Abstract
Neuroendocrine neoplasms of the urinary bladder are a rare type of tumor that account for a small percentage of urinary bladder neoplasms. These tumors of the urinary bladder range from well-differentiated neuroendocrine neoplasms (carcinoids) to the more aggressive subtypes such as small cell carcinoma. Despite the rarity of the neuroendocrine tumors of the bladder, there has been substantial investigation into the underlying genomic, molecular, and the cellular alterations within this group of neoplasms. Accordingly, these findings are increasingly incorporated into the understanding of clinical aspects of these neoplasms. In this review, we provide an overview of recent literature related to the 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Neuroendocrine Tumors of the Urinary Bladder. Particular emphasis is placed on molecular alterations and recently described gene expression. The neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder are subdivided into four subtypes. Similar to their pulmonary and other extrapulmonary site counterparts, these have different degrees of neuroendocrine differentiation and morphological features. The clinical aspects of four subtypes of neuroendocrine tumor are discussed with emphasis of the most recent developments in diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis. An understanding of molecular basis of neuroendocrine tumors will provide a base of knowledge for future investigations into this group of unusual bladder neoplasms.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder are rare and comprise <1 % of all urinary bladder malignancies. The tumors tend to affect older men, clinical presentations remarkably similar to other types of invasive urothelial carcinoma [1, 2]. The most common presenting clinical signs are hematuria and irritative voiding symptoms [3]. Diagnosis methods are also similar and include transurethral biopsy or resection of the lesion. Characterization is performed primarily on morphology and immunohistochemical stains if needed [4].
The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of Urinary System and Male Genital Organ classification system separates four subtypes of neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder and provides a convenient platform to base discussion of the relevant details of the aforementioned: small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma, large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma, well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor, and paragangliomas (Table 1) [5]. Due to the rarity of tumors, systematic studies are retrospective in nature and few in number. In this review, we use a similar taxonomy of the neuroendocrine tumors of the bladder and provide an expansive discussion of the genomic, cellular, and clinical aspects of each entity.
Small Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma (Small Cell Carcinoma) of the Urinary Bladder
Small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder is one of the more common of the neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder with an estimated 500 cases per year or 0.14 cases per 100,000 people [1, 2]. On microscopic examination, the tumor consists of sheets or nests of small or intermediate cells with molding, scant cytoplasm, inconspicuous nucleoli, and evenly dispersed “salt-and-pepper chromatin” (Fig. 1) [6, 7]. Mitotic activity is usually brisk and frequent crush artifact is found. Necrosis is commonly present as is vascular invasion (Table 2) [4, 8].
Small cell carcinoma of the bladder affects patients over the age of 60 with a male predominance [9–16]. The most common presenting symptom is hematuria with voiding symptoms, and rarely can paraneoplastic syndromes accompany the tumor [17, 18]. Approximately 60 % of patients present with metastatic disease at time of diagnosis [7]. Although rarely small cell carcinoma presents diagnostic difficulties, other entities must be considered in the differential diagnosis including lymphoma, poorly differentiated urothelial carcinoma, poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma, small cell carcinoma from other sites, and lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma [4]. Small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder typically exhibits both epithelial and neuroendocrine differentiation. Immunohistochemical stains show high positivity for chromogranin, synaptophysin, CD57 (Leu7) CD56, TTF-1, neuron-specific enolase, CAM5.2, Keratin7, and epithelial membrane antigen (EMA). Additionally, GATA3 has been found in 32 % of tumors (Table 3) [4, 7, 19–24]. Additionally, immunohistochemical stains such as CK20 are negative in small cell carcinoma, but positive in 40–70 % of urothelial carcinomas. Also, CK20 can be used to distinguish Merkel cell carcinoma (positive) from small cell carcinomas of the urinary bladder (negative). The distinction between lymphoma and small cell carcinoma is made by a positive CD45 (LCA), negative neuroendocrine, and negative epithelial profile. The distinction between prostate and bladder origin of small cell carcinoma can be more difficult, especially in smaller biopsy specimens. PSA is usually negative and p501S has a low staining rate (20 %). The prostate-specific TMPRss2-ERG fusion can rule in prostate origin, but negative staining does not rule it out [4, 25, 26].
The original theories of the cells of origin in small cell carcinoma included a tumor arising from a Kultschitzky-type cell or a tumor arising from a cell that is not normally present in the urinary bladder mucosa [27]. Cheng et al. showed molecular genetic evidence of common clonal origin of co-existing small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder suggesting that the cell of origin was a multipotential, undifferentiated cell or stem cell [28].
Genetic studies have identified the frequent loss of heterozygosity in 9p21 (p16), 3p25–26 (VHL), 9q32–33 (DBC1), and 17p13 (TP53) [28, 29]. Quantitative studies performed on the methylation status of RASSSF1, MLH1, DAPK1, TERT, and MGMT tumor suppressor genes found a high incidence of promotor region methylation [30–32]. Subsequent decrease and/or dysfunction of those tumor suppressor genes may lead to unregulated carcinogenesis [33, 34]. More recently, a unique promotor mutation in the TERT gene was identified and found to be a unique mutation from other sites of small cell carcinoma. Immunohistochemical stains show high positivity for chromogranin, synaptophysin, CD56, TTF-1, neuron-specific enolase, CAM5.2, Keratin7, and EMA. Additionally, GATA3 has been found in 32 % of tumors (Table 3) [4, 7, 19–24].
The treatment includes a multimodal approach with some of the longest disease-free survivals occurring in the setting of neoadjuvant (platinum-based) chemotherapy [17, 35]. Other approaches combine partial cystectomy or radical cystectomy with adjuvant chemotherapy [36–38]. Chemotherapy regimens have been extrapolated from the pulmonary counterpart and consist of cisplatin, gemcitabine, isofosfamide, and paclitaxel as first-line agents for patients presenting with extensive disease [39–41]. The survival depends on the stage of presentation; however, most of the outcome data is based on retrospective, small series using various nonstandardized treatment modalities. This makes an identification of subgroups for which a particular therapy modality is appropriate [17].
For treatment of limited disease, a number of potential strategies exist; the optimal therapy has not been defined due to lack of controlled studies. Although transurethral resection of the bladder tumor is an initial diagnostic measure for the disease, it does not appear to be sufficient in terms of control of disease due to the aggressive nature. Several retrospective studies have shown worse long-term outcomes of transurethral resection compared to transurethral resection plus cystectomy. The difference in 5-year overall survival between these modalities ranges from 0–16 to 18–36 %. However, there is inherent bias present in patients not undergoing cystectomy due to comorbidities [3, 42, 43].
Platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy and cystectomy have been shown to provide tumor downstaging and control of micrometastases and lead to improved survival. A retrospective study by Siefker-Radtke et al. in 2004 showed the 5-year disease-specific survival rate to be significantly increased with neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared to cystectomy alone (78 versus 36 %, respectively) [44]. A later study by Lynch et al. found improved survival in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared to cystectomy (160 versus 18 months, respectively) [45]. Another SEER database study found that chemotherapy improved patient survival in localized-stage, regional-stage, and distant-stage disease in conjunction with transurethral resection. The study showed no difference in survival with cystectomy or not [43]. Other clinicopathological parameters such as age, gender, presenting symptoms, and the presence of nonsmall cell carcinoma components do not appear to impact the outcomes in several studies [3, 4, 20]. Currently, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines state that patients with small cell carcinoma of the bladder are best treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radiation or cystectomy [46]. However, prospective, well-controlled studies of the treatment are needed to address the major role treatment modalities to optimize survival outcomes.
In patients presenting with extensive disease, chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment using cisplatin, gemcitabine, ifosfamide, and paclitaxel as first-line agents. The addition of chemotherapy extends the overall survival from 4 to 8–15 months, respectively [47, 48]. In selected patients with extensive disease, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and cystectomy have shown to have improved survival [45]. Despite chemotherapy and local treatment, distant metastases occur early within the first 6 months after presentation [25]. For relapse, second-line chemotherapy agents can be used such as cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and doxorubicin [49].
Unlike small cell carcinoma of the lung, with a high incidence of brain metastases (60 %), small cell of the urinary bladder has a lower incidence (10 %). The high rates in pulmonary small cell carcinoma support prophylactic radiation, but the lower incidence and lack of data regarding effects on disease and quality of life preclude this treatment in small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder [50, 51].
Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of the Urinary Bladder
Similar to small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder, the diagnosis of large cell neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder is established on morphologic criteria similar for the pulmonary counterpart (Fig. 2). This criterion includes large cells, polygonal shape, low nuclear to cytoplasmic ratio, coarse chromatin, and prominent nucleoli. Nuclear palisading and rosettes have been noted (Table 2) [52, 53]. Additionally, immunochemical or ultrastructural evidence of neuroendocrine differentiation is required [54]. The tumor has a high mitotic count and high Ki67 proliferation index with reports of 40 % [15, 24]. Interestingly, the pulmonary literature has shown similar findings as in the bladder: there is no clear nuclear or cell size cutoff between large and small cell carcinoma and high variability in cell size making diagnosis difficult [53, 55].
There are a number of theories for the cell of origin for large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. The first are similar hypotheses common to the other neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder including multipotent stem cells, originating from the submucosa neuroendocrine cells or urinary tract epithelial metaplasia [26]. Another hypothesis is that the neuroendocrine cells originate from the urachal epithelium [56, 57].
Although there have been no studies of the genomic landscape of large cell neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder due to their rarity, the difference in mutational genes between pulmonary small cell and large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma has been explored. Distinct differential mutations between the two were found in JAK3, NRAS, RB1, and VHL (all absent in large cell and all present in small cell). Other mutational differences include IDH, FGFR1, FGFR2, KDR, KRAS, and MET [58]. Additional studies in the pulmonary literature show common mutations in TP53, among the entities [59]. Moreover, chromosomal patterns in large cell carcinoma have demonstrated some similar complex abnormal patterns (4q-, 5q-, 10q-, 13q-, 15q-) to those of small cell carcinoma [60]. Similar to the urinary bladder, investigations of molecular perturbations have focused on small cell carcinoma. Future research is certainly needed to investigate molecular alterations in large cell neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder extrapolated from the pulmonary literature [61].
The index case of large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary bladder was described by Abenoza et al. in 1986 [62]. This neuroendocrine tumor is of high grade, biologically aggressive, and associated with poor prognoses. The presentation is similar to other urinary bladder cancer with gross hematuria being the usual presenting symptom. Additionally, large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma is often admixed with a squamous or adenocarcinoma component [56]. There is a male predominance and old age at presentation [63]. Similar to small cell carcinoma, the diagnosis of the urinary bladder is established on criteria similar for the pulmonary counterpart [54]. As discussed, immunochemical or ultrastructural evidence of neuroendocrine differentiation is required [54]. The tumors show immunohistochemical evidence of neuroendocrine differentiation such as positive staining with chromogranin-A, CD56, and synaptophysin (Table 3). These stains have a combined sensitivity and specificity of 96 and 100 %, respectively, to distinguish neuroendocrine from urothelial carcinoma. However, chromogranin-A staining has a reduced sensitivity for large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma compared to small cell carcinoma (40 versus 80 %, respectively). Not surprisingly, the Ki67 index >40 % has been shown to be 80 % sensitive and 86 % specific to distinguish large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma and urothelial carcinoma [53, 64].
Recognition of the entity is important because of the subsequent poor outcomes. There are no standardized staging protocols; a few scattered reports demonstrate potential utility of positron emission tomography (PET) and computed tomography (CT) for large and small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma [65, 66]. Due to the scarcity of reported cases, there is no standard treatment; however, multimodal therapy with surgery and chemotherapy has been used. A single institution series published by Gupta et al. showed a difference in five patients with large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma treated with adjuvant chemotherapy versus surgery alone (116 versus 2 to 29 months, respectively) [53]. Treatment of these rare bladder tumors have been largely extrapolated from the pulmonary literature. Chemotherapy extrapolated from pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma including a platinum-based regimen is the mainstay [67]. A case in the literature used detection of the EGFR mutation which responds to Gefitinib in order to guide treatment. Other reports use a combination of surgery, radiation, and/or chemotherapy [61, 63, 68].
Distant metastases are frequent, either at diagnosis or later in the course of disease with liver and bone being the most common sites [15, 63]. A case report described a cutaneous metastatic deposit in addition to a reported case of presenting symptom of large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma being neurological symptoms from a brain metastasis. The lack of clinical symptoms related to the bladder lesion is quite unusual. It is unknown what the true incidence is due to rarity of the disease, and extrapolation from the pulmonary literature suggests a high risk with worse outcomes than small cell carcinoma [69–71].
Well-Differentiated Neuroendocrine Tumors (Carcinoids) of the Urinary Bladder
Primary well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors of the bladder (carcinoids) are very rare with the first case reported by Colby in 1980 [72] and hitherto approximately 10 subsequent cases described in the literature [2, 73] Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (carcinoid) exhibit the same microscopic features described in other sites, that is, uniform cells with finely stippled chromatin and inconspicuous nucleoli with intracytoplasmic granules resembling Paneth cells (Table 1). A unique feature is the arrangement of cells in a pseudoglandular pattern and association with cystitis cystica and cystitis glandularis. Less commonly, well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder are composed of anastomosing cords and nests. An oncocytic variant with cells similar to a renal oncocytoma has been reported along with intraluminal mucin and intracytoplasmic mucin. Additionally, subnuclear eosinophilic granules have been observed (similar to those observed in neuroendocrine tumors of the intestine). Overall, mitotic activity is rare with necrosis absent [24, 74–77].
Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder contain argyrophilic and argentaffin neurosecretory granules. Cells within the normal bladder urothelium have neuroendocrine features, and chromogranin and serotonin immunoreactivity has been identified in cells in Von Brunn’s nests, cystitis glandularis, and cystitis cystica [78]. Several cases of well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder have been found to have features of intracytoplasmic eosinophilic granules (which stain for neuroendocrine markers) and polypoid-like stalks with chronic inflammation, cystitis cystica, and cystitis glandularis, in one study (9 of 13 specimens) [14, 73, 76]. As such, it has been postulated that well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder may arise from the increased number of neuroendocrine cells in these reactive lesions [14, 73, 79]. However, there has been one report of a case with several unique features including location in the trigone and without cystitis glandularis and cystitis cystica and without intracytoplasmic eosinophilic granules [80].
Due to their rarity, the genomic landscape of large cell neuroendocrine tumors (carcinoids) of the urinary bladder has not been explored. Again, we can use the pulmonary counterparts to extrapolate potential alterations. One study showed that the main genes involved with chromatin remodeling were mutated: ARID2, SETD1B, and STAG1 [81]. Chromosomal alterations of pulmonary carcinoids showed chromosomal imbalances in 10q and 13q [60]. Future research is certainly needed to identify extrapolations obtained from the pulmonary literature.
Hematuria is the most common presenting symptom with tumors most commonly presenting as small polypoid lesions in bladder neck and trigone. These polypoid-like structures show marked venous engorgement over the tumor and range in size from 3 to 12 mm in greatest dimension [82]. Several cases occurring in the prostatic urethra have also been reported. There is no association with the carcinoid tumor syndrome seen in other body sites. There is one reported case of calcitonin-secreting carcinoid of the urinary bladder; the remainders show no similar paraneoplastic secretion syndromes. The reported range of and gender of patients are similar to conventional urothelial carcinoma [14, 73, 78, 80, 83]. In addition to expressing immunohistochemical neuroendocrine expression, well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder express prostate-specific acid phosphatase but no other prostate markers (Table 3). The prognosis is excellent of typical well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors limited to the lamina propria. Moreover, involvement of the muscularis propria by well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors also appears resulting in favorable outcomes, albeit with conclusions based on shorter clinical follow-up [73, 80, 84].
The treatment for localized disease is similar to the treatment of carcinoids at other body sites and primarily involves surgical resection with clinical follow-up [74]. Previous reports suggest that more than 25 % of patients will present with regional or distant spread [82]. Although the pure well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors of the bladder appear to have excellent prognosis, the number of cases is small with limited follow-up periods. Long-term follow-up for the patient is recommended [80]. Mixed carcinoid tumors appear to exhibit aggressive behavior, with the noncarcinoid driving clinical outcomes [85, 86].
Paraganglioma of the Urinary Bladder
Primary paraganglioma of the bladder is very rare and makes up less than 0.05 % of all bladder malignancies and <1 % of all paragangliomas [1, 87]. The morphological features of a paraganglioma (extra-adrenal pheochromocytoma) are also morphologically similar to other locations of extra-adrenal pheochromocytomas (Fig. 3). The morphology includes the nested growth pattern. Pseudorosette formations exist which are separated by a delicate plexiform vascular or fibrous septa (Table 2). The cells are large and polygonal with amphophilic cytoplasm. Nuclei are usually central but can often be eccentrically located. They can sometimes be pleomorphic and hyperchromatic with smudged chromatin. Mitoses hemorrhage or necrosis is rare [1, 24, 87–91].
The origin of paraganglioma of the urinary bladder is also uncertain but believed to be related to migration of small nests of paraganglionic tissue along the aortic axis and in the pelvic regions into the bladder wall during embryogenesis [92–94]. The paraganglioma originates from the neural crest-derived chromaffin cells of the sympathetic system within the bladder wall [91, 95]. In support of this hypothesis, an autopsy study of 409 patients identified paraganglia in the urinary bladder wall in 52 % cases. The study also showed that paraganglia was present within the different layers of the wall with a predilection for anterior and posterior walls. The muscularis propria of the bladder wall was the commonest location [96].
Approximately, one third of paragangliomas are associated with the inherited mutations in 17 genes. The most important are the von Hippel-Lindau (VHL), rearranged during transfection (RET); neurofibromatosis 1 (NF1); succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) subunits A, B, C, and D; SDH complex assembly factor 2 (SDHAF2); transmembrane protein 127 (TMEM127); and myc-associated factor X genes [97]. More recently, it has been recognized that there are germline mutations in SDHB and SDHD genes and those who harbor such mutations are more likely to develop paraganglioma and malignant disease. These mutations in SDHD tend to be nonsense mutations, whereas in SDHB gene the mutations show a broad spread across exons 2–7 [98–100]. Those with germline mutations also show an age-related penetrance and show to be more aggressive [95].
Recent studies have shown that immunohistochemical stains for SDHB on routine formalin-fixed tissue paragangliomas can reveal the presence of SDHB, SDHC, or SDHD germline mutations with a high degree of reliability regardless of the type of mutational status, whether missense, nonsense, splice site, or frameshift. These studies revealed the absence of SDHB staining in paragangliomas (and pheochromocytomas) with mutations in SDHB, SDHC, or SDHD. Conversely, SDHB staining was seen in all cases of tumors related to MEN2, VHL disease, or NF1 and in paragangliomas with no syndromic germline mutation [101, 102]. This follows results of other studies showing that whatever SDH subunit is mutated, inactivation induces a complete abolition of SDH enzyme activity in the tumor suggesting a conformational change or destabilization or proteolysis [103, 104]. The importance of studying the SDHB gene in both inherited and sporadic cases has recently come to light, and the importance lies in genetic counseling and subsequent treatment. For a patient with a paraganglioma in the urinary bladder, immunohistochemical stain negative for SDHB is directly related to a germline or somatic mutation. Genetic testing is recommended for those who have negative staining [95, 105].
For sporadic bladder, paragangliomas studies have found frequent chromosomal imbalances with frequent gains at 11cen ~ q13 and losses at 1p and 3q. Additionally, losses at 22q and 1q32 have been identified. These regions encompass the PTCH2 gene and tumor suppressor genes which have been implicated in other solid tumors such as meningioma, medulloblastoma, and basal cell carcinoma, among others [106–108]. Furthermore, with regards to individual prognostication, malignant transformation may be associated with increased karyotypic complexity. Currently, future studies are needed to clarify the role of degree of karyotypic complexity for such predictions [106].
Recent studies have shed light into the functional interdependence between genomic and epigenetic landscape of paragangliomas (and pheochromocytomas). Sequencing and high-throughput technologies have been recently used to examine large-scale genomic deletions, amplifications, gene expression, microRNA profiles, and epigenetic alterations thereby improving the characterization of paragangliomas [109–112]. This integrative genomic analysis provides evidence for strong concordance between multiomics data and genetic status and demonstrates that the predisposing maturations discussed in the preceding paragraphs (SDHx, VHL, RET, NF1) act as main drivers of the genetic landscape of paragangliomas and pheochromocytomas. The genomic analysis found that the genetic, epigenetic, and transcriptional changes can be clustered into five subtypes based on four fundamental genetic characteristics: (1) genetic mutations, (2) copy-number alterations, (3) methylation patterns, and (4) miRNA expression. The clustered five subtypes also appear to be associated with different clinical outcomes. This integrative analysis with subtypes clearly defined by unique genomic alterations creates a potential for precise molecular classification by molecular methods. Furthermore, outcomes may be predicted based upon these tumoral genomic landscapes [111, 113–115].
Paragangliomas of the urinary bladder can present at any age (range 11–84 years) with a mean age of 45 years and with slight female sex predilection in women [13, 88, 91, 106]. The tumors can also present in childhood populations, albeit rare with 12 cases reported in the literatures ranging in age from 7 to 16 years [116]. Most paragangliomas of the urinary bladder are solitary and localized submucosally to the dome or trigone of the bladder [13, 88, 91]. The tumors have a mean size of 3.9 cm and range from 1.0 to 9.1 cm at presentation [91]. The majority of bladder paragangliomas are hormonally active and can present with clinical symptoms secondary to catecholamine release with micturition attacks such as headaches, hypertension, palpitations, diaphoresis, and blurred vision before or during voiding [13, 95, 97, 106]. Despite such symptoms, the levels of catecholamines in plasma and urine can be normal with an abnormally increased rise in plasma catecholamines only found directly after micturition [13]. However, nonfunctioning paragangliomas are rarer and more difficult to diagnose during their nonsecreting nature [117–119]. In most cases, gross hematuria is a presenting symptom [88].
Immunohistochemical stains are usually positive for NSE, chromogranin, and synaptophysin and negative for keratin (Table 3) [120, 121]. Additionally, S100 stains the sustentacular cells of the tumor [89]. Placing the tumor in Zenker’s fixative will turn the tumor black, the so-called positive chromaffin reaction [90]. GATA-3 staining has been found in a majority of paragangliomas, regardless of site [122]. Paragangliomas can be misdiagnosed as urothelial carcinoma due to frequent involvement with muscularis propria, artifactual changes associated from the transurethral resection, and the few distinct symptoms that may prompt the diagnosis (especially in cases of nonfunctioning paragangliomas). Additionally, the overlapping GATA-3-positive staining could potentially contribute to a misdiagnosis [122]. One study showed a misdiagnosis for muscle invasive urothelial carcinoma in consultation cases of near 30 %. In these cases, a diffuse growth pattern simulated the growth pattern of invasive urothelial carcinoma; in other case, the nested pattern mimicked the nested variant of urothelial carcinoma [89, 117, 119]. Others have also written some of the diagnostic difficulties resulting from cautery artifact with necrosis and note that three of five patients at their institution were originally misdiagnosed (two as urothelial carcinoma and one as rhabdomyosarcoma). Oftentimes, paragangliomas have an abundant melanin pigment, which should keep melanoma in the differential [123].
There is no reliable way to distinguish between benign and malignant tumors, and the distinction has long been contentious. The only widely accepted and definitive proof of malignancy is metastasis to other organs. Some histological features such as tumor necrosis, mitotic rate greater than three mitotic figures per 30 high-power fields, capsular invasion, large nests with central degeneration, and cytological pattern of spindle cells are suggestive of increased malignant predilection [87, 89, 90, 95, 117]. Some authors have suggested that DNA ploidy analysis, p53 alteration, or Ki67 index may be predictive of outcome; however, the clinical outcomes did not support such indicators [87, 91, 124]. However, these findings have not been found to be seen in most cases and may not be a reliable marker in separating benign from malignant paraganglioma [87, 124]. The studies examining malignant versus benign are limited by the small number of cases reported in the literature (approximately 20). However, as discussed in the earlier molecular section, molecular testing might be useful for future subtyping of the tumors with an accompanying clinical prognosis.
Suspected cases of paraganglioma should first be investigated by measuring the levels of catecholamine and metabolites such as metanephrine and vanillylmandelic acid secretion in either blood or urine. However, in cases of nonfunctional paragangliomas, the metabolites may be normal. Imaging can be used to evaluate the primary tumor as well as metastatic lesions. CT imaging has a high sensitivity for detecting extra-adrenal pheochromocytomas which show marked enhancement if the tumor is less than 4 cm. There is good discriminatory power over the more common epithelial neoplasms of the bladder which are characteristically poorly enhanced [88]. The use of intravenous contrast, however, may precipitate a hypertensive crisis, although nonionic contrast is reported to be safe [90]. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be helpful with the characteristic appearance of the lesion recently being radiographically characterized based on the multiplanar T1 and T2 dynamic contrast images [125]. Additional imaging modalities especially the I-131-MIBG or I-123-MIBG (iodine-131 (-123)-meta-methyl iodobenzylguanidine) scans or PET can be useful for characterization of both primary and metastatic lesions. The iodine-MIBG scans use a radiolabeled guanethidine analog that resembles norepinephrine and thus accumulates in sympathetic tissue such as paragangliomas [13, 88, 117, 119].
Currently, there is no staging system for bladder paragangliomas. Some have reported using the pheochromocytoma system recommended by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) dividing patients into three categories: localized, regional, and metastatic disease [91]. Paragangliomas can be treated in a number of ways including catecholamine blockade, surgery, and chemotherapy or radiation therapy. Standard treatments are limited by the lack of high-quality data allowing organizational guidelines to publish treatment guidelines. Partial cystectomy was found to be the treatment in 70 % of patients in one series with a 20 % recurrence rate. From the largest review of the literature, the metastatic rate of bladder paragangliomas is 10 %; these have been treated effectively with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and dacarbazine (the Averbuch protocol). Radiation has also been incorporated using I-123-MIBG radiation [91, 126, 127].
