Abstract:Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate how L1 cell adhesion molecule (L1CAM) interacting with protein tyrosine kinase 2 (PTK2) affects endometrial cancer (EC) progression and determine its association with the focal adhesion kinase (FAK)–growth factor receptor-bound protein 2 (GRB2)–son of sevenless (SOS)–rat sarcoma (RAS) pathway. EC is a female cancer of major concern in the world, and its incidence has increased rapidly in recent years. L1CAM is considered a reliable marker of poor prognosis in patients with EC. Material and Methods: A single-center and prospective study was conducted using data from the Cancer Genome Atlas and samples from normal and EC tissues to explore the differential expression of L1CAM. Additional experimental models included human immortalized endometrial epithelium cells (hEECs) and EC cell lines such as KLE, RL95-2, and Ishikawa. L1CAM expression was regulated using lentiviruses designed for either overexpression or interference, and PTK2/focal adhesion kinase (FAK) signaling was inhibited with PF431396. Transfected KLE cells were injected into mice, and tumor growth was monitored over 14 days. Cellular proliferation and survival were assessed using cell counting kit, colony formation, and terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated 2'-deoxyuridine 5'-triphosphate (dUTP) nick-end labeling assays. Metastatic behavior was evaluated through Transwell assays for cell migration and invasion. The expression levels of matrix metallopeptidase (MMP) 2 and MMP9 were determined by Western blot. In addition, the activation of the FAK–GRB2–SOS–RAS pathway was examined by assessing the protein levels of FAK, GRB2, SOS, and RAS. Results: There was a significant difference in L1CAM expression between EC tumor tissues and normal tissues, and L1CAM messenger RNA (1.85-fold) and L1CAM protein (2.59-fold) were significantly more expressed in EC tissues (P < 0.01) than in normal tissues. The tumor growth of L1CAM overexpressing EC cells was faster than that of negative control EC cells (6.43 fold; P < 0.001). L1CAM promoted the expression of FAK (1.43-2.72-fold; P < 0.001); enhanced EC cell proliferation (P < 0.01), survival and motility (P < 0.001), migration (P < 0.001), and invasion (P < 0.001); and activated the FAK–GRB2–SOS–RAS pathway, all of which were reversed when FAK expression was not upregulated (P < 0.001). Conclusion: By upregulating PTK2 and its encoded protein FAK, L1CAM was found to promote tumor progression and increase the activation of the FAK–GRB2–SOS–RAS pathway. These findings establish L1CAM and PTK2 as reference genes for poor prognostic prediction in EC and as targets for EC therapy, providing a valuable basis for distinguishing between benign and malignant endometrial conditions and justifying the necessity of targeted therapeutic approaches.

The Clinical Significance of DJ1 and L1CAM Serum Level Monitoring in Patients with Endometrial Cancer

Diagnostic and Prognostic Values of Serum EpCAM, TGM2, and HE4 Levels in Endometrial Cancer

L1CAM and HER2 Expression in Early Endometrioid Uterine Cancer

The mechanism of L1 cell adhesion molecule interacting with protein tyrosine kinase 2 to regulate the focal adhesion kinase–growth factor receptor-bound protein 2–son of sevenless–rat sarcoma pathway in the identification and treatment of type I high-risk endometrial cancer

Circulating tumor DNA as a prognostic marker in high-risk endometrial cancer

Models including preoperative plasma levels of angiogenic factors, leptin and IL-8 as potential biomarkers of endometrial cancer

Expression of L1CAM in curettage or high L1CAM level in preoperative blood samples predicts lymph node metastases and poor outcome in endometrial cancer patients

The value of serum HE4 and CA125 levels for monitoring the recurrence and risk stratification of endometrial endometrioid carcinoma

Endometrial cancer prognosis correlates with the expression of L1CAM and miR34a biomarkers

Discovery of biomarkers for endometrial cancer: current status and prospects

L1CAM as a Negative Prognostic Factor in Endometrioid Endometrial Adenocarcinoma FIGO Stage IA-IB

Prognostic Significance of Disseminated Tumor Cells in Bone Marrow for Endometrial Carcinoma Patients

Multivariate Analysis of Prognostic Biomarkers in Surgically Treated Endometrial Cancer

Serum HE4 and CA125 combined to predict and monitor recurrence of type II endometrial carcinoma

Integrated Biomarker Analysis Reveals L1CAM as a Potential Stratification Marker for No Specific Molecular Profile High-Risk Endometrial Carcinoma

Multiple Serum Markers in Patients with Endometrial Cancer

Prognostic Significance of preoperative serum CA125, CA19-9, CA72-4, CEA, and AFP in Patients with Endometrial cancer

Identification and characterization of endometrial carcinoma with tumor markers HE4 and CA125 in serum and endometrial tissue samples

Identification and validation of serum metabolite biomarkers for endometrial cancer diagnosis

Utility of Circulating Tumor DNA for Detection and Monitoring of Endometrial Cancer Recurrence and Progression

The inflammatory markers combined with CA125 may predict postoperative survival in endometrial cancer.