Many advances in the understanding of the pathologic and molecular features of endometrial cancer have occurred since the FIGO staging was last updated in 2009. Substantially more outcome and biological behavior data are now available regarding the several histological types. Molecular and genetic findings have accelerated since the publication of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data and provide improved clarity on the diverse biological nature of this collection of endometrial cancers and their differing prognostic outcomes. The goals of the new staging system are to better define these prognostic groups and create substages that indicate more appropriate surgical, radiation, and systemic therapies.The FIGO Women's Cancer Committee appointed a Subcommittee on Endometrial Cancer Staging in October 2021, represented by the authors. Since then, the committee members have met frequently and reviewed new and established evidence on the treatment, prognosis, and survival of endometrial cancer. Based on these data, opportunities for improvements in the categorization and stratification of these factors were identified in each of the four stages. Data and analyses from the molecular and histological classifications performed and published in the recently developed ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines were used as a template for adding the new subclassifications to the proposed molecular and histological staging system.Based on the existing evidence, the substages were defined as follows: (IA1): non-aggressive histological type of endometrial carcinoma limited to a polyp or confined to the endometrium; (IA2) non-aggressive histological types of endometrium involving less than 50% of the myometrium with no or focal lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) as defined by WHO criteria; (IA3) low-grade endometrioid carcinomas limited to the uterus with simultaneous low-grade endometrioid ovarian involvement; (IB) non-aggressive histological types involving 50% or more of the myometrium with no LVSI or focal LVSI; (IC) aggressive histological types, i.e. serous, high-grade endometrioid, clear cell, carcinosarcomas, undifferentiated, mixed, and other unusual types without any myometrial invasion. (IIA): non-aggressive histological types that infiltrate the cervical stroma; (IIB) non-aggressive histological types that have substantial LVSI; or (IIC) aggressive histological types with any myometrial invasion. (IIIA): differentiating between adnexal versus uterine serosa infiltration; (IIIB) infiltration of vagina/parametria and pelvic peritoneal metastasis; and (IIIC) refinements for lymph node metastasis to pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes, including micrometastasis and macrometastasis. (IVA): locally advanced disease infiltrating the bladder or rectal mucosa; (IVB) extrapelvic peritoneal metastasis; and (IVC) distant metastasis. The performance of complete molecular classification (, MMRd, NSMP, p53abn) is encouraged in all endometrial cancers. If the molecular subtype is known, this is recorded in the FIGO stage by the addition of "m" for molecular classification, and a subscript indicating the specific molecular subtype. When molecular classification reveals p53abn or status in Stages I and II, this results in upstaging or downstaging of the disease (IICm or IAm).The updated 2023 staging of endometrial cancer includes the various histological types, tumor patterns, and molecular classification to better reflect the improved understanding of the complex nature of the several types of endometrial carcinoma and their underlying biologic behavior. The changes incorporated in the 2023 staging system should provide a more evidence-based context for treatment recommendations and for the more refined future collection of outcome and survival data.© 2023. Asian Society of Gynecologic Oncology, Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology, and Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology.

A European consensus conference on endometrial carcinoma was held in 2014 to produce multi-disciplinary evidence-based guidelines on selected questions. Given the large body of literature on the management of endometrial carcinoma published since 2014, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) jointly decided to update these evidence-based guidelines and to cover new topics in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide.© IGCS and ESGO 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Despite their low risk for recurrence, many women with endometrial adenocarcinoma receive postoperative radiation therapy (RT). This study was developed to determine if adjunctive external beam irradiation lowers the risk of recurrence and death in women with endometrial cancer International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages IB, IC, and II (occult disease).Four hundred forty-eight consenting patients with "intermediate risk" endometrial adenocarcinoma were randomized after surgery to either no additional therapy (NAT) or whole pelvic radiation therapy (RT). They were followed to determine toxicity, date and location of recurrence, and overall survival. A high intermediate risk (HIR) subgroup of patients was defined as those with (1) moderate to poorly differentiated tumor, presence of lymphovascular invasion, and outer third myometrial invasion; (2) age 50 or greater with any two risk factors listed above; or (3) age of at least 70 with any risk factor listed above. All other eligible participants were considered to be in a low intermediate risk (LIR) subgroup.Three hundred ninety-two women met all eligibility requirements (202 NAT, 190 RT). Median follow-up was 69 months. In the entire study population, there were 44 recurrences and 66 deaths (32 disease or treatment-related deaths), and the estimated 2-year cumulative incidence of recurrence (CIR) was 12% in the NAT arm and 3% in the RT arm (relative hazard (RH): 0.42; P=0.007). The treatment difference was particularly evident among the HIR subgroup (2-year CIR in NAT versus RT: 26% versus 6%; RH=0.42). Overall, radiation had a substantial impact on pelvic and vaginal recurrences (18 in NAT and 3 in RT). The estimated 4-year survival was 86% in the NAT arm and 92% for the RT arm, not significantly different (RH: 0.86; P=0.557).Adjunctive RT in early stage intermediate risk endometrial carcinoma decreases the risk of recurrence, but should be limited to patients whose risk factors fit a high intermediate risk definition.

After surgery for intermediate-risk endometrial carcinoma, the vagina is the most frequent site of recurrence. This study established whether vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) is as effective as pelvic external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) in prevention of vaginal recurrence, with fewer adverse effects and improved quality of life.In this open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial undertaken in 19 Dutch radiation oncology centres, 427 patients with stage I or IIA endometrial carcinoma with features of high-intermediate risk were randomly assigned by a computer-generated, biased coin minimisation procedure to pelvic EBRT (46 Gy in 23 fractions; n=214) or VBT (21 Gy high-dose rate in three fractions, or 30 Gy low-dose rate; n=213). All investigators were masked to the assignment of treatment group. The primary endpoint was vaginal recurrence. The predefined non-inferiority margin was an absolute difference of 6% in vaginal recurrence. Analysis was by intention to treat, with competing risk methods. The study is registered, number ISRCTN16228756.At median follow-up of 45 months (range 18-78), three vaginal recurrences had been diagnosed after VBT and four after EBRT. Estimated 5-year rates of vaginal recurrence were 1.8% (95% CI 0.6-5.9) for VBT and 1.6% (0.5-4.9) for EBRT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.78, 95% CI 0.17-3.49; p=0.74). 5-year rates of locoregional relapse (vaginal or pelvic recurrence, or both) were 5.1% (2.8-9.6) for VBT and 2.1% (0.8-5.8) for EBRT (HR 2.08, 0.71-6.09; p=0.17). 1.5% (0.5-4.5) versus 0.5% (0.1-3.4) of patients presented with isolated pelvic recurrence (HR 3.10, 0.32-29.9; p=0.30), and rates of distant metastases were similar (8.3% [5.1-13.4] vs 5.7% [3.3-9.9]; HR 1.32, 0.63-2.74; p=0.46). We recorded no differences in overall (84.8% [95% CI 79.3-90.3] vs 79.6% [71.2-88.0]; HR 1.17, 0.69-1.98; p=0.57) or disease-free survival (82.7% [76.9-88.6] vs 78.1% [69.7-86.5]; HR 1.09, 0.66-1.78; p=0.74). Rates of acute grade 1-2 gastrointestinal toxicity were significantly lower in the VBT group than in the EBRT group at completion of radiotherapy (12.6% [27/215] vs 53.8% [112/208]).VBT is effective in ensuring vaginal control, with fewer gastrointestinal toxic effects than with EBRT. VBT should be the adjuvant treatment of choice for patients with endometrial carcinoma of high-intermediate risk.Dutch Cancer Society.Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The primary objective was to determine if vaginal cuff brachytherapy and chemotherapy (VCB/C) increases recurrence-free survival (RFS) compared with pelvic radiation therapy (RT) in high-intermediate and high-risk early-stage endometrial carcinoma.A randomized phase III trial was performed in eligible patients with endometrial cancer. Eligible patients had International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (2009) stage I endometrioid histology with Gynecologic Oncology Group protocol 33-based high-intermediate-risk criteria, stage II disease, or stage I to II serous or clear cell tumors. Treatment was randomly assigned between RT (45 to 50.4 Gy over 5 weeks) or VCB followed by intravenous paclitaxel 175 mg/m (3 hours) plus carboplatin (area under the curve, 6) every 21 days for three cycles.The median age of the 601 patients was 63 years, and 74% had stage I disease. Histologies included endometrioid (71%), serous (15%), and clear cell (5%). With a median follow-up of 53 months, the 60-month RFS was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.81) for RT and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.81) for VCB/C (hazard ratio, 0.92; 90% confidence limit, 0.69 to 1.23). The 60-month overall survival was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.83 to 0.91) for RT and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.81 to 0.90) for VCB/C (hazard ratio, 1.04; 90% confidence limit, 0.71 to 1.52). Vaginal and distant recurrence rates were similar between arms. Pelvic or para-aortic nodal recurrences were more common with VCB/C (9% 4%). There was no heterogeneity of treatment effect with respect to RFS or overall survival among clinical or pathologic variables evaluated.Superiority of VCB/C compared with pelvic RT was not demonstrated. Acute toxicity was greater with VCB/C; late toxicity was similar. Pelvic RT alone remains an effective, well-tolerated, and appropriate adjuvant treatment in high-risk early-stage endometrial carcinomas of all histologies.