Abstract
Esophageal adenocarcinomas are believed to follow the intestinal metaplasia–dysplasia–carcinoma pathway. The metaplastic glandular epithelium is lined by a layer of periglandular myofibroblastic cells which regulate many aspects of the epithelial cells like in the intestine (refer to the intestine section for more detailed discussion) [4]. Due to the presence of the periglandular myofibroblastic sheath, benign intestinal epithelial proliferations have a characteristic serrated appearance. Except for the rare serrated adenocarcinomas in the colon which possess other easily discernible characteristic features, genuine serration is rarely seen in gastrointestinal epithelial malignancies. This important feature can be very useful in the diagnosis of well-differentiated carcinomas where invasion is insidious and desmoplasia is not evident.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Zayour M, Lazova R. Pseudoepitheliomatous hyperplasia: a review. Am J Dermatopathol. 2011;33(2):112–22. Quiz 123–6.
El-Khoury J, Kibbi AG, Abbas O. Mucocutaneous pseudoepitheliomatous hyperplasia: a review. Am J Dermatopathol. 2012;34(2):165–75.
Clickman JN, Odze RD. Chapter 20. Epithelilal neoplasms of the esophagus. In: Odze RD, Goldblum JR, editors. Surgical pathology of the GI tract, liver, biliary tract, and pancreas: an expert consult title. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier; 2009. p. 535–62.
Ochicha O, Pringle JH, Mohammed AZ. Immuno-histochemical study of epithelialmyofibrblast interaction in Barrett metaplasia. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2010;53(2):262–6.
Li A et al. Immunohistochemical analysis of pericryptal fibroblast sheath and proliferating epithelial cells in human colorectal adenomas and carcinomas with adenoma components. Pathol Int. 1999;49(5):426–34.
Yao T, Tsuneyoshi M. Significance of pericryptal fibroblasts in colorectal epithelial tumors: a special reference to the histologic features and growth patterns. Hum Pathol. 1993;24(5):525–33.
Faragalla HF et al. Immunohistochemical staining for smoothelin in the duplicated versus the true muscularis mucosae of Barrett esophagus. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011;35(1):55–9.
Rubio CA, Riddell R. Musculo-fibrous anomaly in Barrett’s mucosa with dysplasia. Am J Surg Pathol. 1988;12(11):885–9.
Lewis JT, Wang KK, Abraham SC. Muscularis mucosae duplication and the musculo-fibrous anomaly in endoscopic mucosal resections for Barrett esophagus: implications for staging of adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2008;32(4):566–71.
Harada O et al. Esophageal gland duct adenoma: immunohistochemical comparison with the normal esophageal gland and ultrastractural analysis. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007;31(3):469–75.
Brown IS, Whiteman DC, Lauwers GY. Foveolar type dysplasia in Barrett esophagus. Mod Pathol. 2010;23(6):834–43.
Mahajan D et al. Grading of gastric foveolar-type dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus. Mod Pathol. 2010;23(1):1–11.
Mutoh H et al. Pericryptal fibroblast sheath in intestinal metaplasia and gastric carcinoma. Gut. 2005;54(1):33–9.
Tuner JR, Odze RD. Chapter 17. Polyps of the stomach. In: Odze RD, Goldblum JR, editors. Surgical pathology of the GI tract, liver, biliary tract, and pancreas: an expert consult title. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier; 2009. p. 415–46.
Kushima R et al. Gastric-type well-differentiated adenocarcinoma and pyloric gland adenoma of the stomach. Gastric Cancer. 2006;9(3):177–84.
Yao T et al. Extremely well-differentiated adenocarcinoma of the stomach: clinicopathological and immunohistochemical features. World J Gastroenterol. 2006;12(16):2510–6.
Lee WA. Gastric extremely well differentiated adenocarcinoma of gastric phenotype: as a gastric counterpart of adenoma malignum of the uterine cervix. World J Surg Oncol. 2005;3:28.
Yamamoto J et al. Extremely well differentiated adenocarcinoma of the stomach diagnosed preoperatively as esophageal achalasia: report of a case. Surg Today. 2005;35(6):488–92.
Singhi AD, Lazenby AJ, Montgomery EA. Gastric adenocarcinoma with chief cell differentiation: a proposal for reclassification as oxyntic gland polyp/adenoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2012;36(7):1030–5.
Park do Y et al. Adenomatous and foveolar gastric dysplasia: distinct patterns of mucin expression and background intestinal metaplasia. Am J Surg Pathol. 2008;32(4):524–33.
Lauwers GY, Riddell RH. Gastric epithelial dysplasia. Gut. 1999;45(5):784–90.
Odze RD et al. Gastritis cystica profunda versus invasive adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2012;36(2):316.
Chen ZM et al. Pyloric gland adenoma: an entity distinct from gastric foveolar type adenoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;33(2):186–93.
Makinen MJ. Colorectal serrated adenocarcinoma. Histopathology. 2007;50(1):131–50.
Parfitt JR, Driman DK. Survivin and hedgehog protein expression in serrated colorectal polyps: an immunohistochemical study. Hum Pathol. 2007;38(5):710–7.
Horkko TT, Makinen MJ. Colorectal proliferation and apoptosis in serrated versus conventional adenoma-carcinoma pathway: growth, progression and survival. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2003;38(12):1241–8.
Cunningham KS, Riddell RH. Serrated mucosal lesions of the colorectum. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2006;22(1):48–53.
Adegboyega PA et al. Immunohistochemical study of myofibroblasts in normal colonic mucosa, hyperplastic polyps, and adenomatous colorectal polyps. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2002;126(7):829–36.
Yeung TM et al. Regulation of self-renewal and differentiation by the intestinal stem cell niche. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2011;68(15):2513–23.
Shaker A, Rubin DC. Intestinal stem cells and epithelial-mesenchymal interactions in the crypt and stem cell niche. Transl Res. 2010;156(3):180–7.
Sappino AP et al. Colonic pericryptal fibroblasts. Differentiation pattern in embryogenesis and phenotypic modulation in epithelial proliferative lesions Virchows. Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol. 1989;415(6):551–7.
Kaye GI, Lane N, Pascal RR. Colonic pericryptal fibroblast sheath: replication, migration, and cytodifferentiation of a mesenchymal cell system in adult tissue. II. Fine structural aspects of normal rabbit and human colon. Gastroenterology. 1968;54(5):852–65.
Pai RK et al. Histologic and molecular analyses of colonic perineurial-like proliferations in serrated polyps: perineurial-like stromal proliferations are seen in sessile serrated adenomas. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011;35(9):1373–80.
Adegboyega PA et al. Subepithelial myofibroblasts express cyclooxygenase-2 in colorectal tubular adenomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10(17):5870–9.
Okayasu I et al. Mucosal remodeling in long-standing ulcerative colitis with colorectal neoplasia: significant alterations of NCAM + or alpha-SMA + subepithelial myofibroblasts and interstitial cells. Pathol Int. 2009;59(10):701–11.
Radovic S et al. Demonstration of perycriptal fibroblasts in inflammatory-regenerative and dysplastic epithelial lesions of the flat colonic mucosa. Adv Clin Path. 2001;5(4):139–45.
Higaki S et al. Immunohistological study to determine the presence of pericryptal myofibroblasts and basement membrane in colorectal epithelial tumors. J Gastroenterol. 1999;34(2):215–20.
Fu X et al. Retained cell-cell adhesion in serrated neoplastic pathway as opposed to conventional colorectal adenomas. J Histochem Cytochem. 2010;59(2):158–66.
Noffsinger AE. Serrated polyps and colorectal cancer: new pathway to malignancy. Annu Rev Pathol. 2009;4:343–64.
Okayasu I. Development of ulcerative colitis and its associated colorectal neoplasia as a model of the organ-specific chronic inflammation-carcinoma sequence. Pathol Int. 2012;62(6):368–80.
Redston M. Chapter 23. Epithelial neoplasms of the large intestine polyps. In: Odze RD, Goldblum JR, editors. Surgical pathology of the GI tract, liver, biliary tract, and pancreas: an expert consult title. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier; 2009. p. 481–534.
Kanel GC, Korula J. Atlas of liver pathology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier/Saunders; 2011.
Burt AD, Portmann BC, Ferrell LD. MacSween’s pathology of the liver. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone/Elsevier; 2007.
Hong H, Patonay B, Finley J. Unusual reticulin staining pattern in well-differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma. Diagn Pathol. 2011;6:15.
Ward SC, Waxman S. Fibrolamellar carcinoma: a review with focus on genetics and comparison to other malignant primary liver tumors. Semin Liver Dis. 2011;31(1):61–70.
Krings G et al. Immunohistochemical pitfalls and the importance of glypican 3 and arginase in the diagnosis of scirrhous hepatocellular carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 2013;26(6):782–91.
Okamura N et al. Cellular and stromal characteristics in the scirrhous hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison with hepatocellular carcinomas and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas. Pathol Int. 2005;55(11):724–31.
Seok JY et al. A fibrous stromal component in hepatocellular carcinoma reveals a cholangiocarcinoma-like gene expression trait and epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Hepatology. 2012;55(6):1776–86.
Ward SC et al. Fibrolamellar carcinoma of the liver exhibits immunohistochemical evidence of both hepatocyte and bile duct differentiation. Mod Pathol. 2010;23(9):1180–90.
Singhi AD et al. Reticulin loss in benign fatty liver: an important diagnostic pitfall when considering a diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2012;36(5):710–5.
Zhu AX et al. HCC and angiogenesis: possible targets and future directions. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2011;8(5):292–301.
Matsumoto K et al. Liver organogenesis promoted by endothelial cells prior to vascular function. Science. 2001;294(5542):559–63.
Yang ZF, Poon RT. Vascular changes in hepatocellular carcinoma. Anat Rec (Hoboken). 2008;291(6):721–34.
Goodman ZD, Terraciano L. In: Burt AD, Portmann BC, Ferrell LD, editors. MacSween’s pathology of the liver. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone/Elsevier; 2007. p. 761–814. Chapter 15: Tumors and tumor-like lesions of the liver.
Kanel GC, Korula J. Chapter 10. Neoplasms and related lesions. In: Atlas of liver pathology. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier; 2010. p. 249–320.
Jin SY, Choi IH. Early hepatocellular carcinoma. Korean J Hepatol. 2011;17(3):238–41.
Kondo F. Histological features of early hepatocellular carcinomas and their developmental process: for daily practical clinical application: hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatol Int. 2009;3(1):283–93.
Park YN. Update on precursor and early lesions of hepatocellular carcinomas. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2011;135(6):704–15.
Ibukuro K. Vascular anatomy of the pancreas and clinical applications. Int J Gastrointest Cancer. 2001;30(1–2):87–104.
Okahara M et al. Arterial supply to the pancreas; variations and cross-sectional anatomy. Abdom Imaging. 2010;35(2):134–42.
Hruban RH, Bishop PM, Klimstra DS. In: Silverberg SG, editor. Tumors of the pancreas, AFIP atlas of tumor pathology series 4. Washington, DC: ARP, AFIP; 2007.
Hruban RH, Pitman MB, Klimstra DS. Chapter 1. The normal pancreas. In: Tumors of the pancreas. Washington, DC: ARP press; 2007. p. 1–26.
Villasenor A, Cleaver O. Crosstalk between the developing pancreas and its blood vessels: an evolving dialog. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2012;23(6):685–92.
Magenheim J et al. Blood vessels restrain pancreas branching, differentiation and growth. Development. 2011;138(21):4743–52.
Cleaver O, Dor Y. Vascular instruction of pancreas development. Development. 2012;139(16):2833–43.
Pierreux CE et al. Epithelial: endothelial cross-talk regulates exocrine differentiation in developing pancreas. Dev Biol. 2010;347(1):216–27.
O’Morchoe CC. Lymphatic system of the pancreas. Microsc Res Tech. 1997;37(5–6):456–77.
Sah RP, Garg P, Saluja AK. Pathogenic mechanisms of acute pancreatitis. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2012;28(5):507–15.
Sah RP, Saluja A. Molecular mechanisms of pancreatic injury. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2011;27(5):444–51.
Chen JM, Ferec C. Genetics and pathogenesis of chronic pancreatitis: the 2012 update. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol. 2012;36(4):334–40.
Luo G et al. Stroma and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: an interaction loop. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2012;1826(1):170–8.
Pandol S et al. Desmoplasia of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;7(11 Suppl):S44–7.
Omary MB et al. The pancreatic stellate cell: a star on the rise in pancreatic diseases. J Clin Invest. 2007;117(1):50–9.
Apte MV, Pirola RC, Wilson JS. Pancreatic stellate cells: a starring role in normal and diseased pancreas. Front Physiol. 2012;3:344.
Olive KP et al. Inhibition of Hedgehog signaling enhances delivery of chemotherapy in a mouse model of pancreatic cancer. Science. 2009;324(5933):1457–61.
Olson P et al. Imaging guided trials of the angiogenesis inhibitor sunitinib in mouse models predict efficacy in pancreatic neuroendocrine but not ductal carcinoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108(49):E1275–84.
Le A et al. Conceptual framework for cutting the pancreatic cancer fuel supply. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18(16):4285–90.
Kang R, Tang D. Autophagy in pancreatic cancer pathogenesis and treatment. Am J Cancer Res. 2012;2(4):383–96.
Feig C et al. The pancreas cancer microenvironment. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18(16):4266–76.
Hruban RH, Pitman MB, Klimstra DS. Chapter 7. Ductal adenocarcinoma. In: Tumors of the pancreas. Washington, DC: ARP press; 2007. p. 111–218.
Wenig BM, Heffers CS. Chapter 34. Inflammtory, infectious and other non-neoplastic disorders of the pancreas. In: Odze RD, Goldblum JR, editors. Surgical pathology of the GI tract, liver, biliary tract, and pancreas: an expert consult title. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier; 2009.
Lowery MA et al. Acinar cell carcinoma of the pancreas: new genetic and treatment insights into a rare malignancy. Oncologist. 2011;16(12):1714–20.
Stelow EB et al. Pancreatic acinar cell carcinomas with prominent ductal differentiation: mixed acinar ductal carcinoma and mixed acinar endocrine ductal carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2010;34(4):510–8.
El-Bahrawy MA et al. E-cadherin/catenin complex status in solid pseudopapillary tumor of the pancreas. Am J Surg Pathol. 2008;32(1):1–7.
Serra S, Chetty R. Revision 2: an immunohistochemical approach and evaluation of solid pseudopapillary tumour of the pancreas. J Clin Pathol. 2008;61(11):1153–9.
Kloppel G. Classification and pathology of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2011;18 Suppl 1:S1–16.
Asa SL. Pancreatic endocrine tumors. Mod Pathol. 2011;24 Suppl 2:S66–77.
Hruban RH, Pitman MB, Klimstra DS. Chapter 12. Endocrine neoplasms. In: Tumors of the pancreas. Washington, DC: ARP press; 2007. p. 251–304.
Ando H. Embryology of the biliary tract. Dig Surg. 2010;27(2):87–9.
Strazzabosco M, Fabris L. Development of the bile ducts: essentials for the clinical hepatologist. J Hepatol. 2012;56(5):1159–70.
Dai J et al. Impact of bile acids on the growth of human cholangiocarcinoma via FXR. J Hematol Oncol. 2011;4:41.
Xia X et al. Bile acid interactions with cholangiocytes. World J Gastroenterol. 2006;12(22):3553–63.
Perez MJ, Briz O. Bile-acid-induced cell injury and protection. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15(14):1677–89.
Bernstein H et al. Bile acids as endogenous etiologic agents in gastrointestinal cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15(27):3329–40.
Sirica AE, Campbell DJ, Dumur CI. Cancer-associated fibroblasts in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2011;27(3):276–84.
Leyva-Illades D et al. Cholangiocarcinoma pathogenesis: role of the tumor microenvironment. Transl Gastrointest Cancer. 2012;1(1):71–80.
Adsay VN, Klimstra DS. Benign and malignant tumors of the gallbladder and extrahepatic biliary tract. In: Odze RD, Goldblum JR, editors. Surgical pathology of the GI tract, liver, biliary tract, and pancreas: an expert consult title. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier; 2009. p. 845–76.
Nakanuma Y et al. Pathological spectrum of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma arising in non-biliary chronic advanced liver diseases. Pathol Int. 2011;61(5):298–305.
Nakanuma Y et al. Pathological classification of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma based on a new concept. World J Hepatol. 2010;2(12):419–27.
Sempoux C et al. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: new insights in pathology. Semin Liver Dis. 2011;31(1):49–60.
Nakanuma Y et al. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with predominant “ductal plate malformation” pattern: a new subtype. Am J Surg Pathol. 2012;36(11):1629–35.
Yeh MM. Pathology of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;25(9):1485–92.
Panarelli NC, Yantiss RK. Mucinous neoplasms of the appendix and peritoneum. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2011;135(10):1261–8.
Carr NJ, Emory TS, Sobin LH. Chaper 24. Epithelial neoplasm of the appendix. In: Odze RD, Goldblum JR, editors. Surgical pathology of the GI tract, liver, biliary tract, and pancreas: an expert consult title. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier; 2009. p. 639–52.
Lisovsky M et al. Immunophenotypic characterization of anal gland carcinoma: loss of p63 and cytokeratin 5/6. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007;131(8):1304–11.
Longacre TA, Kong CS, Welton ML. Diagnostic problems in anal pathology. Adv Anat Pathol. 2008;15(5):263–78.
Shia J. An update on tumors of the anal canal. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;134(11):1601–11.
Tanaka E et al. Morphology of the epithelium of the lower rectum and the anal canal in the adult human. Med Mol Morphol. 2012;45(2):72–9.
Kondo R et al. Mucoepidermoid carcinoma of the anal canal: an immunohistochemical study. J Gastroenterol. 2001;36(7):508–14.
Zhao X, Yue C. Gastrointestinal stromal tumor. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2012;3(3):189–208.
Chapter 16. Gastrointestinal stromal tumor. In: Edge SB, et al, editors. AJCC cancer staging handbook. 7th ed. Chicago: Springer; 2010. p. 219–226.
Abraham SC. Distinguishing gastrointestinal stromal tumors from their mimics: an update. Adv Anat Pathol. 2007;14(3):178–88.
Kirsch R, Gao ZH, Riddell R. Gastrointestinal stromal tumors: diagnostic challenges and practical approach to differential diagnosis. Adv Anat Pathol. 2007;14(4):261–85.
Swarts DR, Ramaekers FC, Speel EJ. Molecular and cellular biology of neuroendocrine lung tumors: evidence for separate biological entities. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2012;1826(2):255–71.
Rekhtman N. Neuroendocrine tumors of the lung: an update. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134(11):1628–38.
Graeme-Cook F. Chapter 25. Neuroendocrine tumors of the GI tract and appendix. In: Odze RD, Goldblum JR, editors. Surgical pathology of the GI tract, liver, biliary tract, and pancreas: an expert consult title. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier; 2009. p. 653–93.
American Joint Committee on Cancer. Chapter 17. Neuroendocrine tumors. In: Edge SB, editor. AJCC cancer staging handbook. 7th ed. Chicago: Springer; 2010. p. 227–36.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendix
Key Morphological Features of Low-Grade Appendiceal Mucinous Neoplasm (Well-Differentiated Appendiceal Mucinous Adenocarcinoma)
-
Circumferential mucosal replacement by mucin-containing cells
-
Undulating or flat growth with a broad pushing border (Fig. 7.24)
Discussion
Appendiceal adenocarcinomas are uncommon, and in most cases, they resemble their colonic counterparts in histopathological presentation. Here we discuss a unique entity: low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm (well-differentiated mucinous adenocarcinoma).
Low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms are characterized as a circumferential growth with an undulating or flat surface. The growth enlarges, deforms, or even destroys the appendix [103, 104]. The tumor cells are usually tall, thin with basal nuclei and thin mucin vacuoles. In general, they show a broad pushing border with no overt invasion of the mucosa. However, occasional diverticulum-like protrusions into the deep tissue are present. Denudation of the epithelium is also common. The appendiceal wall is usually fibrotic and lacks lymphoid tissue.
Differential Diagnosis
Simple Mucocele
Simple mucoceles are small cystic spaces lined by atrophic epithelium with associated inflammation. They lack the circumferential involvement pattern.
Adenoma with Mucocele
Adenomas with mucocele formation lack circumferential undulating or flattening of the luminal epithelium characteristic of low-grade appendiceal neoplasms. The cells have typical adenomatous features.
Anus
Key Morphological Features of Well-Differentiated Anal Gland Adenocarcinoma
-
Small glands infiltrating the wall
-
Lack of a myoepithelial cell layer (Fig. 7.25)
Discussion
Most adenocarcinomas of the anal canal are secondary involvement by a primary rectal adenocarcinoma. Primary anal gland adenocarcinomas are characterized by small infiltrative glands without an intraluminal component and surface mucosal dysplasia [105–107]. Instead, the tumors are centered within the anorectal wall. The infiltrative pattern is not to be confused with normal distribution of anal glands in the internal and even external sphincter muscles [108]. In this aspect, immunostaining for p63 might be very useful in making the distinction since malignant glands lack a myoepithelial layer which is present around benign anal glands. Immunostainings for CK7 and CK20 are useful in differentiating them from rectal adenocarcinomas. Primary anal canal adenocarcinomas are positive for CK7 and negative for CK20 [105] (1).
Differential Diagnosis
Tailgut Cyst
Tailgut cysts are well circumscribed, multicystic with the cyst lining cells being mainly stratified squamous epithelium and occasional cuboidal or columnar cells. Disorganized smooth muscle fibers in the cyst wall can be seen.
Anal Duct or Gland Cyst
Anal duct or gland cysts can present in all three anatomical zones of the anus. Characteristically, they form intraepithelial microcysts and contain goblet cell metaplasia. The benign gland might penetrate the internal sphincter muscle or even the external sphincter muscle fibers. Presence of myoepithelial cells distinguishes them from anal gland adenocarcinomas.
Hidradenoma Papilliferum of the Perianal Skin
Hidradenomas papilliferum of the perianal skin is believed to derive from perianal sweat gland and contains well-circumscribed complex papillary structures composed of two layers of epithelial cells. The outer layer cells are myoepithelial in nature.
Squamous Cell Carcinoma with Prominent Mucinous Features (Mucoepidermoid Carcinoma)
Squamous cell carcinomas with prominent mucinous features contain a squamous cell component in addition to mucinous microcysts. It seems that the squamous component is biologically closer to adenocarcinoma than to anal squamous cell carcinomas [109].
Key Morphological Features of Well-Differentiated Anal Squamous Cell Carcinoma
-
Dyskeratotic squamous proliferation with infiltrative or pushing border
-
Or Complex papillary structure (Fig. 7.26)
Discussion
Squamous cell carcinomas of the anus are etiologically similar to their cervical counterparts. The diagnostic criteria for esophagus apply to both of them (see esophagus section for more discussion). Two locally invasive variants are to be recognized. The giant condyloma acuminatum of Buschke–Lowenstein normally are large (>10 cm in diameter) complex papillary structures with focal invasion identified in only 50 % of reported case series. Verrucous carcinomas have characteristic pushing border front and crater-like keratinization.
Differential Diagnosis
Condyloma
Condylomas are usually less bulky and have shorter papillae and less epithelial atypia than giant condyloma acuminatum. They also lack locally destructive growth pattern of the latter.
Bowenoid Papulosis
Bowenoid papulosis occurs mainly in young adults and is characterized by its circumscription and low-grade epithelial atypia with surface maturation. It lacks complex structures and dermal involvement.
Bowenoid papulosis should not be confused with Bowen’s disease which is a variant of squamous cell carcinoma in situ in an older population. The latter shows greater cytological atypia with surface maturation disturbance and occasional involvement of adnexal structures.
Squamous Dysplasia Involving Anal Ducts
Squamous dysplasia involving anal ducts manifests a smooth rather than ragged contour. Comparison to adjacent uninvolved ductal structures helps with the appreciation of the smooth outlines of the involved. The nuclear features are the same as those of the dysplastic surface epithelium.
Gastrointestinal Tract Stroma
Key Morphological Features of High-Risk Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor (GIST)
-
Spindle and/or epithelial proliferation in the submucosa
-
Mitotic activity > 5/50HPF (Fig. 7.27)
Discussion
The older scheme for separating GISTs into benign and malignant categories has been replaced by a stratification system in which the risk of aggressive clinical behavior is predicted based on data from large-scale studies [110, 111]. In the stratification system, hemorrhage, necrosis, and nuclear pleomorphism, tumor size and even infiltrative growth pattern have been excluded. The 2010 AJCC classification uses mitotic rate as the only criterion in separating GISTs into low (grade 1) and high (grade 2) categories. In acknowledgment of the effect of anatomical location on tumor behavior, it recommends different staging criteria for gastric and small intestinal GISTS. The staging criteria for the former also apply to omental GISTs and those for the latter to esophageal, colorectal, mesenteric, and peritoneal GISTs.
Morphologically, most GISTS have a spindle cell pattern with epithelioid, mixed cell patterns accounting for the rest [112, 113]. Typically, the spindle cells are in short fascicles or whorls and contain eosinophilic fibrillary cytoplasm and indistinct cell borders. Epithelioid cells in GISTs are characterized by round cells with eosinophilic to clear cytoplasm arranged in nests or sheets. Cytological atypia is more frequently present than in spindle cells. Counterintuitively, scattered bizarre epithelioid cells are more commonly seen in low-grade gastric GISTs than in high-grade ones. As there are many other entities with spindle and epithelioid morphology in the gastrointestinal tract, the importance of microscopic examination of GISTs lies mainly in differentiating them from other spindle and epithelioid tumors and choosing appropriate fields for mitotic counting [112, 113].
As the database on GISTS expands, future studies might bring into the picture additional stratifying criteria, such as tumor rupture and status of surgical margins. Furthermore, high-grade small bowel GISTs are composed of long fascicles of spindles cells and contain less stromal skeinoid fibers than their benign counterparts. A tightly packed epithelioid appearance has been associated with an adverse clinical outcome in gastric GISTS. The current recommendation is that the presence of such morphological features should prompt at least a more meticulous evaluation of mitotic activity [110].
Differential Diagnosis
For Spindle Cell GISTs
Reactive Nodular Fibrous Pseudotumor and Pseudosarcomatous Proliferation
Reactive nodular fibrous pseudotumors occur mainly in the outer layer of the gut in patients with a previous history of abdominal surgery or trauma. Transmural extension, however, is possible. The hypocellular bland spindle and stellar cells are arranged haphazardly or in short fascicles.
Pseudosarcomatous proliferation contains granulation tissue with associated ulceration or polyps. The stromal cells, endothelial cells, and adjacent epithelial cells usually show marked cytological atypia. Overall low cellularity and a prominent inflammatory infiltrate are noticeable.
Leiomyoma
Leiomyomas have characteristic intersecting fascicles composed of cells with abundant eosinophilic cytoplasm, blunt end nuclei, and distinctive cell borders. Relative to GISTs, they have less cellularity. The tumor cells are diffusely negative for CD117 and CD34.
Schwannoma
Gastrointestinal schwannomas occur most frequently in the stomach, and they typically lack or contain inconspicuous trademark components of the tumor: Verocay bodies, nuclear palisading, xanthoma cell, and hyalinized vessels. Instead, they acquire an important feature: presence of a rim of lymphoid tissue with follicular center formation. The spindle cells have elongated, tapering, and often buckled nuclei and are arranged in trabeculae or even sheets. To further confound the matter, gastric and anorectal GISTs are commonly associated with fascicles of spindle cells with prominent nuclear palisading.
Thus accurate distinction between the two entities depends heavily on immunostainings. The tumor cells of the former stain are strongly positive for S100 (both nuclei and cytoplasm) and negative for CD117 and CD34.
Inflammatory Myofibroblastic Tumor
Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumors occur predominantly in the mesentery and omentum of children and young adults. The compact spindle cell variant resembles GISTs. However, the tumors contain a prominent component of inflammatory cells with significant numbers of plasma cells. Tumor cells are positive for ALK-1 and negative for CD117.
Inflammatory Fibroid Polyp
Inflammatory fibroid polyps contain loosely collagenous- or granulation-type stroma, with CD34 + fibroblasts distributed in a patternless pattern. Characteristic onion-skin cuffs of perivascular spindle cells and inflammatory infiltration (eosinophils as the prominent component) set them apart from GISTs. The tumor cells are positive for PDGFR and negative for CD117.
Desmoid Fibromatosis
Desmoid fibromatosis is a predominantly mesenteric tumor with possible infiltration of the gut wall. It is characterized by long sweeping fascicles of spindle cells and collagenous matrix (sometimes keloid-like collagen fibers). It lacks high cellularity, nuclear palisading, skeinoid fibers, and epithelioid cell components. Other characteristic features of the tumor include small muscular arteries and thin-walled and often ectatic veins with scant perivascular lymphocytes and scattered mast cells. The tumor cells commonly express beta-catenin and infrequently CD117.
Solitary Fibrous Tumor
Solitary fibrous tumors are located mainly in the peritoneum and retroperitoneum with possible serosal involvement. Characteristic features include a patternless pattern of the spindle cells, alternating hypercellularity and hypocellularity, ropy keloid collagen fibers, and hemangio-pericytoma-like vasculature. The tumor cells are CD34 positive and CD117 negative.
Spindle Tumors with Malignant Cytology
The differential diagnosis of spindle GISTs includes melanoma, sarcomatoid carcinoma, leiomyosarcoma, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor, clear cell sarcoma, and other rare entities. A detailed discussion of them is out of the scope of this book. Several excellent review papers are available for reference.
For Epithelioid GISTs
Neuroendocrine Tumor
Low-grade neuroendocrine tumors might exhibit both spindle and epithelioid cell patterns. Their characteristic chromatin and growth patterns usually point to the right diagnosis.
PEComa and Glomus Tumor
PEComas are characterized by a perivascular epithelioid cell proliferation which forms sheets or nests. Occasional CD117-positive cases have been reported. Therefore, in difficult cases myomelanocytic markers (HMB-45 or Melan A) should be included.
Glomus tumor cells have a uniform round shape distinctive cell borders and are closely associated with ectatic vessels. They are positive for SMA and negative for CD117.
Paraganglioma
Paragangliomas predominantly involve the duodenum and consist of three types of cells: spindle, epithelioid, and ganglion-like cells. The first two form the so-called Zellballen structure. Interestingly, the spindle cells are S100 positive and the ganglion-like cells stain for synaptophysin. All three of them are positive for NSE.
Epithelioid Tumors with Malignant Cytology
The differential diagnosis of epithelioid GISTs includes melanoma, poorly differentiated carcinoma and neuroendocrine tumors, epithelioid leiomyosarcoma, and other rare entities. A detailed discussion of them is out of the scope of this book. Several excellent review papers are available for reference.
Caution: Variable expression of CD117 has been reported in melanoma, angiosarcomas, and PEComas.
The Gastrointestinal Neuroendocrine Tissue
Key Features of Well-Differentiated Gastrointestinal Neuroendocrine Carcinoma (Net GII)
-
Ki67 index of 3 to 20 % or mitotic counter 2 to 20/10 HPF (Fig. 7.28)
Discussion
The 2010 WHO classification replaces the term well-differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma with neuroendocrine tumor grade 2 (NET GII) [86]. It uses mitotic count as the sole index in the three-tier tumor grading system for the gastrointestinal tract. This is in contrast to the four-tier system for the pulmonary system in which tumor grading is based on both mitotic count and necrosis. Importantly, cytological atypia is left out in both systems. Analogous to pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors, the gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors are a heterogeneous population of tumors which most likely can also be divided into two molecular and biological distinct categories with carcinoid (NET G1) and atypical carcinoid (NET G2) tumors manifesting similar genetic changes [114–116]. The two categories have remarkable differences in histopathologic and cytological features which allow their easy separation.
Information on tumor size, location, depth of tissue involvement, and even nodal metastasis has been incorporated into the staging scheme. In acknowledgement of their functional diversity and nonrandom distribution of the various cell types in the gastrointestinal system, a slightly different staging system has been adopted for the foregut, midgut, and hindgut, respectively [117].
Differential Diagnosis
Adenocarcinoma
NET G1 and G2 tumors have their characteristic trabecular, nest-like, or glandular patterns composed of bland-looking cells with uniform central nuclei with salt and pepper chromatin pattern. Therefore, a diagnosis is usually straightforward for typical cases.
Duodenal NET G1 and G2 tumors can have a prominent tumor acinar or glandular pattern with frequent intraluminal psammoma bodies [116]. Cursory low power examination can lead to an erroneous diagnosis of well-differentiated adenocarcinoma.
Appendiceal duodenal NET G1 and G2 tumors can show goblet cell and Paneth cell differentiation and focal glandular formation. The so-called tubular type simulates invasive adenocarcinoma even more in that it presents as teardrop-like tubules in a loosely fibrotic stroma [116]. The tumor cells are negative for chromogranin A (rectal neuroendocrine tumors are negative for chromogranin A).
Glomus Tumor
Glomus tumors are composed of uniform small round cells with lumpy chromatin pattern, and their close association with ectatic vessels is evident. The tumor cells are positive for SMA and negative for chromogranin and synaptophysin.
Lymphoma, Melanoma, and Poorly Differentiated Tumors
Lymphomas, melanomas, or poorly differentiated tumors can present in a nest pattern. However, attention to their cytological and other histological features avoids an erroneous diagnosis. In difficult cases, immunostainings are required.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sun, X. (2015). Gastrointestinal System, Pancreatobiliary Tract and Liver. In: Well-Differentiated Malignancies. Current Clinical Pathology. Humana Press, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1692-4_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1692-4_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana Press, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-1691-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-1692-4
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)