Anna Yemelyanova

Immunohistochemical staining patterns of p53 can serve as a surrogate marker for TP53 mutations in ovarian carcinoma: an immunohistochemical and nucleotide sequencing analysis

Immunohistochemical staining for p53 is used as a surrogate for mutational analysis in the diagnostic workup of carcinomas of multiple sites including ovarian cancers. Strong and diffuse immunoexpression of p53 is generally interpreted as likely indicating a TP53 gene mutation. The immunoprofile that correlates with wild-type TP53, however, is not as clear. In particular, the significance of completely negative immunostaining is controversial. The aim of this study was to clarify the relationship of the immunohistochemical expression of p53 with the mutational status of the TP53 gene in ovarian cancer. A total of 57 ovarian carcinomas (43 high-grade serous ovarian/peritoneal carcinomas, 2 malignant mesodermal mixed tumors (carcinosarcomas), 2 low-grade serous carcinomas, 4 clear cell carcinomas, 1 well-differentiated endometrioid carcinoma, and 5 carcinomas with mixed epithelial differentiation) were analyzed for TP53 mutations by nucleotide sequencing (exons 4–9), and subjected to immunohistochemical analysis of p53 expression. Thirty six tumors contained functional mutations and 13 had wild type TP53. Five tumors were found to harbor known TP53 polymorphism and changes in the intron region were detected in three. Tumors with wild-type TP53 displayed a wide range of immunolabeling patterns, with the most common pattern showing ≤10% of positive cells in 6 cases (46%). Mutant TP53 was associated with 60–100% positive cells in 23 cases (64% of cases). This pattern of staining was also seen in three cases with wild-type TP53. Tumors that were completely negative (0% cells staining) had a mutation of TP53 in 65% of cases and wild-type TP53 in 11%. Combining two immunohistochemical labeling patterns associated with TP53 mutations (0% and 60–100% positive cells), correctly identified a mutation in 94% of cases (P<0.001). Immunohistochemical analysis can be used as a robust method for inferring the presence of a TP53 mutation in ovarian carcinomas. In addition to a strong and diffuse pattern of p53 expression (in greater than 60% of cells), complete absence of p53 immunoexpression is commonly associated with a TP53 mutation. Accordingly, this latter pattern, unlike low-level expression (10–50% cells), should not be construed as indicative of wild-type TP53.

Cytokeratins 7 and 20 in primary and secondary mucinous tumors of the ovary: analysis of coordinate immunohistochemical expression profiles and staining distribution in 179 cases.

Coordinate expression profiles for cytokeratins 7 and 20 (CK7 and CK20) are useful for distinguishing certain types of adenocarcinomas but use for distinction of primary and secondary mucinous tumors in the ovary is limited due to the existence of a number of tumor types exhibiting overlapping CK7/CK20 immunoprofiles; the use of staining distribution patterns in the distinction of tumors with shared profiles has not been evaluated in detail. We report analysis of both coordinate expression profiles and staining distribution in 179 rigorously classified mucinous tumors in the ovary, including 53 primary tumors [35 atypical proliferative (borderline) mucinous tumors of gastrointestinal type and 18 invasive mucinous carcinomas] and 126 secondary tumors [28 colorectal adenocarcinomas, 54 appendiceal tumors (23 adenocarcinomas, 31 low-grade adenomatous mucinous tumors associated with pseudomyxoma peritonei), 14 pancreatic adenocarcinomas, 8 endocervical adenocarcinomas, 5 gastric adenocarcinomas, 4 gallbladder/biliary tract adenocarcinomas, and 13 adenocarcinomas of unknown primary sites). A CK7+/CK20+ immunoprofile was the most common profile in primary ovarian tumors (74%), upper gastrointestinal tract tumors (78%), and endocervical tumors (88%) but was occasionally observed in lower intestinal tract tumors (colorectal: 11%; appendiceal: 13% of low-grade tumors, 35% of carcinomas). A CK7–/CK20+ immunoprofile was the most common profile in lower intestinal tract tumors (79%) and was uncommon in upper gastrointestinal tract tumors (9%), rarely seen in primary ovarian tumors (4%), and not seen in endocervical tumors. A CK7+/CK20− profile was observed in some primary ovarian (23%), upper gastrointestinal tract (13%), and endocervical tumors (13%) but not in lower intestinal tract tumors. For CK7+ tumors, staining distribution was very frequently diffuse (>50% of tumors cells positive) in primary ovarian, upper gastrointestinal tract, and endocervical tumors, whereas staining distribution was often focal (<50% of tumors cells positive) when present in colorectal and appendiceal carcinomas but not in low-grade appendiceal tumors. For CK20+ tumors, staining distribution was variable but often focal in primary ovarian tumors and nonlower intestinal tract tumors, whereas the pattern was almost always diffuse in lower intestinal tract tumors. Immunohistochemical staining distribution can supplement CK7/CK20 coordinate expression profiles to distinguish subsets of primary ovarian and metastatic lower intestinal tract mucinous tumors having overlapping immunoprofiles but neither coordinate expression profiles nor staining distribution distinguishes primary ovarian tumors from the nonlower intestinal tract metastases.

Immunohistochemical expression of CDX2 in primary ovarian mucinous tumors and metastatic mucinous carcinomas involving the ovary: comparison with CK20 and correlation with coordinate expression of CK7.

Recent studies have demonstrated conflicting results regarding the value of CDX2 for distinguishing primary ovarian mucinous tumors from metastatic mucinous carcinomas in the ovary. Utility of coordinate expression of cytokeratins 7 and 20 is restricted to distinction of ovarian mucinous tumors from lower gastrointestinal tract metastases and data comparing coordinate expression of all three markers is limited. Immunohistochemical studies were performed to compare expression of CDX2 and cytokeratin 20, both markers of intestinal differentiation, in conjunction with coordinate expression of cytokeratin 7, in 90 mucinous tumors involving the ovary: 42 primary ovarian mucinous tumors (31 atypical proliferative (borderline) mucinous tumors (gastrointestinal type), 11 mucinous carcinomas) and 48 metastatic mucinous carcinomas of upper (pancreaticobiliary tract: 14; stomach: five) and lower (colon and rectum: 25; appendix: four) gastrointestinal tract origin. Primary ovarian tumors expressed CDX2 (40%) less frequently than cytokeratin 20 (83%) (P<0.0001). CDX2 expression in primary ovarian tumors (40%) was lower than CDX2 expression in metastatic carcinomas of both upper (74%; P=0.016) and lower gastrointestinal tract origin (90%; P<0.0001). Cytokeratin 20 expression was similar in primary ovarian tumors (83%) and metastases of upper (89%; P=0.071) and lower gastrointestinal tract origin (93%; P=0.29). Thus, as a single marker CDX2 offers some advantage over cytokeratin 20 because it is less frequently positive in primary ovarian tumors. In the almost universally cytokeratin 7-positive primary ovarian tumors and metastases of upper gastrointestinal tract origin, CDX2 coordinate expression was less common in primary ovarian tumors (36%) than in metastases of upper gastrointestinal tract origin (63%) (P=0.022) whereas cytokeratin 20 coordinate expression was identical in both tumor types (79%). In the almost universally cytokeratin 7-negative metastases of lower gastrointestinal tract origin, coordinate expression of CDX2 (83%) and cytokeratin 20 (86%) were equivalent (P=1.00). CDX2 was comparable to cytokeratin 20 in distinguishing metastases of lower gastrointestinal tract origin (usually cytokeratin 7-negative and CDX2/cytokeratin 20 positive) from primary ovarian tumors and metastases of upper gastrointestinal tract origin (usually cytokeratin 7-positive and CDX2/cytokeratin 20 variable). CDX2 provided some advantage over cytokeratin 20 for distinguishing primary ovarian mucinous tumors from metastases of upper but not lower gastrointestinal tract origin; however, the advantage in the former was limited due to the occurrence of shared coordinate expression profiles in both tumor types. Cytokeratin 7 provides the predominant discriminatory value among these markers yet is limited to distinction of primary ovarian tumors from metastases of lower gastrointestinal tract origin.

