Problematic issues in the staging of endometrial, cervical and vulval carcinomas

Histopathology

Volumn 62, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 176-202

  Hirschowitz, Lynn ^a   Nucci, Marisa ^b   Zaino, Richard J ^c  

^a BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN S HOSPITAL NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^b BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c PENN STATE MILTON S HERSHEY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Carcinoma; Cervix; Endometrium; FIGO staging; Vulva

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; BETA CATENIN; CYCLIN D1; GELATINASE A; UVOMORULIN;

ADIPOSE TISSUE; ADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY; BASAL CELL CARCINOMA; BASEMENT MEMBRANE; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER GRADING; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER INVASION; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; CANCER SURVIVAL; CELL STRUCTURE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; ENDOMETRIUM CARCINOMA; EPIDERMIS; EPITHELIAL MESENCHYMAL TRANSITION; FEMALE GENITAL SYSTEM; GAP JUNCTION; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HYSTERECTOMY; INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRIC STAGING SYSTEM; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LYMPH NODE DISSECTION; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; LYMPH VESSEL METASTASIS; METASTASIS; MORBIDITY; PARAAORTIC LYMPH NODE; PATIENT CARE; PELVIS; PERINEUM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECURRENCE FREE SURVIVAL; REVIEW; RISK FACTOR; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TUMOR VOLUME; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX EPITHELIUM; UTERINE TUBE; UTERUS CARCINOMA; VAGINA EPITHELIUM; VAGINA METASTASIS; VAGINA MUCOSA; VERRUCOUS CARCINOMA; VULVA CARCINOMA;

ADENOCARCINOMA; ENDOMETRIAL NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LYMPH NODES; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM STAGING; SARCOMA; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VULVAR NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84871130076     PISSN: 03090167     EISSN: 13652559     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/his.12058     Document Type: Review

References (161)

1. Pecorelli S. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2009; 105; 103-104.
2. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A eds. AJCC cancer staging manual. New York: Springer Science + Business, 2010.
3. Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind CH eds. International Union against cancer TNM classification of malignant tumours. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.
4. McCluggage WG, Hirschowitz L, Ganesan R, Kehoe S, Nordin A. Which staging system to use for gynaecological cancers: a survey with recommendations for practice in the UK. J. Clin. Pathol. 2010; 63; 768-770.
5. Ali A, Black D, Soslow RA. Difficulties in assessing the depth of myometrial invasion in endometrial carcinoma. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 2007; 26; 115-123.
6. Jacques SM, Qureshi F, Munkarah A, Lawrence WD. Interinstitutional surgical pathology review in gynecologic oncology: II. Endometrial cancer in hysterectomy specimens. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 1998; 17; 42-45.
7. Creasman WT, Odicino F, Maisonneuve P et al. Carcinoma of the corpus uteri. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2003; 83(Suppl. 1); 79-118.
8. Clement PB, Young RH. Endometrioid carcinoma of the uterine corpus: a review of its pathology with emphasis on recent advances and problematic aspects. Adv. Anat. Pathol. 2002; 9; 145-184.
9. Jacques SM, Lawrence WD. Endometrial adenocarcinoma with variable-level myometrial involvement limited to adenomyosis: a clinicopathologic study of 23 cases. Gynecol. Oncol. 1990; 37; 401-407.
10. Hall JB, Young RH, Nelson JH Jr. The prognostic significance of adenomyosis in endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol. Oncol. 1984; 17; 32-40.
11. Srodon M, Klein WM, Kurman RJ. CD10 imunostaining does not distinguish endometrial carcinoma invading myometrium from carcinoma involving adenomyosis. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2003; 27; 786-789.
12. Nascimento AF, Hirsch MS, Cviko A, Quade BJ, Nucci MR. The role of CD10 staining in distinguishing invasive endometrial adenocarcinoma from adenocarcinoma involving adenomyosis. Mod. Pathol. 2003; 16; 22-27.
13. Zaino RJ, Kurman RJ, Diana KL, Morrow CP. The utility of the revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics histologic grading of endometrial adenocarcinoma using a defined nuclear grading system. A Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Cancer 1995; 75; 81-86.
