Review

Systematic analysis of perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasms in the female reproductive tract: a comprehensive review

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6201-4465

Department of Gynecology, First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China

Search for more papers by this author

Cheng Li

Department of Gynecology, First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China

Search for more papers by this author

Tongyi Huang

Department of Clinical Medical Ultrasonics, Division of Interventional Ultrasound, Institute of Diagnostic & Interventional Ultrasound, First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China

Search for more papers by this author

Jiaming Huang

Department of Gynecology, First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China

Search for more papers by this author

Ming Chen

*Author for correspondence:

E-mail Address: chenm229@mail.sysu.edu.cn

Department of Gynecology, First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China

Search for more papers by this author

Published Online:1 Mar 2024https://doi.org/10.2217/fon-2023-0778

View article

Abstract

Perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasms (PEComas) are rare mesenchymal lesions, with gynecological PEComas accounting for just over a quarter of cases. Limited reports exist on gynecological PEComa, primarily treated with surgery; adjuvant therapy is considered in high-risk cases. This systematic review aims to summarize the origin and clinical, pathological and molecular characteristics of uterine PEComa, focusing on treatment options for gynecological PEComa. A comprehensive PubMed review of gynecological PEComa reports was conducted. A detailed examination of the literature ensured a thorough understanding. Gynecological PEComa diagnosis relies on histology and immunology. Despite therapy controversies, surgery remains the mainstay. Adjuvant therapy efficacy in high-risk cases is uncertain. mTOR inhibitors are the first line; alternative treatments, including angiogenesis and aromatase inhibitors, should be considered.

