Molecular analysis suggests oligoclonality and metastasis of endometriosis lesions across anatomically defined subtypes

Proposal for targeted, neo-evolutionary-oriented secondary prevention of early-onset endometriosis and adenomyosis. Part II: medical interventions

According to consistent epidemiological data, the slope of the incidence curve of endometriosis rises rapidly and sharply around the age of 25 years. The delay in diagnosis is generally reported to be between 5 and 8 years in adult women, but it appears to be over 10 years in adolescents. If this is true, the actual onset of endometriosis in many young women would be chronologically placed in the early postmenarchal years. Ovulation and menstruation are inflammatory events that, when occurring repeatedly for years, may theoretically favour the early development of endometriosis and adenomyosis. Moreover, repeated acute dysmenorrhoea episodes after menarche may not only be an indicator of ensuing endometriosis or adenomyosis, but may also promote the transition from acute to chronic pelvic pain through central sensitization mechanisms, as well as the onset of chronic overlapping pain conditions. Therefore, secondary prevention aimed at reducing suffering, limiting lesion progression, and preserving future reproductive potential should be focused on the age group that could benefit most from the intervention, i.e. severely symptomatic adolescents. Early-onset endometriosis and adenomyosis should be promptly suspected even when physical and ultrasound findings are negative, and long-term ovulatory suppression may be established until conception seeking. As nowadays this could mean using hormonal therapies for several years, drug safety evaluation is crucial. In adolescents without recognized major contraindications to oestrogens, the use of very low-dose combined oral contraceptives is associated with a marginal increase in the individual absolute risk of thromboembolic events. Oral contraceptives containing oestradiol instead of ethinyl oestradiol may further limit such risk. Oral, subcutaneous, and intramuscular progestogens do not increase the thromboembolic risk, but may interfere with attainment of peak bone mass in young women. Levonorgestrel-releasing intra-uterine devices may be a safe alternative for adolescents, as amenorrhoea is frequently induced without suppression of the ovarian activity. With regard to oncological risk, the net effect of long-term oestrogen-progestogen combinations use is a small reduction in overall cancer risk. Whether surgery should be considered the first-line approach in young women with chronic pelvic pain symptoms seems questionable. Especially when large endometriomas or infiltrating lesions are not detected at pelvic imaging, laparoscopy should be reserved to adolescents who refuse hormonal treatments or in whom first-line medications are not effective, not tolerated, or contraindicated. Diagnostic and therapeutic algorithms, including self-reported outcome measures, for young individuals with a clinical suspicion of early-onset endometriosis or adenomyosis are proposed.

Proposal for targeted, neo-evolutionary-oriented, secondary prevention of early-onset endometriosis and adenomyosis. Part I: pathogenic aspects

The potential for repeated ovulation and menstruation is thought to have provided a Darwinian advantage during the Palaeolithic. Reproductive conditions remained relatively stable until the pre-industrial era, characterized by late menarche, very young age at first birth, multiple pregnancies, and prolonged periods of lactational amenorrhoea. For hundreds of thousands of years, menstruators experienced few ovulatory cycles, even though they were genetically adapted to ovulate and menstruate every month. In the post-industrial era, the age at menarche gradually declined, the age at first birth progressively increased, and breastfeeding became optional and often of short duration. This created a mismatch between genetic adaptation and socio-environmental evolution, so that what was initially a probable reproductive advantage subsequently contributed to increased susceptibility to diseases associated with lifetime oestrogen exposure, such as ovarian, endometrial and breast cancer and, hypothetically, also those associated with the number of ovulatory menstruations, such as endometriosis and adenomyosis. The incidence of endometriosis shows a steep and progressive increase around the age of 25 years, but given the consistently reported delay in diagnosis, the actual incidence curve should be shifted to the left, supporting the possibility that the disease has its roots in adolescence. This raises the question of whether, from an evolutionary point of view, anovulation and amenorrhoea should not still be considered the physiological state, especially in the postmenarchal period. However, an increase in the frequency of endometriosis in recent decades has not been demonstrated, although this deserves further epidemiological investigation. In addition, as endometriosis occurs in a minority of individuals exposed to retrograde menstruation, other important pathogenic factors should be scrutinised. Research should be resumed to explore in more detail the transtubal reflux of not only blood, but also endometrial cells, and whether they are systematically present in the peritoneal fluid after menstruation. If repetitive ovulatory menstruation during the early reproductive years is shown to increase the risk of endometriosis and adenomyosis development and progression in susceptible individuals, hormonal interventions could be used as secondary prevention in symptomatic adolescents.

Cell State of Origin Impacts Development of Distinct Endometriosis-Related Ovarian Carcinoma Histotypes

Clear cell ovarian carcinoma (CCOC) and endometrioid ovarian carcinoma (ENOC) are ovarian carcinoma histotypes, which are both thought to arise from ectopic endometrial (or endometrial-like) cells through an endometriosis intermediate. How the same cell type of origin gives rise to two morphologically and biologically different histotypes has been perplexing, particularly given that recurrent genetic mutations are common to both and present in nonmalignant precursors. We used RNA transcription analysis to show that the expression profiles of CCOC and ENOC resemble those of normal endometrium at secretory and proliferative phases of the menstrual cycle, respectively. DNA methylation at the promoter of the estrogen receptor (ER) gene (ESR1) was enriched in CCOC, which could potentially lock the cells in the secretory state. Compared with normal secretory-type endometrium, CCOC was further defined by increased expression of cysteine and glutathione synthesis pathway genes and downregulation of the iron antiporter, suggesting iron addiction and highlighting ferroptosis as a potential therapeutic target. Overall, these findings suggest that while CCOC and ENOC arise from the same cell type, these histotypes likely originate from different cell states. This "cell state of origin" model may help to explain the presence of histologic and molecular cancer subtypes arising in other organs.

SIGNIFICANCE

Two cancer histotypes diverge from a common cell of origin epigenetically locked in different cell states, highlighting the importance of considering cell state to better understand the cell of origin of cancer.

Are Adenomyosis and Endometriosis Phenotypes of the Same Disease Process?

In recent literature reviews, we concluded that the possibility that endometrial molecular aberrations are the sole or a necessary determinant of endometriosis and the Tissue Injury and Repair (TIAR) theory are yet to be convincingly proven. Here, we critically examine the theory that adenomyosis and endometriosis represent different phenotypes of a single disease. A common etiopathology for adenomyosis and endometriosis has been suggested because both conditions entail the presence of endometrial tissue at locations other than the lining of the uterus. There are wide differences in reported disease incidence and prevalence and, consequently, in estimates of the coexistence of both conditions. There are some similarities but also differences in their clinical features and predisposing factors. Each condition has a range of subtypes. These differences alone pose the question of whether subtypes of endometriosis and adenomyosis have different etiopathologies, and, in turn, this raises the question of whether they all share a common etiology. It is debatable whether the recognized differences between the eutopic endometrium in adenomyosis and endometriosis compared to those in unaffected women are the cause or the effect of the disease. The finding of common mutations, particularly of KRAS, lend support to the notion of shared predisposing factors, but this alone is insufficient evidence of causation.

In the thicket of fears, doubts, and murky facts: some reflections on treatment modalities for endometriosis-associated pain

Endometriosis-associated pain can be managed by either surgery or hormonal therapy. The final decision as to which treatment modality to take is based on efficacy and possible complications of different treatment modalities, risk of recurrence, and the patient's wishes and preferences. But in the thicket of fears, doubts, and murky facts, the choice may ultimately be the trade-off between irrational fears and ignorance versus scientific evidence. We elaborate some pros and cons of the two treatment modalities and highlight some notable downsides of hormonal therapy, in particular the possible yet unquantified risk of long-term hormonal therapy for malignant transformation, perhaps with the only exception of combined oral contraceptives. Thus, when discussing with patients, we advocate the approach of discussing the advantages and disadvantages of all treatment options in detail, accounting for the known pros and cons with a full understanding of the predictive irrationality of human beings. For endometriosis-associated pain, surgery is definitely not a failure of medicine but, rather, a viable option, especially given the recently surfaced undercurrent of wariness and dissatisfaction with the current hormonal drugs among patients with endometriosis. Above all, there is a pressing need to fill the knowledge gap of perioperative interventions intended to reduce the risk of recurrence and to fulfill the demand for the development of safe and efficacious non-hormonal therapeutics.

New concepts on the etiology of endometriosis

Endometriosis is a serious, chronic disorder where endometrial tissue grows outside the uterus, causing severe pelvic pain and infertility. It affects 11% of women. Endometriosis is a multifactorial disorder of unclear etiology, although retrograde menstruation plays a major role. It has a genetic component with over 40 genetic risk factors mapped, although their mechanism of action is still emerging. New evidence suggests a role for retrograde menstruation of endometrial stem/progenitor cells, now that identifying markers of these cells are available. Recent lineage tracing and tissue clearing microscopy and 3D reconstruction has provided new understanding of endometrial glandular structure, particularly the horizontal orientation and interconnection of basalis glands. New sequencing technologies, particularly whole genome DNA sequencing are revealing somatic mutations, including in cancer driver genes, in normal and eutopic endometrium of patients with endometriosis, as well as ectopic endometriotic lesions. Methylome sequencing is offering insight into the regulation of genes and the role of the environmental factors. Single cell RNA sequencing reveals the transcriptome of individual endometrial cells, shedding new light on the diversity and range of cellular subpopulations of the major cell types present in the endometrium and in endometriotic lesions. New endometrial epithelial organoid cultures replicating glandular epithelium are providing tractable models for studying endometriosis. Organoids derived from menstrual fluid offer a non-invasive source of endometrial tissue and a new avenue for testing drugs and developing personalized medicine for treating endometriosis. These new approaches are rapidly advancing our understanding of endometriosis etiology.

KRAS mutations and endometriosis burden of disease

The clinical phenotype of somatic mutations in endometriosis is unknown. The objective was to determine whether somatic KRAS mutations were associated with greater disease burden in endometriosis (i.e. more severe subtypes and higher stage). This prospective longitudinal cohort study included 122 subjects undergoing endometriosis surgery at a tertiary referral center between 2013 and 2017, with 5-9 years of follow-up. Somatic activating KRAS codon 12 mutations were detected in endometriosis lesions using droplet digital PCR. KRAS mutation status for each subject was coded as present (KRAS mutation in at least one endometriosis sample in a subject) or absent. Standardized clinical phenotyping for each subject was carried out via linkage to a prospective registry. Primary outcome was anatomic disease burden, based on distribution of subtypes (deep infiltrating endometriosis, ovarian endometrioma, and superficial peritoneal endometriosis) and surgical staging (Stages I-IV). Secondary outcomes were markers of surgical difficulty, demographics, pain scores, and risk of re-operation. KRAS mutation presence was higher in subjects with deep infiltrating endometriosis or endometrioma lesions only (57.9%; 11/19) and subjects with mixed subtypes (60.6%; 40/66), compared with those with superficial endometriosis only (35.1%; 13/37) (p = 0.04). KRAS mutation was present in 27.6% (8/29) of Stage I cases, in comparison to 65.0% (13/20) of Stage II, 63.0% (17/27) of Stage III, and 58.1% (25/43) of Stage IV cases (p = 0.02). KRAS mutation was also associated with greater surgical difficulty (ureterolysis) (relative risk [RR] = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.02-2.11) and non-Caucasian ethnicity (RR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.47-0.89). Pain severities did not differ based on KRAS mutation status, at either baseline or follow-up. Re-operation rates were low overall, occurring in 17.2% with KRAS mutation compared with 10.3% without (RR = 1.66, 95% CI: 0.66-4.21). In conclusion, KRAS mutations were associated with greater anatomic severity of endometriosis, resulting in increased surgical difficulty. Somatic cancer-driver mutations may inform a future molecular classification of endometriosis.

Endometriosis: Update of Pathophysiology, (Epi) Genetic and Environmental Involvement

Endometriosis is a chronic disease caused by ectopic endometrial tissue. Endometriotic implants induce inflammation, leading to chronic pain and impaired fertility. Characterized by their dependence on estradiol (via estrogen receptor β (ESRβ)) and their resistance to progesterone, endometriotic implants produce their own source of estradiol through active aromatase. Steroidogenic factor-1 (SF1) is a key transcription factor that promotes aromatase synthesis. The expression of SF1 and ESRβ is enhanced by the demethylation of their promoter in progenitor cells of the female reproductive system. High local concentrations of estrogen are involved in the chronic inflammatory environment favoring the implantation and development of endometriotic implants. Similar local conditions can promote, directly and indirectly, the appearance and development of genital cancer. Recently, certain components of the microbiota have been identified as potentially promoting a high level of estrogen in the blood. Many environmental factors are also suspected of increasing the estrogen concentration, especially prenatal exposure to estrogen-like endocrine disruptors such as DES and bisphenol A. Phthalates are also suspected of promoting endometriosis but throughmeans other than binding to estradiol receptors. The impact of dioxin or tobacco seems to be more controversial.

From Retrograde Menstruation to Endometrial Determinism and a Brave New World of "Root Treatment" of Endometriosis: Destiny or a Fanciful Utopia?

Practically unknown outside of China, the "endometrial determinism" theory was proposed to account for the apparent gap between the relatively low prevalence of endometriosis and nearly universal retrograde menstruation. Attracting uncritical advocacy, the theory culminates in a recent consensus by elite Chinese gynecologists in favor of "root treatment", intended to nip endometriosis in the bud. Correcting endometrial "defects" can gain further momentum by the presence of cancer-driver mutations such as KRAS mutations in the endometrium of women with endometriosis and the recent introduction of therapeutics aiming to rectify the effect of these mutations for cancer treatment. We provide a critical appraisal of evidence for endometrial aberrations in endometriosis and relevant experimental evidence. All available evidence of endometrial "defect" is invariably post hoc and may well be secondary to induced endometriosis. We propose that the theory of "endometrial determinism" needs to demonstrate a clear causal and a phylogenetic relationship between endometrial aberrations and endometriosis. We argue that while it is highly likely that endometriosis is a consequence of retrograde menstruation, the case that molecular aberrations as a sole or a necessary determinant remains to be proven. "Root treatment" is a worthy ambition but as of now it is close to a fanciful Utopia.