RESUMEN

Primary epithelial tumor of the renal pelvis is rare and only 100 cases are reported in the literature [1]. Histological examination of the tumor showed glands, cysts, and papillae lined by pseudostratified columnar epithelium with hyperchromatic nuclei. Scattered signet ring-type cells were also seen floating in large pools of extracellular mucin. Sections from the ureter showed a component of adenocarcinoma in situ. No invasive tumor was identified in ureteric tissue. One case was reported with carcinoma in situ of the ureter (2). Immunohistochemically: The tumor showed positivity for CK7, CK20, CK8/18, GATA-3, MSH-2, MSH-6, MLH-1, Ber-EP4, and S-100-P with focal positivity for CDX-2, weak positivity for PMS-2 and negativity in TTF-1 and Her-2. Molecular pathological analysis revealed microsatellite stability and without mutation in K-ras-gene. Thus, a diagnosis of mucinous adenocarcinoma of the renal pelvis with in situ adenocarcinoma of the ureter was made.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: For bladder cancer (BCa) patients undergoing bladder-sparing treatments, molecular markers may aid in accurately predicting progression to muscle invasion and recurrence. Hyaluronic acid (HA) is a glycosaminoglycan that promotes tumor metastasis. Hyaluronoglucosaminidase 1 (HYAL-1)-type hyaluronidase (HAase) promotes tumor growth, invasion, and angiogenesis. Urinary HA and HAase levels are diagnostic markers for BCa. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated whether HA and HYAL-1 can predict progression to muscle invasion and recurrence among patients with non-muscle-invasive BCa. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: : Based on tissue availability, tissue microarrays were prepared from a cohort of 178 BCa specimens (144 non-muscle invasive, 34 muscle invasive). Follow-up information was available on 111 patients with non-muscle-invasive BCa (mean follow-up: 69.5 mo); 58 patients recurred and 25 progressed to muscle invasion (mean time to progress: 22.3 mo). MEASUREMENTS: HA and HYAL-1 expression was evaluated by immunohistochemistry and graded for intensity and area of staining. Association of HA and HYAL-1 staining with BCa recurrence and muscle invasion was evaluated by univariate and multivariate models. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: HA and HYAL-1 expression correlated with tumor grade, stage, and multifocality (p<0.05). In non-muscle-invasive BCa specimens, HYAL-1 staining was higher (234.3+/-52.2; 200.6+/-61.4) if patients experienced progression to muscle invasion or recurrence when compared with no progression or recurrence (164.1+/-48.2; 172.1+/-57; p<0.001). HA staining correlated with muscle invasion (p<0.001). In univariate analysis, age (p=0.014), multifocality (p=0.023), and HYAL-1 staining (p<0.001) correlated with muscle invasion, whereas only HYAL-1 correlated with recurrence (p=0.013). In multivariate analysis, HYAL-1 significantly associated with muscle invasion (p<0.001; 76.8% accuracy) and recurrence (p=0.01; 67.8% accuracy). CONCLUSIONS: HYAL-1 is a potential prognostic marker for predicting progression to muscle invasion and recurrence.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Objetivos: El Grupo de trabajo de la Asociación Europea de Urología (AEU) sobre el Carcinoma de Células Renales (CCR)ha preparado esta guía para ayudar a los urólogos a evaluar la evidencia sobre el manejo del CCR y a incorporar sus recomendaciones a su práctica clínica. Material y métodos: Las recomendaciones proporcionadas en esta guía están basadas en una búsqueda sistemática de la literatura utilizando Medline, el Registro Central de Ensayos Controlados de la Cochrane, así como en publicaciones y artículos de revisión. Resultados: Hay un número limitado de estudios prospectivos aleatorizados con alto nivel de evidencia. La mayoría de las publicaciones acerca del CCR se basan en análisis retrospectivos, incluyendo algunos estudios multicéntricos más largos validados y estudios controlados bien diseñados. Conclusiones: se debe remarcar que esta guía contiene información para el tratamiento individual de un paciente de acuerdo a un enfoque general estándar. El manejo clínico de los pacientes con CCR puede mejorarse con recomendaciones actualizadas sobre diagnóstico, tratamiento y seguimiento (AU)

Objectives: The European Association of Urology (EAU) Guideline Group for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) prepared this guideline to help urologists assess the evidence-based management of RCC and to incorporate the guideline recommendations into their clinical practice. Methods: The re commendations provided in the current guideline are based on a systematic literature search using MedLine, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and publications and review articles. Results: A Limited Number of prospective randomized studies are available with high-level evidence. Most publications concerning RCC are based on retrospective analyses, including some larger multicentre validation studies and well-designed controlled studies. Conclusions: It must be stressed that the current guideline contains information for the treatment of an individual patient according to a standardized general approach. Updated recommendations concerning diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up can improve the clinical handling of patients with RCC (AU)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

CONTEXT: New data regarding diagnosis and treatment of muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer (MiM-BC) has emerged and led to an update of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for MiM-BC. OBJECTIVE: To review the new EAU guidelines for MiM-BC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A comprehensive workup of the literature obtained from Medline, the Cochrane central register of systematic reviews, and reference lists in publications and review articles was developed and screened by a group of urologists, oncologists, and radiologist appointed by the EAU Guideline Committee. Previous recommendations based on the older literature on this subject were taken into account. Levels of evidence and grade of guideline recommendations were added, modified from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The diagnosis of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (BCa) is made by transurethral resection (TUR) and following histopathologic evaluation. Patients with confirmed muscle-invasive BCa should be staged by computed tomography (CT) scans of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis, if available. Adjuvant chemotherapy is currently only advised within clinical trials. Radical cystectomy (RC) is the treatment of choice for both sexes, and lymph node dissection should be an integral part of cystectomy. An orthotopic bladder substitute should be offered to both male and female patients lacking any contraindications, such as no tumour at the level of urethral dissection. Multimodality bladder-preserving treatment in localised disease is currently regarded only as an alternative in selected, well-informed, and compliant patients for whom cystectomy is not considered for clinical or personal reasons. An appropriate schedule for disease monitoring should be based on (1) natural timing of recurrence, (2) probability of disease recurrence, (3) functional deterioration at particular sites, and (4) consideration of treatment of a recurrence. In metastatic disease, the first-line treatment for patients fit enough to sustain cisplatin is cisplatin-containing combination chemotherapy. Presently, there is no standard second-line chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: These EAU guidelines are a short, comprehensive overview of the updated guidelines of (MiM-BC) as recently published in the EAU guidelines and also available in the National Guideline Clearinghouse.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The European Association of Urology (EAU) Guideline Group for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) prepared this guideline to help urologists assess the evidence-based management of RCC and to incorporate the guideline recommendations into their clinical practice. METHODS: The recommendations provided in the current guideline are based on a systematic literature search using MedLine, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and publications and review articles. RESULTS: A limited number of prospective randomised studies are available with high-level evidence. Most publications concerning RCC are based on retrospective analyses, including some larger multicentre validation studies and well-designed controlled studies. CONCLUSIONS: It must be stressed that the current guideline contains information for the treatment of an individual patient according to a standardised general approach. Updated recommendations concerning diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up can improve the clinical handling of patients with RCC.

Asunto(s)