Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 14, 2026
A New Technique for Treating Low-risk Prostate Cancer—Super Active Surveillance
Published on: November 7, 2025
The association between institution at orchiectomy and outcomes on active surveillance for clinical stage I germ cell
Madhur Nayan1, Michael A S Jewett1, Lynn Anson-Cartwright1
1Division of Urology, Departments of Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Introduction:
Institutional experience has been associated with improved outcomes for various malignancies, including testicular cancer. The present study evaluated whether institution at orchiectomy was associated with outcomes on active surveillance (AS) for clinical stage (CS) I germ cell tumours (GCT).
Methods:
815 patients with CSI GCT managed with AS at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre were identified. Princess Margaret is a tertiary academic institution with a multidisciplinary testicular cancer clinic involving radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, and urologists, and has research experience in testicular cancer care. The association between institution of orchiectomy (Princess Margaret vs. Other) and time to progression on AS was analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. Academic vs. non-academic institutions were compared in a sensitivity analysis.
Results:
Patients undergoing orchiectomy at Princess Margaret for non-seminoma GCT were significantly less likely to have pure embryonal carcinoma (EC) in orchiectomy pathology (odds ratio [OR] 0.33; p=0.008) and CSIB disease (OR 0.47; p=0.014). Seminoma characteristics did not differ significantly between institution groups. In non-seminoma GCT, median followup was 5.4 years, 27% progressed on AS, and institution of orchiectomy was not associated with time to progression in either univariate (hazard ratio [HR] 0.79; p=0.33) or multivariable analyses (HR 1.01; p=0.97). In seminoma, median followup was 4.7 years, 12% progressed on AS, and institution of orchiectomy was not associated with progression (univariate: HR 0.87; p=0.73; multivariable: HR 0.98; p=0.96). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated similar results.
Conclusions:
Among CSI GCT patients managed on AS at a specialized cancer centre, there appears to be no difference in oncologic outcomes based upon the institution where orchiectomy was performed.
