Literature DB >> 30347477

Endometrial hyperplasia and the risk of coexistent cancer: WHO versus EIN criteria.

Antonio Travaglino1, Antonio Raffone2, Gabriele Saccone2, Antonio Mollo2, Giuseppe De Placido2, Luigi Insabato1, Fulvio Zullo2.   

Abstract

Endometrial hyperplasia (EH) is classified into benign and precancerous according to two different histomorphological systems: the World Health Organisation (WHO) system (based on the subjective evaluation of cytological atypia) and the endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN) system (based on a combination of several parameters that are assessable subjectively, or objectively through computerised analysis). The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends use of the EIN system. Nonetheless, a higher prognostic value for EIN criteria was demonstrated only with the objective assessment, which is not routinely applicable. The aim of this study was to evaluate which of the subjective classifications of EH (WHO or EIN) has better prognostic value, by assessing the risk of coexistent cancer. Electronic databases were searched for relevant articles from the inception of the databases to July 2018. All studies assessing the presence of cancer on hysterectomy specimens after a preoperative histological diagnosis of EH were included. Odds ratios (ORs), sensitivity and specificity were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Sixteen cohort studies and three case-control studies, assessing 2582 EHs, were included. The WHO criteria showed an OR of 11.15 (95% CI 7.65-16.24), a sensitivity of 0.86 (95% CI 0.82-0.90) and a specificity of 0.67 (95% CI 0.64-0.70) for coexistent cancer. The subjective EIN system showed a similar OR (11.85, 95% CI 4.91-28.62; P = 0.90), higher sensitivity (0.98, 95% CI 0.94-0.99), and lower specificity (0.29, 95% CI 0.24-0.34). The WHO system and the subjective EIN system have similar prognostic values. However, the EIN criteria appear to be more sensitive and thus more suitable for selecting women who need to be treated, whereas the WHO criteria, based on cytological atypia, seem to be more specific for lesions at higher risk of cancer. Therefore, integration of the EIN system with cytological atypia should be considered.
© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  World Health Organization; concurrent cancer; endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia; endometrial precancer; endometrioid adenocarcinoma; prognosis

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30347477     DOI: 10.1111/his.13776

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Histopathology        ISSN: 0309-0167            Impact factor:   5.087


  7 in total

1.  Accuracy of One-Step Nucleic Acid Amplification in Detecting Lymph Node Metastases in Endometrial Cancer.

Authors:  Antonio Raffone; Antonio Travaglino; Angela Santoro; Italia Esposito; Giuseppe Angelico; Saveria Spadola; Gian Franco Zannoni
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2019-08-23       Impact factor: 3.201

2.  TCGA Classification of Endometrial Cancer: the Place of Carcinosarcoma.

Authors:  Antonio Travaglino; Antonio Raffone; Annarita Gencarelli; Antonio Mollo; Maurizio Guida; Luigi Insabato; Angela Santoro; Gian Franco Zannoni; Fulvio Zullo
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2020-05-29       Impact factor: 3.201

3.  Fertility-Sparing Treatment for Atypical Endometrial Hyperplasia and Endometrial Cancer: A Cochrane Systematic Review Protocol.

Authors:  Maria-Eulalia Fernandez-Montoli; Jordi Sabadell; Nayanar-Adela Contreras-Perez
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2021-04-08       Impact factor: 3.845

4.  Concurrent and future risk of endometrial cancer in women with endometrial hyperplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Michelle T Doherty; Omolara B Sanni; Helen G Coleman; Chris R Cardwell; W Glenn McCluggage; Declan Quinn; James Wylie; Úna C McMenamin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  The Value of Vaginal Microbiome in Patients with Endometrial Hyperplasia.

Authors:  Hu Zhang; Qiao Feng; Zhanpeng Zhu; Haiyan Dai; Hua Hu
Journal:  J Healthc Eng       Date:  2021-12-18       Impact factor: 2.682

6.  Impact of endometrial carcinoma histotype on the prognostic value of the TCGA molecular subgroups.

Authors:  Antonio Travaglino; Antonio Raffone; Cristina Stradella; Rosanna Esposito; Paola Moretta; Cinzia Gallo; Giuliana Orlandi; Luigi Insabato; Fulvio Zullo
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 2.344

Review 7.  Heme oxygenase 1: a novel oncogene in multiple gynecological cancers.

Authors:  Jia-Jing Lu; Ayitila Abudukeyoumu; Xing Zhang; Li-Bing Liu; Ming-Qing Li; Feng Xie
Journal:  Int J Biol Sci       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 6.580

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.