Squamous Cell Carcinoma at the Site of a Prince Albert’s Piercing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Medical practitioners should be aware of genital piercing and its potential complications. General piercings are associate with complications common to all piercings as well as some unique to urethral piercings. Specifically, the association between carcinoma and genital piercing is not well recognized. AIM: The present study is a report of two cases describing squamous cell carcinoma associated with genital piercing. METHODS: Case reports of two men admitted to an academic medical center. RESULTS: A 60-year-old man with a history of HIV and hepatitis C as well as a Prince Albert piercing presented for treatment of a urethrocutaneous fistula. A biopsy of indurated granulation tissue surrounding the fistula revealed invasive, moderately-differentiated squamous cell carcinoma. A 56-year-old man with a history of HIV, hepatitis C, and a Prince Albert piercing presented following a single episode of gross hematuria. He also reported splitting of his urinary stream. On physical examination, areas of necrosis were noted on the glans penis; biopsy revealed invasive, poorly-differentiated squamous cell carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: The present study is the first to suggest a possible association between squamous cell carcinoma of the penis/urethra and genital piercing. Patients with genital piercings, especially those with concurrent risk factors such as HIV and HCV, should be counselled about this rare complication.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".