Conservative management of endometrial hyperplasia or carcinoma with the levonorgestrel intrauterine system may be less effective in morbidly obese patients

Analysis of CDO1, PITX2, and CDH13 Gene Methylation in Early Endometrial Cancer for Prediction of Medical Treatment Outcomes

An observational cohort study of patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer (EC) stage IA G1, or atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH), undergoing organ-preserving treatment, was conducted.

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

To determine CDO1, PITX2, and CDH13 gene methylation levels in early endometrial cancer and atypical hyperplasia specimens obtained before organ-preserving treatment in the patients with adequate response and with insufficient response to hormonal treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 41 endometrial specimens obtained during diagnostic uterine curettage in women with EC (n = 28) and AEH (n = 13), willing to preserve reproductive function, were studied; 18 specimens of uterine cancer IA stage G1 from peri- and early postmenopausal women (comparison group) were included in the study. The control group included 18 endometrial specimens from healthy women obtained by diagnostic curettage for missed abortion and/or intrauterine adhesions. Methylation levels were analyzed using the modified MS-HRM method.

RESULTS

All 13 women with AEH had a complete response (CR) to medical treatment. In the group undergoing organ-preserving treatment for uterine cancer IA stage G1 (n = 28), 14 patients had a complete response (EC CR group) and 14 did not (EC non-CR group). It was found that all groups had statistically significant differences in CDO1 gene methylation levels compared to the control group (p < 0.001) except for the EC CR group (p = 0.21). The p-value for the difference between EC CR and EC non-CR groups was <0.001. The differences in PITX2 gene methylation levels between the control and study groups were also significantly different (p < 0.001), except for the AEH group (p = 0.21). For the difference between EC CR and EC non-CR groups, the p-value was 0.43. For CDH13 gene methylation levels, statistically significant differences were found between the control and EC non-CR groups (p < 0.001), and the control and EC comparison groups (p = 0.005). When comparing the EC CR group with EC non-CR group, the p-value for this gene was <0.001. The simultaneous assessment of CDO1 and CDH13 genes methylation allowed for an accurate distinction between EC CR and EC non-CR groups (AUC = 0.96).

CONCLUSION

The assessment of CDO1 and CDH13 gene methylation in endometrial specimens from patients with endometrial cancer (IA stage G1), scheduled for medical treatment, can predict the treatment outcome.

HE4 as a Biomarker for Endometrial Cancer

Simple Summary

There are currently no blood biomarkers approved for routine clinical use in endometrial cancer. Serum human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) is significantly higher in patients with endometrial cancer compared to patients without endometrial cancer and is associated with a poorer prognosis. This makes HE4 an attractive candidate for clinical use in endometrial cancer. The aim of this review is to summarise the evidence for the use of serum HE4 in the detection, prognosis, prediction of therapy response and recurrence monitoring in endometrial cancer. The utility of combining HE4 with other biomarkers or imaging and clinical variables, and its detection in other biofluids is also discussed, as well as potential challenges for clinical use and recommended areas for future research.

Abstract

There are currently no blood biomarkers in routine clinical use in endometrial carcinoma (EC). Human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) is a glycoprotein that is overexpressed in the serum of patients with EC, making it a good candidate for use as a diagnostic and/or prognostic biomarker. HE4 is correlated with poor prognostic factors, including stage, myometrial invasion and lymph node metastases, which means it could be used to guide decisions regarding the extent of surgery and need for adjuvant therapy. Serum HE4 has also shown promise for predicting responses to progestin therapy in early-stage EC. The use of algorithms and indices incorporating serum HE4 and other biomarkers, including clinical and imaging variables, is an area of increasing interest. Serum HE4 levels rise with age and renal dysfunction, which may affect the interpretation of results. This review covers the evidence supporting the use of HE4 as an EC biomarker for diagnosis, prognosis, recurrence monitoring, and prediction of therapy response. The evidence for combining serum HE4 with other biomarkers, including clinical and imaging variables, its value as a biomarker in other biofluids and potential challenges of its clinical use are also discussed.

Efficacy of the LNG-IUS for treatment of endometrial hyperplasia and early stage endometrial cancer: Can biomarkers predict response?

Endometrial Cancer (EC) is the most common gynaecologic malignancy in the developed world, and is increasing in premenopausal women. The surgical standard of care for early-stage EC is not possible in women with concurrent comorbidities or women who desire a fertility sparing approach. The Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System (LNG-IUS) is gaining traction as an alternative treatment for endometrial hyperplasia and early stage EC in inoperable women. Whilst early evidence appears promising, predictive biomarkers need to be established to determine non-responders, which make up one in three women. This timely review discusses the current literature around the identification of clinical, molecular and novel biomarkers that show potential to predict response to progesterone treatment, including the LNG-IUS.

Prospective phase II trial of levonorgestrel intrauterine device: nonsurgical approach for complex atypical hyperplasia and early-stage endometrial cancer

BACKGROUND

The incidence of complex atypical hyperplasia and early-stage endometrioid endometrial cancer is increasing, in part owing to the epidemic of obesity, which is a risk factor tightly linked to the development of endometrial hyperplasia and cancer. The standard upfront treatment for complex atypical hyperplasia and early-stage endometrial cancer is hysterectomy. However, nonsurgical treatment of early-stage endometrial neoplasia may be necessary owing to medical comorbidities precluding surgery or desired future fertility.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the levonorgestrel intrauterine device to treat complex atypical hyperplasia and grade 1 endometrioid endometrial carcinoma.

STUDY DESIGN

A single-institution, single-arm, phase II study of the levonorgestrel intrauterine device (52 mg levonorgestrel, Mirena) was conducted in patients with complex atypical hyperplasia or grade 1 endometrioid endometrial cancer. The primary endpoint was pathologic response rate at 12 months, including complete or partial response. Quality of life and toxicity were assessed. Molecular analyses for proliferation markers, hormone-regulated genes, and wingless-related integration site pathway activation were performed at baseline and 3 months.

RESULTS

A total of 57 patients were treated (21 endometrial cancer, 36 complex atypical hyperplasia). The median age was 48.0 years, and the median body mass index was 45.5 kg/m². Of the 47 evaluable patients, 12-month response rate was 83% (90% credible interval, 72.7-90.3)-37 were complete responders (8 endometrial cancer; 29 complex atypical hyperplasia), 2 were partial responders (2 endometrial cancer), 3 had stable disease (2 endometrial cancer; 1 complex atypical hyperplasia), and 5 had progressive disease (3 endometrial cancer; 2 complex atypical hyperplasia). After stratification for histology, the response rate was 90.6% for complex atypical hyperplasia and 66.7% for grade 1 endometrioid endometrial cancer. Notably, 4 patients (9.5%) experienced relapse after the initial response. Adverse events were mild, primarily irregular bleeding and cramping. Quality of life was not negatively affected. At 3 months, exogenous progesterone effect was present in 96.9% of responders (31 of 32) vs 25% of nonresponders (2 of 8) (P=.001). Nonresponders had higher baseline proliferation (Ki67) and lower dickkopf homolog 3 gene expression than responders (P=.023 and P=.030). Nonresponders had significantly different changes in secreted frizzled-related protein 1, frizzled class receptor 8, and retinaldehyde dehydrogenase 2 compared with responders.

CONCLUSION

The levonorgestrel intrauterine device has a substantial activity in complex atypical hyperplasia and grade 1 endometrioid endometrial cancer, with a modest proportion demonstrating upfront progesterone resistance. Potential biomarkers were identified that may correlate with resistance to therapy; further exploration is warranted.

Progestin therapy for obese women with complex atypical hyperplasia: levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device vs systemic therapy

BACKGROUND

Though hysterectomy remains the standard treatment for complex atypical hyperplasia, patients who desire fertility or who are poor surgical candidates may opt for progestin therapy. However, the effectiveness of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device compared to systemic therapy in the treatment of complex atypical hyperplasia has not been well studied.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to examine differences in treatment response between local progestin therapy with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device and systemic progestin therapy in women with complex atypical hyperplasia.

METHODS

This single-institution retrospective study examined women with complex atypical hyperplasia who received progestin therapy between 2003 and 2018. Treatment response was assessed by histopathology on subsequent biopsies. Time-dependent analyses of complete response and progression to cancer were performed comparing the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device and systemic therapy. A propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighting model was used to create a weighted cohort that differed based on treatment type but was similar with respect to other characteristics. An interaction-term analysis was performed to examine the impact of body habitus on treatment response, and an interrupted time-series analysis was employed to assess if changes in treatment patterns correlated with outcomes over time.

RESULTS

A total of 245 women with complex atypical hyperplasia received progestin therapy (levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device n = 69 and systemic therapy n = 176). The mean age and body mass index were 36.9 years and 40.0 kg/m², respectively. In the patient-level analysis, women who received the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device had higher rates of complete response (78.7% vs 46.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 3.32; 95% confidence interval, 2.39-4.62) and a lower likelihood of progression to cancer (4.5% vs 15.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.73) compared to those who received systemic therapy. In particular, women with class III obesity derived a higher relative benefit from levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device therapy in achieving complete response compared to systemic therapy: class III obesity, adjusted hazard ratio 4.72, 95% confidence interval 2.83-7.89; class I-II obesity, adjusted hazard ratio 1.83, 95% confidence interval 1.09-3.09; and nonobese, adjusted hazard ratio 1.26, 95% confidence interval 0.40-3.95. In the cohort-level analysis, the obesity rate increased during the study period (77.8% to 88.2%, 13.4% relative increase, P = .033) and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device use significantly increased after 2007 (6.3% to 82.7%, 13.2-fold increase, P < .001), both concomitant with a higher proportion of women achieving complete response (32.9% to 81.4%, 2.5-fold increase, P = .005).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that local therapy with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device may be more effective than systemic therapy for women with complex atypical hyperplasia who opt for nonsurgical treatment, particularly in morbidly obese women. Shifts in treatment paradigm during the study period toward increased levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device use also led to improved complete response rates despite increasing rates of obesity.