RESUMEN
Fallopian tube pathology in patients with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations suggests a possible pathway to high grade serous ovarian carcinoma originates with a p53 signature, which is thought to represent a potential precursor to serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC). The clinical implications of an isolated p53 signature in the average-risk population has not been well-established. This study aims to describe clinical outcomes in patients with incidentally noted p53 signature lesions. All patients diagnosed with a p53 signature lesion on final pathology from 2014 to 2022 were identified at a large academic institution. P53 signature is defined by our lab as morphologically normal to mildly atypical tubal epithelium with focal p53 over-expression on immunohistochemistry. Incidental p53 signature was defined as identification of a fallopian tube lesion excised for benign or unrelated indications in patients without a known hereditary disposition. Demographic, clinicopathologic, and genetic data were collected. A total of 127 patients with p53 signatures were identified. Thirty-six patients were excluded for established ovarian cancer or high-risk history leaving 91 total patients. Five patients (5.5%) developed a malignancy, none of which were ovarian or primary peritoneal, at the end of the eight and a half year follow up period. Twenty-four (26.4%) patients had salpingectomy without any form of oophorectomy at the time of initial surgery, while 67 (73.6%) patients had at least a unilateral oophorectomy at the time of their salpingectomy. Seven patients (7.7%) had additional surgery after p53 signature diagnosis; however, the final pathology yielded no evidence of malignancy in all these patients. After subsequent surgeries, 19 (20.9%) patients maintained their ovaries. The diagnosis of an incidental p53 signature was not associated with any primary peritoneal or ovarian cancer diagnoses during our follow up, and the majority of patients were managed conservatively by their providers with no further intervention after diagnosis.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: SOX10 expression helps identify melanocytic lesions. Over time, novel uses have been identified, such as expression in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). We evaluated the usefulness of SOX10 in breast pathology-specifically, identification and subtyping of TNBC and distinction from gynecologic carcinomas, use as a myoepithelial marker, and in the distinction of usual ductal hyperplasia (UDH) from atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH). METHODS: Several breast and gynecologic carcinoma tissue microarrays containing a total of 492 cases were stained with SOX10. Whole sections of 34 ADH, 50 UDH, and 29 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) samples were also stained with SOX10. RESULTS: SOX10 expression was identified in 67% of consecutive TNBC cases. Expression was mostly seen in nonapocrine, androgen receptor (AR)-negative TNBCs. All gynecologic carcinomas (n = 157) were negative. All UDH cases showed mosaic SOX10 expression, while all ADH cases lacked expression. All estrogen receptor (ER)-positive DCIS (n = 19) specimens were negative for SOX10, while 2 of 10 ER-negative DCIS specimens were positive for SOX10. The latter 2 cases showed SOX10-positive invasive carcinomas. CONCLUSIONS: SOX10 identifies nonluminal AR-type TNBC and is useful in distinguishing TNBC from gynecologic carcinomas. SOX10 can distinguish UDH from ADH. SOX10 is not useful in distinguishing ADH from DCIS.