Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 May 1.
Published in final edited form as: Cancer Cytopathol. 2018 Feb 16;126(5):326–335. doi: 10.1002/cncy.21982

Table 5.

A comparison of morphologic features between well differentiated G3 and poorly differentiated carcinoma

Well
differentiated
G3
Poorly
differentiated
large cell
P value
Total 32 5
Large nuclear size No. (%) 3 (9) 2 (33) .1
Pleomorphic nuclei No. (%) 4 (13) 3 (50) .04
Round nucleus No. (%) 19 (59) 2 (33) .6
Smooth nucleus contour No. (%) 30 (93) 4 (67) .4
Angulated nuclei No. (%) 12 (38) 3 (50) .4
Fine chromatin No. (%) 3 (9) 0 (0) .9
Single prominent nucleolus No. (%) 4 (13) 2 (33) .2
Plasmacytoid cells No. (%) 24 (75) 1 (20) .03
Abundant cytoplasm No. (%) 23 3 .59
Nuclear tangles No. (%) 24 (75) 4 (67) .9
Molding No. (%) 3 (9) 2 (33) .12
Apoptosis
     Present No. (%) 28 (88) 5 (100) .9
     >5/ 10 high power fields No. (%) 14 (44) 3 (60) .6
Mitoses
    Present No. (%) 18 (56) 3 (60) .9
    >5/10 high power fields No. (%) 6 (19) 2 (40) .3
Necrosis No. (%) 4 (13) 3 (60) .04