摘要目的:探讨子宫内膜癌分子分型与临床病理特征。方法:选取2020年11月至2021年11月天津市中心妇产科医院病理科确诊的100例子宫内膜癌病例，利用Sanger测序和免疫组织化学染色，按照第5版WHO女性生殖系统肿瘤分类诊断流程进行分子分型，分析各分子亚型的临床病理特征。结果:100例子宫内膜癌患者，年龄26~72岁，平均年龄53岁。POLE突变型10例，其中“双分子特征”子宫内膜癌2例（2/10），G3级宫内膜样癌2例（2/10），其他高级别亚型3例（3/10）。错配修复缺陷型38例，其中“双分子特征”子宫内膜癌1例（1/38，2.6%），宫内膜样癌36例（36/38，94.7%）；21例（21/38，55.3%）表现为MLH1、PMS2同时缺失，20例（20/21，95.2%）为MLH1甲基化阳性病例，即为散发性子宫内膜癌；6例（6/38，15.8%）行Lynch综合征相关基因胚系检测，其中1例为Lynch综合征相关子宫内膜癌。无特异分子特征型44例，其中G1~2级宫内膜样癌34例（34/44，77.3%），G3级宫内膜样癌7例（7/44，15.9%）。p53异常型8例，其中G3级宫内膜样癌4例（4/8），其他高级别亚型2例（2/8），且1例（1/8）为遗传性乳腺癌卵巢癌综合征患者。结论:正确解读子宫内膜癌中POLE基因突变、MMR蛋白及p53蛋白免疫组织化学结果是进行分子分型的关键，必须严格按照标准的诊断流程和规范进行判读，确保分子分型的准确性。

abstractsObjective:To investigate the molecular classification and clinicopathological features of endometrial carcinoma(EC).Methods:One hundred cases of EC diagnosed in the Department of Pathology, Tianjin Central Hospital of Gynecology and Obstetrics from November 2020 to November 2021 were selected. Sanger sequencing and immunohistochemical staining were used for molecular classification according to the 5th WHO classification. The clinicopathological characteristics of each molecular subtype was analyzed.Results:The 100 EC patients had a mean age of 53 years (range 26 to 72 years). There were 10 cases of POLE mutation (POLE mut), including two cases (2/10) of "binary-classifier" EC, two cases (2/10) of FIGO Grade 3 endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (G3-EEC), and three cases (3/10) of other high-grade subtypes. There were 38 cases of mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR), including one case (1/38, 2.6%) of "binary-classifier" EC and 36 cases (36/38, 94.7%) were EEC. Twenty-one cases (21/38, 55.3%) showed simultaneous loss of expression of MLH1 and PMS2, and 20 cases (20/21, 95.2%) were positive for MLH1 methylation, indicating that they were sporadic EC. Six patients (6/38, 15.8%) were tested for germline detection of Lynch syndrome (LS) related genes, and one patient was LS-related EC. There were 44 cases of non-specific molecular profile (NSMP), including 34 cases (34/44, 77.3%) of G1-2 EEC and seven cases (7/44, 15.9%) of G3-EEC. There were eight cases of p53 abnormality (p53 abn), including four cases (4/8) of G3-EEC, two cases (2/8) of other high-grade subtypes, and one patient had hereditary breast cancer and ovarian cancer syndrome.Conclusions:Correct interpretation of POLE mutation, MMR and p53 immunohistochemistry is the key of molecular classification. The interpretation must strictly follow standard diagnostic procedures and specifications to ensure the accuracy of molecular classification.