Archives in Cancer Research

  • ISSN: 2254-6081
  • Journal h-index: 14
  • Journal CiteScore: 3.77
  • Journal Impact Factor: 4.09
  • Average acceptance to publication time (5-7 days)
  • Average article processing time (30-45 days) Less than 5 volumes 30 days
    8 - 9 volumes 40 days
    10 and more volumes 45 days
Awards Nomination 20+ Million Readerbase
Indexed In
  • China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI)
  • CiteFactor
  • OCLC- WorldCat
  • Publons
  • Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research
  • Euro Pub
  • Google Scholar
  • J-Gate
  • Secret Search Engine Labs
  • International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
  • Zenodo
Share This Page

Review - (2023) Volume 11, Issue 3

Endometrial Cancer

Lexi Marthon*
Department of Radiotherapy Oncology, USA
*Correspondence: Lexi Marthon, Department of Radiotherapy Oncology, USA, Email:

Received: 02-May-2023, Manuscript No. ipacr-23-13683; Editor assigned: 04-May-2023, Pre QC No. P-13683; Reviewed: 18-May-2023, QC No. Q-13683; Revised: 23-May-2023, Manuscript No. R-13683; Published: 30-May-2023


The uterus is where endometrial cancer usually develops. Foetal development takes place in the uterus, a hollow, pear-shaped pelvic organ. The layer of cells that makes up the lining (endometrium) of the uterus is where endometrial cancer first appears. Endometrial cancer is also referred to as uterine cancer.


Cancer; Endometrial Cancer; Carcinomas; Uterine cancer


When there are problems with the normal proliferation of endometrial cells, endometrial cancer develops. Cells often die as they are old or injured, and new cells replace them. When damaged or ageing cells do not degrade as they should, cancer begins to grow. Whenever there is an accumulation of extra cells, a growth or tumour is frequently formed. These cancer cells are genetically aberrant and develop uncontrollably as a result. Mutations in a tumour suppressor gene, either p53 or PTEN, are discovered in 10–20% of endometrial malignancies, typically Grade 3 (the highest histologic grade). PTEN has a loss-of-function or null mutation in 20% of endometrial hyperplasias and 50% of endometrioid malignancies, which renders it less effective or altogether useless. The PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway is activated when PTEN function is lost, which promotes cell proliferation. In endometrial cancer, the p53 pathway can either be severely active or repressed. The malignancy is more likely to be aggressive when a mutant form of p53 is overexpressed. Serous carcinomas, which often mimic ovarian and Fallopian carcinomas, are linked to P53 mutations and chromosomal instability. Endometrial intraepithelial carcinoma is hypothesised to give rise to serous carcinomas. Particularly in obese women, PTEN and p27 loss of function mutations are linked to a favourable outcome. 20% of endometrioid and serous carcinomas have the Her2/neu oncogene, which denotes a bad prognosis. Mutations in the transcription gene CTNNB1 (beta-catenin), which are present in 14–44% of endometrial malignancies, may be indicative of a favourable prognosis, albeit the findings are conflicting. Squamous endometrial tumours frequently have beta-catenin mutations. The prognostic relevance of FGFR2 mutations, which are present in 10% to 15% of endometrial malignancies, remains unknown. Another tumour suppressor gene known to be altered in certain endometrial cancer cases is SPOP; it is present in 9% of clear cell endometrial carcinomas and 8% of serous endometrial carcinomas [1-5]. There are often various mutations implicated in type I and type II malignancies. A point mutation in the gene ARID1A, which is frequently present in Type I endometrial cancer, is also present in 26% of clear cell endometrial carcinomas and 18% of serous carcinomas. Type I endometrial cancer frequently exhibits epigenetic silencing as well as point mutations in a number of different genes. Tumour suppressor gene mutations are frequent in Type II endometrial cancer. Both Type I and Type II tumours frequently have mutations in the PIK3CA gene. Microsatellite instability is typical in endometrial cancer in women with Lynch syndrome. Although cancer can occur without an endometrial hyperplasia, the development of one is a substantial risk factor since endometrial hyperplasias can and frequently do progress to adenocarcinoma. 8–30% of atypical endometrial hyperplasia’s turn into cancer within 10 years, compared to 1-3% of non-atypical hyperplasias. Atypical hyperplasias are those in which the nuclei exhibit obvious anomalies. Endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia is another name for pre-cancerous endometrial hyperplasias. Endometrial hyperplasia and Type I endometrial cancer can both result from mutations in the KRAS gene. After the age of 40, endometrial hyperplasia normally develops. When p53 is overexpressed, endometrial glandular dysplasia develops into a serous carcinoma.


The only gynaecologic cancer whose incidence and fatality rates are rising is endometrial cancer. Recently, it was shown that incidence rates were rising by 0.6% year while mortality rates were rising by 1.7%. Fortunately, the majority of endometrial cancers are still found early and may be treated with the intention of curing them. More than half of endometrial cancer fatalities are caused by individuals who, in 10% of cases, have illness that manifests beyond the uterus. Therefore, the majority of endometrial cancer studies are centred on this patient group. Surgery continues to be the cornerstone of endometrial cancer care. By eliminating all gross illness and permitting pathologic examination that informs judgements about adjuvant therapy, surgery serves both therapeutic and diagnostic functions. Recent research have shed light on adjuvant treatment, however there are still some unanswered problems. Studies comparing radiation and systemic treatment have updated clinical judgement. However, a range of patient and tumour factors affect the choice of treatment methods and the most effective sequencing. For instance, randomised trials have shown that chemotherapy can increase survival and lower distant recurrences. How to handle high-risk early-stage illness is unclear because this hasn't been shown for all groups. Similarly, radiation has often been demonstrated to enhance loco regional control, but these advances have not been associated with an improvement in survival. Age, depth of invasion, and grade continue to be the key prognostic indications, but it is necessary to consider the inclusion and significance of a number of additional criteria, such as molecular profile. In addition to highlighting prospective topics for additional study, this review seeks to give an overview of current developments in endometrial cancer from the viewpoints of surgery, systemic treatment, and radiation. The core of endometrial cancer treatment is surgical surgery. It permits removal of the main tumour, pathologic analysis of the condition inside the uterus, and assessment of any potential extra uterine dissemination. Lymph node involvement is still a crucial prognostic factor and frequently denotes the need for extra adjuvant treatment. Improvements in toxicity and patient-reported outcomes as well as shorter hospital stays have been brought about by minimally invasive operations. Similar to this, it has been demonstrated that sentinel lymph node (SLN) assessment lowers the morbidity risks related to more comprehensive staging lymphadenectomy. Its adoption has been rapid due to the decreased toxicity associated with SLN biopsy and significant prognostic information acquired [6-10].

The Fluorescence Imaging for Robotic Endometrial Sentinel lymph node biopsy (FIRES) research was just published to assess the effectiveness of such a method. A thorough multicenter prospective cohort study was used in the experiment to compare SLN versus a full lymphadenectomy. Clinical stage I endometrial cancer patients were included. Indocyanine green was injected into the cervix at the time of surgery, followed by SLN biopsy mapping and pelvic lymphadenectomy with or without para-aortic assessment. Hematoxylin and eosin staining was used to provide a first pathologic evaluation; if the results were negative, cytokeratin immunohistochemistry ultrastaging was carried out. Only 14% of the 340 patients who had SLN mapping failed to map at all, and 34% of those patients failed to map bilaterally. With a 99.6% negative predictive value and a sensitivity of 97%, SLN biopsy was shown to be extremely accurate from a pathologic perspective. These findings imply that SLN mapping is practicable and safe, allowing most patients to avoid having a full lymphadenectomy.

Recent years have seen the publication of several sizable randomised studies assessing the usefulness of adjuvant radiation in both early-stage and more advanced illness. The studies have added more information to help with clinical decision-making, but they have also sparked some debate and shown the need for more research. Age, depth of invasion, and grade continue to be important considerations when deciding whether to use adjuvant treatment in early-stage illness. Similar to the last example, lymphovascular invasion (LVSI) has long been recognised as a risk factor for recurrence but has traditionally only been reported as present or missing. LVI was ranked by extent in a pooled analysis of the Post-Operative Radiotherapy in Endometrial Carcinoma (PORTEC) 1 and 2 trials. Significant LVSI, as opposed to focused or no LVSI, had the greatest influence on pelvic regional recurrence, distant metastasis, and overall survival in this research. In the subset of patients with considerable LVSI, the probability of regional recurrence was 15.3% at 5 years, compared to 1.7% in the case of no LVSI and 2.5% in the case of focal LVSI. Only external beam radiation, as opposed to vaginal brachytherapy, was demonstrated to reduce the incidence of pelvic regional recurrences at 5 years as compared with observation. These findings imply that the presence of significant LVI indicates an Aprked increase in the probability of regional recurrence and is one signal for external beam radiation.


Endometrial cancer stages at detection and subsequent survival differ significantly between Black and White women. Black women have a higher mortality rate but a lower incidence of endometrial cancer. The Black/White Cancer Survival Study that the National Cancer Institute started found that Black women were more likely to have advanced-stage disease if they had histologies that were higher grade and more aggressive. It is difficult to separate the effects of biology and socioeconomic status on African American women with endometrial cancer's lower survival rates. There is evidence that having lower income is linked to having advanced disease, having a lower likelihood of having a hysterectomy, and having lower rates of survival. However, others assert that there is no racial difference between Black and White in the time it takes for a patient to report symptoms and receive their first medical consultation. As a result, it is unlikely that a patient's delay after onset of symptoms can account for much of the higher prevalence of advanced-stage disease among Black women. Black women have a lower incidence of endometrial cancer than White women, but this does not explain why they are more likely to be diagnosed with an aggressive disease and have a higher mortality rate.


  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, et al. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022; 72(4):7-33.
  2. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

  3. Groen RS, Gershenson DM, Fader AN. Updates and emerging therapies for rare epithelial ovarian cancers: one size no longer fits all. Gynecol Oncol. 2015; 136 (6):373–383.
  4. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

  5. Chang SJ, Hodeib M, Chang J, et al. Survival impact of complete cytoreduction to no gross residual disease for advanced-stage ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2013; 130(7):493–498.
  6. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

  7. Robson M, Im SA, Senkus E, et al. Olaparib for metastatic breast cancer in patients with a germline BRCA mutation. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377 (7):523–533.
  8. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

  9. Darnell JE Jr., Kerr IM, Stark GR. Jak-STAT pathways and transcriptional activation in response to IFNs and other extracellular signaling proteins. Sci. 1994; 264(4):1415–1421.
  10. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

  11. Gao B. Cytokines, STATs, and liver disease. Cell Mol Immunol. 2005; 2(6):92–100.
  12. Indexed at, Google Scholar

  13. Machida K, Tsukamoto H, Liu JC, et al. C-jun mediates hepatitis c virus hepatocarcinogenesis through signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 and nitric oxide-dependent impairment of oxidative DNA repair. Hepatology. 2010; 52 (8):480–492.
  14. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

  15. Calò V, Migliavacca M, Bazan V, et al.  STAT proteins: from normal control of cellular events to tumorigenesis. J Cell Physiol. 2003; 197 (6):157–68.
  16. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

  17. Lu T, Bankhead A, Neamati N, et al. Multi-omics profiling reveals key signaling pathways in ovarian cancer controlled by STAT3. Theranostics. 2019; 9(1):5478–5496.
  18. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

  19. Huang D, Chen X, Zeng X, et al. Targeting the regulator of G protein signaling 1 in tumor-specific T cells enhances their trafficking to breast cancer. Nat Immunol. 2021; 22:865–879.
  20. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref