Medscape is available in 5 Language Editions – Choose your Edition here.


Uterus Carcinosarcoma Pathology 

  • Author: Peggy S Sullivan, MD; Chief Editor: Ramya Masand, MD  more...
Updated: Nov 13, 2013


Carcinosarcoma of the uterus is a biphasic neoplasm composed of malignant epithelial and mesenchymal elements.

Although carcinosarcoma is the preferred term for this group of tumors, according to the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists (ISGyP)/World Health Organization (WHO) classification, it is also referred to as malignant müllerian mixed tumor. These tumors are currently thought to be monoclonal carcinomas with sarcomatous differentiation.

Various synonyms have been used to distinguish those with only homologous mesenchymal elements (carcinosarcoma) from those with only heterologous mesenchymal elements (malignant mesodermal mixed tumor or malignant müllerian mixed tumor [MMMT]).



Carcinosarcoma comprises less than 5% of malignant neoplasms of the uterine corpus.[2] It is typically seen in postmenopausal women, although rare cases occur in younger women and even children. The median age at presentation is 65 years,[3, 4] and it may be more common in blacks than in non-Hispanic whites.[5, 6, 7, 66]



Risk factors for carcinosarcoma include excessive weight, exogenous estrogen use, and nulliparity,[5] which are similar risk factors for (but not as strongly linked to) endometrial carcinoma.[8] Oral contraceptives and smoking are thought to be protective.[5] Some cases may result from prior pelvic radiation.[9, 10] In recent years, an association between long-term tamoxifen treatment and the development of carcinosarcoma has been suggested.[3, 12, 13, 67]



Carcinosarcomas typically arise within the endometrial cavity. In rare cases, neoplasms may arise in the cervix or within an endometrial polyp.[14, 68]


Clinical Features and Imaging

Most patients with uterine carcinosarcoma present with abnormal vaginal bleeding. Other clinical presentations include pelvic or abdominal pain, bloody or watery discharge, and/or an abdominal mass.[15] A polypoid tumor may protrude through the external os.

Up to one third of patients may present with extrauterine spread; thus, gastrointestinal or genitourinary symptoms may be present.[1] Rare cervical carcinosarcomas manifest as vaginal bleeding, spotting, or an abnormal Papanicolaou test result.[14]

On MRI, carcinosarcoma cannot be distinguished from endometrial carcinoma, but a large uterine tumor with widened endometrial cavity and extensive myometrial invasion or intraperitoneal metastases should raise suspicion for carcinosarcoma.[16, 17]


Gross Findings

These tumors are generally large, soft, broad-based, and polypoid, expanding the uterine cavity and, in some cases, protruding through the cervical os. In some cases, tumors arise from a normal-sized atrophic uterus[1] or a benign polyp.[18, 19] Grossly evident myometrial invasion into the outer half and extrauterine extension are common.

The cut surface is usually fleshy with extensive necrosis, hemorrhage, and cystic degeneration. Areas of cartilage and bone formation yield a gritty or hard consistency.


Microscopic Findings

Carcinosarcomas comprise an admixture of histologically malignant epithelial and mesenchymal components, as depicted below. In general, both components are easily identifiable. However, the proportion of each component varies greatly, and the diagnosis may not be apparent until after hysterectomy.

Both components are typically high-grade, with marked anaplasia and atypical mitotic figures (as shown below). Low-grade neoplasms are less common but do occur. An estimated 16% of carcinosarcomas have a low-grade stromal component.[20]

The carcinoma component is usually high-grade endometrioid, serous, clear cell, or undifferentiated carcinoma. Rarely, mucinous differentiation or squamous cell carcinoma is seen.

Both epithelial and mesenchymal components of carc Both epithelial and mesenchymal components of carcinosarcoma show high-grade malignant cells. (H&E stain, X400)
Carcinosarcoma with both a high-grade carcinomatou Carcinosarcoma with both a high-grade carcinomatous and sarcomatous component. (H&E stain, X400)
A higher power view of carcinosarcoma. Note the nu A higher power view of carcinosarcoma. Note the numerous mitotic figures. (H&E stain, X1000)

The sarcomatous component may be either homologous or heterologous. Homologous elements (composed of cell types normally found in the uterus) are typically undifferentiated spindle cell sarcoma, pleomorphic sarcoma, or fibrosarcoma. Leiomyosarcoma may also be seen. The most common heterologous elements include rhabdomyosarcoma and chondrosarcoma. Rhabdomyoblasts, if well-differentiated, have cross-striations apparent on routine stains (see image below), although large "straplike" cells with round-to-oval atypical nuclei and abundant eosinophilic cytoplasm should raise suspicion (refer to image below). Rarer forms of heterologous elements include osteosarcoma and liposarcoma. Mature cartilage or osteoid or bone formation may also be seen. Intracellular and extracellular eosinophilic hyaline droplets are common, especially in the sarcomatous component.[21]

Some rhabdomyoblasts are well-differentiated and s Some rhabdomyoblasts are well-differentiated and show cross-striations. (H&E stain, x1000, oil)
Rhabdomyoblasts may be seen in carcinosarcoma and Rhabdomyoblasts may be seen in carcinosarcoma and have abundant eosinophilic or foamy cytopplasm and large vacuolated nuclei with prominent nucleoli. (H&E stain, x200)

In most cases, the carcinomatous and sarcomatous areas are sharply demarcated, but, in some forms, they appear to merge with transitional forms between the two elements, as shown below.[22] Some heterologous foci may appear intimately associated with the epithelial component with no intervening nonspecific sarcomatous component. In a minority of cases (13%), an associated adenosarcomalike component may be present;[20] 40% have deep myometrial invasion.[23]

Lymphatic and vascular space invasion is detected in many cases, with extrauterine spread and metastases at the time of presentation. In general, most metastatic deposits and foci of lymphatic and vascular space invasion are composed of the carcinomatous element, with sarcomatous metastases being rare.[24, 2, 25, 26] However, some studies have found biphasic metastases to be the most common type.[27]

Carcinosarcomas have been reported in otherwise benign endometrial polyps.[18, 19] Others have described carcinosarcoma with a rhabdoid phenotype,[28] a malignant neuroectodermal component,[29] and melanocytic differentiation.[30] A uterine carcinosarcoma of mesonephric origin has been described,[31] as well as a carcinosarcoma with a yolk sac component and elevated serum alpha fetoprotein levels.[32]

Rare cervical carcinosarcomas have been reported. The epithelial component is typically a basaloid carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, or adenocarcinoma (endometrioid type). Mesonephric type has also been reported.[68] Some cases may resemble adenoid cystic carcinoma. The mesenchymal component may be fibrosarcoma or endometrial stromal sarcoma, some with myxoid change.[14]



Immunohistochemistry is typically not required to establish the diagnosis of this entity, although it may be required to distinguish it from a sarcomatoid carcinoma. The epithelial component is usually immunoreactive with cytokeratins, epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), and vimentin. The mesenchymal component usually stains for vimentin, smooth muscle actin, desmin, and focal cytokeratin.[23] Both the sarcomatous and carcinomatous components often coexpress epithelial markers and vimentin to varying degrees.[33, 34, 35, 36] } Myogenic differentiation 1 (MyoD1) and myogenin may help to highlight a rhabdomyosarcomatous component.

The cartilaginous elements usually stain with S-100. TP53 expression typically shows concordance between epithelial and mesenchymal components, supporting a monoclonal origin.[37, 38] Estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor expression have been reported in some cases.[39] Variable expression of epidermal growth factor receptor, HER-2/neu,[40] and c-kit[41] has also been reported.



By convention, the WHO classifies carcinosarcoma as a "mixed’ epithelial and mesenchymal tumor. However, it is generally accepted that most of these biphasic neoplasms are monoclonal, metaplastic, or sarcomatoid carcinomas in which the mesenchymal component retains some epithelial features. This is supported by much of the clinical, histopathological, and immunohistochemical features described above and by recent tissue culture and molecular genetic studies.

Cell lines from carcinosarcoma have supported the theory of a single cell origin.[42, 43] TP53 and KRAS mutations, along with a pattern of chromosome X-inactivation, confirm that most carcinosarcomas are monoclonal.[44] Another study using 3 different methods of determining clonality demonstrated 3 cases of carcinosarcoma were monoclonal.[45] Additional studies examining TP53 mutations[46] and p53 expression[37, 38] have shown concordance between epithelial and mesenchymal elements. Loss of heterozygosity studies also support a monoclonal origin.[47]

Finally, recent cytogenetic studies show shared allelic losses and gains in separate carcinomatous and sarcomatous foci within each tumor.[48] Overrepresentation of 8q has been reported in these neoplasms.[49, 50] DNA mismatch repair and TP53 defects may be early events in tumorigenesis.[51]

While most carcinosarcomas appear to be monoclonal, a subset of carcinosarcomas are truly “biphasic,” as demonstrated by molecular studies[44] and supported by cases demonstrating gross and microscopic features of “collision” tumors and an adjacent adenosarcomalike component.[20] It is estimated that at least 8% of carcinosarcomas are biclonal and that up to 16% may belong to this subset of truly biphasic carcinosarcomas.[20] A recent gene expression profile study found carcinosarcomas were more similar to uterine sarcomas than endometrial carcinoma.[69]


Tumor Spread and Staging

The pattern of tumor spread is similar to that of high-grade endometrial carcinoma: primarily via lymphatics with frequent intra-abdominal and retroperitoneal metastases.[4, 2, 24] This is distinct from uterine sarcomas, in which disease spreads hematogenously. Deep myometrial invasion and extrauterine spread are often seen at the time of presentation.

Mortality is associated with tumor growth within the pelvis and abdomen rather than metastatic disease,[4] although most such patients also have hematogenous spread, most commonly to the lungs, liver, bone, and brain.[23] Carcinosarcomas are staged similarly to endometrial carcinomas using the TNM and FIGO classification of nontrophoblastic tumors of the uterine corpus.[70, 71]


Prognosis and Predictive Factors

Carcinosarcomas behave aggressively and have a poor overall prognosis, considerably worse than high-grade endometrial carcinoma, even after other important prognostic variables such as stage, depth of myometrial invasion, and lymphatic and vascular space invasion are taken into account.[27] Surgical stage is the most important prognostic factor, with deep myometrial invasion and extrauterine extension negatively affecting survival.[65, 52, 53, 54] Deep myometrial invasion is associated with metastatic disease.[2]

The 5-year survival ranges from 60%-75% for uterine-confined disease, 40%-60% for early-stage disease (I and II), and 15%-30% for late-stage disease with a median survival of less than 2 years.[55, 23, 72]

Some have found high-grade epithelial type (serous or clear cell carcinoma) to be associated with a poor prognosis,[53, 52, 72] while others have not.[26] Recent data have linked black/nonwhite race and advanced age with decreased survival.[72, 73]

In general, the presence of heterologous elements does not appear to have prognostic significance.[2, 27, 26]

Another study of 83 patients demonstrated multiparity (≥3 children) to be an independent prognostic factor in improving survival likelihood.[57] Disease confined to a polyp is thought to have a better prognosis.[18, 19, 74] It should be noted that, although tumor stage is the most significant prognostic indicator, even cases lacking myometrial invasion may have subsequent recurrences.