14. Lax SF, Kurman RJ, Pizer ES, Wu L, Ronnett BM. A binary architectural grading system for uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma has superior reproducibility compared with FIGO grading and identifies subsets of advance-stage tumors with favorable and unfavorable prognosis. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2000; 24; 1201-1208.
15. Scholten AN, Smit VT, Beerman H, van Putten WL, Creutzberg CL. Prognostic significance and interobserver variability of histologic grading systems for endometrial carcinoma. Cancer 2004; 100; 764-772.
16. Taylor RR, Zeller J, Lieberman RW, O'Connor DM. An analysis of two versus three grades for endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol. Oncol. 1999; 74; 3-6.
17. Demczuk S, Wierzchowski W, Szczepanski W, Dyduch G, Czopek J, Stachura J. The comparison of the agreement in determining the histological grade of uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma, using the three-grade FIGO classification and the two-grade system. Pol. J. Pathol. 2003; 54; 179-181.
18. Sagae S, Saito T, Satoh M et al. The reproducibility of a binary tumor grading system for uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma, compared with FIGO system and nuclear grading. Oncology 2004; 67; 344-350.
19. Kapucuoglu N, Bulbul D, Tulunay G, Temel MA. Reproducibility of grading systems for endometrial endometrioid carcinoma and their relation with pathologic prognostic parameters. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2008; 18; 790-796.
20. Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Kurman RJ et al. Relationship between surgical-pathological risk factors and outcome in clinical stage I and II carcinoma of the endometrium: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol. Oncol. 1991; 40; 55-65.
21. Pitson G, Colgan T, Levin W et al. Stage II endometrial carcinoma: prognostic factors and risk classification in 170 patients. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2002; 53; 862-867.
22. Eltabbakh GH, Moore AD. Survival of women with surgical stage II endometrial cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 1999; 74; 80-85.
23. Fanning J, Alvarez PM, Tsukada Y, Piver MS. Prognostic significance of the extent of cervical involvement by endometrial cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 1991; 40; 46-47.
24. Jordan LB, Al-Nafussi A. Clinicopathological study of the pattern and significance of cervical involvement in cases of endometrial adenocarcinoma. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2002; 12; 42-48.
25. Blake P, Lodge N, A'Hern RP. An audit of outcome of adjuvant post-operative radiotherapy for 52 women with stage II carcinoma of the endometrium. Br. J. Radiol. 2000; 73; 987-993.
26. Creasman WT, DeGeest K, DiSaia PJ, Zaino RJ. Significance of true surgical pathologic staging: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1999; 181; 31-34.
27. Jobsen JJ, Schutter EM, Meerwaldt JH, Van Der Palen J, Van Der Sijde R, Ten Cate LN. Treatment results in women with clinical stage I and pathologic stage II endometrial carcinoma. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2001; 11; 49-53.
28. McCluggage WG, Hirschowitz L, Wilson GE, Oliva E, Soslow RA, Zaino RJ. Significant variation in the assessment of cervical involvement in endometrial carcinoma: an interobserver variation study. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2011; 35; 289-294.
29. Prat J. Prognostic parameters of endometrial carcinoma. Hum. Pathol. 2004; 35; 649-662.
30. Zaino R, Zhu J, Abendroth C et al. Stage II endometrial carcinoma: endocervical gland spread is not reproducibly distinguished from endocervical stromal invasion. Mod. Pathol. 2011; 24(Suppl.); 224A.
31. Zaino RJ, Abendroth C, Yemelyanova A et al. Endocervical involvement in endometrial adenocarcinoma is not prognostically significant and the pathologic assessment of the pattern of involvement is not reproducible. Gynecol. Oncol. (in press).
32. Ashman JB, Connell PP, Yamada D, Rotmensch J, Waggoner SE, Mundt AJ. Outcome of endometrial carcinoma patients with involvement of the uterine serosa. Gynecol. Oncol. 2001; 82; 338-343.
33. Mariani A, Webb MJ, Keeney GL, Aletti G, Podratz KC. Assessment of prognostic factors in stage IIIA endometrial cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 2002; 86; 38-44.
34. Connell PP, Rotmensch J, Waggoner S, Mundt AJ. The significance of adnexal involvement in endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol. Oncol. 1999; 74; 74-79.
35. Zaino R, Whitney C, Brady MF, DeGeest K, Burger RA, Buller RE. Simultaneously detected endometrial and ovarian carcinomas - a prospective clinicopathologic study of 74 cases: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol. Oncol. 2001; 83; 355-362.
36. Ulbright TM, Roth LM. Metastatic and independent cancers of the endometrium and ovary: a clinicopathologic study of 34 cases. Hum. Pathol. 1985; 16; 28-34.
37. Milosevic MF, Dembo AJ, Thomas GM. The clinical significance of malignant peritoneal cytology in stage I endometrial carcinoma. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 1992; 2; 225-235.
38. Nicklin JL, Petersen RW. Stage 3B adenocarcinoma of the endometrium: a clinicopathologic study. Gynecol. Oncol. 2000; 78; 203-207.
39. Susumu N, Sagae S, Udagawa Y et al. Randomized phase III trial of pelvic radiotherapy versus cisplatin-based combined chemotherapy in patients with intermediate- and high-risk endometrial cancer: a Japanese Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol. Oncol. 2008; 108; 226-233.
40. McLellan R, Dillon MB, Currie JL, Rosenshein NB. Peritoneal cytology in endometrial cancer: a review. Obstet. Gynecol. Surv. 1989; 44; 711-719.
41. McMeekin DS, Lashbrook D, Gold M, Johnson G, Walker JL, Mannel R. Analysis of FIGO Stage IIIc endometrial cancer patients. Gynecol. Oncol. 2001; 81; 273-278.
42. Hirahatake K, Hareyama H, Sakuragi N, Nishiya M, Makinoda S, Fujimoto S. A clinical and pathologic study on para-aortic lymph node metastasis in endometrial carcinoma. J. Surg. Oncol. 1997; 65; 82-87.
43. Corn BW, Lanciano RM, Greven KM et al. Endometrial cancer with para-aortic adenopathy: patterns of failure and opportunities for cure. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 1992; 24; 223-227.
44. Nelson G, Randall M, Sutton G, Moore D, Hurteau J, Look K. FIGO stage IIIC endometrial carcinoma with metastases confined to pelvic lymph nodes: analysis of treatment outcomes, prognostic variables, and failure patterns following adjuvant radiation therapy. Gynecol. Oncol. 1999; 75; 211-214.
45. Bristow RE, Zahurak ML, Alexander CJ, Zellars RC, Montz FJ. FIGO stage IIIC endometrial carcinoma: resection of macroscopic nodal disease and other determinants of survival. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2003; 13; 664-672.
46. Barakat RR, Lev G, Hummer AJ et al. Twelve-year experience in the management of endometrial cancer: a change in surgical and postoperative radiation approaches. Gynecol. Oncol. 2007; 105; 150-156.
47. Chan JK, Urban R, Cheung MK et al. Lymphadenectomy in endometrioid uterine cancer staging: how many lymph nodes are enough? A study of 11, 443 patients. Cancer 2007; 109; 2454-2460.
48. Chi DS, Barakat RR, Palayekar MJ et al. The incidence of pelvic lymph node metastasis by FIGO staging for patients with adequately surgically staged endometrial adenocarcinoma of endometrioid histology. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2008; 18; 269-273.
49. Cragun JM, Havrilesky LJ, Calingaert B et al. Retrospective analysis of selective lymphadenectomy in apparent early-stage endometrial cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2005; 23; 3668-3675.
50. Euscher ED, Bassett R, Malpica A. Lymph node counts in endometrial cancer: expectations versus reality. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2011; 35; 913-918.
51. Forde GK, Carlson JW, Downey GO, Doss BJ, Shoemaker A, Harrison CR. A quality process study of lymph node evaluation in endometrial cancer. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 2011; 30; 335-339.
52. Geisler JP, Linnemeier GC, Manahan KJ. Pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy in patients with endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the endometrium. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2007; 98; 39-43.
53. Hecht JL. To count and how to count, that is the question. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 2011; 135; 480.
54. Kilgore LC, Partridge EE, Alvarez RD et al. Adenocarcinoma of the endometrium: survival comparisons of patients with and without pelvic node sampling. Gynecol. Oncol. 1995; 56; 29-33.
55. Lutman CV, Havrilesky LJ, Cragun JM et al. Pelvic lymph node count is an important prognostic variable for FIGO stage I and II endometrial carcinoma with high-risk histology. Gynecol. Oncol. 2006; 102; 92-97.
56. Mariani A, Dowdy SC, Cliby WA et al. Prospective assessment of lymphatic dissemination in endometrial cancer: a paradigm shift in surgical staging. Gynecol. Oncol. 2008; 109; 11-18.
57. Mariani A, Dowdy SC, Cliby WA et al. Efficacy of systematic lymphadenectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy in node-positive endometrial cancer patients. Gynecol. Oncol. 2006; 101; 200-208.
58. Parkash V, Bifulco C, Feinn R, Concato J, Jain D. To count and how to count, that is the question: interobserver and intraobserver variability among pathologists in lymph node counting. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 2010; 134; 42-49.
59. Abu-Rustum NR, Khoury-Collado F, Pandit-Taskar N et al. Sentinel lymph node mapping for grade 1 endometrial cancer: is it the answer to the surgical staging dilemma? Gynecol. Oncol. 2009; 113; 163-169.
60. Pecorelli S, Zigliani L, Odicino F. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2009; 105; 107-108.
61. McCluggage WG. Endocervical glandular lesions: controversial aspects and ancillary techniques. J. Clin. Pathol. 2003; 56; 164-173.
62. Yahata T, Nishino K, Kashima K et al. Conservative treatment of stage IA1 adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix with a long-term follow-up. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2010; 20; 1063-1066.
63. Gadducci A, Sartori E, Maggino T et al. The clinical outcome of patients with stage Ia1 and Ia2 squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix: a Cooperation Task Force (CTF) study. Eur. J. Gynaecol. Oncol. 2003; 24; 513-516.
64. Creasman WT, Fetter BF, Clarke-Pearson DL, Kaufmann L, Parker RT. Management of stage IA carcinoma of the cervix. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1985; 153; 164-172.
65. Ceballos KM, Shaw D, Daya D. Microinvasive cervical adenocarcinoma (FIGO stage 1A tumors): results of surgical staging and outcome analysis. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2006; 30; 370-374.
66. Yaegashi N, Sato S, Inoue Y, Noda K, Yajima A. Conservative surgical treatment in cervical cancer with 3 to 5 mm stromal invasion in the absence of confluent invasion and lymph-vascular space involvement. Gynecol. Oncol. 1994; 54; 333-337.
67. Raju SK, Papadopoulos AJ, Montalto SA et al. Fertility-sparing surgery for early cervical cancer - approach to less radical surgery. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2012; 22; 311-317.
68. Bisseling KC, Bekkers RL, Rome RM, Quinn MA. Treatment of microinvasive adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix: a retrospective study and review of the literature. Gynecol. Oncol. 2007; 107; 424-430.
69. Karateke A, Kabaca C. Radical abdominal trachelectomy is a safe and fertility preserving option for women with early stage cervical cancer. Eur. J. Gynaecol. Oncol. 2012; 33; 200-203.
70. Muraji M, Sudo T, Nakagawa E et al. Type II versus type III fertility-sparing abdominal radical trachelectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: a comparison of feasibility of surgical outcomes. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2012; 22; 479-483.
71. Helpman L, Grisaru D, Covens A. Early adenocarcinoma of the cervix: is radical vaginal trachelectomy safe? Gynecol. Oncol. 2011; 123; 95-98.
72. Beiner ME, Hauspy J, Rosen B et al. Radical vaginal trachelectomy vs. radical hysterectomy for small early stage cervical cancer: a matched case-control study. Gynecol. Oncol. 2008; 110; 168-171.
73. Baalbergen A, Smedts F, Helmerhorst TJ. Conservative therapy in microinvasive adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix is justified: an analysis of 59 cases and a review of the literature. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2011; 21; 1640-1645.
74. Vercellino GF, Piek JM, Schneider A et al. Laparoscopic lymph node dissection should be performed before fertility preserving treatment of patients with cervical cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 2012; 126; 325-329.
75. Tsubamoto H, Kanazawa R, Inoue K et al. Fertility-sparing management for bulky cervical cancer using neoadjuvant transuterine arterial chemotherapy followed by vaginal trachelectomy. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2012; 22; 1057-1062.
76. Zaino RJ, Ward S, Delgado G et al. Histopathologic predictors of the behavior of surgically treated stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix. A Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Cancer 1992; 69; 1750-1758.
77. Roman LD, Felix JC, Muderspach LI et al. Influence of quantity of lymph-vascular space invasion on the risk of nodal metastases in women with early-stage squamous cancer of the cervix. Gynecol. Oncol. 1998; 68; 220-225.
78. Marchiole P, Buenerd A, Benchaib M, Nezhat K, Dargent D, Mathevet P. Clinical significance of lympho vascular space involvement and lymph node micrometastases in early-stage cervical cancer: a retrospective case-control surgico-pathological study. Gynecol. Oncol. 2005; 97; 727-732.
79. Takeda N, Sakuragi N, Takeda M et al. Multivariate analysis of histopathologic prognostic factors for invasive cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy and systematic retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2002; 81; 1144-1151.
80. Elliott P, Coppleson M, Russell P et al. Early invasive (FIGO stage IA) carcinoma of the cervix: a clinico-pathologic study of 476 cases. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2000; 10; 42-52.
81. Piura B, Rabinovich A, Friger M. Number and distribution of pelvic lymph nodes and effect of surgical pathologic factors on pelvic lymph node status in patients with early-stage cervical carcinoma treated with radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection. Eur. J. Gynaecol. Oncol. 2006; 27; 463-466.
82. Copeland LJ, Silva EG, Gershenson DM, Morris M, Young DC, Wharton JT. Superficially invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol. Oncol. 1992; 45; 307-312.
83. Sedlis A, Sall S, Tsukada Y et al. Microinvasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix: a clinical-pathologic study. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1979; 133; 64-74.
84. Sevin BU, Nadji M, Averette HE, Hilsenbeck S, Smith D, Lampe B. Microinvasive carcinoma of the cervix. Cancer 1992; 70; 2121-2128.
85. van Nagell JR Jr, Greenwell N, Powell DF, Donaldson ES, Hanson MB, Gay EC. Microinvasive carcinoma of the cervix. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1983; 145; 981-991.
86. Buckley SL, Tritz DM, Van Le L et al. Lymph node metastases and prognosis in patients with stage IA2 cervical cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 1996; 63; 4-9.
87. Girardi F, Burghardt E, Pickel H. Small FIGO stage IB cervical cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 1994; 55; 427-432.
88. Benedet JL. Cervical cancer staging systems: the endless debate. Gynecol. Oncol. 1997; 65; 6-7.
89. Lee SW, Kim YM, Son WS et al. The efficacy of conservative management after conization in patients with stage IA1 microinvasive cervical carcinoma. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2009; 88; 209-215.
90. Ostor AG, Rome RM. Micro-invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: a clinico-pathologic study of 200 cases with long-term follow-up. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 1994; 4; 257-264.
91. Robert ME, Fu YS. Squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix - a review with emphasis on prognostic factors and unusual variants. Semin. Diagn. Pathol. 1990; 7; 173-189.
92. Delgado G, Bundy B, Zaino R, Sevin BU, Creasman WT, Major F. Prospective surgical-pathological study of disease-free interval in patients with stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol. Oncol. 1990; 38; 352-357.
93. Chandacham A, Charoenkwan K, Siriaunkgul S et al. Extent of lymphovascular space invasion and risk of pelvic lymph node metastases in stage IB1 cervical cancer. J. Med. Assoc. Thai. 2005; 88(Suppl. 2); S31-S36.
94. Milam MR, Frumovitz M, dos Reis R, Broaddus RR, Bassett RL Jr, Ramirez PT. Preoperative lymph-vascular space invasion is associated with nodal metastases in women with early-stage cervical cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 2007; 106; 12-15.
95. Averette HE, Nelson JH Jr, Ng AB, Hoskins WJ, Boyce JG, Ford JH Jr. Diagnosis and management of microinvasive (stage IA) carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Cancer 1976; 38; 414-425.
96. Hasumi K, Sakamoto A, Sugano H. Microinvasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Cancer 1980; 45; 928-931.
97. Maiman MA, Fruchter RG, DiMaio TM, Boyce JG. Superficially invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix. Obstet. Gynecol. 1988; 72; 399-403.
98. Yoshinaga M, Hamada T, Orita Y et al. Clinical outcome of stage Ia1 squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix and pathological findings of initial conization. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res. 2011; 37; 1645-1649.
99. van Meurs H, Visser O, Buist MR, Ten Kate FJ, van der Velden J. Frequency of pelvic lymph node metastases and parametrial involvement in stage IA2 cervical cancer: a population-based study and literature review. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2009; 19; 21-26.
100. Rogers LJ, Luesley DM. Stage IA2 cervical carcinoma: how much treatment is enough? Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2009; 19; 1620-1624.
101. Al-Kalbani M, McVeigh G, Nagar H, McCluggage WG. Do FIGO stage IA and small (
102. Berek JS, Hacker NF, Fu YS, Sokale JR, Leuchter RC, Lagasse LD. Adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix: histologic variables associated with lymph node metastasis and survival. Obstet. Gynecol. 1985; 65; 46-52.
103. Kasamatsu T, Okada S, Tsuda H et al. Early invasive adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix: criteria for nonradical surgical treatment. Gynecol. Oncol. 2002; 85; 327-332.
104. Ostor AG. Early invasive adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 2000; 19; 29-38.
105. Palmer JE, Amarad P, Ellis K, Dudding N, Smith J, Tidy JA. The outcome for women with microinvasive cervical cancer with stromal invasion 1 mm or less: should we always re-excise? Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 2012; 31; 470-474.
106. Hirschowitz L, Ganesan R, Singh N, McCluggage WG. Dataset for histopathological reporting of cervical neoplasia, 3rd edn. London: Royal College of Pathologists, 2011.
107. Park KJ, Soslow RA. Current concepts in cervical pathology. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 2009; 133; 729-738.
108. Darragh TM, Colgan TJ, Cox JT et al. The Lower Anogenital Squamous Terminology Standardization Project for HPV-Associated Lesions: background and consensus recommendations from the College of American Pathologists and the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology. J. Low. Genit. Tract Dis. 2012; 16; 205-242.
109. Morgan PR, Anderson MC, Buckley CH et al. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists micro-invasive carcinoma of the cervix study: preliminary results. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 1993; 100; 664-668.
110. Al-Nafussi AI, Hughes DE. Histological features of CIN3 and their value in predicting invasive microinvasive squamous carcinoma. J. Clin. Pathol. 1994; 47; 799-804.
111. Al-Nafussi AI, Monaghan H. Squamous carcinoma of the uterine cervix with CIN 3-like growth pattern: an under-diagnosed lesion. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2000; 10; 95-99.
112. Boyle DP, McCluggage WG. Pseudoinvasion of benign squamous epithelium following cervical biopsy: a pseudoneoplastic phenomenon mimicking invasive squamous carcinoma. J. Clin. Pathol. 2011; 64; 1093-1096.
113. Young RH. Simple clefts, complex problems: reflections on glandular lesions of the uterine cervix. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 2002; 21; 212-216.
114. Zaino RJ. Glandular lesions of the uterine cervix. Mod. Pathol. 2000; 13; 261-274.
115. Wheeler DT, Kurman RJ. The relationship of glands to thick-wall blood vessels as a marker of invasion in endocervical adenocarcinoma. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 2005; 24; 125-130.
116. Anderson MC, Hartley RB. Cervical crypt involvement by intraepithelial neoplasia. Obstet. Gynecol. 1980; 55; 546-550.
117. Clement PB, Young RH. Deep nabothian cysts of the uterine cervix. A possible source of confusion with minimal-deviation adenocarcinoma (adenoma malignum). Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 1989; 8; 340-348.
118. Teshima S, Shimosato Y, Kishi K, Kasamatsu T, Ohmi K, Uei Y. Early stage adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix. Histopathologic analysis with consideration of histogenesis. Cancer 1985; 56; 167-172.
119. Stenback F, Wasenius VM, Risteli J, Risteli L. Basement membranes in progressing intraepithelial cervical neoplasia. An ultrastructural and immunohistochemical study with antibodies against human type IV collagen and laminin. Gynecol. Obstet. Invest. 1985; 20; 158-166.
120. Yavner DL, Dwyer IM, Hancock WW, Ehrmann RL. Basement membrane of cervical adenocarcinoma: an immunoperoxidase study of laminin and type IV collagen. Obstet. Gynecol. 1990; 76; 1014-1019.
121. Ehrmann RL, Dwyer IM, Yavner D, Hancock WW. An immunoperoxidase study of laminin and type IV collagen distribution in carcinoma of the cervix and vulva. Obstet. Gynecol. 1988; 72; 257-262.
122. Stewart CJ, McNicol AM. Distribution of type IV collagen immunoreactivity to assess questionable early stromal invasion. J. Clin. Pathol. 1992; 45; 9-15.
123. Richards CJ, Furness PN. Basement membrane continuity in benign, premalignant and malignant epithelial conditions of the uterine cervix. Histopathology 1990; 16; 47-52.
124. Gusterson BA, Clinton S, Gough G. Studies of early invasive and intraepithelial squamous cell carcinomas using an antibody to type IV collagen. Histopathology 1986; 10; 161-169.
125. Tamura K. Immunohistological features of basement membrane formation of uterine cervical epithelium. Osaka City Med. J. 1996; 42; 15-36.
126. Goldberg I, Davidson B, Lerner-Geva L et al. Expression of extracellular matrix proteins in cervical squamous cell carcinoma - a clinicopathological study. J. Clin. Pathol. 1998; 51; 781-785.
127. Davidson B, Goldberg I, Gotlieb WH, Ben-Baruch G, Kopolovic J. Expression of matrix proteins in uterine cervical neoplasia using immunohistochemistry. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 1998; 76; 109-114.
128. Jordan SM, Watanabe T, Osann K, Monk BJ, Lin F, Rutgers JK. Desmoplastic stromal response as defined by positive alpha-smooth muscle actin staining is predictive of invasion in adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 2012; 31; 369-376.
129. Stewart CJ, Crook M, Loi S. Fascin expression in endocervical neoplasia: correlation with tumour morphology and growth pattern. J. Clin. Pathol. 2011; 65; 213-217.
130. Lee MY, Shen MR. Epithelial-mesenchymal transition in cervical carcinoma. Am. J. Transl. Res. 2012; 4; 1-13.
131. Stewart CJ, Crook ML, Little L, Louwen K. Correlation between invasive pattern and immunophenotypic alterations in endocervical adenocarcinoma. Histopathology 2011; 58; 720-728.
132. Agarwal S, Wadhwa N, Gupta G. Eosinophils as a marker for invasion in cervical squamous neoplastic lesions. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 2003; 22; 213.
133. Spiegel GW, Ashraf M, Brooks JJ. Eosinophils as a marker for invasion in cervical squamous neoplastic lesions. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 2002; 21; 117-124.
134. Hirschowitz L ed. Histopathology reporting in cervical screening - an integrated approach. NHSCSP Publication No. 10. Sheffield, UK: NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, 2012.
135. Kaspar HG, Dinh TV, Doherty MG, Hannigan EV, Kumar D. Clinical implications of tumor volume measurement in stage I adenocarcinoma of the cervix. Obstet. Gynecol. 1993; 81; 296-300.
136. Fox H ed. Histopathology reporting in cervical screening. NHSCSP Publication No. 10. Sheffield, UK: NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, 1999.
137. Tavassoli FA, Devilee P eds. World Health Organization Classification of tumours: pathology and genetics: tumours of the breast and female genital organs. Lyon: IARC Press, 2003.
138. Reich O, Pickel H. Multifocal stromal invasion in microinvasive squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: how to measure and stage these lesions. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 2002; 21; 416-417.
139. Hong JH, Tsai CS, Lai CH et al. Risk stratification of patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of cervix treated by radiotherapy alone. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2005; 63; 492-499.
