Immunohistochemical and genetic profiles of endometrioid endometrial carcinoma arising from atrophic endometrium.

OBJECTIVE: Endometrial carcinomas are divided into type I endometrioid endometrial carcinomas (EECs), thought to arise from hyperplastic endometrium, and type II nonendometrioid endometrial carcinomas, thought to arise from atrophic endometrium. However, a minority (20%) of EECs have atrophic background endometrium, which was shown to be a marker of a worse prognosis. This study compares the immunohistochemical and genetic profiles of this possible third type to that of the known two types. METHODS: 43 patients with grade 1 EEC and hyperplastic background endometrium (type I), 43 patients with grade 1 EEC and atrophic background endometrium (type III) and 21 patients with serous carcinoma (type II) were included (n=107). Tissue microarrays of tumor samples were immunohistochemically stained for PTEN, L1CAM, ER, PR, p53, MLH1, PMS2, ß-catenin, E-cadherin and MIB1. The BRAF, KRAS, and PIK3CA genes were analyzed for mutations. RESULTS: A significantly higher expression of ER and PR, and a lower expression of L1CAM, p53 and MLH1 were found in type I and III compared to type II carcinomas. Expression of E-cadherin was significantly reduced in type III compared to type I carcinomas. Mutation analysis showed significantly less mutations of KRAS in type III compared to type I and II carcinomas (p<0.01). CONCLUSION: There appear to be slight immunohistochemical and genetic differences between EECs with hyperplastic and atrophic background endometrium. Carcinogenesis of EEC in atrophic endometrium seems to be characterized by loss of E-cadherin and a lack of KRAS mutations. As expected, endometrioid and serous carcinomas were immunohistochemically different.

Lymphovascular space invasion and the treatment of stage I endometrioid endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Treatment of clinical early-stage endometrioid endometrial cancer (EEC) in The Netherlands consists of primary hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Adjuvant radiotherapy is given when 2 or more the following risk factors are present: 60 years or older, grade 3 histology, and 50% or more myometrial invasion. Lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) is a predictor of poor prognosis and early distant spread. It is unclear whether adjuvant radiotherapy is sufficient in patients with LVSI-positive EEC. METHODS/MATERIALS: Eighty-one patients treated from 1999 until 2011 for stage I LVSI-positive EEC in 11 Dutch hospitals were included. The outcomes of patients with 0 to 1 risk factors were compared with those with 2 to 3 risk factors, and both were compared with the known literature. RESULTS: Eighteen patients presented with recurrent disease, and 12 of those recurrences had a distant component. Overall and distant recurrence rates were 19.2% and 11.5% in patients with 0 to 1 risk factors followed by observation and 25.5% and 17% in patients with 2 to 3 risk factors who received adjuvant radiotherapy. Only 1 patient with grade 1 disease had a recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: In stage I LVSI-positive EEC with 0 to 1 risk factors, observation might not be adequate. Moreover, despite adjuvant radiotherapy, a high overall and distant recurrence rate was observed in patients with 2 to 3 risk factors. The use of systemic treatment in these patients, with the exception of patients with grade 1 disease, should be investigated.

Cervical cytology in serous and endometrioid endometrial cancer.

The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of abnormal cervical cytology in preoperative cervical cytology of patients diagnosed with uterine papillary serous carcinoma (UPSC) and endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (EEC). In addition, associations between abnormal cervical cytology and clinicopathologic factors were evaluated. In this multicentre study, EEC patients diagnosed at two hospitals from 1999 to 2009 and UPSC patients diagnosed at five hospitals from 1992 to 2009, were included. Revision of the histologic slides was performed systematically and independently by 3 gynecopathologists. Cervical cytology within six months before histopathologic diagnosis of endometrial carcinoma was available for 267 EEC and 80 UPSC patients. Cervical cytology with atypical, malignant, or normal endometrial cells in postmenopausal women was considered as abnormal cytology, specific for endometrial pathology. Abnormal cervical cytology was found in 87.5% of UPSC patients, compared with 37.8% in EEC patients. In UPSC, abnormal cytology was associated with extrauterine spread of disease (P=0.043). In EEC, abnormal cytology was associated with cervical involvement (P=0.034). In both EEC and UPSC patients, abnormal cervical cytology was not associated with survival. In conclusion, abnormal cervical cytology was more frequently found in UPSC patients. It was associated with extrauterine disease in UPSC patients, and with cervical involvement in EEC patients. More prospective research should be performed to assess the true clinical value of preoperative cervical cytology in endometrial cancer patients.

Why do women with double primary carcinoma of the endometrium and ovary have a favorable prognosis?

Patients with double primary cancer (DPC) of the ovary and endometrium are considered to have a better prognosis than patients with only epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). The aim of this study was to clarify the difference in prognosis by comparing clinicopathologic characteristics and survival. From the population-based database of the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry, women diagnosed between 1996 and 2006 with EOC were identified. Within this database of all EOC patients in 11 hospitals, the DPC patients were identified. Differences in characteristics between EOC-only and DPC patients were tested using Pearson χ tests and t-tests. Differences in overall survival were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and log-rank tests. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to study the factors that influence survival. Among 1105 EOC patients, 29 (2.6%) DPC patients were identified. DPC patients were more often premenopausal (P<0.01), in the early stage of disease (P<0.01), and more often had low-grade endometrioid tumors. Overall survival was better for DPC patients (P=0.004), but after stratification for stage the overall survival was similar. In multivariable analysis, DPC patients did not show a favorable prognosis after adjustment for age, disease stage, histology, tumor grade, and residual tumor after surgery. DPC patients seem to constitute a prognostically favorable group among EOC patients; however, after correction for age, stage, histology, tumor grade, and residue, survival is similar. This study shows how important it is for clinicians to distinguish DPC from metastatic diseases.

Immunohistochemical Profiles of Endometrioid Endometrial Carcinomas With and Without Metastatic Disease.

A minority of endometrial carcinomas present at an advanced stage with a poor prognosis, and should be identified to individualize treatment. Immunohistochemical markers have been studied, but most have not been directly linked to metastasis. This study analyzes the immunohistochemical profile of endometrioid endometrial carcinomas (EECs) with and without metastases, and corresponding metastases. Tissue microarray slides from stage I EECs, stage III-IV EECs, and corresponding metastases were stained and scored for expression of ß-catenin, E-cadherin, ER, PR, PTEN, p16, MLH1, PMS2, L1CAM, p53, p21, and MIB1. Scores were compared between primary stage I and III-IV EECs, stage III-IV EECs, and the corresponding metastases, and between intra-abdominal and distant metastases. Primary tumors with distant metastases had a significantly lower ER expression than those without metastases or with intra-abdominal metastases. Distant metastases had a significantly lower PR expression than the corresponding primary tumor and intra-abdominal metastases. In contrast, p16 and PTEN expression was significantly higher in intra-abdominal metastases compared with corresponding primary tumors. Immunohistochemistry predicts both presence and location of EEC metastases. Loss of ER and PR was related to distant spread, and increased expression of PTEN and p16 was related to intra-abdominal spread. Additional research should assess the use of these markers in the diagnostic workup as well as the possibility to target metastases through these markers.

L1CAM Expression is Related to Non-Endometrioid Histology, and Prognostic for Poor Outcome in Endometrioid Endometrial Carcinoma.

The majority of endometrial carcinomas are classified as Type I endometrioid endometrial carcinomas (EECs) and have a good prognosis. Type II non-endometrioid endometrial carcinomas (NEECs) have a significant worse outcome. Yet, 20 % of the EECs are associated with an unexplained poor outcome. The aim of this study was to determine if L1CAM expression, a recently reported biomarker for aggressive tumor behavior in endometrial carcinoma, was associated with clinicopathological features of EECs. A total of 103 patients diagnosed as EEC at the Radboud University Medical Centre, based on the pathology report were selected. L1CAM status of these tumors was determined, and histologic slides were reviewed by two expert pathologists. L1CAM-positivity was observed in 17 % (18/103). Review of the diagnostic slides revealed that 11 out of these 18 L1CAM-positive tumors (61 %) contained a serous- or mixed carcinoma component that was not initially mentioned in the pathology report. L1CAM-expression was associated with advanced age, poor tumor grade, and lymphovascular space invasion. A worse five year progression free survival rate was observed for patients with L1CAM-positive tumors (55.6 % for the L1CAM-positive group, compared to 83.3 % for the L1CAM-negative group P = 0.01). L1CAM expression carries prognostic value for histologically classified EEC and supports the identification of tumors with a NEEC component.

High prevalence of atypical hyperplasia in the endometrium of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study is to determine the prevalence of endometrial premalignancies in women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). METHODS: Endometrial and ovarian specimens of 186 patients with EOC were retrospectively selected using the nationwide pathology network and registry, and sections were comprehensively reviewed: 136 (73%) serous, 19 (10%) endometrioid, 15 (8%) mucinous, seven (4%) clear cell, and nine (5%) undifferentiated. Immunohistochemical phenotypes were compared for patients with serous EOC with concurrent endometrial pathology. RESULTS: In 31%, endometrial (pre)malignancy was found: carcinoma in 3%, endometrial intraepithelial carcinoma (EIC) in 4%, and atypical hyperplasia in 24%. Atypical hyperplasia was found in 47% of endometrioid EOCs but in 7% to 33% of other subtypes. Body mass index was higher concurrent to atypical hyperplasia (P=.001). Serous EOC and EIC immunophenotypes were comparable, whereas atypical hyperplasia was expressed differently. CONCLUSIONS: Apart from synchronous endometrial carcinoma, endometrial premalignancies should be taken into account when determining optimal treatment for women diagnosed with EOC.

Histopathologic assessment of the entire endometrium in asymptomatic women.

Knowledge on the nature of the endometrium in women without symptoms of endometrial disease is poor. Therefore, the aim of this prospective study was to describe the endometrium of a cohort of asymptomatic women. The entire endometrium of premenopausal and postmenopausal women was embedded for histologic examination. All included patients underwent a hysterectomy on indication of uterovaginal prolapse, from July 2011 to October 2012, in 3 hospitals in the South of the Netherlands. Exclusion criteria were symptoms of postmenopausal vaginal blood loss or premenopausal disordered vaginal bleeding. As a result, 68 women were included in the study, 48 women were postmenopausal and 20 were premenopausal. In the endometrium of 10 women, simple hyperplasia was found (15%); 1, complex hyperplasia (2%); 2, simple atypical hyperplasia (3%); 2, complex atypical hyperplasia (3%); and 2, a small focus of intramucosal endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (3%). In general, the endometrium was heterogeneous, and most lesions were not present in the entire endometrium. In conclusion, after examining the entire endometrium, a remarkable high prevalence of endometrial pathology was found in asymptomatic women. The clinical meaning of these lesions is not yet clear, but endometrial pathology may frequently exist without symptoms.

L1CAM in early-stage type I endometrial cancer: results of a large multicenter evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Despite the excellent prognosis of Fédération Internationale de Gynécologie et d'Obstétrique (FIGO) stage I, type I endometrial cancers, a substantial number of patients experience recurrence and die from this disease. We analyzed the value of immunohistochemical L1CAM determination to predict clinical outcome. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study to determine expression of L1CAM by immunohistochemistry in 1021 endometrial cancer specimens. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard model were applied for survival and multivariable analyses. A machine-learning approach was used to validate variables for predicting recurrence and death. RESULTS: Of 1021 included cancers, 17.7% were rated L1CAM-positive. Of these L1CAM-positive cancers, 51.4% recurred during follow-up compared with 2.9% L1CAM-negative cancers. Patients bearing L1CAM-positive cancers had poorer disease-free and overall survival (two-sided Log-rank P < .001). Multivariable analyses revealed an increase in the likelihood of recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] = 16.33; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 10.55 to 25.28) and death (HR = 15.01; 95% CI = 9.28 to 24.26). In the L1CAM-negative cancers FIGO stage I subdivision, grading and risk assessment were irrelevant for predicting disease-free and overall survival. The prognostic relevance of these parameters was related strictly to L1CAM positivity. A classification and regression decision tree (CRT)identified L1CAM as the best variable for predicting recurrence (sensitivity = 0.74; specificity = 0.91) and death (sensitivity = 0.77; specificity = 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, L1CAM has been shown to be the best-ever published prognostic factor in FIGO stage I, type I endometrial cancers and shows clear superiority over the standardly used multifactor risk score. L1CAM expression in type I cancers indicates the need for adjuvant treatment. This adhesion molecule might serve as a treatment target for the fully humanized anti-L1CAM antibody currently under development for clinical use.

Endometrioid endometrial carcinoma with atrophic endometrium and poor prognosis.

OBJECTIVE: Type I endometrial carcinomas are characterized by endometrioid histology, develop from hyper-plastic endometrium, and have a good prognosis. Type II, nonendometrioid carcinomas, arise in atrophic endometrium and have a poor prognosis. However, approximately 20% of cases do not fit within this dualistic model and include endometrioid carcinomas associated with recurrence and possibly with atrophy. We aimed to evaluate grade 1 endometrioid endometrial carcinomas with atrophic endometrium, a putative third type of endometrial carcinoma. METHODS: Histologic slides of all grade 1 endometrioid endometrial cancers from the Radboud University Medical Centre and Canisius-Wilhelmina Hospital from 1999-2009 and from the Mayo Clinic from 2002-2008 were reviewed. Comparisons were made between patients with atrophic and hyperplastic endometrium. RESULTS: After review, 527 patients were identified. In 88 patients (16.8%), background endometrium was atrophic and 387 patients (73.3%) had hyperplastic endometrium. Fifty-two patients (9.9%) had proliferative endometrium or no background endometrium and were excluded. Atrophy correlated with older age, low body mass index, advanced International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, malignant cells in peritoneal cytology, lymph node metastases, cervical involvement, lymphovascular space invasion, and deep myometrial invasion. Multivariable analysis showed that age (hazard ratio 1.06, 95% confidence interval [Cl] 1.01-1.12), International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage (hazard ratio 8.47, 95% Cl 1.73-41.57), and background endometrium (hazard ratio 3.11, 95% Cl 1.11-8.70) were predictors of progression-free survival. CONCLUSION: Atrophic endometrium is an independent prognostic factor for patients with grade 1 endometrioid endometrial carcinoma. Endometrioid carcinoma with atrophy may not follow the hypothesized progression model for type I tumors and may arise through unique carcinogenic pathways. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.