Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of the Uterine Cervix: A Clinicopathologic and Immunohistochemical Study with Focus on Novel Markers (Sst2-Sst5).
adenocarcinoma
cervical cancer
gynecologic neuroendocrine neoplasms
immunohistochemistry
somatostatin receptors
Journal
Cancers
ISSN: 2072-6694
Titre abrégé: Cancers (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101526829
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 May 2020
12 May 2020
Historique:
received:
30
03
2020
revised:
06
05
2020
accepted:
06
05
2020
entrez:
16
5
2020
pubmed:
16
5
2020
medline:
16
5
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Gynecological neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are extremely rare, accounting for 1.2-2.4% of the NENs. The aim of this study was to test cervical NENs for novel markers of potential utility for differential diagnosis and target therapy. All cases of our center ( All cases were poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs), 10 small cell types (small cell-neuroendocrine carcinomas, SCNECs) and 6 large cell types (large cell-neuroendocrine carcinomas, LCNECs); in 3 cases a predominant associated adenocarcinoma component was observed. Neuroendocrine cancer cells expressed at least 2 of the 3 tested neuroendocrine markers; p16 was intensely expressed in 14 (87.5%) cases; SST5 in 11 (56.25%, score 2-3, in 9 cases); SST2 in 8 (50%, score 2-3 in 8), CDX2 in 8 (50%), TTF1 in 5 (31.25%), and p53 in 1 case (0.06%). P63 and p40 expressions were negative, with the exception of one case that showed moderate expression for p63. P40 is a more useful marker for the differential diagnosis compared to squamous cell carcinoma. Neither CDX2 nor TTF1 expression may help the differential diagnosis versus potential cervical metastasis. P16 expression may suggest a cervical origin of NEC; however, it must be always integrated by clinical and instrumental data. The expression of SST2 and SST5 could support a role for SSAs (Somatostatin Analogues) in the diagnosis and therapy of patients with cervical NECs.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Gynecological neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are extremely rare, accounting for 1.2-2.4% of the NENs. The aim of this study was to test cervical NENs for novel markers of potential utility for differential diagnosis and target therapy.
METHODS
METHODS
All cases of our center (
RESULTS
RESULTS
All cases were poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs), 10 small cell types (small cell-neuroendocrine carcinomas, SCNECs) and 6 large cell types (large cell-neuroendocrine carcinomas, LCNECs); in 3 cases a predominant associated adenocarcinoma component was observed. Neuroendocrine cancer cells expressed at least 2 of the 3 tested neuroendocrine markers; p16 was intensely expressed in 14 (87.5%) cases; SST5 in 11 (56.25%, score 2-3, in 9 cases); SST2 in 8 (50%, score 2-3 in 8), CDX2 in 8 (50%), TTF1 in 5 (31.25%), and p53 in 1 case (0.06%). P63 and p40 expressions were negative, with the exception of one case that showed moderate expression for p63.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
P40 is a more useful marker for the differential diagnosis compared to squamous cell carcinoma. Neither CDX2 nor TTF1 expression may help the differential diagnosis versus potential cervical metastasis. P16 expression may suggest a cervical origin of NEC; however, it must be always integrated by clinical and instrumental data. The expression of SST2 and SST5 could support a role for SSAs (Somatostatin Analogues) in the diagnosis and therapy of patients with cervical NECs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32408525
pii: cancers12051211
doi: 10.3390/cancers12051211
pmc: PMC7281076
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Références
Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2014 May-Jun;22(5):377-82
pubmed: 24805133
Semin Oncol. 2007 Feb;34(1):57-63
pubmed: 17270667
Acta Histochem Cytochem. 2012 Jun 28;45(3):167-76
pubmed: 22829710
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2001 Feb;125(2):228-31
pubmed: 11175640
Am J Clin Pathol. 2014 Sep;142(3):320-4
pubmed: 25125621
Am J Surg Pathol. 2010 Apr;34(4):525-32
pubmed: 20182342
Hum Pathol. 2020 Feb;96:8-33
pubmed: 31857137
Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2019 Jan;38 Suppl 1:S123-S131
pubmed: 29517499
Histopathology. 2016 Mar;68(4):615-8
pubmed: 26173002
Am J Surg Pathol. 2017 Aug;41(8):1023-1033
pubmed: 28394803
PLoS One. 2017 Nov 7;12(11):e0187667
pubmed: 29112960
Int J Surg Pathol. 2016 Sep;24(6):490-6
pubmed: 27098591
Ann Diagn Pathol. 2018 Apr;33:23-29
pubmed: 29566943
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2009 Apr;279(4):521-5
pubmed: 18726606
J Clin Pathol. 2002 Feb;55(2):108-14
pubmed: 11865004
Virchows Arch. 2016 Sep;469(3):277-84
pubmed: 27392929
Gynecol Oncol. 2018 Feb;148(2):422-429
pubmed: 29248196
Mod Pathol. 2018 Dec;31(12):1770-1786
pubmed: 30140036
Mod Pathol. 2007 Nov;20(11):1172-82
pubmed: 17873898
PLoS One. 2013 May 15;8(5):e63364
pubmed: 23691035
Neuroendocrinology. 2017;104(1):1-10
pubmed: 26562558
Clin Nucl Med. 2017 Mar;42(3):216-217
pubmed: 28005640
Mod Pathol. 2019 Feb;32(2):290-305
pubmed: 30237525
Am J Clin Pathol. 2005 Mar;123(3):394-404
pubmed: 15716236
Hum Pathol. 2001 May;32(5):479-86
pubmed: 11381365
Curr Oncol Rep. 2017 Sep;19(9):59
pubmed: 28735441
Expert Rev Endocrinol Metab. 2013 Mar;8(2):149-157
pubmed: 30736175
Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2008 Jan;27(1):92-100
pubmed: 18156982
Gynecol Oncol. 2011 Jul;122(1):190-8
pubmed: 21621706
Cancer. 2008 Nov 15;113(10):2655-64
pubmed: 18853416