Mismatch Repair Proteins (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2) Immunohistochemical Expression and Microsatellite Instability in Endometrial Carcinoma
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2020.4300Keywords:
Endometrial carcinoma, Mismatch repair proteins, Microsatellite instabilityAbstract
BACKGROUND: Endometrial cancer (EC) is the fourth most common female cancer worldwide constituting 7% of cancer in women. It is a disease of older, postmenopausal women. The most of these patients have an identifiable source of excess estrogen, while in a small subset the pathogenesis is related to mismatch repair abnormality and lynch syndrome (LC). Mismatch repair behave as tumor suppressors and the most clinically relevant include MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2. mutations in mismatch repair (MMR) results in a strong mutator phenotype known as microsatellite instability, which is a hallmark of LC-associated cancers.
AIM: The aim of the study was to study microsatellite instability in endometrial cancer using the immunohistochemical expression of mismatch repair proteins (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty EC cases were studied using MLH-1, MSH-2, MSH-6, and PMS-2 immunohistochemistry and their expression was correlated with different clinicopathologic parameters.
RESULTS: A statistically significant relationship exists between MMR immunohistochemistry (IHC) proteins and tumor grade. Intact MMR proteins profile was associated with the lower tumor grade (31.3% were Grade 1 and 46.9% were Grade 2). Combined loss of MLH1/PMS2, combined loss of MSH2/MSH6, and isolated loss of PMS2 were also associated with the lower tumor grade while isolated loss of MSH6 was associated with the high tumor grade. However, no statistically significant correlation was found between MMR IHC proteins expression and the age of patients; tumor histopathological types, or FIGO stage.
CONCLUSION: A statistically significant correlation between the tumor grade of EC cases and the MMR IHC proteins was found. Further studies are recommended to assess correlation between MMR proteins defect and different clinicopathological parameters of endometrial carcinoma.
Downloads
Metrics
Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block
References
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(1):7-34. PMid:30620402
Garg K, Soslow R. Endometrial carcinoma in women aged 40 years and younger. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2014;138(3):335-42. PMid:24576029
Mokhtar N, Salama A, Badawy O, Khorshed E, Mohamed G, Ibrahim M, et al. Cancer pathology registry a 12-year registry 2000-2011. Natl Cancer Inst. 2016;13:192-208.
Kurman RJ, Carcangiu ML, Herrington CS, Young RH, editors. WHO Classification of Tumours of Female Reproductive Organs. Lyon: IARC; 2014.
Amant F, Mirza MR, Koskas M, Creutzberg CL. Cancer of the corpus uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;143(2):37-50. https:// doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12612 PMid:30306580
Yokoyama T, Takehara K, Sugimoto N, Kaneko K, Fujimoto E, Okazawa-Sakai M, et al. Lynch syndrome associated endometrial carcinoma with MLH1 germline mutation and MLH1 promoter hypermethylation: A case report and literature review. BMC Cancer. 2018;18(1):576. https://doi.org/10.1186/ s12885-018-4489-0 PMid:29783979
Patil PA. Microsatellite instability testing in endometrial cancer-a short review. J Oncol Res Treat. 2018;3:2.
Cohen SA, Leininger A. The genetic basis of Lynch syndrome and its implications for clinical practice and risk management. Appl Clin Genet. 2014;7:147-58. PMid:25161364
Kato A, Sato N, Sugawara T, Takahashi K, Kito M, Makino K, et al. Isolated loss of PMS2 immunohistochemical expression is frequently caused by heterogenous MLH1 promoter hypermethylation in Lynch syndrome screening for endometrial cancer patients. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016;40(6):770-6. https:// doi.org/10.1097/pas.0000000000000606 PMid:26848797
Stewart AP. Genetic testing strategies in newly diagnosed endometrial cancer patients aimed at reducing morbidity or mortality from Lynch syndrome in the index case or her relatives. PLoS Curr. 2013;5. https://doi.org/10.1371/currents. eogt.b59a6e84f27c536e50db4e46aa26309c PMid:24056992
Vasen HF, Blanco I, Aktan-Collan K, Gopie JP, Alonso A, Aretz S, et al. Revised guidelines for the clinical management of Lynch syndrome (HNPCC): Recommendations by a group of European experts. Gut. 2013;62(6):812-23. PMid:23408351
Provenzale D, Gupta S, Ahnen DJ, Bray T, Cannon JA, Cooper G, et al. Genetic/familial high-risk assessment: Colorectal version 1.2016, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2016;14(8):1010-30. https:// doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2016.0108 PMid:27496117
Rubenstein JH, Enns R, Heidelbaugh J, Barkun A, Clinical Guidelines Committee. American gastroenterological association institute guideline on the diagnosis and management of Lynch syndrome. Gastroenterology. 2015;149(3):777-82. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2015.07.036 PMid:26226577
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Molecular testing strategies for Lynch syndrome in people with colorectal cancer. Diagn Guidel. 2017;27:1-37. Available from: https://www. nice.org.uk/guidance/dg27. [Last accessed on 2019 May 10].
Crosbie EJ, Ryan NA, Arends M, Bosse T, Burn J, Cornes JM, et al. The Manchester international consensus group recommendations for the management of gynecological cancers in Lynch syndrome. Genet Med. 2019;21(10):2390-400. https:// doi.org/10.1038/s41436-019-0489-y PMid:30918358
Batte BA, Bruegl AS, Daniels MS, Ring KL, Dempsey KM, Djordjevic B, et al. Consequences of universal MSI/IHC in screening endometrial cancer patients for Lynch syndrome. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;134(2):319-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ygyno.2014.06.009 PMid:24933100
Frolova AI, Babb SA, Zantow E, Hagemann AR, Powell MA, Thaker PH, et al. Impact of an immunohistochemistry-based universal screening protocol for Lynch syndrome in endometrial cancer on genetic counseling and testing. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;137(1):7-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.01.535 PMid:25617771
Dillon JL, Gonzalez JL, DeMars L, Bloch KJ, Tafe LJ. Universal screening for Lynch syndrome in endometrial cancers: Frequency of germline mutations and identification of patients with Lynch-like syndrome. Hum Pathol. 2017;70:121-8. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2017.10.022 PMid:29107668
Mills AM, Sloan EA, Thomas M, Modesitt SC, Stoler MH, Kristen A. Clinicopathologic comparison of Lynch syndrome-associated and “lynch-like” endometrial carcinomas identified on universal screening using mismatch repair protein immunohistochemistry. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016;40(2):155-65. https://doi.org/10.1097/pas.0000000000000544 PMid:26523542
Dudley B, Brand RE, Thull D, Bahary N, Nikiforova MN, Pai RK. Germline MLH1 mutations are frequently identified in Lynch syndrome patients with colorectal and endometrial carcinoma demonstrating isolated loss of PMS2 immunohistochemical expression. Am J Surg Pathol. 2015;39(8):1114-20. https://doi. org/10.1097/pas.0000000000000425 PMid:25871621
Yamamoto H, Imai K. Microsatellite instability: An update. Arch Toxicol. 2015;89(6):899-921. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00204-015-1474-0 PMid:25701956
Egoavil C, Alenda C, Castillejo A, Paya A, Peiro G, Sánchez- Heras A, et al. Prevalence of Lynch syndrome among patients with newly diagnosed endometrial cancers. PLoS One. 2013;8(11):e79737. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0079737 PMid:24244552
Buchanan DD, Rosty C, Clendenning M, Spurdle AB, Win AK. Clinical problems of colorectal cancer and endometrial cancer cases with unknown cause of tumor mismatch repair deficiency (suspected Lynch syndrome). Appl Clin Genet. 2014;7:183-93. https://doi.org/10.2147/tacg.s48625 PMid:25328415
Ferguson SE, Aronson M, Pollett A, Eiriksson LR, Oza AM, Gallinger S, et al. Performance characteristics of screening strategies for Lynch syndrome in unselected women with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer who have undergone universal germline mutation testing. Cancer. 2014;120(24):3932-9. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.28933 PMid:25081409
Joehlin-Price AS, Perrino CM, Stephens J, Backes FJ, Goodfellow PJ, Cohn DE, et al. Mismatch repair protein expression in 1049 endometrial carcinomas, associations with body mass index, and other clinicopathologic variables. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;133(1):43-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ygyno.2014.03.435 PMid:24444820
Clarke BA, Cooper K. Identifying lynch Syndrome in Patients with endometrial carcinoma: Shortcomings of morphologic and clinical schemas. Adv Anat Pathol. 2012;19(4):231-8. https:// doi.org/10.1097/pap.0b013e31825c6b76 PMid:22692286
Hirasawa A, Aoki D, Inoue J, Imoto I, Susumu N, Sugano K, et al. Unfavorable prognostic factors associated with high frequency of microsatellite instability and comparative genomic hybridization analysis in endometrial cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2003;9(15):5675-82. PMid:14654551
Mas-Moya J, Dudley B, Brand RE, Thull D, Bahary N, Nikiforova MN, et al. Clinicopathological comparison of colorectal and endometrial carcinomas in patients with lynch-like syndrome versus patients with lynch syndrome. Hum Pathol. 2015;46(11):1616-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. humpath.2015.06.022 PMid:26319271
Bartosch C, Pires M, Jeronimo C, Lopes JM. The role of pathology in the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma. Future Oncol. 2017;13(11):1003-20. https://doi. org/10.2217/fon-2016-0570 PMid:28481146
Mills AM, Liou S, Ford JM, Berek JS, Pai RK, Longacre TA. Lynch syndrome screening should be considered for all patients with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer. Am J Surg Pathol. 2014;38(11):1501-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/ pas.0000000000000321 PMid:25229768
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Nour El Hoda S. Ismael, Hala M. Naguib, Suzan Mohamed Talaat, Rasha F. Bakry (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0