TY - JOUR
T1 - The landscape of penile cancer research in Germany and Austria
T2 - a survey among professors in academic centers holding chair positions and results of a literature search
AU - Sarcan, Semih
AU - Wolff, Ingmar
AU - Lusuardi, Lukas
AU - Kravchuk, Anton
AU - Wiegland, Jens
AU - Yakac, Abdulbaki
AU - Thomas, Christian
AU - Burger, Maximilian
AU - Gilfrich, Christian
AU - Lebentrau, Steffen
AU - Ahyai, Sascha
AU - Merseburger, Axel
AU - May, Matthias
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2024/12
Y1 - 2024/12
N2 - Background: Research on penile cancer (PeCa) is predominantly conducted in countries with centralized treatment of PeCa-patients. In Germany and Austria (G + A), no state-regulated centralization is established, and no information is available on how PeCa-research is organized. Methods: Current research competence in PeCa was assessed by a 36-item questionnaire sent to all chairholders of urological academic centers in G + A. Based on PubMed records, all scientific PeCa-articles of 2012–2022 from G + A were identified. Current research trends were assessed by dividing the literature search into two periods (P1: 2012–2017, P2: 2018–2022). A bibliometric analysis was supplemented. Results: Response rate of the questionnaire was 75%, a median of 13 (IQR: 9–26) PeCa-patients/center was observed in 2021. Retrospective case series were conducted by 38.9% of participating clinics, while involvement in randomized-controlled trials was stated in 8.3% and in basic/fundamental research in 19.4%. 77.8% declared an interest in future multicenter projects. 205 PeCa-articles were identified [median impact factor: 2.77 (IQR: 0.90–4.37)]. Compared to P1, P2 showed a significant increase in the median annual publication count (29 (IQR: 13–17) vs. 15 (IQR: 19–29), p < 0.001), in multicenter studies (79.1% vs. 63.6%, p = 0.018), and in multinational studies (53% vs. 28.9%, p < 0.001); the proportion of basic/fundamental research articles significantly declined (16.5% vs. 28.9%, p = 0.041). Four of the top-5 institutions publishing PeCa-articles are academic centers. Bibliometric analyses revealed author networks, primary research areas in PeCa, and dominant journals for publications. Conclusions: Given the lack of centralization in G + A, this analysis highlights the need for research coordination within multicenter PeCa-projects. The decline in basic/fundamental research should be effectively addressed by the allocation of funded research projects.
AB - Background: Research on penile cancer (PeCa) is predominantly conducted in countries with centralized treatment of PeCa-patients. In Germany and Austria (G + A), no state-regulated centralization is established, and no information is available on how PeCa-research is organized. Methods: Current research competence in PeCa was assessed by a 36-item questionnaire sent to all chairholders of urological academic centers in G + A. Based on PubMed records, all scientific PeCa-articles of 2012–2022 from G + A were identified. Current research trends were assessed by dividing the literature search into two periods (P1: 2012–2017, P2: 2018–2022). A bibliometric analysis was supplemented. Results: Response rate of the questionnaire was 75%, a median of 13 (IQR: 9–26) PeCa-patients/center was observed in 2021. Retrospective case series were conducted by 38.9% of participating clinics, while involvement in randomized-controlled trials was stated in 8.3% and in basic/fundamental research in 19.4%. 77.8% declared an interest in future multicenter projects. 205 PeCa-articles were identified [median impact factor: 2.77 (IQR: 0.90–4.37)]. Compared to P1, P2 showed a significant increase in the median annual publication count (29 (IQR: 13–17) vs. 15 (IQR: 19–29), p < 0.001), in multicenter studies (79.1% vs. 63.6%, p = 0.018), and in multinational studies (53% vs. 28.9%, p < 0.001); the proportion of basic/fundamental research articles significantly declined (16.5% vs. 28.9%, p = 0.041). Four of the top-5 institutions publishing PeCa-articles are academic centers. Bibliometric analyses revealed author networks, primary research areas in PeCa, and dominant journals for publications. Conclusions: Given the lack of centralization in G + A, this analysis highlights the need for research coordination within multicenter PeCa-projects. The decline in basic/fundamental research should be effectively addressed by the allocation of funded research projects.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85181710158&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00345-023-04719-y
DO - 10.1007/s00345-023-04719-y
M3 - Journal articles
C2 - 38189947
AN - SCOPUS:85181710158
SN - 0724-4983
VL - 42
JO - World Journal of Urology
JF - World Journal of Urology
IS - 1
M1 - 12
ER -