OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinicopathologic features and the outcome in patients with pure and mixed type uterine papillary serous carcinoma (UPSC), and to compare these parameters with those observed in patients with moderately and poorly differentiated endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (MPD-EEC). METHODS: The charts of 34 patients with UPSC and 30 patients with MPD-EEC, operated on between January 1995 and December 2000, were retrospectively reviewed. The UPSC group included ten cases of pure and 24 cases of mixed type UPSC (admixed with endometrioid component). All patients had undergone full surgical staging. Clinical features, surgicopathological findings, recurrence rate and recurrence-free interval were compared between the study groups. RESULTS: Significantly more patients with MPD-EEC than with UPSC were operated on in FIGO stage I and II (p = 0.001). MPD-EEC patients were significantly older and more obese (p = 0.03 and p = 0.01, respectively) as compared with the UPSC patients. Significantly more patients with MPD-EEC presented with postmenopausal bleeding (p = 0.02), had a second primary cancer in the past (p = 0.03) and had a first degree relative with history of malignant disease (p = 0.0001). Conversely, the rates of positive abdominal cytology and cervical involvement were significantly higher in the group of UPSC (p = 0.02 and p = 0.02, respectively). Significantly more patients with UPSC were treated with adjuvant therapy (p = 0.01). No significant difference between the two study groups was observed comparing the recurrence rate, the recurrence free interval and the 3-year survival. There was also no significant difference between the pure and the mixed type UPSC, considering the clinical features and the follow-up data. CONCLUSION: The current study presented no significant difference in the outcome of MPD-EEC as compared with the pure and the mixed type UPSC, yet prospective studies are needed to evaluate the role of adjuvant therapy in each study group.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinicopathologic features and the outcome in patients with pure and mixed type uterine papillary serous carcinoma (UPSC), and to compare these parameters with those observed in patients with moderately and poorly differentiated endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (MPD-EEC). METHODS: The charts of 34 patients with UPSC and 30 patients with MPD-EEC, operated on between January 1995 and December 2000, were retrospectively reviewed. The UPSC group included ten cases of pure and 24 cases of mixed type UPSC (admixed with endometrioid component). All patients had undergone full surgical staging. Clinical features, surgicopathological findings, recurrence rate and recurrence-free interval were compared between the study groups. RESULTS: Significantly more patients with MPD-EEC than with UPSC were operated on in FIGO stage I and II (p = 0.001). MPD-EEC patients were significantly older and more obese (p = 0.03 and p = 0.01, respectively) as compared with the UPSC patients. Significantly more patients with MPD-EEC presented with postmenopausal bleeding (p = 0.02), had a second primary cancer in the past (p = 0.03) and had a first degree relative with history of malignant disease (p = 0.0001). Conversely, the rates of positive abdominal cytology and cervical involvement were significantly higher in the group of UPSC (p = 0.02 and p = 0.02, respectively). Significantly more patients with UPSC were treated with adjuvant therapy (p = 0.01). No significant difference between the two study groups was observed comparing the recurrence rate, the recurrence free interval and the 3-year survival. There was also no significant difference between the pure and the mixed type UPSC, considering the clinical features and the follow-up data. CONCLUSION: The current study presented no significant difference in the outcome of MPD-EEC as compared with the pure and the mixed type UPSC, yet prospective studies are needed to evaluate the role of adjuvant therapy in each study group.
Authors: Yaser R Hussein; Russell Broaddus; Britta Weigelt; Douglas A Levine; Robert A Soslow Journal: Int J Gynecol Pathol Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 2.762
Authors: Kate Lawrenson; Elham Pakzamir; Biao Liu; Janet M Lee; Melissa K Delgado; Kara Duncan; Simon A Gayther; Song Liu; Lynda Roman; Paulette Mhawech-Fauceglia Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-07-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: C A Hamilton; M K Cheung; K Osann; L Chen; N N Teng; T A Longacre; M A Powell; M R Hendrickson; D S Kapp; J K Chan Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2006-03-13 Impact factor: 7.640