TY - JOUR
T1 - Endometrial stromal sarcoma
T2 - Clinicopathological and immunophenotypic study of 16 cases
AU - Iwasaki, Shin Ichi
AU - Sudo, Tamotsu
AU - Miwa, Maiko
AU - Ukita, Masayo
AU - Morimoto, Akemi
AU - Tamada, Masaru
AU - Ueno, Sayaka
AU - Wakahashi, Senn
AU - Yamaguchi, Satoshi
AU - Fujiwara, Kiyoshi
AU - Sakuma, Yoshiko
AU - Mikami, Yoshiki
AU - Nishimura, Ryuichiro
PY - 2013/8
Y1 - 2013/8
N2 - Purpose: Endometrial stromal sarcomas (ESSs) are rare tumors and are divided into two groups: low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (ESS-LG) and undifferentiated endometrial sarcoma (UES). The purpose of this study was to compare the clinicopathological features and immunophenotypes of ESS-LG and UES. Methods: The authors evaluated 16 patients diagnosed with ESS at the Hyogo Cancer Center, reviewed their files and data, and performed an immunohistochemical study for oncogenic proteins (EGFR, PDGFR-α, and PDGFR-β) and cell cycle regulators (cyclin D1, cyclin E, p16 INK4a, p21cip1, p27kip1, and p53) to compare ESS-LG and UES using the World Health Organization (WHO) classification. Results: Four cases (25 %) were classified as ESS-LGs and 12 (75 %) as UES. Patients with UES had a significantly worse overall survival than did those with ESS-LG (p = 0.0445). Although no ESS-LGs showed expression of p16 INK4a, 10 of 12 (83 %) UESs showed expression of p16INK4a. UESs showed a trend toward higher expression of cyclin D1, p21cip1, and p53 compared with ESS-LGs. Conclusions: Our data emphasize the clinical importance of the WHO classification of ESS. It is of utmost importance to establish a proper classification to increase the consistency of data that may be useful for improving clinical and therapeutic management of patients with ESS.
AB - Purpose: Endometrial stromal sarcomas (ESSs) are rare tumors and are divided into two groups: low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (ESS-LG) and undifferentiated endometrial sarcoma (UES). The purpose of this study was to compare the clinicopathological features and immunophenotypes of ESS-LG and UES. Methods: The authors evaluated 16 patients diagnosed with ESS at the Hyogo Cancer Center, reviewed their files and data, and performed an immunohistochemical study for oncogenic proteins (EGFR, PDGFR-α, and PDGFR-β) and cell cycle regulators (cyclin D1, cyclin E, p16 INK4a, p21cip1, p27kip1, and p53) to compare ESS-LG and UES using the World Health Organization (WHO) classification. Results: Four cases (25 %) were classified as ESS-LGs and 12 (75 %) as UES. Patients with UES had a significantly worse overall survival than did those with ESS-LG (p = 0.0445). Although no ESS-LGs showed expression of p16 INK4a, 10 of 12 (83 %) UESs showed expression of p16INK4a. UESs showed a trend toward higher expression of cyclin D1, p21cip1, and p53 compared with ESS-LGs. Conclusions: Our data emphasize the clinical importance of the WHO classification of ESS. It is of utmost importance to establish a proper classification to increase the consistency of data that may be useful for improving clinical and therapeutic management of patients with ESS.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84880827174&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84880827174&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00404-013-2766-3
DO - 10.1007/s00404-013-2766-3
M3 - Article
C2 - 23435725
AN - SCOPUS:84880827174
SN - 0932-0067
VL - 288
SP - 385
EP - 391
JO - Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
JF - Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
IS - 2
ER -