Mesonephric Adenocarcinomas of the Uterine Cervix and Corpus

Mesonephric Adenocarcinoma of the Uterine Corpus: A Case Report and Diagnostic Pitfall

Mesonephric adenocarcinoma is a rare tumor type that is usually found in areas where the Wolffian duct was present during the fetal period. We report a case of mesonephric adenocarcinoma of the uterine corpus in a 66-year-old woman who presented with vaginal bleeding. Pelvic magnetic resonance imaging revealed a 2.7-cm-sized irregular thickening and enhancement of the uterine body. The diagnosis following endometrial curettage biopsy was endometrioid adenocarcinoma, and the patient underwent a total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. The tumor was composed of small tubular and ductal components, and a retiform appearance was also observed in the deeper areas. The tumor cells were immunopositive for cytokeratin, vimentin, CD10 with a luminal staining pattern, PAX2, and PAX8, and immunonegative for estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor, which was consistent with tumor of mesonephric origin. Mesonephric neoplasms reveal relatively low-grade nuclear feature, characteristic immunoprofiles (immunonegative for ER and PR, and immunopositive for CD10, PAX2, PAX8, and GATA3), and unique tumor location (myometrium), whereas Müllerian neoplasms such as endometrial adenocarcinoma show various morphology, immunopositivity for ER and PR, and primarily endometrial location. As described above, an integration of the clinical features, morphologic characteristics, and immunohistochemical profiles is needed to make a diagnosis.

Immunohistochemical Comparison of Ovarian and Uterine Endometrioid Carcinoma, Endometrioid Carcinoma With Clear Cell Change, and Clear Cell Carcinoma

Accurate distinction of clear cell carcinoma (CCC) from endometrioid carcinoma (EC) has important clinical implications, but, not infrequently, EC demonstrates clear cell change (EC-CC), mimicking CCC. We examined whether a panel of immunomarkers can help distinguish between these tumors. Sixty-four CCCs (40 ovarian and 24 uterine), 34 ECs (21 ovarian and 13 uterine), and 34 EC-CCs (6 ovarian and 28 uterine) were stained for HNF1β, BAF250a, Napsin A, ER, and PR. Intensity and extent of immunoreactivity was assessed. Fifty-seven of 64 (89%) CCCs, 14/34 (41%) EC-CCs, and 16/34 (47%) ECs expressed HNF1β, and 56/64 (88%) CCCs, 4/34 (12%) EC-CCs, and 1/34 (3%) ECs stained for Napsin A. Most CCCs demonstrated at least moderate and diffuse staining for both markers, whereas only focal and weak expression was identified in most EC-CC/EC. Compared to HNF1β, Napsin A showed increased specificity (93.0% vs. 55.9%, P<0.0001) and similar sensitivity (87.5% vs. 89.1%) in distinguishing CCC from EC-CC/EC. Thirteen of 64 (20%) CCCs, 6/34 (18%) EC-CCs, and 2/34 (6%) ECs showed loss of BAF250a. ER was expressed by 10/64 (16%) CCCs, 30/34 (88%) EC-CCs, and 33/34 (97%) ECs, whereas PR positivity was identified in 9/64 (14%) CCCs, 26/34 (77%) EC-CCs, and 33/34 (97%) ECs. The majority of EC and EC-CC demonstrated diffuse staining for ER/PR, whereas most CCCs showed very focal positivity. There is a statistically significant difference in HNF1β, Napsin A, ER, and PR immunoexpression between CCC and EC/EC-CC, with Napsin A being a more specific marker for CCC than HNF1β. Overall, the immunoprofile of EC-CC is more comparable to that of EC than CCC. The use of a panel of immunostains can help distinguish EC-CC from CCC.

