Library

X
feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Small cell carcinoma of urinary bladder is differentiated from urothelial carcinoma by chromogranin expression, absence of CD44 variant 6 expression, a unique pattern of cytokeratin expression, and more intense γ-enolase expression (1999)
    Oxford, U.K. and Cambridge, USA : Blackwell Science Ltd
    Histopathology 35 (1999), S. 0 
    Details
    ISSN: 1365-2559
    Source: Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005
    Topics: Medicine
    Notes: Small cell (neuroendocrine) carcinoma of the urinary bladder is clinically more aggressive than urothelial (transitional cell) carcinoma. We have investigated the immunohistochemical markers most useful in diagnosing small cell carcinoma in bladder.〈section xml:id="abs1-2"〉〈title type="main"〉Methods and resultsWe evaluated the expression of chromogranin A, CD44 variant 6 (CD44v6), cytokeratin (CAM 5.2), gamma-enolase, synaptophysin, and CD45 in 46 small cell carcinomas of the bladder. Small cell and urothelial carcinoma were mixed in 21 (46%) cases. The two immunohistochemical markers with best ability to discriminate between small cell and urothelial carcinoma were chromogranin A and CD44v6. Chromogranin A had 97% specificity for small cell carcinoma, staining 65% of cases with 2+/3+ mean intensity; only one case (5%) of urothelial carcinoma was weakly (1+/3+) positive. CD44v6 was 80% specific for urothelial carcinoma, with immunoreactivity in 60% of cases, compared with 7% of small cell carcinoma cases. In cases positive for CD44v6, the mean percentage of reactive urothelial carcinoma cells was 75% (range 10–100%), greater than the 12% of cells in three cases of small cell carcinoma (P = 0.31); further, the pattern of immunoreactivity was membranous vs. focal cytoplasmic, respectively. All small cell carcinomas stained with one of the three neuroendocrine markers tested; 76% of cases were reactive for synaptophysin and 93% for gamma-enolase, with specificities of 86% and 73% in comparison to urothelial carcinoma. γ-enolase staining of small cell carcinoma was more intense (P = 0.01) than for urothelial carcinoma. Cytokeratin CAM 5.2 stained a mean 47% of cells in small cell carcinoma, always in a punctate perinuclear pattern, and 75% in urothelial carcinoma, in a membranous pattern.〈section xml:id="abs1-3"〉〈title type="main"〉ConclusionsCD44v6, chromogranin A, and possibly gamma-enolase and cytokeratin (CAM 5.2) help differentiate small cell carcinoma from urothelial carcinoma.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2559.1999.00715.x
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    Paper (German National Licenses)
    Fulltext
  • 2
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Prostate-specific antigen as a marker of prostate disease (2000)
    Springer
    Virchows Archiv 436 (2000), S. 297-304 
    Details
    ISSN: 1432-2307
    Keywords: Key words Serum prostate-specific antigen ; Prostate carcinoma ; Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia ; Benign prostatic hyperplasia
    Source: Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
    Topics: Medicine
    Notes: Abstract  Serum prostate markers, in particular prostate-specific antigen (PSA), have truly revolutionised all aspects of the management of men with prostatic carcinoma (PCa), the most important application being related to its early detection and screening. Several studies have shown the clinical utility of PSA levels for staging patients with PCa, especially when associated with other parameters, such as tumour grade, digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasound findings, to establish the likelihood of disease extension outside the gland and of positive lymph nodes. Also, serum PSA levels are useful in monitoring patients either after the initial diagnosis of PCa or following therapy.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s004280050450
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    Paper (German National Licenses)
    Fulltext
  • 3
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    The significance of atypical adenomatous hyperplasia and prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia for the development of prostate carcinoma (1995)
    Springer
    Virchows Archiv 426 (1995), S. 425-434 
    Details
    ISSN: 1432-2307
    Keywords: Prostate ; Carcinoma ; Atypical adenomatous hyperplasia ; Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia
    Source: Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
    Topics: Medicine
    Notes: Abstract The term prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) is an accepted diagnosis in pathology of the prostate. The diagnostic difference between atypical adenomatous hyperplasia (AAH) and adenosis is still under debate. A number of questions remain about the significance of grading of AAH and PIN, the biology of AAH and PIN as precursors of carcinoma, the possibility of treatment of AAH and PIN and whether AAH- and PIN-associated cancers differ from non-associated carcinoma. This paper reviews the results and discussions at the First International Consultation Meeting on Atypical Adenomatous Hyperplasia and Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia and the Origins of the Prostatic Carcinomas. AAH is an architectural atypia of the prostate. The histological and cytological features of AAH are intermediate between BPH and low-grade carcinoma of the prostate. Cell kinetic findings show no distinct neoplastic pattern. AAH may be a precursor of transition zone carcinoma but the findings to date are inconclusive. Follow up studies should address whether the association of AAH and carcinoma is incidental or whether transition occurs between AAH and carcinoma. In contrast, PIN is an accepted preneoplastic lesion and the most likely precursor of the dorso-peripheral zone carcinoma. The diagnosis of high-grade PIN is clinically important, because high-grade PIN is associated with carcinoma in a high percentage of patients (38–100%). AAH- and PIN-associated cancers may not differ from other prostatic cancers. At present treatment for AAH and PIN without carcinoma is not indicated, but high-grade PIN warrants surveillance and follow up of the patient to identify a possible coexisting cancer. It must be stressed that AAH and PIN are multifocal lesions and both are age-associated.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00193163
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    Paper (German National Licenses)
    Fulltext
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...