Dinney CP, et al. Sentinel lymph node
dissection for penile carcinoma: the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center
91. Slaton JW, Morgenstern N, Levy DA, et al. Tumor stage, vascular experience. J Urol 1995;154:1999-2003. Available at:
invasion and the percentage of poorly differentiated cancer: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7500444.
independent prognosticators for inguinal lymph node metastasis in
penile squamous cancer. J Urol 2001;165:1138-1142. Available at: 99. Leijte JA, Kroon BK, Valdes Olmos RA, et al. Reliability and safety
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11257655. of current dynamic sentinel node biopsy for penile carcinoma. Eur Urol
2007;52:170-177. Available at:

Penile Cancer
100. Valdes Olmos RA, Tanis PJ, Hoefnagel CA, et al. Penile with penile carcinoma. BJU Int 2005;95:517-521. Available at:
lymphoscintigraphy for sentinel node identification. Eur J Nucl Med http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15705071.
2001;28:581-585. Available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11383862. 108. Crawshaw JW, Hadway P, Hoffland D, et al. Sentinel lymph node
biopsy using dynamic lymphoscintigraphy combined with ultrasound-
101. Gonzaga-Silva LF, Tavares JM, Freitas FC, et al. The isolated guided fine needle aspiration in penile carcinoma. Br J Radiol
gamma probe technique for sentinel node penile carcinoma detection is 2009;82:41-48. Available at:
unreliable. Int Braz J Urol 2007;33:58-63. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19095815.
109. Hadway P, Smith Y, Corbishley C, et al. Evaluation of dynamic
102. Kroon BK, Horenblas S, Meinhardt W, et al. Dynamic sentinel node lymphoscintigraphy and sentinel lymph-node biopsy for detecting occult
biopsy in penile carcinoma: evaluation of 10 years experience. Eur Urol metastases in patients with penile squamous cell carcinoma. BJU Int
2005;47:601-606; discussion 606. Available at: 2007;100:561-565. Available at:
103. Spiess PE, Izawa JI, Bassett R, et al. Preoperative 110. Djajadiningrat RS, Graafland NM, van Werkhoven E, et al.
lymphoscintigraphy and dynamic sentinel node biopsy for staging penile Contemporary management of regional nodes in penile cancer-
cancer: results with pathological correlation. J Urol 2007;177:2157- improvement of survival? J Urol 2014;191:68-73. Available at:
2161. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17509308. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23917166.
104. Tanis PJ, Lont AP, Meinhardt W, et al. Dynamic sentinel node 111. Ficarra V, Galfano A. Should the dynamic sentinel node biopsy
biopsy for penile cancer: reliability of a staging technique. J Urol (DSNB) be considered the gold standard in the evaluation of lymph
2002;168:76-80. Available at: node status in patients with penile carcinoma? Eur Urol 2007;52:17-19.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12050496. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17376585.
105. Kroon BK, Horenblas S, Estourgie SH, et al. How to avoid false- 112. Stancik I, Holtl W. Penile cancer: review of the recent literature.
negative dynamic sentinel node procedures in penile carcinoma. J Urol Curr Opin Urol 2003;13:467-472. Available at:
113. Kroon BK, Horenblas S, Lont AP, et al. Patients with penile
106. Zou ZJ, Liu ZH, Tang LY, et al. Radiocolloid-based dynamic carcinoma benefit from immediate resection of clinically occult lymph
sentinel lymph node biopsy in penile cancer with clinically negative node metastases. J Urol 2005;173:816-819. Available at:
inguinal lymph node: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15711276.
Int Urol Nephrol 2016;48:2001-2013. Available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27577753. 114. McDougal WS. Preemptive lymphadenectomy markedly improves
survival in patients with cancer of the penis who harbor occult
107. Kroon BK, Horenblas S, Deurloo EE, et al. Ultrasonography-guided metastases. J Urol 2005;173:681. Available at:
fine-needle aspiration cytology before sentinel node biopsy in patients https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15711242.

