Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Combined ASRGL1 and p53 immunohistochemistry as an independent predictor of survival in endometrioid endometrial carcinoma
KTH, Centres, Science for Life Laboratory, SciLifeLab. Department of Biology and Biological Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, 41296 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Show others and affiliations
2018 (English)In: Gynecologic Oncology, ISSN 0090-8258, E-ISSN 1095-6859, Vol. 149, no 1, p. 173-180Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective: In clinical practise, prognostication of endometrial cancer is based on clinicopathological risk factors. The use of immunohistochemistry-based markers as prognostic tools is generally not recommended and a systematic analysis of their utility as a panel is lacking. We evaluated whether an immunohistochemical marker panel could reliably assess endometrioid endometrial cancer (EEC) outcome independent of clinicopathological information. Methods: A cohort of 306 EEC specimens was profiled using tissue microarray (TMA). Cost- and time-efficient immunohistochemical analysis of well-established tissue biomarkers (ER, PR, HER2, Ki-67, MLH1 and p53) and two new biomarkers (L1CAM and ASRGL1) was carried out. Statistical modelling with embedded variable selection was applied on the staining results to identify minimal prognostic panels with maximal prognostic accuracy without compromising generalizability. Results: A panel including p53 and ASRGL1 immunohistochemistry was identified as the most accurate predictor of relapse-free and disease-specific survival. Within this panel, patients were allocated into high- (5.9%), intermediate- (29.5%) and low- (64.6%) risk groups where high-risk patients had a 30-fold risk (P < 0.001) of dying of EEC compared to the low-risk group. Conclusions: P53 and ASRGL1 immunoprofiling stratifies EEC patients into three risk groups with significantly different outcomes. This simple and easily applicable panel could provide a useful tool in EEC risk stratification and guiding the allocation of treatment modalities. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Academic Press Inc. , 2018. Vol. 149, no 1, p. 173-180
Keywords [en]
ASRGL1, Endometrial cancer, Modelling, p53, Prognostic, Risk stratification, antineoplastic agent, asrg1 protein, epidermal growth factor receptor 2, estrogen receptor, Ki 67 antigen, l1cam protein, MutL protein homolog 1, progesterone receptor, protein p53, tumor marker, unclassified drug, adult, aged, Article, brachytherapy, cancer chemotherapy, cancer grading, cancer recurrence, cancer surgery, cancer survival, disease specific survival, endometrium carcinoma, female, follow up, high risk patient, histopathology, human, human tissue, immunohistochemistry, immunoreactivity, low risk patient, major clinical study, middle aged, overall survival, priority journal, recurrence free survival, recurrent disease, tissue microarray
National Category
Clinical Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-227355DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.02.016ISI: 000430152400026Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85042406129OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-227355DiVA, id: diva2:1212902
Note

Export Date: 9 May 2018; Article; CODEN: GYNOA; Correspondence Address: Huvila, J.; Department of Pathology, University of Turku, Kiinamyllynkatu 8-10, Finland; email: jutta.huvila@utu.fi; Funding details: 16X064, NCI, National Cancer Institute; Funding details: UH, University Hospitals; Funding details: Swedish Cancer Foundation; Funding details: HMRF, Health and Medical Research Fund; Funding details: Knut och Alice Wallenbergs Stiftelse; Funding details: 272437, Academy of Finland; Funding details: 295504, Academy of Finland; Funding details: 269862, Academy of Finland; Funding details: 292611, Academy of Finland; Funding details: 279163, Academy of Finland; Funding details: 85121904; Funding details: Syöpäjärjestöt; Funding details: TA, Tennis Australia; Funding details: Evonik Stiftung; Funding details: PHE, Public Health England; Funding details: FPInnovations; Funding text: This work was supported by University of Turku Doctoral Program of Clinical Investigations, Regional Fund of Finland Proper of the Finnish Cultural Foundation (grant 85121904 ), Medical Research Fund (EVO) of Turku University Hospital [JH]; Academy of Finland (grants 292611 , 269862 , 272437 , 279163 , 295504 ), National Cancer Institute ( 16X064 ), Cancer Society of Finland [TA] and by grants from the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation (FP, AM, PHE) and the Swedish Cancer foundation (FP). QC 20180604

Available from: 2018-06-04 Created: 2018-06-04 Last updated: 2018-06-04Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Mardinoglu, Adil

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Mardinoglu, Adil
By organisation
Science for Life Laboratory, SciLifeLab
In the same journal
Gynecologic Oncology
Clinical Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 13 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf