PTEN expression in endometrial hyperplasia and risk of cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- 105 Downloads
Rates of progression of endometrial hyperplasia (EH) to endometrial cancer (EC) are highly variable. Among several prognostic markers, PTEN has been recommended by ESMO–ESGO–ESTRO to identify premalignant EH. However, its prognostic accuracy is unclear. Thus, we aimed to assess: (1) the association between PTEN loss in EH and risk of cancer, and (2) the prognostic accuracy of PTEN immunohistochemistry in EH.
Electronic databases were searched from their inception to June 2018. All studies assessing PTEN immunohistochemistry in EH and the presence of EC on subsequent hysterectomy were included. Odds ratio (OR), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value (PPV and NPV), positive and negative likelihood ratio (LR + and LR−) and area under the curve (AUC) on SROC curves were calculated with subgroup analysis (short/long-term; atypical/non-atypical EH).
Nine retrospective studies assessing 933 EH were included. PTEN loss in EH was significantly associated with increased risk of EC (OR = 3.32, p = 0.001). The association was significant only on the short term ( < 1 year) (OR = 3.45, p = 0.002) and in atypical EH (OR = 1.89, p = 0.01). For overall analysis and short-term/atypical EH subgroup the prognostic accuracy was low, with sensitivity = 0.58 and 0.68, specificity = 0.60 and 0.48, VPp = 0.41 and 0.54, VPN = 0.75 and 0.63, LR + = 1.80 and 1.37, LR − = 0.62 and 0.56, AUC = 0.687 and 0.721, respectively.
PTEN loss in EH is a risk factor for EC, but is not reliable in predicting the risk of EC. In atypical EH, PTEN loss is associated with a risk of concurrent EC of over 50%. This information might integrate the patients’ informed consent for the choice of treatment (conservative/hysterectomy), especially in borderline cases. In conservative approach, PTEN loss might suggest closer follow-up.
KeywordsEIN Endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia Endometrioid adenocarcinoma Immunohistochemical Prognosis Tumor suppressor protein phosphatase Tensin homolog
AR, AT: protocol/project development, data collection, data analysis, and manuscript writing/editing. GS: data analysis and manuscript writing/editing. MV: protocol/project development and data collection. PG: protocol/project development and manuscript writing/editing. LI: manuscript writing/editing and study supervision. AM: protocol/project development and study supervision. GDP: protocol/project development and study supervision. FZ: protocol/project development, manuscript writing/editing, and study supervision.
No financial support was received for this study.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflict of interest.
- 1.Kurman R, Carcangiu M, Herrington C, Young R (2014) World Health Organisation classification of tumors of female reproductive organs, 4th edn. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Press, LyonGoogle Scholar
- 9.Baak JP, Mutter GL, Robboy S et al (2005) The molecular genetics and morphometry-based endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia classification system predicts disease progression in endometrial hyperplasia more accurately than the 1994 World Health Organization classification system. Cancer 103(11):2304–2312CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 10.Gallos ID, Allazam M, Clark TJ et al (2016) Management of Endometrial Hyperplasia Green-top Guideline No. 67 RCOG/BSGE Joint Guideline. https://www.rcog.org.uk/en/guidelines-research-services/guidelines/gtg67/
- 14.Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network, et al. Integrated genomic characterization of endometrial carcinoma. Nature 2013;497(7447):67-73Google Scholar
- 15.Colombo N, Creutzberg C, Amant F, et al. ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO Consensus Conference on Endometrial Cancer: diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2016;27(1):16-41Google Scholar
- 33.Travaglino A, Raffone A, Saccone G et al (2018) Loss of B-cell lymphoma 2 immunohistochemical expression in endometrial hyperplasia: a specific marker of precancer and novel indication for treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 97(12):1415–1426CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 39.Gallos ID, Yap J, Rajkhowa M, Luesley DM, Coomarasamy A, Gupta JK (2012) Regression, relapse, and live birth rates with fertility-sparing therapy for endometrial cancer and atypical complex endometrial hyperplasia: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 207(4):266.e1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40.Giampaolino P, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Mollo A et al (2018) Hysteroscopic endometrial focal resection followed by levonorgestrel intrauterine device insertion as a fertility-sparing treatment of atypical endometrial hyperplasia and early endometrial cancer: a retrospective study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2018.07.001 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 41.Raffone A, Travaglino A, Saccone G et al (2019) Should progesterone and estrogens receptors be assessed for predicting the response to conservative treatment of endometrial hyperplasia and cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13586 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 46.Travaglino a, Raffone A, Saccone A, et al. PTEN immunohistochemistry in endometrial hyperplasia: which are the optimal criteria for the diagnosis of precancer? APMIS. 2019 Feb 25. doi: 10.1111/apm.12938. [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar