2.1. Endometrial Cancer
Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common cancer of the female genital tract in developed countries and is the sixth most common cancer in women worldwide, with more than 400,000 new cases diagnosed in 2020
[48][88]. Both its incidence and its associated mortality are increasing
[49][89]. In routine clinical practices, EC is classified into type I or type II, based, in particular, on the histology and grade. Type I (endometrioid) is more common (80–85% of cases) and includes low-grade, diploid, hormone receptor–positive endometrial tumors with a good prognosis. Common molecular alterations identified in type I tumors are microsatellite instability, as well as
PTEN,
KRAS, and
CTNNB1 mutations
[50][90]. Type II (non-endometrioid, serous) represents high-grade, usually aneuploid, hormone receptor–negative endometrial tumors frequently associated with a poor prognosis and an increased risk of metastasis development. In this type we often encounter
TP53 mutations, Her-2/
neu amplifications, negative or reduced E-cadherin expressions, and the inactivation of p16 by mutation or hypermethylation. However, the most important limitation of the classification of endometrioid and serous carcinomas is that the categorizations and behaviors often differ from the theory in specific cases
[51][91]. Recent molecular studies found that EC comprises a range of diseases with distinct genetic and molecular features. Four novel EC categories have recently been proposed by The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network (TCGA), such as polymerase epsilon (
POLE), ultra-mutated, microsatellite unstable (MSI), copy-number low, and copy-number high
[52][92]. This new genomic-based characterization evoked the reclassification of EC, which has recently led to the updating of the European guidelines for diagnosis and treatment
[53][93]. However, significant clinical issues, such as the more detailed stratification of the non-specific molecular profile of EC, still remain to be solved. Thus, further studies should be focused on the integration of molecular and clinicopathological features
[54][94].
2.2. EC Development: Endometrial Precancer–Cancer Sequence
The human endometrium is a highly regenerative tissue, adopting multiple different physiological states during life. During the reproductive years, the endometrium undergoes monthly cycles of growth and regression in response to oscillating levels of estrogen and progesterone sustained by stem/progenitor cells
[55][95]. Thus, an increased rate of mutations in this tissue can be expected, and it mirrors the fact that EC is one the most common gynecological tumors. Accordingly, normal endometrial glands (over 50%) frequently carry ‘driver’ mutations in cancer genes such as
KRAS,
PIK3CA,
FGFR2, and/or
PTEN loss, the burden of which increases with age
[56][96]. Whole-genome sequencing showed that normal human endometrial glands are clonal cell populations with total mutation burdens that increase at about 29 base substitutions per year; however, these are many-fold lower than those of EC
[57][97]. Interestingly, the extremely high mutation loads attributed to the DNA mismatch repair deficiency and
POLE mutations, as well as structural and copy number alterations, are specific to EC, not to normal epithelial cells
[58][98]. Comprehensive examination of the timing of pathogenic somatic
POLE mutations in sporadic endometrial tumors by whole genome sequencing confirmed that pathogenic somatic
POLE mutations occurred early, and are possibly initiating events in endometrial and colorectal tumorigenesis
[59][99]. It was also shown that the acquisition of a
POLE mutation caused a distinct pattern of mutations in cancer driver genes, a substantially increased mutation burden, and an enhanced immune response, detectable even in precancerous lesions.
In a recently published study, Aguilar et al. identified the presence of driver mutations (e.g., in
KRAS, PTEN, CTNNB1, etc.) by high-throughput sequencing of serial endometrial biopsies taken several years before the onset of EC, even without previously diagnosing atypical hyperplasia or endometrioid intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN). It is important to note that these mutations were confirmed in the invasive cancer. This research provided unique insights into precancer initiation and progression and clearly demonstrated the existence of endometrial premalignant lesions with definitive mutations not readily identifiable by histology
[60][100]. These findings are also supported by a case report in which tumor-specific mutations were identified in an asymptomatic individual without clinical or pathologic evidence of cancer nearly one year before symptoms developed, i.e., postmenopausal bleeding and a single microscopic focus of EC diagnosed at the time of hysteroscopy
[61][101].
From the histological point of view, endometrial hyperplasia represents a spectrum of irregular morphological alterations, whereby the abnormal proliferation of the endometrial glands results in an increase in the gland-to-stroma ratio compared to the endometrium from the proliferative phase of the cycle. Nevertheless, different types of EC derive from different precursor lesions. Type I EC typically develops from atypical hyperplasia or EIN, depending on the classification system
[62][102]. It was shown that the risk of progression to carcinoma in women with non-atypical endometrial hyperplasia was <5%, while almost 30% of women with atypical endometrial hyperplasia were diagnosed with EC
[63][103]. Moreover, up to 50% of women with atypical hyperplasia on an endometrial biopsy have EC in the resection specimen
[64][104]. Type II EC usually develops on the atrophic endometrium, often on an endometrial polyp. This lesion is composed of cytologically malignant cells, like those seen in uterine serous carcinoma, lining the surface of the endometrium or endometrial glands without the invasion of the endometrial stroma, myometrium, or lymphovascular spaces
[65][105]. Although technically non-invasive in appearance, these tumors have been associated with extrauterine disease, reflecting their aggressive biology
[66][106]. However, there are many unanswered questions, and it is not clear if cancers obey these model paradigms in all cases.
Taken together, it can be assumed that endometrial precancerous lesions preceding the development of invasive ECs are molecularly different from the normal endometrium, frequently show a monoclonal growth pattern, and share some, but not necessarily all, features of a malignant endometrium
[67][107]. Indeed, these molecular alterations, predominantly single hotspot cancer driver mutations in the context of suspicious histopathologic features, should be detectable already in precursor lesions, especially those with an increased risk of progression to EC and could have sufficient sensitivity and specificity.
2.3. The Current State of the Diagnosis and Screening of Endometrial Precancer and/or Early EC
Although the detection of precancerous lesions, and the patient risk stratification in general, are increasingly important for early diagnoses and the prevention of cancer, the screening of EC and precancerous dysplasia in the non-symptomatic population basically does not exist (
Table 1). In most cases, EC is diagnosed in symptomatic women. There are several lines of evidence that a diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia may precede the development of endometrioid EC, as they share common environmental predisposing risk factors, such as a postmenopausal status, family history, nulliparity, obesity, diabetes mellitus, long-term Tamoxifen therapy, elevated estrogen levels, smoking, etc.
[68][69][108,109]. Known genetic risk factors for endometrial cancer are germline mutations in DNA, mismatch repair genes associated with Lynch syndrome
[70][110], and germline
PTEN mutations responsible for Cowden syndrome
[71][111]. Hereditary EC makes up approximately 2% to 5% of all cases
[72][112]. For women who tested negative for hereditary mutations, the concept of a polygenic risk score (PRS) based on genetic variants determined by genome-wide association studies would be of potential interest, since it predicts women who are at high risk of developing EC
[73][113]. Moreover, the integration of an EC PRS with other known EC risk factors (e.g. obesity) should improve the risk stratification accuracy and could provide opportunities for population-based screening
[74][114].
In current practices, annually performed clinical examinations and transvaginal ultrasounds are insufficient. On the other hand, an additional endometrial biopsy and outpatient hysteroscopy could improve screening results but are not well tolerated. Pipelle sampling can be limited in cases with a non-representative biopsy specimen, or cervical stenosis
[75][4]. This has made EC and its precancerous lesions a major issue for health care investigations. Already, G. Papanicolaou has been interested in the possibility of the diagnostic value of cervical smears. Due to the anatomical continuity of the uterine cavity within the cervix, material from routine cervical Pap brush samples represent a unique opportunity to detect the signs of disease shed from the upper genital tract
[76][2]. However, a systematic review by Frias-Gomez et al. showed that only approximately 40–50% of ECs can be detected with a morphological evaluation of cervical smears
[77][115]. A recent retrospective study, focused on the sensitivity of cervical cytology in EC detection, showed a sensitivity of only 25.6%
[78][116]. Cervical Pap brush samples were also subjected to PapSEEK, the targeted sequencing of specific PCR amplicons generated from the specific loci of 18 genes, which resulted in the detection of 81% EC-positive patients and 78% early-stage EC cases
[79][8].
A recently published pilot cytological analysis of self-collected voided urine samples and vaginal samples collected with a Delphi screener before routine clinical procedures reported that the combination of non-invasive urogenital sampling with cytology distinguished malignant from non-malignant causes of postmenopausal bleeding, with approximately 90% accuracy
[80][14]. Following these promising results, the multicenter prospective validation study (DETECT study, ISRCTN58863784) has been launched to support the utilization of this non-invasive test in clinical practice
[81][117].
Proteins, rather than genes or RNAs, perhaps reflect the properties of living tissue most accurately. Thus, proteomics has emerged as the technique of choice for biomarker discovery. A number of blood-based biomarker candidates for EC detection have been reported, belonging to hormones, cancer-associated antigens, adipokines, complement factors, plasma glycoproteins, plasma lipoproteins, enzymes and their inhibitors, growth factors, etc. (for detailed information, see the review by Njoku et al.
[82][118]). Urine represents an attractive biofluid for biomarker discovery and, indeed, elevated levels of the zinc-alpha-2 glycoprotein, alpha-1 acid glycoprotein, and CD59 indicating the presence of EC were identified by proteomics
[83][119]. Several IHC biomarkers have been also investigated in combination with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining to improve the diagnostics of endometrial precancers and to predict the risk of the transition from hyperplasia to EC. There are several prominent IHC candidates, such as PTEN, p53, PAX2, beta-catenin, E-cadherin, and proteins involved in the DNA mismatch repair pathways (MLH1, MLH2, and MSH6) that may be useful in predicting malignant progression
[84][120].
Nowadays, genomic analyses offer an excellent opportunity to stratify the risk of EC progression; however, despite the considerable worldwide incidence of EC, there is currently no blood-based biomarker in routine use for EC patients
[85][121]. Circulating tumor DNA has been recently shown as an important source of genetic information that may enable the detection of both early- and late-stage EC. An NGS analysis of ctDNA from peripheral blood plasma revealed that a mutation in at least one of the four genes,
PTEN, PIK3CA, KRAS, and
CTTNB1, can be detected in more than 90% of EC patients
[85][121]. Notably, several studies have determined ctDNA in different body fluids and have confirmed its clinical utility for EC patients. For instance, an NGS analysis of uterine aspirates, in combination with an analysis of ctDNA and CTC obtained from blood samples, clearly indicate the potential clinical applicability
[86][122].
Efforts focused on the investigation of circulating free miRNAs as potential biomarkers of early EC are also growing, since these miRNAs have been described as potential biomarkers for these malignancies
[87][123]. Interestingly, several studies have identified miRNAs in extracellular vesicles from different body fluids, e.g., urine
[88][124], peritoneal lavage
[89][125], and blood serum
[90][126]. Recently, a large plasma-derived exosomal miRNA study identified miR-15a-5p as a valuable diagnostic biomarker for the early detection of EC
[91][127]. Another study identified four miRNAs associated with EC (oncogenic miRNAs miR-135b and miR-205, as well as tumor suppressor miRNAs miR-30a-3p and miR-21)
[87][123].
Metabolites represent another promising source for the detection of early-stage endometrial cancer and can be detected in endometrial tissue, brush and lavage specimens, blood samples, and urine
[76][2]. Blood metabolites are of great interest since they are easily accessible, although they have a limited yield. Several blood-based metabolites have been suggested as potential EC biomarkers and are mostly by-products of lipids and amino acids
[92][128]. Interestingly, the most commonly reported dysregulated metabolic pathways responsible for the presence of biomarkers in the serum of EC patients are the lipid- and glycolysis-related pathways
[93][94][129,130]. One of the most promising is phosphocholine, whose elevated levels (approximately a 70% increase) have been identified in EC patients
[95][131]. Recently, Njoku et al. showed that the determination of specific lipid metabolites in blood, such as phospholipids and sphingolipids, could enable the early detection of EC
[96][132].