Advertisement

American Journal of Cancer

, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp 13–23 | Cite as

Endometrial Stromal Sarcoma

Etiology, Prognosis and Treatment Options
  • Fernando C. MalufEmail author
  • Carol Aghajanian
  • David Spriggs
Therapy in Practice

Abstract

Uterine sarcomas comprise 2–3% of all uterine malignancies. Tumors in this category are, in order of decreasing incidence, carcinosarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, endometrial stromal sarcoma, and adenosarcoma. Endometrial stromal sarcomas are divided into low- and high-grade according to tumor cell morphology and mitotic rate. Low-grade tumors are characterized by a slow growth pattern, presence of estrogen and/or progesterone receptors, and an indolent clinical course with late recurrences. Despite this indolent course, 37–60% of patients with early-stage disease experience recurrent disease. High-grade stromal sarcomas, on the other hand, exhibit more aggressive biological behavior and poor outcome.

The standard treatment for localized endometrial stromal sarcomas is total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Adjuvant radiation therapy appears to reduce locoregional failure, although its benefit in terms of overall survival is unknown. Progestogens have been considered first-line therapy in recurrent low-grade tumors, with durable response rates of approximately 50%. Some authors also favor their use in the adjuvant setting, although no clear data exist to support this indication as a standard approach. Other hormonal approaches such as aromatase inhibitors may provide an alternative to progestogens in light of a more favorable toxicity profile and similar antitumor activity. Chemotherapy, including anthracyclines, is generally reserved for recurrent low-grade tumors that progress on hormonal therapies and for high-grade lesions that usually lack hormone receptors. The combination of chemotherapy and hormones may be considered in highly symptomatic patients or in those with high-volume, life-threatening disease.

In summary, endometrial stromal sarcoma of the uterus is a rare disease that should be treated with radical surgery. Prognostic factors according to tumor stage, mitotic count, and tumor grade can, to some extent, predict biologic tumor behavior and prognosis. The role of postoperative radiation therapy and adjuvant progestogens, particularly for low-grade disease, remains to be defined. Recurrent or metastatic disease should be treated with systemic therapy, and the choice between hormonal therapy and chemotherapy should be based on histologic characteristics including mitotic count, cell morphology, and estrogen and progesterone receptor status. Salvage surgery and/or radiation have been associated with some long-term remissions, and can be considered as part of the multimodality approach in selected cases. New prognostic markers and specific therapeutic targets are clearly needed in this rare disease.

Keywords

Uterine Sarcoma Pelvic Recurrence Endometrial Stromal Sarcoma Progestogen Therapy Malignant Mixed Mullerian Tumor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Antonio C. Buzaid, MD, and Ricardo Marques, MD, for their helpful comments during the preparation of the manuscript. We also appreciate Carol Pearce for editing the manuscript. The authors have provided no information on sources of funding or on conflicts of interest directly relevant to the content of this review.

References

  1. 1.
    Oláh KS, Gee H, Blunt S, et al. Retrospective analysis of 318 cases of uterine sarcoma. Eur J Cancer 1991; 27: 1095–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kahanpaa KV, Wahlstrom T, Grohn P, et al. Sarcomas of the uterus: a clinicopathologic study of 119 patients. Obstet Gynecol 1986; 67: 417–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Leibsohn S, d’Ablaing G, Mishell DR, et al. Leiomyosarcoma in a series of hysterectomies performed for presumed uterine leiomyomas. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 162: 968–74PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ueda M, Otsuka M, Hatakenaka M, et al. MR imaging findings of uterine endometrial stromal sarcoma: differentiation from endometrial carcinoma. Eur Radiol 2001; 11: 28–33PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Umesaki N, Tanaka T, Miyama M, et al. Positron emission tomography with (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose of uterine sarcoma: a comparison with magnetic resonance imaging and power Doppler imaging. Gynecol Oncol 2001; 80: 372–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Franquemont DW, FriersonJr HF, Mills SE. An immunohistochemical study of normal endometrial stroma and endometrial neoplasms: evidence for smooth muscle differentiation. Am J Surg Pathol 1991; 15: 861–70PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lillemoe TJ, Perrone T, Norris HJ, et al. Myogenous phenotype of epithelial-like areas in endometrial stromal sarcomas. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1991; 115: 215–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Farhood AI, Abrams J. Immunohistochemistry of endometrial stromal sarcoma. Hum Pathol 1991; 22: 224–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gil-Benso R, Lopez-Gines C, Carda C, et al. Endometrial stromal sarcoma: immunohistochemical, electron microscopical and cytogenetic findings in two cases. Virchows Arch 1999; 434: 307–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Greaves MF, Brown G, Rapson NT, et al. Antisera to acute lymphoblastic leukemia cells. Clin Immunol Immunopathol 1975; 4: 67–84PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    LeBien TW, McCormack RT. The common acute lymphoblastic leukemia antigen (CD10): emancipation from a functional enigma. Blood 1989; 73: 625–35Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Arber DA, Weiss LM. CD 10: a review. Appl Immunohistochem l997; 5: 125–40Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Imai K, Kanzaki H, Mori T. Cell surface peptides in human endometrium. Mol Hum Reprod 1996; 2: 425–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Imai K, Maeda M, Fujiwara H, et al. Human endometrial stromal cells express cluster of differentiation (CD) 13 antigen/aminopeptidase N and CD1O antigen/ neutral endopeptidase. Biol Reprod 1992; 46: 328–34PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chu PG, Arber DA, Weiss LM, et al. Utility of CD10 in distinguishing between endometrial stromal sarcoma and uterine smooth muscle tumors: an immunohistochemical comparison of 34 cases. Mod Pathol 2001; 14: 465–71PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    McCluggage WG, Sumathi VP, Maxwell P. CD10 is a sensitive and diagnostically useful immunohistochemical marker of normal endometrial stroma and of endometrial stromal neoplasms. Histopathology 2001; 39: 273–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nucci MR, O’Connell JT, Huettner PC, et al. h-Caldesmon expression effectively distinguishes endometrial stromal tumors from uterine smooth muscle tumors. Am J Surg Pathol 2001; 25: 455–63PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yoonessi M, Anderson DG, Morley GW. Endometrial carcinoma: causes of death and sites of treatment failure. Cancer 1979; 43: 1944–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Henriksen HM, Hornboll P. Endometrial stroma sarcoma. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1981; 60: 385–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Piver MS, Rutledge FN, Copeland L, et al. Uterine endolymphatic stromal myosis: a collaborative study. Obstet Gynecol 1984; 64: 173–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Taina E, Maenpaa J, Erkkola R, et al. Endometrial stromal sarcoma: a report of nine cases. Gynecol Oncol 1989; 32: 156–62PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Berchuck A, Rubin SC, Hoskins WJ, et al. Treatment of endometrial stromal tumors. Gynecol Oncol 1990; 36: 60–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Norris HJ, Taylor HB. Mesenchymal tumors of the uterus: I. a clinical and pathological study of 53 endometrial stromal tumors. Cancer 1966; 19: 755–66PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kempson RL, Bari W. Uterine sarcomas: classification, diagnosis, and prognosis. Hum Pathol 1970; 1: 331–49PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    DeFusco PA, Gaffey TA, Malkasian Jr GD, et al. Endometrial stromal sarcoma: review of Mayo Clinic experience, 1945–1980. Gynecol Oncol 1989; 35: 8–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Evans HL. Endometrial stromal sarcoma and poorly differentiated endometrial sarcoma. Cancer 1982; 50: 2170–82PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chang KL, Crabtree GS, Lim-Tan SK, et al. Primary uterine endometrial stromal neoplasms: a clinicopathologic study of 117 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1990; 14: 415–38PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Meredith RF, Eisert DR, Kaka Z, et al. An excess of uterine sarcomas after pelvic irradiation. Cancer 1986; 58: 2003–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Honig SF, Wysowski DK, Beitz J. Uterine sarcoma and tamoxifen: poor prognosis compared to endometrial adenocarcinoma [abstract 161]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2002; 21: 41aGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pautier P, Genestie C, Rey A, et al. Analysis of clinicopathologic prognostic factors for 157 uterine sarcomas and evaluation of a grading score validated for soft tissue sarcoma. Cancer 2000; 88: 1425–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    August CZ, Bauer KD, Lurain J, et al. Neoplasms of endometrial stroma: histopathologic and flow cytometric analysis with clinical correlation. Hum Pathol 1989; 20: 232–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dunton CJ, Kelsten ML, Brooks SE, et al. Low-grade stromal sarcoma: DNAflow cytometric analysis and estrogen progesterone receptor data. Gynecol Oncol 1990; 37: 268–75PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Goldfarb S, Richart RM, Okagaki T. Nuclear DNA content in endolymphatic stromal myosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1970; 106: 524–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nordal RR, Kristensen GB, Kaern J, et al. The prognostic significance of surgery, tumor size, malignancy grade, menopausal status, and DNA ploidy in endometrial stromal sarcoma. Gynecol Oncol 1996; 62: 254–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Baggish MS, Woodruff JD. Uterine stromatosis: clinicopathologic features and hormone dependency. Obstet Gynecol 1972; 40: 487–98PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    ScribnerJr DR, Walker JL. Low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma preoperative treatment with Depo-Lupron and Megace. Gynecol Oncol 1998; 71: 458–60PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Goff BA, Rice LW, Fleischhacker D, et al. Uterine leiomyosarcoma and endometrial stromal sarcoma: lymph node metastases and sites of recurrence. Gynecol Oncol 1993; 50: 105–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tabata T, Takeshima N, Hirai Y, et al. Low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma with cardiovascular involvement: a report of three cases. Gynecol Oncol 1999; 75: 495–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jacobsen KB, Haram K. Endolymphatic stromal myosis: report of a case treated surgically and with hormones. Virchows Arch A Pathol AnatHistol 1975; 369: 173–9Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Mansi JL, Ramachandra S, Wiltshaw E, et al. Endometrial stromal sarcomas. Gynecol Oncol 1990; 36: 113–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Whitlatch SP, Meyer RL. Recurrent endometrial stromal sarcoma resembling intravenous leiomyomatosis. Gynecol Oncol 1987; 28: 121–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Gloor E, Schnyder P, Cikes M, et al. Endolymphatic stromal myosis; surgical and hormonal treatment of extensive abdominal recurrence 20 years after hysterectomy. Cancer 1982; 50: 1888–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Styron SL, Burke TW, Linville WK. Low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma recurring over three decades. Gynecol Oncol 1989; 35: 275–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Rose PG, Boutselis JG, Sachs L. Adjuvant therapy for stage I uterine sarcoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987; 156: 660–2PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Echt G, Jepson J, Steel J, et al. Treatment of uterine sarcomas. Cancer 1990; 66: 35–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Katz L, Merino MJ, Sakamoto H, et al. Endometrial stromal sarcoma: a clinicopathologic study of 11 cases with determination of estrogen and progestogen receptor levels in three tumors. Gynecol Oncol 1987; 26: 87–97PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sabini G, Chumas JC, Mann WJ. Steroid hormone receptors in endometrial stromal sarcomas: a biochemical and immunohistochemical study. Am J Clin Pathol 1992; 97: 381–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Reich O, Regauer S, Urdl W, et al. Expression of oestrogen and progesterone receptors in low-grade endometrial stromal sarcomas. Br J Cancer 2000; 82: 1030–4PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Tsukamoto N, Kamura T, Matsukuma K, et al. Endolymphatic stromal myosis: a case with positive estrogen and progesterone receptors and good response to progestogens. Gynecol Oncol 1985; 20: 120–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Sutton GP, Stehman FB, Michael H, et al. Estrogen and progesterone receptors in uterine sarcomas. Obstet Gynecol 1986; 68: 709–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Pellillo D. Proliferative stromatosis of the uterus with pulmonary metastases: remission following treatment with a long acting synthetic progestogen: a case report. Obstet Gynecol 1968; 31: 33–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Krumholz BA, Lobovsky FY, Halitsky V. Endolymphatic stromal myosis with pulmonary metastases: remission with progestogen therapy: report of a case. J Reprod Med 1973; 10: 85–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Keen CE, Philip G. Progestogen-induced regression in low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma: case report and literature review. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1989; 96: 1435–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Montag TW, Manart FD. Endolymphatic stromal myosis: surgical and hormonal therapy for extensive venous recurrence. Gynecol Oncol 1989; 33: 255–60PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rand RJ, Lowe JW. Low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma treated with a progestogen. Br J Hosp Med 1990; 43: 154–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Lantta M, Kahanpaa K, Karkkainen J, et al. Estradiol and progesterone receptors in two cases of endometrial stromal sarcoma. Gynecol Oncol 1984; 18: 233–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    O’Brien AA, O’Briain DS, Daly PA. Aggressive endometrial stromal sarcoma responding to medroxyprogesterone following failure of tamoxifen and combination chemotherapy: case report. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1985; 92: 862–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Mesia AF, Demopoulos RI. Effects of leuprolide acetate on low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182: 1140–1PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Maluf FC, Sabbatini P, Schwartz L,et al. Endometrial stromal sarcoma: objective response to letrozole. Gynecol Oncol 2001; 82: 384–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Thatcher SS, Woodruff JD. Uterine stromatosis: a report of 33 cases. Obstet Gynecol 1982; 59: 428–34PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Barlow JJ, Piver MS, Chuang JT, et al. Adriamycin and bleomycin, alone and in combination, in gynecologic cancers. Cancer 1973; 32: 735–43PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Yamawaki T, Shimizu Y, Hasumi K. Treatment of stage IV “high-grade” endometrial stromal sarcoma with ifosfamide, adriamycin, and cisplatin. Gynecol Oncol 1997; 64: 265–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Sutton G, Blessing JA, Park R, et al. Ifosfamide treatment of recurrent or metastatic endometrial stromal sarcomas previously unexposed to chemotherapy: a study of the Gynecologic Oncology Group. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 87: 747–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Omura GA, Major FJ, Blessing JA, et al. A randomized study of adriamycin with and without dimethyl triazenoimidazole carboxamide in advanced uterine sarcomas. Cancer 1983; 52: 626–32PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Muss HB, Bundy B, DiSaia PJ, et al. Treatment of recurrent or advanced uterine sarcoma: a randomized trial of doxombicin versus doxorubicin and cyclophos-phamide (a phase III trial of the Gynecologic Oncology Group). Cancer 1985; 55: 1648–53PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Piver MS, DeEulis TG, Lele SB, et al. Cyclophosphamide, vincristine, adriamycin, and dimethyl-triazeno imidazole carboxamide (CYVADIC) for sarcomas of the female genital tract. Gynecol Oncol 1982; 14: 319–23PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Hoovis ML. Response of endometrial stromal sarcoma to cyclophosphamide. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1970; 108: 1117–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Lin YC, Kudelka AP, Tresukosol D, et al. Prolonged stabilization of progressive endometrial stromal sarcoma with prolonged oral etoposide therapy. Gynecol Oncol 1995; 58: 262–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Jensen PA, Dockerty MB, Symmonds RE, et al. Endometrioid sarcoma (“stromal endometriosis”): report of 15 cases including 5 with metastases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1966; 95: 79–90PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Hart WR, Yoonessi M. Endometrial stromatosis of the uterus. Obstet Gynecol 1977; 49: 393–403PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Szlosarek PW, Lofts FJ, Pettengell R, et al. Effective treatment of a patient with a high-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma with an accelerated regimen of carboplatin and paclitaxel. Anticancer Drugs 2000; 11: 275–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Keohan ML, Taub RN. Chemotherapy for advanced sarcoma: therapeutic decisions and modalities. Semin Oncol 1997; 24: 572–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Maluf FC, Spriggs D. Anthracyclines in the treatment of gynecologic malignancies. Gynecol Oncol 2002; 85: 18–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Omura GA, Blessing JA, Major F, et al. A randomized clinical trial of adjuvant adriamycin in uterine sarcomas: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. J Clin Oncol 1985; 3: 1240–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Frustaci S, Gherlinzoni F, De Paoli A, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy for adult soft tissue sarcomas of the extremities and girdles: results of the Italian randomized cooperative trial. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 1238–47PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Lehrner LM, Miles PA, Enck RE. Complete remission of widely metastatic endometrial stromal sarcoma following combination chemotherapy. Cancer 1979; 43: 1189–94PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fernando C. Maluf
    • 1
    Email author
  • Carol Aghajanian
    • 2
  • David Spriggs
    • 2
  1. 1.Sírio-Libanès HospitalSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Medicine, Developmental Chemotherapy ServiceMemorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations