ArticleGynecologic oncology2025
The genomic landscape of distant metastatic endometrial cancer.
Article in Gynecologic oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Causal associations between Sjögren's syndrome and subtypes of endometrial cancer.BMC immunology · 2026Pooled it
- A Phase II Trial of Olaparib plus Pembrolizumab in Patients with Recurrent Copy Number-High/p53-Abnormal Endometrial Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2026Trial
- The causal association between ankylosing spondylitis and endometrial cancer: a two-sample mendelian randomization study.Discover oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe molecular underpinnings of primary treatment-naïve endometrial carcinoma (EC) are well described. Here we sought to characterize the genomic landscape of distant metastatic EC.
methodsDistant metastatic ECs from a total of 1888 cases subjected to a clinical panel sequencing between 4/2015 and 6/2020 were identified, and their genomic profiles, affected pathways and actionable alterations were compared to those of 711 primary ECs. Wilcoxon and Fisher's exact tests were used for continuous and categorical variables, respectively, and p-values adjusted for multiple hypothesis-testing.
resultsDistant EC metastases (n = 137) of the lung (n = 66, 48 %), liver (n = 21, 15 %), soft tissue (n = 15, 11 %), distant lymph nodes (n = 15, 11 %), gastrointestinal tract (n = 10, 7 %), central nervous system (n = 5, 4 %), bone (n = 4, 3 %), and renal system (n = 1, 1 %) were included. Distant EC metastases were most commonly of copy number (CN)-high/TP53 abnormal (42 %) or CN-low/no specific molecular profile (NSMP) (39 %) molecular subtype; 18 % were microsatellite instability (MSI)-high/mismatch repair (MMR)-deficient and 1 % were of POLE molecular subtype. Distant EC metastases were significantly more chromosomally unstable compared to primary ECs across molecular subtypes (p < 0.0001). CTNNB1 mutations were more prevalent in distant CN-low/NSMP and MSI-high/MMR-deficient metastases compared to primary ECs (q < 0.1). Clinically actionable alterations were significantly less common in metastatic ECs (27 % vs 37 % primary; p = 0.025). PI3K, p53 and epigenetic pathways were the most altered pathways among all anatomic sites.
conclusionsDistant metastatic ECs are more frequently chromosomally unstable but less commonly exhibit hypermutator phenotypes. Exploitation of genetic differences of metastatic EC is warranted for targeted treatment strategy development.
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.