Objectives: Stratified mucin-producing intraepithelial lesion (SMILE) is an uncommon premalignant lesion of the uterine cervix. A detailed examination of preinvasive SMILE cases including a comparison of the cytologic features with usual-type adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) and human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping was performed. Study Design: Excisions and preceding Papanicolaou (Pap) tests were retrieved from the files of 2 tertiary care centers. Histologic review estimated the lesional SMILE proportion. Pap tests were reviewed and assessed for architectural, cellular and background features. Cobas® HPV test was performed. Results: 13 cases were identified. Mean/median patient age was 35/33 years (range 23-51 years). Concurrent high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion was found in 10/13 (77%) and AIS in 8/13 (62%) cases. In 6 cases, SMILE was dominant (≥50%) and represented in 5/6 corresponding Pap tests. Cytology interpretations differed more often in the SMILE-dominant group (p < 0.05). SMILE and AIS had overlapping features. Feathering and prominent nucleoli were absent in SMILE. HPV DNA was detected in all 12 cases tested. HPV 18 was most common (7/12). Excisions with positive/suspicious margins were reported in 5/6 SMILE-dominant versus 3/7 nondominant cases. Conclusion: SMILE is best considered as an AIS variant for cytologic, etiologic and management purposes. Cytologic features overlap with AIS, but are more subtle and easily missed. HPV testing may play a role in facilitating SMILE detection.

Keywords:
Stratified mucin-producing intraepithelial lesion, Cervix, Papanicolaou test, Human papillomavirus, Atypical glandular cells
© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel
2016
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.