Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Frontiers in Oncology logoLink to Frontiers in Oncology
. 2021 Oct 21;11:762329. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.762329

Association of Myometrial Invasion With Lymphovascular Space Invasion, Lymph Node Metastasis, Recurrence, and Overall Survival in Endometrial Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of 79 Studies With 68,870 Patients

Jianzhang Wang 1,†, Ping Xu 1,†, Xueying Yang 2,†, Qin Yu 1, Xinxin Xu 1, Gen Zou 1, Xinmei Zhang 1,*
PMCID: PMC8567142  PMID: 34746002

Abstract

Background

Myometrial invasion has been demonstrated to correlate to clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis in endometrial cancer. However, not all the studies have the consistent results and no meta-analysis has investigated the association of myometrial invasion with lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI), lymph node metastasis (LNM), recurrence, and overall survival (OS). Therefore, a meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between myometrial invasion and clinicopathological characteristics or overall survival in endometrial cancer.

Materials and Methods

A search of Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science was carried out to collect relevant studies from their inception until June 30, 2021. The quality of each included study was evaluated using Newcastle–Ottawa scale (NOS) scale. Review Manager version 5.4 was employed to conduct the meta-analysis.

Results

A total of 79 articles with 68,870 endometrial cancer patients were eligible including 9 articles for LVSI, 29 articles for LNM, 8 for recurrence, and 37 for OS in this meta-analysis. Myometrial invasion was associated with LVSI (RR 3.07; 95% CI 2.17–4.35; p < 0.00001), lymph node metastasis (LNM) (RR 4.45; 95% CI 3.29–6.01; p < 0.00001), and recurrence (RR 2.06; 95% CI 1.58–2.69; p < 0.00001). Deep myometrial invasion was also significantly related with poor OS via meta-synthesis of HRs in both univariate survival (HR 3.36, 95% CI 2.35–4.79, p < 0.00001) and multivariate survival (HR 2.00, 95% CI 1.59–2.53, p < 0.00001). Funnel plot suggested that there was no significant publication bias in this study.

Conclusion

Deep myometrial invasion correlated to positive LVSI, positive LNM, cancer recurrence, and poor OS for endometrial cancer patients, indicating that myometrial invasion was a useful evaluation criterion to associate with clinical outcomes and prognosis of endometrial cancer since depth of myometrial invasion can be assessed before surgery. The large scale and comprehensive meta-analysis suggested that we should pay more attention to myometrial invasion in clinical practice, and its underlying mechanism also deserves further investigation.

Keywords: endometrial cancer, myometrial invasion, lymphovascular space invasion, lymph node metastasis, recurrence, overall survival, meta-analysis

Introduction

Endometrial cancer is the most prevalent gynecological malignancy in developed countries (1) and the sixth most common cancer in women with continuously increasing incidence and associated mortality (2). Myometrial invasion, lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI), lymph node metastasis (LNM), and recurrence are the important molecular events and clinical behaviors for endometrial cancer. Among them, myometrial invasion is the quietly early action of cancer cells. In addition, three-dimensional ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging are applied for preoperative assessment of the depth of myometrial invasion (3), and frozen sections are used for intraoperative estimation (4). It is meaningful to classify patients with initial stages as low-risk or high-risk patients for surgical planning when the above diagnostic methods are becoming more accurate with a better specificity and sensitivity. Therefore, it deserves more attention on myometrial invasion in endometrial cancer.

Myometrial invasion is defined as the invasion of endometrial cancer cells into myometrium. The depth of invasion is critical to the evaluation of surgical-pathological staging. According to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system, stage IA includes those tumors with myometrial invasion of less than 50% or without myometrial invasion, and stage IB refers to more than 50% of invasion into myometrium. Although the underlying mechanism of myometrial invasion is still unclear, it is one of critical considerations for the surgery types and therapeutic methods. This is because accumulated evidences show that myometrial invasion is related to LVSI, LNM, recurrence, and OS of endometrial cancer in different reports. However, there are some different sounds, and not all the studies share the similar results. Specifically, there were more patients with positive LVSI in superficial myometrial invasion group when compared to deep myometrial invasion group (5); there was no statistically significant difference for positive LNM between superficial and deep myometrial invasion groups (6). In addition, there was no statistically significant difference for recurrence between superficial and deep myometrial invasion groups (7, 8). Therefore, a further study is valuable.

Currently, it is still a mystery whether the above non-uniform results change our previous conclusions and consensus. Until now, there is no aggregated estimate about the relationship between myometrial invasion and LVSI, LNM, recurrence, and OS. This meta-analysis is aiming to further elucidate whether myometrial invasion correlates to LVSI, LNM, recurrence, and OS based on the data available so far. The meta-analysis of multiple clinical studies will provide comprehensive descriptions about myometrial invasion not only from the past to the present but also from clinicopathological characteristics to prognostic value. We hope that the study also could provide us more certainty and confidence in mention and further investigation of myometrial invasion of endometrial cancer.

Materials and Methods

Literature Search Strategy

Literature was searched from Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science from their inception until June 2021. The study published only in English was further considered. The main search terms were formulated as follows: “endometrial cancer”, “endometrial carcinoma”, “endometrial tumor”, “uterine carcinoma”, “uterine cancer”, “endometrial neoplasms”, “myometrial invasion”, “myometrial infiltration”, “clinicopathological factors”, “lymphovascular space invasion”, “lymph node metastasis”, “prognostic marker”, “prognosis”, “overall survival”, “recurrence”, and “relapse”.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

The study had to meet the following inclusion criteria: (1) the patients only had endometrial cancer; (2) enough data about clinicopathological factors (myometrial invasion, LVSI, LNM, or recurrence) and/or related information to extract hazard ratio (HR) and standard error (SE) of lnHR for OS; (3) article was published in English. The exclusion criteria included the following terms: (1) reviews, meta-analysis, animal experiments, and case reports; (2) republished articles; (3) incomplete and unpublished studies; (4) the study did not meet the design. Two reviewers independently reviewed the literatures according to the predefined strategy and criteria. The articles were screened with two researchers independently (JW and PX). The disagreements were further settled through discussion and resolved by a third investigator when necessary.

Data Extraction and Quality Assessment

Two investigators (JW and PX) were assigned to assess the eligibility of all studies. Moreover, a third investigator (XZ) resolved the disagreements when necessary. The following information from each study was extracted: first author, publication year, the region of the study population, the number of participants, design type. For LVSI, LNM and recurrence, and the numbers in case and control groups were extracted respectively. For OS, HR estimate with 95% confidence interval (CI) for OS was extracted. The quality of included studies was assessed using Newcastle–Ottawa scale (NOS) scale, and the score of the quality ranged from 0 to 9.

Data Analysis

Version 5.4 software of Review Manager was applied for this meta-analysis. Risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI was pooled to investigate the association between myometrial invasion and clinicopathological features (LVSI, LNM, and recurrence). HR with 95% CI was combined to study the effect of myometrial invasion on OS. The HR was extracted directly when the HR with 95% CI was reported. SE was calculated using the equation: SElnHR = (lnUpperCI − lnLowerCI)/3.92 (9). If the article did not provide direct HR while Kaplan–Meier survival curve was shown, Engauge Digitizer software was performed to acquire HR with SE (10). A random-effects model was conducted if significant heterogeneity (p ≤ 0.1, I2 > 50%) was shown. Publication bias was evaluated by the shape of funnel plot. Statistically significant difference was pointed out when a p value was less than 0.05.

Results

Study Search Results

The predefined search strategy identified 1,385 records. After screening of titles and abstracts, 1,058 records were excluded including 35 non-English papers, 18 duplicated records, 208 review/meta/letter/abstract, 19 animal studies, and 778 irrelated literature. Full text of 327 articles was assessed, and 248 records were excluded including 8 studies with the same included patients, 11 basic research, and 229 articles without adequate data. Finally, 79 studies of total 68,870 patients were eligible (5–8, 11–85), including 9 articles for LVSI, 29 articles for LNM, 8 for recurrence, and 37 for OS. The included studies and Newcastle-Ottawa scores are presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics of included studies.

Author Year Study period Country N Design Outcomes Quality*
Watanabe et al. (5) 2019 2010–2015 Japan 88 P LVSI 8
Rychlik et al. (6) 2020 2000–2018 Spain 477 R LNM, Univar-HR 6
Pradhan et al. (7) 2012 1998–2007 Norway 56 R Rec 7
Van der Putten et al. (8) 2015 2005–2011 The Netherlands 81 R Rec 6
Abbink et al. (11) 2018 1999–2009 The Netherlands 157 R Univar-HR, Multi-HR 7
Abu-Zaid et al. (12) 2018 2009–2013 Saudi Arabia 148 R Multi-HR 7
Akbayir et al. (13) 2012 2002–2010 Turkey 192 R LNM 6
Akiyama-Abe et al. (14) 2013 1999–2009 Japan 221 R Univar-HR, Multi-HR 8
Altunpulluk et al. (15) 2014 2006–2014 Turkey 121 R LNM 7
Ambros et al. (16) 1991 1970–1988 Maryland 102 R LVSI 7
Aoyama et al. (17) 2019 2007–2013 Japan 197 R LNM 7
Ayhan et al. (18) 1994 1981–1991 Turkey 183 R Rec 7
Bendifallah et al. (19) 2015 2001–2012 France 523 R LNM 7
Bonatz et al. (20) 1999 1985–1990 Germany 164 R Multi-HR 7
Capozzi et al. (21) 2020 2007–2007 Italy 614 R LVSI 7
Cetinkaya et al. (22) 2014 1996–2010 Turkey 247 R LNM 7
Chen et al. (23) 2001 1993–1998 Taiwan 53 R Rec 7
Chen et al. (24) 2020 2009–2019 Taiwan 92 R Univar-HR 6
Cheng et al. (25) 2019 2011–2012 China 113 R Multi-HR 7
Cuylan et al. (26) 2018 2001–2016 Turkey 172 R Multi-HR 7
Erkaya et al. (27) 2017 2007–2015 Turkey 500 R Multi-HR 6
Ghezzi et al. (28) 2010 2000–2009 Italy 336 R Univar-HR, Multi-HR 8
Günakan et al. (29) 2019 2007–2017 Turkey 762 R LNM 6
Hasengaowa et al. (30) 2005 1997–2002 Japan 109 R Multi-HR 7
Hiura et al. (31) 2010 1987–2002 Japan 284 R Multi-HR 6
Ino et al. (32) 2006 1992–2001 Japan 80 R Univar-HR 6
Jorge et al. (33) 2016 2010–2012 USA 25,907 R LVSI 8
Kang et al. (34) 2014 2000–2006 South Korea 957 R LNM 7
Koskas et al. (35) 2013 2002–2010 France 305 R LVSI 6
Kwon et al. (36) 2009 1996–2000 Canada 314 R LNM 7
Kyo et al. (37) 2006 1995–2002 Japan 70 R Multi-HR 6
Larson et al. (38) 1996 1987–1995 USA 125 R LNM 6
Lee et al. (39) 2009 2002–2008 South Korea 834 R LNM 8
Lee et al. (40) 2016 2000–2013 South Korea 172 R LNM 7
Li et al. (41) 2018 2010–2013 China 143 R Multi-HR 7
Li et al. (42) 2019 2010–2018 China 874 R LNM, Multi-HR 6
Li (2) et al. (43) 2019 2014–2019 China 388 R LNM 7
Lin et al. (44) 2019 2006–2013 Taiwan 337 R Univar-HR, Multi-HR 6
Lindah et al. (45) 1994 1980–1987 Sweden 251 R Multi-HR 6
Machida et al. (46) 2018 2008–2015 USA 611 R LVSI 6
Mahdi et al. (47) 2015 2005–2012 USA 140 R LNM 6
Matsuo et al. (48) 2015 2000–2013 USA 703 R LVSI 6
Mhawech-Fauceglia et al. (49) 2012 2000–2010 USA 279 R Multi-HR 8
Miyamoto et al. (50) 2013 1996–2005 Japan 84 R Univar-HR, Multi-HR 6
Nakamura et al. (51) 2011 2007–2011 Japan 106 P Multi-HR 7
Neal et al. (52) 2016 2005–2012 USA 205 R Univar-HR 7
Njølstad et al. (53) 2015 2001–2011 Norway 539 R LNM 8
Nomura et al. (54) 2006 1975–2004 Japan 841 R LNM 7
Ohno et al. (55) 2005 1995–2002 Japan 70 P Multi-HR 8
Panggid et al. (56) 2010 1999–2007 Thailand 136 R LVSI, Rec 7
Patel et al. (57) 2007 1989–2003 Canada 107 R Univar-HR 7
Pifer et al. (58) 2020 2017–2019 USA 438 R LVSI 8
Sahin et al. (59) 2019 2007–2016 Turkey 185 R Rec 8
Sal et al. (60) 2016 2000–2008 Turkey 59 R Multi-HR 6
Sarı et al. (61) 2018 2007–2016 Turkey 280 R LNM 7
Schink et al. (62) 1991 1979–1988 USA 142 R LNM 7
Scott et al. (63) 2017 2003–2009 Canada 849 R Multi-HR 8
Shen et al. (64) 2020 2006–2013 China 263 R Univar-HR, Multi-HR 7
Siesto et al. (65) 2020 2009–2015 Italy 363 R Univar-HR, Multi-HR 6
Sigurdsson et al. (66) 1998 1964–1985 Iceland 203 R Multi-HR 6
Solmaz et al. (67) 2015 1995–2012 Turkey 827 R LNM 7
Stalberg et al. (68) 2019 2010–2017 Sweden 959 P LNM, Multi-HR 8
Stiekema et al. (69) 2017 1994–2014 Netherlands 88 P Univar-HR 8
Tanaka et al. (70) 2013 NR Japan 354 R Multi-HR 6
Tang et al. (71) 1998 1979–1996 Japan 310 R LNM 6
Taşkın et al. (72) 2017 2011–2014 Turkey 279 R LNM 7
Taskiran et al. (73) 2006 1982–2002 Turkey 461 R LNM 8
Todo et al. (74) 2013 2000–2008 Korea 281 R LNM 6
Tuomi et al. (75) 2017 2007–2013 Finland 929 R Rec 7
Urabe et al. (76) 2014 1990–2010 Japan 366 R Univar-HR, Multi-HR 6
Vargas et al. (77) 2014 1988–2010 USA 19329 R LNM 8
Wakayama et al. (78) 2018 2006–2013 Japan 189 R Multi-HR 6
Yabushita et al. (79) 2001 1986–1995 Japan 36 R Rec 6
Yamada et al. (80) 2021 2014–2015 Japan 67 P Univar-HR 7
Yokoyama et al. (81) 1997 1988–1996 Japan 60 R LNM 6
Zanfagnin et al. (82) 2019 1999–2008 USA 85 R LNM 7
Zhang et al. (83) 2012 1989–2006 China 621 R LNM 7
Zhao et al. (84) 2015 2007–2008 China 188 R Multi-HR 7
Zhao et al. (85) 2019 NR China 89 R Univar-HR, Multi-HR 6
Open in a new tab

R, Retrospectively study; P, prospectively study; LVSI, lymphovascular space invasion; LNM, lymph node metastasis; Univar-HR, HR in univariate analysis; Multi-HR, HR in multivariate analysis. *The quality was assessed using Newcastle–Ottawa scale (NOS) scale.

Myometrial Invasion Is Associated With LVSI in Endometrial Cancer

Nine studies with a total of 28,904 endometrial cancer patients were finally included for this analysis. The random-effects model was applied due to the significant between-study heterogeneity (I2 = 91%, p < 0.00001). The risk ratio, which was expressed as >1/2 group versus <1/2 group, was 3.07 (CI 95% 2.17–4.35, p < 0.00001) (Figure 1). The pooled result showed that there was a link between the depth of myometrial invasion and the risk of LVSI. Combined with the clinical information from the included studies, the result indicated that patients with deeper myometrial invasion of endometrial cancer into myometrium (>1/2) were more prone to LVSI.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Meta-analysis of the association between myometrial invasion and LVSI in endometrial cancer.

Myometrial Invasion Is Associated With LNM in Endometrial Cancer

Twenty-nine studies including 31,262 endometrial cancer patients were eligible for analysis. The random-effects model was conducted for the significant between-study heterogeneity (I2 = 92%, p < 0.00001). The risk ratio was 4.45 (CI 95% 3.29–6.01, p < 0.00001) (Figure 2). The aggregated estimate of myometrial invasion was significantly associated with LVSI. According to the included studies, the result showed that deeper myometrial invasion is associated with the tendency of LNM in endometrial cancer.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Meta-analysis of the association between myometrial invasion and LNM in endometrial cancer.

Myometrial Invasion Is Associated With the Recurrence of Endometrial Cancer

Since recurrence is the leading cause of death in cancers, further investigation is conducted by us on the association between myometrial invasion and the recurrence of endometrial cancer. Eight studies including 1,649 patients were included. During the analysis, we found that there was no significant between-study heterogeneity (I2 = 16%; p = 0.30), and fixed-effects model was used. Myometrial invasion was significantly associated with the recurrence of endometrial cancer since the risk ratio was 2.06 (CI 95% 1.58–2.69, p < 0.00001) (Figure 3). Therefore, deep myometrial invasion is associated with higher risk of endometrial cancer recurrence.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

Meta-analysis of the association between myometrial invasion and recurrence in patients with endometrial cancer.

Myometrial Invasion Is Associated With OS in Endometrial Cancer

Thirty-seven studies including 9,416 patients examined the association between myometrial invasion and OS in endometrial cancer. The pooled HRs of all-cause mortality with >1/2 myometrial invasion compared to <1/2 myometrial invasion were evaluated using random-effects model, and the results are presented in Figure 4. Pooled HRs of OS for univariate and multivariate analyses (HR 3.36, 95% CI 2.35–4.79, P < 0.00001, and HR 2.00, 95% CI 1.59–2.53, P < 0.00001, respectively) showed that the group with deep myometrial invasion was related with a higher risk of OS than the group with less than 1/2 myometrial invasion. Therefore, deep myometrial invasion is associated with poor survival in endometrial cancer.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

Meta-analysis of the association between myometrial invasion and overall survival in endometrial cancer patients according to HR from univariate or multivariate survival analyses.

Publication Bias of Included Studies

Funnel plot was applied for the assessment of publication bias in the literature, and tests for funnel plot asymmetry were applied only when there were at least 10 studies included in a meta-analysis. The shape of the funnel plot for the included 29 studies on the association between myometrial invasion and LNM was not significantly asymmetrical, indicating that there was no significant publication bias (Figure 5A). The results also show that no obvious publication bias was indicated in all included studies investigating myometrial invasion on OS in both univariate and multivariate analyses (Figures 5B, C).

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

Funnel plots for potential publication bias. Funnel plot analysis of lymph node metastasis (A), and univariate and multivariate survival analyses (B, C). LNM, lymph node metastasis; OS, overall survival.

Discussion

Although there are many studies showing that myometrial invasion is definitely correlated to LVSI, LNM, recurrence, and OS, and we have reached an agreement that myometrial invasion is absolutely critical in the development of endometrial cancer, there are some inequable results, which makes us more or less feel lack confidence about that. Therefore, we searched all the studies about the relationship between myometrial invasion and clinicopathological characteristics (LVSI, LNM, and recurrence) or OS and conducted this meta-analysis.

The presence of LVSI is significantly associated with pelvic and paraaortic lymph node metastasis, recurrence, and poor prognosis (86, 87). As for lymph node metastasis, it is one of the evaluation criteria for the surgical-pathological staging and therapeutic schedule and is an extremely important determinant of the outcome. We paid extra attention to recurrence because it is uniformly associated with poor survival. Compared to LVSI, LNM, and recurrence, myometrial invasion is a much earlier molecular event and could be the initial driving force for the further progress of cancer cells. In addition, the depth of myometrial invasion before surgery can be accessed. Therefore, we should not only dig deeper into the underlying molecular mechanism but also pay more attention to the relevant clinical study. Since there are many studies about the relationship between myometrial invasion and clinicopathological characteristics (LVSI, LNM, and recurrence) or OS while not all the reports are consistent, we thereby pooled all the eligible studies and performed this meta-analysis.

Seventy-nine studies with a total of 68,870 endometrial cancer patients were finally included for this meta-analysis. Among them, nine studies with a total of 28,904 endometrial cancer patients were for LVSI. The pooled result showed patients with deeper myometrial invasion of endometrial cancer into myometrium (>1/2) were more prone to LVSI. As for LNM, 29 studies including 31,262 endometrial cancer patients were eligible for analysis, and the results demonstrated that deeper myometrial invasion is associated with the tendency of LNM in endometrial cancer. Furthermore, myometrial invasion was significantly associated with the recurrence of endometrial cancer according to the meta-analysis of eight studies including 1,649 patients. Since LVSI, LNM, and recurrence are independent prognostic factors for endometrial cancer patients, myometrial invasion would also be a prognostic factor. As it turned out, the group with deep myometrial invasion was related with a greater risk of OS than the group with less than 1/2 myometrial invasion based on not only univariate survival analysis but also multivariate survival analysis. Therefore, the results indicate that myometrial invasion is associated with LVSI, LNM, recurrence, and OS with much more confidence. Combined with preoperative assessment of the depth of myometrial invasion, now we know more information in regard to LVSI, LNM, recurrence, and OS of these patients before surgery, which suggests that we should especially pay more attention to myometrial invasion in clinical practice, and its underlying mechanism also deserves further investigation.

Potential limitations exist in this study, and meta-analysis without the classification of endometrial cancer is the obvious one. In the past, dualistic classification is the leading theory for the classification, which divides endometrial cancer into type I and type II tumors (88). According to histology, WHO classified endometrial cancer into the following subtypes: endometrioid, serous, mucinous, clear-cell, mixed, squamous-cell, transitional-cell, small-cell, and undifferentiated carcinomas (89). Among them, endometrioid carcinoma and serous carcinoma account for the majority. In this study, we check all the included 79 articles and found that histologic type was not only confined to endometrioid subtype although endometrioid carcinoma is the most common one. And 53 articles of the included 79 studies did not exclude other histologic types, so we did not further conduct the analysis based on histological classification. Recently, endometrial cancer is categorized into four genomic types: DNA polymerase epsilon (POLE) (ultramutated), microsatellite-instable (MSI) (hypermutated), copy-number low (endometrioid), and copy-number high (serous-like) tumors as the quick development of next-generation sequencing (90). The above genomic classification can facilitate the treatment tailored to specific subgroups and potentially enable the delivery of precision medicine to endometrial cancer patients. However, most included studies in the present meta-analysis did not perform the molecular classification, which may be because modern classification in molecular subtypes is relatively new and expensive, and thereby it is still not widely carried out in clinical practice. Given that, we appeal researchers to conduct more studies about the molecular classification and hope that more endometrial cancer patients benefit from the development of precision medicine.

Apart from classification, other potential limitations still exist in this study: (1) The data from the included studies were from the published articles instead of the original information of individual patient; (2) most included articles are the retrospective studies, and the evidence level is lower than that of prospective randomized clinical trial; (3) one of inclusion criteria is that article was published in English and negative results not being reported, which increase the risk of publication bias; (4) the number of included studies is relatively small, especially for LVSI and recurrence, which may cause biased results; (5) the heterogeneity of aggregated results was significant, and the random-effects model was applied.

Conclusion

In summary, a large scale and comprehensive meta-analysis of the association between myometrial invasion and other clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis is provided in the present study. Our results show that myometrial invasion is associated with LVSI, LNM, recurrence, and OS, indicating that deep myometrial invasion is a useful evaluation criterion to associate with poor clinical outcomes and prognosis in endometrial cancer patients.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Author Contributions

JW, PX, and XZ: conceptualization. JW, PX, and XY: data curation and original draft writing. QY, XX, and GZ: statistical analysis. JW and XZ: manuscript review and editing. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Funding

This study was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant numbers: 81802591 and 81974225) and National Key R&D Program of China (Grant number: 2017YFC1001202).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

  • 1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin (2021) 71(3):209–49. doi:  10.3322/caac.21660 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer Statistics, 2020. CA Cancer J Clin (2020) 70(1):7–30. doi:  10.3322/caac.21590 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Christensen JW, Dueholm M, Hansen ES, Marinovskij E, Lundorf E, Ortoft G. Assessment of Myometrial Invasion in Endometrial Cancer Using Three-Dimensional Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand (2016) 95(1):55–64. doi:  10.1111/aogs.12806 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Karatasli V, Cakir I, Sahin H, Ayaz D, Sanci M. Can Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Replace Intraoperative Frozen Sectioning in the Evaluation of Myometrial Invasion for Early-Stage Endometrial Carcinoma? Ginekol Pol (2019) 90(3):128–33. doi:  10.5603/GP.2019.0023 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Watanabe T, Honma R, Kojima M, Nomura S, Furukawa S, Soeda S, et al. Prediction of Lymphovascular Space Invasion in Endometrial Cancer Using the 55-Gene Signature Selected by DNA Microarray Analysis. PloS One (2019) 14(9):e0223178. doi:  10.1371/journal.pone.0223178 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Rychlik A, Zapardiel I, Baquedano L, Martinez Maestre MA, Querleu D, Coronado Martin PJ. Clinical Relevance of High-Intermediate Risk Endometrial Cancer According to European Risk Classification. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2020) 30(10):1528–34. doi:  10.1136/ijgc-2020-001693 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Pradhan M, Davidson B, Abeler VM, Danielsen HE, Trope CG, Kristensen GB, et al. DNA Ploidy May Be a Prognostic Marker in Stage I and II Serous Adenocarcinoma of the Endometrium. Virchows Arch (2012) 461(3):291–8. doi:  10.1007/s00428-012-1275-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. van der Putten LJ, Geels YP, Ezendam NP, van der Putten HW, Snijders MP, van de Poll-Franse LV, et al. Lymphovascular Space Invasion and the Treatment of Stage I Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2015) 25(1):75–80. doi:  10.1097/IGC.0000000000000306 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Tierney JF, Stewart LA, Ghersi D, Burdett S, Sydes MR. Practical Methods for Incorporating Summary Time-to-Event Data Into Meta-Analysis. Trials (2007) 8:16. doi:  10.1186/1745-6215-8-16 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Ioannidis JP, Panagiotou OA. Comparison of Effect Sizes Associated With Biomarkers Reported in Highly Cited Individual Articles and in Subsequent Meta-Analyses. JAMA (2011) 305(21):2200–10. doi:  10.1001/jama.2011.713 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Abbink K, Zusterzeel PL, Geurts-Moespot AJ, Herwaarden AEV, Pijnenborg JM, Sweep FC, et al. HE4 Is Superior to CA125 in the Detection of Recurrent Disease in High-Risk Endometrial Cancer Patients. Tumour Biol (2018) 40(2):1010428318757103. doi:  10.1177/1010428318757103 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Abu-Zaid A, Alsabban M, Abuzaid M, Alomar O, Salem H, Al-Badawi IA. Preoperative Anemia as a Prognostic Factor in Endometrioid-Type Endometrial Carcinoma. J Obstet Gynaecol Can (2018) 40(11):1393–400. doi:  10.1016/j.jogc.2018.05.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Akbayir O, Corbacioglu A, Goksedef BP, Numanoglu C, Akca A, Guraslan H, et al. The Novel Criteria for Predicting Pelvic Lymph Node Metastasis in Endometrioid Adenocarcinoma of Endometrium. Gynecol Oncol (2012) 125(2):400–3. doi:  10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.01.051 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Akiyama-Abe A, Minaguchi T, Nakamura Y, Michikami H, Shikama A, Nakao S, et al. Loss of PTEN Expression is an Independent Predictor of Favourable Survival in Endometrial Carcinomas. Br J Cancer (2013) 109(6):1703–10. doi:  10.1038/bjc.2013.455 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Dogan Altunpulluk M, Kir G, Topal CS, Cetiner H, Gocmen A. The Association of the Microcystic, Elongated and Fragmented (MELF) Invasion Pattern in Endometrial Carcinomas With Deep Myometrial Invasion, Lymphovascular Space Invasion and Lymph Node Metastasis. J Obstet Gynaecol (2015) 35(4):397–402. doi:  10.3109/01443615.2014.960827 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Ambros RA, Kurman RJ. Combined Assessment of Vascular and Myometrial Invasion as a Model to Predict Prognosis in Stage I Endometrioid Adenocarcinoma of the Uterine Corpus. Cancer (1992) 69(6):1424–31. doi:  [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Aoyama T, Takano M, Miyamoto M, Yoshikawa T, Kato K, Sakamoto T, et al. Pretreatment Neutrophil-To-Lymphocyte Ratio Was a Predictor of Lymph Node Metastasis in Endometrial Cancer Patients. Oncology (2019) 96(5):259–67. doi:  10.1159/000497184 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Ayhan A, Tuncer ZS, Tuncer R, Yuce K, Kucukali T. Risk Factors for Recurrence in Clinically Early Endometrial Carcinoma: An Analysis of 183 Consecutive Cases. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol (1994) 57(3):167–70. doi:  10.1016/0028-2243(94)90294-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Bendifallah S, Canlorbe G, Laas E, Huguet F, Coutant C, Hudry D, et al. A Predictive Model Using Histopathologic Characteristics of Early-Stage Type 1 Endometrial Cancer to Identify Patients at High Risk for Lymph Node Metastasis. Ann Surg Oncol (2015) 22(13):4224–32. doi:  10.1245/s10434-015-4548-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Bonatz G, Luttes J, Hamann S, Mettler L, Jonat W, Parwaresch R. Immunohistochemical Assessment of P170 Provides Prognostic Information in Endometrial Carcinoma. Histopathology (1999) 34(1):43–50. doi:  10.1046/j.1365-2559.1999.00564.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Capozzi VA, Sozzi G, Uccella S, Ceni V, Cianciolo A, Gambino G, et al. Novel Preoperative Predictive Score to Evaluate Lymphovascular Space Involvement in Endometrial Cancer: An Aid to the Sentinel Lymph Node Algorithm. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2020) 30(6):806–12. doi:  10.1136/ijgc-2019-001016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Cetinkaya K, Atalay F, Bacinoglu A. Risk Factors of Lymph Node Metastases With Endometrial Carcinoma. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev (2014) 15(15):6353–6. doi:  10.7314/apjcp.2014.15.15.6353 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Chen CA, Cheng WF, Lee CN, Wei LH, Chu JS, Hsieh FJ, et al. Cytosol Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor in Endometrial Carcinoma: Correlation With Disease-Free Survival. Gynecol Oncol (2001) 80(2):207–12. doi:  10.1006/gyno.2000.6048 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Chen HH, Ting WH, Sun HD, Wei MC, Lin HH, Hsiao SM. Predictors of Survival in Women With High-Risk Endometrial Cancer and Comparisons of Sandwich Versus Concurrent Adjuvant Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy. Int J Environ Res Public Health (2020) 17(16):5941. doi:  10.3390/ijerph17165941 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Cheng L, Zhao T, Li S, Wang Y, Fei H, Meng F. Overexpression of HPIP as a Biomarker for Metastasis and Prognosis Prediction in Endometrial Cancer Patients. J Clin Lab Anal (2019) 33(8):e22959. doi:  10.1002/jcla.22959 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Cuylan ZF, Oz M, Ozkan NT, Comert GK, Sahin H, Turan T, et al. Prognostic Factors and Patterns of Recurrence in Lymphovascular Space Invasion Positive Women With Stage IIIC Endometriod Endometrial Cancer. J Obstet Gynaecol Res (2018) 44(6):1140–9. doi:  10.1111/jog.13615 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Erkaya S, Oz M, Topcu HO, Sirvan AL, Gungor T, Meydanli MM. Is Lower Uterine Segment Involvement a Prognostic Factor in Endometrial Cancer? Turk J Med Sci (2017) 47(1):300–6. doi:  10.3906/sag-1602-137 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Ghezzi F, Cromi A, Siesto G, Giudici S, Serati M, Formenti G, et al. Prognostic Significance of Preoperative Plasma Fibrinogen in Endometrial Cancer. Gynecol Oncol (2010) 119(2):309–13. doi:  10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.07.014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Gunakan E, Atan S, Haberal AN, Kucukyildiz IA, Gokce E, Ayhan A. A Novel Prediction Method for Lymph Node Involvement in Endometrial Cancer: Machine Learning. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2019) 29(2):320–4. doi:  10.1136/ijgc-2018-000033 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Hasengaowa, Kodama J, Kusumoto T, Shinyo Y, Seki N, Hiramatsu Y. Prognostic Significance of Syndecan-1 Expression in Human Endometrial Cancer. Ann Oncol (2005) 16(7):1109–15. doi:  10.1093/annonc/mdi224 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Hiura M, Nogawa T, Matsumoto T, Yokoyama T, Shiroyama Y, Wroblewski J. Long-Term Survival in Patients With Para-Aortic Lymph Node Metastasis With Systematic Retroperitoneal Lymphadenectomy Followed by Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Endometrial Carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2010) 20(6):1000–5. doi:  10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181d80aff [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Ino K, Yoshida N, Kajiyama H, Shibata K, Yamamoto E, Kidokoro K, et al. Indoleamine 2,3-Dioxygenase Is a Novel Prognostic Indicator for Endometrial Cancer. Br J Cancer (2006) 95(11):1555–61. doi:  10.1038/sj.bjc.6603477 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Jorge S, Hou JY, Tergas AI, Burke WM, Huang Y, Hu JC, et al. Magnitude of Risk for Nodal Metastasis Associated With Lymphvascular Space Invasion for Endometrial Cancer. Gynecol Oncol (2016) 140(3):387–93. doi:  10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.01.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Kang S, Lee JM, Lee JK, Kim JW, Cho CH, Kim SM, et al. A Web-Based Nomogram Predicting Para-Aortic Nodal Metastasis in Incompletely Staged Patients With Endometrial Cancer: A Korean Multicenter Study. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2014) 24(3):513–9. doi:  10.1097/IGC.0000000000000090 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Koskas M, Bassot K, Graesslin O, Aristizabal P, Barranger E, Clavel-Chapelon F, et al. Impact of Lymphovascular Space Invasion on a Nomogram for Predicting Lymph Node Metastasis in Endometrial Cancer. Gynecol Oncol (2013) 129(2):292–7. doi:  10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.02.027 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Kwon JS, Qiu F, Saskin R, Carey MS. Are Uterine Risk Factors More Important Than Nodal Status in Predicting Survival in Endometrial Cancer? Obstet Gynecol (2009) 114(4):736–43. doi:  10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181b96ec6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Kyo S, Sakaguchi J, Ohno S, Mizumoto Y, Maida Y, Hashimoto M, et al. High Twist Expression Is Involved in Infiltrative Endometrial Cancer and Affects Patient Survival. Hum Pathol (2006) 37(4):431–8. doi:  10.1016/j.humpath.2005.12.021 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Larson DM, Connor GP, Broste SK, Krawisz BR, Johnson KK. Prognostic Significance of Gross Myometrial Invasion With Endometrial Cancer. Obstet Gynecol (1996) 88(3):394–8. doi:  10.1016/0029-7844(96)00161-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Lee KB, Ki KD, Lee JM, Lee JK, Kim JW, Cho CH, et al. The Risk of Lymph Node Metastasis Based on Myometrial Invasion and Tumor Grade in Endometrioid Uterine Cancers: A Multicenter, Retrospective Korean Study. Ann Surg Oncol (2009) 16(10):2882–7. doi:  10.1245/s10434-009-0535-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Lee J, Kong TW, Paek J, Chang SJ, Ryu HS. Predicting Model of Lymph Node Metastasis Using Preoperative Tumor Grade, Transvaginal Ultrasound, and Serum CA-125 Level in Patients With Endometrial Cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2016) 26(9):1630–5. doi:  10.1097/IGC.0000000000000820 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Li P, Yin H, Meng F, Liu S, Liu H, Ma R. High TRIM44 Expression in Endometrial Carcinoma Is Associated With a Poorer Patient Outcome. Pathol Res Pract (2018) 214(5):727–31. doi:  10.1016/j.prp.2018.03.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Li M, Wu S, Xie Y, Zhang X, Wang Z, Zhu Y, et al. Cervical Invasion, Lymphovascular Space Invasion, and Ovarian Metastasis as Predictors of Lymph Node Metastasis and Poor Outcome on Stages I to III Endometrial Cancers: A Single-Center Retrospective Study. World J Surg Oncol (2019) 17(1):193. doi:  10.1186/s12957-019-1733-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Li Y, Cong P, Wang P, Peng C, Liu M, Sun G. Risk Factors for Pelvic Lymph Node Metastasis in Endometrial Cancer. Arch Gynecol Obstet (2019) 300(4):1007–13. doi:  10.1007/s00404-019-05276-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Lin YJ, Hu YW, Twu NF, Liu YM. The Role of Adjuvant Radiotherapy in Stage I Endometrial Cancer: A Single-Institution Outcome. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol (2019) 58(5):604–9. doi:  10.1016/j.tjog.2019.07.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Lindahl B, Ranstam J, Willen R. Five Year Survival Rate in Endometrial Carcinoma Stages I–II: Influence of Degree of Tumour Differentiation, Age, Myometrial Invasion and DNA Content. Br J Obstet Gynaecol (1994) 101(7):621–5. doi:  10.1111/j.1471-0528.1994.tb13654.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Machida H, Hom MS, Adams CL, Eckhardt SE, Garcia-Sayre J, Mikami M, et al. Intrauterine Manipulator Use During Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy and Risk of Lymphovascular Space Invasion in Endometrial Cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2018) 28(2):208–19. doi:  10.1097/IGC.0000000000001181 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Mahdi H, Jernigan A, Nutter B, Michener C, Rose PG. Lymph Node Metastasis and Pattern of Recurrence in Clinically Early Stage Endometrial Cancer With Positive Lymphovascular Space Invasion. J Gynecol Oncol (2015) 26(3):208–13. doi:  10.3802/jgo.2015.26.3.208 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Matsuo K, Garcia-Sayre J, Medeiros F, Casabar JK, Machida H, Moeini A, et al. Impact of Depth and Extent of Lymphovascular Space Invasion on Lymph Node Metastasis and Recurrence Patterns in Endometrial Cancer. J Surg Oncol (2015) 112(6):669–76. doi:  10.1002/jso.24049 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Mhawech-Fauceglia P, Wang D, Syriac S, Godoy H, Dupont N, Liu S, et al. Synuclein-Gamma (SNCG) Protein Expression Is Associated With Poor Outcome in Endometrial Adenocarcinoma. Gynecol Oncol (2012) 124(1):148–52. doi:  10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.09.037 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Miyamoto T, Suzuki A, Asaka R, Ishikawa K, Yamada Y, Kobara H, et al. Immunohistochemical Expression of Core 2 Beta1,6-N-Acetylglucosaminyl Transferase 1 (C2GnT1) in Endometrioid-Type Endometrial Carcinoma: A Novel Potential Prognostic Factor. Histopathology (2013) 62(7):986–93. doi:  10.1111/his.12107 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Nakamura K, Hongo A, Kodama J, Hiramatsu Y. The Measurement of SUVmax of the Primary Tumor Is Predictive of Prognosis for Patients With Endometrial Cancer. Gynecol Oncol (2011) 123(1):82–7. doi:  10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.06.026 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Neal SA, Graybill WS, Garrett-Mayer E, McDowell ML, McLean VE, Watson CH, et al. Lymphovascular Space Invasion in Uterine Corpus Cancer: What Is its Prognostic Significance in the Absence of Lymph Node Metastases? Gynecol Oncol (2016) 142(2):278–82. doi:  10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.05.037 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Njolstad TS, Trovik J, Hveem TS, Kjaereng ML, Kildal W, Pradhan M, et al. DNA Ploidy in Curettage Specimens Identifies High-Risk Patients and Lymph Node Metastasis in Endometrial Cancer. Br J Cancer (2015) 112(10):1656–64. doi:  10.1038/bjc.2015.123 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Nomura H, Aoki D, Suzuki N, Susumu N, Suzuki A, Tamada Y, et al. Analysis of Clinicopathologic Factors Predicting Para-Aortic Lymph Node Metastasis in Endometrial Cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2006) 16(2):799–804. doi:  10.1111/j.1525-1438.2006.00529.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Ohno Y, Ohno S, Suzuki N, Kamei T, Inagawa H, Soma G, et al. Role of Cyclooxygenase-2 in Immunomodulation and Prognosis of Endometrial Carcinoma. Int J Cancer (2005) 114(5):696–701. doi:  10.1002/ijc.20777 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Panggid K, Cheewakriangkrai C, Khunamornpong S, Siriaunkgul S. Factors Related to Recurrence in Non-Obese Women With Endometrial Endometrioid Adenocarcinoma. J Obstet Gynaecol Res (2010) 36(5):1044–8. doi:  10.1111/j.1447-0756.2010.01289.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Patel S, Portelance L, Gilbert L, Tan L, Stanimir G, Duclos M, et al. Analysis of Prognostic Factors and Patterns of Recurrence in Patients With Pathologic Stage III Endometrial Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys (2007) 68(5):1438–45. doi:  10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.02.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Pifer PM, Bhargava R, Patel AK, Ling DC, Vargo JA, Orr BC, et al. Is the Risk of Substantial LVSI in Stage I Endometrial Cancer Similar to PORTEC in the North American Population? - A Single-Institution Study. Gynecol Oncol (2020) 159(1):23–9. doi:  10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.07.024 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59. Sahin H, Meydanli MM, Sari ME, Kocaman E, Cuylan ZF, Yalcin I, et al. Recurrence Patterns and Prognostic Factors in Lymphovascular Space Invasion-Positive Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer Surgically Confined to the Uterus. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol (2019) 58(1):82–9. doi:  10.1016/j.tjog.2018.11.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60. Sal V, Demirkiran F, Erenel H, Tokgozoglu N, Kahramanoglu I, Bese T, et al. Expression of PTEN and Beta-Catenin and Their Relationship With Clinicopathological and Prognostic Factors in Endometrioid Type Endometrial Cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2016) 26(3):512–20. doi:  10.1097/IGC.0000000000000626 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Sari ME, Meydanli MM, Yalcin I, Sahin H, Coban G, Celik H, et al. Risk Factors for Lymph Node Metastasis Among Lymphovascular Space Invasion-Positive Women With Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer Clinically Confined to the Uterus. Oncol Res Treat (2018) 41(12):750–4. doi:  10.1159/000492585 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Schink JC, Rademaker AW, Miller DS, Lurain JR. Tumor Size in Endometrial Cancer. Cancer (1991) 67(11):2791–4. doi:  [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63. Scott SA, van der Zanden C, Cai E, McGahan CE, Kwon JS. Prognostic Significance of Peritoneal Cytology in Low-Intermediate Risk Endometrial Cancer. Gynecol Oncol (2017) 145(2):262–8. doi:  10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.03.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64. Shen J, Chen Q, Li N, Bai X, Wang F, Li B. TWIST1 Expression and Clinical Significance in Type I Endometrial Cancer and Premalignant Lesions: A Retrospective Clinical Study. Med (Baltimore) (2020) 99(48):e23397. doi:  10.1097/MD.0000000000023397 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65. Siesto G, Romano F, Ieda NP, Vitobello D. Survival Outcomes After Surgical Management of Endometrial Cancer: Analysis After the First 10-Year Experience of Robotic Surgery in a Single Center. Int J Med Robot (2020) 16(6):1–9. doi:  10.1002/rcs.2157 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66. Sigurdsson K, Sigurdardottir B, Steinsson S, Benediktsdottir K, Sigurvinsson T, Sigvaldason H. Survival and Prognostic Factors of Endometrial Cancer Patients in Iceland 1964-1985: Can Attendance at Population-Based Pap-Smear Screening Affect Survival? Int J Cancer (1998) 79(2):166–74. doi:  [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67. Solmaz U, Mat E, Dereli M, Turan V, Gungorduk K, Hasdemir P, et al. Lymphovascular Space Invasion and Cervical Stromal Invasion Are Independent Risk Factors for Nodal Metastasis in Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol (2015) 55(1):81–6. doi:  10.1111/ajo.12321 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68. Stalberg K, Bjurberg M, Borgfeldt C, Carlson J, Dahm-Kahler P, Floter-Radestad A, et al. Lymphovascular Space Invasion as a Predictive Factor for Lymph Node Metastases and Survival in Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer - a Swedish Gynecologic Cancer Group (SweGCG) Study. Acta Oncol (2019) 58(11):1628–33. doi:  10.1080/0284186X.2019.1643036 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69. Stiekema A, Lok C, Korse CM, van Driel WJ, van der Noort V, Kenter GG, et al. Serum HE4 Is Correlated to Prognostic Factors and Survival in Patients With Endometrial Cancer. Virchows Arch (2017) 470(6):655–64. doi:  10.1007/s00428-017-2115-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70. Tanaka Y, Terai Y, Kawaguchi H, Fujiwara S, Yoo S, Tsunetoh S, et al. Prognostic Impact of EMT (Epithelial-Mesenchymal-Transition)-Related Protein Expression in Endometrial Cancer. Cancer Biol Ther (2013) 14(1):13–9. doi:  10.4161/cbt.22625 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71. Tang X, Tanemura K, Ye W, Ohmi K, Tsunematsu R, Yamada T, et al. Clinicopathological Factors Predicting Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Metastasis and Survival in Endometrial Cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol (1998) 28(11):673–8. doi:  10.1093/jjco/28.11.673 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72. Taskin S, Sukur YE, Varli B, Koyuncu K, Seval MM, Ates C, et al. Nomogram With Potential Clinical Use to Predict Lymph Node Metastasis in Endometrial Cancer Patients Diagnosed Incidentally by Postoperative Pathological Assessment. Arch Gynecol Obstet (2017) 296(4):803–9. doi:  10.1007/s00404-017-4477-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73. Taskiran C, Yuce K, Geyik PO, Kucukali T, Ayhan A. Predictability of Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Metastasis by Using Clinicopathologic Variables in Surgically Staged Endometrial Cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2006) 16(3):1342–7. doi:  10.1111/j.1525-1438.2006.00534.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74. Todo Y, Choi HJ, Kang S, Kim JW, Nam JH, Watari H, et al. Clinical Significance of Tumor Volume in Endometrial Cancer: A Japan-Korea Cooperative Study. Gynecol Oncol (2013) 131(2):294–8. doi:  10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.08.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75. Tuomi T, Pasanen A, Leminen A, Butzow R, Loukovaara M. Prediction of Site-Specific Tumor Relapses in Patients With Stage I-II Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2017) 27(5):923–30. doi:  10.1097/IGC.0000000000000970 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76. Urabe R, Hachisuga T, Kurita T, Kagami S, Kawagoe T, Matsuura Y, et al. Prognostic Significance of Overexpression of P53 in Uterine Endometrioid Adenocarcinomas With an Analysis of Nuclear Grade. J Obstet Gynaecol Res (2014) 40(3):812–9. doi:  10.1111/jog.12215 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77. Vargas R, Rauh-Hain JA, Clemmer J, Clark RM, Goodman A, Growdon WB, et al. Tumor Size, Depth of Invasion, and Histologic Grade as Prognostic Factors of Lymph Node Involvement in Endometrial Cancer: A SEER Analysis. Gynecol Oncol (2014) 133(2):216–20. doi:  10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.02.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78. Wakayama A, Kudaka W, Matsumoto H, Aoyama H, Ooyama T, Taira Y, et al. Lymphatic Vessel Involvement Is Predictive for Lymph Node Metastasis and an Important Prognostic Factor in Endometrial Cancer. Int J Clin Oncol (2018) 23(3):532–8. doi:  10.1007/s10147-017-1227-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79. Yabushita H, Shimazu M, Yamada H, Sawaguchi K, Noguchi M, Nakanishi M, et al. Occult Lymph Node Metastases Detected by Cytokeratin Immunohistochemistry Predict Recurrence in Node-Negative Endometrial Cancer. Gynecol Oncol (2001) 80(2):139–44. doi:  10.1006/gyno.2000.6067 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80. Yamada S, Tsuyoshi H, Yamamoto M, Tsujikawa T, Kiyono Y, Okazawa H, et al. Prognostic Value of 16α-18F-Fluoro-17β-Estradiol Positron Emission Tomography as a Predictor of Disease Outcome in Endometrial Cancer: A Prospective Study. J Nucl Med (2021) 62(5):636–42. doi:  10.2967/jnumed.120.244319 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81. Yokoyama Y, Maruyama H, Sato S, Saito Y. Risk Factors Predictive of Para-Aortic Lymph Node Metastasis in Endometrial Carcinomas. J Obstet Gynaecol Res (1997) 23(2):179–87. doi:  10.1111/j.1447-0756.1997.tb00829.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82. Zanfagnin V, Huang Y, Mc Gree ME, Weaver AL, Casarin J, Multinu F, et al. Predictors of Extensive Lymphatic Dissemination and Recurrences in Node-Positive Endometrial Cancer. Gynecol Oncol (2019) 154(3):480–6. doi:  10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.07.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83. Zhang C, Wang C, Feng W. Clinicopathological Risk Factors for Pelvic Lymph Node Metastasis in Clinical Early-Stage Endometrioid Endometrial Adenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer (2012) 22(8):1373–7. doi:  10.1097/IGC.0b013e318269f68e [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84. Zhao J, Liu T, Yu G, Wang J. Overexpression of HABP1 Correlated With Clinicopathological Characteristics and Unfavorable Prognosis in Endometrial Cancer. Tumour Biol (2015) 36(2):1299–306. doi:  10.1007/s13277-014-2761-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85. Zhao X, Fan Y, Lu C, Li H, Zhou N, Sun G, et al. PCAT1 Is a Poor Prognostic Factor in Endometrial Carcinoma and Associated With Cancer Cell Proliferation, Migration and Invasion. Bosn J Basic Med Sci (2019) 19(3):274–81. doi:  10.17305/bjbms.2019.4096 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86. Dong Y, Cheng Y, Tian W, Zhang H, Wang Z, Li X, et al. An Externally Validated Nomogram for Predicting Lymph Node Metastasis of Presumed Stage I and II Endometrial Cancer. Front Oncol (2019) 9:1218. doi:  10.3389/fonc.2019.01218 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87. Sadozye AH, Harrand RL, Reed NS. Lymphovascular Space Invasion as a Risk Factor in Early Endometrial Cancer. Curr Oncol Rep (2016) 18(4):24. doi:  10.1007/s11912-016-0505-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88. Bokhman JV. Two Pathogenetic Types of Endometrial Carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol (1983) 15(1):10–7. doi:  10.1016/0090-8258(83)90111-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89. Amant F, Moerman P, Neven P, Timmerman D, Van Limbergen E, Vergote I. Endometrial Cancer. Lancet (2005) 366(9484):491–505. doi:  10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67063-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90. Murali R, Soslow RA, Weigelt B. Classification of Endometrial Carcinoma: More Than Two Types. Lancet Oncol (2014) 15(7):e268–78. doi:  10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70591-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Articles from Frontiers in Oncology are provided here courtesy of Frontiers Media SA

RESOURCES