Penile Cancer
115. Sharp DS, Angermeier KW. Surgery of penile and urethral J Urol 2020;203:1147-1155. Available at:
carcinoma. In: Wein AJ, Kavoussi L, Novick AC, et al., eds. Campbell- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31928407.
Walsh Urology (ed 9). Philadelphia: Saunders; 2007:993-1022.
124. Soria JC, Fizazi K, Piron D, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the
116. Gkegkes ID, Minis EE, Iavazzo C. Robotic-assisted inguinal penis: multivariate analysis of prognostic factors and natural history in
lymphadenectomy: a systematic review. J Robot Surg 2019;13:1-8. monocentric study with a conservative policy. Ann Oncol 1997;8:1089-
Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29730734. 1098. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9426328.
117. Spiess PE, Hernandez MS, Pettaway CA. Contemporary inguinal 125. Theodorescu D, Russo P, Zhang ZF, et al. Outcomes of initial
lymph node dissection: minimizing complications. World J Urol surveillance of invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the penis and
2009;27:205-212. Available at: negative nodes. J Urol 1996;155:1626-1631. Available at:
118. Catalona WJ. Re: Modified inguinal lymphadenectomy for 126. Leijte JA, Kirrander P, Antonini N, et al. Recurrence patterns of
carcinoma of the penis with preservation of saphenous veins: technique squamous cell carcinoma of the penis: recommendations for follow-up
and preliminary results. J Urol 1988;140:836. Available at: based on a two-centre analysis of 700 patients. Eur Urol 2008;54:161-
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3418818. 168. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18440124.
119. Lopes A, Rossi BM, Fonseca FP, Morini S. Unreliability of modified 127. Grabstald H. Controversies concerning lymph node dissection for
inguinal lymphadenectomy for clinical staging of penile carcinoma. cancer of the penis. Urol Clin North Am 1980;7:793-799. Available at:
Cancer 1996;77:2099-2102. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7456188.
128. Horenblas S, van Tinteren H, Delemarre JF, et al. Squamous cell
120. Protzel C, Alcaraz A, Horenblas S, et al. Lymphadenectomy in the carcinoma of the penis. III. Treatment of regional lymph nodes. J Urol
surgical management of penile cancer. Eur Urol 2009;55:1075-1088. 1993;149:492-497. Available at:
121. Bermejo C, Busby JE, Spiess PE, et al. Neoadjuvant 129. Lughezzani G, Catanzaro M, Torelli T, et al. The relationship
chemotherapy followed by aggressive surgical consolidation for between characteristics of inguinal lymph nodes and pelvic lymph node
metastatic penile squamous cell carcinoma. J Urol 2007;177:1335- involvement in penile squamous cell carcinoma: a single institution
1338. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17382727. experience. J Urol 2014;191:977-982. Available at:
122. Pagliaro LC, Crook J. Multimodality therapy in penile cancer: when
and which treatments? World J Urol 2009;27:221-225. Available at: 130. Lont AP, Kroon BK, Gallee MP, et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18682961. for penile carcinoma: extent of inguinal lymph node involvement as an
indicator for pelvic lymph node involvement and survival. J Urol
123. Azizi M, Aydin AM, Hajiran A, et al. Systematic Review and Meta- 2007;177:947-952; discussion 952. Available at:
Analysis-Is there a Benefit in Using Neoadjuvant Systemic https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17296384.
Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma?

Penile Cancer
131. Reddy JP, Pettaway CA, Levy LB, et al. Factors associated with 2018;36:92.e11-92.e16. Available at:
regional recurrence after lymph node dissection for penile squamous https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29174944.
cell carcinoma. BJU Int 2017;119:591-597. Available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27753187. 139. Robinson R, Marconi L, MacPepple E, et al. Risks and Benefits of
Adjuvant Radiotherapy After Inguinal Lymphadenectomy in Node-
132. Pandey D, Mahajan V, Kannan RR. Prognostic factors in node- positive Penile Cancer: A Systematic Review by the European
positive carcinoma of the penis. J Surg Oncol 2006;93:133-138. Association of Urology Penile Cancer Guidelines Panel. Eur Urol
Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16425300. 2018;74:76-83. Available at:
133. Graafland NM, van Boven HH, van Werkhoven E, et al. Prognostic
significance of extranodal extension in patients with pathological node 140. Moore DH, Ali S, Koh WJ, et al. A phase II trial of radiation therapy
positive penile carcinoma. J Urol 2010;184:1347-1353. Available at: and weekly cisplatin chemotherapy for the treatment of locally-
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20723934. advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva: a gynecologic
oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol 2012;124:529-533. Available at:
134. Canter DJ, Nicholson S, Watkin N, et al. The International Penile https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22079361.
Advanced Cancer Trial (InPACT): Rationale and Current Status. Eur
Urol Focus 2019;5:706-709. Available at: 141. Bartelink H, Roelofsen F, Eschwege F, et al. Concomitant
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31160252. radiotherapy and chemotherapy is superior to radiotherapy alone in the
treatment of locally advanced anal cancer: results of a phase III
135. Pagliaro LC, Williams DL, Daliani D, et al. Neoadjuvant paclitaxel, randomized trial of the European Organization for Research and
ifosfamide, and cisplatin chemotherapy for metastatic penile cancer: a Treatment of Cancer Radiotherapy and Gastrointestinal Cooperative
phase II study. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:3851-3857. Available at: Groups. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:2040-2049. Available at:
136. Sharma P, Djajadiningrat R, Zargar-Shoshtari K, et al. Adjuvant 142. Epidermoid anal cancer: results from the UKCCCR randomised
chemotherapy is associated with improved overall survival in pelvic trial of radiotherapy alone versus radiotherapy, 5-fluorouracil, and
node-positive penile cancer after lymph node dissection: a multi- mitomycin. UKCCCR Anal Cancer Trial Working Party. UK Co-
institutional study. Urol Oncol 2015;33:496.e17-23. Available at: ordinating Committee on Cancer Research. Lancet 1996;348:1049-
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26072110. 1054. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8874455.
137. Tang DH, Djajadiningrat R, Diorio G, et al. Adjuvant pelvic 143. van Doorn HC, Ansink A, Verhaar-Langereis M, Stalpers L.
radiation is associated with improved survival and decreased disease Neoadjuvant chemoradiation for advanced primary vulvar cancer.
recurrence in pelvic node-positive penile cancer after lymph node Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006:CD003752. Available at:
dissection: A multi-institutional study. Urol Oncol 2017;35:605.e17- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16856018.
605.e23. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28666722.
144. Pedrick TJ, Wheeler W, Riemenschneider H. Combined modality
138. Winters BR, Kearns JT, Holt SK, et al. Is there a benefit to therapy for locally advanced penile squamous cell carcinoma. Am J Clin
adjuvant radiation in stage III penile cancer after lymph node Oncol 1993;16:501-505. Available at:
dissection? Findings from the National Cancer Database. Urol Oncol https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8256766.

