American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status score as a predictor of long-term outcome in women with endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To study the association of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status score with long-term outcome in endometrial cancer. METHODS: Overall, disease-specific and non-cancer-related survival were estimated using simple and multivariable Cox regression analyses and the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 1166 patients were included in the study. Median follow-up time was 76 (range 1-136) months. All-cause and non-cancer-related mortality were increased in patients whose ASA physical status score was III (HRs 2.5 and 8.0, respectively) or IV (HRs 5.7 and 25, respectively), and cancer-related mortality was increased in patients whose score was IV (HR 2.7). Kaplan-Meier analyses demonstrated a worse overall, disease-specific and non-cancer-related survival for patients whose score was ≥III (p<0.0001 for all). Disease-specific survival was also separately analyzed for patients with stage I and stage II-IV cancer. Compared with patients whose score was ≤II, the survival was worse for patients whose score was ≥III in both subgroups of stages (p=0.003 and p=0.017 for stage I and stages II-IV, respectively). ASA physical status score remained an independent predictor of all-cause mortality (HR 2.2 for scores ≥III), cancer-related mortality (HRs 1.7 and 2.2 for scores ≥III and IV, respectively) and non-cancer related mortality (HR 3.1 for scores ≥III) after adjustment for prognostically relevant clinicopathologic and blood-based covariates. ASA physical status score also remained an independent predictor of cancer-related mortality after exclusion of patients who were at risk for nodal involvement based on features of the primary tumor but who did not undergo lymphadenectomy, and patients with advanced disease who received suboptimal chemotherapy (HRs 1.6 and 2.5 for scores ≥III and IV, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: ASA physical status score independently predicts overall survival, disease-specific survival, and non-cancer-related survival in endometrial cancer.

Prediction of lymphatic dissemination in endometrioid endometrial cancer: Comparison of three risk-stratification models in a single-institution cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the performance characteristics of 3 risk-stratification models, referred to as Mayo, Helsinki and Milwaukee models, in predicting lymphatic dissemination in endometrial cancer. METHODS: A total of 1052 patients with stage I-III endometrioid endometrial cancer were included in the study. The areas under curve were compared with the receiver operating characteristic curve area comparison test. Chi-square and Fisher exact test were used for comparing categorical variables. The Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox regression models were used for survival analyses. The median follow-up time was 55months (range 1-108). RESULTS: Areas under curve were 0.781, 0.830 and 0.829 for the Mayo, Helsinki (P=0.285 vs. Mayo) and Milwaukee (P=0.292 vs. Mayo) models, respectively, in predicting lymphatic dissemination. The rates of false negatives and false positives were similar for all models. The lymphadenectomy rate decreased in the order of Mayo model (71.5%)>Helsinki model (62.4%)>Milwaukee model (48.8%). In patients with stage I cancer, disease specific survival was better for those who satisfied low-risk criteria according to any of the models. In patients with stage II-III cancer, this difference in survival was significant only for the Milwaukee model. Both lymphatic dissemination and high-risk tumor features as per the risk models were independent predictors of survival. CONCLUSIONS: The studied models had a similar accuracy in predicting lymphatic dissemination in endometrial cancer. Lymphadenectomy rate was lowest for the Milwaukee model. Survival analyses suggest that variables included in the models predict patient outcome independently of tumor stage.

Preoperative Risk Stratification of Endometrial Carcinoma: L1CAM as a Biomarker.

OBJECTIVE: Preoperative or intraoperative risk assessment models are used to stratify patients with endometrial carcinoma to lymphadenectomy. Our aim was to determine whether preoperative analysis of L1 cell adhesion molecule (L1CAM) can improve risk assessment. METHODS: Immunohistochemical L1CAM staining was performed on endometrial biopsies of 241 patients and paired hysterectomy samples of 75 patients. Risk assessment models based on preoperative histologic type and grade, myometrial invasion, and/or tumor diameter and alternative models incorporating preoperative L1CAM were compared with regard to their capability of predicting lymph nodal or distant metastasis. Soluble L1 levels were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in serum samples of 40 patients with endometrial carcinoma. RESULTS: The concordance rate between L1CAM staining results of preoperative and hysterectomy samples was moderate (κ = 0.586, P < 0.0001). Preoperative L1CAM expression was associated with nonendometrioid histology, lymph node involvement, advanced stage, and positive peritoneal cytology. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses showed that L1CAM did not significantly improve risk stratification algorithms based on traditional risk factors. Intraoperative tumor diameter was an effective surrogate for myometrial invasion. There was no statistical difference between L1 serum levels of patients with an L1CAM-positive or L1CAM-negative endometrial carcinoma (P = 0.786). CONCLUSIONS: L1 cell adhesion molecule expression in endometrial biopsy correlates with high-risk features of endometrial carcinoma but does not significantly improve risk stratification algorithms based on traditional factors. Soluble L1 detected in the serum of patients with endometrial carcinoma does not correlate with tumoral L1CAM expression.

Prediction of Site-Specific Tumor Relapses in Patients With Stage I-II Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the association of predictors of an advanced disease and/or poor outcome with the occurrence of tumor relapses in different anatomical sites in patients with stage I-II endometrioid endometrial cancer. METHODS: A total of 929 patients were included in the study. The median follow-up time was 57 months (range, 1-108 months). The studied variables were: poor tumor differentiation, myometrial invasion 50% or greater, tumor size 3 cm or greater, lymphovascular space invasion, cervical stromal invasion, positive peritoneal cytology, old age (>77 years), obesity (body mass index ≥30 kg/m), and diabetes. RESULTS: A relapse was diagnosed in 98 patients (10.5%) (vaginal in 15, pelvic in 27, intra-abdominal beyond the pelvis in 27, extra-abdominal in 29). None of the variables were associated with an altered risk of vaginal or pelvic relapses in univariate analyses. Poor differentiation, myometrial invasion 50% or greater, tumor size 3 cm or greater, and positive peritoneal cytology were associated with an increased risk of intra-abdominal relapses beyond the pelvis (odds ratios [ORs] between 2.2 and 9.6). With the exception of obesity and diabetes, all variables were associated with an increased risk of extra-abdominal relapses (ORs between 2.3 and 13). Tumor size 3 cm or greater (OR, 3.1) and positive peritoneal cytology (OR, 16) predicted intra-abdominal relapses beyond the pelvis in multivariate analysis, whereas poor differentiation (OR, 2.9), myometrial invasion 50% or greater (OR, 4.0), and positive peritoneal cytology (OR, 27) predicted extra-abdominal relapses. Compared with vaginal relapses, intra-abdominal relapses beyond the pelvis and extra-abdominal relapses were associated with a worse disease-specific survival. Survival of patients with a pelvic relapse did not differ from that of patients with a vaginal relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Risk variables of endometrial cancer are differently associated with relapses in different locations. Our findings may promote studies that explore the most efficient adjuvant therapy in high-risk early-stage endometrioid endometrial cancer.

L1 Cell Adhesion Molecule as a Predictor of Disease-Specific Survival and Patterns of Relapse in Endometrial Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to study the association of L1 cell adhesion molecule (L1CAM) expression with the outcome of patients with endometrial cancer, especially with regard to conventional risk variables, and to compare the patterns of relapse in L1CAM-positive and -negative cancers. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of 805 women. The Kaplan-Meier method and univariate and multivariate Cox regression models were applied for survival analyses. Missing data were replaced using multiple imputation. The median follow-up time was 51 months (range, 1-98). RESULTS: One hundred twenty-one (15.0%) cases were L1CAM positive. L1CAM positivity was associated with high stage (I vs II-IV) (odds ratio [OR], 2.3), lymph node involvement (OR, 2.9), poor differentiation (OR, 6.1), non-endometrioid histology (OR, 9.9), lymphovascular space invasion (OR, 2.8), cervical stromal invasion (OR, 1.8), positive peritoneal cytology (OR, 4.1), and age older than 65 years (OR, 2.8). The frequencies of deep myometrial invasion (50% or deeper), tumor size 2 cm or greater, and body mass index 30 kg/m or greater were not significantly different between L1CAM-positive and -negative cases. L1CAM predicted poor disease-specific survival in endometrioid (P < 0.0001) but not in non-endometrioid carcinomas (P = 0.934). The negative impact of L1CAM on outcome was confirmed in a Cox multivariate disease-specific survival analysis. Univariate survival analyses in the different ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO endometrial cancer risk groups showed an association between L1CAM positivity and poor outcome in intermediate (hazard ratio, 12) and high-risk advanced metastatic (hazard ratio, 2.0) groups. Extra-abdominal relapses were more frequent in L1CAM-positive (13.2%) than L1CAM-negative (1.9%) stage I endometrioid carcinomas (P < 0.0001), whereas other site-specific relapses in local cancers were L1CAM independent. CONCLUSIONS: L1CAM is associated with the occurrence of poor prognostic variables and predicts advanced disease in endometrial cancer. L1CAM predicts extra-abdominal relapses and poor survival in endometrioid endometrial cancer, but seems not to be a prognostic factor in non-endometrioid carcinomas.

Incidence of and risk factors for surgical site infections in women undergoing hysterectomy for endometrial carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of, and risk factors for, surgical site infections in a contemporary cohort of women with endometrial carcinoma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively studied 1164 women treated for endometrial carcinoma by hysterectomy at a single institution in 2007-2013. In all, 912 women (78.4%) had minimally invasive hysterectomy. Data on surgical site infections were collected from medical records. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify risk factors for incisional and organ/space infections. RESULTS: Ninety-four women (8.1%) were diagnosed with a surgical site infection. Twenty women (1.7%) had an incisional infection and 74 (6.4%) had an organ/space infection. The associations of 17 clinico-pathologic and surgical variables were tested by univariate analyses. Those variables that were identified as potential risk factors in univariate analyses (p < 0.15) were used in logistic regression models with incisional and organ/space infections as dependent variables. Obesity (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m(2)), diabetes, and long operative time (>80th centile) were independently associated with a higher risk of incisional infection, whereas minimally invasive surgery was associated with a smaller risk. Smoking, conversion to laparotomy, and lymphadenectomy were associated with a higher risk of organ/space infection. CONCLUSIONS: Organ/space infections comprised the majority of surgical site infections. Risk factors for incisional and organ/space infections differed. Minimally invasive hysterectomy was associated with a smaller risk of incisional infections but not of organ/space infections.

Risk-stratification of endometrial carcinomas revisited: a combined preoperative and intraoperative scoring system for a reliable prediction of an advanced disease.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to develop a risk-scoring system for predicting lymph node and distant metastasis in endometrial carcinoma. METHODS: A total of 1166 patients, treated at a single institution between 1-2007 and 12-2013, were included in the study. The association of stage IIIC-IV disease with demographic factors (age, body mass index), biochemical factors (complete blood count, serum CA125), preoperative histology and tumor size was examined in unadjusted analyses. Logistic regression analysis was used for the identification of variables that independently predict an advanced disease. RESULTS: Thrombocytosis, serum CA125>35 U/mL, preoperative high-risk histology (nonendometrioid or grade 3 endometrioid carcinoma) and tumor size≥3 cm were independently associated with an advanced disease. These predictors were internally validated by a bootstrapping method with statistical significance. A risk-scoring system with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.852 (95% confidence interval, 0.821-0.883) was developed. Total risk score points ranged from 0 to 8 for individual patients. With a cut-off of 1 point, stratifying 66.3% of patients to surgical staging, the model predicted stage IIIC-IV carcinomas with a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 38.0%, positive predictive value of 17.1%, and negative predictive value of 100%. With the same cut-off, the corresponding values were 100%, 34.7%, 16.5% and 100% in predicting stage IIIC carcinomas in a subgroup that underwent lymphadenectomy and had a stage I-IIIC disease. CONCLUSIONS: This risk-scoring system is highly sensitive in predicting an advanced stage endometrial carcinoma at a cut-off of risk score points that is associated with an acceptable lymphadenectomy rate.

Clinical factors as prognostic variables among molecular subgroups of endometrial cancer.

BACKGROUND: Clinical factors may influence endometrial cancer survival outcomes. We examined the prognostic significance of age, body mass index (BMI), and type 2 diabetes among molecular subgroups of endometrial cancer. METHODS: This was a single institution retrospective study of patients who underwent surgery for endometrial carcinoma between January 2007 and December 2012. Tumors were classified into four molecular subgroups by immunohistochemistry of mismatch repair (MMR) proteins and p53, and sequencing of polymerase-ϵ (POLE). Overall, cancer-related, and non-cancer-related mortality were estimated using univariable and multivariable survival analyses. RESULTS: Age >65 years was associated with increased mortality rates in the whole cohort (n = 515) and in the "no specific molecular profile" (NSMP) (n = 218) and MMR deficient (MMR-D) (n = 191) subgroups during a median follow-up time of 81 months (range 1‒136). However, hazard ratios for cancer-related mortality were non-significant for NSMP and MMR-D. Diabetes was associated with increased overall and non-cancer-related mortality in the whole cohort and MMR-D subgroup. Overweight/obesity had no effect on outcomes in the whole cohort, but was associated with decreased overall and cancer-related mortality in the NSMP subgroup, and increased overall and non-cancer-related mortality in the MMR-D subgroup. Overweight/obesity effect on cancer-related mortality in the NSMP subgroup remained unchanged after controlling for confounders. High-risk uterine factors were more common, and estrogen and progesterone receptor expression less common in NSMP subtype cancers of normal-weight patients compared with overweight/obese patients. No clinical factors were associated with outcomes in p53 aberrant (n = 69) and POLE mutant (n = 37) subgroups. No cancer-related deaths occurred in the POLE mutant subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: The prognostic effects of age, BMI, and type 2 diabetes do not appear to be uniform for the molecular subgroups of endometrial cancer. Our data support further evaluation of BMI combined with genomics-based risk-assessment.