Antonio Travaglino1, Antonio Raffone2, Cristina Stradella3, Rosanna Esposito3, Paola Moretta1, Cinzia Gallo4, Giuliana Orlandi3, Luigi Insabato1, Fulvio Zullo3. 1. Anatomic Pathology Unit, Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy. 2. Gynecology and Obstetrics Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Sciences and Dentistry, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Via Sergio Pansini, 5, 80131, Naples, Italy. anton.raffone@gmail.com. 3. Gynecology and Obstetrics Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Sciences and Dentistry, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Via Sergio Pansini, 5, 80131, Naples, Italy. 4. Gynecology and Obstetrics Unit, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) identified four prognostic subgroups of endometrial carcinoma: copy-number-low/p53-wild-type (p53wt), POLE-mutated/ultramutated (POLEmt), microsatellite-instability/hypermutated (MSI), and copy-number-high/p53-mutated (p53mt). However, it is still unclear if they may be integrated with the current histopathological prognostic factors, such as histotype. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of histotype on the prognostic value of the TCGA molecular subgroups of endometrial carcinoma. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by searching 7 electronic databases from their inception to April 2019 for studies assessing prognosis in all TCGA subgroups of endometrial carcinoma. Pooled hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) was calculated in two different groups ("all-histotypes" and "endometrioid"), using p53wt subgroup as reference standard; HR for non-endometrioid histotypes was calculated indirectly. Disease-specific survival and progression-free survival were assessed as additional analyses. RESULTS: Six studies with 2818 patients were included. In the p53mt subgroup, pooled HRs for OS were 4.322 (all-histotypes), 2.505 (endometrioid), and 4.937 (non-endometrioid). In the MSI subgroup, pooled HRs were 1.965 (all-histotypes), 1.287 (endometrioid), and 6.361 (non-endometrioid). In the POLEmt subgroup, pooled HRs were 0.763 (all-histotypes), 0.481 (endometrioid), and 2.634 (non-endometrioid). Results of additional analyses were consistent for all subgroups except for non-endometrioid POLEmt carcinomas. CONCLUSION: Histotype of endometrial carcinoma shows a crucial prognostic value independently of the TCGA molecular subgroup, with non-endometrioid carcinomas having a worse prognosis in each TCGA subgroup. Histotype should be integrated with molecular characterization for the risk stratification of patients in the future.
BACKGROUND: The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) identified four prognostic subgroups of endometrial carcinoma: copy-number-low/p53-wild-type (p53wt), POLE-mutated/ultramutated (POLEmt), microsatellite-instability/hypermutated (MSI), and copy-number-high/p53-mutated (p53mt). However, it is still unclear if they may be integrated with the current histopathological prognostic factors, such as histotype. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of histotype on the prognostic value of the TCGA molecular subgroups of endometrial carcinoma. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by searching 7 electronic databases from their inception to April 2019 for studies assessing prognosis in all TCGA subgroups of endometrial carcinoma. Pooled hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) was calculated in two different groups ("all-histotypes" and "endometrioid"), using p53wt subgroup as reference standard; HR for non-endometrioid histotypes was calculated indirectly. Disease-specific survival and progression-free survival were assessed as additional analyses. RESULTS: Six studies with 2818 patients were included. In the p53mt subgroup, pooled HRs for OS were 4.322 (all-histotypes), 2.505 (endometrioid), and 4.937 (non-endometrioid). In the MSI subgroup, pooled HRs were 1.965 (all-histotypes), 1.287 (endometrioid), and 6.361 (non-endometrioid). In the POLEmt subgroup, pooled HRs were 0.763 (all-histotypes), 0.481 (endometrioid), and 2.634 (non-endometrioid). Results of additional analyses were consistent for all subgroups except for non-endometrioid POLEmt carcinomas. CONCLUSION: Histotype of endometrial carcinoma shows a crucial prognostic value independently of the TCGA molecular subgroup, with non-endometrioid carcinomas having a worse prognosis in each TCGA subgroup. Histotype should be integrated with molecular characterization for the risk stratification of patients in the future.
Authors: Casey M Cosgrove; David L Tritchler; David E Cohn; David G Mutch; Craig M Rush; Heather A Lankes; William T Creasman; David S Miller; Nilsa C Ramirez; Melissa A Geller; Matthew A Powell; Floor J Backes; Lisa M Landrum; Cynthia Timmers; Adrian A Suarez; Richard J Zaino; Michael L Pearl; Paul A DiSilvestro; Shashikant B Lele; Paul J Goodfellow Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2017-11-11 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Aline Talhouk; Melissa K McConechy; Samuel Leung; Winnie Yang; Amy Lum; Janine Senz; Niki Boyd; Judith Pike; Michael Anglesio; Janice S Kwon; Anthony N Karnezis; David G Huntsman; C Blake Gilks; Jessica N McAlpine Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-01-06 Impact factor: 6.860
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
Authors: Lien N Hoang; Melissa K McConechy; Martin Köbel; Guangming Han; Marjan Rouzbahman; Ben Davidson; Julie Irving; Rola H Ali; Sam Leung; Jessica N McAlpine; Esther Oliva; Marisa R Nucci; Robert A Soslow; David G Huntsman; C Blake Gilks; Cheng-Han Lee Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Antonio Travaglino; Antonio Raffone; Massimo Mascolo; Maurizio Guida; Luigi Insabato; Gian Franco Zannoni; Fulvio Zullo Journal: Pathol Oncol Res Date: 2019-12-06 Impact factor: 3.201
Authors: Ellen Stelloo; Remi A Nout; Elisabeth M Osse; Ina J Jürgenliemk-Schulz; Jan J Jobsen; Ludy C Lutgens; Elzbieta M van der Steen-Banasik; Hans W Nijman; Hein Putter; Tjalling Bosse; Carien L Creutzberg; Vincent T H B M Smit Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2016-03-22 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: A Talhouk; M K McConechy; S Leung; H H Li-Chang; J S Kwon; N Melnyk; W Yang; J Senz; N Boyd; A N Karnezis; D G Huntsman; C B Gilks; J N McAlpine Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2015-06-30 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Cyriac Kandoth; Nikolaus Schultz; Andrew D Cherniack; Rehan Akbani; Yuexin Liu; Hui Shen; A Gordon Robertson; Itai Pashtan; Ronglai Shen; Christopher C Benz; Christina Yau; Peter W Laird; Li Ding; Wei Zhang; Gordon B Mills; Raju Kucherlapati; Elaine R Mardis; Douglas A Levine Journal: Nature Date: 2013-05-02 Impact factor: 49.962
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
Authors: Jingyuan Wang; Yibo Dai; Tao Ji; Wei Guo; Zhiqi Wang; Jianliu Wang Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-06-02 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Lora H Ellenson; Britta Weigelt; Robert A Soslow; Amir Momeni-Boroujeni; Wissam Dahoud; Chad M Vanderbilt; Sarah Chiang; Rajmohan Murali; Eric V Rios-Doria; Kaled M Alektiar; Carol Aghajanian; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Marc Ladanyi Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2021-02-18 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Vanessa M López-Ozuna; Liron Kogan; Mahmood Y Hachim; Emad Matanes; Ibrahim Y Hachim; Cristina Mitric; Lauren Liu Chen Kiow; Susie Lau; Shannon Salvador; Amber Yasmeen; Walter H Gotlieb Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-07-07 Impact factor: 6.244
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
Authors: Antonio Raffone; Diego Raimondo; Antonio Travaglino; Giulia Rovero; Manuela Maletta; Ivano Raimondo; Marco Petrillo; Giampiero Capobianco; Paolo Casadio; Renato Seracchioli; Antonio Mollo Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-03-21 Impact factor: 3.390