Literature DB >> 30922603

Molecular classification defines outcomes and opportunities in young women with endometrial carcinoma.

Heidi Britton1, Leo Huang2, Amy Lum2, Samuel Leung2, Kathryn Shum2, Mruganka Kale1, Angela Burleigh1, Janine Senz2, Winnie Yang2, Melissa McConechy3, Stefan Kommoss4, Sara Brucker4, Aline Talhouk5, C Blake Gilks2, Jessica N McAlpine6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Approximately 15% of endometrial carcinomas (ECs) arise in young women who may wish to avoid surgical menopause and/or preserve fertility. Our aim was to evaluate the prognostic significance of Proactive Molecular risk classifier for Endometrial Carcinoma (ProMisE) in young (<50 yo) women with EC.
METHODS: ProMisE was applied to a retrospective cohort of women with ECs <50 yo at diagnosis, and associations between the four ProMisE molecular subtypes (MMR deficient (MMRd), POLE mutated (POLE), p53 wild type (p53wt), and p53 abnormal (p53abn)) and clinicopathological parameters, including outcomes, were assessed.
RESULTS: Of 257 ECs, there were 48 (19%) MMRd, 34 (13%) POLE, 164 (64%) p53wt and 11 (4%) p53abn. ProMisE subtypes were associated with differences in all measured clinicopathological parameters except for presence of synchronous ovarian tumours and fertility. Age at diagnosis was youngest and BMI highest in women with p53wt ECs. MMRd and p53abn tumours were more likely to be advanced stage (III/IV), high-risk (ESMO), and receive chemotherapy. ProMisE subtypes were strongly associated with outcomes (overall, disease-specific, and progression-free survival (p < 0.0001 for all)). Advanced stage, grade, LVSI, myometrial invasion and ESMO risk groups showed associations with some but not all survival parameters. ProMisE maintained a strong association with OS and DSS on multivariable analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: ProMisE molecular classification is prognostic in young women with EC, enabling early stratification and risk assignment to direct care. Further studies can assess response to therapy, fertility, and cancer-related outcomes within the framework of molecular subtype.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Endometrial cancer; Lynch; Mismatch repair; Molecular classification; POLE; Young women

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30922603     DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.03.098

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  23 in total

Review 1.  Immunotherapy: Checkpoint Inhibitors in Lynch-Associated Gynecologic Cancers.

Authors:  J Stuart Ferriss; M Yvette Williams-Brown
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2019-08-23

Review 2.  MSI testing : What's new? What should be considered?

Authors:  Josef Rüschoff; Gustavo Baretton; Hendrik Bläker; Wolfgang Dietmaier; Manfred Dietel; Arndt Hartmann; Lars-Christian Horn; Korinna Jöhrens; Thomas Kirchner; Ruth Knüchel; Doris Mayr; Sabine Merkelbach-Bruse; Hans-Ulrich Schildhaus; Peter Schirmacher; Markus Tiemann; Katharina Tiemann; Wilko Weichert; Reinhard Büttner
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2021-09-03       Impact factor: 1.011

Review 3.  Prognostic value of the TCGA molecular classification in uterine carcinosarcoma.

Authors:  Antonio Travaglino; Antonio Raffone; Diego Raimondo; Damiano Arciuolo; Giuseppe Angelico; Michele Valente; Giulia Scaglione; Nicoletta D'alessandris; Paolo Casadio; Frediano Inzani; Antonio Mollo; Angela Santoro; Renato Seracchioli; Gian Franco Zannoni
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2021-10-11       Impact factor: 4.447

Review 4.  Synonymous Variants: Necessary Nuance in Our Understanding of Cancer Drivers and Treatment Outcomes.

Authors:  Nayiri M Kaissarian; Douglas Meyer; Chava Kimchi-Sarfaty
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 11.816

Review 5.  [MSI testing : What is new? What should be considered? German version].

Authors:  Josef Rüschoff; Gustavo Baretton; Hendrik Bläker; Wolfgang Dietmaier; Manfred Dietel; Arndt Hartmann; Lars-Christian Horn; Korinna Jöhrens; Thomas Kirchner; Ruth Knüchel; Doris Mayr; Sabine Merkelbach-Bruse; Hans-Ulrich Schildhaus; Peter Schirmacher; Markus Tiemann; Katharina Tiemann; Wilko Weichert; Reinhard Büttner
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 1.011

Review 6.  The Prediction of Recurrence in Low-Risk Endometrial Cancer: Is It Time for a Paradigm Shift in Adjuvant Therapy?

Authors:  Mohamed Laban; Seif Tarek El-Swaify; Sara H Ali; Mazen A Refaat; Mohamed Sabbour; Nourhan Farrag; Alaa Sayed Hassanin
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2021-04-15       Impact factor: 3.060

Review 7.  Incorporation of molecular characteristics into endometrial cancer management.

Authors:  Lisa Vermij; Vincent Smit; Remi Nout; Tjalling Bosse
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 5.087

Review 8.  Clinical actionability of molecular targets in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Mary Ellen Urick; Daphne W Bell
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2019-08-06       Impact factor: 60.716

Review 9.  Impact of adenomyosis on the prognosis of patients with endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Diego Raimondo; Antonio Raffone; Antonio Travaglino; Manuela Maletta; Paolo Casadio; Marco Ambrosio; Anna Chiara Aru; Angela Santoro; Gian Franco Zannoni; Luigi Insabato; Antonio Mollo; Fulvio Zullo; Renato Seracchioli
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2021-07-18       Impact factor: 4.447

Review 10.  New biomarkers for checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

Authors:  Nikki Burdett; Jayesh Desai
Journal:  ESMO Open       Date:  2020-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.