Journal of Pathology and Translational Medicine

Original Articles

Uterine Malignant Mixed Müllerian Tumors Following Treatment with Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators in Patients with Breast Cancer: A Report of 13 Cases and Their Clinicopathologic Characteristics: Byung-Kwan Jeong, Chang O. Sung, Kyu-Rae Kim; J Pathol Transl Med. 2019;53(1):31-39. Published online December 18, 2018; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4132/jptm.2018.11.16

6,367 View
102 Download
2 Web of Science
4 Crossref

Background
Breast cancer treatment with selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) increasesthe incidence of uterine malignant mixed Müllerian tumors (uMMMTs). We examine clinicopathologiccharacteristics and prognosis of SERM-associated uMMMTs (S-uMMMTs) and discusspossible pathogenetic mechanisms.
Methods
Among 28,104 patients with breast cancer, clinicopathologicfeatures and incidence of uMMMT were compared between patients who underwentSERM treatment and those who did not. Of 92 uMMMT cases that occurred during the same period,incidence, dose, and duration of SERM treatment, as well as overall survival rate, were comparedfor patients with breast cancer who underwent SERM treatment and those who did not (S-uMMMTvs NS-uMMMT) and for patients without breast cancer (de novo-uMMMT). Histopathologicalfindings and immunophenotypes for myogenin, desmin, p53, WT-1, estrogen receptor (ER) α, ERβ,progesterone receptor, and GATA-3 were compared between S-uMMMT and de novo-uMMMT.
Results
The incidence of S-uMMMT was significantly higher than that of NS-uMMMT (6.35-fold).All patients with SERM were postmenopausal and received daily 20–40 mg SERM. CumulativeSERM dose ranged from 21.9 to 73.0 g (mean, 46.0) over 39–192 months (mean, 107). Clinicopathologicfeatures, such as International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage andoverall survival, were not significantly different between patients with S-uMMMT and NS-uMMMTor between patients with S-uMMMT and de novo-uMMMT. All 11 S-uMMMT cases available forimmunostaining exhibited strong overexpression/null expression of p53 protein and significantlyincreased ERβ expression in carcinomatous and sarcomatous components.
Conclusions
SERMtherapy seemingly increases risk of S-uMMMT development; however, clinicopathologic featureswere similar in all uMMMTs from different backgrounds. p53 mutation and increased ERβ expressionmight be involved in the etiology of S-uMMMT.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Uterine carcinosarcomas: A case series of 9 cases from a low-income country
Boubacar Efared, Halidou Hamadou Koura, Aïchatou Balaraba Abani Bako, Idrissa Boubacar, Habiba Salifou Boureima, Garba Mahamadou, Hassan Nouhou
Medicine.2024; 103(40): e39773. CrossRef
Uterine carcinosarcoma: Unraveling the role of epithelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition in progression and therapeutic potential
Mohan Shankar Gopinatha Pillai, Pallab Shaw, Arpan Dey Bhowmik, Resham Bhattacharya, Geeta Rao, Shailendra Kumar Dhar Dwivedi
The FASEB Journal.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Tamoxifen/toremifene

Reactions Weekly.2019; 1758(1): 330. CrossRef
Molecular Basis of Tumor Heterogeneity in Endometrial Carcinosarcoma
Susanna Leskela, Belen Pérez-Mies, Juan Manuel Rosa-Rosa, Eva Cristobal, Michele Biscuola, María L. Palacios-Berraquero, SuFey Ong, Xavier Matias-Guiu Guia, José Palacios
Cancers.2019; 11(7): 964. CrossRef

Utility of BRAF VE1 Immunohistochemistry as a Screening Tool for Colorectal Cancer Harboring BRAF V600E Mutation: Jeong-Hwa Kwon, Byung-Kwan Jeong, Yong Sik Yoon, Chang Sik Yu, Jihun Kim; J Pathol Transl Med. 2018;52(3):157-163. Published online March 29, 2018; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4132/jptm.2018.03.28

6,756 View
184 Download
10 Web of Science
6 Crossref

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material

Background
BRAF mutation has been recognized as an important biomarker of colorectal cancer (CRC) for targeted therapy and prognosis prediction. However, sequencing for every CRC case is not cost-effective. An antibody specific for BRAF V600E mutant protein has been introduced, and we thus examined the utility of BRAF VE1 immunohistochemistry for evaluating BRAF mutations in CRC.
Methods
Fifty-one BRAF-mutated CRCs and 100 age and sexmatched BRAF wild-type CRCs between 2005 and 2015 were selected from the archives of Asan Medical Center. Tissue microarrays were constructed and stained with BRAF VE1 antibody.
Results
Forty-nine of the 51 BRAF-mutant CRCs (96.1%) showed more than moderate cytoplasmic staining, except for two weakly stained cases. Six of 100 BRAF wild-type cases also stained positive with BRAF VE1 antibody; four stained weakly and two stained moderately. Normal colonic crypts showed nonspecific weak staining, and a few CRC cases exhibited moderate nuclear reactivity (3 BRAF-mutant and 10 BRAF wild-type cases). BRAF-mutated CRC patients had higher pathologic stages and worse survival than BRAF wild-type patients.
Conclusions
BRAF VE1 immunohistochemistry showed high sensitivity and specificity, but occasional nonspecific staining in tumor cell nuclei and normal colonic crypts may limit their routine clinical use. Thus, BRAF VE1 immunohistochemistry may be a useful screening tool for BRAF V600E mutation in CRCs, provided that additional sequencing studies can be done to confirm the mutation in BRAF VE1 antibody-positive cases.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

The evolving landscape of tissue‐agnostic therapies in precision oncology
Vivek Subbiah, Mohamed A. Gouda, Bettina Ryll, Howard A. Burris, Razelle Kurzrock
CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians.2024; 74(5): 433. CrossRef
Deciphering the Role of BRAFV600E Immunohistochemistry in Breast Lesions: A Comprehensive Review
Simran Khan, Arvind Bhake, Shakti Sagar
Cureus.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Immunohistochemistry as a Surrogate Marker of Underlying Molecular Derangements in Sporadic Colorectal Carcinoma in Children – A Series of Three Cases
Priyanka Maity, Aniket Halder, Ranajoy Ghosh, Uttara Chatterjee, Shibsankar Barman, Ruchirendra Sarkar
Fetal and Pediatric Pathology.2022; 41(1): 98. CrossRef
Risk assessment and genetic counseling for Lynch syndrome – Practice resource of the National Society of Genetic Counselors and the Collaborative Group of the Americas on Inherited Gastrointestinal Cancer
Spring Holter, Michael J. Hall, Heather Hampel, Kory Jasperson, Sonia S. Kupfer, Joy Larsen Haidle, Maureen E. Mork, Selvi Palaniapppan, Leigha Senter, Elena M. Stoffel, Scott M. Weissman, Matthew B. Yurgelun
Journal of Genetic Counseling.2022; 31(3): 568. CrossRef
Current concepts in ameloblastoma-targeted therapies in B-raf proto-oncogene serine/threonine kinase V600E mutation: Systematic review
Rogelio González-González, Sandra López-Verdín, Jesús Lavalle-Carrasco, Nelly Molina-Frechero, Mario Isiordia-Espinoza, Ramón G Carreón-Burciaga, Ronell Bologna-Molina
World Journal of Clinical Oncology.2020; 11(1): 31. CrossRef
Genetic and histopathological analysis of a case of primary intraosseous carcinoma, NOS with features of both ameloblastic carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma
Akane Yukimori, Maiko Tsuchiya, Akane Wada, Yasuyuki Michi, Kou Kayamori, Kei Sakamoto, Tohru Ikeda
World Journal of Surgical Oncology.2020;[Epub] CrossRef

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search