Highlighting the molecular refinement of NSMP endometrial cancer in a case of mesonephric-like adenocarcinoma

Le résumé fourni par la source

• ER-negative NSMP tumors may harbor aggressive molecular features. • Mesonephric-like adenocarcinoma is a frequent diagnostic pitfall in low-grade EC. • L1CAM positivity and KRAS mutation indicate high-risk NSMP disease. • Chromosome 1q gain refines risk stratification in NSMP tumors. • Extended molecular profiling can alter adjuvant treatment decisions. The 2025 ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guideline for endometrial carcinoma (EC) integrates molecular classification into clinical decision-making and, for the first time, recommends the subdivision of carcinomas with no specific molecular profile (NSMP) according to estrogen receptor (ER) status and histological grading. However, NSMP carcinomas remain a highly heterogeneous subgroup, posing challenges in terms of diagnosis and therapy. We report the case of a 71-year-old female patient with low-grade NSMP EC. Due to ER-negativity and strong L1 cell adhesion molecule (L1CAM) expression, the German/Austrian/Swiss S3 guideline at that time required comprehensive histopathological reassessment, which reclassified the tumor as mesonephric-like adenocarcinoma. Extended molecular profiling further identified a KRAS mutation and the absence of common alterations in PTEN , PIK3CA , and PIK3R1 . These features correspond to the aggressive “Cluster 3” subgroup of NSMP tumors, characterized by ER-negativity, L1CAM positivity, KRAS mutations, and frequent chromosome 1q gain. The patient therefore underwent adjuvant carboplatin/paclitaxel chemotherapy followed by vaginal brachytherapy and has remained recurrence-free for five years. This case demonstrates molecular classification of an unusual histological type of EC exhibiting an extremely short-term risk of early distant metastasis and its implication on aggressive adjuvant therapeutical approach. It, furthermore, exemplifies the pronounced heterogeneity of the NSMP subgroup.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.