Molecular Classification of Grade 3 Endometrioid Endometrial Cancers Identifies Distinct Prognostic Subgroups
- PMID: 29505428
- PMCID: PMC5893364
- DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000001020
Molecular Classification of Grade 3 Endometrioid Endometrial Cancers Identifies Distinct Prognostic Subgroups
Abstract
Our aim was to investigate whether molecular classification can be used to refine prognosis in grade 3 endometrial endometrioid carcinomas (EECs). Grade 3 EECs were classified into 4 subgroups: p53 abnormal, based on mutant-like immunostaining (p53abn); MMR deficient, based on loss of mismatch repair protein expression (MMRd); presence of POLE exonuclease domain hotspot mutation (POLE); no specific molecular profile (NSMP), in which none of these aberrations were present. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method (Log-rank test) and univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. In total, 381 patients were included. The median age was 66 years (range, 33 to 96 y). Federation Internationale de Gynecologie et d'Obstetrique stages (2009) were as follows: IA, 171 (44.9%); IB, 120 (31.5%); II, 24 (6.3%); III, 50 (13.1%); IV, 11 (2.9%). There were 49 (12.9%) POLE, 79 (20.7%) p53abn, 115 (30.2%) NSMP, and 138 (36.2%) MMRd tumors. Median follow-up of patients was 6.1 years (range, 0.2 to 17.0 y). Compared to patients with NSMP, patients with POLE mutant grade 3 EEC (OS: hazard ratio [HR], 0.36 [95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.70]; P=0.003; RFS: HR, 0.17 [0.05-0.54]; P=0.003) had a significantly better prognosis; patients with p53abn tumors had a significantly worse RFS (HR, 1.73 [1.09-2.74]; P=0.021); patients with MMRd tumors showed a trend toward better RFS. Estimated 5-year OS rates were as follows: POLE 89%, MMRd 75%, NSMP 69%, p53abn 55% (Log rank P=0.001). Five-year RFS rates were as follows: POLE 96%, MMRd 77%, NSMP 64%, p53abn 47% (P=0.000001), respectively. In a multivariable Cox model that included age and Federation Internationale de Gynecologie et d'Obstetrique stage, POLE and MMRd status remained independent prognostic factors for better RFS; p53 status was an independent prognostic factor for worse RFS. Molecular classification of grade 3 EECs reveals that these tumors are a mixture of molecular subtypes of endometrial carcinoma, rather than a homogeneous group. The addition of molecular markers identifies prognostic subgroups, with potential therapeutic implications.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures




Similar articles
-
TCGA molecular subgroups of endometrial carcinoma in ovarian endometrioid carcinoma: A quantitative systematic review.Gynecol Oncol. 2021 Nov;163(2):427-432. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.08.011. Epub 2021 Aug 24. Gynecol Oncol. 2021. PMID: 34446267
-
Molecular Classification of the PORTEC-3 Trial for High-Risk Endometrial Cancer: Impact on Prognosis and Benefit From Adjuvant Therapy.J Clin Oncol. 2020 Oct 10;38(29):3388-3397. doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.00549. Epub 2020 Aug 4. J Clin Oncol. 2020. PMID: 32749941 Free PMC article.
-
Molecularly Classified Uterine FIGO Grade 3 Endometrioid Carcinomas Show Distinctive Clinical Outcomes But Overlapping Morphologic Features.Am J Surg Pathol. 2021 Mar 1;45(3):421-429. doi: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000001598. Am J Surg Pathol. 2021. PMID: 33021522
-
The prognostic impact of molecular classification in endometrial cancer that undergoes fertility-sparing treatment.Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2025 Jan;35(1):100024. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgc.2024.100024. Epub 2024 Dec 18. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2025. PMID: 39878279
-
Clinicopathological characteristics of multiple-classifier endometrial cancers: a cohort study and systematic review.Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2024 Feb 5;34(2):229-238. doi: 10.1136/ijgc-2023-004864. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2024. PMID: 38135437
Cited by
-
Pan-Asian adapted ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with endometrial cancer.ESMO Open. 2023 Feb;8(1):100774. doi: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100774. Epub 2023 Jan 23. ESMO Open. 2023. PMID: 36696825 Free PMC article.
-
Bone Metastases of Endometrial Carcinoma Treated by Surgery: A Report on 13 Patients and a Review of the Medical Literature.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Jun 2;19(11):6823. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19116823. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022. PMID: 35682407 Free PMC article. Review.
-
FIGO staging of endometrial cancer: 2023.J Gynecol Oncol. 2023 Sep;34(5):e85. doi: 10.3802/jgo.2023.34.e85. Epub 2023 Aug 8. J Gynecol Oncol. 2023. PMID: 37593813 Free PMC article.
-
TCGA Classification of Endometrial Cancer: the Place of Carcinosarcoma.Pathol Oncol Res. 2020 Oct;26(4):2067-2073. doi: 10.1007/s12253-020-00829-9. Epub 2020 May 29. Pathol Oncol Res. 2020. PMID: 32472441
-
Refining Adjuvant Therapy for Endometrial Cancer: New Standards and Perspectives.Biology (Basel). 2021 Aug 30;10(9):845. doi: 10.3390/biology10090845. Biology (Basel). 2021. PMID: 34571723 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- NIH National Cancer Institute. Surveillance Epidemiology, and End Results Program. (Cancer Statistics).Cancer Stat Facts: Endometrial Cancer. 2017 Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/corp.html. Accessed 10/12/2017.
-
- Proctor L, Pradhan M, Leung S, et al. Assessment of DNA Ploidy in the ProMisE molecular subgroups of endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;146:596–602. - PubMed
-
- Stelloo E, Bosse T, Nout RA, et al. Refining prognosis and identifying targetable pathways for high-risk endometrial cancer; a TransPORTEC initiative. Mod Pathol. 2015;28:836–844. - PubMed
-
- Stelloo E, Nout RA, Osse EM, et al. Improved Risk Assessment by Integrating Molecular and Clinicopathological Factors in Early-stage Endometrial Cancer-Combined Analysis of the PORTEC Cohorts. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22:4215–4224. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials
Miscellaneous