NewsFeed
Headlines ASRM ESHRE FIGO ACOG Fertility and Sterility PCOS
October, 2026
October 2026
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
Rukmini Bezbaruah: Interpreting p53 Across Gynaecological Cancers
Rukmini Bezbaruah/LinkedIn
Mar 26, 2026, 07:32

Rukmini Bezbaruah: Interpreting p53 Across Gynaecological Cancers

Rukmini Bezbaruah, Associate Professor Oncopathology at Dr. B. Borooah Cancer Institute, shared a post on LinkedIn:

“Interpreting p53 Across Gynaecological Cancers: One Marker, Multiple Meanings

In gynaecological pathology, TP53 is one of the most frequently altered genes. Yet, its immunohistochemical interpretation is often reduced to a simplistic label – ‘positive’ or ‘negative.’

That approach is no longer acceptable.

p53 must be interpreted as a pattern, and more importantly, in the context of tumour type.

Core principle: Pattern-based interpretation

  • Wild-type (p53wt) → patchy, variable nuclear staining
  • Abnormal (p53abn) →
    • Diffuse strong nuclear (overexpression)
    • Complete absence (null)
    • Cytoplasmic (rare)
    • Subclonal (emerging category)

Tumour-specific interpretation matters

1. High-grade serous carcinoma (ovary/fallopian tube)

  • Nearly universal p53 abnormality
  • p53abn = diagnostic support
  • p53wt → reconsider diagnosis

2. Endometrial carcinoma

  • Majority are p53 wild-type
  • p53abn defines a distinct molecular subgroup with poor prognosis
  • Now integrated into molecular classification algorithms

3. Low-grade serous carcinoma

  • Typically p53 wild-type
  • p53abn → red flag for misclassification

4. Clear cell carcinoma

  • Heterogeneous p53 expression
  • Interpretation requires strong morphologic correlation

5. Cervical carcinoma

  • p53 IHC is less reliable as a surrogate marker
  • In HPV-associated tumors, p53 is often degraded → variable staining

What do recent guidelines emphasize?

  • p53 is a surrogate for mutation, not a simple marker
  • Interpretation must be:
    • Pattern-based
    • Context-specific
    • Integrated with morphology and molecular data
  • In endometrial carcinoma, p53 status is now part of:
    • ESGO–ESTRO–ESP classification
    • FIGO 2023 staging refinement

Common pitfalls

  • Reporting ‘p53 positive’
  • Missing null pattern due to lack of internal control
  • Overcalling wild-type as abnormal
  • Ignoring tumour context

Take-home message

p53 does not behave the same across all gynaecological cancers.

Its value lies not just in detection – but in interpretation within the right biological and morphological framework.”

Rukmini Bezbaruah

Stay updated on all scientific advances in the field of fertility with Fertility News.

Cervical carcinoma Cytoplasmic Endometrial carcinoma Fallopian tube Fertility Fertility News Gynaecological Cancers High-grade serous carcinoma In HPV-associated tumors Low-grade serous carcinoma ovary p53 Rukmini Bezbaruah Tumour-specific interpretation
NewsFeed