ArticleTargeted oncology2026
Concordance Analysis of Microsatellite Instability via NGS and Mismatch Repair Deficiency via IHC in Endometrial and Colorectal Cancer.
Article in Targeted oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAssessment of mismatch repair (MMR) function provides critical guidance for diagnosis, prognosis, and therapeutic decision making in colorectal and endometrial cancers. Mismatch repair immunohistochemistry (IHC) is the routine clinical test for identifying MMR deficiency, while microsatellite instability (MSI) serves as its surrogate, detected by polymerase chain reaction or next-generation sequencing (NGS). Available data indicate a high concordance rate between these approaches in colon cancer, whereas a lower concordance has been reported in endometrial cancer.
objectiveWe aimed to assess the concordance rate between MMR-IHC and MSI-NGS from patients with colorectal or endometrial cancer, using IHC as the gold standard.
methodsA cohort of 520 patients (352 with endometrial cancer and 168 with colorectal cancer) were included. MMR‑IHC assessed MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 expression, while MSI‑NGS was determined by profiling 130 homopolymer repeat loci using the TruSight Oncology 500 panel from Illumina.
resultsWhile concordance was high in the colorectal cancer cohort (99%, 95% confidence interval 96-100), a lower level of agreement was observed in endometrial cancer cases (85%, 95% confidence interval 81-89). Fifty-two of 53 discordant cases exhibited MMR deficiency by IHC in the absence of detectable MSI. Forty percent of discordant cases could be explained by factors previously associated with reduced MSI levels, including mutations in DNA polymerase genes (n = 5), isolated MSH6 loss (n = 10), atypical IHC staining patterns (n = 8), and germline variants (n = 6). Additionally, the presence of genetic and epigenetic alterations (specifically, 19 cases with MLH1 promoter hypermethylation and ten with somatic or germline MMR variants) supports the interpretation that MSI calls were missed in a subset of cases. Finally, optimizing the MSI threshold enhanced detection accuracy in endometrial tumors.
conclusionsThese findings confirm the lower concordance between MMR-IHC and MSI-NGS in endometrial cancer compared with colorectal cancer when broad panels are used, underscoring the importance of tumor-specific interpretation even within tumor-agnostic assays. Although cut-off optimization improved agreement, the evidence remains insufficient for clinical implementation, and further validation studies are needed.
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.