| Literature DB >> 35796805 |
Danyang Liu1, Tingting Chen1, Kexuan Yu1, Jing Li1, Shunni Wang1, Xiaoxi Ma1, Qin Zhu1, Yan Ning2, Yiqin Wang3.
Abstract
Papillary proliferation of the endometrium (PPE) is subdivided based on the complexity of the papillae and the proliferation of lesions, and the complex group is considered to have an increased risk of concurrent/subsequent endometrial neoplasia. However, the current subdivision criteria fail to prove the equivalence of the quantity of simple papillae and structural complexity. In this study, we divided PPE of 207 cases from 2014 to 2022 into 3 groups according to structural complexity and proliferation degrees: Group 1 equaled to the simple PPE with a simple papillary structure and typical localized proliferation; group 2 had the simple structure similar to group 1 but occupy over 50% of the endometrial polyp or > 2 lesions in the surface of nonpolypoid endometrium; group 3 had the truly complex branching papillae despite of its proportion. Group 3 was implicated with significantly more concurrent endometrial neoplasia (EAH and carcinoma) compared with groups 1 and 2 (P < 0.01), while no difference was found between groups 1 and 2. In 128 cases with no concurrent endometrial abnormalities in the initial biopsy or curettage specimens, 4 cases presented endometrial neoplasia (3 carcinoma and 1 atypical hyperplasia) in the subsequent specimens, all of which presented PPE of group 3 but not group 1 or 2 in the prior tissues (P < 0.01). The immunochemistry of 83 cases showed similar expressions of ER, PTEN, ARID1A, PTEN, p16, β-catenin, and p53 between PPE and the surrounding normal endometrium. Nearly 100% of PPE cases lost expressions of PR. A total of 2/83 cases showing PAX2 expression were all in the group 3 and correlated with endometrial neoplasia (2/17, 11.76%, P < 0.05). 76/83 (91.57%) of PPE lesions had KRAS mutations, and the distributions of which were similar among 3 groups. The frequency of mucinous metaplasia was significantly higher in the PPE lesions with KRAS mutations (72/74, 97.30%, P < 0.01). Group 3 showed higher frequency of single KRAS mutations compared with the combination of groups 1 and 2 (P < 0.01). Finally, the concordance of KRAS mutation profiles between PPE and endometrial neoplasia was significantly higher in group 3 than either group 1 or 2 (P < 0.01), while no difference was found between group 1 and 2. Thus, a new 2-tier subdivision system only emphasizing the complexity of papillae is recommended, which might precisely predict the risk of endometrial neoplasia and neoplasia-related molecular characteristics.Entities:
Keywords: Endometrial carcinoma; KRAS mutation; Neoplasia; PPE
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35796805 PMCID: PMC9534819 DOI: 10.1007/s00428-022-03367-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Virchows Arch ISSN: 0945-6317 Impact factor: 4.535
Fig. 1The histological features of 3 groups of papillary proliferations of endometrium (PPE). A–C The histological features of group 1. A The PPE lesions appeared in the background of the endometrial polyp. B The papillae were simple without any secondary branches. C Mucinous epithelium could be seen on the surface of papillae. A Scale bars = 200 µm. B Scale bars = 100 µm. C Scale bars = 50 µm. D–F The histological features of group 2. D The PPE lesions consist of simple papillae occupied over 50% of the endometrial polyp. E–F All the papillae had no complex branches and presented no cytological atypea. Mucinous metaplasia was conspicuous. D Scale bars = 2.5 mm. E Scale bars = 100 µm. F Scale bars = 50 µm. G–L The histological features of group 3 in the background of the endometrial polyp (G–I) and the nonpolypoid endometrium (J–L). The group is characterized by the crowded intraluminal branching papillae with no cytological atypea. Still, mucinous metaplasia was conspicuous. G Scale bars = 400 µm. H Scale bars = 100 µm. I Scale bars = 50 µm. J Scale bars = 1.25 mm. K Scale bars = 100 µm. L Scale bars = 50 µm
Distributions of concurrent and subsequent endometrial abnormalities in three groups of PPE
| PPE | Concurrent Endometrial status ( | Subsequent endometrial abnormalities ( | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal | Hyperplasia | Neoplasia (EAH and carcinoma) | Normal | Hyperplasia | Neoplasia (EAH and carcinoma) | |||
| Group 1 | 102 | 9 | 11 | 75 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Group 2 | 36 | 5 | 6 | 35 | 1 | 0 | ||
| Group 3 | 21 | 2 | 15 | 13 | 0 | 4 | ||
| Total | 159 | 16 | 32 | 123 | 1 | 4 | ||
| Group 1 | 102 | 9 | 11 | 0.328 | 75 | 0 | 0 | 0.261 |
| Group 2 | 36 | 5 | 6 | 35 | 1 | 0 | ||
| Total | 138 | 14 | 14 | 110 | 1 | 0 | ||
a 128 cases showed no endometrial abnormalities in the initial biopsy or curettage specimens. * Spearman rank order. P < 0.05
Fig. 2The immunochemical expressions of papillary proliferations of endometrium (PPE). The immunochemical patterns of MMR proteins (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2), ER-α, PR, Ki67, PAX2, ARID1A, β-catenin, p16, PTEN, and p53 were illustrated. Scale bars = 200 µm
Fig. 3The representative graphs of different expressions of PAX2 in group 3. A–B The H&E (A) and representative positive PAX2 expression (B) in the group 3. C–D The H&E (C) and negative PAX2 expression (D) by immunochemistry cases in group 3. The complex branching papillae could be seen with mucinous metaplasia, and PAX2 expressions were lost with only individual positive cells. Scale bars = 100 µm
The PAX2 expressions and KRAS mutations among groups of PPE
| PPE | PAX2 IHC | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | + | - | + | Single | Multiple | |||||
| Mucinous metaplasia | 8 | 0 | 8 | 0.815 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0.331 | |
| Mucinous metaplasia + | 75 | 2 | 73 | 3 | 72 | 54 | 18 | |||
| Group1 | 47 | 0 | 47 | 5 | 42 | 0.662 | 30 | 12 | ||
| Group2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | 0 | 19 | 13 | 6 | |||
| Group3 | 17 | 2 | 15 | 2 | 15 | 15 | 0 | |||
| Group 1 | 47 | 0 | 47 | – | 5 | 42 | 0.172 | 30 | 12 | 0.519 |
| Group 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | 0 | 19 | 13 | 6 | |||
* Fisher’s exact test. P < 0.05
The KRAS Mutations in the paired non-PPE endometrial tissues
| Non-PPE samples | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| mutation | Mutation type | Concordance with PPE | G12D | |||||||||
| - | + | Single | Multiple | - | + | |||||||
| Normal | 25 | 23 | 18 | 5 | 1.000 | 32 | 16 | 20 | 3 | |||
| Hyperplasia | 0 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 6 | 1 | 4 | 3 | ||||
| Neoplasia (EAH and carcinoma) | 3 | 15 | 11 | 4 | 5 | 13 | 6 | 9 | ||||
| Total | 28 | 45 | 34 | 11 | 43 | 30 | 30 | 15 | ||||
* Fisher’s exact test. P < 0.05
The concordance of KRAS mutations between PPE and non-PPE samples among 3 groups
| Concordance of | All non-PPE samples | Normal | Hyperplasia | Neoplasia (EAH and carcinoma) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | |||||
| Group 1 | 30 | 10 | 23 | 9 | 0.470 | 4 | 0 | 0.429 | 3 | 1 | ||
| Group 2 | 10 | 8 | 8 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Group 3 | 3 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 11 | ||||
| Total | 43 | 30 | 32 | 16 | 6 | 1 | 5 | 13 | ||||
| Group 1 | 30 | 10 | 0.121 | 23 | 9 | 0.259 | 4 | 0 | 0.333 | 3 | 1 | 0.600 |
| Group 2 | 10 | 8 | 8 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Total | 40 | 18 | 31 | 15 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 2 | ||||
* Fisher’s exact test. P < 0.05