The role of immunohistochemistry in the evaluation of gynecologic pathology part 2: a comparative study between two academic institutes

Use of specific immunohistochemistry (IHC) marker, singly or in panels, differs and is influenced by practice setting, individual experience beside other factors. This is a part 2 study where we surveyed the application of IHC in gynecologic (gyn) pathology. Our specific aim in this part was to identify what specific stains are preferentially used. A retrospective chart review on all cases accessioned to the gyn pathology specialty sign out service during a 1-year period was performed at two academic pathology departments. Outside referral and consult as well as gyn cytology cases were excluded from the study. The most commonly ordered markers in diagnostic gyn pathology in descending order of frequency were as follows: P16, ki-67, p53, estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and CK7. P16 was used mainly in establishing the diagnosis/grading of squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL) and differentiating serous from endometrioid carcinomas (ECs). P53 was used particularly in the diagnosis of serous carcinomas and establishing the diagnosis of differentiated vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia. Positive p16 was documented in all high-grade SIL, endocervical carcinomas, and serous carcinomas. In contrast, p16 was negative in all benign, low-grade SIL, and ECs. ER and PR were used in panels with p16, p53, vimentin, and carcinoembryonic antigen to assign tumors to specific site, in differentiating EC from serous carcinomas and in establishing the diagnosis of endocervical adenocarcinomas. Immunohistochemistry was used in 4.7% and 8.7% of gyn surgical path cases at two institutions. P16, ki-67, and p53 were the most commonly used markers especially in grading SIL. This study documents the most commonly used IHC biomarkers at two tertiary care academic centers for defining benchmarks for IHC use.

Differential patterns of PAX8, p16, and ER immunostains in mesonephric lesions and adenocarcinomas of the cervix

Mesonephric remnants, usually located deep in the lateral cervical wall, may become hyperplastic resulting in a florid proliferation. These can be misinterpreted as malignant and confused with endocervical adenocarcinomas. Recent data have shown that PAX2 is diffusely expressed in mesonephric remnants and hyperplasias. PAX8 is a related transcription protein that is expressed in tissues of müllerian and wolffian origin. In this study, we have investigated the utility of an immunohistochemical panel comprising of PAX8, estrogen receptor (ER), and p16 in the differential diagnosis between mesonephric proliferations and cervical adenocarcinomas. A database search was conducted for cases of mesonephric remnants/hyperplasia/carcinoma of cervix and invasive cervical adenocarcinomas. Immunohistochemical stains for PAX8, ER, and p16 were performed using the avidin-biotin peroxidase technique on the most representative tissue. The search yielded 28 cases of mesonephric proliferations of cervix (15 mesonephric remnants, 12 mesonephric hyperplasias, and 1 mesonephric adenocarcinoma) and 16 cases of cervical adenocarcinomas (15 usual type and 1 adenoma malignum). Immunohistochemically, all the mesonephric proliferations, regardless of being benign or malignant, displayed a consistent staining pattern-diffusely and strongly positive for PAX8, negative for ER, and patchy cytoplasmic staining for p16. The usual type cervical adenocarcinomas exhibited a variable staining pattern with PAX8 and ER but all were strongly and diffusely positive for p16. The case of adenoma malignum was PAX8 positive, ER negative, and showed weak and patchy staining with p16. Our study suggests that a panel of immunohistochemical stains composed of PAX8, p16, and ER is useful in the distinction between mesonephric proliferations and cervical adenocarcinomas.

Mesonephric carcinosarcoma involving uterine cervix and vagina: report of 2 cases with immunohistochemical positivity For PAX2, PAX8, and GATA-3

Mesonephric carcinomas are rare tumors predominantly arising in the uterine cervix from mesonephric remnants. Although the tumor has classic morphologic features, some cases can mimic Müllerian adenocarcinoma and be misdiagnosed, especially those with significant ductal pattern. Moreover, there is an overlap in immunohistochemical results with endometrial and endocervical carcinomas. In this study, we report 2 cases of mesonephric carcinosarcoma, originally diagnosed as Müllerian carcinomas, 1 presenting in the vagina; review immunohistochemical results including positivity for GATA-3, not previously reported and comment on the proposed panel of PAX8, p16, and estrogen receptors as discriminators of Müllerian adenocarcinoma (endocervical or endometrial) versus mesonephric carcinoma.