Conclusions
The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of Urinary System and Male Genital Organ classification system separates four subtypes of neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder and provides a convenient platform for discussion of the relevant details of the aforementioned. The four members of this family of tumors include small cell carcinoma, large cell neuroendocrine, well-differentiated neuroendocrine, and paragangliomas. The overall prognosis for urinary bladder cancers is worse compared to urothelial carcinoma despite the similar clinical presentations, demographics, risk factors, and diagnostic measures. Furthermore, the rarity of these tumors has not provided an opportunity to perform well-designed, prospective trials for means of treatment. However, with increased investigations into the genetic and cellular alterations, it is hoped that subsequent advances in clinical characterization, prognostication, and treatment will occur for neuroendocrine tumors of the urinary bladder.
References
Cheng L, Lopez-Beltran A, Bostwick DG. Bladder Pathology. Wiley-Blackwell, Hoboken 2012.
Bostwick DG, Cheng L. Urologic Surgical Pathology, 3rd ed., Elsevier, Philadelphia, 2014.
Cheng L, Pan CX, Yang XJ, Lopez-Beltran A, MacLennan GT, Lin H, et al. Small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder: a clinicopathologic analysis of 64 patients. Cancer 2004;101:957–62.
Wang X, MacLennan GT, Lopez-Beltran A, Cheng L. Small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder—histogenesis, genetics, diagnosis, biomarkers, treatment, and prognosis. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2007;15:8–18.
Moch H, Humphrey PA, Ulbright TM, Reuter VE. WHO Classification of Tumours of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organ. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Press, 2016.
Cheng L, Eble JN. Molecular Surgical Pathology. Springer, New York, NY, 2013.
Zheng X, Liu D, Fallon JT, Zhong M. Distinct genetic alterations in small cell carcinoma from different anatomic sites. Exp Hematol Oncol 2015;4:2.
Cheng L, Bostwick DG. Essentials of Anatomic Pathology, 4th ed, Springer, New York, NY, 2016.
Blomjous CE, Vos W, De Voogt HJ, Van der Valk P, Meijer CJ. Small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder. A clinicopathologic, morphometric, immunohistochemical, and ultrastructural study of 18 cases. Cancer 1989;64:1347–57.
Eliyakin N, Postaci H, Baskin Y, Kozacioglu Z. Small Cell Carcinoma of the Urinary Bladder: KIT and PDGFRA Gene Mutations. Rare Tumors 2015;7:5982.
Hou CP, Lin YH, Chen CL, Chang PL, Tsui KH. Clinical outcome of primary small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Onco Targets Ther 2013;6:1179–85.
Ismaili N, Arifi S, Flechon A, El Mesbahi O, Blay JY, Droz JP, et al. Small cell cancer of the bladder: pathology, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. Bull Cancer 2009;96:E30-44.
Kappers MH, van den Meiracker AH, Alwani RA, Kats E, Baggen MG. Paraganglioma of the urinary bladder. Neth J Med 2008;66:163–5.
Martignoni G, Eble JN. Carcinoid tumors of the urinary bladder. Immunohistochemical study of 2 cases and review of the literature. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2003;127:e22-4.
Lee KH, Ryu SB, Lee MC, Park CS, Juhng SW, Choi C. Primary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Pathol Int 2006;56:688–93.
Shatagopam K, Kaimakliotis HZ, Cheng L, Koch MO. Genitourinary small cell malignancies: prostate and bladder. Future Oncol 2015;11:479–88.
Patel SG, Stimson CJ, Zaid HB, Resnick MJ, Cookson MS, Barocas DA, et al. Locoregional small cell carcinoma of the bladder: clinical characteristics and treatment patterns. J Urol 2014;191:329–34.
Choong NW, Quevedo JF, Kaur JS. Small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder. The Mayo Clinic experience. Cancer 2005;103:1172–8.
Soriano P, Navarro S, Gil M, Llombart-Bosch A. Small-cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder. A clinico-pathological study of ten cases. Virchows Arch 2004;445:292–7.
Abrahams NA, Moran C, Reyes AO, Siefker-Radtke A, Ayala AG. Small cell carcinoma of the bladder: a contemporary clinicopathological study of 51 cases. Histopathology 2005;46:57–63.
Trias I, Algaba F, Condom E, Espanol I, Segui J, Orsola I, et al. Small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Presentation of 23 cases and review of 134 published cases. Eur Urol 2001;39:85–90.
Byrd-Gloster AL, Khoor A, Glass LF, Messina JL, Whitsett JA, Livingston SK, et al. Differential expression of thyroid transcription factor 1 in small cell lung carcinoma and Merkel cell tumor. Hum Pathol 2000;31:58–62.
Cheuk W, Kwan MY, Suster S, Chan JK. Immunostaining for thyroid transcription factor 1 and cytokeratin 20 aids the distinction of small cell carcinoma from Merkel cell carcinoma, but not pulmonary from extrapulmonary small cell carcinomas. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2001;125:228–31.
Helpap B. Morphology and therapeutic strategies for neuroendocrine tumors of the genitourinary tract. Cancer 2002;95:1415–20.
Erdem GU, Ozdemir NY, Demirci NS, Sahin S, Bozkaya Y, Zengin N. Small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder: changing trends in the current literature. Curr Med Res Opin 2016;32:1013–21.
Williamson SR, Zhang S, Yao JL, Huang J, Lopez-Beltran A, Shen S, et al. ERG-TMPRSS2 rearrangement is shared by concurrent prostatic adenocarcinoma and prostatic small cell carcinoma and absent in small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder: evidence supporting monoclonal origin. Mod Pathol 2011;24:1120–7.
Cramer SF, Aikawa M, Cebelin M. Neurosecretory granules in small cell invasive carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Cancer 1981;47:724–30.
Cheng L, Jones TD, McCarthy RP, Eble JN, Wang M, MacLennan GT, et al. Molecular genetic evidence for a common clonal origin of urinary bladder small cell carcinoma and coexisting urothelial carcinoma. Am J Pathol 2005;166:1533–9.
Pan CX, Zhang H, Lara PN, Jr., Cheng L. Small-cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder: diagnosis and management. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2006;6:1707–13.
Iwakawa R, Kohno T, Totoki Y, Shibata T, Tsuchihara K, Mimaki S, et al. Expression and clinical significance of genes frequently mutated in small cell lung cancers defined by whole exome/RNA sequencing. Carcinogenesis 2015;36:616–21.
George J, Lim JS, Jang SJ, Cun Y, Ozretic L, Kong G, et al. Comprehensive genomic profiles of small cell lung cancer. Nature 2015;524:47–53.
Zheng X, Zhuge J, Bezerra SM, Faraj SF, Munari E, Fallon JT, 3rd, et al. High frequency of TERT promoter mutation in small cell carcinoma of bladder, but not in small cell carcinoma of other origins. J Hematol Oncol 2014;7:47.
Abbosh PH, Wang M, Eble JN, Lopez-Beltran A, Maclennan GT, Montironi R, et al. Hypermethylation of tumor-suppressor gene CpG islands in small-cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Mod Pathol 2008;21:355–62.
Pant-Purohit M, Lopez-Beltran A, Montironi R, MacLennan GT, Cheng L. Small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Histol Histopathol 2010;25:217–21.
Ahmed S, Neufeld S, Kroczak TJ, Bashir B, Ahmed N, Czaykowski P, et al. Small Cell Cancer of the Bladder and Prostate: A Retrospective Review from a Tertiary Cancer Center. Cureus 2015;7:e296.
Kaushik D, Frank I, Boorjian SA, Cheville JC, Eisenberg MS, Thapa P, et al. Long-term results of radical cystectomy and role of adjuvant chemotherapy for small cell carcinoma of the bladder. Int J Urol 2015;22:549–54.
Schreiber D, Rineer J, Weiss J, Leaf A, Karanikolas N, Rotman M, et al. Characterization and outcomes of small cell carcinoma of the bladder using the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. Am J Clin Oncol 2013;36:126–31.
Koga F, Yokoyama M, Fukushima H. Small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder: a contemporary review with a special focus on bladder-sparing treatments. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2013;13:1269–79.
Cheng DL, Unger P, Forscher CA, Fine EM. Successful treatment of metastatic small cell carcinoma of the bladder with methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin therapy. J Urol 1995;153:417–9.
Matsui Y, Fujikawa K, Iwamura H, Oka H, Fukuzawa S, Takeuchi H. Durable control of small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder by gemcitabine and paclitaxel. Int J Urol 2002;9:122–4.
Kawahara T, Nishiyama H, Yamamoto S, Kamoto T, Ogawa O. Protocol consisting of cisplatin, etoposide and irinotecan induced complete pathological remission of primary small cell carcinoma of the bladder. Int J Urol 2006;13:1251–3.
Eswara JR, Heney NM, Wu CL, McDougal WS. Long-term outcomes of organ preservation in patients with small cell carcinoma of the bladder. Urol Int 2015;94:401–5.
Koay EJ, Teh BS, Paulino AC, Butler EB. Treatment trends and outcomes of small-cell carcinoma of the bladder. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012;83:64–70.
Siefker-Radtke AO, Kamat AM, Grossman HB, Williams DL, Qiao W, Thall PF, et al. Phase II clinical trial of neoadjuvant alternating doublet chemotherapy with ifosfamide/doxorubicin and etoposide/cisplatin in small-cell urothelial cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:2592–7.
Lynch SP, Shen Y, Kamat A, Grossman HB, Shah JB, Millikan RE, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in small cell urothelial cancer improves pathologic downstaging and long-term outcomes: results from a retrospective study at the MD Anderson Cancer Center. Eur Urol 2013;64:307–13.
Pasquier D, Barney B, Sundar S, Poortmans P, Villa S, Nasrallah H, et al. Small Cell Carcinoma of the Urinary Bladder: A Retrospective, Multicenter Rare Cancer Network Study of 107 Patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2015;92:904–10.
Ismaili N, Heudel PE, Elkarak F, Kaikani W, Bajard A, Ismaili M, et al. Outcome of recurrent and metastatic small cell carcinoma of the bladder. BMC Urol 2009;9:4.
Bex A, de Vries R, Pos F, Kerst M, Horenblas S. Long-term survival after sequential chemoradiation for limited disease small cell carcinoma of the bladder. World J Urol 2009;27:101–6.
Nejat RJ, Purohit R, Goluboff ET, Petrylak D, Rubin MA, Benson MC. Cure of undifferentiated small cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder with M-VAC chemotherapy. Urol Oncol 2001;6:53–5.
Bex A, Sonke GS, Pos FJ, Brandsma D, Kerst JM, Horenblas S. Symptomatic brain metastases from small-cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder: The Netherlands Cancer Institute experience and literature review. Ann Oncol 2010;21:2240–5.
Yazici O, Ozdemir NY, Sendur MA, Aksoy S, Zengin N. Current approaches for prophylactic cranial irradiation in extrapulmonary small cell carcinoma. Curr Med Res Opin 2014;30:1327–36.
Bertaccini A, Marchiori D, Cricca A, Garofalo M, Giovannini C, Manferrari F, et al. Neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary bladder: case report and review of the literature. Anticancer Res 2008;28:1369–72.
Gupta S, Thompson RH, Boorjian SA, Thapa P, Hernandez LP, Jimenez RE, et al. High grade neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary bladder treated by radical cystectomy: a series of small cell, mixed neuroendocrine and large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. Pathology 2015;47:533–42.
Travis WD, Linnoila RI, Tsokos MG, Hitchcock CL, Cutler GB, Jr., Nieman L, et al. Neuroendocrine tumors of the lung with proposed criteria for large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. An ultrastructural, immunohistochemical, and flow cytometric study of 35 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1991;15:529–53.
Marchevsky AM, Gal AA, Shah S, Koss MN. Morphometry confirms the presence of considerable nuclear size overlap between "small cells" and "large cells" in high-grade pulmonary neuroendocrine neoplasms. Am J Clin Pathol 2001;116:466–72.
Colarossi C, Pino P, Giuffrida D, Aiello E, Costanzo R, Martinetti D, et al. Large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) of the urinary bladder: a case report. Diagn Pathol 2013;8:19.
Hata S, Tasaki Y. A case of the large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary bladder. J Med Case Rep 2013;2013:804136.
Vollbrecht C, Werner R, Walter RF, Christoph DC, Heukamp LC, Peifer M, et al. Mutational analysis of pulmonary tumours with neuroendocrine features using targeted massive parallel sequencing: a comparison of a neglected tumour group. Br J Cancer 2015;113:1704–11.
Przygodzki RM, Finkelstein SD, Langer JC, Swalsky PA, Fishback N, Bakker A, et al. Analysis of p53, K-ras-2, and C-raf-1 in pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors. Correlation with histological subtype and clinical outcome. Am J Pathol 1996;148:1531–41.
Walch AK, Zitzelsberger HF, Aubele MM, Mattis AE, Bauchinger M, Candidus S, et al. Typical and atypical carcinoid tumors of the lung are characterized by 11q deletions as detected by comparative genomic hybridization. Am J Pathol 1998;153:1089–98.
Evans AJ, Al-Maghrabi J, Tsihlias J, Lajoie G, Sweet JM, Chapman WB. Primary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2002;126:1229–32.
Abenoza P, Manivel C, Sibley RK. Adenocarcinoma with neuroendocrine differentiation of the urinary bladder. Clinicopathologic, immunohistochemical, and ultrastructural study. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1986;110:1062–6.
Hailemariam S, Gaspert A, Komminoth P, Tamboli P, Amin M. Primary, pure, large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Mod Pathol 1998;11:1016–20.
Martin IJ, Vilar DG, Aguado JM, Perello CG, Aliaga MR, Argente VG, et al. Large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Bibliographic review. Arch Esp Urol 2011;64:105–13.
Treglia G, Bongiovanni M, Giovanella L. A rare case of small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary bladder incidentally detected by F-18-FDG PET/CT. Endocrine 2014;45:156–7.
Iagaru A, Gamie S, Segall G. F-18 FDG PET imaging of urinary bladder oat cell carcinoma with widespread osseous metastases. Clin Nucl Med 2006;31:476–8.
Fasano M, Della Corte CM, Papaccio F, Ciardiello F, Morgillo F. Pulmonary Large-Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma: From Epidemiology to Therapy. J Thorac Oncol 2015;10:1133–41.
Akamatsu S, Kanamaru S, Ishihara M, Sano T, Soeda A, Hashimoto K. Primary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Int J Urol 2008;15:1080–3.
Tsugu A, Yoshiyama M, Matsumae M. Brain metastasis from large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Surg Neurol Int 2011;2:84.
Metro G, Ricciuti B, Chiari R, Baretti M, Falcinelli L, Giannarelli D, et al. Survival outcomes and incidence of brain recurrence in high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas of the lung: Implications for clinical practice. Lung Cancer 2016;95:82–7.
Lee WJ, Kim CH, Chang SE, Lee MW, Choi JH, Moon KC, et al. Cutaneous metastasis from large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary bladder expressing CK20 and TTF-1. Am J Dermatopathol 2009;31:166–9.
Colby TV. Carcinoid tumor of the bladder. A case report. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1980;104:199–200.
Chen YB, Epstein JI. Primary carcinoid tumors of the urinary bladder and prostatic urethra: a clinicopathologic study of 6 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 2011;35:442–6.
Kunz PL. Carcinoid and neuroendocrine tumors: building on success. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:1855–63.
Wang M, Peng J, Yang W, Chen W, Mo S, Cai S. Prognostic analysis for carcinoid tumours of the rectum: a single institutional analysis of 106 patients. Colorectal Dis 2011;13:150–3.
Zozumi M, Nakai M, Matsuda I, Hao H, Ueda Y, Nojima M, et al. Primary carcinoid tumor of the urinary bladder with prominent subnuclear eosinophilic granules. Pathol Res Pract 2012;208:109–12.
McCabe JE, Das S, Dowling P, Hamid BN, Pettersson BA. Oncocytic carcinoid tumour of the bladder. J Clin Pathol 2005;58:446–7.
Sugihara A, Kajio K, Yoshimoto T, Tsujimura T, Iwasaki T, Yamada N, et al. Primary carcinoid tumor of the urinary bladder. Int Urol Nephrol 2002;33:53–7.
Stanfield BL, Grimes MM, Kay S. Primary carcinoid tumor of the bladder arising beneath an inverted papilloma. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1994;118:666–7.
Baydar DE, Tasar C. Carcinoid tumor in the urinary bladder: unreported features. Am J Surg Pathol 2011;35:1754–7.
Fernandez-Cuesta L, Peifer M, Lu X, Sun R, Ozretic L, Seidel D, et al. Frequent mutations in chromatin-remodelling genes in pulmonary carcinoids. Nat Commun 2014;5:3518.
Murali R, Kneale K, Lalak N, Delprado W. Carcinoid tumors of the urinary tract and prostate. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2006;130:1693–706.
Mascolo M, Altieri V, Mignogna C, Napodano G, De Rosa G, Insabato L. Calcitonin-producing well-differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (carcinoid tumor) of the urinary bladder: case report. BMC Cancer 2005;5:88.
Walker BF, Someren A, Kennedy JC, Nicholas EM. Primary carcinoid tumor of the urinary bladder. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1992;116:1217–20.
Chin NW, Marinescu AM, Fani K. Composite adenocarcinoma and carcinoid tumor of urinary bladder. Urology 1992;40:249–52.
Hemal AK, Singh I, Pawar R, Kumar M, Taneja P. Primary malignant bladder carcinoid--a diagnostic and management dilemma. Urology 2000;55:949.
Cheng L, Leibovich BC, Cheville JC, Ramnani DM, Sebo TJ, Neumann RM, et al. Paraganglioma of the urinary bladder: can biologic potential be predicted? Cancer 2000;88:844–52.
Henderson SJ, Kearns PJ, Tong CM, Reddy M, Khurgin J, Bickell M, et al. Patients with urinary bladder paragangliomas: a compiled case series from a literature review for clinical management. Urology 2015;85:e25-9.
Zhou M, Epstein JI, Young RH. Paraganglioma of the urinary bladder: a lesion that may be misdiagnosed as urothelial carcinoma in transurethral resection specimens. Am J Surg Pathol 2004;28:94–100.
Ranaweera M, Chung E. Bladder paraganglioma: A report of case series and critical review of current literature. World J Clin Cases 2014;2:591–5.
Beilan JA, Lawton A, Hajdenberg J, Rosser CJ. Pheochromocytoma of the urinary bladder: a systematic review of the contemporary literature. BMC Urol 2013;13:22.
Dixon JS, Gosling JA, Canning DA, Gearhart JP. An immunohistochemical study of human postnatal paraganglia associated with the urinary bladder. J Anat 1992;181 (Pt 3):431–6.
Fletcher TF, Bradley WE. Neuroanatomy of the bladder-urethra. J Urol 1978;119:153–60.
Rode J, Bentley A, Parkinson C. Paraganglial cells of urinary bladder and prostate: potential diagnostic problem. J Clin Pathol 1990;43:13–6.
Giubellino A, Lara K, Martucci V, Huynh T, Agarwal P, Pacak K, et al. Urinary Bladder Paragangliomas: How Immunohistochemistry Can Assist to Identify Patients With SDHB Germline and Somatic Mutations. Am J Surg Pathol 2015;39:1488–92.
Honma K. Paraganglia of the urinary bladder. An autopsy study. Zentralbl Pathol 1994;139:465–9.
Martucci VL, Lorenzo ZG, Weintraub M, del Rivero J, Ling A, Merino M, et al. Association of urinary bladder paragangliomas with germline mutations in the SDHB and VHL genes. Urol Oncol 2015;33:167 e13-20.
Benn DE, Gimenez-Roqueplo AP, Reilly JR, Bertherat J, Burgess J, Byth K, et al. Clinical presentation and penetrance of pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma syndromes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006;91:827–36.
Milunsky JM, Maher TA, Michels VV, Milunsky A. Novel mutations and the emergence of a common mutation in the SDHD gene causing familial paraganglioma. Am J Med Genet 2001;100:311–4.
Gimenez-Roqueplo AP, Favier J, Rustin P, Rieubland C, Crespin M, Nau V, et al. Mutations in the SDHB gene are associated with extra-adrenal and/or malignant phaeochromocytomas. Cancer Res 2003;63:5615–21.
van Nederveen FH, Gaal J, Favier J, Korpershoek E, Oldenburg RA, de Bruyn EM, et al. An immunohistochemical procedure to detect patients with paraganglioma and phaeochromocytoma with germline SDHB, SDHC, or SDHD gene mutations: a retrospective and prospective analysis. Lancet Oncol 2009;10:764–71.
Dahia PL, Ross KN, Wright ME, Hayashida CY, Santagata S, Barontini M, et al. A HIF1alpha regulatory loop links hypoxia and mitochondrial signals in pheochromocytomas. PLoS Genet 2005;1:72–80.
Lima J, Feijao T, Ferreira da Silva A, Pereira-Castro I, Fernandez-Ballester G, Maximo V, et al. High frequency of germline succinate dehydrogenase mutations in sporadic cervical paragangliomas in northern Spain: mitochondrial succinate dehydrogenase structure-function relationships and clinical-pathological correlations. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2007;92:4853–64.
Gimenez-Roqueplo AP, Favier J, Rustin P, Rieubland C, Kerlan V, Plouin PF, et al. Functional consequences of a SDHB gene mutation in an apparently sporadic pheochromocytoma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2002;87:4771–4.
Jimenez C, Cote G, Arnold A, Gagel RF. Review: Should patients with apparently sporadic pheochromocytomas or paragangliomas be screened for hereditary syndromes? J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006;91:2851–8.
Schaefer IM, Gunawan B, Fuzesi L, Blech M, Frasunek J, Loertzer H. Chromosomal imbalances in urinary bladder paraganglioma. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 2010;203:341–4.
Edstrom E, Mahlamaki E, Nord B, Kjellman M, Karhu R, Hoog A, et al. Comparative genomic hybridization reveals frequent losses of chromosomes 1p and 3q in pheochromocytomas and abdominal paragangliomas, suggesting a common genetic etiology. Am J Pathol 2000;156:651–9.
August C, August K, Schroeder S, Bahn H, Hinze R, Baba HA, et al. CGH and CD 44/MIB-1 immunohistochemistry are helpful to distinguish metastasized from nonmetastasized sporadic pheochromocytomas. Mod Pathol 2004;17:1119–28.
Costa MH, Ortiga-Carvalho TM, Violante AD, Vaisman M. Pheochromocytomas and Paragangliomas: Clinical and Genetic Approaches. Front Endocrinol 2015;6:126.
Dahia PL. Pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma pathogenesis: learning from genetic heterogeneity. Nat Rev Cancer 2014;14:108–19.
de Cubas AA, Korpershoek E, Inglada-Perez L, Letouze E, Curras-Freixes M, Fernandez AF, et al. DNA Methylation Profiling in Pheochromocytoma and Paraganglioma Reveals Diagnostic and Prognostic Markers. Clin Cancer Res 2015;21:3020–30.
de Cubas AA, Leandro-Garcia LJ, Schiavi F, Mancikova V, Comino-Mendez I, Inglada-Perez L, et al. Integrative analysis of miRNA and mRNA expression profiles in pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma identifies genotype-specific markers and potentially regulated pathways. Endocr Relat Cancer 2013;20:477–93.
Castro-Vega LJ, Letouze E, Burnichon N, Buffet A, Disderot PH, Khalifa E, et al. Multi-omics analysis defines core genomic alterations in pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas. Nat Commun 2015;6:6044.
Flynn A, Benn D, Clifton-Bligh R, Robinson B, Trainer AH, James P, et al. The genomic landscape of phaeochromocytoma. J Pathol 2015;236:78–89.
Burnichon N, Vescovo L, Amar L, Libe R, de Reynies A, Venisse A, et al. Integrative genomic analysis reveals somatic mutations in pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma. Hum Mol Genet 2011;20:3974–85.
Bohn OL, Pardo-Castillo E, Fuertes-Camilo M, Rios-Luna NP, Martinez A, Sanchez-Sosa S. Urinary bladder paraganglioma in childhood: a case report and review of the literature. Pediatr Dev Pathol 2011;14:327–32.
Lai Y, Chen D, Yu Z, Ni L, Yang S. Non-functioning paraganglioma of the urinary bladder: A case report and review of the literature. Oncol Lett 2014;7:891–3.
Yadav R, Das AK, Kumar R. Malignant non-functional paraganglioma of the bladder presenting with azotemia. Int Urol Nephrol 2007;39:449–51.
Peng C, Bu S, Xiong S, Wang K, Li H. Non-functioning paraganglioma occurring in the urinary bladder: A case report and review of the literature. Oncol Lett 2015;10:321–4.
Moyana TN, Kontozoglou T. Urinary bladder paragangliomas. An immunohistochemical study. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1988;112:70–2.
Kovacs K, Bell D, Gardiner GW, Honey RJ, Goguen J, Rotondo F. Malignant paraganglioma of the urinary bladder: Immunohistochemical study of prognostic indicators. Endocr Pathol 2005;16:363–9.
So JS, Epstein JI. GATA3 expression in paragangliomas: a pitfall potentially leading to misdiagnosis of urothelial carcinoma. Mod Pathol 2013;26:1365–70.
Menon S, Goyal P, Suryawanshi P, Tongaonkar H, Joshi A, Bakshi G, et al. Paraganglioma of the urinary bladder: a clinicopathologic spectrum of a series of 14 cases emphasizing diagnostic dilemmas. Indian J Pathol Microbiol 2014;57:19–23.
Grignon DJ, Ro JY, Mackay B, Ordonez NG, el-Naggar A, Molina TJ, et al. Paraganglioma of the urinary bladder: immunohistochemical, ultrastructural, and DNA flow cytometric studies. Hum Pathol 1991;22:1162–9.
Wang H, Ye H, Guo A, Wei Z, Zhang X, Zhong Y, et al. Bladder paraganglioma in adults: MR appearance in four patients. Eur J Radiol 2011;80:e217-20.
Averbuch SD, Steakley CS, Young RC, Gelmann EP, Goldstein DS, Stull R, et al. Malignant Pheochromocytoma - Effective Treatment with a Combination of Cyclophosphamide, Vincristine, and Dacarbazine. Ann Intern Med 1988;109:267–73.
Gonias S, Goldsby R, Matthay KK, Hawkins R, Price D, Huberty J, et al. Phase II study of high-dose [131I]metaiodobenzylguanidine therapy for patients with metastatic pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:4162–8.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kouba, E., Cheng, L. Neuroendocrine Tumors of the Urinary Bladder According to the 2016 World Health Organization Classification: Molecular and Clinical Characteristics. Endocr Pathol 27, 188–199 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12022-016-9444-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12022-016-9444-5