Article Data

  • Views 183
  • Dowloads 123

Original Research

Open Access

Evaluating molecular profiling and surgical factors influencing adjuvant therapy in patients with endometrial cancer

  • Merve Olcenoglu1,*,
  • Mehmet Faruk Olcenoglu1
  • Mehmet Kefeli2
  • Ibrahim Yalcin3

1Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Faculty of Medicine, Ondokuz Mayis University, 55100 Samsun, Türkiye

2Department of Medical Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Ondokuz Mayis University, 55100 Samsun, Türkiye

3Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Faculty of Medicine, Dokuz Eylul University, 35000 Izmir, Türkiye

DOI: 10.22514/ejgo.2026.016 Vol.47,Issue 2,April 2026 pp.35-43

Submitted: 14 August 2025 Accepted: 14 October 2025

Published: 15 April 2026

*Corresponding Author(s): Merve Olcenoglu E-mail: merve41uyar@hotmail.com

Abstract

Background: Endometrial cancer (EC) staging is essential for effective treatment. Recent developments in molecular profiling have improved the management of EC through the identification of molecular subtypes that influence prognosis and the requirement for adjuvant therapies. This study aimed to evaluate clinical and diagnostic data together with immunohistochemical biomarker study related to molecular classification in patients with EC and to explore factors independently associated with the administration of adjuvant therapy. Methods: This retrospective study included 100 patients diagnosed with EC who underwent surgical intervention between October 2020 and October 2022. Data were obtained from clinical records and pathology reports. Patients were categorized based on whether they received adjuvant therapy. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent factors associated with adjuvant therapy use. Results: Patients who received adjuvant therapy were older, had larger tumors, higher abnormal p53 staining (consistent with Tumor Protein 53 (TP53) mutation), and greater lymph node involvement. Independent predictors of adjuvant therapy included Stage IB (odds ratio (OR): 68.571, 95%confidence interval (CI): 10.540–446.114, p < 0.001), Stage II–IV (OR: 153.412, 95%CI: 15.048–1564.055, p < 0.001), and abnormal p53 stainings (OR: 8.572, 95% CI: 1.304–56.341, p = 0.025). Endometrioid carcinoma was negatively associated with adjuvant therapy (OR: 0.104, 95% CI: 0.012–0.911, p = 0.041). Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that abnormal p53 stainings, clinical staging, and the presence of endometrioid tumors are significant determinants for the administration of adjuvant therapy. Integration of clinical staging and exact diagnoses in addition to molecular profiling may improve treatment decisions.


Keywords

Endometrial cancer; Molecular profiling; Adjuvant therapy; p53; Neoplasm staging


Cite and Share

Merve Olcenoglu,Mehmet Faruk Olcenoglu,Mehmet Kefeli,Ibrahim Yalcin. Evaluating molecular profiling and surgical factors influencing adjuvant therapy in patients with endometrial cancer. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology. 2026. 47(2);35-43.

References

[1] Makker V, Mackay H, Ray-Coquard I, Levine DA, Westin SN, Aoki D, et al. Endometrial cancer. Nature Reviews Disease Primers. 2021; 7: 88.

[2] Zhai L, Zhang X, Cui M, Wang J. Sentinel lymph node mapping in endometrial cancer: a comprehensive review. Frontiers in Oncology. 2021; 11: 701758.

[3] van den Heerik ASVM, Horeweg N, de Boer SM, Bosse T, Creutzberg CL. Adjuvant therapy for endometrial cancer in the era of molecular classification: radiotherapy, chemoradiation and novel targets for therapy. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer. 2021; 31: 594–604.

[4] Bostan IS, Mihaila M, Roman V, Radu N, Neagu MT, Bostan M, et al. Landscape of endometrial cancer: molecular mechanisms, biomarkers, and target therapy. Cancers. 2024; 16: 2027.

[5] Yang Y, Wu SF, Bao W. Molecular subtypes of endometrial cancer: implications for adjuvant treatment strategies. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics. 2024; 164: 436–459.

