Abstract
Experience demonstrates multiple paths to cure for patients with clinical stage I testicular cancer. Because all options should provide a long-term disease-free rate near 100%, overall survival is no longer relevant in decision making, allowing practitioners to factor in quality of life, toxicity, cost, and impact on compliance. Surveillance for clinical stage I seminoma and clinical stage I nonseminoma has become the preferred option. The contrarian view is that a risk-adapted approach should persist, with surveillance for low-risk individuals and active therapy high-risk individuals. However, results obtained in unselected patients provide a strong argument against the need for such an approach.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
