Search

Background: Standard screening of endometrial cancer (EC) for Lynch syndrome (LS) is gaining traction; however, the prognostic impact of an underlying hereditary etiology is unknown. We established the prevalence, prognosis, and subsequent primary cancer incidence of patients with LS-associated EC in relation to sporadic mismatch repair deficient (MMRd)-EC in the large combined Post Operative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Carcinoma-1, -2, and -3 trial cohort.Methods: After MMR-immunohistochemistry, MLH1-promoter methylation testing, and next-generation sequencing, tumors were classified into 3 groups according to the molecular cause of their MMRd-EC. Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and Cox model were used for survival analysis. Competing risk analysis was used to estimate the subsequent cancer probability. All statistical tests were 2-sided.Results: Among the 1336 ECs, 410 (30.7%) were MMRd. A total of 380 (92.7%) were fully triaged: 275 (72.4%) were MLH1-hypermethylated MMRd-ECs; 36 (9.5%) LS MMRd-ECs, and 69 (18.2%) MMRd-ECs due to other causes. Limiting screening of EC patients to 60 years or younger or to 70 years or younger would have resulted in missing 18 (50.0%) and 6 (16.7%) LS diagnoses, respectively. Five-year recurrence-free survival was 91.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 83.1% to 100%; hazard ratio = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.16 to 1.24, P = .12) for LS, 95.5% (95% CI = 90.7% to 100%; hazard ratio = 0.17, 95% CI = 0.05 to 0.55, P = .003) for "other" vs 78.6% (95% CI = 73.8% to 83.7%) for MLH1-hypermethylated MMRd-EC. The probability of subsequent LS-associated cancer at 10 years was 11.6% (95% CI = 0.0% to 24.7%), 1.5% (95% CI = 0.0% to 4.3%), and 7.0% (95% CI = 3.0% to 10.9%) within the LS, "other," and MLH1-hypermethylated MMRd-EC groups, respectively.Conclusions: The LS prevalence in the Post Operative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Carcinoma trial population was 2.8% and among MMRd-ECs was 9.5%. Patients with LS-associated ECs showed a trend towards better recurrence-free survival and higher risk for second cancers compared with patients with MLH1-hypermethylated MMRd-EC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims POLE exonuclease domain mutations identify a subset of endometrial cancer ( EC) patients with an excellent prognosis. The use of this biomarker has been suggested to refine adjuvant treatment decisions, but the necessary sequencing is not widely performed and is relatively expensive. Therefore, we aimed to identify histopathological and immunohistochemical characteristics to aid in the detection of POLE-mutant ECs. Methods and results Fifty-one POLE-mutant endometrioid, 67 POLE-wild-type endometrioid and 15 POLE-wild-type serous ECs were included (total N = 133). An expert gynaecopathologist, blinded to molecular features, evaluated each case (two or more slides) for 16 morphological characteristics. Immunohistochemistry was performed for p53, p16, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2. POLE-mutant ECs were characterised by a prominent immune infiltrate: 80% showed peritumoral lymphocytes and 59% showed tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes, as compared with 43% and 28% of POLE-wild-type endometrioid ECs, and 27% and 13% of their serous counterparts ( P < 0.01, all comparisons). Of POLE-mutant ECs, 33% contained tumour giant cells; this proportion was significantly higher than that in POLE-wild-type endometrioid ECs (10%; P = 0.003), but not significantly different from that in serous ECs (53%). Serous-like features were as often (focally) present in POLE-mutant as in POLE-wild-type endometrioid ECs (6-24%, depending on the feature). The majority of POLE-mutant ECs showed wild-type p53 (86%), negative/focal p16 (82%) and normal mismatch repair protein expression (90%). Conclusions A simple combination of morphological and immunohistochemical characteristics (tumour type, grade, peritumoral lymphocytes, MLH1, and p53 expression) can assist in prescreening for POLE exonuclease domain mutations in EC, increasing the probability of a mutation being detected from 7% to 33%. This facilitates the use of this important prognostic biomarker in routine pathology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]