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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |
_version_ | 1784636431192293376 |
---|---|
author | 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 |
author_facet | 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 |
author_sort | Coada, Camelia Alexandra |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8774791 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87747912022-01-21 Classification Systems of Endometrial Cancer: A Comparative Study about Old and New 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 Diagnostics (Basel) Article 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. MDPI 2021-12-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8774791/ /pubmed/35054199 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12010033 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article 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 Classification Systems of Endometrial Cancer: A Comparative Study about Old and New |
title | Classification Systems of Endometrial Cancer: A Comparative Study about Old and New |
title_full | Classification Systems of Endometrial Cancer: A Comparative Study about Old and New |
title_fullStr | Classification Systems of Endometrial Cancer: A Comparative Study about Old and New |
title_full_unstemmed | Classification Systems of Endometrial Cancer: A Comparative Study about Old and New |
title_short | Classification Systems of Endometrial Cancer: A Comparative Study about Old and New |
title_sort | classification systems of endometrial cancer: a comparative study about old and new |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8774791/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35054199 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12010033 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT coadacameliaalexandra classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew AT dondigiulia classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew AT ravegninigloria classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew AT deleoantonio classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew AT santinidonatella classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew AT decrescenzoeugenia classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew AT teseimarco classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew AT bovicellialessandro classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew AT giunchisusanna classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew AT dormiada classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew AT distanislaomarco classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew AT morgantialessiog classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew AT debiasedario classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew AT deiacopierandrea classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew AT perroneannamyriam classificationsystemsofendometrialcanceracomparativestudyaboutoldandnew |