Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Predicting the Risk of nOdal disease with histological and Molecular features in Endometrial cancer: the prospective PROME trial
  1. Giorgio Bogani1,
  2. Luca Lalli2,
  3. Jvan Casarin3,
  4. Fabio Ghezzi3,
  5. Valentina Chiappa1,
  6. Francesco Fanfani4,
  7. Giovanni Scambia4 and
  8. Francesco Raspagliesi1
    1. 1Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milan, Italy
    2. 2Unit of Clinical Epidemiology and Trial Organization, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
    3. 3Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, “Filippo Del Ponte” Hospital, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy
    4. 4Department of Women, Children and Public Health Sciences Gynecologic Oncology Unit, Rome, Italy
    1. Correspondence to Dr Giorgio Bogani, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy; giorgiobogani{at}yahoo.it

    Abstract

    Objective To assess the role of histopathological and molecular features in predicting the risk of nodal metastases in apparent early-stage endometrial cancer patients undergoing sentinel node mapping.

    Methods This is a prospective trial. Consecutive patients with apparent early-stage endometrial cancer, undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and sentinel node mapping, were enrolled. Histological and molecular features were used to predict the node positivity.

    Results Charts of 223 apparent early-stage endometrial cancer patients were included in this study. Four (1.8%) patients were excluded from this study due to the lack of data about molecular features. Additionally, nine (4%) patients did not meet the inclusion criteria (due to the presence of peritoneal carcinomatosis or bulky nodes (the presence of p53 abnormality correlated with the presence of advanced stage disease (p<0.001)). The study population included 178 (84.8%) and 32 (15.2%) patients with endometrioid and non-endometrioid endometrial cancer, respectively. According to pathological uterine risk factors, 93 (44.3%), 45 (21.4%), 40 (19.1%), and 32 (15.2%) were classified as low, intermediate, intermediate-high, and high-risk, respectively. Using the surrogate molecular classification, 10 (4.8%), 42 (20%), 57 (27.1%), and 101 (48.1%) were included in the POLE mutated, p53 abnormal, MMRd/MSI-H, and NSMP, respectively. Overall, 41 (19.5%) patients were detected with positive nodes. Molecular features were not associated with the risk of having nodal metastases (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.21 to 5.05, p=0.969 for POLE mutated; OR 0.788, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.98, p=0.602 for p53 abnormal; OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.42, p=0.733 for MMRd/MSI-H). At multivariable analysis, only deep myometrial invasion (OR 3.318, 95% CI 1.357 to 8.150, p=0.009) and lymphovascular space invasion (OR 6.584, 95% CI 2.663 to 16.279, p<0.001) correlated with the increased risk of positive nodes.

    Conclusion Our data suggest that molecular classification does not seem useful to tailor the need of nodal dissection in apparent early-stage endometrial cancer. p53 abnormality predicts the risk of having advanced disease at presentation. Further external validation is needed.

    Clinical trial registration NCT05793333.

    • Endometrial Hyperplasia
    • Sentinel Lymph Node
    • Laparoscopes

    Data availability statement

    Data are available upon reasonable request.

    Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Data availability statement

    Data are available upon reasonable request.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • X @BoganiGiorgio

    • Contributors Author contribution: Conceptualization: GB, FR, GS. Methodology: all authors. Project administration: FR, GS. Supervision: FG, GS, FR. Writing – original draft: all authors. Writing – review and editing: all authors. Guarantor: GB.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.