Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2003 Jul;27(7):994-8.
doi: 10.1097/00000478-200307000-00015.

Preputial variability and preferential association of long phimotic foreskins with penile cancer: an anatomic comparative study of types of foreskin in a general population and cancer patients

Elsa F Velazquez  1 , Adelaida Bock, Ana Soskin, Ricardo Codas, Manuel Arbo, Antonio L Cubilla
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Preputial variability and preferential association of long phimotic foreskins with penile cancer: an anatomic comparative study of types of foreskin in a general population and cancer patients

Elsa F Velazquez et al. Am J Surg Pathol. 2003 Jul.

Abstract

Difficulty in foreskin retraction and phimosis are risk factors for penile carcinoma that may be related to the anatomically variable length of the foreskin. This observation has stimulated us to postulate the hypothesis that foreskin length is related to penile cancer. To compare the foreskin in the general population and patients with penile cancer, an anatomic classification of foreskin was designed. We examined the foreskin of 215 uncircumcised males without cancer (age range 15-93 years) and the foreskin of 23 patients with cancer (age range 31-90 years). Foreskin types were classified as long (with the preputial orifice located beyond glans meatus and entirely covering the glans), medium (with the preputial orifice located between meatus and glans corona), and short (with the preputial orifice located between corona and coronal sulcus). Phimosis was defined as a nonretractable prepuce of the long type. We found that 77% of noncancer population cases had long foreskin and that only 7% of these cases were phimotic. Cancer patients showed long foreskin in 78% of the cases, and phimosis was significantly frequent in this group (52%) as compared with the other (p <0.001). Coexistence of a long foreskin and phimosis may explain the high incidence of penile cancer in some geographic regions. To better document these findings, a comparison of foreskin types in countries with high and low incidence of penile cancer will be interesting. However, because phimosis appears to be a major factor, the presence of long foreskin may be a necessary but not a sufficient condition for cancer development. For these reasons we support preventive circumcision in patients with long and phimotic foreskins living in high-risk areas. Cancers not related to long foreskins and phimosis may be causally different.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources