Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-chc8l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-24T10:48:44.451Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - The value of immunohistochemistry as a diagnostic aid in gynaecological pathology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 January 2010

Nigel Kirkham  and
Neil A. Shepherd
By
W. Glenn McCluggage
Nigel Kirkham
Affiliation:
Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle
Neil A. Shepherd
Affiliation:
Gloucestershire Royal Hospital
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

In recent years there has been a rapidly expanding literature investigating the value of immunohistochemistry as a diagnostic aid in gynaecological pathology [1]–[3]. The aim of this review is to provide a critical appraisal of the uses of immunohistochemistry in diagnostic gynaecological pathology that pathologists will find of practical value in their routine day-to-day practice. The value of immunohistochemical prognostic factors in various gynaecological malignancies is not covered since, although there is an extensive literature on this subject, little has found a role in routine pathological practice. Before detailing the uses of immunohistochemistry as a diagnostic aid in gynaecological pathology, several points are stressed: (a) most cases do not require immunohistochemistry, which should be reserved for those cases where there is genuine diagnostic confusion; (b) the results of immunohistochemistry should always be carefully interpreted in the context of the morphology; (c) no antibody is totally specific; and (d) in general, panels of antibodies should be used rather than relying on a single antibody. In this review I will detail what I consider to be useful applications of immunohistochemistry in gynaecological pathology site-by-site in the female genital tract.

OVARY AND PERITONEUM

ANTIBODIES OF VALUE IN DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN PRIMARY AND METASTATIC ADENOCARCINOMA

The histological distinction between a primary ovarian adenocarcinoma and a metastatic adenocarcinoma may be difficult. In some cases of metastatic adenocarcinoma the presence of a primary neoplasm elsewhere is known, but in other instances an ovarian metastasis is the first manifestation of an adenocarcinoma.

Type
Chapter
Information
Progress in Pathology , pp. 73 - 100
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

McCluggage, WG. Recent advances in immunohistochemistry in gynaecological pathology. Histopathology 2002; 40: 309–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG. Recent advances in immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of ovarian neoplasms. J Clin Pathol 2000; 53: 327–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yaziji, H, Gown, AM. Immunohistochemical analysis of gynaecologic tumors. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2001; 20: 64–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lash, RH, Hart, WR. Intestinal adenocarcinomas metastatic to the ovaries: a clinicopathologic evaluation of 22 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1989; 11: 114–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wauters, CCAP, Smedts, F, Gerrits, LGMet al. Keratins 7 and 20 as diagnostic markers of carcinomas metastatic to the ovary. Hum Pathol 1995; 26: 852–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lagendijk, JA, Mullink, H, Diest, PJet al. Tracing the origin of adenocarcinomas with unknown primary using immunohistochemistry. Differential diagnosis between colonic and ovarian carcinomas as primary sites. Hum Pathol 1998; 29: 491–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berezowski, K, Stasny, JF, Kornstein, MJ. Cytokeratins 7 and 20 and carcinoembryonic antigen in ovarian and colonic carcinoma. Mod Pathol 1996; 9: 426–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Loy, TS, Calaluce, RD, Keeney, GL. Cytokeratin immunostaining in differentiating primary ovarian carcinoma from metastatic colonic adenocarcinoma. Mod Pathol 1996; 9: 1040–4.Google ScholarPubMed
Ueda, G, Sawada, M, Ogawa, Het al. Immunohistochemical study of cytokeratin 7 for the differentiated diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in the ovary. Gynecol Oncol 1993; 51: 219–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chu, PG, Weiss, LM. Keratin expression in human tissues and neoplasms. Histopathology 2002; 40: 403–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Park, SO, Kim, HS, Hong, EK, Kim, AWH. Expression of cytokeratins 7 and 20 in primary carcinomas of the stomach and colorectum and their value in the differential diagnosis of metastatic carcinomas to the ovary. Hum Pathol 2002; 33: 1078–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cathro, HP, Stoler, MH. Expression of cytokeratin 7 and 20 in ovarian neoplasia. Am J Clin Pathol 2002; 117: 944–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Multhaupt, HA, Arenas-Elliott, CP, Warhol, MJ. Comparison of glycoprotein expression between ovarian and colonic adenocarcinomas. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1999; 123: 909–16.Google Scholar
Lagendijk, JH, Mullink, H, Diest, PJ, Meijer, GA, Meijer, CJ. Immunohistochemical differentiation between primary adenocarcinomas of the ovary and ovarian metastases of colon and breast origin. Comparison between a statistical and intuitive approach. J Clin Pathol 1999; 52: 283–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeCostanzo, DC, Elias, JM, Chumas, JC. Necrosis in 84 ovarian carcinomas: a morphologic study of primary versus metastatic colonic carcinoma with a selective immunohistochemical analysis of cytokeratin subtypes and carcinoembryonic antigen. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1997; 16: 245–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, RH, Wart, WR. Metastases from carcinomas of the pancreas simulating primary mucinous tumors of the ovary: a report of seven cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1989; 13: 748–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, RH, Scully, RE. Ovarian metastases from carcinoma of the gallbladder and extrahepatic bile ducts simulating primary tumors of the ovary: a report of six cases. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1990; 9: 60–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, KR, Young, RH. The distinction between primary and metastatic mucinous carcinomas of the ovary: gross and histologic features in 50 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 2003; 27: 281–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kende, AI, Carr, NJ, Sobin, LH. Expression of cytokeratins 7 and 20 in carcinomas of the gastrointestinal tract. Histopathology 2003; 42: 137–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ji, H, Isacson, C, Seidman, JD, Kurman, RJ, Ronnett, BM. Cytokeratins 7 and 20, Dpc 4 and MUC5AC in the distinction of metastatic mucinous carcinomas in the ovary from primary ovarian mucinous tumors: Dpc4 assists in identifying metastatic pancreatic carcinomas. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2002; 21: 391–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, NS, Bassi, D, Uzieblo, A. WT1 is an integral component of an antibody panel to distinguish pancreaticobiliary and some ovarian epithelial neoplasms. Am J Clin Pathol 2001; 116: 246–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Albarracin, CT, Jafri, J, Montag, AG, Hart, J, Kuan, S. Differential expression of MUC2 and MUC5AC mucin genes in primary ovarian and metastatic colonic carcinoma. Hum Pathol 2000; 31: 672–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, RH, Hart, WR. Renal cell carcinoma metastatic to the ovary: a report of three cases emphasizing possible confusion with ovarian clear cell adenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1992; 11: 96–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, RH, Hart, WR. Metastatic intestinal carcinomas simulating primary ovarian clear cell carcinoma and secretory endometrioid carcinoma: A clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical study of five cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1998; 22: 805–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cameron, RI, Ashe, P, O'Rourke, DM, Foster, H, McCluggage, WG. A panel of immunohistochemical stains assists in the distinction between ovarian and renal clear cell carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2003; 22: 272–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guerrieri, C, Franlund, B, Fristedt, Set al. Mucinous tumors of the vermiform appendix and ovary, and pseudomyxoma peritonei. Histogenetic implications of cytokeratin 7 expression. Hum Pathol 1997; 28: 1039–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ronnett, BM, Shmookler, BM, Diener-West, Met al. Immunohistochemical evidence supporting the appendiceal origin of pseudomyxoma peritonei in women. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1997; 16: 1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ronnett, BM, Seidman, JD. Mucinous tumors arising in ovarian mature teratomas: relationship to pseudomyxoma peritonei. Mod Pathol 2003; 16: 209A.Google Scholar
O'Connell, JT, Hacker, CM, Barsky, SH. MUC2 is a molecular marker for pseudomyxoma peritonei. Mod Pathol 2002; 15: 958–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clement, PB, Young, RH, Scully, RE. Malignant mesotheliomas presenting as ovarian masses. A report of nine cases, including two primary ovarian mesotheliomas. Am J Surg Pathol 1996; 20: 1067–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ordonez, NG. Role of immunohistochemistry in distinguishing epithelial peritoneal mesotheliomas from peritoneal and ovarian serous carcinomas. Am J Surg Pathol 1998; 22: 1203–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Attanoos, RL, Webb, R, Dojcinov, SD, Gibbs, AR. Value of mesothelial and epithelial antibodies in distinguishing diffuse peritoneal mesothelioma in females from serous papillary carcinoma of the ovary and peritoneum. Histopathology 2002; 40: 237–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khoury, N, Raju, U, Crissman, JD, Zarbo, RJ, Greenawald, KA. A comparative immunohistochemical study of peritoneal and ovarian serous tumors and mesotheliomas. Hum Pathol 1990; 21: 811–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldstein, NS, Uzieblo, A. WT-1 immunoreactivity in uterine papillary serous carcinomas is different from ovarian serous carcinomas. Am J Clin Pathol 2002; 117: 541–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Hussaini, M, Stockman, A, Foster, H, McCluggage, WG. WT-1 assists in distinguishing ovarian from uterine serous carcinoma and in distinguishing between serous and endometrioid ovarian carcinoma. Histopathology 2004; 44: 109–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shimizu, M, Toki, T, Takagi, Y, Konishi, I, Fujii, S. Immunohistochemical detection of the Wilms' tumor gene (WT1) in epithelial ovarian tumors. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2000; 19: 158–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shimizu, M, Nikaido, T, Toki, T, Shiozawa, T, Fugii, S. Clear cell carcinoma has an expression pattern of cell cycle regulatory molecules that is unique among ovarian adenocarcinomas. Cancer 1999; 85: 669–77.3.0.CO;2-F>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, RH, Scully, RE. Ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors: problems in differential diagnosis. Pathol Annu 1998; 23: 237–96.Google Scholar
McCluggage, WG, Maxwell, P, Sloan, JM. Immunohistochemical staining of ovarian granulosa cell tumors with monoclonal antibody against inhibin. Hum Pathol 1997; 28: 1034–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zheng, W, Sung, CJ, Hanna, Iet al. α and β subunits of inhibin/activin as sex cord-stromal differentiation markers. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1997; 16: 263–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stewart, CJR, Jeffers, MD, Kennedy, A. Diagnostic value of inhibin immunoreactivity in ovarian gonadal stromal tumours and their histological mimics. Histopathology 1997; 31: 67–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hildebrandt, RH, Rouse, RV, Longacre, TA. Value of inhibin in the identification of granulosa cell tumors of the ovary. Hum Pathol 1997; 28: 1387–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Costa, MJ, Ames, PF, Walls, J, Roth, LM. Inhibin immunohistochemistry applied to ovarian neoplasms: a novel, effective diagnostic tool. Hum Pathol 1997; 28: 1247–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wells, M. Making sense of inhibin in ovarian tumours. Histopathology 1998; 32: 81–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kommoss, F, Oliva, E, Bhan, AK, Young, RH, Scully, RE. Inhibin expression in ovarian tumors and tumor-like lesions: an immunohistochemical study. Mod Pathol 1998; 11: 656–64.Google Scholar
Yamashita, K, Yamoto, M, Shikone, Tet al. Production of inhibin A and inhibin B in human ovarian sex cord stromal tumors. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 177: 1450–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matias-Guiu, X, Pons, C, Prat, J. Mullerian inhibiting substance, alpha-inhibin, and CD99 expression in sex cord-stromal tumors and endometrioid ovarian carcinomas resembling sex cord-stromal tumors. Hum Pathol 1998; 29: 840–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riopel, MA, Perlman, EJ, Seidman, JD, Kurman, RJ, Sherman, ME. Inhibin and epithelial membrane antigen immunohistochemistry assist in the diagnosis of sex cord-stromal tumors and provide clues to the histogenesis of hypercalcaemic small cell carcinomas. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1998; 17: 46–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rishi, M, Howard, LN, Bratthauer, GL, Tavassoli, FA. Use of monoclonal antibody against human inhibin as a marker for sex cord-stromal tumors of the ovary. Am J Surg Pathol 1997; 21: 583–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flemming, P, Wellmann, A, Maschek, H, Lang, H, Georgii, A. Monoclonal antibodies against inhibin represent key markers of adult granulosa cell tumors of the ovary even in their metastases. Am J Surg Pathol 1995; 19: 927–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pelkey, TJ, Frierson HF, Jr, Mills, SE, Stoler, MH. The diagnostic utility of inhibin staining in ovarian neoplasms. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1998; 17: 97–105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guerrieri, C, Franlund, B, Malmstrom, H, Boeryd, B. Ovarian endometrioid carcinomas simulating sex cord-stromal tumors: a study using inhibin and cytokeratin 7. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1998; 17: 266–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Maxwell, P. Immunohistochemical staining for calretinin is useful in the diagnosis of ovarian sex cord-stromal tumours. Histopathology 2001; 38: 403–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doglioni, C, Dei Tos, AP, Laurino, L. Calretinin: a novel immunocytochemical marker for mesothelioma. Am J Surg Pathol 1996; 20: 1037–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cao, QJ, Jones, JG, Li, M. Expression of calretinin in human ovary, testis and ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2001; 20: 346–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deavers, MT, Malpica, A, Ordonez, NG, Silva, EG. Ovarian steroid cell tumors: an immunohistochemical study including a comparison of calretinin with inhibin. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2003; 22: 162–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loo, KT, Leung, AKF, Chan, JKC. Immunohistochemical staining of ovarian granulosa cell tumours with MIC2 antibody. Histopathology 1995; 27: 388–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gordon, MD, Corless, C, Renshaw, AAet al. CD99, keratin and vimentin staining of sex cord-stromal tumors, normal ovary and testis. Mod Pathol 1998; 11: 769–73.Google ScholarPubMed
Choi, YL, Kim, HS, Ahn, G. Immunoexpression of inhibin alpha subunit, inhibin/activin beta subunit and CD99 in ovarian tumors. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000; 124: 563–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Stewart, CJR, Nandini, CL, Richmond, JA. Value of A103 (melan-A) immunostaining in the differential diagnosis of ovarian sex cord tumors. J Clin Pathol 2000; 53: 206–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busam, KJ, Iversen, K, Coplan, KAet al. Immunoreactivity for A103, an antibody to melan-A (Mart-1) in adrenocortical and other steroid tumors. Am J Surg Pathol 1998; 22: 57–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gustafson, ML, Lee, MM, Scully, REet al. Mullerian inhibiting substance as a marker for sex-cord tumor. N Engl J Med 1992; 326: 466–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silverman, , Gitelman, SE. Immunoreactive inhibin, mullerian inhibiting substance and activin as biochemical markers for juvenile granulosa cell tumors. J Pediatr 1996; 129: 918–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bamberger, AM, Ivell, R, Balvers, M. Relaxin-like factor (RLF): a new specific marker for Leydig cells in the ovary. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1998; 18: 163–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sasano, H, Mason, JI, Sasaki, Eet al. Immunohistochemical study of 3 beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase in sex cord-stromal tumors of the ovary. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1990; 9: 352–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Costa, MJ, Morris, R, Sasano, H. Sex steroid biosynthesis enzymes in ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1994; 13: 109–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tiltman, AJ, Ali, H. Distribution of alpha glutathione S-transferase in ovarian neoplasms: an immunohistochemical study. Histopathology 2001; 39: 266–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiltman, AJ, Haffajee, Z. Sclerosing stromal tumors, thecomas and fibromas of the ovary: an immunohistochemical profile. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1999; 18: 254–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mouhedi-Lankarani, S, Kurman, RJ. Calretinin, a more sensitive but less specific marker than alpha-inhibin for ovarian sex cord-stromal neoplasms: an immunohistochemical study of 215 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 2002; 26: 1477–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shah, VI, Freites, ON, Maxwell, P, McCluggage, WG. Inhibin is more specific than calretinin as an immunohistochemical marker for differentiating sarcomatoid granulosa cell tumour of the ovary from other spindle cell neoplasms. J Clin Pathol 2003; 56: 221–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Maxwell, P. Adenocarcinomas of various sites may exhibit immunoreactivity with anti-inhibin antibodies. Histopathology 1999; 35: 216–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aquirre, P, Thor, AD, Scully, RE. Ovarian endometrioid carcinomas resembling sex cord-stromal tumors: an immunohistochemical study. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1989; 8: 364–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otis, CN, Powell, JL, Barbuto, Det al. Intermediate filamentous proteins in adult granulosa cell tumors. Am J Surg Pathol 1992; 16: 962–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Czernobilsky, B, Moll, R, Levy, R, Franke, WW. Co-expression of cytokeratin and vimentin flaments in mesothelial, granulosa and rete ovarii cells of the human ovary. Eur J Cell Biol 1985; 37: 175–90.Google Scholar
Costa, MJ, DeRose, PB, Roth, LM, Brescia, RJ, Zaloudek, CJ, Cohen, C. Immunohistochemical phenotype of ovarian granulosa cell tumors: absence of epithelial membrane antigen has diagnostic value. Hum Pathol 1994; 25: 60–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flemming, P, Grothe, W, Maschek, H, Petry, KU, Wellmann, A. The site of inhibin production in ovarian neoplasms. Histopathology 1996; 29: 465–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG. The value of inhibin staining in gynaecological pathology. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2001; 20: 79–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCluggage, WG, Patterson, A, White, J, Anderson, NH. Immunocytochemical staining of ovarian cyst aspirates with monoclonal antibody against inhibin. Cytopathology 1998; 9: 336–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Devouassoux-Shisheboran, M, Silver, SA, Tavassoli, FA. Wolffian adnexal tumor, so-called female adnexal tumor of probable Wolffian origin (FATWO): immunohistochemical evidence in support of a Wolffian origin. Hum Pathol 1999; 30: 856–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tiltman, AJ, Allard, U. Female adnexal tumours of probable Wolffian origin: an immunohistochemical study comparing tumours, mesonephric remnants and paramesonephric derivatives. Histopathology 2001; 38: 237–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clement, PB, Scully, RE. Uterine tumors resembling ovarian sex cord tumors: a clinicopathologic analysis of fourteen cases. Am J Clin Pathol 1976; 66: 512–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krishnamurthy, S, Jungbloth, AA, Busam, KJ, Rosai, J. Uterine tumors resembling ovarian sex-cord tumors have an immunophenotype consistent with true sex-cord differentiation. Am J Surg Pathol 1998; 22: 1078–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baker, RJ, Hildebrant, RH, Rouse, RV, Hendrickson, MR, Longacre, TA. Inhibin and CD 99 (MIC2) expression in uterine stromal neoplasms with sex cord-like elements. Hum Pathol 1999; 30: 671–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCluggage, WG. Uterine tumours resembling ovarian sex cord tumours: immunohistochemical evidence for true sex cord differentiation. Histopathology 1999; 34: 373–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ambros, RA, Sherman, ME, Zahn, CM, Bitterman, P, Kurman, RJ. Endometrial intraepithelial carcinoma: distinctive lesion specifically associated with tumors displaying serous differentiation. Hum Pathol 1995; 26: 1260–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spiegel, GW. Endometrial carcinoma in situ in postmenopausal women. Am J Surg Pathol 1995; 19: 417–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matias Guiu, X, Catasus, L, Bussaglia, Eet al. Molecular pathology of endometrial hyperplasia and carcinoma. Hum Pathol 2001; 32: 569–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wheeler, DT, Bell, KA, Kurman, RJ, Sherman, ME. Minimal uterine serous carcinoma: diagnosis and clinicopathologic correlation. Am J Surg Pathol 2000; 24: 797–806.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stewart, RL, Royds, JA, Burton, JLet al. Direct sequencing of the p53 gene shows absence of mutations in endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinomas expressing p53 protein. Histopathology 1998; 33: 440–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silva, EG, Jenkins, R. Serous carcinoma in endometrial polyps. Mod Pathol 1990; 3: 120–8.Google ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Sumathi, VP, McManus, DT. Uterine serous carcinoma and endometrial intraepithelial carcinoma arising in endometrial polyps: report of five cases including two associated with tamoxifen therapy. Hum Pathol 2003; 34: 939–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quddus, MR, Sung, CJ, Zheny, W, Lauchlan, SC. p53 immunoreactivity in endometrial metaplasia with dysfunctional uterine bleeding. Histopathology 1999; 35: 44–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schlosshauer, PW, Ellenson, LH, Soslow, RA. β-catenin and E-cadherin expression patterns in high-grade endometrial carcinoma are associated with histological subtype. Mod Pathol 2002; 15: 1032–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castrillon, DH, Lee, KR, Nucci, MR. Distinction between endometrial and endocervical adenocarcinomas: an immunohistochemical study. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2002; 21: 4–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCluggage, WG, Sumathi, VP, McBride, HA, Patterson, A. A panel of immunohistochemical stains, including carcinoembryonic antigen, vimentin and estrogen receptor, aids the distinction between primary endometrial and endocervical adenocarcinomas. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2002; 21: 11–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kamoi, S, Al Juboury, MI, Akin, MR, Silverberg, SG. Immunohistochemical staining in the distinction between primary endometrial and endocervical adenocarcinomas: another viewpoint. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2002; 21: 217–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Staebler, A, Sherman, ME, Zaino, RJ, Ronnett, BM. Hormone receptor immunohistochemistry and human papilloma virus in situ hybridization are useful for distinguishing endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinomas. Am J Surg Pathol 2002; 26: 998–1006.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Jenkins, D. p16 immunoreactivity may assist in the distinction between endometrial and endocervical adenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2003; 22: 231–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Leary, JJ, Landers, RJ, Crowley, Met al. Human papillomavirus and mixed epithelial tumors of the endometrium. Hum Pathol 1998; 29: 383–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oliva, E, Young, RH, Clement, PB, Scully, RE. Myxoid and fibrous endometrial stromal tumors of the uterus. A report of 10 cases. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1999; 18: 310–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oliva, E, Young, RH, Clement, PB, Bhan, AK, Scully, RE. Cellular benign mesenchymal tumors of the uterus: a comparative morphologic and immunohistochemical analysis of 33 highly cellular leiomyomas and seven endometrial stromal nodules, two frequently confused tumors. Am J Surg Pathol 1995; 19: 757–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franquemont, DW, Frierson HF, Jr, Mills, SE. An immunohistochemical study of normal endometrial stroma and endometrial stromal neoplasms: evidence for smooth muscle differentiation. Am J Surg Pathol 1991; 15: 861–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Devaney, K, Tavassoli, FA. Immunohistochemistry as a diagnostic aid in the interpretation of unusual mesenchymal tumors of the uterus. Mod Pathol 1991; 4: 225–31.Google ScholarPubMed
Farhood, AI, Abrams, J. Immunohistochemistry of endometrial stromal sarcoma. Hum Pathol 1991; 22: 224–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Sumathi, VP, Maxwell, P. CD10 is a sensitive and diagnostically useful immunohistochemical marker of normal endometrial stroma and of endometrial stromal neoplasms. Histopathology 2001; 39: 273–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chu, PG, Arber, PA, Weiss, LMet al. Utility of CD10 in distinguishing between endometrial stromal sarcoma and uterine smooth muscle tumors: an immunohistochemical comparison of 34 cases. Mod Pathol 2001; 14: 465–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nucci, MR, O'Connell, JT, Huettner, PCet al. h-Caldesmon expression effectively distinguishes endometrial stromal tumors from uterine smooth muscle tumors. Am J Surg Pathol 2001; 25: 455–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rash, DS, Tan, JY, Baergen, RNet al. h-Caldesmon, a novel smooth muscle-specific antibody, distinguishes between cellular leiomyoma and endometrial stromal sarcoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2001; 25: 253–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agoff, SN, Grieco, VS, Garcia, R, Gown, AM. Immunohistochemical distinction of endometrial stromal sarcoma and cellular leiomyoma. Appl Immuno Mol Morphol 2001; 9: 164–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Toki, T, Shimizu, M, Takagi, Y, Ashida, T, Konishi, I. CD10 is a marker for normal and neoplastic endometrial stromal cells. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2002; 21: 41–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chu, P, Arber, DA. Paraffin-section detection of CD10 in 505 nonhematopoietic neoplasms. Frequent expression in renal cell carcinoma and endometrial stromal sarcoma. Am J Clin Pathol 2000; 113: 374–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scully, RE. Smooth muscle differentiation in genital tract disorders. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1981; 105: 505–7.Google ScholarPubMed
Oliva, E, Clement, PB, Young, RH, Scully, RE. Mixed endometrial stromal and smooth muscle tumors of the uterus: a clinicopathologic study of 15 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1998; 22: 997–1005.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sumathi, VP, McCluggage, WG. CD10 is useful in demonstrating endometrial stroma at ectopic sites and in confirming a diagnosis of endometriosis. J Clin Pathol 2002; 25: 391–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vang, R, Kempson, RL. Perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa) of the uterus: a subset of HMB-45-positive epithelioid mesenchymal neoplasms with an uncertain relationship to pure smooth muscle tumors. Am J Surg Pathol 2002; 26: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silva, EG, Deavers, MT, Bodurka, D, Malpica, A. Uterine epithelioid leiomyosarcomas with clear cells or malignant PEComas?Mod Pathol 2003; 16: 211(A).Google Scholar
Zamecnik, M, Michal, M. HMB45+ hyalinized epithelioid tumor of the uterus is linked to epithelioid leiomyoma rather than PEC-omas. Int J Surg Pathol 2001; 9: 341–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Walsh, MY, Thornton, CMet al. Inter and intraobserver variation in the histopathological reporting of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions using a modified Bethesda grading system. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 105: 206–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Bharucha, H, Date, Aet al. Interobserver variation in the reporting of cervical colposcopic biopsies. Comparison of grading systems. J Clin Pathol 1996; 49: 833–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Tang, L, Maxwell, P, Bharucha, H. Monoclonal antibody MIB1 in the assessment of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1996; 15: 131–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Maxwell, P, Bharucha, H. Immunohistochemical detection of metallothionein and MIB1 in uterine cervical squamous lesions. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1998; 17: 29–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mittal, KR, Demopoulos, RI, Goswami, S. Proliferating cell nuclear antigen (cyclin) expression in normal and abnormal cervical squamous epithelia. Am J Surg Pathol 1993; 17: 117–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raju, GC. Expression of the proliferating cell nuclear antigen in cervical neoplasia. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1994; 12: 337–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kobayashi, I, Matsuo, K, Ishibashi, Y, Kanda, S, Sati, H. The proliferative activity in dysplasia and carcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix analysed by proliferating cell nuclear antigen immunostaining and silver-binding argyrophilic nucleolar organiser region staining. Hum Pathol 1994; 25: 198–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bulten, J, Laak, JAWM, Gemmink, JH, Pahlplatz, MMM, Wilde, PCM, Hanselaar, AGJM. MIB1, a promising marker for the classification of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Pathol 1996; 178: 268–73.3.0.CO;2-4>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Al-Saleh, W, Delvenne, P, Greimers, R, Fridman, P, Doyen, J, Boniver, J. Assessment of Ki-67 antigen immunostaining in squamous intraepithelial lesions of the uterine cervix: correlation with histological grade and human papilloma virus type. Am J Clin Pathol 1995; 104: 154–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, S, Kernohan, NM, Walker, F. Proliferation in the normal cervix and in preinvasive cervical lesions. J Clin Pathol 1996; 49: 667–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mittal, K. Utility of proliferation – associated marker MIB1 in evaluating lesions of the uterine cervix. Adv Anat Pathol 1999; 6: 177–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kruse, AJ, Baak, JPA, Helliesen, T, Kjellevold, KH, Bol, MGW, Janssen, EAM. Evaluation of MIB-1 positive cell clusters as a diagnostic marker for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Surg Pathol 2002; 26: 1501–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mittal, K, Mesia, A, Demopoulos, RI. MIB1 expression is useful in distinguishing dysplasia from atrophy in elderly women. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1999; 18: 122–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pirog, EC, Baergen, RN, Soslow, RAet al. Diagnostic accuracy of cervical low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions is improved with MIB1 immunostaining. Am J Surg Pathol 2002; 26: 70–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mittal, K. Utility of MIB1 in evaluating cauterised cervical cone biopsy margins. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1999; 18: 211–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, JT, Cviko, A, Riethdorf, Set al. Ki-67, cyclin E and p16 (INK4) are complementary surrogate biomarkers for human papilloma virus-related cervical neoplasia. Am J Surg Pathol 2001; 25: 884–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klaes, R, Friedrich, T, Spitkovsky, Det al. Over expression of p16 (INK4A) as a specific marker for dysplastic and neoplastic epithelial cells of the cervix uteri. Int J Cancer 2001; 92: 276–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, N, Ring, M, Killalea, AGet al. p16 INK4A as a marker for cervical dyskaryosis: CIN and CGIN in cervical biopsies and ThinPrep smears. J Clin Pathol 2003; 56: 56–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klaes, R, Benner, A, Friedrich, Tet al. p16INK4A immunohistochemistry improves interobserver agreement in the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Surg Pathol 2002; 26: 1389–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, RI, Maxwell, P, Jenkins, D, McCluggage, WG. Immunohistochemical staining with MIB1, bcl2 and p16 assists in the distinction of cervical glandular intraepithelial neoplasia from tubo-endometrial metaplasia, endometriosis and microglandular hyperplasia. Histopathology 2002; 41: 313–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Maxwell, P, McBride, HA, Hamilton, PW, Bharucha, H. Monoclonal antibodies Ki-67 and MIB1 in the distinction of tuboendometrial metaplasia from endocervical adenocarcinoma and adenocarcinoma in situ in formalin fixed material. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1995; 14: 209–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoeven, KH, Ramondetta, L, Kovatich, AJ, Bibbo, L, Dunton, CJ. Quantitative image analysis of MIB1 reactivity in inflammatory, hyperplastic and neoplastic endocervical lesions. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1997; 16: 15–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pirog, EC, Isacson, C, Szabolcs, MJ, Kleter, B, Quint, W, Richart, RM. Proliferative activity of benign and neoplastic endocervical epithelium and correlation with HPV DNA detection. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2002; 21: 22–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cina, SJ, Richardson, MS, Austin, RM, Kurman, RJ. Immunohistochemical staining for Ki-67 antigen, carcinoembryonic antigen, and p53 in the differential diagnosis of glandular lesions of the cervix. Mod Pathol 1997; 10: 176–80.Google ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Maxwell, P, Bharucha, H. Immunohistochemical detection of p53 and bcl2 proteins, in neoplastic and non-neoplastic endocervical glandular lesions. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1997; 16: 22–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Maxwell, P. bcl-2 and p21 immunostaining of cervical tubo-endometrial metaplasia. Histopathology 2002; 40: 107–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Piek, JMJ, Diest, PJ, Verheijen, RHM, Kenemans, P. Cell cycle-related proteins p21 and bcl2: markers of differentiation in the human fallopian tube. Histopathology 2001; 38: 481–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, GS, Brown, KA, Perkins, SL, Abbott, TM, Clayton, F. Bcl-2 is down-regulated in atypical endometrial hyperplasia and adenocarcinoma. Mod Pathol 1996; 9: 430–6.Google ScholarPubMed
Reithdorf, L, Riethdorf, S, Lee, KR, Cviko, A, Loning, T, Crum, CP. Human papillomavirus, expression of p16 INK4A and early endocervical glandular neoplasia. Hum Pathol 2002; 33: 899–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Negri, G, Egarter-Vigli, E, Kasal, A, Romano, F, Haitel, A, Mian, C. p16 INK4A is a useful marker for the diagnosis of adenocarcinoma of the cervix uteri and its precursors: an immunohistochemical study with immunocytochemical correlations. Am J Surg Pathol 2003; 27: 187–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marques, T, Andrade, , Vassallo, J. Endocervical tubal metaplasia and adenocarcinoma in situ: role of immunohistochemistry for carcinoembryonic antigen and vimentin in differential diagnosis. Histopathology 1996; 28: 549–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilks, CB, Young, RH, Aquirre, Pet al. Adenoma malignum/minimal deviation adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix. A clinicopathological and immunohistochemical analysis of 26 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1989; 13: 717–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Michael, H, Grave, L, Kraus, FT. Minimal deviation endocervical adenocarcinoma: clinical and histologic features, immunohistochemical staining for carcinoembryonic antigen and differentiation from confusing benign lesions. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1984; 3: 261–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ordi, J, Romagosa, C, Tavassoli, FAet al. CD10 expression in epithelial tissues and tumors of the gynaecologic tract: a useful marker in the diagnosis of mesonephric, trophoblastic and clear cell tumors. Am J Surg Pathol 2003; 27: 178–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ordi, J, Nogales, FF, Palacia, Aet al. Mesonephric adenocarcinoma of the uterine corpus: CD10 expression as evidence of mesonephric differentiation. Am J Surg Pathol 2001; 25: 1540–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Oliva, E, Herrington, CS, McBride, H, Young, RH. CD10 and calretinin staining of endocervical glandular lesions, endocervical stroma and endometrioid adenocarcinomas of the uterine corpus: CD10 positivity is characteristic of, but not specific for, mesonephric lesions and is not specific for endometrial stroma. Histopathology 2003; 43: 144–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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: 22–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ishii, K, Kumagai, T, Tozuka, M, Ota, H, Katsuyama, T, Kurihara, M. A new diagnostic method for adenoma malignum and related lesions: latex aglutination test with a new monoclonal antibody, HIK 1083. Clinica Chimica Acta 2001; 312: 231–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ischimura, T, Koizumi, T, Tateiwa, Het al. Immunohistochemical expression of gastric mucin and p53 in minimal deviation adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2001; 20: 220–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Utsugi, K, Hirai, Y, Takeshima, N, Akiyama, F, Sakurai, S, Hasumi, K. Utility of the monoclonal antibody HIK1083 in the diagnosis of adenoma malignum of the uterine cervix. Gynecol Oncol 1999; 75: 345–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nucci, MR, Clement, PB, Young, RH. Lobular endocervical glandular hyperplasia, not otherwise specific: a clinicopathologic analysis of thirteen cases of a distinctive pseudoneoplastic lesion and comparison with fourteen cases of adenoma malignum. Am J Surg Pathol 1999; 23: 886–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mikami, Y, Hata, S, Melamed, J, Fujiwara, K, Manabe, T. Lobular endocervical glandular hyperplasia is a metaplastic process with a pyloric gland phenotype. Histopathology 2001; 39: 364–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Ashe, P, McBride, H, Maxwell, P, Sloan, JM. Localisation of the cellular expression of inhibin in trophoblastic tissue. Histopathology 1998; 32: 252–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kommoss, F, Schmidt, D, Coerdt, W, Olert, J, Munteferig, H. Immunohistochemical expression analysis of inhibin-alpha and -beta subunits in partial and complete moles, trophoblastic tumors and endometrial decidua. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2001; 20: 380–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shih, IM, Seidman, JD, Kurman, RJ. Placental site nodule and characterisation of distinctive types of intermediate trophoblast. Hum Pathol 1999; 30: 687–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shih, IM, Kurman, RJ. Immunohistochemical localisation of inhibin-alpha in the placenta and gestational trophoblastic lesions. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1999; 18: 144–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pelkey, TJ, Frierson, HF, Mills, SE, Stoler, MH. Detection of the alpha-subunit of inhibin in trophoblastic neoplasia. Hum Pathol 1999; 30: 26–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shih, IM, Kurman, RJ. Epithelioid trophoblastic tumor – a neoplasm distinct from choriocarcinoma and placental site trophoblastic tumor simulating carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 1998; 22: 1393–403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shih, IM, Kurman, RJ. The pathology of intermediate trophoblastic tumors and tumor-like lesions. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2001; 20: 31–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shih, IM, Kurman, RJ. Ki-67 labelling index in the differential diagnosis of exaggerated placental site, placental site trophoblastic tumor and choriocarcinoma. A double immunohistochemical staining technique using Ki-67 and mel CAM antibodies. Hum Pathol 1998; 29: 27–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Singer, G, Kurman, RJ, McMaster, MT, Shih, IM. HLA-G immunoreactivity is specific for intermediate trophoblast in gestational trophoblastic disease and can serve as a useful marker in differential diagnosis. Am J Surg Pathol 2002; 26: 914–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castrillon, DH, Sun, DQ, Weremowicz, S, Fisher, RA, Crum, CP, Genest, DR. Discrimination of complete hydatidiform mole from its mimics by immunohistochemistry of the paternally imprinted gene product p57 (KIP2). Am J Surg Pathol 2001; 25: 1225–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fukunaga, M. Immunohistochemical characterization of p57KIP2 expression in early hydatidiform moles. Hum Pathol 2002; 33: 1188–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nucci, MR, Fletcher, CDM. Vulvovaginal soft tissue tumours: update and review. Histopathology 2000; 36: 97–108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCluggage, WG, Patterson, A, Maxwell, P. Aggressive angiomyxoma of pelvic parts exhibits oestrogen and progesterone receptor postivity. J Clin Pathol 2000; 53: 603–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartmann, CA, Sperling, M, Stein, H. So-called fibroepithelial polyps of the vagina exhibiting an unusual but uniform antigen profile characterised by expression of desmin and steroid hormone receptors but no muscle-specific actin or macrophages markers. Am J Clin Pathol 1990; 93: 604–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nielsen, GP, Rosenberg, AE, Young, RH, Lee, KC, Chan, JKC. Angiomyofibroblastoma of the vulva and vagina. Mod Pathol 1996; 9: 284–91.Google ScholarPubMed
Nucci, MR, Weremowicz, S, Neskey, DMet al. Chromosomal translocation t(8; 12) induces aberrant HMGIC expression in aggressive angiomyxoma of the vulva. Genes Chrom Can 2001; 32: 172–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nucci, MR, Tallini, G, Quade, BJ. HMGIC expression as a diagnostic marker for vulvar aggressive angiomyxoma. Mod Pathol 2001; 14: 829(A).Google Scholar
Lloyd, J, Flanaghan, AM. Mammary and extramammary Paget's disease. J Clin Pathol 2000; 53: 742–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldblum, JR, Wart, WR. Vulvar Paget's disease: a clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical study of 19 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1997; 21: 1178–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldblum, JR, Hart, WR. Perianal Paget's disease – a histologic and immunohistochemical study of 11 cases with and without associated rectal adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 1998; 2: 170–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, D, Nimmo, M, Clement, PBet al. Prognostic factors in Paget's disease of the vulva: a study of 21 cases. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1999; 18: 351–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brainard, JA, Hart, WR. Proliferative epidermal lesions associated with anogenital Paget's disease. Am J Surg Pathol 2000; 24: 543–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fox, H, Wells, M. Recent advances in pathology of the vulva. Histopathology 2003; 42: 209–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raju, RR, Goldblum, JR, Hart, WR. Pagetoid squamous cell carcinoma in situ (Pagetoid Bowen's disease) of the external genitalia. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2003; 22: 127–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, HM, Wilkinson, EJ. Uroplakin III to distinguish primary vulvar Paget disease from Paget disease secondary to urothelial carcinoma. Hum Pathol 2002; 33: 545–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×