L1 Cell Adhesion Molecule (L1CAM) expression in endometrioid endometrial carcinomas: A possible pre-operative surrogate of lymph vascular space invasion

Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Citações na Scopus
14
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2018
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
Citação
PLOS ONE, v.13, n.12, article ID e0209294, 10p, 2018
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Background Risk stratification of endometrial carcinomas is primarily based on surgical staging that requires extensive retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. One of the most powerful predictor of lymph node involvement is the lymph vascular space invasion (LVSI). The objective of this study was to determine the potential of L1 Cell Adhesion Molecule (L1CAM) to predict LVSI and its association with other risk factors in endometrioid endometrial carcinomas. Materials and methods We studied 47 consecutive patients aged 37-88 (61.34 +/- 10.52). Twenty-three patients (48.9%) were submitted to complete surgical staging. Nine patients (19.1%) underwent surgical staging without para-aortic dissection. Seven (14.9%) were submitted to hysterectomy with no lymph node dissection. Eight patients (17.0%) only had the biopsy material for analysis. The 32 patients submitted to lymphadenectomy were staged according to the FIGO system and classified among the risk categories of the ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO guidelines. The following histological characteristics were analyzed: tumor size (mm), depth of myometrial infiltration, presence of microcystic, elongated, and fragmented (MELF) pattern of myoinvasion, and lymph vascular space invasion (LVSI). Immunohistochemical analyses of mismatch repair (MMR) proteins MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2, p53, and L1CAM were performed in formalin-fixed paraffin embedded whole tumor tissue sections. Results LVSI was identified in 26/41 (63,4%) of the cases. L1CAM was positive in 8/47 (17%) cases, all of them positive for LVSI and within the high-risk category of ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO. L1CAM-positive cases were associated with high histological grade and p53 aberrant immunohistochemical profile. Besides, it showed a trend to larger tumors, greater depth of myometrial infiltration, and with a higher frequency of the MELF pattern of myoinvasion. LVSI was also associated with FIGO stage, tumor size, depth of myometrial infiltration, and tumor grade. Conclusions L1CAM is highly associated with LVSI and could be used as a pre-operative predictor of lymph node involvement in endometrioid endometrial carcinomas.
Palavras-chave
Referências
  1. AlHilli MM, 2013, GYNECOL ONCOL, V131, P103, DOI 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.06.037
  2. American Joint Committee on Cancer. AJCC, 2017, CANC STAGING MANUAL
  3. Anton C, 2015, CLINICS, V70, P470, DOI 10.6061/clinics/2015(07)02
  4. Belhadj H, 2014, INT J GYNECOL OBSTET, V125, P97, DOI 10.1016/j.ijgo.2014.02.003
  5. Bosse T, 2014, EUR J CANCER, V50, P2602, DOI 10.1016/j.ejca.2014.07.014
  6. Colombo N, 2016, INT J GYNECOL CANCER, V26, P2, DOI 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000609
  7. Cusano E, 2018, INT J GYNECOL CANCER, V28, P890, DOI 10.1097/IGC.0000000000001229
  8. Dellinger TH, 2016, GYNECOL ONCOL, V141, P336, DOI 10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.02.003
  9. dos Reis R, 2015, INT J GYNECOL CANCER, V25, P1292, DOI 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000490
  10. Getz G, 2013, NATURE, V497, P67, DOI 10.1038/nature12113
  11. Kommoss F, 2017, J CANCER RES CLIN, V143, P255, DOI 10.1007/s00432-016-2276-3
  12. Kurman RJ, 2014, WHO CLASSIFICATION T
  13. Mariani A, 2000, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V182, P1506, DOI 10.1067/mob.2000.107335
  14. Matsuo K, 2015, J SURG ONCOL, V112, P669, DOI 10.1002/jso.24049
  15. Morice P, 2016, LANCET, V387, P1094, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00130-0
  16. Pasanen A, 2016, INT J GYNECOL CANCER, V26, P1465, DOI 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000801
  17. Piulats JM, 2017, GYNECOL ONCOL, V145, P200, DOI 10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.12.015
  18. Roma AA, 2015, HUM PATHOL, V46, P1529, DOI 10.1016/j.humpath.2015.06.015
  19. Salvesen HB, 2012, LANCET ONCOL, V13, pE353, DOI 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70213-9
  20. Sari ME, 2017, INT J CLIN ONCOL, V22, P937, DOI 10.1007/s10147-017-1139-5
  21. Talhouk A, 2016, Gynecol Oncol Res Pract, V3, P14, DOI 10.1186/s40661-016-0035-4
  22. Talhouk A, 2017, CANCER-AM CANCER SOC, V123, P802, DOI 10.1002/cncr.30496
  23. Talhouk A, 2016, GYNECOL ONCOL, V143, P46, DOI 10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.07.090
  24. Tangen IL, 2017, BRIT J CANCER, V117, P840, DOI 10.1038/bjc.2017.235
  25. Taskin S, 2017, ARCH GYNECOL OBSTET, V296, P803, DOI 10.1007/s00404-017-4477-7
  26. van Esterik M, 2017, ONCOTARGET, V8, P25542, DOI 10.18632/oncotarget.16067
  27. Van Gool IC, 2016, MODERN PATHOL, V29, P174, DOI 10.1038/modpathol.2015.147
  28. Wang XY, 2016, INT J GYNECOL CANCER, V26, P918, DOI 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000692
  29. Widschwendter P, 2018, INT J GYNECOL CANCER, V28, P1145, DOI 10.1097/IGC.0000000000001290
  30. Zeimet AG, 2013, JNCI-J NATL CANCER I, V105, P1142, DOI 10.1093/jnci/djt144
  31. Zhu MH, 2017, BMC CANCER, V17, DOI 10.1186/s12885-017-3671-0