Introduction: HPV infection is a highly prevalent sexually transmitted disease and there is evidence of the relationship of HPV infection and the development of genital warts, penile intraepitelial neoplasia, invasive penile carcinoma and cervical cancer. However, there is sparse data regarding the prevalence of HPV types and co-infection of different HPV types among men. Objectives: To assess the prevalence of HPV subtypes infections and rates of co-infection among men. Materials and Methods: 366 men were evaluated from March to October 2010. Men were referred to our institution for HPV diagnostic evaluation based on the following criteria: 1. presence of a genital wart; 2. presence of an atypical genital lesion; 3. absence of symptoms and a partner with a HPV diagnosis; 4. absence of symptoms and a desire to undergo a full STD diagnostic evaluation. Genital samples were collected from the urethra, penile shaft, scrotum and anus with Digene® collection and preservation kit and submitted to HPV genotype microarray detection (Papillocheck®). All men were tested for the low-risk HPV types 6-11-40-42-43-44 and for the high-risk HPV types 16-18-31-33-35-39-45-51-52-53-56-58-59-66-68-70-73-82. Results: Of the 366 men, 11 were tested inconclusive and were excluded from the analysis. 256 men (72.1% of the men from the cohort referred to our institution) tested positive with genotype micro-array detection and 99 tested negative. The most prevalent HPV-subtypes in the studied population were 6, 42, 51 and 16. Co-infection was found in 153 men. Of those, 70 (19.7%) had a co-infection by 2 types, 37 (10.4%) by 3 types; 33 men (9.2%) by 4 types; 8 men (2.2%) by 5 types; 1 man (0.3%) by 6 types; 1 man (0.3%) by 7 types; 2 men (0.6%) by 8 types and 1 man (0.3%) by 9 types. Conclusion: The most frequent HPV types were 6, 16, 42 and 51. Co-infection was found in 59% of our patients. This information is vital to drive future public health policies including massive public vaccination campaign.

Os autores relatam um caso exuberante de condiloma acuminado gigante de Buschke-Lowenstein, em paciente do sexo masculino, de crescimento lento e progressivo e de comportamento destrutivo das regiões inguinal, corpo do pênis, escroto, perineal e perianal. Após tratamento cirúrgico, não apresentou sinais de recidiva em 20 meses de seguimento. A identificação dos HPVs, tipos 6 e 11, foi realizada através da técnica de hibridização in situ.

The authors report a case of exuberant giant condyloma acuminatum of Buschke-Loewenstein in a male patient, slow-growing, progressive and with locally destructive behavior in the inguinal, body of the penis, scrotum, perineal and perianal regions. After surgery he showed no signs of recurrence in 20 months of follow-up. The identification of HPV types 6 and 11 was performed using in situ hybridization.

Breast tumors exhibit extensive molecular and clinical heterogeneity. One of the most utilized breast carcinoma classifications is based on its molecular aspects and subdivides breast cancer into five major groups based on the expression of certain genes. In this study, we evaluated which factors are important in determining a prognosis after 5 years of follow-up for patients with clinical stage IIA breast tumors. We took into consideration the different phenotypes (luminal A luminal B HER-2 overexpression, basal and triple-negative), various epithelial-mesenchymal (EMT) molecular markers and adhesion molecules (E-cadherin, P-cadherin, N-cadherin, vimentin, twist snail and slug) and NOS-2, in addition to clinical and demographic data, tumor characteristics and treatment types. METHODS: The study population consisted of 82 patients with breast cancer. We analyzed eight molecular markers by immunohistochemistry on tissue microarrays containing breast tumor specimens from patients with ten years of follow-up, and we classified each tumor according to its estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and HER-2 expression. We then placed the tumor into one of the above categories. RESULTS: The presence of several clinical and demographic factors, various histopathologies, treatment forms and several immunohistochemical markers were not associated with a worse prognosis for group IIA patients. The factors that were associated with a mortality risk were the triple-negative (odds ratio (OR) = 11.8, 95% confident interval (CI) = 2.0-70.3, P = 0.007) and basal (OR =18.4, 95% CI = 1.8-184.7, P= 0.013) phenotypic patterns. CONCLUSIONS: The EMT markers and NOS-2 were not mortality risk factors. Basal and triple-negative phenotypic patterns were related to a higher mortality risk in patients with stage IIA tumors.