Background: Outcomes for advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (EC) remain poor, with historically limited systemic options beyond platinum-based chemotherapy. EC is uniquely immunotherapy-amenable among solid tumors: it harbors the highest prevalence of mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) and microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) status of any cancer, and its molecular classification into four major molecular subtypes defines a spectrum of tumor mutational burden, neoantigen load, and immune infiltration that predicts the response to checkpoint blockade. Current Landscape: Over the past several years, multiple programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors have received regulatory approval in EC, spanning monotherapy in dMMR/MSI-H disease, combination with carboplatin–paclitaxel in the first-line advanced setting, and combination with anti-angiogenic therapy in biomarker-unselected recurrent disease, fundamentally altering the standard of care. Scope and Objectives: This narrative review synthesizes the molecular rationale for checkpoint inhibition in EC, including the biological basis of its molecular subtypes and their immune microenvironments, and provides a focused overview of the trial evidence supporting each major checkpoint inhibitor class, including PD-1 inhibitors, PD-L1 inhibitors, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 inhibitors, and emerging targets. We further review the landscape of ongoing trials addressing unresolved questions, including chemotherapy-free regimens in dMMR disease, maintenance intensification for mismatch repair-proficient (pMMR) disease, neoadjuvant and fertility-sparing approaches, and novel combinations. This review aims to provide a comprehensive, up-to-date synthesis of this rapidly evolving field and to identify challenges and opportunities that will shape the next phase of immunotherapy in EC.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Huang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: