Biomarkers of Uterine Fibroids

Chapter
Part of the Comprehensive Gynecology and Obstetrics book series (CGO)

Abstract

Although uterine leiomyomas, or fibroids, are benign tumors, surgery has been the main mode of therapy for them. Because women who wish to retain the uterus for future pregnancies are increasing in number due to an increase in the average age of childbearing, therapy with molecular-targeted agents is desired. The development of effective agents requires a better understanding of the molecular mechanisms involved in the onset and development of leiomyomas. In addition, because uterine leiomyosarcomas, which, unlike leiomyomas, are malignant, occur in a similar location and have similar shapes, differentiating leiomyomas from leiomyosarcomas is needed to retain the uterus. Therefore, in this chapter, we focus on the pathological diagnostic markers that appear to be involved in the mechanisms of the onset and development of leiomyomas and the differential diagnostic markers to distinguish them from leiomyosarcomas. To identify the pathological diagnostic markers of leiomyomas, previous studies have used cytogenetic status, mRNA, microRNA and protein expression, and DNA methylation patterns. In recent years, genome-wide sequencing studies have associated leiomyomas most frequently with somatic mutations of the MED12 gene and less frequently with several other genomic alterations. To identify candidate markers for differential diagnosis, several studies have used microRNA expression, omics, and immunohistochemical analyses. Here, we outline the above findings and describe our recent application of leiomyoma-specific marker genes that have aberrant DNA methylation, to distinguish leiomyomas from leiomyosarcomas.

Keywords

Diagnostic biomarkers Uterine leiomyoma Uterine leiomyosarcoma 

References

  1. 1.
    Stewart EA. Uterine fibroids. Lancet. 2001;357:293–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bajekal N, Li TC. Fibroids, infertility and pregnancy wastage. Hum Reprod Update. 2000;6:614–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gadducci A, Cosio S, Romanini A, Genazzani AR. The management of patients with uterine sarcoma: a debated clinical challenge. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2008;65:129–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lange SS, Novetsky AP, Powell MA. Recent advances in the treatment of sarcomas in gynecology. Discov Med. 2014;18:133–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roque DR, et al. Gemcitabine and docetaxel compared with observation, radiation, or other chemotherapy regimens as adjuvant treatment for stage I-to-IV uterine leiomyosarcoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016;26:505–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Foley OW, et al. Trends in the treatment of uterine leiomyosarcoma in the Medicare population. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2015;25:453–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Reed NS, et al. Phase III randomised study to evaluate the role of adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy in the treatment of uterine sarcomas stages I and II: an European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Gynaecological Cancer Group Study. Eur J Cancer. 2008;44:808–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bell SW, Kempson RL, Hendrickson MR. Problematic uterine smooth muscle neoplasms. A clinicopathologic study of 213 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 1994;18:535–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ly A, et al. Atypical leiomyomas of the uterus: a clinicopathologic study of 51 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2013;37:643–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhang Q, et al. Molecular analyses of 6 different types of uterine smooth muscle tumors: emphasis in atypical leiomyoma. Cancer. 2014;120:3165–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fan D, Yi X. Pulmonary benign metastasizing leiomyoma: a case report. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2014;15:7072–5.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tohya T, et al. Case of concurrent benign metastasizing leiomyoma in the lung and retroperitoneum, with a focus on its etiology. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2014;40:2010–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Biomarkers Definitions Working Group. Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2001;69:89–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Canevari RA, Pontes A, Rosa FE, Rainho CA, Rogatto SR. Independent clonal origin of multiple uterine leiomyomas that was determined by X chromosome inactivation and microsatellite analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193:1395–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang P, et al. Use of X-chromosome inactivation pattern to determine the clonal origins of uterine leiomyoma and leiomyosarcoma. Hum Pathol. 2006;37:1350–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Makinen N, et al. MED12, the mediator complex subunit 12 gene, is mutated at high frequency in uterine leiomyomas. Science. 2011;334:252–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gross KL, Morton CC. Genetics and the development of fibroids. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2001;44:335–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sandberg AA. Updates on the cytogenetics and molecular genetics of bone and soft tissue tumors: leiomyoma. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 2005;158:1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tsibris JC, et al. Insights from gene arrays on the development and growth regulation of uterine leiomyomata. Fertil Steril. 2002;78:114–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Skubitz KM, Skubitz AP. Differential gene expression in uterine leiomyoma. J Lab Clin Med. 2003;141:297–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Arslan AA, et al. Gene expression studies provide clues to the pathogenesis of uterine leiomyoma: new evidence and a systematic review. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:852–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wang T, et al. A micro-RNA signature associated with race, tumor size, and target gene activity in human uterine leiomyomas. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2007;46:336–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Marsh EE, Lin Z, Yin P, Milad M, Chakravarti D, Bulun SE. Differential expression of microRNA species in human uterine leiomyoma versus normal myometrium. Fertil Steril. 2008;89(6):1771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lemeer S, Gholami AM, Wu Z, Kuster B. Quantitative proteome profiling of human myoma and myometrium tissue reveals kinase expression signatures with potential for therapeutic intervention. Proteomics. 2015;15:356–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ura B, Scrimin F, Arrigoni G, Franchin C, Monasta L, Ricci G. A proteomic approach for the identification of up-regulated proteins involved in the metabolic process of the leiomyoma. Int J Mol Sci. 2016;17:540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Maekawa R, et al. Disease-dependent differently methylated regions (D-DMRs) of DNA are enriched on the X chromosome in uterine leiomyoma. J Reprod Dev. 2011;57:604–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Maekawa R, et al. Genome-wide DNA methylation analysis reveals a potential mechanism for the pathogenesis and development of uterine leiomyomas. PLoS One. 2013;8:e66632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sato S, et al. Potential mechanisms of aberrant DNA hypomethylation on the x chromosome in uterine leiomyomas. J Reprod Dev. 2014;7:47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Navarro A, et al. Genome-wide DNA methylation indicates silencing of tumor suppressor genes in uterine leiomyoma. PLoS One. 2012;7:e33284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Croce S, Chibon F. MED12 and uterine smooth muscle oncogenesis: state of the art and perspectives. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:1603–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    McGuire MM, Yatsenko A, Hoffner L, Jones M, Surti U, Rajkovic A. Whole exome sequencing in a random sample of North American women with leiomyomas identifies MED12 mutations in majority of uterine leiomyomas. PLoS One. 2012;7:e33251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Halder SK, Laknaur A, Miller J, Layman LC, Diamond M, Al-Hendy A. Novel MED12 gene somatic mutations in women from the Southern United States with symptomatic uterine fibroids. Mol Gen Genomics. 2015;290:505–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kämpjärvi K, et al. Mutations in exon 1 highlight the role of MED12 in uterine leiomyomas. Hum Mutat. 2014;35:1136–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yatsenko SA, et al. Highly heterogeneous genomic landscape of uterine leiomyomas by whole exome sequencing and genome-wide arrays. Fertil Steril. 2017;107:457–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ravegnini G, et al. MED12 mutations in leiomyosarcoma and extrauterine leiomyoma. Mod Pathol. 2013;26:743–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kämpjärvi K, et al. Somatic MED12 mutations in uterine leiomyosarcoma and colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer. 2012;107:1761–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lim WK, et al. Exome sequencing identifies highly recurrent MED12 somatic mutations in breast fibroadenoma. Nat Genet. 2014;46:877–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lehtonen R, et al. Biallelic inactivation of fumarate hydratase (FH) occurs in nonsyndromic uterine leiomyomas but is rare in other tumors. Am J Pathol. 2004;164:17–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mehine M, Mäkinen N, Heinonen HR, Aaltonen LA, Vahteristo P. Genomics of uterine leiomyomas: insights from high-throughput sequencing. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:621–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Mehine M, et al. Characterization of uterine leiomyomas by whole-genome sequencing. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:43–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mehine M, et al. Integrated data analysis reveals uterine leiomyoma subtypes with distinct driver pathways and biomarkers. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016;113:1315–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bertsch E, et al. MED12 and HMGA2 mutations: two independent genetic events in uterine leiomyoma and leiomyosarcoma. Mod Pathol. 2014;27:1144–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sandberg AA. Updates on the cytogenetics and molecular genetics of bone and soft tissue tumors: leiomyosarcoma. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 2005;161:1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mäkinen N, et al. Exome sequencing of uterine leiomyosarcomas identifies frequent mutations in TP53, ATRX, and MED12. PLoS Genet. 2016;12:e1005850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Danielson LS, et al. A differentiation-based microRNA signature identifies leiomyosarcoma as a mesenchymal stem cell-related malignancy. Am J Pathol. 2010;177:908–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Miyata T, et al. Genomic, epigenomic, and transcriptomic profiling towards identifying omics features and specific biomarkers that distinguish uterine leiomyosarcoma and leiomyoma at molecular levels. Sarcoma. 2015;2015:412068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Mittal K, Demopoulos RI. MIB-1 (Ki-67), p53, estrogen receptor, and progesterone receptor expression in uterine smooth muscle tumors. Hum Pathol. 2001;32:984–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Akhan SE, et al. The expression of Ki-67, p53, estrogen and progesterone receptors affecting survival in uterine leiomyosarcomas. A clinicopathologic study. Gynecol Oncol. 2005;99:36–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Hayashi T, et al. Potential role of LMP2 as tumor-suppressor defines new targets for uterine leiomyosarcoma therapy. Sci Rep. 2011;1:180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hayashi T, et al. Potential role of LMP2 as an anti-oncogenic factor in human uterine leiomyosarcoma: morphological significance of calponin h1. FEBS Lett. 2012;586:1824–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Hayashi T, et al. Potential diagnostic biomarkers: differential expression of LMP2/β1i and cyclin B1 in human uterine leiomyosarcoma. Tumori. 2014;100:99e–106e.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Hayashi T, Faustman DL. Development of spontaneous uterine tumors in low molecular mass polypeptide-2 knockout mice. Cancer Res. 2002;62:24–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Hayashi T, et al. Mice-lacking LMP2, immuno-proteasome subunit, as an animal model of spontaneous uterine leiomyosarcoma. Protein Cell. 2010;1:711–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Sato S, et al. Identification of uterine leiomyoma-specific marker genes based on DNA methylation and their clinical application. Sci Rep. 2016;6:30652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Mittal P, et al. Med12 gain-of-function mutation causes leiomyomas and genomic instability. J Clin Invest. 2015;3:3280–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mittal KR, Chen F, Wei JJ, Rijhvani K, Kurvathi R, Streck D, Dermody J, Toruner GA. Molecular and immunohistochemical evidence for the origin of uterine leiomyosarcomas from associated leiomyoma and symplastic leiomyoma-like areas. Mod Pathol. 2009;22:1303–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Christacos NC, Quade BJ, Dal Cin P, Morton CC. Uterine leiomyomata with deletions of Ip represent a distinct cytogenetic subgroup associated with unusual histologic features. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2006;45:304–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Yanai H, et al. Uterine leiomyosarcoma arising in leiomyoma: clinicopathological study of four cases and literature review. Pathol Int. 2010;60:506–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Shiota K, et al. Epigenetic marks by DNA methylation specific to stem, germ and somatic cells in mice. Genes Cells. 2002;7:961–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Yagi S, et al. DNA methylation profile of tissue-dependent and differentially methylated regions (T-DMRs) in mouse promoter regions demonstrating tissue-specific gene expression. Genome Res. 2008;18:1969–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyYamaguchi University School of MedicineUbe, YamaguchiJapan

Personalised recommendations