4.4 Review

Small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma as a variant form of prostate cancer recurrence: A case report and short literature review

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2005.08.022

Keywords

prostate cancer; small-cell carcinoma; neuroendocrine marker; progastrin-releasing peptide

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma has been recognized as a rare histologic variant occurring in only 0.5% to 2% of prostatic primary tumors. However, recent autopsy studies suggest development to this phenotype in up to 10% to 20% of the cases with hormone-refractory disease. Case Presentation: A case of conventional adenocarcinoma before androgen-ablation therapy but showing progression to small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma at the recurrence. The immunohistochemistry;try of the tumor showed strong positive staining for progastrin-releasing peptide (ProGRP), a carboxy terminal region common to 3 precursors for gastrin-releasing peptide. but almost negative staining for chromogranin-A and prostate-specific antigen. Combination chemotherapy based on cisplatin and etoposide was effective for controlling the tumor progression for 7 months. and the serum ProGRP level correlated well to the clinical course. Neither objective nor subjective responses were observed to somatostatin analogue therapy performed in the late stage of disease. Conclusions: The present case reminds the urologist that small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma may be a variant form of disease recurrence during androgen ablation in advanced prostate cancer. A strategic approach for this phenotype evaluating serum neuroendocrine markers. such as ProGRP. should be taken when serum prostate-specific antigen does not reflect the disease state. This approach Would allow one to choose alternative therapies targeting neuroendocrine cells other than androgen ablation. (C) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available