Abstract

High-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC) can be categorized into four gene expression-based subtypes, with supposedly distinct prognoses and treatment responses. Murakami et al. translated these gene expression-based subtypes into the histopathological mesenchymal, immunoreactive, solid and proliferative, and papilloglandular subtypes, showing differences in survival outcomes. Miyagawa et al. refined these criteria to improve the interobserver concordance. The current retrospective study evaluated the interobserver variability and the prognostic differences between the histopathologic subtypes using the criteria of both Murakami et al. and Miyagawa et al. in 208 HGSOC cases. The mesenchymal subtype was considered first, followed by the immunoreactive subtype. Non-conforming cases were categorized as solid and proliferative or papilloglandular. The mesenchymal subtype was identified in 122 patients (58.7%) for both criteria. Using the criteria of Murakami et al., 10 cases (4.8%) were immunoreactive, 26 (12.5%) solid and proliferative, and 50 (24%) papilloglandular, with a concordance rate of 62.5% (κ = 0.34, p < .001). Using the Miyagawa et al. criteria, 23 cases (11%) were immunoreactive, 20 (9.6%) solid and proliferative, and 43 (20.7%) papilloglandular. No survival differences were observed between the subtypes. The fair reproducibility of the histopathological subtype classification of HGSOC and the lack of survival differences among these subtypes indicate the need for further refinement of the criteria and exploration of their correlation with overall survival outcomes before clinical application.

Original languageEnglish
JournalVirchows Archiv
Early online date16 Apr 2024
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 16 Apr 2024

Keywords

  • Epithelial ovarian carcinoma
  • High-grade serous ovarian carcinoma
  • Prognosis
  • Subtypes

Cite this