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

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 ≥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.

Endocervical adenocarcinomas with ovarian metastases: analysis of 29 cases with emphasis on minimally invasive cervical tumors and the ability of the metastases to simulate primary ovarian neoplasms.

Most endocervical adenocarcinomas (∼90%) are high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV)-related neoplasms, with the remainder being unrelated to HPV; both types infrequently metastasize to the ovaries. Clinicopathologic features of 29 cases of synchronous and metachronous endocervical and ovarian tumors (26 HPV-related, 3 unrelated to HPV) were analyzed. In 18 cases, the cervical tumors were clearly invasive; these included 5 clinically evident tumors diagnosed before the ovarian metastases (immediately preoperatively to 7 y), 11 clinically unsuspected tumors diagnosed concurrently in specimens obtained for evaluation of ovarian/pelvic masses, 1 case with concurrent clinically evident cervical and ovarian masses, and 1 clinically occult tumor diagnosed subsequent to the ovarian metastasis. In 11 cases, the cervical tumors were more limited; these included 5 tumors comprised predominantly of adenocarcinoma in situ with small foci of superficial invasion (“microinvasive carcinomas”) diagnosed before the ovarian metastases (3 mo to 7 y) and 6 tumors comprised of extensive adenocarcinoma in situ lacking unequivocally recognizable stromal invasion diagnosed before (9 mo to 7 y, n=4), concurrently with (n=1), or subsequent to (n=1) the ovarian metastases. Fifteen cervical tumors involved lower uterine segment corpus endometrium or endomyometrium, including 4 tumors that were minimally invasive or not recognizably invasive in the cervix. The ovarian tumors ranged in size from 2.1 to 30.0 cm (mean/median=12.7/13.5); they were unilateral in 19 cases (65.5%) and 12 of these were unilateral and 10 cm or greater. In 26 cases, including the 19 unilateral tumors, the ovarian tumors exhibited “borderlinelike,” confluent glandular, cribriform, and/or villoglandular patterns simulating primary ovarian atypical proliferative (borderline) tumors or well-differentiated carcinomas; these patterns were pure in 24 and admixed with minor infiltrative foci in 2. The ovarian tumors had features typical of metastases (bilateral and infiltrative) in only 3 cases. In all HPV-related cases the paired endocervical and ovarian tumors contained identical HPV types, establishing the ovarian tumors as metastases. Endocervical adenocarcinomas, including microinvasive forms and some not recognizably invasive, have the potential to metastasize to the ovaries; extension into the lower uterine segment/corpus endometrium may be a risk factor, with retrograde uterine/transtubal spread as a possible mechanism.

The fallopian tube-peritoneal junction: a potential site of carcinogenesis.

Junctions between different types of epithelia are hot spots for carcinogenesis, but the junction of the peritoneal mesothelium with the fallopian tubal epithelium, the tubal-peritoneal junction, has not been characterized earlier. A total of 613 junctional foci in 228 fallopian tube specimens from 182 patients who underwent surgery for a variety of indications, including 27 risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy specimens, were studied. Edema, congestion, and dilated lymphatic channels were commonly present. Transitional metaplasia was found at the junction in 20% of patients and mesothelial hyperplasia in 17%. Inflammation at the junction was seen predominantly in patients with salpingitis, torsion, or tubal pregnancy. Ovarian-type stroma was found at the junction in 5% of patients, and was found elsewhere in the tubal lamina propria in an additional 27% of patients. Findings in risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy specimens in women with BRCA mutations, a personal history of breast cancer, and/or a family history of breast/ovarian cancer were similar to those in controls. Transitional metaplasia specifically localizes to this junction, and is the probable source of Walthard cell nests. The recently highlighted significance of fimbrial tubal epithelium in the origin of serous ovarian carcinomas and a study suggesting that mucinous and Brenner tumors may arise from transitional-type epithelium in this location suggest that the tubal-peritoneal junction may play a role in the development of these tumors. This is the first comprehensive description of a hitherto unrecognized transitional zone in the adnexa.

