Literature DB >> 27721274

Comparison of histological grading methods in mucoepidermoid carcinoma of minor salivary glands.

Ahmed Qannam1, Ibrahim O Bello1.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC) is the most common salivary gland malignancy and its grading is greatly consequential in the management and prognosis of patients with the disease. AIMS: To compare histologic grading systems in MEC of minor salivary glands. SETTINGS AND
DESIGN: Two qualitative (modified Healy and Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center [MSKCC] methods) and two quantitative (Armed Forces Institute of Pathology [AFIP] and Brandwein methods) were evaluated. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Diagnostics slides of 19 patients including one recurrent case were evaluated using the four grading systems. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Percentages and proportions were used.
RESULTS: Agreement across all grading system was found to be very low (32%) while there was a better agreement between AFIP and MSKCC methods (84%) between modified Healy and Brandwein (58%). The method that gave the poorest agreement with all the others was the Brandwein grading. In general, the AFIP and MSKCC methods tended to grade the tumors lower while the Brandwein and modified Healy methods seemed to grade them higher.
CONCLUSIONS: Most MEC of minor salivary glands appear to be low-grade tumors. It is conceivable that some grading methods (Brandwein and modified Healy) may lead to an unnecessary escalation of management methods in these tumors. The MSKCC method may have emphasized some parameters which may not have much importance in minor salivary gland MEC. The AFIP method appears to be the most appropriate to use for the grading of minor salivary gland MEC. Further studies are required to confirm or disprove this finding.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27721274     DOI: 10.4103/0377-4929.191765

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Pathol Microbiol        ISSN: 0377-4929            Impact factor:   0.740


  5 in total

1.  Mucoepidermoid Carcinoma: A Comparison of Histologic Grading Systems and Relationship to MAML2 Rearrangement and Prognosis.

Authors:  Nicole A Cipriani; Jonathan J Lusardi; James McElherne; Alexander T Pearson; Andrea D Olivas; Carrie Fitzpatrick; Mark W Lingen; Elizabeth A Blair
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 6.394

2.  Overall and cause-specific survival for mucoepidermoid carcinoma of the major salivary glands: Analysis of 2210 patients.

Authors:  Zachary C Taylor; Erin A Kaya; Jeffrey D Bunn; Zachary D Guss; Brian J Mitchell; Robert K Fairbanks; Wayne T Lamoreaux; Aaron E Wagner; Ben J Peressini; Christopher M Lee
Journal:  World J Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-12-24

3.  Mucoepidermoid carcinoma of the head and neck: CRTC1/3 MAML 2 translocation and its prognosticators.

Authors:  Stijn van Weert; Birgit I Lissenberg-Witte; Elisabeth Bloemena; C René Leemans
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-08-17       Impact factor: 3.236

4.  Mucoepidermoid Carcinoma of the Lacrimal Sac: Clinical-Pathologic Analysis, Including Molecular Genetics.

Authors:  Kalla A Gervasio; Paul J L Zhang; Robert B Penne; Mary A Stefanyszyn; Ralph C Eagle; Raghunath Puthiyaveettil; Tatyana Milman
Journal:  Ocul Oncol Pathol       Date:  2019-09-20

5.  Assessing the prognostic significance of MUC4β in mucoepidermoid carcinoma of the salivary glands: An immunohistochemical study.

Authors:  Poonam R Sawant; Anita Spadigam; Anita Dhupar; Shaheen Syed; Karla Carvalho
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2019-11-14
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.