Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Microcystic stromal tumour of testis
  1. Marije Hoogland1,
  2. Ivar Bleumer2 and
  3. Albert Suurmeijer3
  1. 1Pathology, Isala, Department of Pathology, Zwolle, The Netherlands
  2. 2Urology, Ziekenhuis Sint Jansdal, Harderwijk, Gelderland, The Netherlands
  3. 3Pathology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to Dr Marije Hoogland; a.m.hoogland{at}


Within the group of gonadal sex cord-stromal tumours, microcystic stromal tumour (MCST) is a rare entity. In the literature, most case series and reviews discussed MCST arising in the ovary, only one case-report concerned a testicular MCST. We present a Caucasian man in his late 30s, who presented with an MCST in his right testis. The tumour was encapsulated and composed of vaguely lobulated cellular nodules and cystic spaces with bland spindle cells and hyalinised fibrous stroma. By immunohistochemistry, the tumour cells expressed cluster designation 10, androgen receptor, steroidogenic factor-1 and nuclear beta-catenine, and there was focal nuclear expression of cyclin D1. Molecular diagnostics confirmed the presence of an exon 3 mutation (c.98C>T) in the CTNNB1 gene. These features are similar to MSCT described in the ovary. Clinical follow-up (more than 1 year) was uneventful.

Although the clinical and radiological presentation was that of a possible malignant testicular lesion, this entity is benign.

  • Urinary and genital tract disorders
  • Genetics
  • Pathology
  • Urology

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Contributors MH, first author and corresponding author was the pathologist who dissected and reported on this case. She wrote the template of the article and explained to the patient the reason for this case report and the importance of his informed consent on the publication of information and images. IB is the urologist who treated the patient. He provided the clinical information in this publication. He asked the patient for permission to be contacted by pathologist MH about informed consent and he reviewed the paper before submission. AS is the academical pathologist who reviewed the case before diagnosis, who ordered the molecular testing needed to prove the diagnosis. He also helped writing this paper and reviewed it before submission.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Case reports provide a valuable learning resource for the scientific community and can indicate areas of interest for future research. They should not be used in isolation to guide treatment choices or public health policy.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.