Current Women`s Health Reviews

Author(s): Naina Kumar*, Immanuel Pradeep, Mishu Mangla and Annapurna Srirambhatla

DOI: 10.2174/0115734048299563240318061151

DownloadDownload PDF Flyer Cite As
A Complex Case: Solid Unilateral Ovarian Mucinous Carcinoma Masquerading as Leiomyosarcoma in Postmenopausal Women

Article ID: e200324228143 Pages: 6

  • * (Excluding Mailing and Handling)

Abstract

Introduction: Ovarian cancers are the third most common gynecological and 8th most common cancer in women, associated with high mortality rates globally.

Case Presentation: A 60-year-old postmenopausal woman presented to the Gynecological outpatient department with complaints of pain in the abdomen for 2-3 months and loss of appetite with weight loss for 1-2 months. She was diagnosed as a case of uterine leiomyosarcoma or left adnexal mass on ultrasound and MRI. Intra-operatively, she was diagnosed with a unilateral left ovarian malignant mass, predominantly solid in consistency with metastasis to the left fallopian tube, uterus, cervical stroma, and omentum. The right ovary and tube were healthy. On histopathological examination, the final diagnosis of primary mucinous ovarian carcinoma was made. The patient tolerated staging laparotomy (total abdominal hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and infracolic omentectomy) well and was started on six cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy with Paclitaxel and Carboplatin injections along with Bevacizumab.

Conclusion: Primary mucinous ovarian carcinomas are rare and distinct subtypes of epithelial ovarian carcinomas. Due to their strong resemblance to other ovarian tumors and leiomyosarcoma, their diagnosis becomes challenging. Hence, it is crucial to consider leiomyosarcomas in the differential diagnosis of ovarian masses, especially in postmenopausal women.

Keywords: Leiomyosarcoma, metastasis, mucinous carcinoma, ovary, uterus, leiomyosarcomas.

Graphical Abstract

[1]
Cancer stat facts: Ovarian cancer. 2023. Available from: https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/ovary.html
[2]
Babaier, A.; Ghatage, P. Mucinous cancer of the ovary: Overview and current status. Diagnostics, 2020, 10(1), 52.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10010052] [PMID: 31963927]
[3]
Kurnit, K.C.; Frumovitz, M. Primary mucinous ovarian cancer: Options for surgery and chemotherapy. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer, 2022, 32(11), 1455-1462.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2022-003806] [PMID: 36229081]
[4]
Cheasley, D.; Wakefield, M.J.; Ryland, G.L. The molecular origin and taxonomy of mucinous ovarian carcinoma. Nat. Commun., 2019, 10(1), 3935.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11862-x] [PMID: 31477716]
[5]
Chauhan, S.C.; Kumar, D.; Jaggi, M. Mucins in ovarian cancer diagnosis and therapy. J. Ovarian Res., 2009, 2(1), 21.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1757-2215-2-21] [PMID: 20034397]
[6]
Dundr, P.; Singh, N.; Nožičková, B.; Němejcová, K.; Bártů, M.; Stružinská, I. Primary mucinous ovarian tumors vs. ovarian metastases from gastrointestinal tract, pancreas and biliary tree: A review of current problematics. Diagn. Pathol., 2021, 16(1), 20.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13000-021-01079-2] [PMID: 33706757]
[7]
Angelina, Y.A.; Tjokroprawiro, B.A. Advanced stage clear cell ovarian carcinoma mimicking uterine sarcoma without gross residual tumor during primary surgery: A case report. Clin. Med. Insights Case Rep., 2023, 16.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/11795476231166623] [PMID: 37056468]
[8]
Simons, M.; Bolhuis, T.; De Haan, A.F. A novel algorithm for better distinction of primary mucinous ovarian carcinomas and mucinous carcinomas metastatic to the ovary. Virchows Arch., 2019, 474(3), 289-296.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00428-018-2504-0] [PMID: 30631934]
[9]
Dundr, P.; Bártů, M.; Bosse, T. Primary mucinous tumors of the ovary: An interobserver reproducibility and detailed molecular study reveals significant overlap between diagnostic categories. Mod. Pathol., 2023, 36(1), 100040.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.modpat.2022.100040] [PMID: 36788074]
[10]
Park, C.K.; Kim, H.S. Clinicopathological characteristics of ovarian metastasis from colorectal and pancreatobiliary carcinomas mimicking primary ovarian mucinous tumor. Anticancer Res., 2018, 38(9), 5465-5473.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.12879] [PMID: 30194204]
[11]
Lee, S.; Sung, J.A.; Jung, M.; Kim, H.; Lee, C. Prognosis in primary mucinous ovarian carcinoma: Focusing on the five pathological findings indicating metastatic mucinous carcinoma to the ovary. J. Gynecol. Oncol., 2022, 33(2), e18.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2022.33.e18] [PMID: 34910399]
[12]
Morice, P.; Gouy, S.; Leary, A. Mucinous ovarian carcinoma. N. Engl. J. Med., 2019, 380(13), 1256-1266.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1813254] [PMID: 30917260]
[13]
Schiavone, M.B.; Herzog, T.J.; Lewin, S.N. Natural history and outcome of mucinous carcinoma of the ovary. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 2011, 205(5), 480.e1-480.e8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2011.06.049] [PMID: 21861962]
[14]
Brown, J.; Frumovitz, M. Mucinous tumors of the ovary: Current thoughts on diagnosis and management. Curr. Oncol. Rep., 2014, 16(6), 389.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11912-014-0389-x] [PMID: 24777667]
[15]
Karamurzin, Y.S.; Kiyokawa, T.; Parkash, V. Gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma. Am. J. Surg. Pathol., 2015, 39(11), 1449-1457.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000532] [PMID: 26457350]
[16]
Lu, J.; Na, J.; Li, Y.; Wang, X.; Wang, J.; Han, S. Gastric-type mucinous endocervical adenocarcinomas: A case report and literature review. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol., 2022, 12, 917009.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2022.917009] [PMID: 36310872]
[17]
Schmeler, K.M.; Tao, X.; Frumovitz, M. Prevalence of lymph node metastasis in primary mucinous carcinoma of the ovary. Obstet. Gynecol., 2010, 116(2), 269-273.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181e7961d] [PMID: 20664385]
[18]
Lertkhachonsuk, A.; Buranawongtrakoon, S.; Lekskul, N.; Rermluk, N.; Wee-Stekly, W.W.; Charakorn, C. Serum CA19 ‐9, CA ‐125 and CEA as tumor markers for mucinous ovarian tumors. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res., 2020, 46(11), 2287-2291.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jog.14427] [PMID: 32830422]
[19]
Khamene, S.S.; Khawajah, M.I.; Mahboobipour, A.A. The role of CA19-9 and CA125 in differentiation of ovarian dermoid cyst and ovarian malignancy: A case-control study. Fertility. Gynecology and Andrology, 2023, 3(1), e137144.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.5812/fga-137144]
[20]
Craig, O.; Salazar, C.; Gorringe, K.L. Options for the treatment of mucinous ovarian carcinoma. Curr. Treat. Options Oncol., 2021, 22(12), 114.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11864-021-00904-6] [PMID: 34773517]
[21]
Siarkou, M.C.; Petousis, S.; Papanikolaou, A. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced-stage ovarian cancer – State of the art. Przegl. Menopauz., 2022, 21(4), 272-275.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/pm.2022.124018] [PMID: 36704762]
[22]
Satoh, T.; Hatae, M.; Watanabe, Y. Outcomes of fertility-sparing surgery for stage I epithelial ovarian cancer: A proposal for patient selection. J. Clin. Oncol., 2010, 28(10), 1727-1732.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2009.24.8617] [PMID: 20194858]
[23]
Park, J.Y.; Kim, D.Y.; Suh, D.S. Outcomes of fertility-sparing surgery for invasive epithelial ovarian cancer: Oncologic safety and reproductive outcomes. Gynecol. Oncol., 2008, 110(3), 345-353.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.04.040] [PMID: 18586310]
[24]
Li, J.; Qiao, H.; Liu, Y. Safety of fertility-sparing surgery in young women with stage I endometrioid epithelial and mucinous ovarian cancer: A population-based analysis. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol., 2024, 50(1), 107276.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2023.107276] [PMID: 38064863]
[25]
Lee, J.Y.; Jo, Y.R.; Kim, T.H. Safety of fertility-sparing surgery in primary mucinous carcinoma of the ovary. Cancer Res. Treat., 2015, 47(2), 290-305.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4143/crt.2014.004] [PMID: 25287480]
[26]
Gullo, G.; Perino, A.; Cucinella, G. Open vs. closed vitrification system: Which one is safer? Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci., 2022, 26(4), 1065-1067.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.26355/eurrev_202202_28092] [PMID: 35253158]
[27]
Giampaolino, P.; Cafasso, V.; Boccia, D. Fertility-sparing approach in patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer grade 2 stage IA (FIGO): A qualitative systematic review. BioMed Res. Int., 2022, 2022, 1-15.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/4070368] [PMID: 36203482]
[28]
Mutlu, L.; Manavella, D.D.; Gullo, G.; McNamara, B.; Santin, A.D.; Patrizio, P. Endometrial cancer in reproductive age: Fertility-sparing approach and reproductive outcomes. Cancers, 2022, 14(21), 5187.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers14215187] [PMID: 36358604]
[29]
Gullo, G.; Cucinella, G.; Chiantera, V. Fertility-sparing strategies for early-stage endometrial cancer: Stepping towards precision medicine based on the molecular fingerprint. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 2023, 24(1), 811.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms24010811] [PMID: 36614253]
[30]
Piergentili, R.; Gullo, G.; Basile, G. Circulating miRNAs as a tool for early diagnosis of endometrial cancer—implications for the fertility-sparing process: Clinical, biological, and legal aspects. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 2023, 24(14), 11356.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms241411356] [PMID: 37511115]