Epithelioid hemangioma of the penis: case report and review of literature

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Epithelioid hemangioma is a rare vascular tumor found in the penis. It is essential to avoid misdiagnosis with Peyronie's disease and penile cancer, as management differs significantly.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>We present a case of epithelioid hemangioma of the penis in a 50-year-old Caucasian man. We also review the literature to evaluate the incidence of benign vascular anomalies of the penis and their management.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Epithelioid hemangioma of the penis should be considered in the differential diagnosis of patients presenting with painful penile lumps. A thorough histological and immunohistochemical examination is required to make the diagnosis. Optimal management is complete local excision and periodic physical examination for local recurrence.</p

Mixed Endometrial Epithelial Carcinoma: Epidemiology, Treatment and Survival Rates-A 10-Year Retrospective Cohort Study from a Single Institution

Mixed endometrial carcinoma (MEEC) refers to rare endometrial tumours that are composed of two or more distinct histotypes, at least one of which is serous or clear cell. The aim of this study was to evaluate the epidemiology, treatment outcomes and survival rates of patients with mixed endometrial carcinoma. The medical records of 34 patients diagnosed with MEEC between March 2010 and January 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. Clinicopathological variables and treatment strategies were assessed, and overall survival and disease-free survival rates were evaluated. The histology of endometrioid and serous component was found in 26 (76.5%) patients, followed by serous and clear-cell components (5/34, 14.5%) and mixed endometrioid serous and clear-cell components (3/34, 8.8%). The median age at diagnosis was 70 years (range 52-84), and the median follow-up time was 55 months. The 5-year disease-free survival and the 5-year overall survival were 50.4% and 52.4%, respectively. Advanced disease stage was identified as an independent predictor of inferior disease-free (&lt;0.003) and overall survival (p &lt; 0.001). Except for stage, none of the traditional prognostic factors was associated with disease recurrence or death from disease. MEECs represent rare high-risk endometrial carcinomas with significant diagnostic and treatment challenges. Undoubtedly, the implementation of a molecular analysis can offer further diagnostic and management insights

The Prognostic Characteristics and Recurrence Patterns of High Grade Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer: A Large Retrospective Analysis of a Tertiary Center

High grade endometrioid endometrial cancer (HGEEC) is a heterogeneous group of tumors with unclear prognostic features. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the independent risk factors for recurrence and mortality and to describe the recurrence patterns of HGEEC. Ninety-six consecutive cases of HGEEC treated with primary surgery in a single Tertiary Center were retrospectively reviewed. Clinicopathological and treatment details were recorded, and all patients were closely followed up. Disease-free, overall and cancer-specific survival rates were 83.8%, 77.8% and 83.6%, respectively. Cervical stromal involvement was independently related to recurrence (HR = 25.67; 95%CI 2.95-223.30; p = 0.003) and cancer-related death (HR = 15.39; 95%CI 1.29-183.43; p = 0.031) after adjusting for other pathological and treatment variables. Recurrence rate was 16%, with 60% of these cases having lung metastases and only one case with single vaginal vault recurrence. 81.81% of the recurrences presented with symptoms and not a single recurrence was diagnosed in routine follow-up clinical examination. In conclusion, the recurrence pattern may suggest that patient-initiated follow-up (PIFU) could be considered a potential alternative to clinical-based follow-up for HGEEC survivors, especially for patients without cervical involvement and after two years from treatment. Additional caution is needed in patients with cervical stromal involvement

Why do banks promise to pay par on demand?

We survey the theories of why banks promise to pay par on demand and examine evidence about the conditions under which banks have promised to pay the par value of deposits and banknotes on demand when holding only fractional reserves. The theoretical literature can be broadly divided into four strands: liquidity provision, asymmetric information, legal restrictions, and a medium of exchange. We assume that it is not zero cost to make a promise to redeem a liability at par value on demand. If so, then the conditions in the theories that result in par redemption are possible explanations of why banks promise to pay par on demand. If the explanation based on customers’ demand for liquidity is correct, payment of deposits at par will be promised when banks hold assets that are illiquid in the short run. If the asymmetric-information explanation based on the difficulty of valuing assets is correct, the marketability of banks’ assets determines whether banks promise to pay par. If the legal restrictions explanation of par redemption is correct, banks will not promise to pay par if they are not required to do so. If the transaction explanation is correct, banks will promise to pay par value only if the deposits are used in transactions. After the survey of the theoretical literature, we examine the history of banking in several countries in different eras: fourth-century Athens, medieval Italy, Japan, and free banking and money market mutual funds in the United States. We find that all of the theories can explain some of the observed banking arrangements, and none explain all of them

Comparison between patient-reported outcomes after enucleation and proton beam radiotherapy for uveal melanomas: a 2-year cohort study

Background Uveal melanomas affect 2-8 per million Europeans each year. Approximately 35%, are treated by enucleation. Proton beam radiotherapy (PBR) can be an eye-conserving alternative to enucleation for patients who wish to retain the eye. Both treatments have adverse effects, and it is difficult for clinicians and patients to make fully informed choices between them because the relative effects of enucleation and PBR on patient-reported outcomes are unknown. Methods We compared differential effects of enucleation and PBR on patient-reported outcomes on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Ophthalmological module (EORTC QLQ- OPT30) in a consecutive sample of 115 treated patients ~ 6, 12 and 24 months after diagnosis. Pre-treatment demographic variables, unrelated health problems, vision in the fellow eye, tumour characteristics and prognosis for metastatic disease were statistically controlled. Results Patients treated by enucleation experienced greater functional problems at 6 months, which abated at 12 and 24 months (P = 0.020). PBR patients reported greater impairments of central and peripheral vision (P = 0.009) and reading difficulties (P = 0.002) over 24 months. Treatment modality did not influence difficulty in driving (P = 0.694), ocular irritation (P = 0.281), headaches (P = 0.640), appearance concerns (P = 0.187) or worry about recurrence (P = 0.899). Conclusions When making treatment decisions, it is important that patients and clinicians consider long-standing difficulties of visual impairment associated with PBR and temporary 6-month difficulties in activities related to depth perception associated with enucleation