Penile Cancer
145. Eliason M, Bowen G, Bowen A, et al. Primary treatment of 152. Graafland NM, Moonen LM, van Boven HH, et al. Inguinal
verrucous carcinoma of the penis with fluorouracil, cis-diamino-dichloro- recurrence following therapeutic lymphadenectomy for node positive
platinum, and radiation therapy. Arch Dermatol 2009;145:950-952. penile carcinoma: outcome and implications for management. J Urol
Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19687438. 2011;185:888-893. Available at:
146. Chhabra A, Schwartz D, Leaf A, et al. Neoadjuvant concurrent
chemoradiation for curative treatment of penile squamous cell 153. Baumgarten AS, Alhammali E, Hakky TS, et al. Salvage surgical
carcinoma. Case Rep Oncol Med 2014;2014:479376. Available at: resection for isolated locally recurrent inguinal lymph node metastasis of
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25400960. penile cancer: international study collaboration. J Urol 2014;192:760-
764. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24603104.
147. Pond GR, Milowsky MI, Kolinsky MP, et al. Concurrent
chemoradiotherapy for men with locally advanced penile squamous cell 154. Lopes A, Bezerra AL, Serrano SV, Hidalgo GS. Iliac nodal
carcinoma. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2014;12:440-446. Available at: metastases from carcinoma of the penis treated surgically. BJU Int
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24787971. 2000;86:690-693. Available at:
148. Zargar-Shoshtari K, Djajadiningrat R, Sharma P, et al. Establishing
Criteria for Bilateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in the Management 155. Pow-Sang JE, Benavente V, Pow-Sang JM, Pow-Sang M. Bilateral
of Penile Cancer: Lessons Learned from an International Multicenter ilioinguinal lymph node dissection in the management of cancer of the
Collaboration. J Urol 2015;194:696-701. Available at: penis. Semin Surg Oncol 1990;6:241-242. Available at:
149. Chakiryan NH, Dahmen A, Bandini M, et al. Patterns of 156. Ravi R. Morbidity following groin dissection for penile carcinoma.
Recurrence following Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection for Penile Br J Urol 1993;72:941-945. Available at:
Cancer: Optimizing Surveillance Strategies. J Urol 2021;206:960-969. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8306161.
157. Sanchez-Ortiz RF, Pettaway CA. The role of lymphadenectomy in
150. Chaux A, Reuter V, Lezcano C, et al. Comparison of morphologic penile cancer. Urol Oncol 2004;22:236-244; discussion 244-245.
features and outcome of resected recurrent and nonrecurrent Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15271324.
squamous cell carcinoma of the penis: a study of 81 cases. Am J Surg
Pathol 2009;33:1299-1306. Available at: 158. Srinivas V, Morse MJ, Herr HW, et al. Penile cancer: relation of
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19471153. extent of nodal metastasis to survival. J Urol 1987;137:880-882.
151. Ornellas AA, Nobrega BL, Wei Kin Chin E, et al. Prognostic factors
in invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the penis: analysis of 196 159. Culkin DJ, Beer TM. Advanced penile carcinoma. J Urol
patients treated at the Brazilian National Cancer Institute. J Urol 2003;170:359-365. Available at:
160. Pettaway CA, Pagliaro L, Theodore C, Haas G. Treatment of
visceral, unresectable, or bulky/unresectable regional metastases of

Penile Cancer
penile cancer. Urology 2010;76:S58-65. Available at: Oncol 2020;21:1353-1365. Available at:
161. Di Lorenzo G, Buonerba C, Federico P, et al. Cisplatin and 5- 168. Chahoud J, Skelton WP, 4th, Spiess PE, et al. Case Report: Two
fluorouracil in inoperable, stage IV squamous cell carcinoma of the Cases of Chemotherapy Refractory Metastatic Penile Squamous Cell
penis. BJU Int 2012;110:E661-666. Available at: Carcinoma With Extreme Durable Response to Pembrolizumab. Front
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22958571. Oncol 2020;10:615298. Available at:
162. Haas GP, Blumenstein BA, Gagliano RG, et al. Cisplatin,
methotrexate and bleomycin for the treatment of carcinoma of the penis: 169. Hahn AW, Chahoud J, Campbell MT, et al. Pembrolizumab for
a Southwest Oncology Group study. J Urol 1999;161:1823-1825. advanced penile cancer: a case series from a phase II basket trial.
Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10332445. Invest New Drugs 2021;39:1405-1410. Available at:
163. Wang J, Pettaway CA, Pagliaro LC. Treatment for Metastatic
Penile Cancer After First-line Chemotherapy Failure: Analysis of 170. Di Lorenzo G, Federico P, Buonerba C, et al. Paclitaxel in
Response and Survival Outcomes. Urology 2015;85:1104-1110. pretreated metastatic penile cancer: final results of a phase 2 study. Eur
Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25819619. Urol 2011;60:1280-1284. Available at:
164. U. S. Food & Drug Administration. Prescribing Information.
KEYTRUDA® (pembrolizumab) injection, for intravenous use. 2021. 171. Carthon BC, Ng CS, Pettaway CA, Pagliaro LC. Epidermal growth
Available at: factor receptor-targeted therapy in locally advanced or metastatic
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2021/125514s12 squamous cell carcinoma of the penis. BJU Int 2014;113:871-877.
1s122lbl.pdf. Accessed November 15, 2021. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24053151.
165. Marabelle A, Le DT, Ascierto PA, et al. Efficacy of Pembrolizumab

in Patients With Noncolorectal High Microsatellite Instability/Mismatch
Repair-Deficient Cancer: Results From the Phase II KEYNOTE-158
Study. J Clin Oncol 2020;38:1-10. Available at:
166. Le DT, Durham JN, Smith KN, et al. Mismatch repair deficiency
predicts response of solid tumors to PD-1 blockade. Science
2017;357:409-413. Available at:
167. Marabelle A, Fakih M, Lopez J, et al. Association of tumour

mutational burden with outcomes in patients with advanced solid
tumours treated with pembrolizumab: prospective biomarker analysis of
the multicohort, open-label, phase 2 KEYNOTE-158 study. Lancet

Penile

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Penile

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Penile

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®)

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

*Thomas W. Flaig, MD †/Chair Hristos Kaimakliotis, MD ϖ Charles Peyton, MD ϖ

Kevin Chan, MD ϖ Vitaly Margulis, MD ϖ Wade J. Sexton, MD ϖ

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

NCCN and the NCCN Penile Cancer Panel believe

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

PRIMARY EVALUATION CLINICAL PRIMARY TREATMENT

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

PATHOLOGIC DIAGNOSIS PRIMARY TREATMENT

Wide local excisionb

b See Principles of Penile Organ-Sparing Approaches (PN-A).

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

MANAGEMENT OF NON-PALPABLE INGUINAL LYMPH NODES

c See Principles of Surgery (PN-B).

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

MANAGEMENT OF PALPABLE NON-BULKY INGUINAL LYMPH NODES

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

MANAGEMENT OF PALPABLE BULKY INGUINAL LYMPH NODES

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

MANAGEMENT OF ENLARGED PELVIC LYMPH NODES

See management depending on inguinal lymph node status:

d See Principles of Radiotherapy (PN-C).

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

ANATOMIC SITE INITIAL TREATMENT SURVEILLANCEw

x Clinical examination includes examination of the penis and inguinal region.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

MANAGEMENT OF RECURRENT DISEASE

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

MANAGEMENT OF METASTATIC DISEASE

d See Principles of Radiotherapy (PN-C).

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

PRINCIPLES OF PENILE ORGAN-SPARING APPROACHES

Laser Therapy (category 2B)

CO2 Nd:YAG KTP

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

PRINCIPLES OF PENILE ORGAN-SPARING APPROACHES

Mohs Micrographic Surgery (category 2B)

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

Surgical Management of Inguinal and Pelvic Lymph Nodes

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

1 Crook J, et al. World J Urol 2009;27:189-196.

Note: All recommendations are category 2A unless otherwise indicated.

NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2023 NCCN Guidelines Index

PRINCIPLES OF SYSTEMIC THERAPY

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Prior to ILND or PLND