Skip to main content
Science Progress logoLink to Science Progress
. 2025 Sep 4;108(3):00368504251362743. doi: 10.1177/00368504251362743

Adenosarcoma of uterus characterized by differentiation of rhabdomyosarcoma and chondrosarcoma: A case report and review of literature

Guorong Yang 1, Yongxin Lu 1, Yongdong An 2,, Xiaoxia He 3,, Dunhui Ma 1, Li Jiao 1, Yankun Li 1
PMCID: PMC12411721  PMID: 40906397

Abstract

Although Müllerian adenosarcoma of the uterus shows weak malignant potential, there are still some factors indicating a worse prognosis. An incontinuous pelvic pain with urinary frequency, urgency, and hypouricemia arose in a mid-70s woman who refused to acknowledge the history of Tamoxifen use. A huge mass in the pelvis was found simultaneously by palpation, B-ultrasonography, and computed tomography. After a total hysterectomy was performed, a mass with a size of 10.5 cm × 8.5 cm × 8.5 cm was seen at the fundus of the uterus. The tumor consisted of a few benign epithelia and the majority of sarcomas, which mainly contained rhabdomyosarcoma and chondrosarcoma, and a small proportion of endometrial stromal sarcoma. Multifocal necrosis was noticed while the superficial muscular layer of the uterus was invaded. So Müllerian adenosarcoma of the uterus was given to the patient. Eight months after the operation, the patient died from respiratory failure due to pulmonary metastasis. It is suggested that sarcomatous overgrowth, the presence of heterologous elements, especially rhabdomyosarcoma and chondrosarcomatous, myoinvasion, and necrosis, may be histological factors indicating an adverse prognosis.

Keywords: Uterus, Müllerian adenosarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, chondrosarcoma, case report

Introduction

Uterine sarcomas are relatively rare tumors that account for ∼1%–3% of female genital tract malignancies and 3%–7% of uterine tumors. 1 Uterine adenosarcoma, also known as Müllerian adenosarcoma, is a variety of mixed Müllerian tumor of the uterus and accounts for 8% of sarcomas of the uterus. 2 Weak malignancy potential, late-onset local recurrence (25%), rare metastasis, and a high incidence in old women are considered to be typical biological features of Müllerian adenosarcoma of the uterus. Although occasionally presenting in younger women of reproductive age with a desire for future fertility,3,4 it is most frequently diagnosed in postmenopausal women. 5 Postmenopausal bleeding is the most common symptom. Adenosarcomas stage I without sarcomatous overgrowth have a rather good prognosis, with a 5-year overall survival up to 80%. 6 However, sarcomatous overgrowth, which is defined as the presence of pure sarcoma occupying at least 25%, makes this tumor transform into a high-grade sarcoma. 7 Recurred lesion is often found in the vagina and pelvis (60%). 8 A case of Müllerian adenosarcoma of the uterus was diagnosed in our hospital, but died soon after the operation. The case is presented, and some factors probably involved in the poor prognosis are discussed.

Case report

An incontinuous pelvic pain arose in a mid-70s woman (G4P4) 25 days before hospitalization, accompanied by urinary frequency, urgency, and hypourocrinia. Without treatment, the patient's condition deteriorated gradually. As far as anamnesis was concerned, cholecystectomy was performed 12 years ago because of cholecystolithiasis. And since hypertension was diagnosed 10 years ago, the blood pressure has been controlled at a normal level by the use of nifedipine (5 mg, bid). As for menstrual and reproductive history, age of menarche was 14, while menopause was 55, with a menstrual cycle of 25–28 days and lasting for 3–5 days. The patient had four pregnancies and four offspring. The history of abnormal menorrhagia was denied. At the time of hospitalization, pulse was 80 times per minute and blood pressure was 22/12 kPa. Physical examination, the extensibility of the vagina was poor, and the cervix was atrophied. A huge mass was felt in the lower right part of the belly. Blood routing tests showed that RBC was 5.22 × 1012/L (reference value 3.5–5.5) with WBC 6.2 × 109/L (4–10), PLT 65 × 109/L (100–300), and HGB 135G/L (110–150). Biochemical examination showed that serum albumin was 34.3 (37–53) g/L with fasting plasma glucose 13.03 mmol/L (3.9–6.1), serum uric acid 620 µmol/L (150–430), serum calcium 2.02 mmol/L (2.1–2.6), and serum potassium 3 mmol/L (3.5–5.3). Tumor marker tests showed that CA125 was 35 µg/mL (0–30) with TSGF < 64 µg/mL, AFP < 25 µg/L, and CEA< 5 µg/L. A huge mass was found behind the right of the bladder by color Doppler ultrasound. The echo distribution within the mass was uneven, predominantly solid, with irregular low-echo areas interspersed (Figure 1(a)). Evaluation of computed tomography (CT) demonstrated that the mass was solid-cystic with a wall thickness of about 8 cm. Its density was maldistribution, and the borderline was clear while the uterus was undefined (Figure 1(b)). According to the manifestations, auxiliary examinations, and laboratory inspections, the malignancy of the right ovary or fallopian tube or broad ligament, or uterus was given by a multiple-disciplinary team (MDT). Then, exploratory laparotomy and total hysterectomy were performed. The consent to treatment from the patient was signed.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Imaging examination demonstrated that a huge mass was located behind the right side of the bladder. (a) Hypogastric color Doppler ultrasound. The echo distribution within the mass was uneven, predominantly solid, with irregular low-echo areas interspersed. (b) Computed tomography (CT) of the pelvic cavity. The mass density was maldistribution, and the value of CT was 19–22 HU. The borderline of the uterus was unclear.

The total hysterectomy was sent for pathological examination. Grossly, a huge mass with a size of 10.5 × 8.5 × 8.5 cm3 was found inside the cavity of the uterus. This tumor protruded from the bottom and showed a wide base, with an incomplete amicula and a henna to gray appearance. On its cross section, the tumor was soft but fragile and looked like rotted fish (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Gross features of the tumor. A huge mass with a size of 10.5 × 8.5 × 8.5 cm3 was seen inside the cavity of the uterus and protruded from the bottom.

Histologically, HE staining showed that the tumor was mainly made up of malignancies, with only a few benign glands scattered around (Figure 3). The epithelium of the gland was endometrial or cervical mucinous type (Figure 3(a)). Malignancies included rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS, about 35%), chondrosarcoma (CS, about 30%), and endometrial stromal sarcoma (ESS, 25%). RMS cells were astro-like, round, spindle-shaped, dry-pipe-like, girdle-shaped, cobweb-like, and plasmodium-like, with acidophilic cytoplasm and dissymmetry nuclei (Figure 3(b)). Tightly squeezed CS cells were poorly differentiated, with one nucleus, two nuclei, or a huge nucleus. Most extracellular area was full of hyaline cartilage-like matrix (Figure 3(c)). As far as ESS was concerned, cellular atypia was much more obvious, and pathologic caryokinesis was easily found (> 6/high power field) (Figure 3(d)). So ESS was classified as high-grade. Moreover, fatty tissue metaplasia and mucoid degeneration were also found among RMS, CS, and ESS cells. Multifocal necrosis was noticed. The superficial muscular layer of the uterus was invaded.

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Histological features of the tumor are shown by HE staining, × 100. (a) The epithelium of the endometrial gland was benign. (b) Rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) cells were pleomorphic with acidophilic cytoplasm and dissymmetry nuclei. (c) Tightly squeezed chondrosarcoma (CS) cells were poorly differentiated. (d) Atypia of endometrial stromal cells was much more obvious.

Other microscopic features were observed. Several small tumors, which had been found in the mucosa surrounding the huge mass and among uterine muscles by color Doppler ultrasound and CT, were turned out to be composed of leiomyoma cells with hyaline degeneration and fatty degeneration. No obvious lesions were seen on the two sides of the adnexa uteri. Then the same pathological diagnosis, Müllerian adenosarcoma of the uterus, was given to this huge mass by three experienced pathologists, respectively.

Epithelium of glands in the tumor was positive upon the immune detection of low molecular cytokeratin (Figure 4(a)). RMS cells were positive for desmin (Figure 4(b)), myoglobin detection (Figure 4(c)), and negative for vimentin (Figure 4(d)). ESS cells were positive upon CD10 detection (Figure 4(e)). Ki67 was about 75% (Figure 4(f)).

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Immunophenotypes of the tumor. (a) Epithelium of glands was positive for low molecular cytokeratin, × 100. (b) Rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) cells were positive for desmin, × 200. (c) RMS cells were positive for myoglobin, × 200. (d) RMS cells were negative for vimentin, × 200. (e) Endometrial stromal sarcoma (ESS) cells were positive for CD10, × 200. (f) Ki67 was about 75%, × 200.

At the follow-up 1 year after surgery, it was learned that the patient had died 8 months after surgery from respiratory failure led by “lung metastasis,” according to CT examination at the local hospital in another city (imaging figures unavailable). No lung biopsy or autopsy was performed. The reporting of this study conforms to CARE guidelines. 9 The consent to publish was signed by the patient's legally authorized representative. We have de-identified all patient details.

Discussion

Uterine adenosarcoma was first reported by Clement and Scully, 10 and the term Müllerian adenosarcoma has become universally recognized since a few cases were added to the original series in 1979. 11 As a rare biphasic malignant mesenchymal tumor, uterine adenosarcoma is composed of a benign glandular component and a malignant, but generally low-grade, stromal component. 12 The molecular pathogenesis of this tumor, however, remains to be elucidated. Some studies suggest that tamoxifen may play a role in the pathogenesis of adenosarcoma.1316

Although the uterine corpus is by far the most common primary site, adenosarcoma may also arise in the cervix, 17 ovary, fallopian tube, or vagina. 18 Adenosarcoma occurring outside the female genital tract likely represents tumors arising from pre-existing endometriosis.1921 Uterine adenosarcoma affects women of a broad age range. The incidence is highest in perimenopausal or postmenopausal women, but cases have been reported in children as young as 10 years. 22 Patients may present clinically with abnormal vaginal bleeding and/or pelvic pain or, in a large percentage of cases, with no symptoms or only with a mass in the pelvic cavity.

Surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and hormone therapy are standard treatments according to the guidelines of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). Surgical resection is the most commonly used method involving a total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and dissection of pelvic and iliac lymph nodes will be performed if there are poor prognostic factors, 7 just like what has been done in our case. Chemotherapy shows some effect on patients after surgery or those who cannot be cured by hysterectomy. The combinations of gemcitabine/docetaxe, doxorubicin/ifosfamide, doxorubicin/cisplatin, cisplatin/ifosfamide, and carbo/paclitaxel are the chemotherapy agents widely used.23,24 However, only tumors with sarcomatous overgrowth could benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. 25 Regrettably, the patient in our case refused the adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

Adenosarcoma is of generally low malignant potential, except when accompanied by sarcomatous overgrowth and myoinvasion. Sarcoma component originates from the stromal of the uterus (homologous) and /or differentiates towards elements not typically found in the uterus (heterologous). Sarcomatous overgrowth (SO) and the presence of heterologous elements are found in about 10–15% of cases.2628 Typically, rhabdomyosarcomatous differentiation is the most common. 1 Because uterine adenosarcoma with sarcomatous overgrowth (ASSO) has a malignant potential more similar to that of high-grade sarcoma, 29 sarcomatous overgrowth has received a lot of attention. At present, it is defined as the presence of pure sarcoma occupying at least 25% of the tumor, usually high grade in nature, and without a benign glandular component. 7 The reported prevalence of sarcomatous overgrowth in patients with uterine adenosarcoma varies greatly, from 8% to 65%.29,30 Given the aggressive nature of ASSO, local excision alone is insufficient, and thorough resection with negative margins may be beneficial for young, early staged patients. 31 Recurrent disease has been reported to occur in 26%–40% of all patients with uterine adenosarcoma after primary therapy. 32 However, patients with sarcomatous overgrowth have a much higher reported rate of recurrence (70%–82%). 29