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest

References

1. Bonetti F, Pea M, Martignoni G, Zamboni G. PEC and sugar. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 16(3), 307–308 (1992).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
2. Pea M, Martignoni G, Zamboni G, Bonetti F. Perivascular epithelioid cell. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 20(9), 1149–1153 (1996).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
3. Simpson KW, Albores-Saavedra J. HMB-45 reactivity in conventional uterine leiomyosarcomas. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 31(1), 95–98 (2007).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
4. Stone CH, Lee MW, Amin MB et al. Renal angiomyolipoma: further immunophenotypic characterization of an expanding morphologic spectrum. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 125(6), 751–758 (2001).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
5. Hornick JL, Fletcher CD. PEComa: what do we know so far? Histopathology 48(1), 75–82 (2006).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
6. Fernandez-Flores A. Evidence on the neural crest origin of PEComas. Rom. J. Morphol. Embryol. 52(1), 7–13 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
7. Ardeleanu C, Bussolati G. Telocytes are the common cell of origin of both PEComas and GISTs: an evidence-supported hypothesis. J. Cell. Mol. Med. 15(12), 2569–2574 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
8. Liu R, Jia W, Zou H et al. Expression of CD44 and CD29 by PEComa cells suggests their possible origin of mesenchymal stem cells. Int. J. Clin. Exp. Pathol. 8(10), 13023–13033 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
9. Schoolmeester JK, Carlson J, Keeney GL et al. Alveolar soft part sarcoma of the female genital tract: a morphologic, immunohistochemical, and molecular cytogenetic study of 10 cases with emphasis on its distinction from morphologic mimics. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 41(5), 622–632 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
10. Folpe AL, Mentzel T, Lehr HA, Fisher C, Balzer BL, Weiss SW. Perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasms of soft tissue and gynecologic origin: a clinicopathologic study of 26 cases and review of the literature. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 29(12), 1558–1575 (2005).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
11. Yamada Y, Yamamoto H, Ohishi Y et al. Sclerosing variant of perivascular epithelioid cell tumor in the female genital organs. Pathol. Int. 61(12), 768–772 (2011).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
12. Bennett JA, Braga AC, Pinto A et al. Uterine PEComas: a morphologic, immunohistochemical, and molecular analysis of 32 tumors. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 42(10), 1370–1383 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
13. Hornick JL, Fletcher CD. Sclerosing PEComa: clinicopathologic analysis of a distinctive variant with a predilection for the retroperitoneum. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 32(4), 493–501 (2008).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
14. Babayev E, Fay KE, Horowitz JM et al. Perivascular epithelioid cell tumors (PEComa) in pregnancy with uterine rupture and ongoing abdominal gestation: a case report. Case Rep. Womens Health 25, e00172 (2020). • The authors recommend this paper for clinicians interested in navigating perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasm complexities during pregnancy.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
15. Nguyen JMV, Ghandehari H, Parra-Herran C, Vicus D. Uterine rupture: an unusual presentation of a uterine perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa). Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 30(12), 2008–2011 (2020).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
16. Ruco LP, Pilozzi E, Wedard BM et al. Epithelioid lymphangioleiomyomatosis-like tumour of the uterus in a patient without tuberous sclerosis: a lesion mimicking epithelioid leiomyosarcoma. Histopathology 33(1), 91–93 (1998).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
17. Bosincu L, Rocca PC, Martignoni G et al. Perivascular epithelioid cell (PEC) tumors of the uterus: a clinicopathologic study of two cases with aggressive features. Mod. Pathol. 18(10), 1336–1342 (2005).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
18. Theofanakis C, Thomakos N, Sotiropoulou M, Rodolakis A. Perivascular epithelioid cell tumor of the uterus: report of two cases and mini-review of the literature. Int. J. Surg. Case Rep. 28, 85–87 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
19. Rothenberger R, Jackson A, Kendler A, Herzog T, Billingsley C. An unusual case of uterine PEComa presenting with disseminated intravascular coagulation. Gynecol. Oncol. Rep. 29, 76–78 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
20. Gentile M, Zinna M, Zanella C et al. Uterine PEComa with aggressive behavior: a review with an additional case of spontaneous vaginal expulsion. Pathol. Res. Pract. 216(6), 152991 (2020). • The authors recommend this paper for clinicians interested in aiming to refine diagnostic approaches and optimize surgical interventions in cases of uterine perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasm with aggressive behavior.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
21. Giannella L, Delli Carpini G, Montik N et al. Ultrasound features of a uterine perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa): case report and literature review. Diagnostics (Basel) 10(8), (2020). • The authors recommend this paper for clinicians interested in enhancing diagnostic strategies and surgical management.
Google Scholar
22. Yamagata Y, Kawauchi S, Tamura H, Murakami A, Sasaki K, Sugino N. A case of HMB45-negative perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa) of the uterine corpus: a possible diagnostic application of molecular-cytogenetic analysis. Eur. J. Gynaecol. Oncol. 30(2), 216–219 (2009).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
23. Poomtavorn Y, Warnnissorn N, Warnnissorn M, Boonyarangkul A. Caesarean section unmasking perivascular epithelioid cell tumour of the uterus. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 34(5), 441–442 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
24. Nitahara K, Sasaki M, Ichikawa S, Tsuji K, Yoshida Y. Rupture of perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasm at 34 weeks' gestation: a nonendometriosis case of spontaneous hemoperitoneum in pregnancy. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res. 45(3), 709–713 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
25. Tilstra M, Maksem J, Bakhru A, Carlan SJ, Wilson J. Perivascular epithelioid cell tumor masquerading as retained placenta. J. Ultrasound Med. 34(8), 1515–1517 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
26. Fadare O. Perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa) of the uterus: an outcome-based clinicopathologic analysis of 41 reported cases. Adv. Anat. Pathol. 15(2), 63–75 (2008).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
27. Bleeker JS, Quevedo JF, Folpe AL. Malignant perivascular epithelioid cell tumor of the uterus. Rare Tumors 4(1), e14 (2012).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
28. Schoolmeester JK, Howitt BE, Hirsch MS, Dal Cin P, Quade BJ, Nucci MR. Perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasm (PEComa) of the gynecologic tract: clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical characterization of 16 cases. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 38(2), 176–188 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
29. Conlon N, Soslow RA, Murali R. Perivascular epithelioid tumours (PEComas) of the gynaecological tract. J. Clin. Pathol. 68(6), 418–426 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
30. Vang R, Kempson RL. Perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (‘PEComa’) of the uterus: a subset of HMB-45-positive epithelioid mesenchymal neoplasms with an uncertain relationship to pure smooth muscle tumors. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 26(1), 1–13 (2002).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
31. Yang YP, Zhu YL, Wu WP, Wang ZM, Zhang JM. [Perivascular epithelioid cell tumor of uterus: report of 5 cases and literature review]. Zhonghua Bing Li Xue Za Zhi 36(5), 302–306 (2007).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
32. Fadare O, Parkash V, Yilmaz Y et al. Perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa) of the uterine cervix associated with intraabdominal “PEComatosis”: a clinicopathological study with comparative genomic hybridization analysis. World J. Surg. Oncol. 2, 35 (2004).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
33. Shan W, Shi Y, Zhu Q et al. Five cases of uterine perivascular epithelioid cell tumors (PEComas) and review of literature. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 299(1), 185–190 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
34. Gu J, Wang W, Wang S. A retrospective case study of 13 uterine perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasm (PEComa) patients. Onco Targets Ther. 14, 1783–1790 (2021). • The authors recommend this paper for clinicians interested in enhancing diagnostic accuracy and treatment strategies for uterine perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasm.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
35. Fang CL, Lin YH, Chen WY. Microscopic endometrial perivascular epithelioid cell nodules: a case report with the earliest presentation of a uterine perivascular epithelioid cell tumor. Diagn. Pathol. 7, 117 (2012).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
36. Folpe AL, Kwiatkowski DJ. Perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasms: pathology and pathogenesis. Hum. Pathol. 41(1), 1–15 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
37. Fadare O. Uterine PEComa: appraisal of a controversial and increasingly reported mesenchymal neoplasm. Int. Semin. Surg. Oncol. 5, 7 (2008).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
38. Liu CH, Chao WT, Lin SC, Lau HY, Wu HH, Wang PH. Malignant perivascular epithelioid cell tumor in the female genital tract: preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Medicine (Baltimore) 98(2), e14072 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
39. Gulavita P, Fletcher CDM, Hirsch MS. PNL2: an adjunctive biomarker for renal angiomyolipomas and perivascular epithelioid cell tumours. Histopathology 72(3), 441–448 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
40. Valencia-Guerrero A, Pinto A, Anderson WJ, Trevisan G, Nucci MR, Hirsch MS. PNL2: a useful adjunct biomarker to HMB45 in the diagnosis of uterine perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa). Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 39(6), 529–536 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
41. Horn LC, Einenkel J. Uterine perivascular epitheloid cell tumor (PEComa) with CD117 and PNL2 positivity and entrapped endometriotic glands, mimicking sex-cordlike differentiation. Ann. Diagn. Pathol. 15(3), 216–218 (2011).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
42. Adachi Y, Horie Y, Kitamura Y et al. CD1a expression in PEComas. Pathol. Int. 58(3), 169–173 (2008).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
43. Fadare O, Liang SX. Epithelioid smooth muscle tumors of the uterus do not express CD1a: a potential immunohistochemical adjunct in their distinction from uterine perivascular epithelioid cell tumors. Ann. Diagn. Pathol. 12(6), 401–405 (2008).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
44. Ahrens WA, Folpe AL. CD1a immunopositivity in perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasms: true expression or technical artifact? A streptavidin-biotin and polymer-based detection system immunohistochemical study of perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasms and their morphologic mimics. Hum. Pathol. 42(3), 369–374 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
45. Park SH, Ro JY, Kim HS, Lee ES. Perivascular epithelioid cell tumor of the uterus: immunohistochemical, ultrastructural and molecular study. Pathol. Int. 53(11), 800–805 (2003).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
46. Gao Z, Bhuiya T, Anderson A. Perivascular epithelioid cell tumour (PEComa) of the uterus associated with malignant neoplasm of the female genital tract. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 24(5), 600–604 (2004).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
47. Shrestha S, Meyers C, Shen J et al. Ang-1 and Ang-2 expression in angiomyolipoma and PEComa family tumors. J Orthop. 14(1), 154–160 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
48. Bennett JA, Oliva E. Perivascular epithelioid cell tumors (PEComa) of the gynecologic tract. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 60(3), 168–179 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
49. Musella A, De Felice F, Kyriacou AK et al. Perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasm (PEComa) of the uterus: a systematic review. Int. J. Surg. 19, 1–5 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
50. Akumalla S, Madison R, Lin DI et al. Characterization of clinical cases of malignant PEComa via comprehensive genomic profiling of DNA and RNA. Oncology 98(12), 905–912 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
51. Liu F, Zhang R, Wang ZY et al. Malignant perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa) of cervix with TFE3 gene rearrangement: a case report. Int. J. Clin. Exp. Pathol. 7(9), 6409–6414 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
52. Agaram NP, Sung YS, Zhang L et al. Dichotomy of genetic abnormalities in PEComas with therapeutic implications. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 39(6), 813–825 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
53. Schoolmeester JK, Dao LN, Sukov WR et al. TFE3 translocation-associated perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasm (PEComa) of the gynecologic tract: morphology, immunophenotype, differential diagnosis. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 39(3), 394–404 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
54. Tan Y, Zhang H, Xiao EH. Perivascular epithelioid cell tumour: dynamic CT, MRI and clinicopathological characteristics – analysis of 32 cases and review of the literature. Clin. Radiol. 68(6), 555–561 (2013).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
55. Tirumani SH, Shinagare AB, Hargreaves J et al. Imaging features of primary and metastatic malignant perivascular epithelioid cell tumors. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 202(2), 252–258 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
56. Pattamapaspong N, Khunamornpong S, Phongnarisorn C, Pojchamarnwiputh S. Malignant perivascular epithelioid cell tumour of the round ligament mimics leiomyoma on computed tomography. Singapore Med. J. 50(7), e239–e242 (2009).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
57. Mor E, Visenzi C, Marasciulo F, Longo FR, Quaglia F. Ultrasound appearance of perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa). Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 57(5), 844–845 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
58. Nishio N, Kido A, Minamiguchi S et al. MR findings of uterine PEComa in patients with tuberous sclerosis: report of two cases. Abdom. Radiol. (NY) 44(4), 1256–1260 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
59. Yoshizawa H, Kawai S, Hirota Y, Ueda T, Kuroda M, Fujii T. A case of uterine lymphangioleiomyomatosis in a young woman that was identified via peritonitis. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res. 45(2), 482–486 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
60. Zamecnik M, Michal M. HMB45+ hyalinized epithelioid tumor of the uterus is linked to epithelioid leiomyoma rather than to PEC-omas. Int. J. Surg. Pathol. 9(4), 341–343 (2001).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
61. Silva EG, Deavers MT, Bodurka DC, Malpica A. Uterine epithelioid leiomyosarcomas with clear cells: reactivity with HMB-45 and the concept of PEComa. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 28(2), 244–249 (2004).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
62. Hurrell DP, Mccluggage WG. Uterine leiomyosarcoma with HMB45+ clear cell areas: report of two cases. Histopathology 47(5), 540–542 (2005).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
63. Yavuz E, Cakr C, Tuzlal S, Ahskal B, Topuz S, Ilhan R. Uterine perivascular epithelioid cell tumor coexisting with pulmonary lymphangioleiomyomatosis and renal angiomyolipoma: a case report. Appl. Immunohistochem. Mol. Morphol. 16(4), 405–409 (2008).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
64. Wang YY, Shi QF. [Endometrial stromal sarcoma complicating uterine perivascular epithelioid cell tumor: report of a case]. Zhonghua Bing Li Xue Za Zhi 42(5), 345–346 (2013).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
65. Dimmler A, Seitz G, Hohenberger W, Kirchner T, Faller G. Late pulmonary metastasis in uterine PEComa. J. Clin. Pathol. 56(8), 627–628 (2003).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
66. Greene LA, Mount SL, Schned AR, Cooper K. Recurrent perivascular epithelioid cell tumor of the uterus (PEComa): an immunohistochemical study and review of the literature. Gynecol. Oncol. 90(3), 677–681 (2003).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
67. Armah HB, Parwani AV. Malignant perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa) of the uterus with late renal and pulmonary metastases: a case report with review of the literature. Diagn. Pathol. 2, 45 (2007).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
68. Gadducci A, Zannoni GF. Perivascular epithelioid cell tumors (PEComa) of the female genital tract: a challenging question for gynaecologic oncologist and pathologist. Gynecol. Oncol. Rep. 33, 100603 (2020).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
69. Ciarallo A, Makis W, Hickeson M, Derbekyan V. Malignant perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa) of the uterus: serial imaging with F-18 FDG PET/CT for surveillance of recurrence and evaluation of response to therapy. Clin. Nucl. Med. 36(4), e16–e19 (2011).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
70. Phongnarisorn C, Khunamornpong S, Pattamapaspong N, Srisomboon J. Laparoscopic radical excision of primary round ligament perivascular epithelioid cell tumor mimicking leiomyoma. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 16(5), 626–629 (2009).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
71. Yamamoto E, Ino K, Sakurai M, Takigawa S, Iwase A, Kikkawa F. Fertility-sparing operation for recurrence of uterine cervical perivascular epithelioid cell tumor. Rare Tumors 2(2), e26 (2010).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
72. Jeon IS, Lee SM. Multimodal treatment using surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy in a patient with a perivascular epithelioid cell tumor of the uterus. J. Pediatr. Hematol. Oncol. 27(12), 681–684 (2005).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
73. Liu JL, Lin YM, Lin MC, Yeh KT, Hsu JC, Chin CJ. Perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa) of the uterus with aggressive behavior at presentation. Hematol. Oncol. Stem Cell Ther. 2(3), 426–430 (2009).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
74. Italiano A, Delcambre C, Hostein I et al. Treatment with the mTOR inhibitor temsirolimus in patients with malignant PEComa. Ann. Oncol. 21(5), 1135–1137 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
75. Starbuck KD, Drake RD, Budd GT, Rose PG. Treatment of advanced malignant uterine perivascular epithelioid cell tumor with mTOR Inhibitors: single-institution experience and review of the literature. Anticancer Res. 36(11), 6161–6164 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
76. Ross C, Sharma S, Louca O, Scurr M, Hayes A, Judson I. A patient presenting with a perivascular epithelioid cell tumor in the broad ligament: a case report. J. Med. Case Rep. 5, 383 (2011).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
77. Bunch K, Sunde J. Fertility sparing treatment of a malignant uterine perivascular epithelioid cell tumor: a case report. Gynecol. Oncol. Case Rep. 8, 14–16 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
78. Gao F, Huang C, Zhang Y et al. Combination targeted therapy of VEGFR inhibitor, sorafenib, with an mTOR inhibitor, sirolimus induced a remakable response of rapid progressive uterine PEComa. Cancer Biol. Ther. 17(6), 595–598 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
79. Kopparthy P, Murphy M. Rapid and durable response with nab-sirolimus after everolimus failure in a patient with perivascular epithelioid cell tumors (PEComas) of the uterus. Cureus 13(5), e14951 (2021).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
80. Liapi A, Mathevet P, Herrera FG, Hastir D, Sarivalasis A. VEGFR inhibitors for uterine metastatic perivascular epithelioid tumors (PEComa) resistant to mTOR inhibitors. A case report and review of literature. Front. Oncol. 11, 641376 (2021).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
81. Prizant H, Taya M, Lerman I et al. Estrogen maintains myometrial tumors in a lymphangioleiomyomatosis model. Endocr. Relat. Cancer 23(4), 265–280 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar

Vol. 20, No. 5

Metrics

Downloaded 45 times

History

Received 9 September 2023

Accepted 19 February 2024

Published online 1 March 2024

Published in print February 2024

Information

Keywords

Author contributions

Q Cui: conceptualization, literature review, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing original draft; C Li: literature review, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology; T Huang: literature review, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, writing original draft; J Huang: data curation, investigation, methodology; M Chen: conceptualization, literature review, supervision; S Yao: writing guidance; M He: writing guidance.

Financial disclosure

The authors have no financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending or royalties.

Competing interests disclosure

The authors have no competing interests or relevant affiliations with any organization or entity with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, stock ownership or options and expert testimony.

Writing disclosure

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

PDF download