VALIDATION OF AN ALGORITHM FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF SEROUS TUBAL INTRAEPITHELIAL CARCINOMA

It has been reported that the diagnosis of serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC) is not optimally reproducible on the basis of only histologic assessment. Recently, we reported that the use of a diagnostic algorithm that combines histologic features and coordinate immunohistochemical expression of p53 and Ki-67 substantially improves reproducibility of the diagnosis. The goal of the current study was to validate this algorithm by testing a group of 6 gynecologic pathologists who had not participated in the development of the algorithm (3 faculty and 3 fellows) but who were trained in its use by referring to a website designed for the purpose. They then reviewed a set of microscopic slides, which contained 41 mucosal lesions of the fallopian tube. Overall consensus (≥4 of 6 pathologists) for the 4 categories of STIC, serous tubal intraepithelial lesion (our atypical intermediate category), p53 signature, and normal/reactive was achieved in 76% of the lesions, with no consensus in 24%. Combining diagnoses into 2 categories (STIC versus non-STIC) resulted in an overall consensus of 93% and no consensus in 7%. The &kgr; value for STIC versus non-STIC among all 6 observers was also high at 0.67 and did not significantly differ, whether for faculty (&kgr;=0.66) or fellows (&kgr;=0.60). These findings confirm the reproducibility of this algorithm by a group of gynecologic pathologists who were trained on a website for that purpose. Accordingly, we recommend its use in research studies. Before applying it to routine clinical practice, the algorithm should be evaluated by general surgical pathologists in a community setting.

p16 expression in primary ovarian mucinous and endometrioid tumors and metastatic adenocarcinomas in the ovary: Utility for identification of metastatic HPV-related endocervical adenocarcinomas

Distinction of primary ovarian epithelial tumors from metastatic adenocarcinomas is challenging for tumors exhibiting mucinous, endometrioid, or mixed endometrioid/mucinous differentiation. Metastatic carcinomas with these types of differentiation can be derived from several sites, including the gastrointestinal tract and the uterus. Most endocervical adenocarcinomas exhibit mucinous and/or endometrioid differentiation; they infrequently metastasize to the ovaries but may simulate primary ovarian tumors [both atypical proliferative (borderline) and carcinoma]. Most are high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV)-related and demonstrate diffuse p16 over-expression due to complex molecular mechanisms by which high-risk HPV transforming proteins interact with cell cycle regulatory proteins. The performance of this expression pattern for identifying metastatic endocervical adenocarcinomas in the ovaries among primary ovarian tumors and other metastatic adenocarcinomas having mucinous and/or endometrioid/endometrioidlike differentiation has not been evaluated. Immunohistochemical expression of p16 was assessed in 195 tumors, including 98 primary ovarian tumors (51 mucinous, 47 endometrioid, and 4 mixed mucinous-endometrioid tumors), 93 metastatic adenocarcinomas of known primary sites (colorectum: 34, endocervix: 19, pancreaticobiliary tract: 17, appendix: 7, stomach: 5), 11 metastatic adenocarcinomas of unknown origin (7 established as noncervical), and 4 adenocarcinomas of uncertain (primary ovarian vs. metastatic) origin. The HPV status of the endocervical adenocarcinomas was determined by in situ hybridization and polymerase chain reaction (when in situ hybridization was negative). Expression was assessed based on the percentage of moderately to strongly positive cells, estimated to the nearest 10%. Mean and median expression values for HPV-positive endocervical adenocarcinomas (99%, 100%; range 90% to 100%) were substantially higher than those for primary ovarian mucinous (5%, 0%; range 0% to 70%) and endometrioid (20%, 10%; range 0% to 100%) tumors, HPV-unrelated endocervical adenocarcinomas (0%, 0%; range 0% to 60%), metastatic adenocarcinomas of unknown origin (11%, 0%; range 0% to 30%), and adenocarcinomas of uncertain (primary ovarian vs. metastatic) origin (40%, 35%; range 0% to 90%); only the 15 HPV-positive endocervical adenocarcinomas and 6 other tumors had values of 80% or greater. Diffuse (>75% positive tumor cells) moderate to strong p16 expression is a sensitive (100%) and specific (97%) marker for identifying HPV-related endocervical adenocarcinomas metastatic to the ovary among the primary ovarian tumors and metastatic adenocarcinomas from other sites that are in the differential diagnosis of ovarian tumors having mucinous and/or endometrioid/endometrioidlike differentiation. p16 is useful as part of a panel of immunohistochemical markers for distinguishing primary ovarian tumors from metastases and, when diffusely positive, can suggest the cervix as a potential primary site for metastatic adenocarcinomas of unknown origin.

Defining the cut point between low-grade and high-grade ovarian serous carcinomas: a clinicopathologic and molecular genetic analysis.

A 2-tier grading system based on nuclear grade divides ovarian serous carcinomas into low (nuclear grade 1) and high grade (nuclear grade 3). In most instances the separation is straightforward but at times, the morphologic distinction between them can be difficult. We studied 11 ovarian serous carcinomas with features that were “intermediate” (nuclear grade 2) between low and high grade. All the cases were high staged and had a poor clinical outcome. None of the tumors showed mutations in KRAS, BRAF, and ERBB2 genes that characterize most low-grade serous carcinomas. In contrast, 10 (90.9%) of 11 cases contained nonsynonymous TP53 mutations characteristic of high-grade serous carcinomas. In summary, the molecular genetic profile and behavior of serous carcinomas with grade 2 nuclei are virtually the same as those of serous carcinomas with grade 3 nuclei, supporting the use of the 2-tier grading system for classifying ovarian serous carcinomas.

Ovarian metastases of appendiceal tumors with goblet cell carcinoidlike and signet ring cell patterns: A report of 30 cases

Synchronous and metachronous ovarian and appendiceal mucinous tumors are often the subject of diagnostic consultations in gynecologic pathology practices to address whether the tumors are independent neoplasms or related as primary and metastasis. Those with goblet cell carcinoidlike patterns have not been extensively evaluated in a large series. Clinicopathologic features of 30 cases were examined. All patients presented with signs or symptoms related to a pelvic/adnexal or abdominal mass. The ovarian tumors were bilateral in 25 of 28 cases with data on both ovaries and were typically large (mean/median: 14 cm, range: 4.5 to 24.0 cm). The appendices were often firm or thickened but usually did not have a discrete measurable tumor and were not notably enlarged; microscopically, transmural invasion was present in all of them. The ovarian and appendiceal tumors exhibited a variety of patterns of differentiation, including signet ring cell and glandular, with all displaying some goblet cell carcinoidlike patterns (nests, islands, cords, or cryptlike tubules with goblet cells); teratomatous elements were not identified in any ovarian tumors. Chromogranin was expressed in 7 of 19 ovarian tumors (mean/median: 6.3%/0%; range: 0% to 20%) and synaptophysin was expressed in 4 of 18 of these (mean/median: 7.8%/0%; range: 0% to 90%). Chromogranin was expressed in 6 of 16 appendiceal tumors (mean/median: 11.9%/0%; range: 0% to 70%) and synaptophysin was expressed in 6 of 15 of these (mean/median: 16.7%/0%; range: 0% to 90%). Follow-up was available for 25 patients: 17 died of disease at intervals ranging from 4 to 47 months (mean/median: 18/16) and 8 were alive with disease at 1 to 25 months (mean/median: 11/10); median survival was 19 months and the 1-year and 2-year survival rates were 63% and 34%, respectively. The clinicopathologic features of these ovarian tumors indicate they should be labeled as metastatic appendiceal adenocarcinomas rather than as goblet cell carcinoid tumors both to reflect their behavior and help distinguish them from the rare true primary ovarian goblet cell carcinoid tumors. As the ovarian tumors have appreciable components of signet ring cells they qualify as Krukenberg tumors. In cases in which the primary tumor is not already evident, their “goblet cell carcinoidlike” patterns should direct attention to the appendix as a possible source.