The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Use of mutation profiles to refine the classification of endometrial carcinomas
Open accessAbstract
The classification of endometrial carcinomas is based on pathological assessment of tumour cell type; the different cell types (endometrioid, serous, carcinosarcoma, mixed, undifferentiated, and clear cell) are associated with distinct molecular alterations. This current classification system for high‐grade subtypes, in particular the distinction between high‐grade endometrioid (EEC‐3) and serous carcinomas (ESC), is limited in its reproducibility and prognostic abilities. Therefore, a search for specific molecular classifiers to improve endometrial carcinoma subclassification is warranted. We performed target enrichment sequencing on 393 endometrial carcinomas from two large cohorts, sequencing exons from the following nine genes: ARID1A, PPP2R1A, PTEN, PIK3CA, KRAS, CTNNB1, TP53, BRAF , and PPP2R5C . Based on this gene panel, each endometrial carcinoma subtype shows a distinct mutation profile. EEC‐3s have significantly different frequencies of PTEN and TP53 mutations when compared to low‐grade endometrioid carcinomas. ESCs and EEC‐3s are distinct subtypes with significantly different frequencies of mutations in PTEN, ARID1A, PPP2R1A, TP53 , and CTNNB1 . From the mutation profiles, we were able to identify subtype outliers, ie cases diagnosed morphologically as one subtype but with a mutation profile suggestive of a different subtype. Careful review of these diagnostically challenging cases suggested that the original morphological classification was incorrect in most instances. The molecular profile of carcinosarcomas suggests two distinct mutation profiles for these tumours: endometrioid‐type ( PTEN, PIK3CA, ARID1A, KRAS mutations) and serous‐type ( TP53 and PPP2R1A mutations). While this nine‐gene panel does not allow for a purely molecularly based classification of endometrial carcinoma, it may prove useful as an adjunct to morphological classification and serve as an aid in the classification of problematic cases. If used in practice, it may lead to improved diagnostic reproducibility and may also serve to stratify patients for targeted therapeutics. Copyright © 2012 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation
Chapman, P. B., Hauschild, A., Robert, C., Haanen, J. B., Ascierto, P., Larkin, J., Dummer, R., Garbe, C., Testori, A., Maio, M., et al. (2011) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1103782 · Cited by 7,720
Unresponsiveness of colon cancer to BRAF(V600E) inhibition through feedback activation of EGFR
Prahallad, A., Sun, C., Huang, S., Di Nicolantonio, F., Salazar, R., Zecchin, D., Beijersbergen, R. L., Bardelli, A., & Bernards, R. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10868 · Cited by 2,051
The clonal and mutational evolution spectrum of primary triple-negative breast cancers
Shah, S. P., Roth, A., Goya, R., Oloumi, A., Ha, G., Zhao, Y., Turashvili, G., Ding, J., Tse, K., Haffari, G., et al. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10933 · Cited by 1,967
Self-citationARID1A Mutations in Endometriosis-Associated Ovarian Carcinomas
Wiegand, K. C., Shah, S. P., Al-Agha, O. M., Zhao, Y., Tse, K., Zeng, T., Senz, J., McConechy, M. K., Anglesio, M. S., Kalloger, S. E., et al. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1008433 · Cited by 1,712
Self-citationFrequent mutation of histone-modifying genes in non-Hodgkin lymphoma
Morin, R. D., Mendez-Lago, M., Mungall, A. J., Goya, R., Mungall, K. L., Corbett, R. D., Johnson, N. A., Severson, T. M., Chiu, R., Field, M., et al. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10351 · Cited by 1,614
Self-citation
Cited by
Integrated Analysis of TP53 Gene and Pathway Alterations in The Cancer Genome Atlas
Donehower, L. A., Soussi, T., Korkut, A., Liu, Y., Schultz, A., Cardenas, M., Li, X., Babur, O., Hsu, T.-K., Lichtarge, O., et al. (2019) · Cell Reports · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2019.07.001 · Cited by 710
Boretto, M., Maenhoudt, N., Luo, X., Hennes, A., Boeckx, B., Bui, B., Heremans, R., Perneel, L., Kobayashi, H., Van Zundert, I., et al. (2019) · Nature Cell Biology · doi:10.1038/s41556-019-0360-z · Cited by 503
Integrated genomic characterization of endometrial carcinoma
The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network, & Levine, D. A. (2013) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature12113 · Cited by 5,784
Clinical actionability of molecular targets in endometrial cancer
Urick, M. E., & Bell, D. W. (2019) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/s41568-019-0177-x · Cited by 405
New concepts for an old problem: the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia
Sanderson, P. A., Critchley, H. O. D., Williams, A. R. W., Arends, M. J., & Saunders, P. T. K. (2016) · Human Reproduction Update · doi:10.1093/humupd/dmw042 · Cited by 323
Metadata
- Authors
- McConechy, M. K., Ding, J., Cheang, M. C., Wiegand, K. C., Senz, J., Tone, A. A., Yang, W., Prentice, L. M., Tse, K., Zeng, T., McDonald, H., Schmidt, A. P., Mutch, D. G., McAlpine, J. N., Hirst, M., Shah, S. P., Lee, C., Goodfellow, P. J., Gilks, C. B., & Huntsman, D. G.
- Venue
- The Journal of Pathology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-07-18
- Volume
- 228
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 20-30
- ISSN
- 0022-3417 (ISSN-L)
- 1096-9896
- OpenAlex
- W1968578021
- Cited by
- 301
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 28.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.