BRAF Activation Initiates but Does Not Maintain Invasive Prostate Adenocarcinoma

Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in men. Activation of MAP kinase signaling pathway has been implicated in advanced and androgen-independent prostate cancers, although formal genetic proof has been lacking. In the course of modeling malignant melanoma in a tyrosinase promoter transgenic system, we developed a genetically-engineered mouse (GEM) model of invasive prostate cancers, whereby an activating mutation of BRAFV600E–a mutation found in ∼10% of human prostate tumors–was targeted to the epithelial compartment of the prostate gland on the background of Ink4a/Arf deficiency. These GEM mice developed prostate gland hyperplasia with progression to rapidly growing invasive adenocarcinoma without evidence of AKT activation, providing genetic proof that activation of MAP kinase signaling is sufficient to drive prostate tumorigenesis. Importantly, genetic extinction of BRAFV600E in established prostate tumors did not lead to tumor regression, indicating that while sufficient to initiate development of invasive prostate adenocarcinoma, BRAFV600E is not required for its maintenance

Aseptic intussuscepted incidental appendectomy: three successful cases

BACKGROUND: Incidental appendectomy remains a controversial issue. We aimed to collect experience using a modified surgical technique that could be applied securely in infants. METHODS: We performed aseptic intussuscepted incidental appendectomy (AIIA) in three patients using a technique that is thought to assure appendix necrosis along with intact cecal wall. RESULTS: There was no perioperative morbidity due to AIIA in the three patients. In two infants the necrotic appendix was found in the diaper. One infant died secondary to diaphragmatic hernia. Autopsy with histological examination revealed that the cecum was intact along with appendix necrosis. CONCLUSIONS: Modified AIIA could securely be performed in the 3 reported cases. We advocate prospective evaluation of the method