Estrogen and Progestin Receptors in Relation to Conventional Prognosis Indicators in Endometrial Carcinomas

  • Antti Kauppila
Part of the AGO Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Gynäkologische Onkologie book series (AGO)


Determination of hormonal dependency by biochemical estrogen (ERC) and progestin receptor (PRC) assays have been found clinically beneficial in breast carcinoma [1,2]. ERC and PRC assays are being used e.g. in selecting breast carcinoma patients suitable for endocrine therapy. In endometrial carcinoma the clinical significance of ERC and PRC has remained unclear, despite receptor determinations, since the early years of the seventies in several centres. As in breast cancer, ERC and PRC assays seem, however, to be able to discriminate hormone sensitive tumors from those which are not hormine dependent [1–4]. The preliminary data from trials with a limited number of patients and short follow-up time about ten years ago suggested that they are clinically useful markers of the aggressivity of endometrial malignancies [5–6]. At present, several clinical studies with a sufficient number of patients with ERC and/or PRC assays and long follow-up time have been accomplished [4,7–18]. By reviewing the data from these studies, the present article is aimed at describing the available knowledge of ERC and PRC as prognosis indicators in endometrial carcinoma.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Vihko R, Alanko A, Isomaa V, Kauppila A: The predictive value of steroid hormone receptor analysis in breast, endometrial and ovarian cancer. Med Oncol & Tumor Pharmacother 3: 197–210, 1986Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Desombre ER, Holt JA, Herbst AL: Steroid receptors in breast, uterine and ovarian malignancy. Diagnostic and therapeutic applications. In Gynecol Endocrinol, eds JJ Gold, JB Josimovich, Plenum Publishing Corporation, pp 511–528, 1987Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kauppila A: Oestrogen and progestin receptors as prognostic indicators in endometrial cancer. A review of literature. Acta Oncol 28: 561–566, 1989PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ehrlich CE, Young PCM, Stehman FB, Sutton GP, Alford WM: Steroid receptors and clinical outcome in patients with adenocarcinoma of the endometrium. Am J Obstet Gynecol 158: 796–807, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Creasman WT, McCarty KS, Barton TK, McCarty KS Sr: Clinical correlates of estrogen- and progesterone-binding proteins in human endometrial adenocarcinoma. Obstet Gynecol 55: 363–370, 1980PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kauppila AJI, Isotalo H, Kujansuu E, Vihko R: Clinical significance of female sex steroid hormone receptors in endometrial carcinoma treated with conventional methods and medroxyprogesterone acetate. Excerpta Medica Intern Congr Series No 611. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Medroxyprogesterone acetate, pp 350–359, Excerpta Medica, Amsterdam, 1982Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Martin JD, Hähnel R, McCartney AJ, Woodings TL: The effect of estrogen receptor status on survival in patients with endometrial cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 147: 322–324, 1983PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Creasman WT, Soper JT, McCarty KS jr, McCarty KS Sr, Hinshaw W, Clarke-Peterson DL: Influence of cytoplasmic steroid receptor content on prognosis of early stage endometrial carcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol 151: 922–932, 1985PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kauppila AJI, Isotalo HE, Kivinen S, Vihko R: Prediction of clinical outcome with estrogen and progestin receptor concentrations and their relationships to clinical and histopathological variables in endometrial cancer. Cancer Res 46: 5380–5384, 1986PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lindahl B, Alm P, Fernö M, Grundsell H, Norgren A, Trope C: Relapse of endometrial cancer related to steroid receptor concentration, staging, hystol. grading and myométrial invasion. Anticancer Res 6: 1317–1320, 1986PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chambers JT, McLusky N, Eisenfield A, Kohorn El, Lawrence R, Schwartz PE: Estrogen and progestin receptor levels as prognosticators for survival in endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 31: 65–77, 1988PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Palmer DC, Muir IM, Alexander AI, Cauchi M, Bennett RC, Quinn MA: The prognostic importance of steroid receptors in endometrial carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol 72: 388–393, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ingram SS, Rosenman J, Heath R, Morgan TM, Moore D, Varia M: The predictive value of progesterone receptor levels in endometrial cancer. Int J Rad Oncol Biol Phys 17: 21–27, 1989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sutton GP, Geisler HE, Stehman FB, Young PCM, Kimes TM, Ehrlich CE: Features associated with survival and disease-free survival in early endometrial cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 160: 1385–1393, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kleine W, Bergmann W, Geyer H, Pfleiderer H: Progesteronreceptoren beim Endometriumkarzinoma - ein entscheidender Prognosefaktor. Arch Gynecol Obstet 245: 1–4, 1989Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Borazjani G, Twiggs LB, Leung BS, Prem KA, Adcock LL, Carson LF: Prognostic significance of steroid receptors measured in primary metastatic and recurrent endometrial carcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol 161: 1253–1257, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Utaaker E, Iversen OE, Skaarland E: The distribution and prognostic implications of steroid receptors in endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 28: 89–100, 1987PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lindahl B, Alm P, Fernö M, Killander D, Längström E, Norgren A, Trope C: Prognostic value of steroid receptor concentration and flow cytometrial DNA measurements in stage I-II endometrial carcinoma. Acta Oncol 28: 595–599, 1989PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Iversen OE, Utaaker E and Skaarland E: DNA ploidy and steroid receptors as predictors of disease course in patients with endometrial carcinoma. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 67: 531–537, 1988PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Quillamor RM, Furlog JW, Hoschner JA, Wynn EM: Relative prognostic significance of DNA flow cytometry and histologic grading in endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Obstet Invest 26: 332–337, 1988PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sorbe B, Risberg B, Frankendal B: DNA ploidy, morphometry, and nuclear grading as prognostic factors in endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 38: 22–27, 1990.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antti Kauppila

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations