Evidence Hub

Clinicopathological spectrum of 19 adenosarcomas of female genital tract, including uncommon clinical associations and immunohistochemical profile, reviewed at a single institution

Rekhi B, Deodhar KK, Maheshwari A, Menon S, Kerkar R, Bajpai J, Ghosh J, Gupta S et al.

Indian journal of pathology & microbiology, 2012

11 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Adenosarcomas of the female genital tract have been rarely documented as case series from our continent.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Over a seven-year period, 19 adenosarcomas were critically reviewed.

RESULTS: Nineteen tumors occurred in the age range of 21-65 years (mean: 43), in the endometrium (8), endometrium and cervix (4), cervix (4), and ovary (3). Four cases displayed coexisting leiomyomas; two, adenomyosis; two on background endometriosis; and one in post-treated cervix carcinoma. Histopathologically, the tumors were low grade (10; 52.6%) and high grade (9; 47.3%), the latter with sarcomatous overgrowth (SO) (7/9 cases). Dedifferentiation (8, 42.1%) and conspicuous decidualization (2) were noted. Immunohistochemically, the tumors focally expressed CD10 (4/6), smooth muscle actin (SMA) (3/8), desmin (8/11); diffuse vimentin (7/7), and estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor (ER/PR) (2/4). Ki-67 (6 cases) varied 5-20%. Seventeen patients underwent surgery and four received adjuvant treatment (3/4 high-grade tumors). Five tumors recurred (4 high-grade tumors with SO) and one metastasized. Among 11 patients, five were alive with disease (AWD) (mean: 29.4 months) and six, free of disease (FOD) (mean: 15 months), the latter mostly with low-grade type tumors (83.3% cases).

CONCLUSIONS: Diverse clinicopathological spectrum was noted within adenosarcomas. Low-grade tumors were less aggressive than high-grade ones, with SO. Immunohistochemically, lower CD10 and ER/PR…

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. Reported size: 11 participants or records.

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