Understanding the clinical implication of mismatch repair deficiency in endometrioid endometrial cancer through a prospective study

Abstract

ObjectivesFindings on impact of mismatch repair deficiency (MMRd) on patient outcomes in endometrial cancer (EC) have been inconsistent to date. The objective of this study was to compare the oncologic outcomes and recurrence patterns between MMRd and MMR-intact (MMRi) endometrioid EC (EEC). MethodsBetween 2015 and 2018, we prospectively recruited 492 EEC cases from three cancer centers in Ontario, Canada. Tumors were reflexively assessed for MMR protein expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Clinicopathological, survival and recurrence patterns were compared between MMRd and MMRi cases. ResultsOf 492 EEC, 348 were MMRi (71%) and 144 were MMRd (29%) with median follow-up of 16.8 months (0–69.6). MMRd tumors tended to be grade 2 or 3 (56% vs. 29%, p < 0.001), with propensity for lymphovascular space invasion (28% vs. 18%, p = 0.024), lymph node involvement (7% vs. 5%, p < 0.001) and received more adjuvant treatment (46% vs. 33%, p = 0.027). This group also had significantly lower 3-year recurrence-free survival (78% vs. 90%, p = 0.014) although there was no difference in OS (p = 0.603). MMRd cases were more likely to recur in retroperitoneal lymph nodes (p = 0.045). Upon subgroup analysis, MLH1 methylated tumors had the worst prognostic features and survival outcomes. ConclusionsMLH1 methylated EECs exhibit more aggressive features compared to other MMRd and MMRi EECs. This may indicate an inherent difference in tumor biology, suggesting the importance of individualized management based on EC molecular phenotype.