Dergiler / Turkish Journal of Urology / 2019 / Cilt: 45 - Sayı: 6

Evaluation of germ-cell neoplasia in situ entity in testicular tumors

Sayfa
418–422
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

For presently these findings show us that GCNIS cannot be used as a prognostic facto

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objective: Germ-cell neoplasia in situ (GCNIS) is accepted as the precursor of the testicular tumors.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Material and methods: Data from 108 patients who underwent orchiectomy for testicular tumor between January 2007 and December 2014 in our clinic were retrospectively analyzed and included in the study.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:For presently these findings show us that GCNIS cannot be used as a prognostic facto
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2007 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Objective: Germ-cell neoplasia in situ (GCNIS) is accepted as the precursor of the testicular tumors. The aim in our study is to compare the lymphadenopathy and metastasis parameters in patients diagnosed with testicular tumor with or without GCNIS based on pathological evaluation. Material and methods: Data from 108 patients who underwent orchiectomy for testicular tumor between January 2007 and December 2014 in our clinic were retrospectively analyzed and included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups based on the pathology reports as GCNIS or not. Groups were com- pared regarding lymphadenopathy, metastasis, tumor marker levels, tumor size, lymphovascular invasion, rete testis invasion. Mann-Whitney U test was used for statistical evaluation. Results: Mean age of the patients included in the study were calculated as 34.6±9.3 years. Eighty-five (78.7%) patients had GCNIS, while 23 (21.3%) of them had not. In terms of metastasis, lymphadenopathy, marker levels, tumor size, lymphovascular invasion and rete testis invasion, no statistical significant differ - ence were observed between two groups (p>0.05). Conclusion: In our study, no statistical significant difference was observed on the prognostic factors con- cerning the GCNIS entity, which is reported frequently in testicular tumor pathologies. For presently these findings show us that GCNIS cannot be used as a prognostic facto

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

AKYÜZ, M., TOPAKTAŞ, R., ÜRKMEZ, A., KOCA, O., ÖZTÜRK, M. İ. (2019). Evaluation of germ-cell neoplasia in situ entity in testicular tumors. Turkish Journal of Urology, Cilt: 45 - Sayı: 6, 418–422. https://ajindex.com/articles/417622

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (16)

  1. Huyghe E, Matsuda T, Thonneau P. Increasing incidence of testicular cancer Worldwide: a review. J Urol 2003
  2. [CrossRef] 2. Skakkebaek NE. Possible carcinoma in situ of the testis. Lancet 1972
  3. v 3. Montironi R. Intra tubuler germ cell neoplasia of the testis. Eur Urol 2002
  4. [CrossRef] 4. In Brierley JD, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C. The TNM clas- sification of malignant tumours, 8th ed. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 2017. 5. Hargreaves TB. Carcinoma in situ of the testis. Br Med J 1986
  5. [CrossRef] 6. Coffin CM, Ewing S, Dehner LP. Frequency of intra tubuler germ cell neoplasia with invasive testicular germ cell tumors. Arch Patol Lab Med 1985
  6. Dieckmann KP, Kulejewski M, Pichlmeier U, Loy V. Diagnosis of contralateral testicular intraepithelial neoplasia (TIN) in patients with testicular germ cell cancer: systematic two-site biopsies are more sensitive than a single random biopsy. Eur Urol 2007
  7. [CrossRef] 8. Shaw J. Diagnosis and treatment of testicular cancer. Am Fam Physician 2008
  8. Shanmugalingam T, Soultati A, Chowdhury S, Rudman S, Van Hemelrijck M. Global incidence and outcome of testicular cancer. Clin Epidemiol 2013
  9. Andrew JS, Timothy DG. Neoplasms of the Testis Campell-Walsh Urology. 10th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier
  10. pp.837- 70. 11. Albers P, Albrecht W, Algaba F, Bokemeyer C, Cohn-Cedermark G, Fizazi K, et al. EAU guidelines on testicular cancer: 2016 update. Eur Urol 2011
  11. [CrossRef] 12. Bilir G, Çakır E, Benzer E, Pak I, Kebat T, Ardıç F. Intratubular germ cell neoplasia accompanying germ cell tumors. Ege J Med 2007
  12. Linke J, Loy V, Dieckmann KP. Prevalence of testicular intraepi- thelial neoplasia in healthy males. J Urol 2005
  13. [CrossRef] 14. Bahrami A, Ro JY, Ayala AG. An overview of testicular germ cell tumors. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2007
  14. Dieckmann KP, Pichlmeier U. Clinical epidemiology of testicular germ cell tumors. World J Urol 2004
  15. [CrossRef] 16. Dieckmann KP, Wilken S, Loy V, Matthies C, Kleinschmidt K, Bedke J, et al. Treatment of testicular intraepithelial neo- plasia (intratubular germ cell neoplasia unspecified) with loca radiotherapy or with platinum-based chemotherapy: a survey of the German Testicular Cancer Study Group. Ann Oncol 2013
  16. [CrossRef] 17. Vogt AP, Chen Z, Osunkoya AO. Rete testis invasion by malignant germ cell tumor and/or intratubular germ cell neo-