Zusammenfassung
Es werden heute zwei morphologisch, molekularbiologisch und prognostisch unterschiedliche Gruppen von endometrialen Adenokarzinomen voneinander abgegrenzt. Typ-I-Karzinome sind östrogenabhängig und prognostisch günstig. Das wichtigste und zahlenmäßig häufigste Karzinom dieser Gruppe ist das endometrioide Adenokarzinom. Molekularbiologisch findet sich in ca. 80% der Fälle eine Mutation des PTEN-Gens. Andere häufige Mutationen treten beim K-ras-Gen und beim β-catenin-Gen auf. Die Prognose wird wesentlich vom Tumorstadium bestimmt. Vorläuferläsion ist die atypische Endometriumhyperplasie, die ebenfalls Mutationen des PTEN-Gens erkennen lässt. Typ-II-Karzinome sind nicht östrogenabhängig, sondern treten typischerweise im atrophischen Endometrium auf. Klassische Vertreter dieser Gruppe sind das seröse und das klarzellige Karzinom. Im Gegensatz zu den Typ-I-Karzinomen sind die Karzinome dieser Gruppe p53-positiv. Vorläuferläsion des serösen Karzinoms ist wahrscheinlich das endometriale intraepitheliale Karzinom (EIC), das ebenfalls p53-positiv ist. Die Wachstumsfraktion (Ki67 bzw. MIB1) ist hoch. Die Klassifikation der Endometriumhyperplasie hat in den letzten Jahren einen Wandel erfahren, der sich auch heute noch fortsetzt. Nach der WHO-Klassifikation werden heute die einfache Hyperplasie und die komplexe Hyperplasie voneinander unterschieden; hierbei wird als weitere, biologisch und prognostisch wichtige Form die atypische Hyperplasie (komplexe Hyperplasie mit Atypie) abgegrenzt. Das neue Konzept der endometrialen intraepithelialen Neoplasie (EIN) hat aufgrund besser reproduzierbarer Kriterien eine wesentlich geringere Interobservervariabilität. Es geht davon aus, dass es sich bei den atypischen Drüsen in der Hyperplasie um eine monoklonale Proliferation handelt, die ein erhöhtes Risiko für ein Endometriumkarzinom darstellt und deshalb behandlungsbedürftig ist.
Abstract
Two groups of endometrial adenocarcinoma can be distinguished, which differ in morphology, molecular biology and prognosis. Type I carcinomas are estrogen-dependent and have a favorable prognosis. The most frequent type of carcinoma in this group is endometrioid carcinoma. By molecular biology, PTEN mutations can be found in ca. 80% of the cases. Other frequent mutations affect the K-ras and the ß catenin gene. The most important prognostic factor is tumor stage. The precursor lesion is atypical hyperplasia of the endometrium which also reveals mutations of the PTEN gene. Type II carcinomas are not estrogen-dependent and by contrast are typically found in an atrophic endometrium. Classical examples of carcinomas in this group are serous and clear cell carcinoma. In contrast to type I carcinomas, these tumors are positive for p53 by immunohistochemistry. The most likely precursor lesion of invasive serous carcinoma is the endometrial intraepithelial carcinoma (EIC) which also reacts positively for p53. Growth fractions as determined by Ki67 immunostaining or MIB1 staining in type II carcinomas are large. Classification systems of endometrial hyperplasia have continued to change over the years, and this process is likely to continue. In the WHO classification simple and complex hyperplasia are distinguished as the two main groups, and as a third group atypical hyperplasia has been defined, since this form is biologically and prognostically different from the non-atypical forms. A new concept has recently been proposed. This concept of endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN) is characterized by better reproducibility and lower interobserver variability. The main idea of this new concept is the perception that atypical endometrial glands represent a monoclonal proliferation of cells with an increased risk of endometrial cancer, and thus need proper treatment.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.




Literatur
Bastert G, Beckmann MW, Blohmer JU et al. (2003) Kurzgefasste interdisziplinäre AGO-Leitlinien für die Diagnostik und Therapie des Endometriumkarzinoms. Zentralbl Gynakol 123 (im Druck)
Berchuck A, Boyd J (1995) Molecular basis of endometrial cancer. Cancer 76 [Suppl 10]: 2034–2040
Bergeron C, Nogales FF, Masseroli M et al. (1999) A multicentric european study testing the reproducibility of the WHO classification of endometrial hyperplasia with a proposal of a simplified working classification for biopsy and curettage specimens. Am J Surg Pathol 23:1102–1108
Bokhman JV (1983) Two pathogenic types of endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 15:10–17
Creasman WT, Odicino F, Maisonneuve P et al. (2001) FIGO annual report on the results of treatment in gynecological cancer, vol. 24. Carcinoma of the corpus uteri. J Epidemiol Biostat 6:47–86
Dallenbach-Hellweg G, Schmidt D (1996) Oestrogens and proliferation of endometrial cells. J Cardiol Pharmacol 28 [Suppl 5]:24–28
Duggan BD, Felix JC, Muderspach LI, Tourgeman D, Zheng J, Shibata D (1994) Microsatellite instability in sporadic endometrial carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 86:1216–1221
Enomoto T, Inoue M, Perantoni AO, Buzard GS, Miki H, Tanizawa O, Rice JM (1991) K-ras activation in permaligant and malignant epithelial lesions of the human uterus. Cancer Res 51:5308–5314
Hendrickson MR, Ross JC, Kempson RL (1983) Toward the development of morphologic criteria for well differentiated adenocarcinoma of the endometrium. Am J Surg Pathol 7:819–821
Kendall BS, Ronnet BM, Isacson C, Cho KR, Hedrick L, Diener-West M, Kurman RJ (1998) Reproducibility of the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia, atypical hyperplasia and well differentiated carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 22:1012–1019
Kurman RJ, Norris HJ (1984) Endometrial stromal invasion in the diagnosis of well-differentiated carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 8:719–720
Kurman RJ, Kaminski PF, Norris HJ (1985) The behavior of endometrial hyperplasia. A long-term study of „untreated“ hyperplasia in 170 patients. Cancer 56:403–412
Lax SF, Kurman RJ, Pizer ES, Wu L, Ronnett BM (2000) A binary architectural grading system for uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma has superior reproducibility compared with FIGO grading and identifies subsets of advance-stage tumors with favorable and unfavorable prognosis. Am J Surg Pathol 24:1201–1208
Longacre TA, Chung MH, Jensen DN, Hendrickson MR (1995) Proposed criteria for the diagnosis of well-differentiated endometrial carcinoma. A diagnostic test for myoinvasion. Am J Surg Pathol 19:371–406
Mutter GL, Ince TA (2003) Molecular pathogenesis of endometrial cancer. In: Fuller A, Seiden MV, Young R (eds) Uterine cancer: American Cancer Society atlas of clinical oncology. Decker, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Mutter GL, Lin MC, Fitzgerald JT (2000) Altered PTEN expression as a diagnostic marker for the earliest endometrial precancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:924–930
Mutter GL, and The Endometrial Collaborative Group (2000) Endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN): Will it bring order to chaos? Gynecol Oncol 76:287–290
Mutter GL, Ince TA, Baak JPA, Kust G, Zhou X, Eng C (2001) Molecular identification of latent precancers in histologically normal endometrium. Cancer Res 61:4311–4314
Randall TC, Kurman RJ (1997) Progestin treatment of atypical hyperplasia and well-differentiated carcinoma of the endometrium in women under age 40. Obstet Gynecol 90:434–440
Scully RE, Young RH (2000) Endometrioid neoplasia retrogressive terminology (letter to the editor). Am J Surg Pathol 24:753–754
Scully RE, Bonfiglio TA, Kurman RJ, Silverberg SG, Wilkinson EJ (1994) WHO-histological typing of female genital tract tumours. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York
Skov BG, Broholm H, Engel U, Franzmann MB, Nielsen AL, Lauritzen AF, Skov T (1997) Comparison of the reproducibility of the WHO classifications of 1975 and 1994 of endometrial hyperplasia. Int J Gynecol Pathol 16:33–37
Sutter C, Dallenbach-Hellweg G, Schmidt D, Bielau S, Knebel Doeberitz M von, Gebert J (2003) Molecular characterization and prognostic impact of endometrial carcinomas and precursor lesions of young HNPCC-suspicious patients. Int J Gynecol Pathol (in press)
Takeshima N, Hirai Y, Hasumi K (1998) Prognostic validity of neoplastic cells with notable nuclear atypia in endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol 92:119–123
Taylor RR, Zeller J, Liebermann RW, O’Connor DM (1999) An analysis of two versus three grades for endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 74:3–6
Wittekind C, Wagner G (1997) TNM Klassifikation maligner Tumoren, 5. Aufl. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York
Zaino RJ, Kurman RJ, Diana KL, Morrow CP (1995) The utility of the revised International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetics histologic grading of endometrial adenocarcinoma using a defined nuclear grading system. A Gynecology Oncology Group study. Cancer 75:81–86
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schmidt, D. Histopathologie und Stadieneinteilung des Endometriumkarzinoms und seiner Präkanzerosen. Onkologe 9, 1211–1218 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00761-003-0595-x
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00761-003-0595-x
Schlüsselwörter
- Endometrioides Adenokarzinom
- Klassifizierung
- P53
- Tumorstadium
- Endometriumhyperplasie
- Endometriale intraepitheliale Neoplasie