Myoepithelial Carcinoma 

Myoepithelial Carcinoma 

No Results

No Results

processing….

Myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) is a rare salivary gland tumor composed entirely of myoepithelial cells that exhibit a dual epithelial and smooth muscle phenotype. The tumor shows wide morphologic and cytologic diversity in a similar way to its benign counterpart, myoepithelioma, with evidence of malignant change. The malignancy manifests mainly as an infiltrative growth pattern, angiolymphatic and/or perineural invasion, with a propensity for mostly distant metastasis and occasional regional lymph node involvement. Other corroborative evidence of malignancy such as necrosis and increased mitotic activity can also be seen. [1]

Originally described by Stromeyer et al in 1975, [2] Barnes et al renewed interest in this rare entity in 1985 after describing 3 cases of myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) in their review of myoepitheliomas of the head and neck. [3] However, it was Dardick et al’s detailed descriptions of myoepitheliomas that were crucial in furthering the understanding of myoepithelial tumors. [4, 5] Their articles helped to increase the accuracy of describing ensuing reported cases of myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma). In 1991, myoepithelial carcinoma was added to the second edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) classifications of malignant salivary gland tumors. [6]

Many of these tumors arise as a malignant transformation in the setting of a benign pleomorphic adenoma or a benign myoepithelioma, [7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13] and myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) is particularly seen in association with recurrence of these benign tumors. [3, 11] Other such tumors arise de novo. [7, 8, 14]

Myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) is a rare tumor with a reported incidence of 0.2% of all salivary gland tumors. [15] However, some authors contend that myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) may not be as rare as previously suggested. [7, 16] A lack of recognition and/or awareness of its diversity and diagnostic criteria may contribute to the relatively small number of reported cases.

Different series of myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) have showed variability in sex distribution with a generally similar age range, although the pediatric age group was not represented in all the relatively large reported series.

In this context, a review by Gnepp et al of 70 cases of myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) from the literature, [17] the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP), [15] Memorial Sloan-Kettering, [7] and Beijing Medical University [18] found that affected patients are usually in the sixth decade of life, with an age range of 14-86 years. The series had varying sex distribution, from equal sex distribution (1:1) to female predominance (4:1). A series of 10 cases by Nagao et al in 1997 showed an age range of 48-81 years with no pediatric cases and a predominance of women over men (2:1). [19] In 2003, Yu et al examined 27 cases of myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) and found a predominance of males (1.7:1), with an age range of 16-73 years. [20]

No definitive etiologic factors have been identified in myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma); however, p53 accumulated mutations have been reported. [21] C-kit overexpression has also been seen in these tumors. [22]

Most reported cases of myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) arise in the parotid gland (48%-75%), followed by minor salivary glands (reported sites include the palate, cheek, gum, nasal cavity, maxillary sinus, nasopharynx, infratemporal fossa, oral cavity, base of tongue, supraglottic larynx) and the submandibular gland. Even rarer cases have been reported in the sublingual gland. [7, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29]

Most patients with myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) present with a painless mass, occasionally with a recent rapid increase in size. In this context, some authors have suggested that the tumor may remain small for a period, after which it starts growing rapidly. [30, 31, 32]

Symptoms vary depending on the site (eg, laryngeal location may manifest as hoarseness; a sinus location may manifest as nasal obstruction, epistaxis, pain, and headache, etc). Facial nerve involvement in parotid tumors manifests as weakness/paralysis.

The average duration of symptoms before diagnosis varies from 3 months to 3 years. [10]

Myoepithelial tumors are unencapsulated soft to firm masses with infiltrative margins, although some may appear well delineated grossly. The size ranges from 2-20 cm. [30] A multinodular appearance can be appreciated on gross examination in many of these tumors. The cut surface may show focal hemorrhage, cystic degeneration, and necrosis.

Myoepithelial carcinomas (malignant myoepitheliomas) are unencapsulated and usually multinodular in appearance, with infiltrative borders. [7, 8, 14, 16] The nodules vary in size with intervening thin fibrous septae, and they can exhibit central nodular necrosis. [7, 16] Other less-common growth patterns include diffuse solid, trabecular, and reticular infiltrating patterns. [16]

Like all tumors with myoepithelial component, myoepithelial carcinomas (malignant myoepitheliomas) exhibit a wide morphologic and cytologic diversity that is based on 4 major types of cells similar to those seen in benign myoepithelioma: spindle, plasmacytoid (hyaline), epithelioid, and clear cell types. Many myoepithelial carcinomas (malignant myoepitheliomas) exhibit more than one cell type, but even in these, one cell type usually predominates. Other cell morphologies such as stellatelike or vacuolated cells have also been described, [16] as well as some tumors that exhibit an oncocytic morphology. In these malignant neoplasms, however, the cell type does not appear to significantly influence a patient’s survival. [8]

The epithelioid cells are large polygonal cells with central ovoid or round nuclei and eosinophilic or amphophilic, sometimes focally clear cytoplasm (see the following image); these can form pseudoacini or pseudoglandular structures (not true glands). [7]

Plasmacytoid cells (also known as hyaline cells) are round to ovoid with abundant eosinophilic cytoplasm and eccentrically located nuclei. The cells tend to be discohesive and occur mainly in aggregates in abundant mucoid stroma (see the image below).

Spindle cells with central fusiform/cigar-shaped nuclei, eosinophilic cytoplasm, and tapered ends are usually arranged in interlacing fascicles (see images below). When marked spindle cell atypia is present, the cases can be confused with other spindle cell sarcomas.

Clear cells, the rarest cell type, are polygonal cells with clear cytoplasm (due to glycogen content) (see the following image). Savera et al observed that the nuclei of clear cells in their cases appeared small with wrinkled nuclear membranes and that the cells can exhibit a signet-ring or lipoblastlike appearance in some cases. [7]

The degree of atypia of the cells varies from a surprisingly bland cytology to highly pleomorphic nuclei. Accordingly, determination of malignancy can be problematic in cases with bland morphology, particularly in small biopsy samples in which the other features of malignancy cannot be fully appreciated. [33]

Infiltration into the surrounding structures and destructive growth pattern remains the most significant and unequivocal evidence of malignancy seen in malignant myoepitheliomas. [16] The presence of angiolymphatic or perineural invasion, metastatic lesions, tumor necrosis to variable degrees, [7, 8, 16] increased mitotic activity, and marked nuclear atypia are also corroborative evidence of malignancy that are variably demonstrated among cases.

el-Naggar et al found that the DNA content and S-phase fraction of tumor cells are good indicators of aggressive cell behavior. [34] Nagao et al found that cases of myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) in their series showed an increased mitotic activity of more than 7 mitotic figures per 10 high-power fields (HPFs) or a Ki-67 L1 of more than 10%. [8] In addition, the investigators found that all those with perineural invasion had a fatal outcome, and the mitotic rate was significantly higher in the cases associated with fatal outcome than in those who survived and was generally higher than those seen in benign myoepitheliomas. Moreover, necrosis is usually seen in most cases to variable degrees.

Foci of chondroid, sebaceous, and squamous metaplasia may also be seen. [7] Collagenous crystalloids (radially arranged, needle shaped, eosinophilic, nonrefractile fibers) have been described in myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma), [35] similar to those seen in pleomorphic adenoma and myoepithelioma. [36]

Dedifferentiated myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma), in which nuclei exhibit clear high-grade undifferentiated features, including bizarre or giant cell forms with loss of myoepithelial marker expression, have also been described. [7, 8, 37] It is worth noting that the concept of dedifferentiation in salivary gland tumors, described initially by Stanley et al in dedifferentiated acinic cell carcinoma, [38] has also been described in many other salivary gland tumors, including adenoid cystic carcinoma, epithelial-myoepithelial carcinoma, and polymorphous low-grade adenocarcinoma, among others.

As described for benign myoepithelioma, some authors consider that the presence of a small component of true ductal or tubular epithelial forms (up to 5%) still qualifies the tumor to be labeled a myoepithelioma, whereas others insist on the total absence of ductal elements. This issue is probably more problematic in malignant myoepitheliomas, as many authors consider the presence of ductal elements as a qualification for considering the neoplasm “epithelial-myoepithelial carcinoma” rather than a malignant myoepithelioma. [7, 16] This explanation carries a lot of credibility, and it is probably better to classify cases that show ductal elements as “epithelial-myoepithelial carcinomas with predominant myoepithelial component” than to create a confused set of criteria.

Myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) mainly exhibits different types of tumor matrix: myxoid and hyalinized. [7, 16] Savera et al demonstrated myxoid matrix in all of their 25 cases, considering this finding an invaluable clue to myoepithelial differentiation. [7] Sternlicht et al found that neoplastic myoepithelial cells have an increased capacity to modify and augment their production of matrix (primarily chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans). [39]

As in myoepitheliomas, the electron microscopy appearance of myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) shows hybrid epithelial and myoid features, including longitudinally oriented microfilaments with dense bodies, pinocytic vesicles, basal lamina, desmosomes, hemidesmosomes, and intermediate filaments [7, 40, 41, 29] .

As the reader reviews the various individual case reports and the larger case series, with the exception of the dedifferentiated forms, which exhibit a predictable aggressive course, judging the biologic behavior (low grade vs high grade) of different types of myoepithelial carcinomas (malignant myoepitheliomas) has been controversial and largely unknown. As noted above, myoepithelial carcinomas (malignant myoepitheliomas) can occur as ex pleomorphic adenomas or ex benign myoepitheliomas, as well as de novo.

Di Palma and Guzzo suggested that such tumors arising in the background of pleomorphic adenoma are usually low grade and that myoepithelial carcinomas (malignant myoepitheliomas) are more aggressive when arising de novo [14] ; however, others found that the clinical outcome did not follow that premise. [7, 8, 20] Many investigators also observed no discernible histologic features that correlate with biologic behavior, as some very bland tumors had a fatal clinical course, whereas other tumors with marked atypical histologic features did not. [7, 42] Indeed, in a retrospective review of the clinical course of 27 cases, Yu et al argued that myoepithelial carcinomas (malignant myoepitheliomas) should actually be considered a high-grade salivary gland neoplasm. [20]

Although some attempts have laid down criteria for low-grade versus high-grade myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma), the best evidence so far suggests that such criteria are unpredictable when measured with the usual morphologic parameters only. In that context, Savera et al theorized that the unpredictable and erratic biologic behavior of myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) may be more of a reflection of the underlying biochemical secretory products of neoplastic myoepithelial cells, which are variably modified and therefore affect the biologic behavior of the tumor, regardless of the morphologic nature of the tumor. [7]

Like myoepitheliomas, the following markers are found to be useful immunohistochemical markers in myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma): [41]

Cytokeratins (eg, AE1/AE3, CK 5/6, Cam 5.2, CK7, and CK14)

Vimentin (reported to be positive in neoplastic myoepithelial cells and negative in normal myoepithelial cells)

As neoplastic transformation of myoepithelial cells can result in loss or modification of their smooth muscle phenotype, variable positivity for the following is seen:

S-100 (almost always positive in the neoplastic myoepithelial cells but not in the normal salivary gland myoepithelial cells)

Calponin

Smooth muscle actin (SMA)

Muscle-specific actin (MSA)

Smooth muscle myosin

P63 protein

Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP)

CD10 [43]

Aberration in chromosome 8 has been noted in some myoepithelial carcinomas (malignant myoepitheliomas), in line with other salivary gland carcinomas of different differentiation, while others did not have any. [44] In soft-tissue myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma), Brandal et al found that t(19;22)(q13;q12) translocation leads to a novel fusion gene, EWSR1-ZNF444. The significance of this new fusion gene to tumorigenesis is not clearly defined, but it may be a defining pathogenetic feature of some of these tumors. [45]

In dedifferentiated myoepithelial carcinoma, nuclear accumulation of p53 and cyclin D1 has been described. [21, 37] As mentioned above, C-kit overexpression has also been seen in some myoepithelial carcinomas (malignant myoepitheliomas) (see Etiology), [22] and a more recent article also showed an expression of platelet-derived growth factor A (PDGFA) genes in the tumor. [46]

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC, 7th edition) staging system for malignant tumors of the major salivary glands (ie, parotid, submandibular, sublingual glands) is shown below. [47] Tumor spread can occur by direct extension and lymphovascular or perineural invasion.

T – Primary tumor

Tx – Primary tumor cannot be assessed

T0 – No evidence of primary tumor

T1 – Tumor 2 cm or less in greatest dimension without extraparenchymal extension

T2 – Tumor >2 cm but not more than 4 cm in greatest dimension without extraparenchymal extension

T3 – Tumor >4 cm and/or tumor having extraparenchymal extension

T4a – Tumor invades skin, mandible, ear canal, and/or facial nerve

T4b – Tumor invades skull base and/or pterygoid plates and/or encases carotid artery

N – Regional lymph nodes

NX – Regional lymph nodes cannot be assessed

N0 – No regional lymph node metastasis

N1 – Metastasis into a single ipsilateral lymph node, 3 cm or less in greatest dimension

N2 – Metastasis into a single ipsilateral lymph node, >3 cm in greatest dimension but not >6 cm in greatest dimension, or in multiple ipsilateral lymph nodes, none >6 cm in greatest dimension, or in bilateral or contralateral lymph nodes, none >6 cm in greatest dimension

N3 – Metastasis in a lymph node > 6 cm in greatest dimension

M – Distant metastasis

M0 – No distant metastasis

M1 – Distant metastasis

Table. (Open Table in a new window)

Stage

Grouping

Stage I

T1 N0 M0

Stage II

T2 N0 M0

Stage III

T3 N0 M0

 

T1 N1 M0

 

T2 N1 M0

 

T3 N1 M0

Stage IVA

T4a N0 M0

 

T4a N1 M0

 

T1 N2 M0

 

T2 N2 M0

 

T3 N2 M0

 

T4a N2 M0

Stage IVB

T4b Any N M0

 

Any T N3 M0

Stage IVC

Any T Any N M1

Myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) exhibits a propensity for distant metastasis more than for regional lymph node metastasis, [20] with an ability by most tumors for extensive local growth, infiltration, and destruction. [11, 20] Distant metastasis has been seen to the lungs (most commonly), bone, liver, peritoneum, pleura, kidneys, brain, and skin. [2, 7, 14, 28, 40, 48]

Prognostic reports on myoepithelial carcinomas (malignant myoepitheliomas) are generally limited. In Yu et al’s series of 27 patients, in which the follow-up period ranged from 9 months to 17 years, 14 patients had recurrent tumors, 6 patients developed distant metastasis (mainly lung), 3 had regional lymph node metastasis, and 10 patients died of their disease. [20] All patients underwent surgical tumor removal, and 12 patients underwent postoperative radiotherapy. At the time of writing their report, 17 patients were still alive, 4 survived for longer than 7 years, 6 for longer than 3 years, and 7 for less than 3 years; 1 patient with localized disease survived 17 years. [20] Of 12 patients who received postoperative radiotherapy, 8 developed recurrences and 4 were free of tumor for 1.5, 2, 8, and 11 years, respectively.

Savera et al also gave detailed clinical account of their 25 cases (follow-up, 6-96 mo; 8 patients lost to follow-up), in which 10 of 17 patients with follow-up had recurrence of myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma), and 7 patients survived with no evidence of disease (follow-up, 6-60 mo). [7] Of the 10 patients with recurrence, 2 patients were alive with disease (follow-up, 19 and 49 mo, respectively), but 8 patients had died, 5 of the disease and 3 of other causes. All of the patients had surgical intervention, with 2 receiving chemotherapy and 6 receiving radiotherapy; no combination chemotherapy/radiotherapy was recorded. The 2 patients who were treated with postoperative chemotherapy were among those who died of disease, and, of the 6 patients who received postoperative radiation, 2 were lost to follow-up, 3 were alive and free of disease, and 1 had died of the disease. [7]

In a review by Gnepp et al, 63% of 46 patients with tumors had recurrence, with 13 dying of their disease, 4 dying of other causes, and 9 alive with disease. Fifteen patients were free of the disease, but 17 patients developed distant metastasis, mainly to the lungs. The modality of treatment was reported to be surgical excision with radiation. [17]

A study that looked to provide a better characterization of myoepithelial carcinoma and its prognostic factors reported that myoepithelial carcinoma is an aggressive tumor that is associated with a high rate of distant metastasis and compared with de novo myoepithelial carcinoma, carcinoma ex-pleomorphic adenoma correlates with worse clinical outcome. [48]

It can be gleaned from the studies above that to the best evidence provided, and with around 50% to over 65% survival from cases that were followed up in these reported series, myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) is probably best considered a tumor with high-grade potential and unpredictable biologic behavior. Careful patient follow-up and staging is therefore essential for better characterization and understanding of this tumor’s behavior in the future.

Differential diagnoses of myoepithelial carcinoma include the following:

Spindle cell neoplasms (eg, leiomyosarcoma, schwannoma, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor [MPNST], synovial sarcoma, spindle cell squamous cell carcinoma, metaplastic carcinoma, metastatic malignant melanoma)

Tumors with clear cell morphology (eg, epithelial-myoepithelial carcinoma, hyalinizing clear cell carcinoma, mucoepidermoid carcinoma, metastatic renal cell carcinoma, clear cell carcinoma of salivary glands)

Tumors with epithelioid morphology (eg, adenocarcinoma, adenoid cystic carcinoma, metastatic malignant melanoma)

Tumors with plasmacytoid morphology (eg, plasmacytoma, malignant melanoma, lymphomas, medullary thyroid carcinoma)

Jo VY. Myoepithelial Tumors: An Update. Surg Pathol Clin. 2015 Sep. 8 (3):445-66. [Medline].

Stromeyer FW, Haggitt RC, Nelson JF, Hardman JM. Myoepithelioma of minor salivary gland origin. Light and electron microscopical study. Arch Pathol. 1975 May. 99(5):242-5. [Medline].

Barnes L, Appel BN, Perez H, El-Attar AM. Myoepithelioma of the head and neck: case report and review. J Surg Oncol. 1985 Jan. 28(1):21-8. [Medline].

Dardick I. Myoepithelioma: definitions and diagnostic criteria. Ultrastruct Pathol. 1995 Sep-Oct. 19(5):335-45. [Medline].

Dardick I, Thomas MJ, van Nostrand AW. Myoepithelioma–new concepts of histology and classification: a light and electron microscopic study. Ultrastruct Pathol. 1989 Mar-Jun. 13(2-3):187-224. [Medline].

Seifert G, Sobin LH. The World Health Organization’s Histological Classification of Salivary Gland Tumors. A commentary on the second edition. Cancer. 1992 Jul 15. 70(2):379-85. [Medline].

Savera AT, Sloman A, Huvos AG, Klimstra DS. Myoepithelial carcinoma of the salivary glands: a clinicopathologic study of 25 patients. Am J Surg Pathol. 2000 Jun. 24(6):761-74. [Medline].

Nagao T, Sugano I, Ishida Y, Tajima Y, Matsuzaki O, Konno A. Salivary gland malignant myoepithelioma: a clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical study of ten cases. Cancer. 1998 Oct 1. 83(7):1292-9. [Medline].

Carinci F, Grasso DL, Grandi E, Pelucchi S, Pastore A. Malignant myoepithelioma of the tongue base: case report and literature review. J Craniofac Surg. 2001 Nov. 12(6):544-6. [Medline].

Sasaguri T, Tanimoto A, Arima N, Hamada T, Hashimoto H, Sasaguri Y. Myoepithelioma of soft tissue. Pathol Int. 1999 Jun. 49(6):571-6. [Medline].

Dean A, Sierra R, Alamillos FJ, Lopez-Beltran A, Morillo A, Arévalo R. Malignant myoepithelioma of the salivary glands: clinicopathological and immunohistochemical features. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1999 Feb. 37(1):64-6. [Medline].

Yoshizaki T, Himi Y, Minato H, Ogawa I, Nikai H, Furukawa M. Malignant myoepithelioma arising from recurrent pleomorphic adenoma of minor salivary gland. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2002 Jan. 29(1):91-4. [Medline].

Singh R, Cawson RA. Malignant myoepithelial carcinoma (myoepithelioma) arising in a pleomorphic adenoma of the parotid gland. An immunohistochemical study and review of the literature. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1988 Jul. 66(1):65-70. [Medline].

Di Palma S, Guzzo M. Malignant myoepithelioma of salivary glands: clinicopathological features of ten cases. Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol. 1993. 423(5):389-96. [Medline].

Ellis GL, Auclair PL. Tumors of Salivary GlandsAtlas of tumor pathology. Washington, DC: AFIP; 1996. Fasc.17:

Skalova A, Jakel KT. Tumours of the salivary glands. Barnes L, Eveson JW, Reichart P, Sidransky D. WHO Classification of Tumours;Pathology and genetics of Head and Neck Tumours. Lyon, France: IARC Press; 2005. 240-241.

Gnepp D, Brandwein M, Henley J. Salivary and lacrimal glands. Gnepp DR. Diagnostic surgical pathology of the head ane neck. Philadelphia, PA: W.B Saunders Company; 2001. chapter 6.

Jie W, Qiguang W, Kaihua S, Chengrui B. Quantitative multivariate analysis of myoepithelioma and myoepithelial carcinoma. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1995. 24:153-157.

Nagao T, Sugano I, Ishida Y, Tajima Y, Matsuzaki O, Konno A. Salivary gland malignant myoepithelioma: a clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical study of ten cases. Cancer. 1998 Oct 1. 83(7):1292-9. [Medline].

Yu G, Ma D, Sun K, Li T, Zhang Y. Myoepithelial carcinoma of the salivary glands: behavior and management. Chin Med J (Engl). 2003 Feb. 116(2):163-5. [Medline].

McCluggage WG, Primrose WJ, Toner PG. Myoepithelial carcinoma (malignant myoepithelioma) of the parotid gland arising in a pleomorphic adenoma. J Clin Pathol. 1998 Jul. 51(7):552-6. [Medline]. [Full Text].

Jeng YM, Lin CY, Hsu HC. Expression of the c-kit protein is associated with certain subtypes of salivary gland carcinoma. Cancer Lett. 2000 Jun 1. 154(1):107-11. [Medline].

Nayak JV, Molina JT, Smith JC, Branstetter BF 4th, Hunt JL, Snyderman CH. Myoepithelial neoplasia of the submandibular gland: case report and therapeutic considerations. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003 Mar. 129(3):359-62. [Medline].

Tuncel U, Ergul G, Ozlugedik S, Unal A. Myoepithelial carcinoma in the nasopharynx: an unusual localization. Yonsei Med J. 2004 Feb 29. 45(1):161-5. [Medline].

Ghosh A, Saha S, Saha VP, Sadhu A, Chattopadhyay S. Infratemporal fossa myoepithelial carcinoma-a rare case report. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009 Mar. 13(1):59-62. [Medline].

Herrera GA. Light microscopic, ultrastructural and immunocytochemical spectrum of malignant lacrimal and salivary gland tumors, including malignant mixed tumors. Pathobiology. 1990. 58(6):312-22. [Medline].

Nilles R, Lenarz T, Kaiserling E. [Myoepithelial carcinoma of the nasopharynx. Case report and review of the literature]. HNO. 1993 Aug. 41(8):396-400. [Medline].

Ibrahim R, Bird DJ, Sieler MW. Malignant myoepithelioma of the larynx with massive metastatic spread to the liver: an ultrastructural and immunocytochemical study. Ultrastruct Pathol. 1991 Jan-Feb. 15(1):69-76. [Medline].

Losito NS, Botti G, Ionna F, Pasquinelli G, Minenna P, Bisceglia M. Clear-cell myoepithelial carcinoma of the salivary glands: a clinicopathologic, immunohistochemical, and ultrastructural study of two cases involving the submandibular gland with review of the literature. Pathol Res Pract. 2008. 204(5):335-44. [Medline].

Crissman JD, Wirman JA, Harris A. Malignant myoepithelioma of the parotid gland. Cancer. 1977 Dec. 40(6):3042-9. [Medline].

Singh R, Cawson RA. Malignant myoepithelial carcinoma (myoepithelioma) arising in a pleomorphic adenoma of the parotid gland. An immunohistochemical study and review of the literature. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1988 Jul. 66(1):65-70. [Medline].

Guzzo M, Cantù G, Di Palma S. Malignant myoepithelioma of the palate: report of case. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1994 Oct. 52(10):1080-2. [Medline].

Said S, Campana J. Myoepithelial carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma of salivary glands: a problematic diagnosis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005 Feb. 99(2):196-201. [Medline].

el-Naggar A, Batsakis JG, Luna MA, Goepfert H, Tortoledo ME. DNA content and proliferative activity of myoepitheliomas. J Laryngol Otol. 1989 Dec. 103(12):1192-7. [Medline].

Bellizzi AM, Mills SE. Collagenous crystalloids in myoepithelial carcinoma: report of a case and review of the literature. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008 Sep. 130(3):355-62. [Medline].

Skalova A, Leivo I, Michal M, Saksela E. Analysis of collagen isotypes in crystalloid structures of salivary gland tumors. Hum Pathol. 1992 Jul. 23(7):748-54. [Medline].

Ogawa I, Nishida T, Miyauchi M, Sato S, Takata T. Dedifferentiated malignant myoepithelioma of the parotid gland. Pathol Int. 2003 Oct. 53(10):704-9. [Medline].

Stanley RJ, Weiland LH, Olsen KD, Pearson BW. Dedifferentiated acinic cell (acinous) carcinoma of the parotid gland. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1988 Feb. 98(2):155-61. [Medline].

Sternlicht MD, Safarians S, Rivera SP, Barsky SH. Characterizations of the extracellular matrix and proteinase inhibitor content of human myoepithelial tumors. Lab Invest. 1996 Apr. 74(4):781-96. [Medline].

Alós L, Cardesa A, Bombí JA, Mallofré C, Cuchi A, Traserra J. Myoepithelial tumors of salivary glands: a clinicopathologic, immunohistochemical, ultrastructural, and flow-cytometric study. Semin Diagn Pathol. 1996 May. 13(2):138-47. [Medline].

El-Mofty S, O’Leary T, Swanson P. Malignant Myoepitheliomaof salivary glands: clinicopathologic and immunophenotypic features,. Review of literature and report of two cases. Int J Surg Pathol. 1994. 2:133-140.

Ohba S, Fujimori M, Ito S, Matsumoto F, Hata M, Takayanagi H, et al. A case report of metastasizing myoepithelial carcinoma of the parotid gland arising in a recurrent pleomorphic adenoma. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2009 Feb. 36(1):123-6. [Medline].

Neves Cde O, Soares AB, Costa AF, de Araujo VC, Furuse C, Juliano PB. CD10 (Neutral Endopeptidase) Expression in Myoepithelial Cells of Salivary Neoplasms. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2010 Mar. 18(2):172-8. [Medline].

Hungermann D, Roeser K, Buerger H, Jäkel T, Löning T, Herbst H. Relative paucity of gross genetic alterations in myoepitheliomas and myoepithelial carcinomas of salivary glands. J Pathol. 2002 Dec. 198(4):487-94. [Medline].

Brandal P, Panagopoulos I, Bjerkehagen B, Heim S. t(19;22)(q13;q12) Translocation leading to the novel fusion gene EWSR1-ZNF444 in soft tissue myoepithelial carcinoma. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2009 Sep 16. [Medline].

Terada T. Myoepithelial carcinoma of pharynx expressing KIT and PDGFRA. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2013. 6(2):314-7. [Medline].

Head and Neck. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. Seventh. Springer; 2010. 79.

Kong M, Drill EN, Morris L, West L, Klimstra D, Gonen M, et al. Prognostic factors in myoepithelial carcinoma of salivary glands: a clinicopathologic study of 48 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2015 Jul. 39 (7):931-8. [Medline].

Stage

Grouping

Stage I

T1 N0 M0

Stage II

T2 N0 M0

Stage III

T3 N0 M0

 

T1 N1 M0

 

T2 N1 M0

 

T3 N1 M0

Stage IVA

T4a N0 M0

 

T4a N1 M0

 

T1 N2 M0

 

T2 N2 M0

 

T3 N2 M0

 

T4a N2 M0

Stage IVB

T4b Any N M0

 

Any T N3 M0

Stage IVC

Any T Any N M1

M Sherif Said, MD, PhD Associate Professor, Department of Pathology, University of Colorado School of Medicine; Associate Director of Pathology Department, Denver Health Medical Center

M Sherif Said, MD, PhD is a member of the following medical societies: American Society for Clinical Pathology, College of American Pathologists

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

M Sherif Said, MD, PhD Associate Professor, Department of Pathology, University of Colorado School of Medicine; Associate Director of Pathology Department, Denver Health Medical Center

M Sherif Said, MD, PhD is a member of the following medical societies: American Society for Clinical Pathology, College of American Pathologists

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Mary R Schwartz, MD Clinical Professor of Pathology, Baylor College of Medicine; Director of Surgical Pathology Fellowship and Director of Anatomic Pathology at The Methodist Hospital

Mary R Schwartz, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Medical Association, American Society of Cytopathology, College of American Pathologists, United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Myoepithelial Carcinoma 

Research & References of Myoepithelial Carcinoma |A&C Accounting And Tax Services
Source