PAX8 expression in uterine adenocarcinomas and mesonephric proliferations

PAX8 is a useful immunohistochemical marker for the diagnosis of gynecologic tract malignancies. Several studies have described PAX8 expression in a wide variety of epithelial neoplasms, including ovarian and endometrial carcinomas. The goal of this study was to evaluate PAX8 expression in various types of uterine adenocarcinomas and mesonephric proliferations. Ninety-four cases of uterine adenocarcinomas (52 endometrial endometrioid carcinomas, 21 endometrial serous carcinomas, and 21 human papillomavirus-related endocervical carcinomas), 11 cases of benign mesonephric proliferations (remnants/hyperplasia), and normal endometrial and endocervical glandular epithelium in 58 cases were studied. Immunohistochemical staining was performed with the rabbit polyclonal anti-PAX8 antibody. All adenocarcinoma groups demonstrated a high frequency of PAX8 expression but with relatively high variability in the extent of staining among different subtypes. Both serous carcinomas and endometrioid carcinomas were positive in most cases (95% and 96%, respectively), but serous carcinomas displayed a significantly higher level of expression (immunohistochemical composite scores based on combined extent and intensity of expression) compared with endometrioid carcinomas (mean immunohistochemical composite scores: 8.3 vs. 5.3, respectively; P<0.006). Endocervical adenocarcinomas also had a high frequency of PAX8 expression (86% of cases), but the level of expression was significantly less than that of endometrial adenocarcinomas (mean immunohistochemical composite scores: 2.9 vs. 5.3-8.3, respectively; P<0.004). Among benign glandular epithelia, normal endocervical glands exhibited a significantly lower level of expression compared with either normal endometrial glands or benign mesonephric proliferations (mean immunohistochemical composite scores: 2.6 vs. 6.6-11.2, respectively; P<0.0006). We conclude that PAX8 is expressed in the vast majority of uterine adenocarcinomas, including those of both endometrial and endocervical origin, and that the level of expression based on combined extent and intensity is highest in endometrial serous carcinoma and lowest in endocervical adenocarcinoma. However, the high prevalence of PAX8 expression in the various types of uterine adenocarcinomas precludes use of this marker for distinguishing these tumors. In extrauterine sites, PAX8 can serve as a useful marker for adenocarcinomas of uterine origin (also positive in the majority of ovarian carcinomas), being most sensitive for identification of endometrial adenocarcinomas (both serous and endometrioid). The sensitivity for identifying metastatic endocervical adenocarcinomas is likely less and dependent on the degree to which the significantly lower extent of expression in these tumors is maintained in metastatic sites.

Expression of HNF-1β in cervical carcinomas: an immunohistochemical study of 155 cases

Background

HNF-1β is a commonly used marker in the differential diagnosis of clear cell carcinoma of the ovary and endometrium. Recent studies have found HNF-1β expression to a lesser extent in other ovarian and endometrial tumors including endometrioid, mucinous and, rarely, serous carcinoma. Regarding cervical carcinoma, HNF-1β expression has been mentioned exceptionally in mesonephric and some other types of adenocarcinoma. However, a systematic analysis of HNF-1β expression in cervical carcinomas has not been performed to date.

Methods

We analyzed HNF-1β expression in 155 cervical carcinomas (including 56 adenocarcinomas, 85 squamous cell carcinomas and 14 undifferentiated carcinomas). Expression of HNF-1β was correlated with the expression of other markers including estrogen receptors, progesterone receptors, CEA, p63, p40, p16, and D2-40.

Results

Adenocarcinomas showed expression of HNF-1β in 42/56 cases (75%), CEA in 48/56 cases (85.7%), p63 in 4/56 cases (7.2%), p40 in 2/56 cases (3.6%), estrogen receptors in 9/56 cases (16.1%), progesterone receptors in 5/56 cases (8.9%), p16 in 56/56 (100%) cases, and D2-40 in 0/56 cases (0%). Squamous cell carcinomas showed expression of HNF-1β in 2/85 cases (2.35%), CEA in 77/85 cases (90.6%), p63 and p40 in 85/85 cases (100%), estrogen receptors in 9/85 cases (10.6%), progesterone receptors in 1/85 cases (1.2%), p16 in 84/85 cases (98.8%), and D2-40 in 45/84 cases (53.6%). Undifferentiated carcinomas showed expression of HNF-1β in 2/14 cases (14.3%), CEA in 8/14 cases (57.1%), p16 in 14/14 cases (100%), hormone receptors in 0/13 cases (0%), p63 in 7/14 cases (50%), p40 in 5/14 cases (35.7%), and D2-40 in 1/14 cases (7.1%).

Conclusions

In cervical carcinoma, expression of HNF-1β is mostly restricted to adenocarcinomas and can be used as an auxiliary adenocarcinoma marker in the differential diagnosis of poorly differentiated cervical carcinomas. HNF-1β as an adenocarcinoma marker and p63/p40 and D2-40 as a squamous cell carcinoma markers are highly specific with variable sensitivity. Optimal results can be achieved using these markers in a panel.

Virtual Slides

The virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/1348836442160205.

Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) consensus review for cervical adenocarcinoma

Cervical adenocarcinoma is known to be less common than squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix comprising approximately 25% of all cervical carcinomas. Differences in associated human papillomavirus types, patterns of spread, and prognosis call for treatments that are not always like those for squamous cancers. In this review, we report a consensus developed by the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup surrounding cervical adenocarcinoma for epidemiology, pathology, treatment, and unanswered questions. Prospective clinical trials are needed to help develop treatment guidelines.

Effects of HMGA2 on malignant degree, invasion, metastasis, proliferation and cellular morphology of ovarian cancer cells

OBJECTIVE

To analyze effects of high mobility group AT-hook 2 (HMGA2) on malignant degree, invasion, metastasis, proliferation and cellular morphology of ovarian cancer cells.

METHODS

Three methods were applied to observe the effect on HMGA2 expression in ovarian cancer cells and ovarian epithelial cells.

RESULTS

After the application of siRNA-HMGA2, number of T29A2-cell clones was decreased, there was significant difference compared with the negative control Block-iT. After application of let-7c, number of T29A2+ cell clones was decreased significantly, however, after the application of Anti-let-7, the number of clones restored, and there was no significant difference compared with the negative control group. After interference, the number of T29A2- cells which passed through Matrigel polycarbonate membrane were significantly lower than the negative control group. After the treatment of siRNA-HMGA2, let-7c and sh-HMGA2 respectively, growth and proliferation of T29A2-, T29A2+ and SKOV3 were slower, and the phenomenon was most obvious in SKOV3. Stable interference of HMGA2 induced mesenchymal-epithelial changes in the morphology of SKOV3-sh-HMGA2.

CONCLUSIONS

HMGA2 can promote malignant transformation of ovarian cancer cells, enhance cell invasion and metastasis, and promote cell growth and proliferation of ovarian cancer cells, which can cause ovarian cancer to progress rapidly and affect the quality of life.

The spectrum of cervical glandular neoplasia and issues in differential diagnosis

CONTEXT

Premalignant and malignant glandular lesions of the cervix are known to often cause diagnostic problems with a variety of benign (more common) as well as other malignant mimics, the latter setting often being represented by secondary involvement by endometrioid endometrial carcinoma especially in small samplings.

OBJECTIVE

To highlight key histologic features and immunohistochemical markers that may be helpful in the distinction of in situ endocervical carcinoma from benign glandular proliferations, and those that separate different subtypes of invasive endocervical carcinoma, as well as invasive carcinoma from other carcinomas secondarily involving the cervix and nonneoplastic proliferations of the cervix.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical and morphologic features as well as immunohistochemistry results should be used in conjunction in the differential diagnosis of glandular proliferations of the cervix, as correct interpretation has major clinical consequences for the patient in most instances (especially benign versus malignant). Immunohistochemical markers should be used as part of a panel of antibodies, as exceptions may occur to the usual pattern of staining, and if used singly, they may mislead the pathologist to establish a wrong diagnosis.

Newly Available Antibodies With Practical Applications in Surgical Pathology

Selected antibodies that have become available in recent years and have applications in diagnostic pathology are discussed. They include antibodies that are organ-related, provide information on cellular differentiation or histogenetic type, have predictive value in tumors, and highlight infective agents. PAX8 (paired box gene 8) is a marker expressed in the lower female genital tract, thyroid, and kidney and their tumors. Napsin A is expressed in the lung and kidney and is an alternative marker for pulmonary adenocarcinoma. Arginase A is a sensitive and specific marker for liver tumors. ERG (Ets-related gene) is an excellent marker for endothelium and vascular tumors as well as prostatic cancer (about 50% of cases). SOX10 (SRY-related HMG box) is expressed predominantly in melanocytic and Schwann cells and the corresponding tumors. DOG1 (discovered on GIST 1) is an excellent marker for gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) and acinic cell carcinoma. OCT3/4 is a pan–germ cell tumor marker, except yolk sac tumor. SALL4 is positive in various types of germ cell tumors, including yolk sac tumor. MUC4 (mucin-related antigen 4) is a sensitive and specific marker for low-grade fibromyxoid sarcoma. Langerin is a specific marker for Langerhans cells and their tumors. SOX11 is a sensitive marker for mantle cell lymphoma. New generation antibodies against anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) are required to reliably demonstrate ALK gene translocation in pulmonary carcinomas. Lack of expression of succinate dehydrogenase B is seen in paragangliomas of the hereditary form and in the pediatric type of GIST. Antibodies against Trepenoma pallidum can facilitate the diagnosis of syphilis, whereas those against SV40 (simian virus 40) are helpful for diagnosis of BK virus infection and progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy.

Utility of α-methylacyl-coenzyme-A racemase (p504s) immunohistochemistry in distinguishing endometrial clear cell carcinomas from serous and endometrioid carcinomas

The expression of α-methylacyl-coenzyme-A racemase (AMACR) has previously been reported in 75% to 100% of urethral/bladder clear cell carcinomas, tumors that are known to display broad phenotypic overlap with their identically named müllerian counterparts. Herein, we assess the utility of AMACR in distinguishing endometrial clear cell carcinomas (CCCs) from endometrial serous carcinomas (ESCs) and endometrial endometrioid carcinomas (EECs). A total of 111 endometrial carcinomas in a tissue microarray, including 49 CCCs, 13 ESCs, and 49 EECs, were assessed for AMACR immunoreactivity, with results scored semiquantitatively (scores 0, 1+, 2+, 3+ for 0%, 1%-5%, 6%-50%, >50% immunoreactive cells, respectively). Fifty (45%) of the 111 carcinomas were AMACR positive, with the following score distribution: CCC: 0 (n = 12), 1+ (n = 12), 2+ (n = 3), 3+ (n = 22); EEC: 0 (n = 38), 1+ (n = 4), 2+ (n = 4), 3+ (n = 3); ESC: 0 (n = 11), 1+ (n = 1), 2+ (n = 0), 3+ (n = 1). AMACR expression was significantly more frequent in CCC (75%) than in ESC (15%) or EEC (22%); P < .0001. The sensitivity and specificity of AMACR expression in classifying a carcinoma as CCC were 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-0.86) and 0.79 (95% CI, 0.66-0.88), respectively, with an odds ratio of 11.62 (95% CI, 5-28; P < .001) and an area under the curve of 0.79 (95% CI, 0.68-0.88). These findings indicate that AMACR expression is strongly associated with CCC and displays a relatively robust diagnostic test performance. However, its practical utility may be limited by the focal nature of its expression in 32% of the AMACR-positive CCC cases as well as its expression in 15% to 22% of the non-CCC histotypes.

Novel synthetic monoketone transmute radiation-triggered NFκB-dependent TNFα cross-signaling feedback maintained NFκB and favors neuroblastoma regression

Recently, we demonstrated that radiation (IR) instigates the occurrence of a NFκB-TNFα feedback cycle which sustains persistent NFκB activation in neuroblastoma (NB) cells and favors survival advantage and clonal expansion. Further, we reported that curcumin targets IR-induced survival signaling and NFκB dependent hTERT mediated clonal expansion in human NB cells. Herein, we investigated the efficacy of a novel synthetic monoketone, EF24, a curcumin analog in inhibiting persistent NFκB activation by disrupting the IR-induced NFκB-TNFα-NFκB feedback signaling in NB and subsequent mitigation of survival advantage and clonal expansion. EF24 profoundly suppressed the IR-induced NFκB-DNA binding activity/promoter activation and, maintained the NFκB repression by deterring NFκB-dependent TNFα transactivation/intercellular secretion in genetically varied human NB (SH-SY5Y, IMR-32, SK-PN-DW, MC-IXC and SK-N-MC) cell types. Further, EF24 completely suppressed IR-induced NFκB-TNFα cross-signaling dependent transactivation/translation of pro-survival IAP1, IAP2 and Survivin and subsequent cell survival. In corroboration, EF24 treatment maximally blocked IR-induced NFκB dependent hTERT transactivation/promoter activation, telomerase activation and consequent clonal expansion. EF24 displayed significant regulation of IR-induced feedback dependent NFκB and NFκB mediated survival signaling and complete regression of NB xenograft. Together, the results demonstrate for the first time that, novel synthetic monoketone EF24 potentiates radiotherapy and mitigates NB progression by selectively targeting IR-triggered NFκB-dependent TNFα-NFκB cross-signaling maintained NFκB mediated survival advantage and clonal expansion.

Mesonephric adenocarcinoma with a sarcomatous component, a notable subtype of cervical carcinosarcoma: a case report and review of the literature

Abstract

Carcinosarcoma of the uterine cervix is less common than its counterpart in the uterine corpus. On the other hand, mesonephric adenocarcinoma is also a rare neoplasm in the uterine cervix, and it has been reported that mesonephric adenocarcinomas are often accompanied by sarcomatous components. We present a case of mesonephric adenocarcinoma with a sarcomatous component which arose in a 63-year-old postmenopausal woman. The hysterectomy specimen grossly showed an exophytic mass measuring 1.8 cm in the uterine cervix. Histologically, diffuse mesonephric hyperplasia and adenocarcinoma with malignant spindle cell proliferation was recognized, and therefore the tumor was diagnosed as “mesonephric adenocarcinoma with a sarcomatous component.” The review of the literature of cervical carcinosarcoma and cervical mesonephric adenocarcinoma revealed that 16% of cervical carcinosarcoma is of mesonephric duct origin, and that mesonephric adenocarcinoma seems to be more likely to have sarcomatous change. We think the presence of a sarcomatous component in the cervical biopsy specimen could be helpful in the diagnosis of mesonephric duct origin.

Virtual slides

The virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/1243996503911062

[Update on gynecopathology]

Recent years have witnessed significant achievements in light microscopic, immunohistochemical and molecular diagnostics in gynecopathology. In this article four topics will be discussed as examples. The squamous precancerous and carcinomatous lesions of the female anogenital tract and the cervix are caused by a transforming high risk human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. No differences in morphological findings can be found between the different locations. In contrast to the current WHO classification a new categorization into low grade and high grade precancerous lesions is suggested. Only some cervical adenocarcinomas are related to high risk HPV infection. Nevertheless, some of these unusual variants demonstrate p16 overexpression. Uterine leiomyosarcomas are clinically aggressive neoplasms independent of the histological grade and in most cases curative treatment is not feasible. It is most important to distinguish leiomyosarcoma from those leiomyoma variants which mimic uterine leiomyosarcoma. Pelvic and ovarian serous carcinomas can be separated into low grade and high grade types which differ significantly in formal pathogenesis, molecular features and pathomorphological findings. Significant differences are also obvious in clinical behavior and response to chemotherapy regimens.

New developments in endocervical glandular lesions

McCluggage W G (2012) Histopathology New developments in endocervical glandular lesions There is evidence that the prevalence of premalignant and malignant endocervical glandular lesions is increasing in real as well as in apparent terms. In this review, new developments and selected controversial aspects of endocervical glandular lesions are covered, concentrating mainly on premalignant and malignant lesions. The terminology of premalignant endocervical glandular lesions is discussed with a comparison of the World Health Organization classification and the cervical glandular intraepithelial neoplasia (CGIN) system, which is in widespread use in the United Kingdom. Primary cervical adenocarcinomas comprise a heterogeneous group of different morphological types, and while it is known that the majority of these are associated with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV), it has become clear in recent years that most of the more uncommon morphological types are unassociated with HPV, although they may sometimes be p16-positive. A spectrum of benign, premalignant and malignant cervical glandular lesions exhibiting gastric differentiation is now recognized; these include type A tunnel clusters, typical and atypical lobular endocervical glandular hyperplasia, adenoma malignum and gastric-type adenocarcinoma. The latter is a recently described variant of primary cervical adenocarcinoma which has a different morphological appearance to the usual endocervical type and which is probably associated with different patterns of spread and a worse prognosis. There is accumulating evidence that 'early invasive' cervical adenocarcinomas have an excellent prognosis and are suitable for conservative management. Immunohistochemical markers of value in the distinction between a primary cervical and endometrial adenocarcinoma are discussed. While it is well known that a panel of markers comprising oestrogen receptor (ER), vimentin, p16 and monoclonal carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is useful, several major pitfalls are pointed out and this panel of markers is predominantly of value in 'low-grade' adenocarcinomas. A related group of lesions, including cervical ectopic prostatic tissue and vaginal tubulosquamous polyp, are probably derived from para-urethral Skene's glands and may be positive with prostatic markers. Recent developments in cervical neuroendocrine neoplasms are discussed, as these are associated not uncommonly with a premalignant or malignant endocervical glandular lesion.

The diagnosis of endometrial carcinomas with clear cells by gynecologic pathologists: an assessment of interobserver variability and associated morphologic features

The purposes of this study are to assess the level of interobserver variability in the diagnosis of endometrial carcinomas with clear cells by gynecologic pathologists based purely on their morphologic features and to comparatively describe the cases of putative clear cell carcinoma (CCC) with and without significant interobserver variability. A total of 35 endometrial carcinomas (1 slide per case) were reviewed by 11 gynecologic pathologists (median experience: 10 y) from 11 North American institutions. The cases were selected from the files of 3 institutions on the basis of the presence of at least focal clear cells and had previously been classified as a variety of histotypes at these institutions. Diagnoses were rendered in a blinded manner and without predetermined diagnostic criteria or categories. The κ values between any pair of observers ranged from 0.18 to 0.69 (combined 0.46), which was indicative of a "moderate" level of interobserver agreement for the group. Subgroups of "confirmed CCC" [cases diagnosed as such by at least 8 (73%) of the 11 observers, n=14] and "possible CCC" (cases diagnosed as CCC by ≥1 but <8 observers, n=13) were compared with regard to a variety of semiquantified morphologic features. By combining selected morphologic features that displayed statistically significant differences between the 2 groups on univariate analyses, the following approximate morphologic profile emerged for the confirmed CCC group: papillae with hyalinized cores in ≥33% of the lesion, clear cells in ≥33% of the lesion, hyperchromasia in ≥33% of the lesion, the absence of nuclear pseudostratification in >3 cells on the papillae, the absence of nuclear pseudostratification in glands in ≥33% of the lesion, the absence of diffuse grade 3 nuclei, the absence of long and slender papillae in ≥33% of the lesion, and glands and papillae lined by cuboidal to flat, noncolumnar cells. In a backward stepwise logistic regression analysis, features from the profile that predicted the confirmed CCC group included: (1) absence or minimality of diffuse sheets of grade 3 nuclei [P=0.025; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.0266-0.363]; (2) absence or minimality of nuclear stratification in glands and papillae (P=0.040; 95% CI, -0.228 to -0.0054); and (3) glands and papillae lined by cuboidal to flat, noncolumnar cells (P=0.008; 95% CI, 0.0911-0.566). The 2 groups displayed significant overlap regarding a wide variety of features, and no single case displayed a full complement of potentially diagnostic features. Morphologic patterns associated with cases with very high levels of interobserver variability (defined as cases with ≥4 different diagnoses rendered for them, n=9) included the near-exclusive or exclusively solid pattern of clear cells (3/9) and glandular/papillary proliferations whose only CCC-like feature was the presence of clear cells (2/9). In conclusion, the diagnosis of endometrial carcinomas with clear cells by gynecologic pathologists is associated with a moderate level of interobserver variability. However, there is a morphologic profile that characterizes cases that gynecologic pathologists more uniformly classify as CCC, and the presence of these features is supportive of a CCC diagnosis in an endometrial carcinoma with clear cells. Cases that display broad and significant qualitative deviations from the aforementioned profile should prompt the consideration of a diagnosis other than CCC.