[6] Ribeiro-Santos P, Martins Vieira C, Viana Veloso GG, Vieira Giannecchini G, Parenza Arenhardt M, Müller Gomes L, et al. Tailoring endometrial cancer treatment based on molecular pathology: current status and possible impacts on systemic and local treatment. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2024; 25: 7742.

[7] Oaknin A, Bosse TJ, Creutzberg CL, Giornelli G, Harter P, Joly F, et al.; ESMO Guidelines Committee. Endometrial cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Annals of Oncology. 2022; 33: 860–877.

[8] Höhn AK, Brambs CE, Hiller GGR, May D, Schmoeckel E, Horn LC. 2020 WHO classification of female genital tumors. Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde. 2021; 81: 1145–1153.

[9] Berek JS, Matias-Guiu X, Creutzberg C, Fotopoulou C, Gaffney D, Kehoe S, et al. FIGO staging of endometrial cancer: 2023. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics. 2023; 162: 383–394.

[10] Kuhn TM, Dhanani S, Ahmad S. An overview of endometrial cancer with novel therapeutic strategies. Current Oncology. 2023; 30: 7904–7919.

[11] Giustozzi A, Salutari V, Giudice E, Musacchio L, Ricci C, Landolfo C, et al. Refining adjuvant therapy for endometrial cancer: new standards and perspectives. Biology. 2021; 10: 845.

[12] Nero C, Ciccarone F, Pietragalla A, Duranti S, Daniele G, Scambia G, et al. Adjuvant treatment recommendations in early-stage endometrial cancer: what changes with the introduction of the integrated molecular-based risk assessment. Frontiers in Oncology. 2021; 11: 612450.

[13] Singh N, Hirschowitz L, Zaino R, Alvarado-Cabrero I, Duggan MA, Ali-Fehmi R, et al. Pathologic prognostic factors in endometrial carcinoma (other than tumor type and grade). International Journal of Gynecological Pathology. 2019; 38: S93–S113.

[14] Mills KA, Lopez H, Sun L, Cripe JC, Litz T, Thaker PH, et al. Type II endometrial cancers with minimal, non-invasive residual disease on final pathology: what should we do next? Gynecologic Oncology Reports. 2019; 29: 20–24.

[15] Chang YW, Kuo HL, Chen TC, Chen J, Lim L, Wang KL, et al. Abnormal p53 expression is associated with poor outcomes in grade I or II, stage I, endometrioid carcinoma: a retrospective single-institute study. Journal of Gynecologic Oncology. 2024; 35: e78.

[16] Vermij L, Léon-Castillo A, Singh N, Powell ME, Edmondson RJ, Genestie C, et al. p53 immunohistochemistry in endometrial cancer: clinical and molecular correlates in the PORTEC-3 trial. Modern Pathology. 2022; 35: 1475–1483.

[17] Mariani A, Sebo TJ, Katzmann JA, Roche PC, Keeney GL, Lesnick TG, et al. Endometrial cancer: can nodal status be predicted with curettage? Gynecologic Oncology. 2005; 96: 594–600.

[18] Brett MA, Atenafu EG, Singh N, Ghatage P, Clarke BA, Nelson GS, et al. Equivalent survival of p53 mutated endometrial endometrioid carcinoma grade 3 and endometrial serous carcinoma. International Journal of Gynecological Pathology. 2021; 40: 116–123.

[19] León-Castillo A, de Boer SM, Powell ME, Mileshkin LR, Mackay HJ, Leary A, et al. Molecular classification of the PORTEC-3 trial for high-risk endometrial cancer: impact on prognosis and benefit from adjuvant therapy. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2020; 38: 3388–3397.

[20] Jamieson A, Huvila J, Leung S, Chiu D, Thompson EF, Lum A, et al. Molecular subtype stratified outcomes according to adjuvant therapy in endometrial cancer. Gynecologic Oncology. 2023; 170: 282–289.

[21] Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network; Kandoth C, Schultz N, Cherniack AD, Akbani R, Liu Y, Shen H, et al. Integrated genomic characterization of endometrial carcinoma. Nature. 2013; 497: 67–73.


Submission Turnaround Time

Top