Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 May 12;112(10):1656-64.
doi: 10.1038/bjc.2015.123. Epub 2015 Apr 21.

DNA ploidy in curettage specimens identifies high-risk patients and lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer

Affiliations

DNA ploidy in curettage specimens identifies high-risk patients and lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer

T S Njølstad et al. Br J Cancer. .

Abstract

Background: Preoperative risk stratification is essential in tailoring endometrial cancer treatment, and biomarkers predicting lymph node metastasis and aggressive disease are aspired in clinical practice. DNA ploidy assessment in hysterectomy specimens is a well-established prognostic marker. DNA ploidy assessment in preoperative curettage specimens is less studied, and in particular in relation to the occurrence of lymph node metastasis.

Methods: Curettage image cytometry DNA ploidy in relation to established clinicopathological variables and outcome was investigated in 785 endometrial carcinoma patients prospectively included in the MoMaTEC multicentre trial.

Results: Diploid curettage status was found in 72.0%, whereas 28.0% were non-diploid. Non-diploid status significantly correlated with traditional aggressive postoperative clinicopathological features, and was an independent predictor of lymph node metastasis among FIGO stage I-III patients in multivariate analysis (OR 1.94, P=0.033). Non-diploid status was related to shorter disease-specific survival (5-year DSS of 74.4% vs 88.8% for diploid curettage, P<0.001). When stratifying by FIGO stage and lymph node status, the prognostic effect remained. However, in multivariate regression analysis, preoperative histological risk classification was a stronger predictor of DSS than DNA ploidy.

Conclusions: Non-diploid curettage is significantly associated with aggressive clinicopathological phenotype, lymph node metastasis, and poor survival in endometrial cancer. The prognostic effect was also observed among subgroups with (presumably) less aggressive traits, such as low FIGO stage and negative lymph node status. Our results indicate curettage DNA ploidy as a possible supplement to existing parameters used to tailor surgical treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Disease-specific survival (DSS) for endometrial cancer patients related to curettage specimens classified according to DNA ploidy. (A) Disease-specific survival for all patients, grouped according to DNA ploidy (n=733). (B) Disease-specific survival for patients with FIGO stage I/II according to curettage DNA ploidy (n=623). Patients with aneuploid, tetraploid, and polyploid tumours were merged because of similar survival, and classified as non-diploid. The number of cases followed by the number of endometrial carcinoma-related deaths is given in parenthesis. P-values are by Kaplan–Meier estimation by the log-rank test.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Disease-specific survival (DSS) for endometrial cancer patients in relation to curettage specimen DNA ploidy and lymph node status. (A) Disease-specific survival for patients with positive lymph node status (n=66); (B) DSS for patients with negative lymph node status (n=485); (C) DSS for patients with unevaluated lymph node status (n=182); (D) DSS for patients with FIGO stage I/II and unevaluated lymph node status (n=152). Patients with aneuploid, tetraploid, and polyploid tumours were merged because of similar survival, and classified as non-diploid. The number of cases followed by the number of endometrial carcinoma related deaths is given in parenthesis. All P-values are by Kaplan–Meier estimation by the log-rank test.

References

    1. American Cancer Society 2014. Cancer Facts & Figures 2014.
    1. Abeler VM, Kjorstad KE. Endometrial adenocarcinoma in Norway. A study of a total population. Cancer. 1991;67 (12:3093–3103. - PubMed
    1. Amant F, Moerman P, Neven P, Timmerman D, Van Limbergen E, Vergote I. Endometrial cancer. Lancet. 2005;366 (9484:491–505. - PubMed
    1. Boveri T. The Origin of Malignant Tumors. The Williams and Wilkins Company: Baltimore; 1914.
    1. Cancer Registry of Norway 2012. Cancer in Norway. Cancer incidence, mortality, survival and prevalence in Norway.

LinkOut - more resources