Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29132872›Full record

ArticleGynecologic oncology2018

An NRG Oncology/GOG study of molecular classification for risk prediction in endometrioid endometrial cancer.

Casey M Cosgrove, David L Tritchler, David E Cohn, David G Mutch, Craig M Rush, Heather A Lankes, William T Creasman, David S Miller, Nilsa C Ramirez, Melissa A Geller and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gynecologic oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
11.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 133 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Impact of TP53 somatic mutations on prognosis in endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 12 institutions in 1 country.

Casey M CosgroveThe Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States.
David L TritchlerNRG Oncology Statistics and Data Management Center, Buffalo, NY, United States.
David E CohnThe Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States.
David G MutchWashington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United States.
Craig M RushThe Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States.
Heather A LankesGynecologic Oncology Group Tissue Bank, Biopathology Center, Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, United States.
William T CreasmanDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States.
David S MillerDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.
Nilsa C RamirezGynecologic Oncology Group Tissue Bank, Biopathology Center, Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, United States.
Melissa A GellerUniversity of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.
Matthew A PowellWashington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United States.
Floor J BackesThe Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States.
Lisa M LandrumStephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, United States.
Cynthia TimmersThe Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States.
Adrian A SuarezThe Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States.
Richard J ZainoAnatomic Pathology, Penn State Milton S. Hersey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, United States.
Michael L PearlStony Brook University Hospital, Stony Brook, NY, United States.
Paul A DiSilvestroWomen and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Providence, RI, United States.
Shashikant B LeleRoswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, United States.
Paul J GoodfellowThe Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States. Electronic address: Paul.Goodfellow@osumc.edu.
The Ohio State University · USNationwide Children's Hospital · USWashington University in St. Louis · USMedical University of South Carolina · USNRG Oncology · USPenn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center · USRoswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center · USStony Brook University Hospital · USThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USUniversity of Minnesota · USUniversity of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center · USWomen & Infants Hospital of Rhode Island · US

Funding

NRG Oncology Network Group Operations Center - GY9 BIQSFP Reports/BudgetsU10CA180868 · NCI · NRG ONCOLOGY FOUNDATION, INC. · PI NORMAN WOLMARK · 2014 to 2026
$206.8M
Statistics CoreU10CA180822 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Mei-Yin C Polley · 2014 to 2026
$146.4M
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY GROUP HEADQUARTERSU10CA027469 · NCI · GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY GROUP · PI DISAIA, PHILIP J. · 1985 to 2013
$132.6M
Translational Therapeutics Research Program (TT)P30CA016058 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI Tasleem J Padamsee · 1985 to 2026
$132.3M
GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY GROUP STATISTICAL OFFICEU10CA037517 · NCI · ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORP · PI BLESSING, JOHN A · 1985 to 2013
$67.4M
NRG Oncology Biospecimen BankU24CA196067 · NCI · NRG ONCOLOGY FOUNDATION, INC. · PI Tanner J. Freeman, Nilsa Del Carmen Ramirez Milan · 2015 to 2026
$42.6M
The Ohio State University Center for clinical and Translational ScienceUL1TR001070 · NCATS · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI JACKSON, REBECCA D · 2013 to 2017
$22.6M
Washington University/ Siteman Cancer Center Lead Academic SiteU10CA180833 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI BARTLETT, NANCY L, KOZOWER, BENJAMIN D · 2014 to 2018
$7.6M
Gynecologic Oncology Group Specimen BankingU24CA114793 · NCI · GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY GROUP · PI DISAIA, PHILIP J. · 2005 to 2014
$7.0M
Network Lead Academic Participating Site Grant from the Roswell Cancer Inst.U10CA180866 · NCI · ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORP · PI ERNSTOFF, MARC S, LELE, SHASHIKANT · 2014 to 2018
$2.9M
Integrative Training in Biomedical SystemsT32GM068412 · NIGMS · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI PARVIN, JEFFREY D · 2005 to 2020
$2.4M
Tissue and Pathology CoreP50CA134254 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI POLLOCK, PAMELA M, POWELL, MATTHEW A · 2009 to 2011
$1.7M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001070NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016058NCI NIH HHS P50 CA134254NCI NIH HHS R50 CA211529NCI NIH HHS U10 CA027469NCI NIH HHS U10 CA037517NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180822NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180833NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180866NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180868NCI NIH HHS U24 CA114793NCI NIH HHS U24 CA196067NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM068412
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe purpose of this study was to assess the prognostic significance of a simplified, clinically accessible classification system for endometrioid endometrial cancers combining Lynch syndrome screening and molecular risk stratification.

methodsTumors from NRG/GOG GOG210 were evaluated for mismatch repair defects (MSI, MMR IHC, and MLH1 methylation), POLE mutations, and loss of heterozygosity. TP53 was evaluated in a subset of cases. Tumors were assigned to four molecular classes. Relationships between molecular classes and clinicopathologic variables were assessed using contingency tests and Cox proportional methods.

resultsMolecular classification was successful for 982 tumors. Based on the NCI consensus MSI panel assessing MSI and loss of heterozygosity combined with POLE testing, 49% of tumors were classified copy number stable (CNS), 39% MMR deficient, 8% copy number altered (CNA) and 4% POLE mutant. Cancer-specific mortality occurred in 5% of patients with CNS tumors; 2.6% with POLE tumors; 7.6% with MMR deficient tumors and 19% with CNA tumors. The CNA group had worse progression-free (HR 2.31, 95%CI 1.53-3.49) and cancer-specific survival (HR 3.95; 95%CI 2.10-7.44). The POLE group had improved outcomes, but the differences were not statistically significant. CNA class remained significant for cancer-specific survival (HR 2.11; 95%CI 1.04-4.26) in multivariable analysis. The CNA molecular class was associated with TP53 mutation and expression status.

conclusionsA simple molecular classification for endometrioid endometrial cancers that can be easily combined with Lynch syndrome screening provides important prognostic information. These findings support prospective clinical validation and further studies on the predictive value of a simplified molecular classification system.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, EndometrioidDNA Mismatch RepairDNA Polymerase IIEndometrial NeoplasmsFemaleGenes, p53HumansLoss of HeterozygosityMicrosatellite InstabilityMiddle AgedMutationPoly-ADP-Ribose Binding ProteinsPredictive Value of TestsRiskTumor Suppressor Protein p53DNA Polymerase IIPOLE protein, humanPoly-ADP-Ribose Binding ProteinsTP53 protein, humanTumor Suppressor Protein p53Combined Lynch syndrome screening and molecular classificationEndometrioid endometrial cancerMolecular classificationPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID29132872
PMCPMC5756518
OpenAlexW2768036758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.