rss
J Clin Pathol 2009;62:212-218 doi:10.1136/jcp.2008.057240
  • Reviews

A review of molecular pathological markers in vulvar carcinoma: lack of application in clinical practice

  1. S Knopp1,3,4,
  2. C Tropè2,3,
  3. J M Nesland1,3,
  4. R Holm1
  1. 1Division of Pathology, The Norwegian Radium Hospital, Rikshospitalet University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
  2. 2Division of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The Norwegian Radium Hospital, Rikshospitalet University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
  3. 3Faculty Division The Norwegian Radium Hospital, University of Oslo, Norway
  4. 4Department of Pathology and Medical Genetics, St Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
  1. Ruth Holm, Division of Pathology, The Norwegian Radium Hospital, Montebello, 0310 Oslo, Norway; ruth.holm{at}radiumhospitalet.no
  • Accepted 19 November 2008

Abstract

Vulvar carcinoma is a rare female genital neoplasia. Radical surgery, which has been the standard treatment approach, is often accompanied by considerable morbidity. To reduce the incidence of complications there has been a movement toward individualised therapy and less radical surgery. Associated with this, new tumour markers that could serve as prognostic indicators would be of considerable value to guide treatment decision. In this review, a brief update of molecular pathological markers of vulvar carcinomas is provided, and their impact as prognostic markers is addressed. p16, p21, p14, p27, cyclin A, cyclin D1, p53, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), transforming growth factor α, HER-2 and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) have been found to be important in the pathogenesis and/or progression of vulvar carcinomas. Furthermore, human papillomavirus, p16, p21, p14, p53, VEGF, CD44v3, CD44v6, CD44v4, CD44v9, CD44v10, HER-2, EGFR, matrix metalloproteinase-12, caspase 3, Bcl-2 and nm23-H1 have been correlated to clinical outcome of patients with vulvar carcinomas. However, due to the relative small number of studies reported for each molecular pathological marker, and the relative small number of vulvar carcinomas included and the lack of multivariate analysis in the majority of these studies, no conclusion regarding the prognostic value of these markers can be drawn. Therefore, the investigated markers have not yet earned a place in standard clinical diagnostics or treatment, and further studies are needed to clarify the clinical value of these markers.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None.

Latest from JCP Education

Latest from JCP Education

Register for free content


Free sample
This recent issue is free to all users to allow everyone the opportunity to see the full scope and typical content of JCP.
View free sample issue >>

Free archive
The full back archive is now available for JCP. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006, back to volume 1 issue 1.
Register to access the free archive >>

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

  • Latest Pathology jobs

    Latest Pathology jobs