Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 301

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 access
McConechy, Melissa K, Ding, Jiarui, Cheang, Maggie CU, Wiegand, Kimberly C, Senz, Janine, Tone, Alicia A, Yang, Winnie, Prentice, Leah M, Tse, Kane, Zeng, Thomas, McDonald, Helen, Schmidt, Amy P, Mutch, David G, McAlpine, Jessica N, Hirst, Martin, Shah, Sohrab P, Lee, Cheng‐Han, Goodfellow, Paul J, Gilks, C Blake, Huntsman, David G·2012·The Journal of Pathology

Abstract

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/path.4056

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 301

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.