Baylor College of Medicine (A.D.D.V.), Texas Children's Hospital Pavilion for Women The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (A.D.D.V., I.A.-B., E.G.S.), Houston, Texas Cleveland Clinic (A.A.R.), Cleveland, Ohio Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (K.J.P.), New York, New York Mexican Oncology Hospital (I.A.-C.) Instituto Nacional de Cancerologia (Mexico) (J.G.C.-V.), Mexico City, Mexico University Health Network (G.R.), University of Toronto, Toronto Juravinski Hospital (D.D.), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada Kyoto University Hospital (Y.M.), Kyoto Shikoku Cancer Center (N.T.), Matsuyama, Japan Cheil General Hospital & Women's Healthcare Center (S.R.H.), Kwandong University, Gangneung, Korea Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (B.A., D.B., E.G.S.), Los Angeles Long Beach Memorial Medical Center (J.K.L.R.), University of California, Long Beach, California Wayne State University (R.A.-F., F.T.), Detroit, Michigan University Cancer Care (A.S.-B.), University of Mississippi Cancer Center, Jackson, Mississippi.
Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2013 Nov;32(6):592-601. doi: 10.1097/PGP.0b013e31829952c6.
The management of endocervical adenocarcinoma is largely based on tumor size and depth of invasion (DOI); however, DOI is difficult to measure accurately. The surgical treatment includes resection of regional lymph nodes, even though most lymph nodes are negative and lymphadenectomies can cause significant morbidity. We have investigated alternative parameters to better identify patients at risk of node metastases. Cases of invasive endocervical adenocarcinoma from 12 institutions were reviewed, and clinical/pathologic features assessed: patients' age, tumor size, DOI, differentiation, lymph-vascular invasion, lymph node metastases, recurrences, and stage. Cases were classified according to a new pattern-based system into Pattern A (well-demarcated glands), B (early destructive stromal invasion arising from well-demarcated glands), and C (diffuse destructive invasion). In total, 352 cases (FIGO Stages I-IV) were identified. Patients' age ranged from 20 to 83 years (mean 45), DOI ranged from 0.2 to 27 mm (mean 6.73), and lymph-vascular invasion was present in 141 cases. Forty-nine (13.9%) demonstrated lymph node metastases. Using this new system, 73 patients (20.7%) with Pattern A tumors (all Stage I) were identified. None had lymph node metastases and/or recurrences. Ninety patients (25.6%) had Pattern B tumors, of which 4 (4.4%) had positive nodes; whereas 189 (53.7%) had Pattern C tumors, of which 45 (23.8%) had metastatic nodes. The proposed classification system can spare 20.7% of patients (Pattern A) of unnecessary lymphadenectomy. Patients with Pattern B rarely present with positive nodes. An aggressive approach is justified in patients with Pattern C. This classification system is simple, easy to apply, and clinically significant.
宫颈内膜腺癌的治疗主要基于肿瘤大小和浸润深度(DOI);然而,DOI 很难准确测量。手术治疗包括切除区域淋巴结,尽管大多数淋巴结为阴性,且淋巴结切除术可导致显著的发病率。我们已经研究了替代参数,以更好地识别有淋巴结转移风险的患者。回顾了 12 个机构的浸润性宫颈内膜腺癌病例,并评估了临床/病理特征:患者年龄、肿瘤大小、DOI、分化、淋巴血管侵犯、淋巴结转移、复发和分期。根据一种新的基于模式的系统对病例进行分类,分为 A 型(界限清楚的腺体)、B 型(来源于界限清楚的腺体的早期破坏性间质浸润)和 C 型(弥漫性破坏性浸润)。共发现 352 例(FIGO 分期 I-IV 期)。患者年龄为 20-83 岁(平均 45 岁),DOI 为 0.2-27mm(平均 6.73mm),141 例存在淋巴血管侵犯。49 例(13.9%)出现淋巴结转移。使用新系统,确定了 73 例(20.7%)A 型肿瘤(均为 I 期)患者。无一例出现淋巴结转移和/或复发。90 例(25.6%)为 B 型肿瘤,其中 4 例(4.4%)出现阳性淋巴结;189 例(53.7%)为 C 型肿瘤,其中 45 例(23.8%)出现转移性淋巴结。所提出的分类系统可使 20.7%(A 型)的患者免于不必要的淋巴结切除术。B 型患者很少出现阳性淋巴结。对于 C 型患者,采取积极的治疗方法是合理的。这种分类系统简单、易于应用,具有临床意义。