C ONCERNING arrhenoblastoma, definite information is lacking with regard to the incidence of malignancy, and the relationship to pregnancy and sterility.Accordingly, a questionnaire was prepared that inquired into these matters, which was sent to various authors.This communication has a double purpose: (1) to present the follow-up data obtained by the questionnaire and add them to other information already in the literature,(2) to report three additional patients, bringing the total number to approximately 121 cases through 1949.QUESI IONNAIRE 1. Nanie, initials or number of the patient.2. Total length of follow-up.3. Is the patient alive and well, without rc-4.Is the patient alive with recurrence?If so, 5. Is the patient dead?If so, cause?6. Autopsy findings.7. Number o f subsequent pregnancies?How 8. Sex of the infant.9. Any kirilization in the infant?c urrence? where?long after the operation did each occur?10.Any history of such tumor in father or mother?In siblings?This questionnaire was sent to fifty acccssible authors who had published on arrhenoblastoma with an adequate gross and microscopic description and who specifically mentioned the benign or malignant aspects.Several cases of so-called arrhenoblastoma were rejected, although they have been included by other reviewers: one by Goldberg who reported in a personal communication the correction of the original diagnosis ok arrhenoblastoma and its substitution with another diagnosis of cryptorchid testes; another by Hamblen who, in reply to the ques-
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Javert et al. (1951) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: