Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate for the first time in the literature the role of HE4, at primary diagnosis, compared to CA125 as an indicator of endometrial cancer (EC) recurrence. Our study is a retrospective analysis of 252 EC patients treated, between January 2009 and July 2013, at the Division of Gynaecologic Oncology of Campus Bio-Medico University of Rome. Thirty-seven patients experienced recurrence. Median follow-up was 38 months. HE4 and CA125 levels were analyzed at primary diagnosis, during follow-up and either after histological or radiological confirmation of recurrent disease or at last registered visit, when patients returned to our Department with no evidence of recurrent disease. A statistically significant difference was observed between HE4 values at primary diagnosis and at recurrence, respectively, comparing recurrent and non-recurrent patients (p < 0.05), while CA125 values resulted not statistically significant (p = 0.08) at each time point. Considering the poor specificity of HE4 at threshold of 70 pmol/L at primary diagnosis, in our cohort of patients, we found out that HE4 cut-off of 201.3 pmol/L is able to correctly classify patients at high or low risk of EC recurrence, with a sensitivity of 80 % and a specificity of 91 % (PPV = 90.3 % and NPV = 90.8 %). In particular, HE4 performance improves in cases of endometrioid histotype. HE4 levels at primary diagnosis correlate with an increased risk of EC recurrence, particularly in cases of endometrioid histotype, and they may help to recognize patients who may need a more intensive follow-up.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, et al. GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11 [Internet]. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2013.
Ueda SM, Kapp DS, Cheung MK, et al. Trends in demographic and clinical characteristics in women diagnosed with corpus cancer and their potential impact on the increasing number of deaths. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198:218.e211–6.
Fung-Kee-Fung M, Dodge J, Elit L, Lukka H, Chambers A, Oliver T, et al. Follow-up after primary therapy for endometrial cancer: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol. 2006;101(3):520–9.
Smith CJ, Heeren M, Nicklin JL, Perrin LC, Land R, Crandon AJ, et al. Efficacy of routine follow-up in patients with recurrent uterine cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;107(1):124–9.
Salani R, Backes FJ, Fung MF, et al. Posttreatment surveillance and diagnosis of recurrence in women with gynecologic malignancies: Society of Gynecologic Oncologists recommendations. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;204:466–78.
Colombo N, Preti E, Landoni F, Carinelli S, Colombo A, Marini C, Sessa C; ESMO Guidelines Working Group. Endometrial cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2013 Oct;24 Suppl 6:vi33–8.
Aggarwal P, Kehoe S. Serum tumour markers in gynaecological cancers. Maturitas. 2010;67:46–53.
Bignotti E, Ragnoli M, Zanotti L, Calza S, Falchetti M, Lonardi S, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic impact of serum HE4 detection in endometrial carcinoma patients. Br J Cancer. 2011;104(9):1418–25.
Moore RG, Brown AK, Miller MC, Badgwell D, Lu Z, Allard WJ, et al. Utility of a novel serum tumor biomarker HE4 in patients with endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the uterus. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;110(2):196–201.
Zanotti L, Bignotti E, Calza S, Bandiera E, Ruggeri G, Galli C, et al. Human epididymis protein 4 as a serum marker for diagnosis of endometrial carcinoma and prediction of clinical outcome. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2012;50(12):2189–98.
Capriglione S, Plotti F, Miranda A, Ricciardi R, Scaletta G, Aloisi A, et al. Utility of tumor marker HE4 as prognostic factor in endometrial cancer: a single-center controlled study. Tumour Biol. 2015;36(6):4151–6.
Angioli R, Miranda A, Aloisi A, Montera R, Capriglione S, De Cicco NC, et al. A critical review on HE4 performance in endometrial cancer: where are we now? Tumour Biol. 2014;35(2):881–7.
Angioli R, Capriglione S, Aloisi A, Luvero D, Cafà EV, Dugo N, et al. REM (risk of endometrial malignancy): a proposal for a new scoring system to evaluate risk of endometrial malignancy. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19(20):5733–9.
Angioli R, Plotti F, Capriglione S, Montera R, Damiani P, Ricciardi R, et al. The role of novel biomarker HE4 in endometrial cancer: a case control prospective study. Tumour Biol. 2013;34(1):571–6.
Kalogera E, Scholler N, Powless C, Weaver A, Drapkin R, Li J, et al. Correlation of serum HE4 with tumor size and myometrial invasion in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;124(2):270–5.
Brennan DJ, Hackethal A, Metcalf AM, Coward J, Ferguson K, Oehler MK, et al. Serum HE4 as a prognostic marker in endometrial cancer—a population based study. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;132(1):159–65.
Moore RG, Miller CM, Brown AK, Robison K, Steinhoff M, Lambert-Messerlian G. Utility of tumor marker HE4 to predict depth of myometrial invasion in endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the uterus. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011;21(7):1185–90.
Mutz-Dehbalaie I, Egle D, Fessler S, Hubalek M, Fiegl H, Marth C, et al. HE4 is an independent prognostic marker in endometrial cancer patients. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;126(2):186–91.
Brennan DJ, Hackethal A, Mann KP, Mutz-Dehbalaie I, Fiegl H, Marth C, et al. Serum HE4 detects recurrent endometrial cancer in patients undergoing routine clinical surveillance. BMC Cancer. 2015;15:33.
Amant F, Moerman P, Neven P, Timmerman D, Van Limbergen E, Vergote I. Endometrial cancer. Lancet. 2005;366(9484):491–505.
Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:205–16.
Creutzberg CL, van Putten WL, Koper PC, Lybeert ML, Jobsen JJ, Warlam-Rodenhuis CC, et al. Survival after relapse in patients with endometrial cancer: results from a randomized trial. Gynecol Oncol. 2003;89(2):201–9.
Lajer H, Jensen MB, Kilsmark J, Albaek J, Svane D, Mirza MR, et al. The value of gynecologic cancer follow-up: evidence-based ignorance? Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20:1307–20.
Zanagnolo V, Ming L, Gadducci A, Maggino T, Sartori E, Zola P, et al. Surveillance procedures for patients with cervical carcinoma: a review of the literature. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009;19:194–201.
Sartori E, Pasinetti B, Chiudinelli F, Gadducci A, Landoni F, Maggino T, et al. Surveillance procedures for patients treated for endometrial cancer: a review of the literature. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20:985–92.
Lo SS, Khoo US, Cheng DK, Ng TY, Wong LC, Ngan HY. Role of serial tumor markers in the surveillance for recurrence in endometrial cancer. Cancer Detect Prev. 1999;23(5):397–400.
Patsner B, Orr Jr JW, Mann Jr WJ. Use of serum CA 125 measurement in posttreatment surveillance of early-stage endometrial carcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990;162(2):427–9.
Rose PG, Sommers RM, Reale FR, Hunter RE, Fournier L, Nelson BE. Serial serum CA 125 measurements for evaluation of recurrence in patients with endometrial carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol. 1994;84(1):12–6.
Lv YW, Yang L, Zhang M, Jiang LH, Niu JH, Hou J, et al. Increased human epididymis protein 4 in benign gynecological diseases complicated with chronic renal insufficiency patients. Genet Mol Res. 2015;14(1):2156–61.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
None
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Angioli, R., Capriglione, S., Scaletta, G. et al. The role of HE4 in endometrial cancer recurrence: how to choose the optimal follow-up program. Tumor Biol. 37, 4973–4978 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13277-015-4324-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13277-015-4324-z