Search

Simple Summary Vulvar squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC) is the most frequent malignant vulvar tumor, with a peak incidence in the 7–8th decades of life. However, VSCCs can also occur in young women. This unfortunate event is even rarer and more worrisome in pregnant women, being hard to manage for gynecologists, oncologists, and radiotherapists. Very few cases have been reported and we felt the need for an updated review on this topic. Thus, we performed a systematic literature review of VSCCs diagnosed during pregnancy, discussing the clinic-pathologic features, the implications in pregnancy outcomes, and the effects of such a diagnosis in the management of mothers and their babies. Abstract According to our systematic literature review (PRISMA guidelines), only 37 vulvar squamous cell carcinomas (VSCCs) were diagnosed during pregnancy (age range: 17–41 years). The tumor size range was 0.3–15 cm. The treatment was performed after (14/37, 38%), before (10/37, 27%), or before-and-after delivery (11/37, 30%). We found that 21/37 (57%) cases were stage I, 2 II (5%), 11 III (30%), and 3 IVB (8%). HPV-related features (condylomas/warts; HPV infection; high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) were reported in 11/37 (30%) cases. We also found that 9/37 (24%) patients had inflammatory conditions (lichen sclerosus/planus, psoriasis, chronic dermatitis). The time-to-recurrence/progression (12/37, 32%) ranged from 0 to 36 (mean 9) months. Eight women died of disease (22%) 2.5–48 months after diagnosis, 2 (5%) were alive with disease, and 23 (62%) were disease-free at the end of follow-up. Pregnant patients must be followed-up. Even if they are small, newly arising vulvar lesions should be biopsied, especially in women with risk factors (HPV, dermatosis, etc.). The treatment of VSCCs diagnosed in late third trimester might be delayed until postpartum. Elective cesarean section may prevent vulvar wound dehiscence. In the few reported cases, pregnancy/fetal outcomes seemed to not be affected by invasive treatments during pregnancy. However, clinicians must be careful; larger cohorts should define the best treatment. Definite guidelines are lacking, so a multidisciplinary approach and discussion with patients are mandatory.

Background Central nervous system (CNS) spreading from epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC) is an uncommon but increasing phenomenon. We previously reported in a small series of 11 patients a correlation between Androgen Receptor (AR) loss and localization to CNS. Aims of this study were: to confirm a predictive role of AR loss in an independent validation cohort; to evaluate if AR status impacts on EOC survival. Results We collected an additional 29 cases and 19 controls as validation cohort. In this independent cohort at univariate analysis, cases exhibited lower expression of AR, considered both as continuous (p p p p = 0.005 for Progression Free Survival (PFS) and p = 0.002 for brain PFS (bPFS) respectively). Comparison of AR expression between primary tissue and paired brain metastases in the combined dataset did not show any statistically significant difference. Conclusions We confirmed AR loss as predictive role for CNS involvement from EOC in an independent cohort of cases and controls. Early assessment of AR status could improve clinical management and patients’ prognosis.

HER2 overexpression and anti-HER2 agents represent probably the best story of success of individualized therapy in breast cancer. Due to the important therapeutic implications, the issue under the spotlight has been, since ever, the correct identification of true HER2 positivity on tissue specimens. Eligibility to anti-HER2 agents is strictly dependent on the demonstration of HER2 overexpression (by immunohistochemistry) or of HER2 gene amplification by in situ techniques (fluorescence in situ hybridization, FISH), however there are controversial issues involving cases with “equivocal” HER2 status based on conventional techniques (about 20% of specimens). In terms of HER2 expression a major debate is the presence of full-length and truncated forms of the protein and controversial clinical data have been reported on the therapeutic implications of these HER2 fragments. In terms of HER2 gene assessment, the occurrence of amplification of the chromosome 17 centromeric region (CEP17) has been proven responsible for misleading HER2 FISH results, precluding anti-HER2 based therapy to some patients. Finally HER2 activating mutations have been recently described as a biological mechanisms alternative to HER2 gene amplification. In this review we will focus on the controversies that pathologists and oncologists routinely face in the attempt to design the most tailored treatment for breast cancer patients. We will focus on the HER2 gene and on the protein, both at technical and interpretational levels.

Background The group of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancers (both luminal-A and -B) behaves differently from the ER-negative group. At least in early follow-up, ER expression influences positively patients' prognosis. This low aggressive biology flattens out the differences of clinical management. Thus we aimed to produce a prognostic index specific for ER-positive (ERPI) cancers that could be of aid for clinical decision. Patients and methods The test set comprised 495 consecutive ER-positive breast cancers. Tumor size, number of metastatic lymph nodes and androgen receptor expression were the only independent variables related to disease-specific survival. These variables were used to create the ERPI, which was applied to the entire test set and to selected subpopulations (grade 2 (G2)-tumors, luminal-A and -B breast cancers). A series of 581 ER-positive breast cancers, collected from another hospital, was used to validate ERPI. Results In the test population, 96.9% of patients classified as ERPI-good showed a good prognosis compared with 79.6% classified as ERPI-poor (P < 0.001). ERPI effectively discriminated outcome in luminal-A and luminal-B and in G2-tumors. In the validation series, the ERPI maintained its value. Conclusion ERPI is a practical tool in refining the prediction of outcome of patients with ER-positive breast cancer.