10
Endometrial Lesions, Unusual Tumors, and Extrauterine Cancer
r
*
%
ยป
_
Fig. 10.42 Ovarian carcinoma, mixed serous and clear cell type. (LBC
ThinPrep Papanicolaou x HP).
In
most
cases,
the
cytomorphology
does
not
permit
localization of the primary extrauterine site of the tumor. There
are some features that may facilitate identification of a likely pri-
mary site. A distinctive papillary differentiation, with any associ-
ated psammoma body formation, should raise the possibility
of an ovarian (or primary peritoneal) origin. The presence of
psammoma bodies alone, however, is not an indicator of malig-
nancy; the formation of psammoma bodies is commonly seen
in association with benign mesothelial reactions, endosalpingi-
osis, and benign ovarian cystadenofibromas.106 The presence of
small bland-appearing epithelial cells107 or detached ciliary tufts
("ciliocytophthoria")108 clinging to psammoma bodies strongly
favors a benign origin. When malignant cells are arrayed in a lin-
ear, discohesive pattern, primary breast and gastric carcinomas
should be considered.
Not unexpectedly, direct endometrial sampling may also
detect ovarian carcinoma cells, possibly with higher sensitivity
than exfoliative cervicovaginal cytology.103
Concluding Remarks
CV cytology has the ability to detect abnormalities beyond the
range of lesions that arise at the transformation zone of the cer-
vix, including uterine and extrauterine neoplasms. Although CV
cytology has had no or minimal impact on the incidence rates of
endometrial carcinoma, the recognition of normal and abnor-
mal endometrial cells can lead to the diagnosis of significant
endometrial disease. Furthermore, both normal and abnormal
endometrial cells need to be distinguished from cervical glan-
dular and squamous lesions. Direct endometrial cytologic sam-
pling may be of some value in some situations, but its limited
capability to detect architectural features restricts its diagnostic
potential and use. In the future molecular markers may expand
the diagnostic utility of CV cytology in detecting lesions from
the uterine cavity and extrauterine sources.
References
1.
Tavassoli FA, Devilee P (eds).
Pathology and
Genetics of Tumors of the Breast and Female
Genital Organs.
Lyon: IARC Press; 2003.
2.
Sherman ME. Theories of endometrial
carcinogenesis: A multidisciplinary
approach.
Mod Pathol
2000;13:295-308.
3.
Sherman ME, Sturgeon S, Brinton LA,
et al. Risk factors and hormone levels
in patients with serous and endome-
trioid uterine carcinomas.
Mod Pathol
1997;10:963-968.
4.
Lax SF, Pizer ES, Ronnett BM, et al. Clear
cell carcinoma of the endometrium is char-
acterized by a distinctive profile of p53,
ki-67, estrogen, and progesterone receptor
expression.
Hum Pathol
1998;29:551-558.
5.
Hendrickson M, Ross J, Eifel P, et al.
Uterine papillary serous carcinoma: A
highly malignant form of endometrial
adenocarcinoma.
Am J Surg Pathol
1982;6:93-108.
6.
Fadare O, Liang SX, Cagnur Ulukus E, et al.
Precursors of endometrial clear cell carci-
noma.
Am J Surg Pathol
2006;30:1519-1530.
7.
Zheng W, Schwartz PE. Serous EIC as an
early form of uterine papillary serous
carcinoma: Recent progress in under-
standing its pathogenesis and current
opinions regarding pathologic and
clinical management.
Gynecol Oncol
2005;96:579-582.
8.
Soslow RA, Pirog E, Isacson C. Endome-
trial intraepithelial carcinoma with
associated peritoneal carcinomatosis.
Am J Surg Pathol
2000;24:726-732.
9.
Accessed 23 May 2007. Available at:
tal/cit_86751114/36/15/1816216925cw
_2007stats_en. pdf
10.
Scully RE, Bonfliglio TA, Kurman RJ,
eds:
Histologic Typing of Female Genital
Tract Tumors.
Berlin, 1994, Springer-Ver-
lag.
11.
Zucker PK, Kasdon EJ, Feldstein ML.
The validity of pap smear parameters
as predictors of endometrial pathol-
ogy in menopausal women.
Cancer
1985;56:2256-2263.
12.
Blumenfeld W, Holly EA, Mansur DL,
et al. Histiocytes and the detection of
endometrial adenocarcinoma.
Acta
Cytol
1985;29:317-322.
13.
Hall TE, Stapleton JJ, McCance JM.
The isolated finding of histiocytes in
Papanicolaou smears from postmeno-
pausal women.
J Reprod Med
1982;27:
647-650.
14.
Nguyen TN, Bourdeau JL, Ferenczy A,
et al. Clinical significance of histio-
cytes in the detection of endometrial
adenocarcinoma and hyperplasia.
Diagn
Cytopathol
1998;19:89-93.
15.
Boschmann HW. Cytometry on normal
and abnormal endometrial cells.
Acta
Cytol
1958;2:520.
16.
Jordan M.J, Bader G, Nemazie AS. Com-
parative accuracy of preoperative cytologic
and histologic diagnosis in endometrial
lesions.
Obstet Gynecol
1956;7:646.
17.
DuBeshter B, Warshal DP, Angel C,
et al. Endometrial carcinoma: The
relevance of cervical cytology.
Obstet
Gynecol
1991;77:458-462.
18.
Burk JR, Lehman HF, Wolf FS. Inad-
equacy of Papanicolaou smears in the
detection of endometrial cancer.
N Engl
J Med
1974;291:191-192.
19.
Schorge JO, Hossein Saboorian M,
Hynan L, et al. ThinPrep detection of
cervical and endometrial adenocarci-
noma: A retrospective cohort study.
Cancer
2002;96:338-343.
20.
Guidos BJ, Selvaggi SM. Detection of
endometrial adenocarcinoma with the
ThinPrep pap test.
Diagn Cytopathol
2000;23:260-265.
21.
de Peralta-Venturino MN, Purslow MJ,
Kini SR. Endometrial cells of the "lower
uterine segment" (LUS) in cervical
smears obtained by endocervical brush-
ings: A source of potential diagnostic
pitfall.
Diagn Cytopathol
1995;12:263-
268; discussion 268-271.
269
previous page 269 ComprehensiveCytopathology 1104p 2008 read online next page 271 ComprehensiveCytopathology 1104p 2008 read online Home Toggle text on/off