Literature DB >> 31248668

Molecular classification of endometrial carcinoma applied to endometrial biopsy specimens: Towards early personalized patient management.

Eman Abdulfatah1, Erin Wakeling2, Sharif Sakr3, Khaleel Al-Obaidy4, Sudeshna Bandyopadhyay4, Robert Morris3, Gerald Feldman2, Rouba Ali-Fehmi5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The current risk stratification systems used to guide management of endometrial cancer are based on irreproducible post surgical pathological information, hence the need for more reliable classification systems. Using microarray and sequencing technologies, TCGA recently identified four prognostically significant endometrial carcinoma subtypes, which subsequently proved reproducible using clinically applicable surrogate tests. Using these tests, we sought to determine the level of concordance between endometrial biopsies and subsequent hysterectomy specimens in assessing the molecular classification of endometrial carcinoma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty biopsies with corresponding hysterectomy specimens for endometrial carcinomas were collected. Additionally, 10 cases of biopsy proven atypical hyperplasia/EIN who were found to have endometrial carcinoma on resection were included. IHC for mismatch repair (MMR) proteins (MLH1, PMS2, MSH2 and MSH6) and P53 was performed. Microsatellite instability analysis was performed by PCR and Sanger sequencing was performed to detect mutations in exons 9 and 13 of the POLE gene. The level of concordance for tumor grade, histologic subtype, immunohistochemical and molecular profile in both specimens was determined using Cohen's kappa estimates.
RESULTS: A high level of concordance was achieved for MMR-loss, MSI-high, P53-wild and abnormal types. In contrast, grade and histologic subtype showed only moderate levels of agreement. POLE gene mutation was detected in two patients. For both cases, mutations were detected only in resection specimens. When comparing atypical hyperplasia/EIN with subsequent hysterectomy tumor, the profile was identical to that of endometrial carcinoma.
CONCLUSION: In our cohort of endometrial carcinoma, a high level of concordance was achieved between biopsy and hysterectomy specimens for MMR-loss, MSI-high, P53-wild and abnormal types, superior to that of grade and histologic subtype, providing earlier and more reliable prognostic information to inform management. Similar concordance could not be achieved for POLE mutation, given the low frequency of this mutation in our study.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biopsy; Classification; Endometrial; Molecular; Prognostic

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31248668     DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.06.012

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


  10 in total

1.  Prognostic impact of tumor budding in endometrial carcinoma within distinct molecular subgroups.

Authors:  Sara Imboden; Inti Zlobec; Tilman T Rau; Eva Bettschen; Carol Büchi; Lucine Christe; Amanda Rohner; Michael D Müller; Joseph W Carlson
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2020-07-29       Impact factor: 7.842

2.  Injection rate of contrast medium affects diagnostic ability of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for endometrial carcinoma: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Donghui Xu; Aiping Jin; Yongqian Ge; Yanmei Zhang
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2021-08

3.  Endometrial Cancer Following Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System Insertion in Young Women with Atypical Hyperplasia: Two Case Reports and Literature Review.

Authors:  Hongfa Peng; Jingjing Jiang; Xiaodong Li
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2022-05-31       Impact factor: 2.924

4.  TWIST1 expression and clinical significance in type I endometrial cancer and premalignant lesions: A retrospective clinical study.

Authors:  Junhua Shen; Qin Chen; Na Li; Xiaoxia Bai; Fenfen Wang; Baohua Li
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 1.889

Review 5.  Current Prognostic and Predictive Biomarkers for Endometrial Cancer in Clinical Practice: Recommendations/Proposal from the Italian Study Group.

Authors:  Gian Franco Zannoni; Emma Bragantini; Francesca Castiglione; Matteo Fassan; Giancarlo Troncone; Frediano Inzani; Anna Pesci; Angela Santoro; Filippo Fraggetta
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-04-08       Impact factor: 5.738

Review 6.  The Role of Immunohistochemistry Markers in Endometrial Cancer with Mismatch Repair Deficiency: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Amelia Favier; Justine Varinot; Catherine Uzan; Alex Duval; Isabelle Brocheriou; Geoffroy Canlorbe
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-03       Impact factor: 6.575

7.  Clinical Testing for Mismatch Repair in Neoplasms Using Multiple Laboratory Methods.

Authors:  Richard K Yang; Hui Chen; Sinchita Roy-Chowdhuri; Asif Rashid; Hector Alvarez; Mark Routbort; Keyur P Patel; Raja Luthra; L Jeffrey Medeiros; Gokce A Toruner
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-09-20       Impact factor: 6.575

8.  MicroRNA-641 Inhibits Endometrial Cancer Progression via Targeting AP1G1.

Authors:  Yanfen Dong; He Yang; Handan Hua
Journal:  Evid Based Complement Alternat Med       Date:  2022-09-30       Impact factor: 2.650

Review 9.  New Pathological and Clinical Insights in Endometrial Cancer in View of the Updated ESGO/ESTRO/ESP Guidelines.

Authors:  Angela Santoro; Giuseppe Angelico; Antonio Travaglino; Frediano Inzani; Damiano Arciuolo; Michele Valente; Nicoletta D'Alessandris; Giulia Scaglione; Vincenzo Fiorentino; Antonio Raffone; Gian Franco Zannoni
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 6.639

10.  Pre-treatment risk assessment of women with endometrial cancer: differences in outcomes of molecular and clinical classifications in the Slovenian patient cohort.

Authors:  Jure Knez; Monika Sobocan; Urska Belak; Rajko Kavalar; Mateja Zupin; Tomaz Büdefeld; Uros Potocnik; Iztok Takac
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2021-09-17       Impact factor: 2.991

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.