A small subset of carcinosarcomas are true “collision”’ tumors, which may have a better prognosis than similarly staged “metaplastic” carcinosarcoma in some cases.[58] Of the rare cases of cervical carcinosarcomas that have been reported, they are generally confined to the uterus at presentation and may have a better prognosis.[14]

Contributor Information and Disclosures

Peggy S Sullivan, MD Assistant Professor, Department of Pathology and Lab Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine

Peggy S Sullivan, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Society for Clinical Pathology, American Society of Cytopathology, College of American Pathologists, United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

Ramya Masand, MD Assistant Professor, Department of Pathology and Immunology, Baylor College of Medicine

Ramya Masand, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Society for Clinical Pathology, College of American Pathologists, United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, International Society of Gynecological Pathologists

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

  1. Robboy SJ, Anderson MC, Russell P. Pathology of the Reproductive Tract. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2002.

  2. Silverberg SG, Major FJ, Blessing JA, Fetter B, Askin FB, Liao SY. Carcinosarcoma (malignant mixed mesodermal tumor) of the uterus. A Gynecologic Oncology Group pathologic study of 203 cases. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1990. 9(1):1-19. [Medline].

  3. Evans MJ, Langlois NE, Kitchener HC, Miller ID. Is there an association between long-term tamoxifen treatment and the development of carcinosarcoma (malignant mixed Müllerian tumor) of the uterus?. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 1995 Jul. 5(4):310-313. [Medline].

  4. Major FJ, Blessing JA, Silverberg SG, Morrow CP, Creasman WT, Currie JL, et al. Prognostic factors in early-stage uterine sarcoma. A Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Cancer. 1993 Feb 15. 71(4 Suppl):1702-9. [Medline].

  5. Zelmanowicz A, Hildesheim A, Sherman ME, Sturgeon SR, Kurman RJ, Barrett RJ. Evidence for a common etiology for endometrial carcinomas and malignant mixed mullerian tumors. Gynecol Oncol. 1998 Jun. 69(3):253-7. [Medline].

  6. Sherman ME, Devesa SS. Analysis of racial differences in incidence, survival, and mortality for malignant tumors of the uterine corpus. Cancer. 2003 Jul 1. 98(1):176-86. [Medline].

  7. Brooks SE, Zhan M, Cote T, Baquet CR. Surveillance, epidemiology, and end results analysis of 2677 cases of uterine sarcoma 1989-1999. Gynecol Oncol. 2004 Apr. 93(1):204-8. [Medline].

  8. Ostor AG, Rollason TP. Mixed tumors of the uterus. Fox H, Wells M. Haines and Taylor Obstetrical and Gynaecological Pathology. 4. New York City: Churchill Livingstone; 1995. 1: 587-621.

  9. Ali S, Wells M. Mixed Mullerian tumors of the uterine corpus: a review. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 1993 Jan. 3(1):1-11. [Medline].

  10. Pothuri B, Ramondetta L, Martino M, Alektiar K, Eifel PJ, Deavers MT. Development of endometrial cancer after radiation treatment for cervical carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol. 2003 May. 101(5 Pt 1):941-5. [Medline].

  11. Varela-Duran J, Nochomovitz LE, Prem KA, Dehner LP. Postirradiation mixed müllerian tumors of the uterus: a comparative clinicopathologic study. Cancer. 1980 Apr 1. 45(7):1625-31. [Medline].

  12. McCluggage WG, Abdulkader M, Price JH, Kelehan P, Hamilton S, Beattie J. Uterine carcinosarcomas in patients receiving tamoxifen. A report of 19 cases. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2000 Jul. 10(4):280-284. [Medline].

  13. Treilleux T, Mignotte H, Clement-Chassagne C, Guastalla P, Bailly C. Tamoxifen and malignant epithelial-nonepithelial tumours of the endometrium: report of six cases and review of the literature. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1999 Oct. 25(5):477-82. [Medline].

  14. Clement PB, Zubovits JT, Young RH, Scully RE. Malignant mullerian mixed tumors of the uterine cervix: a report of nine cases of a neoplasm with morphology often different from its counterpart in the corpus. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1998 Jul. 17(3):211-22. [Medline].

  15. Dinh TV, Slavin RE, Bhagavan BS, Hannigan EV, Tiamson EM, Yandell RB. Mixed müllerian tumors of the uterus: a clinicopathologic study. Obstet Gynecol. 1989 Sep. 74(3 Pt 1):388-92. [Medline].

  16. Grayson W, Taylor LF, Cooper K. Carcinosarcoma of the uterine cervix: a report of eight cases with immunohistochemical analysis and evaluation of human papillomavirus status. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001 Mar. 25(3):338-47. [Medline].

  17. Takemori M, Nishimura R, Yasuda D, Sugimura K. Carcinosarcoma of the uterus: magnetic resonance imaging. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 1997. 43(2):139-41. [Medline].

  18. Barwick KW, LiVolsi VA. Heterologous mixed müllerian tumor confined to an endometrial polyp. Obstet Gynecol. 1979 Apr. 53(4):512-4. [Medline].

  19. Kahner S, Ferenczy A, Richart RM. Homologous mixed Müllerian tumors (carcinosarcomal) confined to endometrial polyps. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1975 Jan 15. 121(2):278-9. [Medline].

  20. Seidman JD, Chauhan S. Evaluation of the relationship between adenosarcoma and carcinosarcoma and a hypothesis of the histogenesis of uterine sarcomas. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2003 Jan. 22(1):75-82. [Medline].

  21. Reymundo C, Toro M, Morales C, López-Beltrán A, Nogales F, Nogales F Jr. Hyaline globules in uterine malignant mixed müllerian tumours. A diagnostic aid?. Pathol Res Pract. 1993 Nov. 189(9):1063-6. [Medline].

  22. McCluggage WG, Haller U, Kurman RJ, et al. Mixed epithelial and mesenchymal tumours. Tavassoli FA, Devilee P. World Health Organization Classification of Tumours. Pathology and Genetics of Tumours of the Breast and Female Genital Organs. Lyon: IARC Press; 2003. 247-248.

  23. Clement PB and Young RH. Clement PB and Young RH. Atlas of Gynecologic Surgical Pathology. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 2000.

  24. Bitterman P, Chun B, Kurman RJ. The significance of epithelial differentiation in mixed mesodermal tumors of the uterus. A clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical study. Am J Surg Pathol. 1990 Apr. 14(4):317-28. [Medline].

  25. Sreenan JJ, Hart WR. Carcinosarcomas of the female genital tract. A pathologic study of 29 metastatic tumors: further evidence for the dominant role of the epithelial component and the conversion theory of histogenesis. Am J Surg Pathol. 1995 Jun. 19(6):666-74. [Medline].

  26. Costa MJ, Khan R, Judd R. Carcinoma (malignant mixed müllerian [mesodermal] tumor) of the uterus and ovary. Correlation of clinical, pathologic, and immunohistochemical features in 29 cases. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1991 Jun. 115(6):583-90. [Medline].

  27. George E, Lillemoe TJ, Twiggs LB, Perrone T. Malignant mixed müllerian tumor versus high-grade endometrial carcinoma and aggressive variants of endometrial carcinoma: a comparative analysis of survival. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1995 Jan. 14(1):39-44. [Medline].

  28. Baschinsky DY, Niemann TH, Eaton LA, Frankel WL. Malignant mixed Müllerian tumor with rhabdoid features: a report of two cases and a review of the literature. Gynecol Oncol. 1999 Apr. 73(1):145-50. [Medline].

  29. Fukunaga M, Nomura K, Endo Y, Ushigome S, Aizawa S. Carcinosarcoma of the uterus with extensive neuroectodermal differentiation. Histopathology. 1996 Dec. 29(6):565-70. [Medline].

  30. Amant F, Moerman P, Davel GH, De Vos R, Vergote I, Lindeque BG. Uterine carcinosarcoma with melanocytic differentiation. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2001 Apr. 20(2):186-90. [Medline].

  31. Yamamoto Y, Akagi A, Izumi K, Kishi Y. Carcinosarcoma of the uterine body of mesonephric origin. Pathol Int. 1995 Apr. 45(4):303-9. [Medline].

  32. Shokeir MO, Noel SM, Clement PB. Malignant müllerian mixed tumor of the uterus with a prominent alpha-fetoprotein-producing component of yolk sac tumor. Mod Pathol. 1996 Jun. 9(6):647-51. [Medline].

  33. Geisinger KR, Dabbs DJ, Marshall RB. Malignant mixed müllerian tumors. An ultrastructural and immunohistochemical analysis with histogenetic considerations. Cancer. 1987 May 15. 59(10):1781-90. [Medline].

  34. Meis JM, Lawrence WD. The immunohistochemical profile of malignant mixed müllerian tumor. Overlap with endometrial adenocarcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol. 1990 Jul. 94(1):1-7. [Medline].

  35. de Brito PA, Silverberg SG, Orenstein JM. Carcinosarcoma (malignant mixed müllerian (mesodermal) tumor) of the female genital tract: immunohistochemical and ultrastructural analysis of 28 cases. Hum Pathol. 1993 Feb. 24(2):132-42. [Medline].

  36. George E, Manivel JC, Dehner LP, Wick MR. Malignant mixed müllerian tumors: an immunohistochemical study of 47 cases, with histogenetic considerations and clinical correlation. Hum Pathol. 1991 Mar. 22(3):215-23. [Medline].

  37. Mayall F, Rutty K, Campbell F, Goddard H. p53 immunostaining suggests that uterine carcinosarcomas are monoclonal. Histopathology. 1994 Mar. 24(3):211-4. [Medline].

  38. Szukala SA, Marks JR, Burchette JL, Elbendary AA, Krigman HR. Co-expression of p53 by epithelial and stromal elements in carcinosarcoma of the female genital tract: an immunohistochemical study of 19 cases. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 1999 Mar. 9(2):131-136. [Medline].

  39. Ansink AC, Cross PA, Scorer P, de Barros Lopes A, Monaghan JM. The hormonal receptor status of uterine carcinosarcomas (mixed müllerian tumours): an immunohistochemical study. J Clin Pathol. 1997 Apr. 50(4):328-31. [Medline].

  40. Livasy CA, Reading FC, Moore DT, Boggess JF, Lininger RA. EGFR expression and HER2/neu overexpression/amplification in endometrial carcinosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2006 Jan. 100(1):101-6. [Medline].

  41. Winter WE 3rd, Seidman JD, Krivak TC, Chauhan S, Carlson JW, Rose GS. Clinicopathological analysis of c-kit expression in carcinosarcomas and leiomyosarcomas of the uterine corpus. Gynecol Oncol. 2003 Oct. 91(1):3-8. [Medline].

  42. Gorai I, Doi C, Minaguchi H. Establishment and characterization of carcinosarcoma cell line of the human uterus. Cancer. 1993 Feb 1. 71(3):775-86. [Medline].

  43. Emoto M, Iwasaki H, Kikuchi M, Shirakawa K. Characteristics of cloned cells of mixed müllerian tumor of the human uterus. Carcinoma cells showing myogenic differentiation in vitro. Cancer. 1993 May 15. 71(10):3065-75. [Medline].

  44. Wada H, Enomoto T, Fujita M, Yoshino K, Nakashima R, Kurachi H, et al. Molecular evidence that most but not all carcinosarcomas of the uterus are combination tumors. Cancer Res. 1997 Dec 1. 57(23):5379-85. [Medline].

  45. Thompson L, Chang B, Barsky SH. Monoclonal origins of malignant mixed tumors (carcinosarcomas). Evidence for a divergent histogenesis. Am J Surg Pathol. 1996 Mar. 20(3):277-85. [Medline].

  46. Kounelis S, Jones MW, Papadaki H, Bakker A, Swalsky P, Finkelstein SD. Carcinosarcomas (malignant mixed mullerian tumors) of the female genital tract: comparative molecular analysis of epithelial and mesenchymal components. Hum Pathol. 1998 Jan. 29(1):82-7. [Medline].

  47. Abeln EC, Smit VT, Wessels JW, de Leeuw WJ, Cornelisse CJ, Fleuren GJ. Molecular genetic evidence for the conversion hypothesis of the origin of malignant mixed müllerian tumours. J Pathol. 1997 Dec. 183(4):424-31. [Medline].

  48. Fujii H, Yoshida M, Gong ZX, Matsumoto T, Hamano Y, Fukunaga M. Frequent genetic heterogeneity in the clonal evolution of gynecological carcinosarcoma and its influence on phenotypic diversity. Cancer Res. 2000 Jan 1. 60(1):114-20. [Medline].

  49. Schulten HJ, Gunawan B, Enders C, Donhuijsen K, Emons G, Füzesi L. Overrepresentation of 8q in carcinosarcomas and endometrial adenocarcinomas. Am J Clin Pathol. 2004 Oct. 122(4):546-51. [Medline].

  50. Schipf A, Mayr D, Kirchner T, Diebold J. Molecular genetic aberrations of ovarian and uterine carcinosarcomas--a CGH and FISH study. Virchows Arch. 2008 Mar. 452(3):259-68. [Medline].

  51. Taylor NP, Zighelboim I, Huettner PC, Powell MA, Gibb RK, Rader JS. DNA mismatch repair and TP53 defects are early events in uterine carcinosarcoma tumorigenesis. Mod Pathol. 2006 Oct. 19(10):1333-8. [Medline].

  52. Gagné E, Têtu B, Blondeau L, Raymond PE, Blais R. Morphologic prognostic factors of malignant mixed müllerian tumor of the uterus: a clinicopathologic study of 58 cases. Mod Pathol. 1989 Sep. 2(5):433-8. [Medline].

  53. Nordal RR, Kristensen GB, Stenwig AE, Nesland JM, Pettersen EO, Trope CG. An evaluation of prognostic factors in uterine carcinosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol. 1997 Dec. 67(3):316-21. [Medline].

  54. Iwasa Y, Haga H, Konishi I, Kobashi Y, Higuchi K, Katsuyama E. Prognostic factors in uterine carcinosarcoma: a clinicopathologic study of 25 patients. Cancer. 1998 Feb 1. 82(3):512-9. [Medline].

  55. Ronnett BM, Zaino RJ, Ellenson LH, Kurman RJ. Endometrial carcinoma. Kurman RJ. Blaustein’s Pathology of the Female Genital Tract. 5. New York City: Springer-Verlag; 2002. 538-541.

  56. Ferguson SE, Tornos C, Hummer A, Barakat RR, Soslow RA. Prognostic features of surgical stage I uterine carcinosarcoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007 Nov. 31(11):1653-61. [Medline].

  57. Marth C, Windbichler G, Petru E, Dirschlmayer W, Obermair A, Czerwenka K, et al. Parity as an independent prognostic factor in malignant mixed mesodermal tumors of the endometrium. Gynecol Oncol. 1997 Jan. 64(1):121-5. [Medline].

  58. McCluggage WG. Malignant biphasic uterine tumours: carcinosarcomas or metaplastic carcinomas?. J Clin Pathol. 2002 May. 55(5):321-5. [Medline].

  59. Amant F, Cadron I, Fuso L, Berteloot P, de Jonge E, Jacomen G. Endometrial carcinosarcomas have a different prognosis and pattern of spread compared to high-risk epithelial endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2005 Aug. 98(2):274-80. [Medline].

  60. Anderson MC, Robboy SJ, Russell P. Endometrial tumors with a stromal component. Robboy SJ, Anderson MC, Russell P. Pathology of the Reproductive Tract. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2002. 361-387.

  61. Clement PB, Young RH. Endometrioid carcinoma of the uterine corpus: a review of its pathology with emphasis on recent advances and problematic aspects. Adv Anat Pathol. 2002 May. 9(3):145-84. [Medline].

  62. Cokelaere K, Michielsen P, De Vos R, Sciot R. Primary mesenteric malignant mixed mesodermal (müllerian) tumor with neuroendocrine differentiation. Mod Pathol. 2001 May. 14(5):515-20. [Medline].

  63. McCluggage WG. Uterine carcinosarcomas (malignant mixed Mullerian tumors) are metaplastic carcinomas. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2002 Nov-Dec. 12(6):687-90. [Medline].

  64. Murray SK, Clement PB, Young RH. Endometrioid carcinomas of the uterine corpus with sex cord-like formations, hyalinization, and other unusual morphologic features: a report of 31 cases of a neoplasm that may be confused with carcinosarcoma and other uterine neoplasms. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005 Feb. 29(2):157-66. [Medline].

  65. Barwick KW, LiVolsi VA. Malignant mixed müllerian tumors of the uterus. A clinicopathologic assessment of 34 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 1979 Apr. 3(2):125-35. [Medline].

  66. Smotkin D, Nevadunsky NS, Harris K, Einstein MH, Yu Y, Goldberg GL. Histopathologic differences account for racial disparity in uterine cancer survival. Gynecol Oncol. 2012 Dec. 127(3):616-9. [Medline].

  67. Uehara T, Onda T, Togami S, Amano T, Tanikawa M, Sawada M, et al. Prognostic impact of the history of breast cancer and of hormone therapy in uterine carcinosarcoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2012 Feb. 22(2):280-5. [Medline].

  68. Meguro S, Yasuda M, Shimizu M, Kurosaki A, Fujiwara K. Mesonephric adenocarcinoma with a sarcomatous component, a notable subtype of cervical carcinosarcoma: a case report and review of the literature. Diagn Pathol. 2013 May 7. 8(1):74. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  69. Chiyoda T, Tsuda H, Tanaka H, Kataoka F, Nomura H, Nishimura S, et al. Expression profiles of carcinosarcoma of the uterine corpus-are these similar to carcinoma or sarcoma?. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2012 Mar. 51(3):229-39. [Medline].

  70. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2009;105:103-4.

  71. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A. (Eds) AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 7th Ed. Springer:New York; 2010:485.

  72. Bansal N, Herzog TJ, Seshan VE, Schiff PB, Burke WM, Cohen CJ, et al. Uterine carcinosarcomas and grade 3 endometrioid cancers: evidence for distinct tumor behavior. Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Jul. 112(1):64-70. [Medline].

  73. Arend R, Bagaria M, Lewin SN, Sun X, Deutsch I, Burke WM, et al. Long-term outcome and natural history of uterine adenosarcomas. Gynecol Oncol. 2010 Nov. 119(2):305-8. [Medline].

  74. Djordjevic B, Gien LT, Covens A, Malpica A, Khalifa MA. Polypoid or non-polypoid? A novel dichotomous approach to uterine carcinosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Oct. 115(1):32-6. [Medline].

Both epithelial and mesenchymal components of carcinosarcoma show high-grade malignant cells. (H&E stain, X400)
Carcinosarcoma with both a high-grade carcinomatous and sarcomatous component. (H&E stain, X400)
A higher power view of carcinosarcoma. Note the numerous mitotic figures. (H&E stain, X1000)
Rhabdomyoblasts may be seen in carcinosarcoma and have abundant eosinophilic or foamy cytopplasm and large vacuolated nuclei with prominent nucleoli. (H&E stain, x200)
Some rhabdomyoblasts are well-differentiated and show cross-striations. (H&E stain, x1000, oil)
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2016 by WebMD LLC. This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.