ArticlePloS one2022
ECPPF (E2F1, CCNA2, POLE, PPP2R1A, FBXW7) stratification: Profiling high-risk subtypes of histomorphologically low-risk and treatment-insensitive endometrioid endometrial cancer.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In endometrial cancer, occult high-risk subtypes (rooted in histomorphologically low-risk disease) with insensitivity to adjuvant therapies impede improvements in therapeutic efficacy. Therefore, we aimed to assess the ability of molecular high-risk (MHR) and low-risk (MLR) ECPPF (E2F1, CCNA2, POLE, PPP2R1A, FBXW7) stratification to profile recurrence in early, low-risk endometrioid endometrial cancer (EEC) and insensitivity to platinum-based chemotherapy or radiotherapy (or both) in high-risk EEC. Using The Cancer Genome Atlas endometrial cancer database, we identified 192 EEC cases with available DNA sequencing and RNA expression data. Molecular parameters were integrated with clinicopathologic risk factors and adverse surveillance events. MHR was defined as high (-H) CCNA2 or E2F1 log2 expression (≥2.75), PPP2R1A mutations (-mu), or FBXW7mu; MLR was defined as low (-L) CCNA2 and E2F1 log2 expression (<2.75). We assessed 164 cases, plus another 28 with POLEmu for favorable-outcomes comparisons. MHR and MLR had significantly different progression-free survival (PFS) rates (P < .001), independent of traditional risk factors (eg, TP53mu), except for stage IV disease. PFS of CCNA2-L/E2F1-L paralleled that of POLEmu. ECPPF status stratified responses to adjuvant therapy in stage III-IV EEC (P < .01) and profiled stage I, grade 1-2 cases with risk of recurrence (P < .001). MHR was associated with CTNNB1mu-linked treatment failures (P < .001). Expression of homologous recombination repair (HR) and cell cycle genes was significantly elevated in CCNA2-H/E2F1-H compared with CCNA2-L/E2F1-L (P<1.0E-10), suggesting that HR deficiencies may underlie the favorable PFS in MLR. HRmu were detected in 20.7%. No treatment failures were observed in high-grade or advanced EEC with HRmu (P = .02). Favorable PFS in clinically high-risk EEC was associated with HRmu and MLR ECPPF (P < .001). In summary, MLR ECPPF and HRmu were associated with therapeutic efficacy in EEC. MHR ECPPF was associated with low-risk, early-stage recurrences and insensitivity to adjuvant therapies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.