Conclusion

It is suggested that the pathogenesis of some uterine adenosarcomar cases may not be associated with tamoxifen use, and that sarcomatous overgrowth, the presence of heterologous elements, especially rhabdomyosarcoma and chondrosarcomatosis, muscular invasion, and necrosis, may be histological factors indicating adverse prognosis.

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Wei Zhang and Xiaohong Chen (Department of Gynecology, San Ai Tang Hospital, Lanzhou) for their kind help, and to Xiaoqiang Wang, Jingling Wu (Department of Imaging, San Ai Tang Hospital, Lanzhou) for her kindly giving some good advice.

Ethical considerations: The study was approved by the ethics committee of San Ai Tang Hospital and conducted in accordance with the ethical guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent to participate: Verbal consent was obtained from the patients’ carer.

Consent for publication: All authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript to publish.

Authors’ contributions: GY: the author was actively involved in writing the article, reviewed the literature, and wrote the final draft. YL: the author was actively involved in writing the article, reviewed the literature, and wrote the initial draft of the manuscript. YA: the authors reviewed and interpreted imaging studies, performed surgery, and edited the final manuscript. XH: the author provided clinical history, provided patient follow-up, gathered information, and critically edited the final manuscript. DM: the author reviewed the slides, contributed to the case workup, and reviewed the final manuscript. LJ and YL: the authors contributed to the gross and microscopic examination and reviewed the manuscript. All authors contributed substantially by gathering relevant data and clinical details and drafting and revising this manuscript. All authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Funding: The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of conflicting interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Reference style and citations: International Journal of Surgical Pathology.

