Pathologic Prognostic Factors in Endometrial Carcinoma (Other Than Tumor Type and Grade)

Although endometrial carcinoma (EC) is generally considered to have a good prognosis, over 20% of women with EC die of their disease, with a projected increase in both incidence and mortality over the next few decades. The aim of accurate prognostication is to ensure that patients receive optimal tr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Singh, Naveena, Hirschowitz, Lynn, Zaino, Richard, Alvarado-Cabrero, Isabel, Duggan, Maire A., Ali-Fehmi, Rouba, Euscher, Elizabeth, Hecht, Jonathan L., Horn, Lars-Christian, Ioffe, Olga, Matias-Guiu, Xavier, McCluggage, W. Glenn, Mikami, Yoshiki, Ordi, Jaume, Parkash, Vinita, Quddus, M. Ruhul, Quick, Charles M., Staebler, Annette, Zaloudek, Charles, Nucci, Marisa, Malpica, Anais, Oliva, Esther
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6296841/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30550486
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PGP.0000000000000524
_version_ 1783381118957912064
author Singh, Naveena
Hirschowitz, Lynn
Zaino, Richard
Alvarado-Cabrero, Isabel
Duggan, Maire A.
Ali-Fehmi, Rouba
Euscher, Elizabeth
Hecht, Jonathan L.
Horn, Lars-Christian
Ioffe, Olga
Matias-Guiu, Xavier
McCluggage, W. Glenn
Mikami, Yoshiki
Ordi, Jaume
Parkash, Vinita
Quddus, M. Ruhul
Quick, Charles M.
Staebler, Annette
Zaloudek, Charles
Nucci, Marisa
Malpica, Anais
Oliva, Esther
author_facet Singh, Naveena
Hirschowitz, Lynn
Zaino, Richard
Alvarado-Cabrero, Isabel
Duggan, Maire A.
Ali-Fehmi, Rouba
Euscher, Elizabeth
Hecht, Jonathan L.
Horn, Lars-Christian
Ioffe, Olga
Matias-Guiu, Xavier
McCluggage, W. Glenn
Mikami, Yoshiki
Ordi, Jaume
Parkash, Vinita
Quddus, M. Ruhul
Quick, Charles M.
Staebler, Annette
Zaloudek, Charles
Nucci, Marisa
Malpica, Anais
Oliva, Esther
author_sort Singh, Naveena
collection PubMed
description Although endometrial carcinoma (EC) is generally considered to have a good prognosis, over 20% of women with EC die of their disease, with a projected increase in both incidence and mortality over the next few decades. The aim of accurate prognostication is to ensure that patients receive optimal treatment and are neither overtreated nor undertreated, thereby improving patient outcomes overall. Patients with EC can be categorized into prognostic risk groups based on clinicopathologic findings. Other than tumor type and grade, groupings and recommended management algorithms may take into account age, body mass index, stage, and presence of lymphovascular space invasion. The molecular classification of EC that has emerged from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) study provides additional, potentially superior, prognostic information to traditional histologic typing and grading. This classifier does not, however, replace clinicopathologic risk assessment based on parameters other than histotype and grade. It is envisaged that molecular and clinicopathologic prognostic grouping systems will work better together than either alone. Thus, while tumor typing and grading may be superseded by a classification based on underlying genomic abnormalities, accurate assessment of other pathologic parameters will continue to be key to patient management. These include those factors related to staging, such as depth of myometrial invasion, cervical, vaginal, serosal surface, adnexal and parametrial invasion, and those independent of stage such as lymphovascular space invasion. Other prognostic parameters will also be discussed. These recommendations were developed from the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists Endometrial Carcinoma project.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6296841
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62968412018-12-26 Pathologic Prognostic Factors in Endometrial Carcinoma (Other Than Tumor Type and Grade) Singh, Naveena Hirschowitz, Lynn Zaino, Richard Alvarado-Cabrero, Isabel Duggan, Maire A. Ali-Fehmi, Rouba Euscher, Elizabeth Hecht, Jonathan L. Horn, Lars-Christian Ioffe, Olga Matias-Guiu, Xavier McCluggage, W. Glenn Mikami, Yoshiki Ordi, Jaume Parkash, Vinita Quddus, M. Ruhul Quick, Charles M. Staebler, Annette Zaloudek, Charles Nucci, Marisa Malpica, Anais Oliva, Esther Int J Gynecol Pathol Articles Although endometrial carcinoma (EC) is generally considered to have a good prognosis, over 20% of women with EC die of their disease, with a projected increase in both incidence and mortality over the next few decades. The aim of accurate prognostication is to ensure that patients receive optimal treatment and are neither overtreated nor undertreated, thereby improving patient outcomes overall. Patients with EC can be categorized into prognostic risk groups based on clinicopathologic findings. Other than tumor type and grade, groupings and recommended management algorithms may take into account age, body mass index, stage, and presence of lymphovascular space invasion. The molecular classification of EC that has emerged from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) study provides additional, potentially superior, prognostic information to traditional histologic typing and grading. This classifier does not, however, replace clinicopathologic risk assessment based on parameters other than histotype and grade. It is envisaged that molecular and clinicopathologic prognostic grouping systems will work better together than either alone. Thus, while tumor typing and grading may be superseded by a classification based on underlying genomic abnormalities, accurate assessment of other pathologic parameters will continue to be key to patient management. These include those factors related to staging, such as depth of myometrial invasion, cervical, vaginal, serosal surface, adnexal and parametrial invasion, and those independent of stage such as lymphovascular space invasion. Other prognostic parameters will also be discussed. These recommendations were developed from the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists Endometrial Carcinoma project. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2019-01 2018-12-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6296841/ /pubmed/30550486 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PGP.0000000000000524 Text en Copyright © 2018 International Society of Gynecological Pathologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Articles
Singh, Naveena
Hirschowitz, Lynn
Zaino, Richard
Alvarado-Cabrero, Isabel
Duggan, Maire A.
Ali-Fehmi, Rouba
Euscher, Elizabeth
Hecht, Jonathan L.
Horn, Lars-Christian
Ioffe, Olga
Matias-Guiu, Xavier
McCluggage, W. Glenn
Mikami, Yoshiki
Ordi, Jaume
Parkash, Vinita
Quddus, M. Ruhul
Quick, Charles M.
Staebler, Annette
Zaloudek, Charles
Nucci, Marisa
Malpica, Anais
Oliva, Esther
Pathologic Prognostic Factors in Endometrial Carcinoma (Other Than Tumor Type and Grade)
title Pathologic Prognostic Factors in Endometrial Carcinoma (Other Than Tumor Type and Grade)
title_full Pathologic Prognostic Factors in Endometrial Carcinoma (Other Than Tumor Type and Grade)
title_fullStr Pathologic Prognostic Factors in Endometrial Carcinoma (Other Than Tumor Type and Grade)
title_full_unstemmed Pathologic Prognostic Factors in Endometrial Carcinoma (Other Than Tumor Type and Grade)
title_short Pathologic Prognostic Factors in Endometrial Carcinoma (Other Than Tumor Type and Grade)
title_sort pathologic prognostic factors in endometrial carcinoma (other than tumor type and grade)
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6296841/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30550486
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PGP.0000000000000524
work_keys_str_mv AT singhnaveena pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT hirschowitzlynn pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT zainorichard pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT alvaradocabreroisabel pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT dugganmairea pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT alifehmirouba pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT euscherelizabeth pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT hechtjonathanl pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT hornlarschristian pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT ioffeolga pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT matiasguiuxavier pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT mccluggagewglenn pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT mikamiyoshiki pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT ordijaume pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT parkashvinita pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT quddusmruhul pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT quickcharlesm pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT staeblerannette pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT zaloudekcharles pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT nuccimarisa pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT malpicaanais pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade
AT olivaesther pathologicprognosticfactorsinendometrialcarcinomaotherthantumortypeandgrade