Trichorhinophalangeal Syndrome Type 1 Immunohistochemical Expression in Carcinomas of Gynecologic Origin

Trichorhinophalangeal syndrome type 1 (TRPS1) is a new reportedly sensitive and specific immunohistochemical marker for carcinomas of breast origin, including triple-negative (estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2) tumors. In our practice, we have observed a subset of cases of nonmammary carcinomas that are positive for TRPS1, with higher frequency in cytology effusion samples with metastatic gynecologic malignancies. This study aimed to evaluate the expression of TRPS1 in a large tissue cohort of Müllerian carcinomas. We retrospectively retrieved 105 cases of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded gynecologic tumors from our surgical pathology archives. Cases corresponded to tumors of tubo-ovarian (17 high-grade serous carcinomas, 3 low-grade serous carcinomas, 2 clear cell carcinomas, and 8 endometrioid adenocarcinomas), endometrial (25 endometrioid adenocarcinomas, 8 serous carcinomas, 6 clear cell carcinomas, 12 carcinosarcomas, 1 dedifferentiated carcinoma, and 1 mesonephric-like adenocarcinoma), cervical (6 human papillomavirus [HPV]-associated squamous cell carcinomas [SCCs], 11 HPV-associated endocervical adenocarcinomas, and 2 HPV-independent gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinomas), and vulvar (2 HPV-independent SCCs and 1 HPV-associated SCC) origins. Immunohistochemistry for TRPS1 was performed in whole tissue sections and assessed for positivity (≥5% of nuclear labeling), distribution (focal: 5% to 49%, diffuse: 50% to 100%), and intensity (1+, 2+, 3+) in tumor cells. Positive TRPS1 staining was observed in 51.4% (54/105) of cases. Most tumors (64.8%) demonstrated diffuse labeling, while focal in 35.2%. Among positive cases, the intensity was predominantly 1+ (57.4%), followed by 2+ (33.3%) and 3+ (9.2%). Tumors with a high percentage of positivity overall consisted of tubo-ovarian (70%) and endometrial carcinomas (58.4%). TRPS1 immunostain is often expressed in gynecologic carcinomas. Awareness of this phenomenon is crucial when evaluating challenging cases in which the differential diagnosis includes a malignancy of breast origin, to avoid misclassification of the primary site.