Which penile cancer patients with metastasis in a sentinel node may be spared inguinal lymph node dissection without compromising oncological safety? Development of a low-risk selection model

Abstract Purpose To develop and internally validate a low-risk selection model to guide omission of completion inguinal lymph node dissection (ILND) after a positive dynamic sentinel node biopsy (DSNB) and to identify predictors of an inguinal basin harboring additional inguinal lymph node metastases following a positive DSNB. Methods Data were drawn from the Danish National Penile Cancer Database (DaPeCa-data), comprising patients with penile cancer treated from 2000 to 2025. The analysis included 300 DSNB-positive inguinal basins, and each basin was analyzed independently. Candidate predictors were screened using a penalized logistic regression across multiple imputed datasets, with variables meeting a pre-specified selection threshold carried forward to a confirmatory multivariable model. An exhaustive search across combinations of clinical criteria was used to derive low-risk selection models, subject to a pre-specified safety constraint of a negative predictive value (NPV) ≥ 0.92. Results Among 300 DSNB-positive basins, 188 underwent ILND, of which 33 (18%) had additional nodal metastases. Metastasis size ≥ 10 mm, having more than one positive lymph node at DSNB, and bilateral positive DSNB were the strongest independent predictors of additional metastases after a positive DSNB. A two-criterion model (metastasis size ≤ 10 mm and no urethral invasion) spared 63 out of 248 evaluable basins (25.4%) from ILND, with 5 false-negative cases equal to an NPV of 0.921. A stricter three-criterion model spared 21 out of 248 basins (8.5%) with 1 false negative and an NPV of 0.952. Sensitivity analysis restricted to directly observed outcomes lowered the higher-yield model's NPV to 0.908. Conclusions In penile cancer patients with a positive DSNB, the strongest predictors of the presence of additional inguinal lymph node metastases were: sentinel node metastases of 10 mm or more; two or more positive sentinel lymph nodes and bilateral sentinel lymph node metastases. A simple, bedside-usable selection model may safely spare a meaningful subset of DSNB-positive patients from completion ILND, but the prediction performance was sensitive to outcome-imputation assumptions and requires external validation before clinical implementation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Urology and Nephrology
Published
2026-09-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-026-05398-5
Primary Topic
Genital Health and Disease
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Which penile cancer patients with metastasis in a sentinel node may be spared inguinal lymph node dissection without compromising oncological safety? Development of a low-risk selection model

A.B. Als, J. Mølsted, J.K. Jakobsen, M. Aagaard et al.
International Urology and Nephrology
Genital Health and Disease
article

Which penile cancer patients with metastasis in a sentinel node may be spared inguinal lymph node dissection without compromising oncological safety? Development of a low-risk selection model

A.B. Als, J. Mølsted, J.K. Jakobsen, M. Aagaard, J. B. Jensen
article en

Abstract

Abstract Purpose To develop and internally validate a low-risk selection model to guide omission of completion inguinal lymph node dissection (ILND) after a positive dynamic sentinel node biopsy (DSNB) and to identify predictors of an inguinal basin harboring additional inguinal lymph node metastases following a positive DSNB. Methods Data were drawn from the Danish National Penile Cancer Database (DaPeCa-data), comprising patients with penile cancer treated from 2000 to 2025. The analysis included 300 DSNB-positive inguinal basins, and each basin was analyzed independently. Candidate predictors were screened using a penalized logistic regression across multiple imputed datasets, with variables meeting a pre-specified selection threshold carried forward to a confirmatory multivariable model. An exhaustive search across combinations of clinical criteria was used to derive low-risk selection models, subject to a pre-specified safety constraint of a negative predictive value (NPV) ≥ 0.92. Results Among 300 DSNB-positive basins, 188 underwent ILND, of which 33 (18%) had additional nodal metastases. Metastasis size ≥ 10 mm, having more than one positive lymph node at DSNB, and bilateral positive DSNB were the strongest independent predictors of additional metastases after a positive DSNB. A two-criterion model (metastasis size ≤ 10 mm and no urethral invasion) spared 63 out of 248 evaluable basins (25.4%) from ILND, with 5 false-negative cases equal to an NPV of 0.921. A stricter three-criterion model spared 21 out of 248 basins (8.5%) with 1 false negative and an NPV of 0.952. Sensitivity analysis restricted to directly observed outcomes lowered the higher-yield model's NPV to 0.908. Conclusions In penile cancer patients with a positive DSNB, the strongest predictors of the presence of additional inguinal lymph node metastases were: sentinel node metastases of 10 mm or more; two or more positive sentinel lymph nodes and bilateral sentinel lymph node metastases. A simple, bedside-usable selection model may safely spare a meaningful subset of DSNB-positive patients from completion ILND, but the prediction performance was sensitive to outcome-imputation assumptions and requires external validation before clinical implementation.

International Urology and Nephrology
Aarhus University (DK), Aarhus University Hospital (DK), Copenhagen University Hospital (DK)
Novo Nordisk Fonden
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Genital Health and Disease
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.