Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Endocervical Adenocarcinoma In Situ/Cervical Glandular Intraepithelial Neoplasia and Adenocarcinoma of the Usual Type

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Pathology of the Cervix

Part of the book series: Essentials of Diagnostic Gynecological Pathology ((EDGP,volume 3))

  • 1321 Accesses

Abstract

Glandular carcinomas of the cervix and their precursor lesions comprise a minority of all cervical cancers; however, their relative prevalence and possibly absolute prevalence are increasing. Better sampling methods and recognition of the cytological features of early neoplasia make early detection feasible. Of all the variant types of glandular cervical neoplasia, the usual type of adenocarcinoma and its in situ precursor comprise the vast majority of cases. This chapter details the demographics and pathobiology of cancers and precursor lesions of the endocervix, the histopathological and cytopathological features, and presents a discussion of the morphological mimics of the usual type of endocervical adenocarcinoma, both in situ and invasive, including the differential diagnosis of atypical glandular cells in cytological preparations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Vizcaino AP, Moreno V, Bosch FX, Munoz N, Barros-Dios XM, Parkin DM. International trends in the incidence of cervical cancer: I. Adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous cell carcinomas. Int J Cancer. 1998;75(4):536–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bulk S, Visser O, Rozendaal L, Verheijen RH, Meijer CJ. Cervical cancer in the Netherlands 1989–1998: decrease of squamous cell carcinoma in older women, increase of adenocarcinoma in younger women. Int J Cancer. 2005;113(6):1005–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Smith HO, Tiffany MF, Qualls CR, Key CR. The rising incidence of adenocarcinoma relative to squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix in the United States – a 24-year population-based study. Gynecol Oncol. 2000;78(2):97–105.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wang SS, Sherman ME, Hildesheim A, Lacey Jr JV, Devesa S. Cervical adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma incidence trends among white women and black women in the United States for 1976–2000. Cancer. 2004;100(5):1035–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ward KK, Shah NR, Saenz CC, McHale MT, Alvarez EA, Plaxe SC. Changing demographics of cervical cancer in the United States (1973–2008). Gynecol Oncol. 2012;126(3):330–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bray F, Carstensen B, Moller H, Zappa M, Zakelj MP, Lawrence G, et al. Incidence trends of adenocarcinoma of the cervix in 13 European countries. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14(9):2191–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pirog EC, Kleter B, Olgac S, Bobkiewicz P, Lindeman J, Quint WG, et al. Prevalence of human papillomavirus DNA in different histological subtypes of cervical adenocarcinoma. Am J Pathol. 2000;157(4):1055–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Castellsague X, Diaz M, de Sanjose S, Munoz N, Herrero R, Franceschi S, et al. Worldwide human papillomavirus etiology of cervical adenocarcinoma and its cofactors: implications for screening and prevention. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98(5):303–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lacey Jr JV, Brinton LA, Abbas FM, Barnes WA, Gravitt PE, Greenberg MD, et al. Oral contraceptives as risk factors for cervical adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1999;8(12):1079–85.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lacey Jr JV, Brinton LA, Barnes WA, Gravitt PE, Greenberg MD, Hadjimichael OC, et al. Use of hormone replacement therapy and adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas of the uterine cervix. Gynecol Oncol. 2000;77(1):149–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Appleby P, Beral V, Berrington de Gonzalez A, Colin D, Franceschi S, Goodill A, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix and tobacco smoking: collaborative reanalysis of individual data on 13,541 women with carcinoma of the cervix and 23,017 women without carcinoma of the cervix from 23 epidemiological studies. Int J Cancer. 2006;118(6):1481–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Munoz N, Franceschi S, Bosetti C, Moreno V, Herrero R, Smith JS, et al. Role of parity and human papillomavirus in cervical cancer: the IARC multicentric case-control study. Lancet. 2002;359(9312):1093–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lacey Jr JV, Frisch M, Brinton LA, Abbas FM, Barnes WA, Gravitt PE, et al. Associations between smoking and adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas of the uterine cervix (United States). Cancer Causes Control. 2001;12(2):153–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. An HJ, Kim KR, Kim IS, Kim DW, Park MH, Park IA, et al. Prevalence of human papillomavirus DNA in various histological subtypes of cervical adenocarcinoma: a population-based study. Mod Pathol. 2005;18(4):528–34.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Clifford G, Franceschi S. Members of the human papillomavirus type 18 family (alpha-7 species) share a common association with adenocarcinoma of the cervix. Int J Cancer. 2008;122(7):1684–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tornesello ML, Losito S, Benincasa G, Fulciniti F, Botti G, Greggi S, et al. Human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes and HPV16 variants and risk of adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol. 2011;121(1):32–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Li N, Franceschi S, Howell-Jones R, Snijders PJ, Clifford GM. Human papillomavirus type distribution in 30,848 invasive cervical cancers worldwide: Variation by geographical region, histological type and year of publication. Int J Cancer. 2011;128(4):927–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. de Sanjose S, Quint WG, Alemany L, Geraets DT, Klaustermeier JE, Lloveras B, et al. Human papillomavirus genotype attribution in invasive cervical cancer: a retrospective cross-sectional worldwide study. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(11):1048–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kurman RJ, Carcangiu M-L, Herrington CS, Young RH. WHO classification of tumours of female reproductive organs. Lyon: IARC; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Friedell GH, Mc KD. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the endocervix. Cancer. 1953;6(5):887–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Krumins I, Young Q, Pacey F, Bousfield L, Mulhearn L. The cytologic diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix uteri. Acta Cytol. 1977;21(2):320–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bousfield L, Pacey F, Young Q, Krumins I, Osborn R. Expanded cytologic criteria for the diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix and related lesions. Acta Cytol. 1980;24(4):283–96.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ayer B, Pacey F, Greenberg M, Bousfield L. The cytologic diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix uteri and related lesions I. Adenocarcinoma in situ. Acta Cytol. 1987;31(4):397–411.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Qizilbash AH. In-situ and microinvasive adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix. A clinical, cytologic and histologic study of 14 cases. Am J Clin Pathol. 1975;64(2):155–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Boon ME, Baak JP, Kurver PJ, Overdiep SH, Verdonk GW. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix: an underdiagnosed lesion. Cancer. 1981;48(3):768–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Costales AB, Milbourne AM, Rhodes HE, Munsell MF, Wallbillich JJ, Brown J, et al. Risk of residual disease and invasive carcinoma in women treated for adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;129(3):513–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Zielinski GD, Snijders PJ, Rozendaal L, Daalmeijer NF, Risse EK, Voorhorst FJ, et al. The presence of high-risk HPV combined with specific p53 and p16INK4a expression patterns points to high-risk HPV as the main causative agent for adenocarcinoma in situ and adenocarcinoma of the cervix. J Pathol. 2003;201(4):535–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Quint KD, de Koning MN, Geraets DT, Quint WG, Pirog EC. Comprehensive analysis of Human Papillomavirus and Chlamydia trachomatis in in-situ and invasive cervical adenocarcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;114(3):390–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hurt WG, Silverberg SG, Frable WJ, Belgrad R, Crooks LD. Adenocarcinoma of the cervix: histopathologic and clinical features. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1977;129(3):304–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Shingleton HM, Gore H, Bradley DH, Soong SJ. Adenocarcinoma of the cervix. I. Clinical evaluation and pathologic features. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1981;139(7):799–814.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Saigo PE, Cain JM, Kim WS, Gaynor JJ, Johnson K, Lewis Jr JL. Prognostic factors in adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix. Cancer. 1986;57(8):1584–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Tobon H, Dave H. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix. Clinicopathologic observations of 11 cases. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1988;7(2):139–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mulvany N, Ostor A. Microinvasive adenocarcinoma of the cervix: a cytohistopathologic study of 40 cases. Diagn Cytopathol. 1997;16(5):430–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Massad LS, Einstein MH, Huh WK, Katki HA, Kinney WK, Schiffman M, et al. 2012 updated consensus guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2013;17(5 Suppl 1):S1–S27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. McCluggage WG. New developments in endocervical glandular lesions. Histopathology. 2013;62(1):138–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Young RH, Clement PB. Endocervical adenocarcinoma and its variants: their morphology and differential diagnosis. Histopathology. 2002;41(3):185–207.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Wilbur DC. Practical issues related to uterine pathology: in situ and invasive cervical glandular lesions and their benign mimics: emphasis on cytology-histology correlation and interpretive pitfalls. Mod Pathol. 2016;29(Suppl 1):S1–S11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Nayar R, Wilbur DC. The Bethesda system for reporting cervical cytology: definitions, criteria and explanatory notes. 3rd ed. New York: Springer; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Tambouret RT, Wilbur DC. In: Rosenthal DL, editor. Glandular lesions of the uterine cervix. Cytopathology with Histologic Correlates. New York: Springer; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Mikami Y, McCluggage WG. Endocervical glandular lesions exhibiting gastric differentiation: an emerging spectrum of benign, premalignant, and malignant lesions. Adv Anat Pathol. 2013;20(4):227–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Kastritis E, Bamias A, Efstathiou E, Gika D, Bozas G, Zorzou P, et al. The outcome of advanced or recurrent non-squamous carcinoma of the uterine cervix after platinum-based combination chemotherapy. Gynecol Oncol. 2005;99(2):376–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Lee KB, Lee JM, Park CY, Cho HY, Ha SY. What is the difference between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the cervix? A matched case-control study. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006;16(4):1569–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Katanyoo K, Sanguanrungsirikul S, Manusirivithaya S. Comparison of treatment outcomes between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma in locally advanced cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;125(2):292–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Macdonald OK, Chen J, Dodson M, Lee CM, Gaffney DK. Prognostic significance of histology and positive lymph node involvement following radical hysterectomy in carcinoma of the cervix. Am J Clin Oncol. 2009;32(4):411–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Davy ML, Dodd TJ, Luke CG, Roder DM. Cervical cancer: effect of glandular cell type on prognosis, treatment, and survival. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;101(1):38–45.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Shimada M, Kigawa J, Nishimura R, Yamaguchi S, Kuzuya K, Nakanishi T, et al. Ovarian metastasis in carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Gynecol Oncol. 2006;101(2):234–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Eifel PJ, Morris M, Oswald MJ, Wharton JT, Delclos L. Adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix. Prognosis and patterns of failure in 367 cases. Cancer. 1990;65(11):2507–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Li C, Rock KL, Woda BA, Jiang Z, Fraire AE, Dresser K. IMP3 is a novel biomarker for adenocarcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix: an immunohistochemical study in comparison with p16(INK4a) expression. Mod Pathol. 2007;20(2):242–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Han CP, Lee MY, Tyan YS, Kok LF, Yao CC, Wang PH, et al. p16 INK4 and CEA can be mutually exchanged with confidence between both relevant three-marker panels (ER/Vim/CEA and ER/Vim/p16 INK4) in distinguishing primary endometrial adenocarcinomas from endocervical adenocarcinomas in a tissue microarray study. Virchows Arch. 2009;455(4):353–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Jonasson JG, Wang HH, Antonioli DA, Ducatman BS. Tubal metaplasia of the uterine cervix: a prevalence study in patients with gynecologic pathologic findings. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1992;11(2):89–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Babkowski RC, Wilbur DC, Rutkowski MA, Facik MS, Bonfiglio TA. The effects of endocervical canal topography, tubal metaplasia, and high canal sampling on the cytologic presentation of nonneoplastic endocervical cells. Am J Clin Pathol. 1996;105(4):403–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Ismail SM. Cone biopsy causes cervical endometriosis and tubo-endometrioid metaplasia. Histopathology. 1991;18(2):107–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Oliva E, Clement PB, Young RH. Tubal and tubo-endometrioid metaplasia of the uterine cervix. Unemphasized features that may cause problems in differential diagnosis: a report of 25 cases. Am J Clin Pathol. 1995;103(5):618–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Jones MA, Young RH. Atypical oxyphilic metaplasia of the endocervical epithelium: a report of six cases. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1997;16(2):99–102.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Baker PM, Clement PB, Bell DA, Young RH. Superficial endometriosis of the uterine cervix: a report of 20 cases of a process that may be confused with endocervical glandular dysplasia or adenocarcinoma in situ. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1999;18(3):198–205.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. 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(4):313–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Clement PB, Young RH, Scully RE. Stromal endometriosis of the uterine cervix. A variant of endometriosis that may simulate a sarcoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 1990;14(5):449–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Young RH, Clement PB. Endocervicosis involving the uterine cervix: a report of four cases of a benign process that may be confused with deeply invasive endocervical adenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2000;19(4):322–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Clement PB, Young RH. Florid cystic endosalpingiosis with tumor-like manifestations: a report of four cases including the first reported cases of transmural endosalpingiosis of the uterus. Am J Surg Pathol. 1999;23(2):166–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Fluhmann CF. Focal hyperplasis (tunnel clusters) of the cervix uteri. Obstet Gynecol. 1961;17:206–14.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Segal GH, Hart WR. Cystic endocervical tunnel clusters. A clinicopathologic study of 29 cases of so-called adenomatous hyperplasia. Am J Surg Pathol. 1990;14(10):895–903.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Gilks CB, Young RH, Aguirre P, DeLellis RA, Scully RE. Adenoma malignum (minimal deviation adenocarcinoma) of the uterine cervix. A clinicopathological and immunohistochemical analysis of 26 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 1989;13(9):717–29.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Taylor HB, Irey NS, Norris HJ. Atypical endocervical hyperplasia in women taking oral contraceptives. JAMA. 1967;202(7):637–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Kyriakos M, Kempson RL, Konikov NF. A clinical and pathologic study of endocervical lesions associated with oral contraceptives. Cancer. 1968;22(1):99–110.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Candy J, Abell MR. Progesten-induced adenomatous hyperplasia of the uterine cervix. JAMA. 1968;203(5):85–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Govan AD, Black WP, Sharp JL. Aberrant glandular polypi of the uterine cervix associated with contraceptive pills: pathology and pathogenesis. J Clin Pathol. 1969;22(1):84–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Chumas JC, Nelson B, Mann WJ, Chalas E, Kaplan CG. Microglandular hyperplasia of the uterine cervix. Obstet Gynecol. 1985;66(3):406–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Wilkinson E, Dufour DR. Pathogenesis of microglandular hyperplasia of the cervix uteri. Obstet Gynecol. 1976;47(2):189–95.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Jones MA, Young RH, Scully RE. Diffuse laminar endocervical glandular hyperplasia. A benign lesion often confused with adenoma malignum (minimal deviation adenocarcinoma). Am J Surg Pathol. 1991;15(12):1123–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Nucci MR, Clement PB, Young RH. Lobular endocervical glandular hyperplasia, not otherwise specified: 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(8):886–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Nucci MR, Young RH. Arias-Stella reaction of the endocervix: a report of 18 cases with emphasis on its varied histology and differential diagnosis. Am J Surg Pathol. 2004;28(5):608–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Laverty CR, Farnsworth A, Thurloe J, Bowditch R. The reliability of a cytological prediction of cervical adenocarcinoma in situ. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1988;28(4):307–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Lee KR, Minter LJ, Granter SR. Papanicolaou smear sensitivity for adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix. A study of 34 cases. Am J Clin Pathol. 1997;107(1):30–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Ashfaq R, Gibbons D, Vela C, Saboorian MH, Iliya F. ThinPrep Pap Test. Accuracy for glandular disease. Acta Cytol. 1999;43(1):81–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Ramsaroop R, Chu I. Accuracy of diagnosis of atypical glandular cells – Conventional and ThinPrep. Diagn Cytopathol. 2006;34(9):614–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. DeSimone CP, Day ME, Tovar MM, Dietrich 3rd CS, Eastham ML, Modesitt SC. Rate of pathology from atypical glandular cell Pap tests classified by the Bethesda 2001 nomenclature. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(6):1285–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Negri G, Bellisano G, Carico E, Faa G, Kasal A, Antoniazzi S, et al. Usefulness of p16ink4a, ProEX C, and Ki-67 for the diagnosis of glandular dysplasia and adenocarcinoma of the cervix uteri. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2011;30(4):407–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Ravarino A, Nemolato S, Macciocu E, Fraschini M, Senes G, Faa G, et al. CINtec PLUS immunocytochemistry as a tool for the cytologic diagnosis of glandular lesions of the cervix uteri. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012;138(5):652–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Singh M, Mockler D, Akalin A, Burke S, Shroyer A, Shroyer KR. Immunocytochemical colocalization of P16(INK4a) and Ki-67 predicts CIN2/3 and AIS/adenocarcinoma. Cancer Cytopathol. 2012;120(1):26–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. College of American Pathologists Accreditation Program, Cytopathology Checklist 2016, pages 27–29, CYP.07600 Statistical Records, revised 7/28/2015, Northfield, IL, USA

    Google Scholar 

  81. Bose S, Kannan V, Kline TS. Abnormal endocervical cells. Really abnormal? Really endocervical? Am J Clin Pathol. 1994;101(6):708–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Chhieng DC, Elgert PA, Cangiarella JF, Cohen JM. Clinical significance of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance. A follow-up study from an academic medical center. Acta Cytol. 2000;44(4):557–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Zhao C, Austin RM, Pan J, Barr N, Martin SE, Raza A, et al. Clinical significance of atypical glandular cells in conventional pap smears in a large, high-risk U.S. west coast minority population. Acta Cytol. 2009;53(2):153–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Ajit D, Gavas S, Joseph S, Rekhi B, Deodhar K, Kane S. Identification of atypical glandular cells in pap smears: is it a hit and miss scenario? Acta Cytol. 2013;57(1):45–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Suh KS, Silverberg SG. Tubal metaplasia of the uterine cervix. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1990;9(2):122–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Novotny DB, Maygarden SJ, Johnson DE, Frable WJ. Tubal metaplasia. A frequent potential pitfall in the cytologic diagnosis of endocervical glandular dysplasia on cervical smears. Acta Cytol. 1992;36(1):1–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Van Le L, Novotny D, Dotters DJ. Distinguishing tubal metaplasia from endocervical dysplasia on cervical Papanicolaou smears. Obstet Gynecol. 1991;78(5 Pt 2):974–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. de Peralta-Venturino MN, Purslow MJ, Kini SR. Endometrial cells of the “lower uterine segment” (LUS) in cervical smears obtained by endocervical brushings: a source of potential diagnostic pitfall. Diagn Cytopathol. 1995;12(3):263–8; discussion 8–71.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Heaton Jr RB, Harris TF, Larson DM, Henry MR. Glandular cells derived from direct sampling of the lower uterine segment in patients status post-cervical cone biopsy. A diagnostic dilemma. Am J Clin Pathol. 1996;106(4):511–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Lundeen SJ, Horwitz CA, Larson CJ, Stanley MW. Abnormal cervicovaginal smears due to endometriosis: a continuing problem. Diagn Cytopathol. 2002;26(1):35–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Sauder K, Wilbur DC, Duska L, Tambouret RH. An approach to post-radical trachelectomy vaginal-isthmus cytology. Diagn Cytopathol. 2009;37(6):437–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Gupta PK. Intrauterine contraceptive devices: vaginal cytology, pathologic changes and clinical implications. Acta Cytol. 1982;26(5):571–613.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Kobayashi TK, Casslen B, Stormby N. Cytologic atypias in the uterine fluid of intrauterine contraceptive device users. Acta Cytol. 1983;27(2):138–41.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Mali B, Joshi JV, Wagle U, Hazari K, Shah R, Chadha U, et al. Actinomyces in cervical smears of women using intrauterine contraceptive devices. Acta Cytol. 1986;30(4):367–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Geirsson G, Woodworth FE, Patten Jr SF, Bonfiglio TA. Epithelial repair and regeneration in the uterine cervix. I. An analysis of the cells. Acta Cytol. 1977;21(3):371–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Yelverton CL, Bentley RC, Olenick S, Krigman HR, Johnston WW, Robboy SJ. Epithelial repair of the uterine cervix: assessment of morphologic features and correlations with cytologic diagnosis. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1996;15(4):338–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Selvaggi SM. Cytologic features of squamous cell carcinoma in situ involving endocervical glands in endocervical cytobrush specimens. Acta Cytol. 1994;38(5):687–92.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Kumar N, Bongiovanni M, Molliet MJ, Pelte MF, Egger JF, Pache JC. Diverse glandular pathologies coexist with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion in cyto-histological review of atypical glandular cells on ThinPrep specimens. Cytopathology. 2009;20(6):351–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Shukla A, Thomas D, Roh MH. PAX8 and PAX2 expression in endocervical adenocarcinoma in situ and high-grade squamous dysplasia. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2013;32(1):116–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Massachusetts General Hospital, Department of Pathology, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

    Rosemary H. Tambouret

  2. Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Department of Pathology, Boston, MA, USA

    David C. Wilbur

Authors
  1. Rosemary H. Tambouret
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David C. Wilbur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rosemary H. Tambouret .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Edinburgh Edinburgh, Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

    C. Simon Herrington

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tambouret, R.H., Wilbur, D.C. (2017). Endocervical Adenocarcinoma In Situ/Cervical Glandular Intraepithelial Neoplasia and Adenocarcinoma of the Usual Type. In: Herrington, C. (eds) Pathology of the Cervix. Essentials of Diagnostic Gynecological Pathology, vol 3. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51257-0_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51257-0_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-51255-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-51257-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation