RESUMO
BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether uterine carcinosarcoma (UCS) is more aggressive than endometrial serous carcinoma (SC) and clear cell carcinoma (CCC). OBJECTIVES: To compare the prognosis of UCS to that of endometrial SC and CCC, through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Four electronic databases were searched from January 2000 to October 2020. All studies assessing hazard ratio (HR) for death in UCS vs SC and/or CCC. HRs for death with 95% confidence interval were extracted and pooled by using a random-effect model. A significant P-value <0.05 was adopted. RESULTS: Six studies with 11 029 patients (4995 with UCS, 4634 with SC, 1346 with CCC and 54 with either SC or CCC) were included. UCS showed a significantly worse prognosis than SC/CCC both overall (HR = 1.51; P = 0.008) and at early stage (HR = 1.58; P < 0.001). Similar results were found for UCS vs SC (HR = 1.53; P < 0.001) and UCS vs CCC (HR = 1.60; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to SC and CCC, UCS has a significantly worse prognosis, with a 1.5-1.6-fold increased risk of death. This might justify a more aggressive treatment for UCS compared to SC and CCC. Further studies are necessary to define the prognostic impact of different molecular subgroups.
Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma de Células Claras , Carcinossarcoma , Cistadenocarcinoma Seroso , Neoplasias do Endométrio , Neoplasias Uterinas , Adenocarcinoma de Células Claras/patologia , Adenocarcinoma de Células Claras/terapia , Carcinossarcoma/patologia , Carcinossarcoma/terapia , Cistadenocarcinoma Seroso/patologia , Neoplasias do Endométrio/patologia , Feminino , Humanos , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Estudos Retrospectivos , Neoplasias Uterinas/patologia , Neoplasias Uterinas/terapiaRESUMO
Endometrial clear cell carcinoma (CCC) shows morphological overlap with endometrioid and serous carcinoma. We aimed to assess the accuracy of immunohistochemical diagnostic markers of CCC, i.e. HNF1ß, Napsin A and P504S/Alpha-Methylacyl-CoA Racemase (AMACR). A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted by searching 4 electronic databases from their inception to April 2022 for all studies assessing HNF1ß, Napsin A and/or AMACR in endometrial CCC vs endometrioid/serous carcinomas. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed as sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and area under the curve (AUC) on sROC curves. Eleven studies were included. HNF1ß positivity (any expression) showed sensitivity= 0.78; specificity= 0.81; LR+ =2.46; LR-= 0.38; DOR= 5.96; AUC= 0.79. Diffuse HNF1ß expression showed sensitivity= 0.53; specificity= 0.95; LR+ =9.68; LR-= 0.51; DOR= 18.02; AUC= 0.40. Napsin A positivity (any expression) showed sensitivity= 0.76; specificity= 0.97; LR+ =18.79; LR-= 0.27; DOR= 73.31; AUC= 0.81. Diffuse Napsin A expression showed sensitivity= 0.52; specificity= 0.99; LR+ =14.50; LR-= 0.55; DOR= 24.93; AUC= 0.98. AMACR positivity (any expression) showed sensitivity= 0.76; specificity= 0.86; LR+ =4.86; LR-= 0.30; DOR= 13.56; AUC was not assessable due to the presence of only 2 studies. In conclusion, HNF1ß, Napsin A and AMACR show moderate accuracy in identifying endometrial CCC. Considering only a diffuse expression of these markers as positive leads to high specificity but low sensitivity. In particular, Napsin A appears as the most specific marker of endometrial CCC.