140. Perez CA, Grigsby PW, Chao KS, Mutch DG, Lockett MA. Tumor size, irradiation dose, and long-term outcome of carcinoma of uterine cervix. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 1998; 41; 307-317.
141. Hoffman MS. Extent of radical hysterectomy: evolving emphasis. Gynecol. Oncol. 2004; 94; 1-9.
142. Yen MS, Yuan CC, Wang PH, Ng HT, Twu NF, Juang CM. Parametrial tumor spreading patterns in cervix cancer patients treated by radical hysterectomy. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2003; 80; 145-151.
143. van den Tillaart SA, Trimbos JB, Dreef EJ, Jordanova ES, Fleuren GJ. Patterns of parametrial involvement in radical hysterectomy specimens of cervical cancer patients. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 2011; 30; 185-192.
144. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2009; 59; 225-249.
145. Marsden DE, Hacker NF. Controversies and new trends in staging vulval and vaginal carcinoma. CME J. Gynecol. Oncol. 2001; 6; 235-239.
146. Shanbour KA, Mannel RS, Morris PC, Yadack A, Walker JL. Comparison of clinical versus surgical staging systems in vulvar cancer. Obstet. Gynecol. 1992; 80; 927-930.
147. Hacker NF. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2009; 105; 105-106.
148. Homesley HD, Bundy BN, Sedlis A et al. Assessment of current International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging of vulvar carcinoma relative to prognostic factors for survival (a Gynecologic Oncology Group study). Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1991; 164; 997-1003; discussion 1003-1004.
149. Tantipalakorn C, Robertson G, Marsden DE, Gebski V, Hacker NF. Outcome and patterns of recurrence for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages I and II squamous cell vulvar cancer. Obstet. Gynecol. 2009; 113; 895-901.
150. Hacker NF, Berek JS, Lagasse LD, Leuchter RS, Moore JG. Management of regional lymph nodes and their prognostic influence in vulvar cancer. Obstet. Gynecol. 1983; 61; 408-412.
151. Hoffman JS, Kumar NB, Morley GW. Prognostic significance of groin lymph node metastases in squamous carcinoma of the vulva. Obstet. Gynecol. 1985; 66; 402-405.
152. Origoni M, Sideri M, Garsia S, Carinelli SG, Ferrari AG. Prognostic value of pathological patterns of lymph node positivity in squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva stage III and IVA FIGO. Gynecol. Oncol. 1992; 45; 313-316.
153. Paladini D, Cross P, Lopes A, Monaghan JM. Prognostic significance of lymph node variables in squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva. Cancer 1994; 74; 2491-2496.
154. van der Velden J, van Lindert AC, Lammes FB et al. Extracapsular growth of lymph node metastases in squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva. The impact on recurrence and survival. Cancer 1995; 75; 2885-2890.
155. Sun X, Zhang Y, Sun J, Feng S, Yan M, Cheng H. The comparative study of former and latest FIGO staging of vulva cancer. Minerva Chir. 2012; 67; 187-195.
156. Tan J, Chetty N, Kondalsamy-Chennakesavan S et al. Validation of the FIGO 2009 staging system for carcinoma of the vulva. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 2012; 22; 498-502.
157. Dvoretsky PM, Bonfiglio TA, Helmkamp BF, Ramsey G, Chuang C, Beecham JB. The pathology of superficially invasive, thin vulvar squamous cell carcinoma. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 1984; 3; 331-342.
158. Kurzl R, Messerer D, Baltzer J, Lohe KJ, Zander J. Comparative morphometric study on the depth of invasion in vulvar carcinoma. Gynecol. Oncol. 1988; 29; 12-25.
159. Yoder BJ, Rufforny I, Massoll NA, Wilkinson EJ. Stage IA vulvar squamous cell carcinoma: an analysis of tumor invasive characteristics and risk. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2008; 32; 765-772.
160. Lomo L, Crum CP. Papillary carcinoma of the vulva. Mod. Pathol. 2004; 17; 204A.
161. Andersen ES, Sorensen IM. Verrucous carcinoma of the female genital tract: report of a case and review of the literature. Gynecol. Oncol. 1988; 30; 427-434.