Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Developing a validated nomogram for predicting ovarian metastasis in endometrial cancer patients: a retrospective research

  • Gynecologic Oncology
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To explore risk factors and develop a prediction model for ovarian metastasis in endometrial cancer (EC), as well as providing provide a reference for clinical ovarian preservation.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective observational study enrolling 1496 EC patients having received complete staging surgery from Qilu Hospital of Shandong University from 2012 to 2018. These patients were randomly divided into two cohorts: training cohort (n = 1046) and validation cohort (n = 448). A nomogram prediction model was developed based on univariate, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso), and multivariate logistic regression. Then, the nomogram model’s performance was evaluated in discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility three aspects.

Results

Parametrium invasion, lymph node metastasis, and oviduct metastasis were finally contained in the nomogram prediction model. The AUC of the model in the training cohort was 0.85 compared with 0.72 in the validation cohort. It also behaved well in calibration and had good clinical utility. With a threshold probability of 20% ~ 80%, the nomogram increased the net benefit by 0 ~ 13.6 per 100 patients than surgery for all patients upon validation.

Conclusions

We develop a nomogram with good performances for predicting ovarian metastasis in EC patients, which may help clinicians identify candidate patients appropriate for ovarian preservation in premenopausal EC patients.

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
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

We are pleased to share our data with any qualified researchers without undue reservation. Please contact the corresponding author if there is anything they need.

References

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2018) Cancer statistics 2018. CA Cancer J Clin 68(1):7–30

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lee YC, Lheureux S, Oza AM (2017) Treatment strategies for endometrial cancer: current practice and perspective. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 29(1):47–58

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lortet-Tieulent J, Ferlay J, Bray F, Jemal A (2018) International Patterns and Trends in Endometrial Cancer Incidence, 1978–2013. J Natl Cancer Inst 110(4):354–361

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Taylan E, Oktay K (2019) Fertility preservation in gynecologic cancers. Gynecol Oncol 155(3):522–529

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lee NK, Cheung MK, Shin JY, Husain A, Teng NN, Berek JS et al (2007) Prognostic factors for uterine cancer in reproductive-aged women. Obstet Gynecol 109(3):655–662

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. de Boer SM, Powell ME, Mileshkin L, Katsaros D, Bessette P, Haie-Meder C et al (2019) Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone in women with high-risk endometrial cancer (PORTEC-3): patterns of recurrence and post-hoc survival analysis of a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 20(9):1273–1285

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Ignatov T, Eggemann H, Burger E, Ortmann O, Costa SD, Ignatov A (2018) Ovarian metastasis in patients with endometrial cancer: risk factors and impact on survival. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 144(6):1103–1107

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Walsh C, Holschneider C, Hoang Y, Tieu K, Karlan B, Cass I (2005) Coexisting ovarian malignancy in young women with endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol 106(4):693–699

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. AlHilli MM, Dowdy SC, Weaver AL, St Sauver JL, Keeney GL, Mariani A et al (2012) Incidence and factors associated with synchronous ovarian and endometrial cancer: a population-based case-control study. Gynecol Oncol 125(1):109–113

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Song T, Seong SJ, Bae DS, Suh DH, Kim DY, Lee KH et al (2013) Synchronous primary cancers of the endometrium and ovary in young women: a Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Gynecol Oncol 131(3):624–628

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lobo RA, Davis SR, De Villiers TJ, Gompel A, Henderson VW, Hodis HN et al (2014) Prevention of diseases after menopause. Climacteric 17(5):540–556

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rivera CM, Grossardt BR, Rhodes DJ, Brown RD Jr, Roger VL, Melton LJ 3rd et al (2009) Increased cardiovascular mortality after early bilateral oophorectomy. Menopause 16(1):15–23

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Rocca WA, Grossardt BR, de Andrade M, Malkasian GD, Melton LJ 3rd (2006) Survival patterns after oophorectomy in premenopausal women: a population-based cohort study. Lancet Oncol 7(10):821–828

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Parker WH, Feskanich D, Broder MS, Chang E, Shoupe D, Farquhar CM et al (2013) Long-term mortality associated with oophorectomy compared with ovarian conservation in the nurses’ health study. Obstet Gynecol 121(4):709–716

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Gu H, Li J, Gu Y, Tu H, Zhou Y, Liu J (2017) Survival Impact of Ovarian Preservation on Women With Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer 27(1):77–84

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gonthier C, Trefoux-Bourdet A, Koskas M (2017) Impact of Conservative Managements in Young Women With Grade 2 or 3 Endometrial Adenocarcinoma Confined to the Endometrium. Int J Gynecol Cancer 27(3):493–499

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jia P, Zhang Y (2017) Ovarian preservation improves overall survival in young patients with early-stage endometrial cancer. Oncotarget 8(35):59940–59949

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Hou T, Sun Y, Li J, Liu C, Wang Z, Li Y et al (2017) The Safety of Ovarian Preservation in Stage I Endometrial Endometrioid Adenocarcinoma Based on Propensity Score Matching. Comb Chem High Throughput Screening 20(7):647–655

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Shin W, Park SY, Kang S, Lim MC, Seo SS (2020) The survival effect of ovary preservation in early stage endometrial cancer: a single institution retrospective analysis. J Ovarian Res 13(1):97

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Wright JD, Jorge S, Tergas AI, Hou JY, Burke WM, Huang Y et al (2016) Utilization and Outcomes of Ovarian Conservation in Premenopausal Women With Endometrial Cancer. Obstet Gynecol 127(1):101–108

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. GilaniModaress M, Cheraghi F, Zamani N (2011) Ovarian metastasis in endometriod type endometrial cancer. Int J Fertility Sterility 5(3):148–151

    Google Scholar 

  22. Li J, Zhu Q, Yang B, Ning C, Liu X, Luo X et al (2018) Risk factors for ovarian involvement in young and premenopausal endometrioid endometrial cancer patients. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 222:151–154

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gemer O, Bergman M, Segal S (2004) Ovarian metastasis in women with clinical stage I endometrial carcinoma. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 83(2):208–210

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Iasonos A, Schrag D, Raj GV, Panageas KS (2008) How to build and interpret a nomogram for cancer prognosis. JCO 26(8):1364–1370

    Google Scholar 

  25. Praiss AM, Huang Y, Clair CMS, Tergas AI, Melamed A, Khoury-Collado F, Hou JY, Hur C, Ananth CV, Neugut AI, Hershman DL (2020) A modern assessment of the surgical pathologic spread and nodal dissemination of endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.02.014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Amant F, Mirza MR, Koskas M, Creutzberg CL (2018) Cancer of the corpus uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 143(Suppl 2):37–50

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Jundt G (2018) Updates to the WHO classification of bone tumours. Pathologe 39(2):107–116

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Vargas R, Rauh-Hain JA, Clemmer J, Clark RM, Goodman A, Growdon WB et al (2014) Tumor size, depth of invasion, and histologic grade as prognostic factors of lymph node involvement in endometrial cancer: a SEER analysis. Gynecol Oncol 133(2):216–220

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Park SY (2018) Nomogram: an analogue tool to deliver digital knowledge. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 155(4):1793

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Vickers AJ, Elkin EB (2006) Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Making 26(6):565–574

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Campbell W, Ganna A, Ingelsson E, Janssens AC (2016) Prediction impact curve is a new measure integrating intervention effects in the evaluation of risk models. J Clin Epidemiol 69:89–95

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wang J, Li XM (2016) Meta-analysis of prognosis of ovarian preserving in young patients with early endometrial cancer. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi 51(8):602–607

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Li L, Wu L, Zhang R, Zhang G, Li N, Li X et al (2014) Clinical analysis of ovarian preservation for stage I endometrial carcinomas in women aged 40 years and younger. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi 49(4):260–264

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. van der Schouw YT, van der Graaf Y, Steyerberg EW, Eijkemans JC, Banga JD (1996) Age at menopause as a risk factor for cardiovascular mortality. Lancet 347(9003):714–718

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Colditz GA, Willett WC, Stampfer MJ, Rosner B, Speizer FE, Hennekens CH (1987) Menopause and the risk of coronary heart disease in women. N Engl J Med 316(18):1105–1110

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Matsuo K, Machida H, Shoupe D, Melamed A, Muderspach LI, Roman LD et al (2016) Ovarian conservation and overall survival in young women with early-stage low-grade endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol 128(4):761–770

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Lau HY, Twu NF, Yen MS, Tsai HW, Wang PH, Chuang CM et al (2014) Impact of ovarian preservation in women with endometrial cancer. JCMA 77(7):379–384

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Sun C, Chen G, Yang Z, Jiang J, Yang X, Li N et al (2013) Safety of ovarian preservation in young patients with early-stage endometrial cancer: a retrospective study and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 100(3):782–787

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Lau HY, Chen MY, Ke YM, Chen JR, Chen IH, Liou WS et al (2015) Outcome of ovarian preservation during surgical treatment for endometrial cancer: a Taiwanese Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 54(5):532–536

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Casey L, Singh N (2020) Metastases to the ovary arising from endometrial, cervical and fallopian tube cancer: recent advances. Histopathology 76(1):37–51

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Akel RA, Guo XM, Moravek MB, Confino R, Smith KN, Lawson AK et al (2020) Ovarian stimulation is safe and effective for patients with gynecologic cancer. J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol 9(3):367–374

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Kinjyo Y, Kudaka W, Ooyama T, Inamine M, Nagai Y, Aoki Y (2015) Ovarian preservation in young women with endometrial cancer of endometrioid histology. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 94(4):430–434

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Smith D, Stewart CJR, Clarke EM, Lose F, Davies C, Armes J et al (2018) ER and PR expression and survival after endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 148(2):258–266

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Ballester M, Canlorbe G, Cortez A, Gonin J, Laas E, Bendifallah S et al (2013) Histological and immunohistochemical profiles predict lymph node status in women with low-intermediate risk endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 130(3):457–462

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Peishu Liu and Xiaolei Zhang share the co-last authorship.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, China

    Xiaodie Liu, Peishu Liu & Xiaolei Zhang

  2. Department of Urology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, China

    Yaohai Wu

  3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100029, China

    Xiaodie Liu

  4. Department of Urology, Seventh Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Shenzhen, 518107, People’s Republic of China

    Yaohai Wu

Authors
  1. Xiaodie Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yaohai Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peishu Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xiaolei Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

LXD: project development, data collection, manuscript writing; WYH: data collection, manuscript writing; ZXL: data analysis, research design; LPS: manuscript revision. All authors contributed to manuscript revision, read, and approved the submitted version.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Peishu Liu or Xiaolei Zhang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical approval

This is an observational study. The Research Ethics Committee of Shandong University Qilu hospital has confirmed that no ethical approval is required.

Informed consent

The research did not involve personal information about the patient participants, and the requirement for informed consent was exempted by the Review Board of Shandong University Qilu hospital.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (XLSX 84 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, X., Wu, Y., Liu, P. et al. Developing a validated nomogram for predicting ovarian metastasis in endometrial cancer patients: a retrospective research. Arch Gynecol Obstet 305, 719–729 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-021-06214-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-021-06214-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation