Keywords
endometrial neoplasm - hysteroscopy - endometrial polyp
Palavras-chave
câncer de endométrio - histeroscopia - pólipo endometrial
Introduction
Patients with endometrial cancer (EC) present with polyps at the time of diagnosis
between 10 and 30% of the cases.[1]
[2] If the tumor originates from a typical polyp, it is described as a neoplastic polyp,
but if the cancer acquires a polypoid configuration, it is classified as a polypoid
cancer.[2] Patients with concomitant endometrial polyps and cancer usually present in earlier
stages than those with tumors that are not associated with a polyp.[1]
Molecularly, the epithelium of the polyp differs from that of the endometrium,[3]
[4] but can be as prone to carcinogenesis as the normal endometrium.[1] Although the risk factors for endometrial neoplasms are the same for polyps and
normal endometrium,[1]
[5] the histological findings of the polyp might not reflect the condition of the adjacent
endometrium.[5]
Few studies have described the aggressiveness of a tumor that is associated with polyps.[1]
[6] In the case of EC in a polyp, the thickness of the parenchyma of the polyp can be
a protective factor against myometrial invasion, based on reports of the absence of
residual disease after polypectomy in patients with EC.[1]
[2]
Atypical hyperplasia in a polyp usually requires a more conservative treatment.[7]
[8] Even histologically high-grade cancer that originates in a polyp can present as
confined uterine disease[9] and thus receive less adjuvant treatment.[10] Moreover, endometrioid tumors appear to be less aggressive when they are restricted
to a polyp,[11] but studies that have characterized such tumors are lacking.
Our aim was to correlate the location of endometrioid EC (within the polyp and/or
the adjacent endometrium) with clinical and pathological factors, trying to find a
subgroup of patients prone to the absence of residual neoplasia in the final uterine
specimen.
Methods
We analyzed a sequential series of 104 patients (92 cases from the Hospital AC Camargo
and 12 from the Hospital do Servidor Público Estadual de São Paulo) who had presented
endometrial polyps in the hysteroscopy and undergone surgery for EC from January 2002
to January 2017. Clinical and pathological data were retrospectively retrieved from
their medical records. The respective institutional ethical review boards approved
the present study (approval CAAE numbers 70580117.9.1001.5463/ 70580117.9.2001.5432).
We included patients with polyps and a diagnosis of EC. The diagnosis was achieved
by hysteroscopic biopsy/polypectomy or defined after hysterectomy, based on the definitive
pathologic uterine specimen. Patients with nonendometrioid tumors were excluded. Staging
and grade were defined according to the International Federation of Gynecology and
Obstetrics (FIGO) classification.[12]
A database was constructed using SPSS for Mac, version 20.0 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago,
IL, USA). The chi-squared and Fisher exact tests were used to analyze the correlations
between categories and clinicopathological variables. For all tests, an α error of
up to 5% (p < 0.05) was considered significant.
Results
The clinical and pathological characteristics are summarized in [Table 1]. Menopause was described in 87 patients (83.7%), and the main symptom was vaginal
bleeding. A high percentage of patients had lymph node dissection (72%), but no cases
of lymph node involvement were observed.
Table 1
Clinical and pathological variables of the 104 patients with a diagnosis of endometrial
polyps and cancer
|
Clinical variables
|
n = 104
|
%
|
|
Age - years old (mean)
|
58
|
|
|
Menopause
|
87
|
83.7
|
|
Bleeding
|
61
|
58.1
|
|
Lymph node dissection
|
75
|
72.1
|
|
Absence of residual tumor
|
18
|
17.3
|
[Table 2] lists the pathological variables according to the location of the tumor. In 78 cases
(75%), the EC involved the polyp and the adjacent endometrium and in 40 (38.5%), it
was restricted to the polyp, with no endometrial involvement. Moreover, in 16 cases
(15.3%), the EC involved only the adjacent endometrium. In 10 (9.6%) cases, the polyp
biopsy showed atypical hyperplasia and EC was detected only in the final pathological
specimen. There was no correlation between the presence of postmenopausal bleeding
and the exact location of the EC (p = 0.42).
Table 2
Symptoms and hysteroscopic findings of the 104 patients with a diagnosis of endometrial
polyps and cancer
|
Data
|
Status
|
Polyp involvement (n = 40)
|
Polyp and endometrial involvement (n = 38)
|
Endometrial involvement (n = 16)
|
Neoplasm only in final specimen (10)
|
p-value
|
|
Bleeding
|
Yes
No
|
24
16
|
25
13
|
8
8
|
4
6
|
0.42
|
|
Number of polyps
|
1
2
3+
Not described
|
17
6
4
13
|
16
2
6
14
|
8
0
0
8
|
3
3
0
4
|
0.25
|
|
Polyp procedure
|
Excision
Biopsy
not described
|
18
3
19
|
28
4
6
|
7
1
8
|
4
2
4
|
0.59
|
Most cases (n = 96; 92.3%) were classified as stage IA and 90 (86.5%) were classified as grade
1 or 2. In 18 cases (17.3%), there was no residual tumor in the definitive hysterectomy
specimen ([Table 3]); however, of the 40 cases in which the tumor was apparently restricted to the polyp,
5 (12.5%) showed deep myometrial invasion in the definitive uterine specimen.
Table 3
Final pathological report variables of the 104 patients with a diagnosis of endometrial
polyps and cancer
|
Data
|
Status
|
Polyp involvement (n = 40)
|
Polyp and endometrial involvement (n = 38)
|
Endometrial involvement (n = 16)
|
Neoplasm only in final specimen (n = 10)
|
Total
|
p-value
|
|
Residual tumor
|
Absent
Present
|
9
31
|
6
32
|
3
13
|
0
10
|
18
86
|
0.45
|
|
Stage
|
IA
IB
|
35
5
|
35
3
|
16
0
|
10
0
|
96
8
|
0.48
|
|
Grade
|
1
2
3
|
18
14
8
|
22
12
4
|
10
4
2
|
9
1
0
|
59
31
14
|
0.32
|
Cancer that was localized in the polyp by hysteroscopy was unrelated to a higher percentage
of final specimens without disease ([Table 3]). Even when cases with tumor involvement outside of the polyp were grouped, there
was no significant impact on the presence of residual disease (p = 0.20). Moreover, there was no significant association between polyp-restricted
tumors and early-stage disease (p = 0.13). Grade 3 tumors occurred irrespective of the precise location of the neoplasm.
Of the 14 high-grade tumors (13.4%), 3 were IB tumors ([Table 3]). Complete removal (with no residual disease) of the 14 grade 3 tumors by hysteroscopy
was achieved in 5 patients (35.6%) and in 13 of the 90 grade grade 1 or 2 tumors (14.4%)
(p = 0.064).
Discussion
Several studies have evaluated concomitant EC and endometrial polyps,[1]
[4]
[13] but this group of patients must be better characterized, aiming to tailor surgery
and adjuvant treatment. The present study was performed at 2 cancer centers, where
besides oncologic treatment, hysteroscopies are also usually performed to diagnose
endometrial diseases.
The mean age and menopausal status of our patients were similar to those in previous
studies.[14]
[15]
[16] We recorded a higher rate of asymptomatic patients, compared with previous studies,[17]
[18] concluding that hysteroscopic investigation of polyps can identify cases of initial
EC, even in patients who still have no symptoms, such as vaginal bleeding.[1]
[19]
[20] Indeed, cancer that is associated with polyps appears to present at earlier stages,
compared with those that do not,[1] but this probably does not cause an impact on survival rates.[21]
The diagnosis of cancer as an unexpected finding occurred in 9.6% of the patients.
They had undergone a pathological examination of polyps, which suggested a benign
alteration (atypical hyperplasia), but the definitive pathological report described
adenocarcinoma. This finding has been corroborated by other studies.[7]
[8]
[22] This situation was less frequent than that reported in the GOG 167, in which the
prevalence of endometrial cancer after hysterectomy with atypical hyperplasia was
42.6%.[23] Notably, a systematic review confirmed that when the atypical hyperplasia is restricted
to polyps, < 10% of the final specimen would be expected to have cancer.[7]
At least 10 studies have evaluated definitive pathological reports of patients with
an endometrial tumor that involved polyps ([Table 4]). The criteria for patient selection varied significantly among studies, with some
having a hysteroscopic focus[1]
[24]
[25] and others evaluating oncological outcomes and detailing the staging and follow-up.[2]
[5]
[6]
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
Table 4
Previous studies with endometrioid uterine neoplasms associated with polyps
|
n
|
n (%) Restricted to polyps in hysteroscopy
|
Grade 1 or 2
|
Stage IA (n/%)
|
Absence of residual tumor in hysterectomy
|
|
Salm (1972)[29]
[*]
|
4
|
ND
|
4
|
ND
|
1 (25%)
|
|
Farrell et al. (2005)[2]
[*]
|
26
|
ND
|
25 (96.1%)
|
26 (100%) (selected just IA)
|
6 (23%)
|
|
Fernández-Parra et al. (2006)[25]
|
10
|
10
|
ND
|
8 (80%)
|
3 (30%)
|
|
Giordano et al. (2007)[26]
[*]
|
5
|
5 (100%)
|
5 (100%)
|
3 (60%)
|
0 (0%)
|
|
Vilos et al. (2007)[28]
|
10
|
10 (100%)
|
10
|
10 (100%)
|
2 (20%)
|
|
Mittal et al. (2008)[5]
[*]
|
18
|
11 (61%)
|
ND
|
16 (88.9%)
|
1 (5.6%)
|
|
Perri et al. (2010)[1]
[**]
|
125
|
ND
|
96 (76.8%)
|
96 (76.8%)
|
13 (10.4%)
|
|
Wethington et al. (2011)[24]
[**]
|
13
|
3 (23.1%)
|
ND
|
ND
|
ND
|
|
Gambadauro et al. (2014)[6]
[*]
|
12
|
ND
|
11 (91.6%)
|
8 (66.7%)
|
0 (0%)
|
|
Elyashiv et al. (2017)[27]
|
18
|
ND
|
ND
|
13 (72.2%)
|
4 (22.2%)
|
|
Present study
|
104
|
40 (38.5%)
|
86.5
|
96 (92.3%)
|
18 (17.3%)
|
Abbreviation: ND, not described.
* Other histological types were excluded from this table.
** Other histological types included in the analysis.
In our series, when the polyp was associated with cancer, the tumor in most cases
involved the polyp, (78 cases, 75%), but in 38.5%, it was restricted to the polyp
and in 36.5%, there was also endometrial involvement. With our findings, it was not
possible to establish whether the malignancy is more likely to affect the polyp tissue
or the adjacent endometrium. Conversely, our data suggest that the tumor randomly
affects the adjacent polyp or the endometrium. Similarly, Farrell et al.[2] reported the involvement of the adjacent endometrium in 61.5% (16/26) of cases and
6 cases had no residual disease in the final pathologic uterine specimen (23%).
Complete removal of the polyp when the tumor was restricted to the polyp was achieved
in 18/40 cases (45%), but only in 9 (50%) of them it resulted in a uterine specimen
without cancer. This finding suggests that hysteroscopy is not very accurate for distinguishing
neoplastic tissue and that the complete resection of the polyp does not always match
the definitive pathological result.[27]
It is possible that an early neoplasm, opportunistically diagnosed in asymptomatic
patients, allows for the tumor to be resected entirely by hysteroscopy. If the disease
develops, it is expected that tumors that are initiated in pre-existing polyps will
affect the base of the polyp and the endometrium. In this context, it would no longer
be possible to distinguish the neoplastic polyp from a polypoid neoplasm.[2]
It is more difficult for extra-polyp disease to be removed by hysteroscopy, but 6
(15.7%) of 38 patients in this group had a definitive uterine specimen without cancer.
Removal of all EC tissue by hysteroscopy was reported previously in some exceptional
situations.[28]
[30]
Almost all the series described tumors with stages > IA ([Table 4]), with the prevalence ranging between 0 and 30%, and some of them have also described
stages II-IIIA.[1]
[6]
[26] Although in the present study and in most of the previous series there was no lymph
node involvement, one previous study documented stages III and IV,[1] suggesting that lymph node evaluation could not be omitted. We excluded nonendometrioid
types from our analysis, due to the particularly aggressive behavior of the disease
in this group.[2]
The inherent nature of a retrospective study hindered a more precise hysteroscopic
characterization of the biopsy site, especially the location of the tumor in the polyp.
Conversely, several years would be necessary to recruit this sample in a prospective
study.
Because blind biopsies usually have a lower diagnostic accuracy,[31]
[32] a potential bias of our study is that, in certain cases, the biopsy was performed
after a diagnostic hysteroscopy with curettage, rather than with a working instrument.
Nevertheless, blind avulsion of the polyp using the appropriate materials and standardized
technique leads to an adequate pathological analysis.[33] In the case of curettage, the sample fragmentation makes it impossible to differentiate
whether the biopsy came from the polyp or the endometrium.[34]
Another concern is that certain patients with polypoid cancer were inadvertently included,
due to poor hysteroscopic descriptions when the exam was performed outside of the
referred services. In some hysteroscopies, only the appearance of the polyp, and not
that of the adjacent endometrium, was described.
The absence of pathological indicators of the low aggressiveness of tumors that are
restricted to polyps is our most important finding. The strength of our study is its
large sample size in comparison with other studies on polyps and cancer, and our data
confirm that even patients with endometrioid EC that is apparently restricted to the
polyp in hysteroscopy, regardless of histological grade, can experience deep myometrial
invasion.
Conclusion
In conclusion, there was no association between polyp location of the EC during hysteroscopy
and less residual disease or absence of deep myometrial invasion in the final uterine
specimen.
