Department of Molecular Oncology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Department of Pathology, University of Turku, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.
Mod Pathol. 2022 Dec;35(12):1974-1982. doi: 10.1038/s41379-022-01165-w. Epub 2022 Oct 14.
We assessed the landscape of diagnostic pathology practice and how molecular classification could potentially impact management of patients with endometrial cancer by collecting patient samples, clinicopathologic data, and patient outcomes from EC patients diagnosed in 2016 at 10 Canadian tertiary cancer centers and 19 community hospitals. ProMisE molecular subtype (POLEmut, MMRd, p53abn, No Specific Molecular Profile (NSMP)) was assigned retrospectively. 1357 patients were fully evaluable including 85 POLEmut (6.3%), 380 MMRd (28.0%), 643 NSMP (47.4%), and 249 p53abn ECs (18.3%). Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for MMR proteins was undertaken at the time of primary diagnosis in 2016 in only 42% of the cohort (570/1357; range 3.5-95.4%/center). p53 IHC had only been performed in 21.1% of the cohort (286/1357; range 10.1-41.9%/center). Thus, based on the retrospective molecular subtype assignment, 54.7% (208/380) of MMRd EC had not been tested with MMR IHC (or MSI) and 48.2% (120/249) of p53abn ECs were not tested with p53 IHC in 2016. Molecular subtype diversity within histotypes was profound; most serous carcinomas were p53abn (91.4%), but only 129/249 (51.8%) p53abn EC were serous. Low-grade (Gr1-2) endometrioid carcinomas were mostly NSMP (589/954, 61.7%) but included all molecular subtypes, including p53abn (19/954, 2.0%). Molecular subtype was significantly associated with clinical outcomes (p < 0.001) even in patients with stage I disease (OS p = 0.006, DSS p < 0.001, PFS p < 0.001). Assessment of national pathologic practice in 2016 shows highly variable use of MMR and p53 IHC and demonstrates significant opportunities to improve and standardize biomarker reporting. Inconsistent, non-reflexive IHC resulted in missed opportunities for Hereditary Cancer Program referral and Lynch Syndrome diagnosis, and missed potential therapeutic implications (e.g., chemotherapy in p53abn EC, immune blockade for MMRd EC). Routine integration of molecular subtyping into practice can improve the consistency of EC pathology assessment and classification.
我们通过收集 2016 年在加拿大 10 个三级癌症中心和 19 家社区医院诊断的子宫内膜癌患者的患者样本、临床病理数据和患者结局,评估了诊断病理学实践的现状,以及分子分类如何可能影响子宫内膜癌患者的管理。通过回顾性分析,将 ProMisE 分子亚型(POLEmut、MMRd、p53abn、无特定分子谱(NSMP))分配给患者。共有 1357 例患者可进行全面评估,包括 85 例 POLEmut(6.3%)、380 例 MMRd(28.0%)、643 例 NSMP(47.4%)和 249 例 p53abn 子宫内膜癌(18.3%)。在 2016 年,只有 42%的患者(570/1357)进行了 MMR 蛋白免疫组化(IHC)检测(范围为 3.5-95.4%/中心)。仅对 21.1%的患者(286/1357)进行了 p53 IHC 检测(范围为 10.1-41.9%/中心)。因此,根据回顾性分子亚型分配,54.7%(208/380)的 MMRd 子宫内膜癌未进行 MMR IHC(或 MSI)检测,48.2%(120/249)的 p53abn 子宫内膜癌未在 2016 年进行 p53 IHC 检测。组织学类型内的分子亚型多样性非常明显;大多数浆液性癌为 p53abn(91.4%),但只有 129/249(51.8%)的 p53abn 子宫内膜癌为浆液性。低级别(Gr1-2)子宫内膜样癌主要为 NSMP(589/954,61.7%),但包括所有分子亚型,包括 p53abn(19/954,2.0%)。即使在 I 期疾病患者中,分子亚型也与临床结局显著相关(p<0.001)(OS p=0.006,DSS p<0.001,PFS p<0.001)。对 2016 年全国病理实践的评估显示,MMR 和 p53 IHC 的使用差异很大,有很大的机会可以改进和标准化生物标志物报告。不一致的、非反射性的 IHC 导致遗传性癌症计划转诊和 Lynch 综合征诊断的机会丧失,并错失潜在的治疗意义(例如,p53abn 子宫内膜癌的化疗、MMRd EC 的免疫阻断)。将分子分型常规纳入实践可以提高子宫内膜癌病理评估和分类的一致性。