Search

Objective. Endometrial cancers have historically been classified by histomorphologic appearance, which is subject to interobserver disagreement. As molecular and biomarker testing has become increasingly available, the prognostic significance and accuracy of histomorphologic diagnoses have been questioned. To address these issues for a large, prospective cohort study, we provide the results of a centralized pathology review and biomarker analysis of all incidental endometrial carcinomas occurring between 1976 and 2012 in the Nurses’ Health Study. Methods. Routine histology of all ( n = 360 ) cases was reviewed for histomorphologic diagnosis. Cases were subsequently planted in a tissue microarray to explore expression of a variety of biomarkers (e.g., ER, PR, p53, PTEN, PAX2, AMACR, HNF1β, Napsin A, p16, PAX8, and GATA3). Results. Histologic subtypes included endometrioid (87.2%), serous (5.6%), carcinosarcoma (3.9%), clear cell (1.7%), and mixed type (1.7%). Biomarker results within histologic subtypes were consistent with existing literature: abnormal p53 was frequent in serous cases (74%), and HNF1β (67%), Napsin A (67%), and AMACR (83%) expression was frequent in clear cell carcinomas. Our dataset also allowed for examination of biomarker expression across non-preselected histologies. The results demonstrated that (1) HNF1β was not specific for clear cell carcinoma, (2) TP53 mutations occurred across many histologies, and (3) GATA3 was expressed across multiple histotypes, with 75% of positive cases demonstrating high-grade features. Conclusions. Our findings establish the subtypes of endometrial cancer occurring in the Nurses’ Health Study, corroborate the sensitivity of certain well-established biomarkers, and call into question previously identified associations between certain biomarkers (e.g., HNF1B) and particular histotypes.

The pathologic diagnosis of neoplasia requires localization and classification of lesional tissue, a process that depends on the recognition of an abnormal spatial distribution of neoplastic elements relative to admixed normal background tissue. In endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN), a pre-cancer usually managed by hysterectomy, a clonally mutated proliferation of cytologically altered glands ('neoplastic-EIN') aggregates in clusters that also contain background non-neoplastic glands ('background-NL'). Here, we used image analysis to classify individual glands within endometrial tissue fragments as neoplastic-EIN or background-NL, and we used the distribution of predictions to localize foci diagnostic of EIN. Nuclear coordinates were automatically assigned and were used as vertices to generate Delaunay triangulations for each gland. Graph statistical variables were used to develop random forest algorithms to classify glands as neoplastic-EIN or background-NL. Individual glands in an independent validation set were scored by a 'ground truth' biomarker (PAX2 immunohistochemistry). We found that exclusion of small glands led to improvement in classification accuracy. Using an inclusion threshold of 200 nuclei per gland, our final model classification accuracy was 77.5% in the validation set, with a positive predictive value of 0.81. We leveraged this high positive predictive value in a point cloud overlay display to assist end-user identification of EIN foci. This study demonstrates that graph theory approaches applied to small-scale anatomic elements in the endometrium allow biologic classification by machine learning, and that spatial superimposition over large-scale tissue expanses can have practical diagnostic utility. We expect this augmented diagnostic approach to be generalizable to commonly encountered problems in other organ systems. © 2020 The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Developing a system of molecular subtyping for endometrial tumors might improve insight into disease etiology and clinical prediction of patient outcomes. High body mass index (BMI) has been implicated in development of endometrial cancer through hormonal pathways and might influence tumor expression of biomarkers involved in BMI-sensitive pathways. We evaluated whether endometrial tumor expression of 7 markers from BMI-sensitive pathways of insulin resistance could effectively characterize molecular subtypes: Adiponectin Receptor 1, Adiponectin Receptor 2, Leptin Receptor, Insulin Receptor (beta subunit), Insulin Receptor Substrate 1, Insulin-Like Growth Factor 1 Receptor, and Insulin-Like Growth Factor 2 Receptor. Using endometrial carcinoma tissue specimens from a case-only prospective sample of 360 women from the Nurses’ Health Study, we scored categorical immunohistochemical measurements of protein expression for each marker. Logistic regression was used to estimate associations between endometrial cancer risk factors, especially BMI, and tumor marker expression. Proportional hazards modeling was performed to estimate associations between marker expression and time to all-cause mortality as well as time to endometrial cancer-specific mortality. No association was observed between BMI and tumor expression of any marker. No marker was associated with time to either all-cause mortality or endometrial cancer-specific mortality in models with or without standard clinical predictors of patient mortality (tumor stage, grade, and histologic type). It did not appear that any of the markers evaluated here could be used effectively to define molecular subtypes of endometrial cancer.

Background: Endometrial tumors arise from a hormonally responsive tissue. Defining subtypes by hormone receptor expression might better inform etiology and prediction of patient outcomes. We evaluated the potential role of tumor estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) expression to define endometrial cancer subtypes. Methods: We measured semi-continuous ER and PR protein expression in tissue specimens from 360 endometrial primary tumors from the Nurses' Health Study. To explore the impact of different definitions of marker positivity, we dichotomized ER and PR expression at different cut points in increments of 5% positive cells. Logistic regression was used to estimate associations between endometrial cancer risk factors, such as body mass index, with dichotomous ER or PR status. Reclassification statistics were used to assess whether adding dichotomous ER or PR status to standard prognostic factors of stage, grade, and histologic type would improve endometrial cancer-specific mortality prediction. Results: Compared with not being obese, obesity increased the odds of having an ER-positive tumor at cut points of 0% to 20% [maximum OR, 2.92; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.34–6.33] as well as the odds of having a PR-positive tumor at cut points of 70% to 90% (maximum OR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.36–4.68). Adding dichotomous tumor ER or PR status to the panel of standard predictors did not improve both model discrimination and calibration. Conclusions: Obesity may be associated with greater endometrial tumor expression of ER and PR. Adding either marker does not appear to improve mortality prediction beyond the standard predictors. Impact: Body mass index might explain some of the biological variation among endometrial tumors. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(5); 727–35. ©2017 AACR.