Zhonghua nan ke xue = National journal of andrology · 2016
[Urothelial-type mucinous adenocarcinoma of the prostate: A case report and review of the literature].
Клинический случайСтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Guo Yong-shun, Gao Su-mei, Zhang Ming-rong, Zhang Ju-min, Zang Yun-jiang, Lu Hong-kai
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical manifestations, pathological characteristics, and treatments of urothelial-type mucinous adenocarcinoma of the prostate (UMAP).
METHODS: We reported a case of UMAP, reviewed relevant literature, and analyzed the clinicopaothological features, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of the disease.
RESULTS: The patient was a 60-year-old male and underwent transurethral resection of the prostate for dysuria. Postoperative pathology indicated mucinous adenocarcinoma and sigmoidoscopy revealed no primary colon cancer. Immunohistochemical staining showed the negative expressions of PSA and P504s and positive expressions of CK7, CK34 β E12, CK20, and CDX2. Thus UMAP was confirmed and treated by intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Then the patient was followed up for 30 months, which showed desirable therapeutic result, with neither local progression nor distant metastasis.
CONCLUSION: UMAP has a bad prognosis and its diagnosis depends on pathological and immunohistocchemical examinations. It responds well to radical prostatectomy but is not sensitive to endocrine therapy. Radiotherapy can be considered for those who are not fit to receive radical prostatectomy.
METHODS: We reported a case of UMAP, reviewed relevant literature, and analyzed the clinicopaothological features, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of the disease.
RESULTS: The patient was a 60-year-old male and underwent transurethral resection of the prostate for dysuria. Postoperative pathology indicated mucinous adenocarcinoma and sigmoidoscopy revealed no primary colon cancer. Immunohistochemical staining showed the negative expressions of PSA and P504s and positive expressions of CK7, CK34 β E12, CK20, and CDX2. Thus UMAP was confirmed and treated by intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Then the patient was followed up for 30 months, which showed desirable therapeutic result, with neither local progression nor distant metastasis.
CONCLUSION: UMAP has a bad prognosis and its diagnosis depends on pathological and immunohistocchemical examinations. It responds well to radical prostatectomy but is not sensitive to endocrine therapy. Radiotherapy can be considered for those who are not fit to receive radical prostatectomy.