Type of vascular invasion in association with progress of endometrial cancer
Nicole C.M. Visser
Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Search for more papers by this authorHenrica M.J. Werner
Center for Cancer Biomarkers, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
Search for more papers by this authorCamilla Krakstad
Center for Cancer Biomarkers, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
Search for more papers by this authorKaren K. Mauland
Center for Cancer Biomarkers, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
Search for more papers by this authorJone Trovik
Center for Cancer Biomarkers, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
Search for more papers by this authorLeon F.A.G. Massuger
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Search for more papers by this authorIris D. Nagtegaal
Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Search for more papers by this authorJohanna M.A. Pijnenborg
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Search for more papers by this authorHelga B. Salvesen
Center for Cancer Biomarkers, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
DeceasedSearch for more papers by this authorJohan Bulten
Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Ingunn M. Stefansson
Department of Clinical medicine, Section for Pathology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
Center for Cancer Biomarkers, Department of Clinical Medicine, Section for Pathology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Ingunn M. Stefansson, Centre for Cancer Biomarkers, CCBIO, Department of Clinical Medicine, Section for Pathology, University of Bergen, N-5021 Bergen, Norway. e-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorNicole C.M. Visser
Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Search for more papers by this authorHenrica M.J. Werner
Center for Cancer Biomarkers, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
Search for more papers by this authorCamilla Krakstad
Center for Cancer Biomarkers, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
Search for more papers by this authorKaren K. Mauland
Center for Cancer Biomarkers, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
Search for more papers by this authorJone Trovik
Center for Cancer Biomarkers, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
Search for more papers by this authorLeon F.A.G. Massuger
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Search for more papers by this authorIris D. Nagtegaal
Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Search for more papers by this authorJohanna M.A. Pijnenborg
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Search for more papers by this authorHelga B. Salvesen
Center for Cancer Biomarkers, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
DeceasedSearch for more papers by this authorJohan Bulten
Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Ingunn M. Stefansson
Department of Clinical medicine, Section for Pathology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
Center for Cancer Biomarkers, Department of Clinical Medicine, Section for Pathology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Ingunn M. Stefansson, Centre for Cancer Biomarkers, CCBIO, Department of Clinical Medicine, Section for Pathology, University of Bergen, N-5021 Bergen, Norway. e-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Vascular invasion (VI) is a well-established marker for lymph node metastasis and outcome in endometrial cancer. Our study explored whether specific types of VI, defined as lymphatic (LVI) or blood vessel invasion (BVI), predict pattern of metastasis. From a prospectively collected cohort, we conducted a case–control study by selecting three groups of endometrial cancer patients (n = 183): 52 with positive lymph nodes at primary surgery, 33 with negative nodes at primary surgery and later recurrence and death from disease, and 98 with negative nodes and no recurrence. All patients underwent hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy. Immunohistochemical staining with D2-40 and CD31 antibodies was used to differentiate between BVI and LVI. By immunohistochemical staining, detection of VI increased from 24.6 to 36.1% of the cases. LVSI was significantly more often seen in patients with positive lymph nodes compared with patients with negative nodes (p = 0.001). BVI was significantly more often seen in node-negative patients with recurrence compared with node-negative patients without recurrence (p = 0.011). In multivariable analysis, BVI, age, and tumor grade were predictors separating patients with and without recurrence. Lymph node–positive patients showed more often LVI compared with lymph node–negative patients, while BVI seems to be a predictor for recurrent disease.
References
- 1Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 2014; 64: 9–29.
- 2Boll D, Karim-Kos HE, Verhoeven RH, Burger CW, Coebergh JW, van de Poll-Franse LV, et al. Increased incidence and improved survival in endometrioid endometrial cancer diagnosed since 1989 in The Netherlands: a population based study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2013; 166: 209–14.
- 3Creasman WT, Odicino F, Maisonneuve P, Quinn MA, Beller U, Benedet JL, et al. Carcinoma of the corpus uteri. FIGO 26th Annual Report on the Results of Treatment in Gynecological Cancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2006; 95(Suppl 1): S105–43.
- 4Liang P, Nakada I, Hong JW, Tabuchi T, Motohashi G, Takemura A, et al. Prognostic significance of immunohistochemically detected blood and lymphatic vessel invasion in colorectal carcinoma: its impact on prognosis. Ann Surg Oncol 2007; 14: 470–7.
- 5Gujam FJ, Going JJ, Edwards J, Mohammed ZM, McMillan DC. The role of lymphatic and blood vessel invasion in predicting survival and methods of detection in patients with primary operable breast cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2014; 89: 231–41.
- 6Schmid K, Birner P, Gravenhorst V, End A, Geleff S. Prognostic value of lymphatic and blood vessel invasion in neuroendocrine tumors of the lung. Am J Surg Pathol 2005; 29: 324–8.
- 7Sakuragi N, Takeda N, Hareyama H, Fujimoto T, Todo Y, Okamoto K, et al. A multivariate analysis of blood vessel and lymph vessel invasion as predictors of ovarian and lymph node metastases in patients with cervical carcinoma. Cancer 2000; 88: 2578–83.
10.1002/1097-0142(20000601)88:11<2578::AID-CNCR21>3.0.CO;2-Y CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
- 8Klingen TA, Chen Y, Stefansson IM, Knutsvik G, Collett K, Abrahamsen AL, et al. Tumour cell invasion into blood vessels is significantly related to breast cancer subtypes and decreased survival. J Clin Pathol 2017; 70: 313–9.
- 9Weber SK, Sauerwald A, Polcher M, Braun M, Debald M, Serce NB, et al. Detection of lymphovascular invasion by D2-40 (podoplanin) immunoexpression in endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2012; 22: 1442–8.
- 10Vandenput I, Vanhove T, Calster BV, Gorp TV, Moerman P, Verbist G, et al. The use of lymph vessel markers to predict endometrial cancer outcome. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2010; 20: 363–7.
- 11Mannelqvist M, Stefansson I, Salvesen HB, Akslen LA. Importance of tumour cell invasion in blood and lymphatic vasculature among patients with endometrial carcinoma. Histopathology 2009; 54: 174–83.
- 12Alexander-Sefre F, Nibbs R, Rafferty T, Ayhan A, Singh N, Jacobs I. Clinical value of immunohistochemically detected lymphatic and vascular invasions in clinically staged endometrioid endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2009; 19: 1074–9.
- 13Wik E, Birkeland E, Trovik J, Werner HM, Hoivik EA, Mjos S, et al. High phospho-Stathmin(Serine38) expression identifies aggressive endometrial cancer and suggests an association with PI3K inhibition. Clin Cancer Res 2013; 19: 2331–41.
- 14Trovik J, Wik E, Werner HM, Krakstad C, Helland H, Vandenput I, et al. Hormone receptor loss in endometrial carcinoma curettage predicts lymph node metastasis and poor outcome in prospective multicentre trial. Eur J Cancer 2013; 49: 3431–41.
- 15 WT Creasman, editors. Announcements. FIGO stages. 1988 Revision. Gynecol Oncol 1989; 35: 125–7.
10.1016/0090-8258(89)90027-9 Google Scholar
- 16Lax SF, Kurman RJ, Pizer ES, Wu L, Ronnett BM. A binary architectural grading system for uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma has superior reproducibility compared with FIGO grading and identifies subsets of advance-stage tumors with favorable and unfavorable prognosis. Am J Surg Pathol 2000; 24: 1201–8.
- 17Inoue Y, Obata K, Abe K, Ohmura G, Doh K, Yoshioka T, et al. The prognostic significance of vascular invasion by endometrial carcinoma. Cancer 1996; 78: 1447–51.
10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19961001)78:7<1447::AID-CNCR11>3.0.CO;2-# PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
- 18Ganesan R, Singh N, McCluggage W. Dataset for Histological Reporting of Endometrial Cancer. G090. London: The Royal College of Pathologists, 2014.
- 19Stefansson IM, Salvesen HB, Immervoll H, Akslen LA. Prognostic impact of histological grade and vascular invasion compared with tumour cell proliferation in endometrial carcinoma of endometrioid type. Histopathology 2004; 44: 472–9.
- 20Gal D, Recio FO, Zamurovic D, Tancer ML. Lymphvascular space involvement–a prognostic indicator in endometrial adenocarcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1991; 42: 142–5.
- 21Hanson MB, van Nagell JR Jr, Powell DE, Donaldson ES, Gallion H, Merhige M, et al. The prognostic significance of lymph-vascular space invasion in stage I endometrial cancer. Cancer 1985; 55: 1753–7.
10.1002/1097-0142(19850415)55:8<1753::AID-CNCR2820550823>3.0.CO;2-P CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
- 22Tsuruchi N, Kaku T, Kamura T, Tsukamoto N, Tsuneyoshi M, Akazawa K, et al. The prognostic significance of lymphovascular space invasion in endometrial cancer when conventional hemotoxylin and eosin staining is compared to immunohistochemical staining. Gynecol Oncol 1995; 57: 307–12.
- 23Alexander-Sefre F, Singh N, Ayhan A, Thomas JM, Jacobs IJ. Clinical value of immunohistochemically detected lymphovascular invasion in endometrioid endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2004; 92: 653–9.
- 24Bosse T, Peters EE, Creutzberg CL, Jurgenliemk-Schulz IM, Jobsen JJ, Mens JW, et al. Substantial lymph-vascular space invasion (LVSI) is a significant risk factor for recurrence in endometrial cancer–A pooled analysis of PORTEC 1 and 2 trials. Eur J Cancer 2015; 51: 1742–50.
- 25Gilani S, Anderson I, Fathallah L, Mazzara P. Factors predicting nodal metastasis in endometrial cancer. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2014; 290: 1187–93.
- 26Guntupalli SR, Zighelboim I, Kizer NT, Zhang Q, Powell MA, Thaker PH, et al. Lymphovascular space invasion is an independent risk factor for nodal disease and poor outcomes in endometrioid endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2012; 124: 31–5.
- 27Mitobe J, Ikegami M, Urashima M, Takahashi H, Goda K, Tajiri H. Clinicopathological investigation of lymph node metastasis predictors in superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma with a focus on evaluation of lympho-vascular invasion. Scand J Gastroenterol 2013; 48: 1173–82.
- 28Mohammed RA, Martin SG, Gill MS, Green AR, Paish EC, Ellis IO. Improved methods of detection of lymphovascular invasion demonstrate that it is the predominant method of vascular invasion in breast cancer and has important clinical consequences. Am J Surg Pathol 2007; 31: 1825–33.
- 29Roma AA, Magi-Galluzzi C, Kral MA, Jin TT, Klein EA, Zhou M. Peritumoral lymphatic invasion is associated with regional lymph node metastases in prostate adenocarcinoma. Mod Pathol 2006; 19: 392–8.
- 30Murray SK, Young RH, Scully RE. Unusual epithelial and stromal changes in myoinvasive endometrioid adenocarcinoma: a study of their frequency, associated diagnostic problems, and prognostic significance. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2003; 22: 324–33.
- 31Storr SJ, Safuan S, Mitra A, Elliott F, Walker C, Vasko MJ, et al. Objective assessment of blood and lymphatic vessel invasion and association with macrophage infiltration in cutaneous melanoma. Mod Pathol 2012; 25: 493–504.
