Cargando…

Classification Systems of Endometrial Cancer: A Comparative Study about Old and New

Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecological malignancy of the female reproductive organs. Historically it was divided into type I and type II, until 2013 when the Cancer Genome Atlas molecular classification was proposed. Here, we applied the different classification types on our endometrial...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Coada, Camelia Alexandra, Dondi, Giulia, Ravegnini, Gloria, De Leo, Antonio, Santini, Donatella, De Crescenzo, Eugenia, Tesei, Marco, Bovicelli, Alessandro, Giunchi, Susanna, Dormi, Ada, Di Stanislao, Marco, Morganti, Alessio G., De Biase, Dario, De Iaco, Pierandrea, Perrone, Anna Myriam
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8774791/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35054199
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12010033
Descripción
Sumario:Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecological malignancy of the female reproductive organs. Historically it was divided into type I and type II, until 2013 when the Cancer Genome Atlas molecular classification was proposed. Here, we applied the different classification types on our endometrial cancer patient cohort in order to identify the most predictive one. We enrolled 117 endometrial cancer patients available for the study and collected the following parameters: age, body mass index, stage, menopause, Lynch syndrome status, parity, hypertension, type of localization of the lesion at hysteroscopy, type of surgery and complications, and presence of metachronous or synchronous tumors. The tumors were classified according to the European Society for Medical Oncology, Proactive Molecular Risk Classifier for Endometrial Cancer, Post-Operative Radiation Therapy in Endometrial Carcinoma, and Cancer Genome Atlas classification schemes. Our data confirmed that European Society for Medical Oncology risk was the strongest predictor of prognosis in our cohort. The parameters correlated with poor prognosis were the histotype, FIGO stage, and grade. Our study cohort shows that risk stratification should be based on the integration of histologic, clinical, and molecular parameters.