Yıl: 2022 Cilt: 37 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 51 - 59 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.5505/tjo.2021.3380 İndeks Tarihi: 29-10-2022

Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature

Öz:
OBJECTIVE It was aimed to reevaluate uterine sarcoma cases diagnosed in our institution within the last 20 years according to current information and to provide intra-departmental standardization in the differential diagnosis and reporting. METHODS Totally 84 uterine sarcoma cases were re-examined. Recurrence, metastasis, and prognostic data were collected from the patient files. Immunohistochemistry panel consisting of CD10, h-caldesmon, and cyclin D1 was applied to the representative tumor tissues. The relationships between the parameters studied were evaluated statistically. RESULTS Statistically significant differences were found between different histopathological types of uterine sar comas (US) in terms of age distribution, tumor diameter, mitotic index, necrosis, depth of myometrial invasion, cervical, adnexial and/or omental involvement, lymphovascular invasion, lymph node metas tasis, recurrence, and distant metastasis. Statistically significant correlation was determined between the prognosis of the patients and mitotic activity of their tumors and the presence of distant metastasis. The immunohistochemistry panel was found to have significant contribution to the histomorphological ex amination in the differential diagnosis. CONCLUSION Routine use of CD10, h-caldesmon, and cyclin D1 in the histopathological evaluation of US and es tablishing an updated standard checklist was thought to be beneficial for the differential diagnosis and reporting prognostic parameters.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
0
0
0
  • 1. Santos P, Cunha TM. Uterine sarcomas: Clinical presentation and MRI features. Diagn Interv Radiol 2015;21(1):4–9.
  • 2. Barquet-Muñoz SA, Isla-Ortiz D, Montalvo-Esquivel G, Cantú-de-León D, Salcedo-Hernández RA, Cor doba-Gonzalez V, et al. Prognostic factors associated with uterine sarcomas: The experience of a single in stitution. J Obstet Gynaecol 2019;39(2):231–6.
  • 3. El-Khalfaoui K, du Bois A, Heitz F, Kurzeder C, Se- houli J, Harter P. Current and future options in the management and treatment of uterine sarcoma. Ther Adv Med Oncol 2014;6(1):21–8.
  • 4. Fadare O. Heterologous and rare homologous sarco mas of the uterine corpus: A clinicopathologic review. Adv Anat Pathol 2011;18(1):60–74.
  • 5. D’Angelo E, Prat J. Uterine sarcomas: A review. Gynecol Oncol 2010;116(1):131–9.
  • 6. Mallmann P. Uterine sarcoma-difficult to diagnose, hard to treat. Oncol Res Treat 2018;41(11):674.
  • 7. Gao Y, Meng H, Zhang Y, Jiao T, Hui N. Retrospec tive analysis of 80 cases with uterine carcinosar coma, leiomyosarcoma and endometrial stromal sarcoma in China, 1988-2007. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2014;7(4):1616–24.
  • 8. Gadducci A, Landoni F, Sartori E, Zola P, Maggino T, Lissoni A, et al. Uterine leiomyosarcoma: Analy sis of treatment failures and survival. Gynecol Oncol 1996;62(1):25–32.
  • 9. Nordal RR, Kristensen GB, Stenwig AE, Nesland JM, Pettersen EO, Trope CG. An evaluation of prognos tic factors in uterine carcinosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol 1997;67(3):316–21.
  • 10.Abeler VM, Røyne O, Thoresen S, Danielsen HE, Nes land JM, Kristensen GB. Uterine sarcomas in Norway. A histopathological and prognostic survey of a total population from 1970 to 2000 including 419 patients. Histopathology 2009;54(3):355–64.
  • 11.Günthert AR. Sarcomas and mixed mesodermal tu mors of the uterus. Therapeutische Umschau. Ther Umsch 2011;68(10):559–64.
  • 12.Leitao MM Jr., Zivanovic O, Chi DS, Hensley ML, O’Cearbhaill R, Soslow RA, et al. Surgical cytoreduc tion in patients with metastatic uterine leiomyosar coma at the time of initial diagnosis. Gynecol Oncol 2012;125(2):409–13.
  • 13.Larson B, Silfverswärd C, Nilsson B, Pettersson F. Prognostic factors in uterine leiomyosarcoma. A clinical and Histopathological study of 143 cases. The Radiumhemmet series 1936-1981. Acta Oncol 1990;29(2):185–91.
  • 14.Evans HL, Chawla SP, Simpson C, Finn KP. Smooth muscle neoplasms of the uterus other than ordinary leiomyoma. A study of 46 cases, with emphasis on diagnostic criteria and prognostic factors. Cancer 1988;62(10):2239–47.
  • 15.Nordal RR, Kristensen GB, Kaern J, Stenwig AE, Pet tersen EO, Tropé CG. The prognostic significance of stage, tumor size, cellular atypia and DNA ploidy in uterine leiomyosarcoma. Acta Oncol 1995;34(6):797– 802.
  • 16.Park JY, Park SK, Kim DY, Kim JH, Kim YM, Kim YT, et al. The impact of tumor morcellation during surgery on the prognosis of patients with apparently early uterine leiomyosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol 2011;122(2):255–9.
  • 17.Wolfson AH, Wolfson DJ, Sittler SY, Breton L, Markoe AM, Schwade JG, et al. A multivariate analysis of clini copathologic factors for predicting outcome in uterine sarcomas. Gynecol Oncol 1994;52(1):56–62.
  • 18.Salazar OM, Bonfiglio TA, Patten SF, Keller BE, Feldstein M, Dunne ME, et al. Uterine sarcomas: Natural history, treatment and prognosis. Cancer 1978;42(3):1152–60.
  • 19.Wheelock JB, Krebs HB, Schneider V, Goplerud DR. Uterine sarcoma: Analysis of prognostic variables in 71 cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985;151(8):1016–22.
  • 20.Kahanpää KV, Wahlström T, Gröhn P, Heinonen E, Nieminen U, Widholm O. Sarcomas of the uterus: A clinicopathologic study of 119 patients. Obstet Gynecol 1986;67(3):417–24.
  • 21.Durnali A, Tokluoğlu S, Özdemir N, Inanç M, Alkiş N, Zengin N, et al. Prognostic factors and treat ment outcomes in 93 patients with uterine sarcoma from 4 centers in Turkey. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2012;13(5):1935–41.
  • 22.Covens AL, Nisker JA, Chapman WB, Allen HH. Uterine sarcoma: An analysis of 74 cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987;156(2):370–4.
  • 23.Kohorn EI, Schwartz PE, Chambers JT, Peschel RE, Kapp DS, Merino M. Adjuvant therapy in mixed mullerian tumors of the uterus. Gynecol Oncol 1986;23(2):212–21.
  • 24.Kokawa K, Nishiyama K, Ikeuchi M, Ihara Y, Aka matsu N, Enomoto T, et al. Clinical outcomes of uter ine sarcomas: Results from 14 years worth of experi ence in the Kinki district in Japan (1990-2003). Int J Gynecol Cancer 2006;16(3):1358–63.
  • 25.Pautier P, Genestie C, Rey A, Morice P, Roche B, Lhommé C, et al. Analysis of clinicopathologic prog nostic factors for 157 uterine sarcomas and evaluation of a grading score validated for soft tissue sarcoma. Cancer 2000;88(6):1425–31.
  • 26.Koivisto-Korander R, Butzow R, Koivisto AM, Lemi nen A. Immunohistochemical studies on uterine carci nosarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, and endometrial stromal sarcoma: Expression and prognostic importance of ten different markers. Tumour Biol 2011;32(3):451–9.
  • 27.Lee CH, Mariño-Enriquez A, Ou W, Zhu M, Ali RH, Chiang S, et al. The clinicopathologic features of YWHAE-FAM22 endometrial stromal sarcomas: A histologically high-grade and clinically aggressive tu mor. Am J Surg Pathol 2012;36(5):641–53.
  • 28.Oliva E, Carcangiu ML, Carinelli SG, Young RH. Tu mours of the uterine corpus, mesenchymal tumours. In: Kurman RJ, Carcangiu ML, Herrington CS, Young RH, editors. WHO Classification of Tumours of Female Re productive Organs. 4th ed. Lyon: IARC; 2014. p. 135–45.
  • 29.Kurihara S, Oda Y, Ohishi Y, Kaneki E, Kobayashi H, Wake N, et al. Coincident expression of β-catenin and cyclin D1 in endometrial stromal tumors and related high-grade sarcomas. Mod Pathol 2010;23(2):225–34.
  • 30.de Jong RA, Nijman HW, Wijbrandi TF, Reyners AK, Boezen HM, Hollema H. Molecular markers and clinical behavior of uterine carcinosarcomas: Fo cus on the epithelial tumor component. Mod Pathol 2011;24(10):1368–79.
  • 31.Kanthan R, Senger JL, Diudea D. Malignant mixed Mullerian tumors of the uterus: Histopathological evaluation of cell cycle and apoptotic regulatory pro teins. World J Surg Oncol 2010;8:60.
  • 32.Fuchs B, Inwards CY, Janknecht R. Vascular endothe lial growth factor expression is up-regulated by EWS ETS oncoproteins and Sp1 and may represent an inde pendent predictor of survival in Ewing’s sarcoma. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10(4):1344–53.
  • 33.Amant F, van Calsteren K, Halaska MJ, Beijnen J, La gae L, Hanssens M, et al. Gynecologic cancers in preg nancy: Guidelines of an international consensus meet ing. Rare and Uncommon Gynecological Cancers. Berlin: Springer; 2011. p. 209–27.
  • 34.Benson C, Ray-Coquard I, Sleijfer S, Litière S, Blay JY, Le Cesne A, et al. Outcome of uterine sarcoma pa tients treated with pazopanib: A retrospective analysis based on two European organisation for research and treatment of cancer (EORTC) soft tissue and bone sar coma group (STBSG) clinical trials 62043 and 62072. Gynecol Oncol 2016;142(1):89–94.
  • 35.Hemming ML, Wagner AJ, Nucci MR, Chiang S, Wang L, Hensley ML, et al. YWHAE-rearranged high grade endometrial stromal sarcoma: Two-center case series and response to chemotherapy. Gynecol Oncol 2017;145(3):531–5.
  • 36.Tuyaerts S, Amant F. Endometrial stromal sarcomas: A revision of their potential as targets for ımmunother apy. Vaccines (Basel) 2018;6(3):56.
APA DUMAN ÖZTÜRK S, Turan G, Kaçar Özkara S (2022). Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature. , 51 - 59. 10.5505/tjo.2021.3380
Chicago DUMAN ÖZTÜRK Seda,Turan Gupse,Kaçar Özkara Sevgiye Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature. (2022): 51 - 59. 10.5505/tjo.2021.3380
MLA DUMAN ÖZTÜRK Seda,Turan Gupse,Kaçar Özkara Sevgiye Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature. , 2022, ss.51 - 59. 10.5505/tjo.2021.3380
AMA DUMAN ÖZTÜRK S,Turan G,Kaçar Özkara S Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature. . 2022; 51 - 59. 10.5505/tjo.2021.3380
Vancouver DUMAN ÖZTÜRK S,Turan G,Kaçar Özkara S Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature. . 2022; 51 - 59. 10.5505/tjo.2021.3380
IEEE DUMAN ÖZTÜRK S,Turan G,Kaçar Özkara S "Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature." , ss.51 - 59, 2022. 10.5505/tjo.2021.3380
ISNAD DUMAN ÖZTÜRK, Seda vd. "Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature". (2022), 51-59. https://doi.org/10.5505/tjo.2021.3380
APA DUMAN ÖZTÜRK S, Turan G, Kaçar Özkara S (2022). Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature. Türk Onkoloji Dergisi, 37(1), 51 - 59. 10.5505/tjo.2021.3380
Chicago DUMAN ÖZTÜRK Seda,Turan Gupse,Kaçar Özkara Sevgiye Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature. Türk Onkoloji Dergisi 37, no.1 (2022): 51 - 59. 10.5505/tjo.2021.3380
MLA DUMAN ÖZTÜRK Seda,Turan Gupse,Kaçar Özkara Sevgiye Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature. Türk Onkoloji Dergisi, vol.37, no.1, 2022, ss.51 - 59. 10.5505/tjo.2021.3380
AMA DUMAN ÖZTÜRK S,Turan G,Kaçar Özkara S Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature. Türk Onkoloji Dergisi. 2022; 37(1): 51 - 59. 10.5505/tjo.2021.3380
Vancouver DUMAN ÖZTÜRK S,Turan G,Kaçar Özkara S Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature. Türk Onkoloji Dergisi. 2022; 37(1): 51 - 59. 10.5505/tjo.2021.3380
IEEE DUMAN ÖZTÜRK S,Turan G,Kaçar Özkara S "Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature." Türk Onkoloji Dergisi, 37, ss.51 - 59, 2022. 10.5505/tjo.2021.3380
ISNAD DUMAN ÖZTÜRK, Seda vd. "Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Evaluation of 84 Uterine Sarcomas According to Current Literature". Türk Onkoloji Dergisi 37/1 (2022), 51-59. https://doi.org/10.5505/tjo.2021.3380