Evidence Hub

Invasive Complete Hydatidiform Moles: Analysis of a Case Series With Genotyping

Bynum J, Murphy KM, DeScipio C, Beierl K, Adams E, Anderson D, Vang R, Ronnett BM

International journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists, 2016

Abstract

Complete hydatidiform moles (CHM) are purely androgenetic conceptions, with most (∼85%) arising from fertilization of an egg lacking maternal DNA by a single sperm that duplicates (homozygous/monospermic 46,XX) and a small subset arising via fertilization by 2 sperms (heterozygous/dispermic 46,XY or 46,XX). It remains controversial if heterozygous/dispermic CHMs have a significantly greater risk of persistent gestational trophoblastic disease. Analysis of zygosity of CHMs with and without invasion at presentation, including invasive CHMs with concurrent atypical trophoblastic proliferations concerning for or consistent with choriocarcinoma, has not been specifically addressed. In a prospective series of 1024 products of conception specimens subjected to immunohistochemical analysis of p57 expression and molecular genotyping with short tandem-repeat markers, 288 CHMs were diagnosed, of which 126 were genotyped, including 16 invasive CHMs. Zygosity was compared between those with and without invasion. Of the 16 study cases, 12 (75%) were homozygous/monospermic XX and 4 (25%) were heterozygous/dispermic (3 XY and 1 XX). Of the 110 genotyped noninvasive CHMs, 96 (87%) were homozygous/monospermic XX and 14 (13%) were heterozygous/dispermic (12 XY, 2 XX). Comparison of the zygosity results for the invasive CHMs (study group) with the noninvasive CHMs in the database did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference (P=0.24, Fisher exact test). In addition, of the 3 cases…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free