European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ cell cancer: A report of the second meeting of the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG): Part I

S Krege, J Beyer, R Souchon, P Albers, W Albrecht, F Algaba, M Bamberg, I Bodrogi, C Bokemeyer, E Cavallin-Stahl, J Classen, C Clemm, G Cohn-Cedermark, S Culine, G Daugaard, PHM de Mulder, M De Santis, M de Wit, Ronald de Wit, HG DerigsKP Dieckmann, A Dieing, JP Droz, M Fenner, K Fizazi, A Flechon, SD Fossa, XG del Muro, T Gauler, L Geczi, A Gerl, JR Germa-Lluch, S Gillessen, JT Hartmann, M Hartmann, A Heidenreich, W Hoeltl, A Horwich, R Huddart, M Jewett, J Joffe, WG Jones, L Kisbenedek, O Klepp, S Kliesch, KU Koehrmann, C Kollmannsberger, M Kuczyk, P Laguna, OL Galvis, V Loy, MD Mason, GM Mead, R Mueller, C Nichols, N Nicolai, T Oliver, D Ondrus, GON Oosterhof, LP Ares, G Pizzocaro, J Pont, T Pottek, T Powles, O Rick, G Rosti, R Salvioni, J Scheiderbauer, HU Schmelz, H Schmidberger, HJ Schmoll, M Schrader, F Sedlmayer, NE Skakkebaek, A Sohaib, S Tjulandin, P Warde, S Weinknecht, L Weissbach, C Wittekind, E Winter, L Wood, H von der Maase

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

439 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: The first consensus report presented by the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG) in the year 2004 has found widespread approval by many colleagues throughout the world. In November 2006, the group met a second time under the auspices of the Department of Urology of the Amsterdam Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Methods: Medical oncologists, urological surgeons, radiation oncologists as well as pathologists from several European countries reviewed and discussed the data that had emerged since the 2002 conference, and incorporated the new data into updated and revised guidelines. As for the first meeting, the methodology of evidence-based medicine (EBM) was applied. The results of the discussion were compiled by the writing committee. All participants have agreed to this final update. Results: The first part of the consensus paper describes the clinical presentation of the primary tumor, its treatment, the importance and treatment of testicular intraepithelial neoplasia (TIN), histological classification, staging and prognostic factors, and treatment of stage I seminoma and non-seminoma. Conclusions: Whereas the vast majority of the recommendations made in 2004 remain valid 3 yr later, refinements in the treatment of early- and advanced-stage testicular cancer have emerged from clinical trials. Despite technical improvements, expert clinical skills will continue to be one of the major determinants for the prognosis of patients with germ cell cancer. In addition, the particular needs of testicular cancer survivors have been acknowledged. (C) 2007 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Original languageUndefined/Unknown
Pages (from-to)478-496
Number of pages19
JournalEuropean Urology
Volume53
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2008

Research programs

  • EMC MM-03-86-08

Cite this