utd_medknow
Indian Journal of Cancer
Home  ICS  Feedback Subscribe Top cited articles Login 
Users Online :993
Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Navigate here
  Search
 
  
Resource links
   Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
   Article in PDF (1,059 KB)
   Citation Manager
   Access Statistics
   Reader Comments
   Email Alert *
   Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
   References
   Article Figures

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1738    
    Printed41    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded134    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal

 

  Table of Contents  
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 52  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 241-242
 

The inside mystery of penile leiomyosarcoma


1 Department of Radiation Oncology, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India
2 Department of Surgery, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India
3 Department of Pathology, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana, India

Date of Web Publication5-Feb-2016

Correspondence Address:
Anil Kumar Dhull
Department of Radiation Oncology, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0019-509X.175826

Rights and Permissions



How to cite this article:
Dhull AK, Kaushal V, Dalal S, Singh S. The inside mystery of penile leiomyosarcoma. Indian J Cancer 2015;52:241-2

How to cite this URL:
Dhull AK, Kaushal V, Dalal S, Singh S. The inside mystery of penile leiomyosarcoma. Indian J Cancer [serial online] 2015 [cited 2021 Jul 25];52:241-2. Available from: https://www.indianjcancer.com/text.asp?2015/52/2/241/175826


Sir,

A 45-year-male patient presented with 2-month-old history of suprapubic discomfort, dysuria, a mass over the proximal shaft of the penis measuring 4 × 3 cm in diameter and indurated ulcer over the penis with raised edges. Symptoms gradually progressed and resulted in a large unhealed painful wound with moderate intensity pain. Patient also gave a history of bleeding from the local ulcerated site. Patient was chronic bidi smoker and alcoholic. During the local physical examination a non-mobile hard-mass was palpated involving the shaft of the penis. The glans penis was normal and no inguinal or iliac nodes were palpable. Ultrasound and Computed tomography scan of abdomen and pelvis were normal. Patient underwent biopsy and histopathologically the overlying epithelium was ulcerated. The tumor was composed of oval to spindle cells arranged in long-interlacing fascicles. Individual cells had cigar-shaped nuclei with tapering ends [Figure 1]a and [Figure 1]b. The neoplastic cells illustrated wide spread positivity for desmin and vimentin immunocytochemical stain [Figure 2]a and [Figure 2]b and stain for cytokeratin (CK) and leucocyte common antigen (LCA) were negative. The histopathological appearance and immunohistochemical profile of the biopsy tissue confirmed it to be a grade-II leimyosarcoma of the penis. With this diagnosis, the patient underwent partial penectomy with perineal urethrostomy [Figure 3]a and [Figure 3]b. Macroscopically, a tumor measuring 3 × 3 × 2 cm was found to arise from the corpora, making the distinction between them almost impossible. The urethra and glans were free of invasion. Histopathologically, no lymph node metastases were found. The histopathological appearance and immunohistochemical profile of the mass again confirmed the preliminary pre-operative diagnosis. Urethral mucosa was free. Areas of necrosis and degeneration were seen. Resected margins were free. The patient had an uneventful post-operative course and is well, without any evidence of tumor recurrence after 1 year of post-operative follow-up.
Figure 1: (a) Photomicrograph (H and E stain, original magnification × 40) showing oval to spindle cells arranged in long interlacing fascicles. (b) Photomicrograph (H and E stain, original magnification ×100) showing cells with cigar-shaped nuclei and tapering ends

Click here to view
Figure 2: (a) Photomicrograph (IHC stain; original magnification ×200) of immunohistochemical study showing tumor cells positive for desmin. (b) Photomicrograph (IHC stain, original magnification ×200) of immunohistochemical study showing tumor cells positive for vimentin

Click here to view
Figure 3: (a) Pre-operative clinical photograph. (b) Post-operative clinical photograph

Click here to view


The mesenchymal neoplasms of the penis are rare and represent less than 5% of all types of penile malignant disease.[1] Leiomyosarcoma of the penis is a rare disease and only infinitesimal number of cases have been reported sofar. Pratt and Ross were the first authors who classified penile leiomyosarcomas into two distinct pathological and clinical entities, superficial and deep-seated tumors.[2] The patients with superficial type tumors as in our case, usually lack symptoms and involve the prepuce, shaft, coronal sulcus, foreskin and glans. These often occur in middle-aged men and commonly are slowly growing tumor, with low metastatic potential. Surgery remains the mainstay of treatment and should aim at the excision of the tumor mass. Amputation is the most effective treatment to prevent recurrences for both types of penile leiomyosarcoma, but the approach should be individualized, and because superficial tumors tend to appear in younger men, these cases can be managed by partial penectomy or local excision with negative surgical margins whenever this is possible.[3] Hensley et al. reported that the combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine and docetaxel is highly effective in the first and second line settings.[4]

 
  References Top

1.
Lucia MS, Miller GJ. Histopathology of malignant lesions of the penis. Urol Clin North Am 1992;19:227-46.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Pratt RM, Ross RT. Leiomyosarcoma of the penis. A report of a case. Br J Surg 1969;56:870-2.  Back to cited text no. 2
[PUBMED]    
3.
Pow-Sang MR, Orihuela E. Leiomyosarcoma of the penis. J Urol 1994;151:1643-5.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Hensley ML, Maki R, Venkatraman E, Geller G, Lovegren M, Aghajanian C, et al. Gemcitabine and docetaxel in patients with unresectable leiomyosarcoma: Results of a phase II trial. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:2824-31.  Back to cited text no. 4
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3]

This article has been cited by
1 Leiomyosarkom der Vorhaut
Juri Rabinovich
Der Urologe. 2018; 57(5): 591
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
Print this article  Email this article
 

    

  Site Map | What's new | Copyright and Disclaimer
  Online since 1st April '07
  2007 - Indian Journal of Cancer | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow