Evaluation of a Patient With Non-Myoinvasive Uterine Serous Carcinoma Confined to a Polyp and Positive Peritoneal Washings With Somatic ARHGAP35 and KRAS Mutations
Currently, the application of peritoneal washings as a diagnostic tool for endometrial cancer staging is not well defined. The case described aims to highlight the current ambiguity surrounding the use of peritoneal washings in clinical practice. A 69-year-old G3P3003 presented to her gynecologist...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) CA), 2022-07, Vol.14 (7), p.e26663 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 7 |
container_start_page | e26663 |
container_title | Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) |
container_volume | 14 |
creator | Silverwood, Sierra M Lagstein, Amir Risinger, John I Gressel, Gregory |
description | Currently, the application of peritoneal washings as a diagnostic tool for endometrial cancer staging is not well defined. The case described aims to highlight the current ambiguity surrounding the use of peritoneal washings in clinical practice. A 69-year-old G3P3003 presented to her gynecologist with complaints of new-onset heavy vaginal bleeding. The patient sought an endometrial biopsy, which suggested serous endometrial intraepithelial carcinoma (EIC) focally suspicious for invasive carcinoma, with the involvement of polyps. Based on these results, a robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, bilateral sentinel lymph node dissection, and omentectomy were performed. Results from her final pathology exhibited a stage IA uterine serous carcinoma (USC) involving a polyp (4.2 cm in greatest dimension) with no myometrial or lymphovascular invasion, but washings were positive for adenocarcinoma. Based on her family history of malignancy, the patient underwent germline panel testing. The patient's somatic tumor testing demonstrated proficient DNA mismatch repair status, microsatellite stability, low tumor mutational burden (4 mut/Mb), low loss of heterozygosity (9%), amplification of the ERBB2 (HER2/neu) gene by both immunohistochemistry (3+, 20% positive) and fluorescence in-situ hybridization. Her tumor also had weakly positive estrogen receptor expression (1+, 10% positive); furthermore, some pathogenic variants in KRAS (c.37G>T), PIK3CA (c.263G>A), and TP53 (c.743G>A) were identified. Given the incongruent findings found with the positive peritoneal washing and negative lymph node involvement in addition to molecular testing, management for this patient was unclear. Ultimately, this case highlights a number of advances within the field of gynecological oncology but also emphasizes the persistent ambiguity and incongruency in the management of patients with early-stage high-risk histologies. Moving forward it will become increasingly important to be able to develop a more standardized process to assess how these diagnostic tools should inform prognosis and treatment plans. |
doi_str_mv | 10.7759/cureus.26663 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9357428</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2708653714</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-6ef000241011da89d12ae3798da30023187fa5ba355e097929beed5690b99c793</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkk1vEzEQhleIilalN87IEhcObLHX668LUhSVFtGPqKHq0ZrsehtXGzvY3kj5PfxRvEmpSk8eeZ739cx4iuIDwadCMPW1GYIZ4mnFOadviqOKcFlKIuu3L-LD4iTGR4wxwaLCAr8rDilTtRKSHxV_zjbQD5Csd8h3CNAsx8YldG_TEl17V15tvXUbiHZj0F0ywTqD5ib4IaIphMY6vwI09a7LiRYlP3r4frtG4NocRZtG5SwLk3cGenQPcWndQ9w_Mc_yZBs0ub04n8wo28l-3k7m6GpIu7ri--Kggz6ak6fzuLj7fvZrelFe3pz_mE4uy4bWVSq56XKTVU0wIS1I1ZIKDBVKtkDzPSVSdMAWQBkzWAlVqYUxLeMKL5RqhKLHxbe973pYrEzb5DEE6PU62BWErfZg9f8ZZ5f6wW-0okzUlcwGn58Mgv89mJj0ysbG9D04k-elKzH-Qc0pz-inV-ijH4LL7Y2U5IwKUmfqy55qgo8xmO65GIL1uAB6vwB6twAZ__iygWf433fTv3TYrhU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2708653714</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of a Patient With Non-Myoinvasive Uterine Serous Carcinoma Confined to a Polyp and Positive Peritoneal Washings With Somatic ARHGAP35 and KRAS Mutations</title><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Silverwood, Sierra M ; Lagstein, Amir ; Risinger, John I ; Gressel, Gregory</creator><creatorcontrib>Silverwood, Sierra M ; Lagstein, Amir ; Risinger, John I ; Gressel, Gregory</creatorcontrib><description>Currently, the application of peritoneal washings as a diagnostic tool for endometrial cancer staging is not well defined. The case described aims to highlight the current ambiguity surrounding the use of peritoneal washings in clinical practice. A 69-year-old G3P3003 presented to her gynecologist with complaints of new-onset heavy vaginal bleeding. The patient sought an endometrial biopsy, which suggested serous endometrial intraepithelial carcinoma (EIC) focally suspicious for invasive carcinoma, with the involvement of polyps. Based on these results, a robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, bilateral sentinel lymph node dissection, and omentectomy were performed. Results from her final pathology exhibited a stage IA uterine serous carcinoma (USC) involving a polyp (4.2 cm in greatest dimension) with no myometrial or lymphovascular invasion, but washings were positive for adenocarcinoma. Based on her family history of malignancy, the patient underwent germline panel testing. The patient's somatic tumor testing demonstrated proficient DNA mismatch repair status, microsatellite stability, low tumor mutational burden (4 mut/Mb), low loss of heterozygosity (9%), amplification of the ERBB2 (HER2/neu) gene by both immunohistochemistry (3+, 20% positive) and fluorescence in-situ hybridization. Her tumor also had weakly positive estrogen receptor expression (1+, 10% positive); furthermore, some pathogenic variants in KRAS (c.37G>T), PIK3CA (c.263G>A), and TP53 (c.743G>A) were identified. Given the incongruent findings found with the positive peritoneal washing and negative lymph node involvement in addition to molecular testing, management for this patient was unclear. Ultimately, this case highlights a number of advances within the field of gynecological oncology but also emphasizes the persistent ambiguity and incongruency in the management of patients with early-stage high-risk histologies. Moving forward it will become increasingly important to be able to develop a more standardized process to assess how these diagnostic tools should inform prognosis and treatment plans.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2168-8184</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2168-8184</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.7759/cureus.26663</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35949786</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Cureus Inc</publisher><subject>Abdomen ; Cancer therapies ; Case reports ; Cellular biology ; Chemotherapy ; Decision making ; Endometrial cancer ; Family medical history ; Genetics ; Hysterectomy ; Lymphatic system ; Medical prognosis ; Mutation ; Obstetrics/Gynecology ; Oncology ; Patients ; Polyps ; Vagina</subject><ispartof>Curēus (Palo Alto, CA), 2022-07, Vol.14 (7), p.e26663</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2022, Silverwood et al.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022, Silverwood et al. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022, Silverwood et al. 2022 Silverwood et al.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-6ef000241011da89d12ae3798da30023187fa5ba355e097929beed5690b99c793</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-6ef000241011da89d12ae3798da30023187fa5ba355e097929beed5690b99c793</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9357428/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9357428/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35949786$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Silverwood, Sierra M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lagstein, Amir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Risinger, John I</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gressel, Gregory</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of a Patient With Non-Myoinvasive Uterine Serous Carcinoma Confined to a Polyp and Positive Peritoneal Washings With Somatic ARHGAP35 and KRAS Mutations</title><title>Curēus (Palo Alto, CA)</title><addtitle>Cureus</addtitle><description>Currently, the application of peritoneal washings as a diagnostic tool for endometrial cancer staging is not well defined. The case described aims to highlight the current ambiguity surrounding the use of peritoneal washings in clinical practice. A 69-year-old G3P3003 presented to her gynecologist with complaints of new-onset heavy vaginal bleeding. The patient sought an endometrial biopsy, which suggested serous endometrial intraepithelial carcinoma (EIC) focally suspicious for invasive carcinoma, with the involvement of polyps. Based on these results, a robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, bilateral sentinel lymph node dissection, and omentectomy were performed. Results from her final pathology exhibited a stage IA uterine serous carcinoma (USC) involving a polyp (4.2 cm in greatest dimension) with no myometrial or lymphovascular invasion, but washings were positive for adenocarcinoma. Based on her family history of malignancy, the patient underwent germline panel testing. The patient's somatic tumor testing demonstrated proficient DNA mismatch repair status, microsatellite stability, low tumor mutational burden (4 mut/Mb), low loss of heterozygosity (9%), amplification of the ERBB2 (HER2/neu) gene by both immunohistochemistry (3+, 20% positive) and fluorescence in-situ hybridization. Her tumor also had weakly positive estrogen receptor expression (1+, 10% positive); furthermore, some pathogenic variants in KRAS (c.37G>T), PIK3CA (c.263G>A), and TP53 (c.743G>A) were identified. Given the incongruent findings found with the positive peritoneal washing and negative lymph node involvement in addition to molecular testing, management for this patient was unclear. Ultimately, this case highlights a number of advances within the field of gynecological oncology but also emphasizes the persistent ambiguity and incongruency in the management of patients with early-stage high-risk histologies. Moving forward it will become increasingly important to be able to develop a more standardized process to assess how these diagnostic tools should inform prognosis and treatment plans.</description><subject>Abdomen</subject><subject>Cancer therapies</subject><subject>Case reports</subject><subject>Cellular biology</subject><subject>Chemotherapy</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Endometrial cancer</subject><subject>Family medical history</subject><subject>Genetics</subject><subject>Hysterectomy</subject><subject>Lymphatic system</subject><subject>Medical prognosis</subject><subject>Mutation</subject><subject>Obstetrics/Gynecology</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Polyps</subject><subject>Vagina</subject><issn>2168-8184</issn><issn>2168-8184</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkk1vEzEQhleIilalN87IEhcObLHX668LUhSVFtGPqKHq0ZrsehtXGzvY3kj5PfxRvEmpSk8eeZ739cx4iuIDwadCMPW1GYIZ4mnFOadviqOKcFlKIuu3L-LD4iTGR4wxwaLCAr8rDilTtRKSHxV_zjbQD5Csd8h3CNAsx8YldG_TEl17V15tvXUbiHZj0F0ywTqD5ib4IaIphMY6vwI09a7LiRYlP3r4frtG4NocRZtG5SwLk3cGenQPcWndQ9w_Mc_yZBs0ub04n8wo28l-3k7m6GpIu7ri--Kggz6ak6fzuLj7fvZrelFe3pz_mE4uy4bWVSq56XKTVU0wIS1I1ZIKDBVKtkDzPSVSdMAWQBkzWAlVqYUxLeMKL5RqhKLHxbe973pYrEzb5DEE6PU62BWErfZg9f8ZZ5f6wW-0okzUlcwGn58Mgv89mJj0ysbG9D04k-elKzH-Qc0pz-inV-ijH4LL7Y2U5IwKUmfqy55qgo8xmO65GIL1uAB6vwB6twAZ__iygWf433fTv3TYrhU</recordid><startdate>20220708</startdate><enddate>20220708</enddate><creator>Silverwood, Sierra M</creator><creator>Lagstein, Amir</creator><creator>Risinger, John I</creator><creator>Gressel, Gregory</creator><general>Cureus Inc</general><general>Cureus</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20220708</creationdate><title>Evaluation of a Patient With Non-Myoinvasive Uterine Serous Carcinoma Confined to a Polyp and Positive Peritoneal Washings With Somatic ARHGAP35 and KRAS Mutations</title><author>Silverwood, Sierra M ; Lagstein, Amir ; Risinger, John I ; Gressel, Gregory</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c342t-6ef000241011da89d12ae3798da30023187fa5ba355e097929beed5690b99c793</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Abdomen</topic><topic>Cancer therapies</topic><topic>Case reports</topic><topic>Cellular biology</topic><topic>Chemotherapy</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Endometrial cancer</topic><topic>Family medical history</topic><topic>Genetics</topic><topic>Hysterectomy</topic><topic>Lymphatic system</topic><topic>Medical prognosis</topic><topic>Mutation</topic><topic>Obstetrics/Gynecology</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Polyps</topic><topic>Vagina</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Silverwood, Sierra M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lagstein, Amir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Risinger, John I</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gressel, Gregory</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Curēus (Palo Alto, CA)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Silverwood, Sierra M</au><au>Lagstein, Amir</au><au>Risinger, John I</au><au>Gressel, Gregory</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of a Patient With Non-Myoinvasive Uterine Serous Carcinoma Confined to a Polyp and Positive Peritoneal Washings With Somatic ARHGAP35 and KRAS Mutations</atitle><jtitle>Curēus (Palo Alto, CA)</jtitle><addtitle>Cureus</addtitle><date>2022-07-08</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>e26663</spage><pages>e26663-</pages><issn>2168-8184</issn><eissn>2168-8184</eissn><abstract>Currently, the application of peritoneal washings as a diagnostic tool for endometrial cancer staging is not well defined. The case described aims to highlight the current ambiguity surrounding the use of peritoneal washings in clinical practice. A 69-year-old G3P3003 presented to her gynecologist with complaints of new-onset heavy vaginal bleeding. The patient sought an endometrial biopsy, which suggested serous endometrial intraepithelial carcinoma (EIC) focally suspicious for invasive carcinoma, with the involvement of polyps. Based on these results, a robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, bilateral sentinel lymph node dissection, and omentectomy were performed. Results from her final pathology exhibited a stage IA uterine serous carcinoma (USC) involving a polyp (4.2 cm in greatest dimension) with no myometrial or lymphovascular invasion, but washings were positive for adenocarcinoma. Based on her family history of malignancy, the patient underwent germline panel testing. The patient's somatic tumor testing demonstrated proficient DNA mismatch repair status, microsatellite stability, low tumor mutational burden (4 mut/Mb), low loss of heterozygosity (9%), amplification of the ERBB2 (HER2/neu) gene by both immunohistochemistry (3+, 20% positive) and fluorescence in-situ hybridization. Her tumor also had weakly positive estrogen receptor expression (1+, 10% positive); furthermore, some pathogenic variants in KRAS (c.37G>T), PIK3CA (c.263G>A), and TP53 (c.743G>A) were identified. Given the incongruent findings found with the positive peritoneal washing and negative lymph node involvement in addition to molecular testing, management for this patient was unclear. Ultimately, this case highlights a number of advances within the field of gynecological oncology but also emphasizes the persistent ambiguity and incongruency in the management of patients with early-stage high-risk histologies. Moving forward it will become increasingly important to be able to develop a more standardized process to assess how these diagnostic tools should inform prognosis and treatment plans.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Cureus Inc</pub><pmid>35949786</pmid><doi>10.7759/cureus.26663</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2168-8184 |
ispartof | Curēus (Palo Alto, CA), 2022-07, Vol.14 (7), p.e26663 |
issn | 2168-8184 2168-8184 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9357428 |
source | PubMed Central Open Access; PubMed Central |
subjects | Abdomen Cancer therapies Case reports Cellular biology Chemotherapy Decision making Endometrial cancer Family medical history Genetics Hysterectomy Lymphatic system Medical prognosis Mutation Obstetrics/Gynecology Oncology Patients Polyps Vagina |
title | Evaluation of a Patient With Non-Myoinvasive Uterine Serous Carcinoma Confined to a Polyp and Positive Peritoneal Washings With Somatic ARHGAP35 and KRAS Mutations |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-23T01%3A26%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20a%20Patient%20With%20Non-Myoinvasive%20Uterine%20Serous%20Carcinoma%20Confined%20to%20a%20Polyp%20and%20Positive%20Peritoneal%20Washings%20With%20Somatic%20ARHGAP35%20and%20KRAS%20Mutations&rft.jtitle=Cur%C4%93us%20(Palo%20Alto,%20CA)&rft.au=Silverwood,%20Sierra%20M&rft.date=2022-07-08&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=e26663&rft.pages=e26663-&rft.issn=2168-8184&rft.eissn=2168-8184&rft_id=info:doi/10.7759/cureus.26663&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2708653714%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2708653714&rft_id=info:pmid/35949786&rfr_iscdi=true |