References

  • 1.Patrelli TS, Gizzo S, Gangi D, et al. Cervical Mullerian adenosarcoma with heterologous sarcomatous overgrowth: a fourth case and review of literature. BMC Cancer 2011; 11: 236. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Nathenson MJ, Ravi V, Fleming N, et al. Uterine adenosarcoma: a review. Curr Oncol Rep 2016; 18: 68. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Liu H, Shen Z, Wu Det al. et al. Uterine adenosarcoma with sarcomatous overgrowth: a case report of aggressive disease in a 16-year-old girl and a literature review. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol 2018; 31: 426–431. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Wang B, Yang HD, Shi XHet al. et al. Advanced uterine adenosarcoma with sarcomatous overgrowth in a young woman: a case report. Medicine (Baltimore) 2019; 98: e18119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Zizolfi B, Foreste V, Di Spiezio Sardo A, et al. Fertility sparing management of uterine adenosarcoma: case report and literature review. Facts Views Vis Obgyn 2021; 12: 315–318. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Ulrich UA, Denschlag D. Uterine adenosarcoma. Oncol Res Treat 2018; 41: 693–696. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.D'Angelo E, Prat J. Uterine sarcomas: a review. Gynecol Oncol 2010; 116: 131–139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Fortune DW, A Ö. Mixed Müllerian tumours of the uterus. In: HT F. (ed) Obstetrical and gynaecological pathology. London: Churchill Livingstone, 1987: 458. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Gagnier JJ, Kienle G, Altman DG, et al. The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case reporting guideline development. Headache 2013; 53: 1541–1547. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Clement PB, R S. Müllerian adenosarcoma of the uterus: a clinicopathologic analysis of ten cases of a distinctive type of Müllerian mixed tumor. Cancer 1974; 34: 12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Valdez VA, Planas AT, Lopez VF, et al. Adenosarcoma of uterus and ovary: a clinicopathologic study of two cases. Cancer 1979; 43: 1439–1447. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Pinto A, Howitt B. Uterine adenosarcoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2016; 140: 286–290. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Arici DS, Aker H, Yildiz Eet al. et al. Mullerian adenosarcoma of the uterus associated with tamoxifen therapy. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2000; 264: 105–107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Bocklage T, Lee KR, Belinson JL. Uterine Mullerian adenosarcoma following adenomyoma in a woman on tamoxifen therapy. Gynecol Oncol 1992; 44: 104–109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Clement PB, Oliva E, Young RH. Mullerian adenosarcoma of the uterine corpus associated with tamoxifen therapy: a report of six cases and a review of tamoxifen-associated endometrial lesions. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1996; 15: 222–229. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Jessop FA, Roberts PF. Müllerian adenosarcoma of the uterus in association with tamoxifen therapy. Histopathology 2000; 36: 91–92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Mohapatra D, Mohanty P, Biswal R. Mullerian adenosarcoma (heterologous) of uterine cervix with sarcomatous overgrowth: a case report with review of the literature. Indian J Pathol Microbiol 2019; 62: 139–141. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.McCluggage WG. Mullerian adenosarcoma of the female genital tract. Adv Anat Pathol 2010; 17: 122–129. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Gollard R, Kosty M, Bordin G, et al. Two unusual presentations of Müllerian adenosarcoma: case reports, literature review, and treatment considerations. Gynecol Oncol 1995; 59: 412–422. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.N'Senda P, Wendum D, Balladur P, et al. Adenosarcoma arising in hepatic endometriosis. Eur Radiol 2000; 10: 1287–1289. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Yantiss RK, Clement PB, Young RH. Neoplastic and pre-neoplastic changes in gastrointestinal endometriosis: a study of 17 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 2000; 24: 513–524. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Fleming NA, Hopkins L, de Nanassy J, et al. Mullerian adenosarcoma of the cervix in a 10-year-old girl: case report and review of the literature. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol 2009; 22: e45–e51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Carroll A, Ramirez PT, Westin SN, et al. Uterine adenosarcoma: an analysis on management, outcomes, and risk factors for recurrence. Gynecol Oncol 2014; 135: 455–461. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Bernard B, Clarke BA, Malowany JI, et al. Uterine adenosarcomas: a dual-institution update on staging, prognosis and survival. Gynecol Oncol 2013; 131: 634–639. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Tanner EJ, Toussaint T, Leitao MM, Jr., et al. Management of uterine adenosarcomas with and without sarcomatous overgrowth. Gynecologic Oncology. 2013;129:140–144. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Togami S, Kawamura T, Fukuda M, et al. Clinical management of uterine cervical Mullerian adenosarcoma: a clinicopathological study of six cases and review of the literature. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2018; 57: 479–482. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Nannini M, Dondi G, Santini D, et al. A single-centre experience on the management of adenosarcoma: a successful report of an integrated medical and surgical approach. Clin Med Insights Oncol 2018; 12: 1179554918782477. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Verschraegen CF, Vasuratna A, Edwards C, et al. Clinicopathologic analysis of Mullerian adenosarcoma: the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Oncol Rep 1998; 5: 939–944. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Krivak TC, Seidman JD, McBroom JW, et al. Uterine adenosarcoma with sarcomatous overgrowth versus uterine carcinosarcoma: comparison of treatment and survival. Gynecol Oncol 2001; 83: 89–94. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.D'Angelo E, Spagnoli LG, Prat J. Comparative clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical analysis of uterine sarcomas diagnosed using the World Health Organization classification system. Hum Pathol 2009; 40: 1571–1585. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Dowding DD, Wayne LM, Guirguis AS. High grade uterine adenosarcoma with sarcomatous overgrowth in a young woman amenable to primary surgical reduction: a case study and literature review. Gynecol Oncol Rep. 2022; 39: 100920. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Arend R, Bagaria M, Lewin SN, et al. Long-term outcome and natural history of uterine adenosarcomas. Gynecol Oncol 2010; 119: 305–308. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Science Progress are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

RESOURCES