Tumor Biology

, Volume 36, Issue 6, pp 4151–4156 | Cite as

Utility of tumor marker HE4 as prognostic factor in endometrial cancer: a single-center controlled study

  • Stella Capriglione
  • Francesco Plotti
  • Andrea Miranda
  • Roberto Ricciardi
  • Giuseppe Scaletta
  • Alessia Aloisi
  • Federica Guzzo
  • Roberto Montera
  • Roberto Angioli
Research Article

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the correlation between preoperative human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) levels, endometrial cancer (EC) staging, and ideal cutoff for stage prediction. All EC patients, treated within January 2009 and February 2014 at the Division of Gynaecologic Oncology of the University Campus Bio-Medico of Rome, were considered for the study. For the first part of the study, we consider an HE4 cutoff of 70 pmol/L. Histotypes (endometrioid versus non-endometrioid), grading (G1, G2, G3), and stage were correlated with HE4 levels. In the second part of the study, the logistic regression was performed in stepwise mood to identify the ideal HE4 cutoff for stage prediction. Two hundred thirty-two patients with surgically staged EC and preoperative HE4 dosage were included in the study. We found that higher HE4 levels correlate with undifferentiated grading (p < 0.05). Moreover, we found that 42, 77, 90, 93 and 100 % of patients classified as International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IA, IB, II, III, and IV, respectively, presented HE4 levels above the standard cutoff of 70 pmol/L. Based on receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, we found the ideal HE4 cutoff as follows: 61.3 pmol/L for FIGO stage IA (sensitivity = 82.3 % and specificity = 96 %), 89.2 pmol/L for FIGO stage IB (sensitivity = 83.3 % and specificity = 96 %), 104.3 pmol/L for FIGO stage II (sensitivity = 80.9 % and specificity = 98.6 %), 152.6 pmol/L for FIGO stage III (sensitivity = 92.5 % and specificity = 98.6 %), and 203.8 pmol/L for FIGO stage IV (sensitivity = 81.8 % and specificity = 99.3 %). Our results suggest a potential role of HE4 in EC stage prediction.

Keywords

Endometrial cancer HE4 Staging Prognostic factor HE4 cutoff 

Notes

Conflicts of interest

None

References

  1. 1.
    Creasman WT. FIGO stage 1988 revision. GynecolOncol. 1989;35:125–7.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Creasman WT, Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Homesly HD, Graham JE, Heller PB. Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancer. Cancer. 1987;60:2035–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rubin SC, Hoskins WJ, Saigo PE, Nori D, Mychalczak B, Chapman D, et al. Management of endometrial adenocarcinoma with cervical involvement. Gynecol Oncol. 1992;45:294–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Morrow CP, Curtin JP, Townsend DG. Tumors of the endometrium. In Synopsis of gynecologic oncology (5th edn), Morrow CP, Curtin JP (eds). Churchill Livingstone: New York, NY, 1998; 151–185.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kinkel K, Kaji Y, Yu KK, Segal MR, Powell CB, Hricak H. Radiologic staging in patients with endometrial cancer: a metaanalysis. Radiology. 1999;212:711–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ayhan A, Taskiran C, Celik C, Yuce K. The long term survival of women with surgical stage II endometrioid type endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2004;93:9–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nagar H, Dobbs S, McClelland HR, Price J, McCluggage WG, Grey A. The diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in detecting cervical involvement in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2006;103:431–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Magrina JF. Outcomes of laparoscopic treatment for endometrial cancer. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2005;17:343–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Varpula MJ, Klemi PJ. Staging of uterine endometrial carcinoma with ultra-low field (0.02 T) MRI: a comparative study with CT. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1993;17:641–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Karlsson B, Norstrom A, Granberg S, Wikland M. The use of endovaginal ultrasound to diagnose invasion of endometrial carcinoma. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1992;2:35–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kim SH, Kim HD, Song YS, Kang SB, Lee HP. Detection of deep myometrial invasion in endometrial carcinoma: comparison of transvaginal ultrasound, CT, and MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1995;19:766–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hasami K, Matsuzawa M, Chen HF, Takahashi M, Sakura M. Computed tomography in the evaluation and treatment of endometrial carcinoma. Cancer. 1982;50:904–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Teefey SA, Stahl JA, Middleton WD, Huettner PC, Bernhard LM, Brown JJ, et al. Local staging of endometrial carcinoma: comparison of transvaginal and intraoperative sonography and gross visual inspection. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996;166:547–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Joja I, Asakawa M, Asakawa T, Nakagawa T, Kanazawa S, Kuroda M, et al. Endometrial carcinoma: dynamic MRI with turbo-flash technique. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1996;20:878–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Seki H, Kimura M, Sakai K. Myometrial invasion of endometrial carcinoma: assessment with plain and gadolinium enhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 1992;185:207–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Arko D, Takac I. High frequency transvaginal ultrasonography in preoperative assessment of myometrial invasion in endometrial cancer. J Ultrasound Med. 2000;19:639–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Manfredi R, Mirk P, Maresca G, Margariti PA, Testa A, Zannoni GF, et al. Local–regional staging of endometrial carcinoma: role of MR imaging in surgical planning. Radiology. 2004;231:372–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    De Smet F, De Brabanter J, Van den Bosch T, Pochet N, Amant F, Van Holsbeke C, et al. New models to predict depth of infiltration in endometrial carcinoma based on transvaginal sonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006;27:664–971.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hardesty LA, Sumkin JH, Hakim C, Johns C, Nath M. The ability of helical CT to preoperatively stage endometrial carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176:603–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Savelli L, Ceccarini M, Ludovisi M, Fruscella E, de Laco PA, Salizzoni E, et al. Preoperative local staging of endometrial cancer: transvaginal sonography vs. magnetic resonance imaging. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;31:560–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Scambia G, Benedetti Panici P, Baiocchi G, Perrone L, Greggi S, Mancuso S. CA 15–3 as a tumor marker in gynecological malignancies. Gynecol Oncol. 1988;30(2):265–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Moore RG, Brown AK, Miller MC, Badgwell D, Lu Z, Allard WJ, et al. Utility of a novel serum tumor biomarker HE4 in patients with endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the uterus. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;110(2):196–201.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bignotti E, Ragnoli M, Zanotti L, Calza S, Falchetti M, Lonardi S, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic impact of serum HE4 detection in endometrial carcinoma patients. Br J Cancer. 2011;104:1418–25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Drapkin R, von Horsten HH, Lin Y, et al. Human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) is a secreted glycoprotein that is overexpressed by serous and endometrioid ovarian carcinomas. Cancer Res. 2005;65(6):2162–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kobel M, Kalloger SE, Boyd N, et al. Ovarian carcinoma subtypes are different diseases: implications for biomarker studies. PLoS Med. 2008;5(12):e232.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Plotti F, Capriglione S, Terranova C, Montera R, Aloisi A, Damiani P, et al. Does HE4 have a role as biomarker in the recurrence of ovarian cancer? Tumour Biol. 2012;33(6):2117–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Angioli R, Miranda A, Aloisi A, Montera R, Capriglione S, De Cicco NC, et al. A critical review on HE4 performance in endometrial cancer: where are we now? Tumour Biol. 2014;35(2):881–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Duk IM. CA125: a useful marker in endometrial carcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynaecol Oncol. 1994;54(3):321–6.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Angioli R, Plotti F, Capriglione S, Montera R, Damiani P, Ricciardi R, et al. The role of novel biomarker HE4 in endometrial cancer: a case control prospective study. Tumour Biol. 2013;34(1):571–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Angioli R, Capriglione S, Aloisi A, Luvero D, Cafà EV, Dugo N, et al. REM (risk of endometrial malignancy): a proposal for a new scoring system to evaluate risk of endometrial malignancy. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19(20):5733–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Amant F, Moerman P, Neven P, Timmerman D, Van Limbergen E, Vergote I. Endometrial cancer. Lancet. 2005;366(9484):491–505.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kalogera E, Scholler N, Powless C, Weaver A, Drapkin R, Li J, et al. Correlation of serum HE4 with tumor size and myometrial invasion in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;124(2):270–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mutz-Dehbalaie I, Egle D, Fessler S, Hubalek M, Fiegl H, Marth C, et al. HE4 is an independent prognostic marker in endometrial cancer patients. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;126(2):186–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zanotti L, Bignotti E, Calza S, Bandiera E, Ruggeri G, Galli C, et al. Human epididymis protein 4 as a serum for diagnosis of endometrial carcinoma and prediction of clinical out come. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2012;50(12):2189–98.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Saarelainen SK, Peltonen N, Lehtimäki T, Perheentupa A, Vuento MH, Mäenpää JU. Predictive value of serum human epididymis protein 4 and cancer antigen 125 concentrations in endometrial carcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(2):142–el-6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Omer B, Genc S, Takmaz O, Dirican A, Kusku-Kiraz Z, Berkman S, et al. The diagnostic role of human epididymis protein 4 and serum amyloid-A in early-stage endometrial cancer patients. Tumor Biol. 2013;34(5):2645–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Moore RG, Miller CM, Brown AK, Robison K, Steinhoff M, Lambert-Messerlian G. Utility of tumor marker HE4 to predict depth of myometrial invasion in endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the uterus. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011;21(7):1185–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of Oncology and BioMarkers (ISOBM) 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stella Capriglione
    • 1
  • Francesco Plotti
    • 1
  • Andrea Miranda
    • 1
  • Roberto Ricciardi
    • 1
  • Giuseppe Scaletta
    • 1
  • Alessia Aloisi
    • 1
  • Federica Guzzo
    • 1
  • Roberto Montera
    • 1
  • Roberto Angioli
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynaecologyCampus Bio Medico University of RomeRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations