Literature DB >> 25720322

Refining prognosis and identifying targetable pathways for high-risk endometrial cancer; a TransPORTEC initiative.

Ellen Stelloo1, Tjalling Bosse1, Remi A Nout2, Helen J MacKay3, David N Church4, Hans W Nijman5, Alexandra Leary6, Richard J Edmondson7, Melanie E Powell8, Emma J Crosbie7, Henry C Kitchener7, Linda Mileshkin9, Pamela M Pollock10, Vincent T Smit1, Carien L Creutzberg2.   

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate whether molecular analysis can be used to refine risk assessment, direct adjuvant therapy, and identify actionable alterations in high-risk endometrial cancer. TransPORTEC, an international consortium related to the PORTEC3 trial, was established for translational research in high-risk endometrial cancer. In this explorative study, routine molecular analyses were used to detect prognostic subgroups: p53 immunohistochemistry, microsatellite instability and POLE proofreading mutation. Furthermore, DNA was analyzed for hotspot mutations in 13 additional genes (BRAF, CDKNA2, CTNNB1, FBXW7, FGFR2, FGFR3, FOXL2, HRAS, KRAS, NRAS, PIK3CA, PPP2R1A, and PTEN) and protein expression of ER, PR, PTEN, and ARID1a was analyzed. Rates of distant metastasis, recurrence-free, and overall survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. In total, samples of 116 high-risk endometrial cancer patients were included: 86 endometrioid; 12 serous; and 18 clear cell. For endometrioid, serous, and clear cell cancers, 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were 68%, 27%, and 50% (P=0.014) and distant metastasis rates 23%, 64%, and 50% (P=0.001), respectively. Four prognostic subgroups were identified: (1) a group of p53-mutant tumors; (2) microsatellite instable tumors; (3) POLE proofreading-mutant tumors; and (4) a group with no specific molecular profile (NSMP). In group 3 (POLE-mutant; n=14) and group 2 (microsatellite instable; n=19) patients, no distant metastasis occurred, compared with 50% distant metastasis rate in group 1 (p53-mutant; n=36) and 39% in group 4 (NSMP; P<0.001). Five-year recurrence-free survival was 93% and 95% for group 3 (POLE-mutant) and group 2 (microsatellite instable) vs 42% (group 1, p53-mutant) and 52% (group 4, NSMP; P<0.001). Targetable FBXW7 and FGFR2 mutations (6%), alterations in the PI3K-AKT pathway (60%) and hormone receptor positivity (45%) were frequently found. In conclusion, molecular analysis of high-risk endometrial cancer identifies four distinct prognostic subgroups, with potential therapeutic implications. High frequencies of targetable alterations were identified and may serve as targets for individualized treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25720322     DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.2015.43

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mod Pathol        ISSN: 0893-3952            Impact factor:   7.842


  35 in total

1.  Patterns of p53 immunoreactivity in endometrial carcinomas: 'all or nothing' staining is of importance.

Authors:  W Glenn McCluggage; Robert A Soslow; C Blake Gilks
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2011-08-22       Impact factor: 5.087

2.  POLE exonuclease domain mutation predicts long progression-free survival in grade 3 endometrioid carcinoma of the endometrium.

Authors:  Bo Meng; Lien N Hoang; John B McIntyre; Máire A Duggan; Gregg S Nelson; Cheng-Han Lee; Martin Köbel
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2014-05-16       Impact factor: 5.482

3.  Poor interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of high-grade endometrial carcinoma.

Authors:  C Blake Gilks; Esther Oliva; Robert A Soslow
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 6.394

4.  High concordance of molecular tumor alterations between pre-operative curettage and hysterectomy specimens in patients with endometrial carcinoma.

Authors:  Ellen Stelloo; Remi A Nout; Lisanne C L M Naves; Natalja T Ter Haar; Carien L Creutzberg; Vincent T H B M Smit; Tjalling Bosse
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 5.482

5.  The clinicopathologic significance of p53 and BAF-250a (ARID1A) expression in clear cell carcinoma of the endometrium.

Authors:  Oluwole Fadare; Katja Gwin; Mohamed M Desouki; Marta A Crispens; Howard W Jones; Dineo Khabele; Sharon X Liang; Wenxin Zheng; Khaled Mohammed; Jonathan L Hecht; Vinita Parkash
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2013-03-22       Impact factor: 7.842

6.  Clinicopathologic significance of defective DNA mismatch repair in endometrial carcinoma.

Authors:  Destin Black; Robert A Soslow; Douglas A Levine; Carmen Tornos; Shirley C Chen; Amanda J Hummer; Faina Bogomolniy; Narciso Olvera; Richard R Barakat; Jeff Boyd
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-03-20       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 7.  Classification of endometrial carcinoma: more than two types.

Authors:  Rajmohan Murali; Robert A Soslow; Britta Weigelt
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 41.316

8.  Microsatellite instability and epigenetic inactivation of MLH1 and outcome of patients with endometrial carcinomas of the endometrioid type.

Authors:  Israel Zighelboim; Paul J Goodfellow; Feng Gao; Randall K Gibb; Matthew A Powell; Janet S Rader; David G Mutch
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-05-20       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 9.  Past, present, and future of hormonal therapy in recurrent endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Matthew J Carlson; Kristina W Thiel; Kimberly K Leslie
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2014-05-02

Review 10.  The target therapy of ovarian clear cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Ying Jin; Yan Li; Lingya Pan
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2014-09-23       Impact factor: 4.147

View more
  111 in total

1.  FGFR2 mutations are associated with poor outcomes in endometrioid endometrial cancer: An NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group study.

Authors:  Yvette W Jeske; Shamshad Ali; Sara A Byron; Feng Gao; Robert S Mannel; Rahel G Ghebre; Paul A DiSilvestro; Shashikant B Lele; Michael L Pearl; Amy P Schmidt; Heather A Lankes; Nilsa C Ramirez; Golnar Rasty; Matthew Powell; Paul J Goodfellow; Pamela M Pollock
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2017-03-15       Impact factor: 5.482

2.  POLE gene hotspot mutations in advanced pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Michael Guenther; Vivien Veninga; Joerg Kumbrink; Michael Haas; C Benedikt Westphalen; Stephan Kruger; Volker Heinemann; Thomas Kirchner; Stefan Boeck; Andreas Jung; Steffen Ormanns
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-09-07       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 3.  Mismatch Repair Deficiency and Response to Immune Checkpoint Blockade.

Authors:  Valerie Lee; Adrian Murphy; Dung T Le; Luis A Diaz
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2016-07-13

Review 4.  Practical issues in the diagnosis of serous carcinoma of the endometrium.

Authors:  Sonia Gatius; Xavier Matias-Guiu
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 7.842

5.  Proteogenomic Characterization of Endometrial Carcinoma.

Authors:  Yongchao Dou; Emily A Kawaler; Daniel Cui Zhou; Marina A Gritsenko; Chen Huang; Lili Blumenberg; Alla Karpova; Vladislav A Petyuk; Sara R Savage; Shankha Satpathy; Wenke Liu; Yige Wu; Chia-Feng Tsai; Bo Wen; Zhi Li; Song Cao; Jamie Moon; Zhiao Shi; MacIntosh Cornwell; Matthew A Wyczalkowski; Rosalie K Chu; Suhas Vasaikar; Hua Zhou; Qingsong Gao; Ronald J Moore; Kai Li; Sunantha Sethuraman; Matthew E Monroe; Rui Zhao; David Heiman; Karsten Krug; Karl Clauser; Ramani Kothadia; Yosef Maruvka; Alexander R Pico; Amanda E Oliphant; Emily L Hoskins; Samuel L Pugh; Sean J I Beecroft; David W Adams; Jonathan C Jarman; Andy Kong; Hui-Yin Chang; Boris Reva; Yuxing Liao; Dmitry Rykunov; Antonio Colaprico; Xi Steven Chen; Andrzej Czekański; Marcin Jędryka; Rafał Matkowski; Maciej Wiznerowicz; Tara Hiltke; Emily Boja; Christopher R Kinsinger; Mehdi Mesri; Ana I Robles; Henry Rodriguez; David Mutch; Katherine Fuh; Matthew J Ellis; Deborah DeLair; Mathangi Thiagarajan; D R Mani; Gad Getz; Michael Noble; Alexey I Nesvizhskii; Pei Wang; Matthew L Anderson; Douglas A Levine; Richard D Smith; Samuel H Payne; Kelly V Ruggles; Karin D Rodland; Li Ding; Bing Zhang; Tao Liu; David Fenyö
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2020-02-13       Impact factor: 41.582

6.  Molecular Classification of Grade 3 Endometrioid Endometrial Cancers Identifies Distinct Prognostic Subgroups.

Authors:  Tjalling Bosse; Remi A Nout; Jessica N McAlpine; Melissa K McConechy; Heidi Britton; Yaser R Hussein; Carlene Gonzalez; Raji Ganesan; Jane C Steele; Beth T Harrison; Esther Oliva; August Vidal; Xavier Matias-Guiu; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Douglas A Levine; C Blake Gilks; Robert A Soslow
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 6.394

7.  Nuclear receptor 4A1 (NR4A1) antagonists induce ROS-dependent inhibition of mTOR signaling in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Kumaravel Mohankumar; Xi Li; Subhashree Sridharan; Keshav Karki; Stephen Safe
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2019-04-30       Impact factor: 5.482

8.  Molecular Analysis of Mixed Endometrial Carcinomas Shows Clonality in Most Cases.

Authors:  Martin Köbel; Bo Meng; Lien N Hoang; Noorah Almadani; Xiaodong Li; Robert A Soslow; C Blake Gilks; Cheng-Han Lee
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 6.394

9.  Prognostic significance of L1CAM expression and its association with mutant p53 expression in high-risk endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Inge C Van Gool; Ellen Stelloo; Remi A Nout; Hans W Nijman; Richard J Edmondson; David N Church; Helen J MacKay; Alexandra Leary; Melanie E Powell; Linda Mileshkin; Carien L Creutzberg; Vincent T H B M Smit; Tjalling Bosse
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2016-01-08       Impact factor: 7.842

Review 10.  Immunotherapy in endometrial cancer: rationale, practice and perspectives.

Authors:  Wenyu Cao; Xinyue Ma; Jean Victoria Fischer; Chenggong Sun; Beihua Kong; Qing Zhang
Journal:  Biomark Res       Date:  2021-06-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.