Concurrent immunohistochemical testing of L1CAM and MMR proteins adds value in risk stratification of endometrial cancer: a proof of concept

Objectives: Histologic classification along with clinical stage predominantly drive management of patients with endometrial cancer. However, current clinico-pathologic risk-based stratification has proven suboptimal, inciting efforts to identify additional molecular classi-fiers, such as L1CAM. This is of particular relevance for the TCGA-defined Nonspecific Molecular Profile (NSMP) and MMR-deficient (MMR-d) groups of tumors, both of which are classified as having an intermediate prognosis. In current practice, L1CAM immunostaining is reserved for NSMP tumors that have been classified as MMR-proficient. The aim of this study is to investigate L1CAM testing in tandem, rather than sequential with that of MMR. Methods: A total of 149 MMR-tested endometrial carcinoma cases from 2019–2020 were identified, of which, 45 had also undergone L1CAM immunostaining. Clinical information including grade, stage, and treatment was reviewed. This was correlated with percentage of L1CAM positivity and MMR-status. Results: L1CAM positivity was noted in 7/45 (15.6%) cases with 6/45 (13.3%) additional cases demonstrating only focal positivity. MMR deficiency was noted in 24/45 (53.3%) of the cases in which L1CAM was performed. Of the cases that showed L1CAM positivity, 6/7 (85.7%), were found to be MMR-deficient. Within the remaining group in which L1CAM was not performed, 24/104 (23.1%) of cases showed MMR deficiency. Conclusions: Current findings suggest that L1CAM positivity is not mutually exclusive when correlating with MMR status. Performing L1CAM immunostaining on all endometrial carcinomas may assist in appropriate treatment for patients with L1CAM positivity, and in particular, in MMR-proficient cases classified within the NSMP category.

L1CAM; MMR; Endometrial cancer; Testing algorithm; Molecular classification

[1] Clarke MA, Devesa SS, Harvey SV, Wentzensen. Hysterectomy-corrected uterine corpus cancer incidence trends and differences in relative survical reveal racial disparities and rising rates of nonendometrioid cancers. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2019; 37: 1895–1908.

[2] Weinberger V, Bednarikova M, Hausnerova J, Ovesna P, Vin-klerova P, Minar L, et al. A Novel Approach to Preoperative Risk Stratification in Endometrial Cancer: the Added Value of Im-munohistochemical Markers. Frontiers in Oncology. 2019; 9: 265.

[3] Zeimet AG, Reimer D, Huszar M, Winterhoff B, Puistola U, Abdel Azim S, et al. L1CAM in Early-Stage Type i Endometrial Cancer: Results of a Large Multicenter Evaluation. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2013; 105: 1142–1150.

[4] Kommoss F, Kommoss F, Grevenkamp F, Bunz A, Taran F, Fend F, et al. L1CAM: amending the “low-risk” category in endome-trial carcinoma. Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology. 2017; 143: 255–262.

[5] Kandoth C, Schultz N, Cherniack AD, Akbani R, Liu Y, Shen H, et al. Integrated genomic characterization of endometrial carcinoma. Nature. 2013; 497: 67–73.

[6] Kommoss FK, Karnezis AN, Kommoss F, Talhouk A, Taran F, Staebler A, et al. L1CAM further stratifies endometrial carcinoma patients with no specific molecular risk profile. British Journal of Cancer. 2018; 119: 480–486.

[7] Talhouk A, McConechy MK, Leung S, Li-Chang HH, Kwon JS, Melnyk N, et al. A clinically applicable molecular-based classification for endometrial cancers. British Journal of Cancer. 2015; 113: 299–310.

[8] Talhouk A, McConechy MK, Leung S, Yang W, Lum A, Senz J, et al. Confirmation of ProMisE: a simple, genomics-based clinical classifier for endometrial cancer. Cancer. 2017; 123: 802–813.

[9] McAlpine J, Leon-Castillo A, Bosse T. The rise of a novel classification system for endometrial carcinoma; integration of molecular subclasses. The Journal of Pathology. 2018; 244: 538–549.

[10] Bosse T, Nout RA, Stelloo E, Dreef E, Nijman HW, Smit VT, et al. L1 cell adhesion molecule is a strong predictor for distant recurrence and overall survival in early stage endometrial cancer: pooled PORTEC trial results. European Journal of Cancer. 2014; 50: 2602–2610.

[11] León‐Castillo A, Gilvazquez E, Nout R, Smit VT, McAlpine JN, McConechy M, et al. Clinicopathological and molecular characterisation of ‘multiple‐classifier’ endometrial carcinomas. The Journal of Pathology. 2020; 250: 312–322.

[12] Talhouk A, McAlpine JN. New classification of endometrial cancers: the development and potential applications of genomic-based classification in research and clinical care. Gynecologic Oncology Research and Practice. 2016; 3: 14.

[13] Stelloo E, Nout RA, Osse EM, Jürgenliemk-Schulz IJ, Jobsen JJ, Lutgens LC, et al. Improved Risk Assessment by Integrat-ing Molecular and Clinicopathological Factors in Early-stage En-dometrial Cancer-Combined Analysis of the PORTEC Cohorts. Clinical Cancer Research. 2016; 22: 4215–4224.

[14] Pasanen A, Loukovaara M, Bützow R. Clinicopathological significance of deficient DNA mismatch repair and MLH1 promoter methylation in endometrioid endometrial carcinoma. Modern Pathology. 2020; 33: 1443–1452.

[15] Uppendahl L, Mullany SA, Winterhoff B. Molecular characterization of endometrial cancer and therapeutic implications. Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2017; 29: 35–39.

[16] Carlson J, McCluggage WG. Reclassifying endometrial carcinomas with a combined morphological and molecular approach. Current Opinion in Oncology. 2019; 31: 411–419.