Nonspecific granulomatous prostatitis with prostatic adenocarcinoma.

Granulomatous prostatitis is an infrequently seen entity in routine practice. One of its most common subtypes is nonspecific granulomatous prostatitis (NSGP), the etiology of which is still under debate. Such cases may be mistaken for adenocarcinoma clinically and radiologically. Histological resemblance to adenocarcinoma may arise when there is a xanthogranulomatous pattern or a prominence of epithelioid histiocytes. However, NSGP may rarely coexist with adenocarcinoma and it is critical to sample these cases thoroughly to exclude the presence of malignancy.

Immunohistochemical distinction between mesothelial and adenocarcinoma cells in serous effusions: a combination panel-based approach with a brief review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic and therapeutic significance of differentiating adenocarcinoma (AC) from reactive mesothelium (RM) in effusions cannot be overemphasized. To avoid diagnostic errors, ancillary techniques like immunohistochemistry are employed. However, results vary and no universal standard has been accepted so far. OBJECTIVE: To study the combined diagnostic efficacy of epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), E-cadherin (EC), calretinin (CAL), desmin (DES) and vimentin (VIM) in distinguishing RM from AC cells in serous effusions. STUDY DESIGN: Unequivocally diagnosed cases of 39 adenocarcinomatous and 38 RM populations were studied using sections from 49 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded cell blocks. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The immunomarkers were applied on cell block sections using the avidin-biotin peroxidase technique. The distribution/intensity of immunostaining in mesothelial and AC cells were graded semiquantitatively. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Fischer's exact test was used to calculate the efficacy of individual markers and their combinations. RESULTS: EMA was the best single marker for AC, with 100% sensitivity and 97.37% specificity. For the mesothelial cells, CAL exhibited 100% sensitivity and 92.31% specificity. DES was more specific than CAL but had a poor sensitivity of 55.26%. EC, CEA and VIM had unsatisfactory predictive values precluding their use as individual diagnostic markers. Among the combinations, two panels--EMA+ AND (CAL- OR DES-) for ACs and CAL+ AND (EMA- OR CEA-) for RM had 100% specificities and sensitivities. CONCLUSIONS: Most panel studies on fluid cytology are based on the arbitrary use of individual markers with the best statistical values, leading to a less than accurate diagnostic assessment. We believe that statistical parameters calculated in combination provide for a more practical and objective evaluation as well as allowing for meaningful comparative studies.

Osseous metaplasia in renal cell carcinoma: report of a rare case.

Focal calcifications are frequently seen in renal masses including renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Osseous metaplasia, on the other hand, is a rare finding in RCC. We report a case of RCC with radiological evidence of speckled calcification that showed osseous metaplasia on histopathological examination. The clinical and pathologic differential diagnosis for this tumor is discussed along with a review of the literature on this unusual phenomenon.