ArticleThe American journal of surgical pathology2026
Endometrioid Intraepithelial Neoplasia in the Secretory Phase: Morphologic and Biomarker Diagnostic Features in a Common, Overlooked Setting.
Article in The American journal of surgical pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- From Epigenetic Dysregulation to Therapeutic Reprogramming in Endometrial Cancer: A State-Response Framework for Treatment Resistance.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Endometrioid intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN) is a preinvasive precursor of endometrial carcinoma, yet its recognition in secretory-phase endometrium remains diagnostically challenging. Current criteria for EIN diagnosis do not account for female reproductive physiology, including the effects of endogenous progestins on the endometrium or EIN. Because women spend a substantial proportion of reproductive life in the secretory phase, failure to recognize EIN in this context represents an important gap in early detection. We systematically analyzed 40 cases of EIN arising in unequivocal physiological secretory endometrium, excluding patients with exogenous hormone exposure or other confounding factors. All cases exhibited architectural and cytologic distinctiveness relative to the background endometrium. Paradoxically, most lesions demonstrated diminished or absent secretory differentiation, challenging prevailing assumptions. Morules were identified in 38% of cases and represented a useful diagnostic clue. Additional features, including eosinophilic cytoplasm, epithelial stratification, mitotic activity, and apoptotic bodies, were variably present and functioned as supportive but nonessential findings. Immunohistochemistry demonstrated aberrancy for at least 1 of 3 established biomarkers (PAX2, PTEN, or β-catenin) in 95% of cases, underscoring the diagnostic value of this panel in the secretory phase, whereas Ki-67 proved unreliable. Collectively, these findings delineate morphologic and immunophenotypic features of EIN in secretory phase endometrium. Because most lesions have diminished secretory differentiation, the term "secretory EIN" is diagnostically problematic. We recommend adoption of the term "EIN in the secretory phase" and emphasize that improved recognition of this entity has direct implications for diagnostic accuracy and cancer prevention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.