Sonia Gatius, Marta Vaquero, Oliver Scheiber, Ana Velasco, Dolors Cuevas, Karl Kashofer, Maria Santacana, Núria Eritja, Sigurd Lax, Xavier Matias-Guiu
{"title":"EPM2 AIP1 immunohistochemistry as a surrogate of promoter methylation analysis in endometrial carcinoma.","authors":"Sonia Gatius, Marta Vaquero, Oliver Scheiber, Ana Velasco, Dolors Cuevas, Karl Kashofer, Maria Santacana, Núria Eritja, Sigurd Lax, Xavier Matias-Guiu","doi":"10.1007/s00428-025-04132-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mismatch repair (MMR) status in endometrial carcinoma (EC) is crucial for diagnosis, prognosis, treatment, and Lynch syndrome pre-screening. MLH1 loss is the most frequent cause of MMR deficiency and usually by promoter hypermethylation. We tried to confirm the role of EPM2 AIP1 immunohistochemistry as a surrogate of MLH1 promoter methylation in EC. Case series from two different institutions were analyzed by comparable methods using immunohistochemistry for MMR proteins and EPM2 AIP1, and pyrosequencing for MLH1 methylation. In the first series of 70 cases, concordance was 100%, after reassessing three cases with methylation scores close to cut-off, by tumor cell enrichment. In the second series of 29 MLH1-deficient ECs, concordance was 96.5%, while in the control group of 30 MMR-proficient EC, one MLH1-positive case was EPM2 AIP1-negative. EPM2 AIP1 immunoreactivity was qualitatively superior in curettages and biopsies compared to hysterectomy. We conclude that EPM2 AIP1 immunohistochemistry is a good surrogate for MLH1 promoter methylation analysis, cost-effective with short turnaround time, but needs attention regarding preanalytical handling, normal tissue contamination, or low tumor percentage.</p>","PeriodicalId":23514,"journal":{"name":"Virchows Archiv","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Virchows Archiv","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-025-04132-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Mismatch repair (MMR) status in endometrial carcinoma (EC) is crucial for diagnosis, prognosis, treatment, and Lynch syndrome pre-screening. MLH1 loss is the most frequent cause of MMR deficiency and usually by promoter hypermethylation. We tried to confirm the role of EPM2 AIP1 immunohistochemistry as a surrogate of MLH1 promoter methylation in EC. Case series from two different institutions were analyzed by comparable methods using immunohistochemistry for MMR proteins and EPM2 AIP1, and pyrosequencing for MLH1 methylation. In the first series of 70 cases, concordance was 100%, after reassessing three cases with methylation scores close to cut-off, by tumor cell enrichment. In the second series of 29 MLH1-deficient ECs, concordance was 96.5%, while in the control group of 30 MMR-proficient EC, one MLH1-positive case was EPM2 AIP1-negative. EPM2 AIP1 immunoreactivity was qualitatively superior in curettages and biopsies compared to hysterectomy. We conclude that EPM2 AIP1 immunohistochemistry is a good surrogate for MLH1 promoter methylation analysis, cost-effective with short turnaround time, but needs attention regarding preanalytical handling, normal tissue contamination, or low tumor percentage.
期刊介绍:
Manuscripts of original studies reinforcing the evidence base of modern diagnostic pathology, using immunocytochemical, molecular and ultrastructural techniques, will be welcomed. In addition, papers on critical evaluation of diagnostic criteria but also broadsheets and guidelines with a solid evidence base will be considered. Consideration will also be given to reports of work in other fields relevant to the understanding of human pathology as well as manuscripts on the application of new methods and techniques in pathology. Submission of purely experimental articles is discouraged but manuscripts on experimental work applicable to diagnostic pathology are welcomed. Biomarker studies are welcomed but need to abide by strict rules (e.g. REMARK) of adequate sample size and relevant marker choice. Single marker studies on limited patient series without validated application will as a rule not be considered. Case reports will only be considered when they provide substantial new information with an impact on understanding disease or diagnostic practice.