Literature DB >> 18162780

Distinction of primary and metastatic mucinous tumors involving the ovary: analysis of size and laterality data by primary site with reevaluation of an algorithm for tumor classification.

Anna V Yemelyanova1, Russell Vang, Kara Judson, Lee-Shu-Fune Wu, Brigitte M Ronnett.   

Abstract

Distinction of primary ovarian mucinous tumors from metastatic/secondary mucinous tumors involving the ovaries is often challenging, not only at the time of intraoperative assessment when requested for surgical management (staging decisions) but also for final pathologic diagnosis. Previous studies have shown that a simple algorithm using tumor size and laterality (bilateral tumors of any size, or unilateral tumor <10 cm=metastatic; unilateral tumor > or =10 cm=primary) can accurately classify a substantial majority of tumors. To assess the general utility of this algorithm for distinction of primary and secondary mucinous tumors in the ovary and address the occurrence of exceptions (large unilateral metastases), analysis of tumor size and laterality data was performed using 194 tumors (52 primary tumors and 142 metastases), with metastases subclassified by primary site [colorectum (46), appendix (28 low-grade tumors, 20 carcinomas), pancreaticobiliary tract (20), small intestine (3), stomach (5), and endocervix (20)]. Performance of the algorithm was evaluated using the originally proposed method and modified size criteria were analyzed to optimize tumor classification. The original algorithm correctly classified 84% of tumors overall, including 100% of primary ovarian tumors and 77% of all metastases (colorectal: 74%; appendiceal: 79% of low-grade tumors, 100% of carcinomas; pancreaticobiliary: 95%; small intestinal: 33%; gastric: 80%; endocervical: 55%). By adjusting the size criterion to 12 cm, performance of the algorithm was both maintained for primary ovarian tumors and improved for metastases, with correct classification of 86% of tumors overall, including 100% of primary tumors and 80% of metastases. Performance was optimized at 13 cm, with correct classification of 87% of tumors overall, including 98% of primary tumors and 82% of metastases (colorectal: 80%; appendiceal: 79% of low-grade tumors, 100% of carcinomas; pancreaticobiliary: 100%; small intestinal: 33%; gastric: 100%; endocervical: 70%). Of the more common metastases, metastatic colorectal and endocervical carcinomas provided the greatest number of exceptions, even when analyzed with the optimized size criterion. Recognition that metastatic colorectal carcinomas represent the most common metastases and have a greater tendency to violate the algorithm should prompt lowering of the threshold for suggesting the possibility of metastatic colorectal carcinoma for tumors displaying any microscopic features suggestive of that diagnosis, even when a history of primary colorectal carcinoma is lacking. Use of the algorithm is intended as an adjunct to the complete clinicopathologic evaluation that ideally should occur when problematic mucinous tumors in the ovary are encountered.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18162780     DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3180690d2d

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol        ISSN: 0147-5185            Impact factor:   6.394


  37 in total

1.  Advanced stage mucinous adenocarcinoma of the ovary is both rare and highly lethal: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study.

Authors:  Richard J Zaino; Mark F Brady; Subodh M Lele; Helen Michael; Benjamin Greer; Michael A Bookman
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-09-22       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 2.  Unmasking the complexities of mucinous ovarian carcinoma.

Authors:  Michael Frumovitz; Kathleen M Schmeler; Anais Malpica; Anil K Sood; David M Gershenson
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2010-03-23       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 3.  [Morphology of secondary ovarian tumors and metastases].

Authors:  L-C Horn; J Einenkel; R Handzel; A K Höhn
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.011

4.  "Novel" nomogram and algorithm do not aid in the distinction of primary vs. metastatic mucinous carcinoma of the ovary: letter to the Editor.

Authors:  Miglena K Komforti; Rebecca M Thomas
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2019-04-04       Impact factor: 4.064

Review 5.  [Pitfalls and common problems in the differential diagnosis of epithelial ovarian tumors].

Authors:  S F Lax
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 1.011

Review 6.  A guided tour of selected issues pertaining to metastatic carcinomas involving or originating from the gynecologic tract.

Authors:  Robert A Soslow; Rajmohan Murali
Journal:  Semin Diagn Pathol       Date:  2017-11-20       Impact factor: 3.464

Review 7.  Mucinous Neoplasms of the Ovary: Radiologic-Pathologic Correlation.

Authors:  Jamie Marko; Kathryn I Marko; Suvidya L Pachigolla; Barbara A Crothers; Rubina Mattu; Darcy J Wolfman
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2019 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.333

8.  The challenge of diagnosing a malignancy metastatic to the ovary: clinicopathological characteristics vary and morphology can be different from that of the corresponding primary tumor.

Authors:  João Lobo; Bianca Machado; Renata Vieira; Carla Bartosch
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2016-10-18       Impact factor: 4.064

9.  Mucinous adenocarcinoma involving the ovary: comparative evaluation of the classification algorithms using tumor size and laterality.

Authors:  Eun Sun Jung; Jeong Hoon Bae; Ahwon Lee; Yeong Jin Choi; Jong-Sup Park; Kyo-Young Lee
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2010-01-19       Impact factor: 2.153

Review 10.  [Mucinous ovarian neoplasms. Prognostically mostly excellent, infrequently a wolf in sheep's clothing].

Authors:  S Lax; A Staebler
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.011

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.