Neoplasms in prune belly syndrome: A novel case of early-onset metastatic bladder carcinoma and systematic review of reported tumors.

Abstract

PURPOSE: Prune Belly Syndrome (PBS) is a rare congenital malformation complex characterized by cryptorchidism, urinary tract abnormalities and deficiency of the abdominal wall musculature. Although advances in neonatal and reconstructive care have substantially improved survival, the long-term risk of malignancy in this population remains poorly defined. We report a novel case of early-onset metastatic bladder carcinoma in a patient with PBS and perform a systematic review of all tumors described in association with the syndrome. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251072086). Databases searched through April 2025 included PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane, and SciELO. Reported tumor cases in PBS patients were identified and classified as either PBS-associated or not. We additionally describe a new case of invasive bladder carcinoma. RESULTS: Seventeen studies comprising 20 patients met inclusion criteria. Tumors directly related to the genitourinary tract accounted for half of the cases. Bladder carcinoma was the most frequent neoplasm (35%), followed by hepatoblastoma (25%). Bladder tumors occurred at markedly younger ages and often presented as advanced diseases. Our index case involved a 33-year-old man with PBS who developed metastatic muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma and died shortly after diagnosis. DISCUSSION: Improved survival in PBS has led to recognition of new late complications, including malignancy. Tumorigenesis may be influenced by chronic urinary stasis, infection, catheterization, cryptorchidism, and underlying genitourinary developmental abnormalities. These findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating given the limited number of reported cases. CONCLUSION: Although uncommon, malignancies in PBS may occur earlier and behave more aggressively than in the general population. Given the current level of evidence, careful long-term follow-up with clinical awareness is warranted, rather than routine invasive screening for all patients.