Jamieson Amy, Thompson Emily F, Huvila Jutta, Gilks C Blake, McAlpine Jessica N
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2021 Jun;31(6):907-913. doi: 10.1136/ijgc-2020-002256. Epub 2021 Feb 15.
Over the past decade, our understanding of endometrial cancer has changed dramatically from the two-tiered clinicopathologic classification system of type I and type II endometrial cancer through to the four distinct molecular subtypes identified by The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) in 2013. In both systems there is a small subset of endometrial cancers (serous histotype/high numbers of somatic copy number abnormalities) that account for a disproportionately high percentage of endometrial cancer related deaths. This subset can be identified in routine clinical practice by first identifying the approximately one-third of endometrial cancers that are either ultramutated/mut tumors, with pathogenic mutations in the exonuclease domain of , or hypermutated/MMRd tumors, with loss of DNA mismatch repair. Immunostaining for p53 stratifies the remaining endometrial cancers into those with wild-type staining pattern and those with mutant pattern staining (p53abn endometrial cancer). This latter group of p53abn endometrial cancer is the subject of this review. Most p53abn endometrial cancers are serous type and high grade, but it also includes other histotypes and lower grade tumors, and has consistently been associated with the poorest clinical outcomes. Although it only accounts for 15% of all endometrial cancer cases, it is responsible for 50-70% of endometrial cancer mortality. A better understanding of the molecular alterations in the p53abn subgroup, beyond the ubiquitous and definitional mutations, is required so we can identify better treatments for these most aggressive endometrial cancers. Recent evidence has shown improved survival outcomes with the addition of chemotherapy compared with radiation alone in p53abn endometrial cancers. Opportunities for targeted therapy for p53abn endometrial cancers also exist with a proportion of p53abn endometrial cancers known to have homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) or human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) overexpression/amplification. This review will provide an overview of our current understanding of p53abn endometrial cancer.
在过去十年中,我们对子宫内膜癌的认识发生了巨大变化,从I型和II型子宫内膜癌的两级临床病理分类系统,发展到2013年癌症基因组图谱(TCGA)确定的四种不同分子亚型。在这两种系统中,都有一小部分子宫内膜癌(浆液性组织学类型/大量体细胞拷贝数异常),其在子宫内膜癌相关死亡中所占比例高得不成比例。在常规临床实践中,可以通过首先识别大约三分之一的子宫内膜癌来确定这一亚组,这些癌症要么是超突变/突变肿瘤,在 的外切酶结构域中有致病突变,要么是高突变/错配修复缺陷(MMRd)肿瘤,存在DNA错配修复缺失。p53免疫染色将其余子宫内膜癌分为野生型染色模式和突变型染色模式(p53异常子宫内膜癌)。后者这组p53异常子宫内膜癌是本综述的主题。大多数p53异常子宫内膜癌是浆液性类型且分级高,但它也包括其他组织学类型和低级别肿瘤,并且一直与最差的临床结果相关。尽管它仅占所有子宫内膜癌病例的15%,但却导致了50 - 70%的子宫内膜癌死亡率。除了普遍存在的定义性突变之外,还需要更好地了解p53异常亚组中的分子改变,以便我们能够为这些最具侵袭性的子宫内膜癌确定更好的治疗方法。最近的证据表明,在p53异常子宫内膜癌中,与单纯放疗相比,加用化疗可改善生存结果。p53异常子宫内膜癌的靶向治疗机会也存在,已知一部分p53异常子宫内膜癌存在同源重组缺陷(HRD)或人表皮生长因子2(HER2)过表达/扩增。本综述将概述我们目前对p53异常子宫内膜癌的认识。