Impact of pre-treatment prognostic nutritional index and the haemoglobin, albumin, lymphocyte and platelet (HALP) score on endometrial cancer survival: A prospective database analysis.

PURPOSE: The Onodera's prognostic nutritional index (PNI) and the haemoglobin, albumin, lymphocyte and platelet (HALP) score are immune-nutritional indices that correlate with survival outcomes in several adult solid malignancies. The aim of this study was to investigate whether PNI and HALP are associated with survival outcomes in endometrial cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women undergoing management for endometrial cancer were recruited to a single centre prospective cohort study. Pre-treatment PNI and HALP scores were computed for study participants and analysed as continuous variables and by selecting cut-off values based on previous publications. Both parameters were analysed in relation to overall, endometrial cancer-specific and recurrence-free survival using Kaplan-Meier estimation and multivariable Cox proportional regression. RESULTS: A total of 439 women, with a median age of 67 years (interquartile range (IQR), 58, 74) and BMI of 31kg/m2 (IQR 26, 37) were included in the analysis. Most had low-grade (63.3%), early-stage (84.4% stage I/II) endometrial cancer of endometrioid histological subtype (72.7%). Primary treatment was surgery in 98.2% of cases. Adjusted overall mortality hazard ratios for PNI and HALP as continuous variables were 0.97(95%CI 0.94-1.00, p = 0.136) and 0.99(95%CI 0.98-1.01, p = 0.368), respectively. Women with pre-treatment PNI ≥45 had a 45% decrease in both overall (adjusted HR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.33-0.92, p = 0.022) and cancer-specific mortality risk (adjusted HR = 0.55, 95%CI 0.30-0.99, p = 0.048) compared to those with PNI <45. There was no evidence for an effect of PNI on recurrence free survival. HALP scores were associated with adverse clinico-pathologic factors, but not overall, cancer-specific or recurrence-free survival in the multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: PNI is an independent prognostic factor in endometrial cancer and has the potential to refine pre-operative risk assessment.

Pre-treatment inflammatory parameters predict survival from endometrial cancer: A prospective database analysis.

PURPOSE: Inflammation predisposes to tumorigenesis by damaging DNA, stimulating angiogenesis and potentiating pro-proliferative and anti-apoptotic processes. The aim of this study was to investigate whether pre-treatment biomarkers of systemic inflammation are associated with survival outcomes in endometrial cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women with endometrial cancer were recruited to a prospective database study. Pre-treatment systemic markers of inflammation, including C-reactive protein (CRP), Glasgow Prognostic Score and lymphocyte-based ratios [neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NMR), monocyte-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), systemic immune-inflammation index (SII)], were analysed in relation to overall, endometrial cancer-specific and recurrence-free survival using Kaplan-Meier estimation and multivariable Cox regression. RESULTS: In total, 522 women of mostly White British ethnicity, with a median age of 66 years (interquartile range (IQR), 56, 73) and BMI of 32 kg/m2 (IQR 26, 39) were included in the analysis. Most had low-grade (67.2%), early-stage (85.4% stage I/II), endometrioid (74.5%) tumors. Women with pre-treatment CRP ≥5.5 mg/L had a 68% increase in overall (adjusted HR = 1.68, 95% CI 1.00-2.81, p = 0.049) and a two-fold higher cancer-specific mortality risk than those with CRP <5.5 mg/L (adjusted HR = 2.04, 95%CI 1.03-4.02, p = 0.04). Absolute lymphocyte count, NLR, MLR and SII were associated with adverse clinico-pathologic factors, but not overall, cancer-specific or recurrence-free survival in the multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: If confirmed in an independent cohort, CRP may offer a simple, low-cost test to refine pre-treatment risk assessment and guide personalised care in endometrial cancer. Our participants were mostly of White British ethnicity and further studies are needed to confirm the utility of CRP as a prognostic biomarker in other populations.

Lynch syndrome for the gynaecologist.

KEY CONTENT: Lynch syndrome is an autosomal dominant condition closely associated with colorectal, endometrial and ovarian cancer.Women with Lynch syndrome are at increased risk of both endometrial and ovarian cancer and should be offered personalised counselling regarding family planning, red flag symptoms and risk-reducing strategies.Surveillance for gynaecological cancer in women with Lynch syndrome remains controversial; more robust data are needed to determine its effectiveness.Universal testing for Lynch syndrome in endometrial cancer is being adopted by centres across Europe and is now recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; thus, gynaecologists must become familiar with testing strategies and their results.Testing strategies involve risk stratification of cancers based on phenotypical features and definitive germline testing. LEARNING OBJECTIVES: To define the pathogenesis of Lynch syndrome and its associated gynaecological cancers.To understand the testing strategies for Lynch syndrome in women with gynaecological cancer.To learn how best to counsel women with Lynch syndrome regarding gynaecological cancer and risk-reducing strategies to enable informed decision-making. ETHICAL ISSUES: Offering gynaecological surveillance despite a lack of robust evidence for its clinical effectiveness may falsely reassure women and delay risk-reducing hysterectomy.Genetic testing may yield variants of unknown significance with ill-defined clinical implications, which can lead to confusion and anxiety.Genetic testing has implications not only for the individual, but also for the whole family, so expert counselling is crucial.

The proportion of endometrial tumours associated with Lynch syndrome (PETALS): A prospective cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Lynch syndrome (LS) predisposes to endometrial cancer (EC), colorectal cancer, and other cancers through inherited pathogenic variants affecting mismatch-repair (MMR) genes. Diagnosing LS in women with EC can reduce subsequent cancer mortality through colonoscopic surveillance and aspirin chemoprevention; it also enables cascade testing of relatives. A growing consensus supports LS screening in EC; however, the expected proportion of test positives, and optimal testing strategy is uncertain. Previous studies from insurance-based healthcare systems were limited by narrow selection criteria, failure to apply reference standard tests consistently, and poor conversion to definitive testing. The aim of this study was to establish the prevalence of LS and the diagnostic accuracy of LS testing strategies in an unselected EC population. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This was a prospective cross-sectional study carried out at a large United Kingdom gynaecological cancer centre between October 2015 and January 2017. Women diagnosed with EC or atypical hyperplasia (AH) were offered LS testing. Tumours underwent MMR immunohistochemistry (IHC), microsatellite instability (MSI), and targeted MLH1-methylation testing. Women <50 years, with strong family histories and/or indicative tumour molecular features, underwent MMR germline sequencing. Somatic MMR sequencing was performed when indicative molecular features were unexplained by LS or MLH1-hypermethylation. The main outcome measures were the prevalence of LS in an unselected EC population and the diagnostic accuracy of clinical and tumour testing strategies for risk stratifying women with EC for MMR germline sequencing. In total, 500 women participated in the study; only 2 (<1%) declined. Germline sequencing was indicated and conducted for 136 and 135 women, respectively. A total of 16/500 women (3.2%, 95% CI 1.8% to 5.1%) had LS, and 11 more (2.2%) had MMR variants of uncertain significance. Restricting testing to age <50 years, indicative family history (revised Bethesda guidelines or Amsterdam II criteria) or endometrioid histology alone would have missed 9/16 (56%), 8/13 (62%) or 9/13 (69%), and 5/16 (31%) cases of LS, respectively. In total 132/500 tumours were MMR deficient by IHC of which 83/132 (63%) had MLH1-hypermethylation, and 16/49 (33%) of the remaining patients had LS (16/132 with MMR deficiency, 12%). MMR-IHC with targeted MLH1-methylation testing was more discriminatory for LS than MSI with targeted methylation testing, with 100% versus 56.3% (16/16 versus 9/16) sensitivity (p = 0.016) and equal 97.5% (468/484) specificity; 64% MSI-H and 73% MMR deficient tumours unexplained by LS or MLH1-hypermethylation had somatic MMR mutations. The main limitation of the study was failure to conduct MMR germline sequencing for the whole study population, which means that the sensitivity and specificity of tumour triage strategies for LS detection may be overestimated, although the risk of LS in women with no clinical or tumour predictors is expected to be extremely low. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that age, family history, and histology are imprecise clinical correlates of LS-EC. IHC outperformed MSI for tumour triage and reliably identified both germline and somatic MMR mutations. The 3.2% proportion of LS-EC is similar to colorectal cancer, supporting unselected screening of EC for LS.

Distinct Immunological Landscapes Characterize Inherited and Sporadic Mismatch Repair Deficient Endometrial Cancer.

Around 30% of endometrial cancers (EC) are mismatch repair (MMR) deficient, mostly as a consequence of mutations acquired during tumorigenesis, but a significant minority is caused by Lynch syndrome (LS). This inherited cancer predisposition syndrome primes an anti-cancer immune response, even in healthy carriers. We sought to explore the intra-tumoral immunological differences between genetically confirmed LS-associated MMR-deficient (MMRd), sporadic MMR-deficient, and MMR-proficient (MMRp) EC. Endometrial tumors from women with known LS were identified (n = 25). Comparator tumors were recruited prospectively and underwent microsatellite instability (MSI) testing, immunohistochemistry (IHC) for MMR expression and MLH1 methylation testing. Those found to have MLH1 hypermethylation formed the sporadic MMR-deficient group (n = 33). Those found to be mismatch repair proficient and microsatellite stable formed the MMR-proficient group (n = 35). A fully automated monoplex IHC panel was performed on sequential formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor sections to identify CD3+, CD8+, CD45RO+, FoxP3+, and PD-1+ immune cells, and PD-L1 expression by tumor/immune cells. Two independent observers quantified immune marker expression at the tumor center and invasive margin. Mean and overall compartmental T-cell counts generated standard (binary: Low/High) and higher resolution (quaternary: 0-25, 25-50, 50-75, 75-100%) immune scores, which were used as explanatory features in neural network, support vector machine, and discriminant predictive modeling. Overall T-cell counts were significantly different between the three cohorts: CD3+ (p = <0.0001), CD8+ (p = <0.0001), CD45RO+ (<0.0001), FoxP3+ (p = <0.0001), and PD1+ (p = <0.0001), with LS-associated MMR-deficient tumors having highest infiltrations. There were significant differences in CD8+ (p = 0.02), CD45RO+ (p = 0.007), and PD-1+ (p = 0.005) T-cell counts at the invasive margin between LS-associated and sporadic MMR-deficient tumors, but not between sporadic MMR-deficient and MMR-proficient tumors. Predictive modeling could accurately determine MMR status based on CD8+ T-cell counts within the tumor center alone. This study shows that LS-associated and sporadic MMR-deficient EC are distinct immunological entities, which has important implications for treatment and prognosis.