Revised Histologic Criteria for Ovarian Carcinoma Cell Type Show Improved Correlation with Genotype and Protein Expression Profile.
Yevgeniy Karamurzin, Mario Leitao, Daniel Chiappetta, David Marshal, Robert Soslow. Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
Background: In 2004 we reported data emphasizing the prognostic value of TP53 mutation in FIGO stage I and II ovarian carcinoma (low stage OC). However, tumor histologic subtype, grade, and substage did not correlate with prognosis in this cohort. Histologic recalibration of these tumors using criteria proposed by Gilks et al. will allow reassessment of correlations between carcinoma type, genotype and immunophenotype.
Design: The cohort comprised 91 previously identified patients with low stage OC who underwent primary surgical management at our institution from 1980 to 2000. H&E slides were reviewed and histologic type reassigned using Gilks et al. criteria. p53 and WT1 expression was evaluated using standard immunohistochemistry (IHC) techniques on a tissue microarray. p53 expression assessment has evolved between 2004 and 2010. In 2004, p53 expression profile was reported as either positive or negative. In 2010, abnormal p53 expression was scored when there was absolute loss of staining, or overexpression involving at least 50% of cells; p53 expression was considered to be within normal limits if it was focal and involved less than 50% of cells. Direct TP53 gene sequencing of the entire coding region was performed on all cases with available tissue.
Results: Tumor histologic subtype distributions, as well as correlation between tumor cell type and the other variables are outlined in Table 1.
|Serous with TP53 mutation||57%||75%|
|Non-serous with TP53 mutation||24%||13%|
|Serous with aberrant p53||58%||87%|
|Non-serous with aberrant p53||31%||9%|
|TP53 mutation with aberrant p53||71%||83%|
|Wild type TP53 with aberrant p53||27%||9%|
|Serous with WT1 expression||65%||77%|
|Non-serous with WT1 expression||8%||2%|