Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Molecular profile in endometrial carcinoma: can we predict the lymph node status? A systematic review and meta-analysis

  • RESEARCH ARTICLE
  • Published:
Clinical and Translational Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Molecular classification of endometrial cancer (EC) has become a promising information to tailor preoperatively the surgical treatment. We aimed to evaluate the rate of lymph node metastases (LNM) in patients with EC according to molecular profile.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to PRISMA guidelines by searching in two major electronic databases (PubMed and Scopus), including original articles reporting lymph node metastases according to the molecular classification of EC as categorized in the ESGO-ESMO-ESP guidelines.

Results

Fifteen studies enrolling 3056 patients were included. Pooled prevalence LNM when considering only patients undergoing lymph node assessment was 4% for POLE-mutated (95%CI: 0-12%), 22% for no specific molecular profile (95% CI: 9-39%), 23% for Mismatch repair-deficiency (95%CI: 10-40%) and 31% for p53-abnormal (95%CI: 24-39%).

Conclusions

The presence of LNM seems to be influenced by molecular classification. P53-abnormal group presents the highest rate of nodal involvement, and POLE-mutated the lowest.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data is available upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Wagle NS, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2023. CA Cancer J Clin. 2023;73(1):17–48. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21763. (PMID: 36633525).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Concin AN, Matias-Guiu X, Vergote I, Cibula D, Mirza MR, Marnitz S, et al. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2021;31:12–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mitchard J, Hirschowitz L. Concordance of FIGO grade of endometrial adenocarcinomas in biopsy and hysterectomy specimens. Histopathology. 2003;42:372–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Han G, Sidhu D, Duggan MA, Arseneau J, Cesari M, Clement PB, et al. Reproducibility of histological cell type in high-grade endometrial carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 2013;26:1594–604.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gilks CB, Oliva E, Soslow RA. Poor interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of high-grade endometrial carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2013;37:874–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Abu-Rustum NR, Khoury-Collado F, Pandit-Taskar N, Soslow RA, Dao F, Sonoda Y, et al. Sentinel lymph node mapping for grade 1 endometrial cancer: Is it the answer to the surgical staging dilemma? Gynecol Oncol. 2009;113(2):163–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Mariani A, Dowdy SC, Cliby WA, Gostout BS, Jones MB, Wilson TO, et al. Prospective assessment of lymphatic dissemination in endometrial cancer: a paradigma shift in surgical staging. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;109:11–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Stelloo E, Nout RA, Naves LCLM, Ter Haar NT, Creutzberg CL, Smit VTHBM, et al. High concordance of molecular tumor alterations between pre-operative curettage and hysterectomy specimens in patients with endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;133:197–204.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Plotkin A, Kuzeljevic B, De Villa V, Thompson EF, Gilks CB, Clarke BA, et al. Interlaboratory concordance of ProMisE molecular classification of endometrial carcinoma based on endometrial biopsy specimens. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2020;39:537–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network, Kandoth C, Schultz N, Cherniack AD, Akbani R, Liu Y, Shen H, et al. Integrated genomic characterization of endometrial carcinoma. Nature. 2013;497:67–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kommoss S, McConechy MK, Kommoss F, Leung S, Bunz A, Magrill J, et al. Final validation of the ProMisE molecular classifier for endometrial carcinoma in a large population-based case series. Ann Oncol. 2018;29:1180–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Talhouk A, McConechy MK, Leung S, Li-Chang HH, Kwon JS, Melnyk N, et al. A clinically applicable molecular-based classification for endometrial cancers. Br J Cancer. 2015;113:299–310.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Talhouk A, McConechy MK, S. Leung,Wang W, Lum A, Senz J, et al. Confirmation of ProMisE: a simple, genomics-based clinical classifier for endometrial cancer. Cancer. 2017;123:802–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Stelloo E, Nout RA, Osse E, Jurgenliemk-Schulz IJ, Jobsen JJ, Lutgens LC, et al. Improved risk assessment by integrating molecular and clinicopathological factors in early-stage endometrial cancer—combined analysis of the PORTEC Cohorts. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22:4215–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bosse T, Nout RA, McAlpine JN, McConechy MK, Britton H, Jussein YR, et al. Molecular classification of grade 3 endometrioid endometrial cancers identifies distinct prognostic subgroups. Am J Obs Gynecol. 2018;42:561–8.

    Google Scholar 

  16. León-Castillo A, de Boer S, Powell ME, Mileshkin LR, Mackay HJ, Leary A, et al. Molecular classification of the PORTEC-3 trial for high-risk endometrial cancer: impact on prognosis and benefit from adjuvant therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(29):3388–97.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Jamieson A, Thompson EF, Huvila J, Leung S, Lum A, Morin C, et al. Endometrial carcinoma molecular subtype correlated with the presence of lymph node metastases. Gynecol Oncol. 2022;165:376–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Leon-Castillo A, Horeweg N, Peter EEM, Rutten T, Ter Haar N, Smit VTHBM, et al. Prognostic relevante of the molecular classification in high-grade endometrial cancer for patients staged by lymphadenectomy and without adjuvant treatment. Gynecol Oncol. 2022;164:577–86.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Moher L, Shamseer M, Clarke D, Ghersi D, Liiberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Colombo N, Creutzberg C, Amant F, Bosse T, Gonzalez-Martin A, Ledermann J, et al. ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO consensus conference on endometrial cancer: diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2016;27(1):16–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J, et al. Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg. 2003;73:712–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bayramoglu D, Kerimoğlu OS, Bayramoğlu Z, Cintesun E, Sahin G, Karabagli P, et al. Classification of high-grade endometrium carcinomas using molecular and immunohistochemical methods. Ginekol Pol. 2022. https://doi.org/10.5603/GP.a2021.0177.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Shuangni Y, Zezheng S, Zong L, Yan J, Yu M, Chen J, et al. Clinicopathological and molecular characterization of high-grade endometrial carcinoma with POLE mutation: a single center study. J Gynecol Oncol. 2022;33(3): e38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. McConechy MK, Talhouk A, Leung S, Chiu D, Yang W, Senz J, et al. Endometrial carcinomas with POLE exonuclease domain mutations have a favorable prognosis. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(12):2865–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Devereaux KA, Weiel JJ, Pors J, Steiner DF, Ho C, Charu V, et al. Prospective molecular classification of endometrial carcinomas: institutional implementation, practice, and clinical experience. Mod Pathol. 2022;35:688–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Coada CA, Dondi G, Ravegnini G, De Leo A, Santini D, De Crescenzo E, et al. Classification systems of endometrial cancers: a comparative study about old and new. Diagnostics (Basel). 2021;12(1):33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Imboden S, Nastic D, Ghaderi M, Rydberg F, Rau TT, Mueller MD, et al. Phenotype of POLE-mutated endometrial cancer. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(3): e0214318.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Persson J, Salehi S, Bollino M, Lonnerfors C, Falconer H, Geppert B, et al. Pelvic Sentinel lymph node detection in High-Risk Endometrial Cancer (SHREC-trial)—the final step towards a paradigm shift in surgical staging. Eur J of Cancer. 2019;116:77–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Cusimano MC, Vicus D, Pulman K, Maganti M, Bernardini MQ, Bouchard-Fortier G, et al. Assessent of sentinel lymph node biopsy by lymphadenectomy for intermediate- and high-grade endometrial cancer staging. JAMA Surg. 2021;156(2):157–64. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2020.5060.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Amezcua CA, MacDonald HR, Lum CA, Munderspach LI, Roman DL, Feliz JC, et al. Endometrial cancer patients have a significant risk of harboring isolated tumor cells in histologically negative lymph nodes. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006;16(3):1336–41. https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-00009577-200605000-00058.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Erkanli S, Bolat F, Seydaoglu G. Detection and importance of micrometastases in histologically negative lymph nodes in endometrial carcinoma. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2011;32(6):619–25.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kim CH, Soslow RA, Park KJ, Barber EL, Khoury-Collado F, Barlin NJ, et al. Pathologic ultrastaging improves micrometastasis detection in sentinel lymph nodes during endometrial cancer staging. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2013;23(5):964–70. https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0b013e3182954da8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. St Clair CM, Eriksson AG, Ducie JA, Jewell EL, Alektiar KM, Hensley ML, et al. Low-volume lymph node metastasis discovered during sentinel lymph node mapping for endometrial carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(5):1653–9. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-5040-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. RAINBO Research Consortium. Refining adjuvant treatment in endometrial cancer based on molecular features: the RAINBO clinical trial program. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2022;33(1):109–17. https://doi.org/10.1136/ijgc-2022-004039.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Bosse T, Nout RA, Stelloo E, Dreef E, Nijman HW, Jurgenliemk-Schulz IM, et al. L1 cell adhesion molecule is a strong predictor for distant recurrence and overall survival in early stage endometrial cancer: pooled PORTEC trial results. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50:2602–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kommoss FK, Karnezis AN, Kommoss F, Talhouk A, Taran FA, Staebler A, et al. L1CAM further stratifies endometrial carcinoma patients with no specific molecular risk profile. Br J Cancer. 2018;119:480–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Vermij L, Jobsen JJ, León-Castillo A, Brinkhuis M, Roothan S, Powell ME, et al. Prognostic refinement of NSMP high-risk endometrial cancers using oestrogen receptor immunohistochemistry. Br J Cancer. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-023-02141-0.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Kim SR, Cloutier BT, Leung S, Cochrane D, Britton H, Pinna A, et al. Molecular subtypes of clear cell carcinoma of the endometrium: opportunities for prognostic and predictive stratification. Gynecol Oncol. 2020;158(1):3–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Timmerman S, Van Rompuy AS, Van Gorp T, Vanden Bempt I, Brems H, Van Nieuwenhuysen E, et al. Analysis of 108 patients with endometrial carcinoma using the PROMISE classification and additional genetic analyses for MMR-D. Gynecol Oncol. 2020;157(1):245–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The performance of this article did not require any funding.

Author information

Author notes

  1. A. Gil-Moreno and S. Cabrera have equally contributed to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Unitat de Ginecologia Oncològica. Servei de Ginecología. Hospital, Universitari Vall d’Hebron, Vall d’Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Barcelona, Spain

    Ana Luzarraga Aznar, Vicente Bebia, Natalia Rodriguez Gomez-Hidalgo, Marta Miguez, Asunción Pérez-Benavente, Antonio Gil-Moreno & Silvia Cabrera

  2. Grup de Recerca Biomèdica en Ginecología, Vall Hebron Institut de Recerca (VHIR), Vall d’Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Barcelona, Spain

    Ana Luzarraga Aznar, Vicente Bebia, Carlos López-Gil, Eva Colas, Asunción Pérez-Benavente, Antonio Gil-Moreno & Silvia Cabrera

Authors
  1. Ana Luzarraga Aznar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vicente Bebia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Natalia Rodriguez Gomez-Hidalgo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Carlos López-Gil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marta Miguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Eva Colas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Asunción Pérez-Benavente
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Antonio Gil-Moreno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Silvia Cabrera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AL, NRGH and SC conceived and planned the study. AL and VB performed the searches, screening, data extraction and quality analysis. AL performed the manuscript preparation. VB, SC, APB, CLG, NRGH, EC, MM and AGM made substantial contributions to conception and design and supervised and edited the whole study. Both SC and AGM are the Seniors of the project and supervised the whole study. All authors (AL, NRGH, SC, ABP, CLG, VB, EC, MM and AGM) performed a final approval of the version to be published.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vicente Bebia.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors of this article have no conflict of interest to disclose.

Ethical approval

This article did not require an IRB approval. Patients were not involved in the development of this study as no primary research was conducted. This article do not include information about patients that has not been published previously by the authors of the included studies.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Luzarraga Aznar, A., Bebia, V., Gomez-Hidalgo, N.R. et al. Molecular profile in endometrial carcinoma: can we predict the lymph node status? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Transl Oncol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-024-03401-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-024-03401-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation