Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Role of Screening Modalities in Endometrial Cancer Detection

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Preventive Oncology for the Gynecologist

  • 487 Accesses

Abstract

Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecological cancer seen in the developed world and is currently on a rise in the developing world as well. The increase in its prevalence is attributable to the rise in the use of exogenous hormones, reproductive factors, and older menopausal age along with obesity. It has an early clinical presentation when the survival rate is good. So, improving the early detection rate can thereby improve the overall survival. In this chapter, we will go through the various screening modalities and more importantly discuss their role in improving the survival rate for this cancer. Also, brief mention is made in the end of the novel techniques that can be used in the near future for screening of the endometrial cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(2):87–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, Miller D, Bishop K, Altekruse SF, et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2014. Bethesda: National Cancer Institute; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lortet-Tieulent J, Ferlay J, Bray F, Jemal A. International patterns and trends in endometrial cancer incidence, 1978–2013. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018;110(4):354–61. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djx214.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jiang X, Tang H. Epidemiology of gynecologic cancers in China. J Gynecol Oncol. 2018;29(1):e7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/corp.html. Accessed 06 June 2016.

  6. Galczynski K, Nowakowski L, Rechberger T, Semczuk A. Should we be more aware of endometrial cancer in adolescents? Dev Period Med. 2016;20(3):169–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Practice Bulletin No. 149: Endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(4):1006–1026.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Creasman WT, Odicino F, Maisonneuve P, Quinn MA, Beller U, Benedet JL, et al. Carcinoma of the corpus uteri. FIGO 26th annual report on the results of treatment in gynecological cancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2006;95(suppl 1):S105–43. (Level III)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014;64(1):9–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Yamagami W, Nagase S, Takahashi F. Clinical statistics of gynecologic cancers in Japan. J Gynecol Oncol. 2017;28(2):e32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bokhman JV. Two pathogenetic types of endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 1983;15:10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Emons G, Beckmann MW, Schmidt D, et al. New WHO classification of endometrial hyperplasias. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2015;75:135.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Scully RE, Bonfiglio TA, Kurman RJ, et al. Uterine corpus. In: Histological typing of female genital tract tumours. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 1994. p. 13.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Kim YB, Ghosh K, Ainbinder S, Berek JS. Diagnostic and therapeutic advances in gynecologic oncology: screening for gynecologic cancer. Cancer Treat Res. 1998;95:253–76.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Zanotti KM, Kennedy AW. Screening for gynecologic cancer. Med Clin North Am. 1999;83(6):1467–87.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Smith RA, von Eschenbach AC, Wender R, Levin B, Byers T, Rothenberger D, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer: update of early detection guidelines for prostate, colorectal, and endometrial cancers. Also: update 2001—testing for early lung cancer detection. CA Cancer J Clin. 2001;51(1):38–75; quiz 7-80

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Dillon JL, Gonzalez JL, DeMars L, Bloch KJ, Tafe LJ. Universal screening for Lynch syndrome in endometrial cancers: frequency of germline mutations and identification of patients with Lynch-like syndrome. Hum Pathol. 2017;70:121–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lancaster JM, Powell CB, Chen LM, et al. Society of Gynecologic Oncology statement on risk assessment for inherited gynecologic cancer predispositions. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;136:3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Tzur T, Kessous R, Weintraub AY. Current strategies in the diagnosis of endometrial cancer. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2017;296(1):5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Goldstein SR, Nachtigall M, Snyder JR, Nachtigall L. Endometrial assessment by vaginal ultrasonography before endometrial sampling in patients with postmenopausal bleeding. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990;163:119.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Karlsson B, Granberg S, Wikland M, Ylöstalo P, Torvid K, Marsal K, et al. Transvaginal ultrasonography of the endometrium in women with postmenopausal bleeding—a Nordic multicenter study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;172:1488.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Timmermans A, Opmeer BC, Khan KS, Bachmann LM, Epstein E, Clark TJ, et al. Endometrial thickness measurement for detecting endometrial cancer in women with postmenopausal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(1):160–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG committee opinion no. 440. The role of transvaginal ultrasonography in the evaluation of postmenopausal bleeding. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Goldstein RB, Bree RL, Benson CB, Benacerraf BR, Bloss JD, Carlos R, et al. Evaluation of the woman with postmenopausal bleeding: society of radiologists in ultrasound-sponsored consensus conference statement. J Ultrasound Med. 2001;20:1025.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Yasa C, Dural O, Bastu E, Ugurlucan FG, Nehir A, Iyibozkurt AC. Evaluation of the diagnostic role of transvaginal ultrasound measurements of endometrial thickness to detect endometrial malignancy in asymptomatic postmenopausal women. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2016;294(2):311–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Louie M, Canavan TP, Mansuria S. Threshold for endometrial sampling among postmenopausal patients without vaginal bleeding. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016;132(3):314–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Debby A, Malinger G, Glezerman M, Golan A. Intra-uterine fluid collection in postmenopuasal women with cervical stenosis. Maturitas. 2006;55:334.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Schmidt T, Nawroth F, Breidenbach M, Hoopmann M, Mallmann P, Valter MM. Differential indication for histological evaluation of endometrial fluid in postmenopause. Maturitas. 2005;50:177.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Vuento MH, Pirhonen JP, Mäkinen JI, Tyrkkö JE, Laippala PJ, Grönroos M, et al. Endometrial fluid accumulation in asymptomatic postmenopausal women. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1996;8:37.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Breitkopf DM, Frederickson RA, Snyder RR. Detection of benign endometrial masses by endometrial stripe measurement in premenopausal women. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Goldstein SR, Zeltser I, Horan CK, Snyder JR, Schwartz LB. Ultrasonography-based triage for perimenopausal patients with abnormal uterine bleeding. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;177:102.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Holbert TR. Transvaginal ultrasonographic measurement of endometrial thickness in postmenopausal women receiving estrogen replacement therapy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;176:1334.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Meuwissen JH, Oddens BJ, Klinkhamer PJ. Endometrial thickness assessed by transvaginal ultrasound insufficiently predicts occurrence of hyperplasia during unopposed oestrogen use. Maturitas. 1996;24:21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Torres ML, Weaver AL, Kumar S, Uccella S, Famuyide AO, Cliby WA, et al. Risk factors for developing endometrial cancer after benign endometrial sampling. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120:998.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Kaunitz AM, Masciello A, Ostrowski M, Rovira EZ. Comparison of endometrial biopsy with the endometrial Pipelle and vabra aspirator. J Reprod Med. 1988;33(5):427–31.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Wu HH, Harshbarger KE, Berner HW, Elsheikh TM. Endometrial brush biopsy (Tao brush). Histologic diagnosis of 200 cases with complementary cytology: an accurate sampling technique for the detection of endometrial abnormalities. Am J Clin Pathol. 2000;114(3):412–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Abdelazim IA, Aboelezz A, Abdulkareem AF. Pipelle endometrial sampling versus conventional dilatation & curettage in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2013;14(1):1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Leng X, Wang M, Zhang SL, Wang D, Cao W, Yang XH. Different methods for the diagnosis of endometrial histological comparative study. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2013;48(12):891–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Fakhar S, Saeed G, Khan AH, Alam AY. Validity of Pipelle endometrial sampling in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding. Ann Saudi Med. 2008;28(3):188–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Machado F, Moreno J, Carazo M, Leon J, Fiol G, Serna R. Accuracy of endometrial biopsy with the Cornier pipelle for diagnosis of endometrial cancer and atypical hyperplasia. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2003;24(3–4):279–81.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Zorlu CG, Cobanoglu O, Isik AZ, Kutluay L, Kuscu E. Accuracy of pipelle endometrial sampling in endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 1994;38(4):272–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Sanam M, Majid MM. Comparison the diagnostic value of dilatation and curettage versus endometrial biopsy by Pipelle—a clinical trial. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2015;16(12):4971–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Rauf R, Shaheen A, Sadia S, Waqar F, Zafar S, Sultana S, et al. Outpatient endometrial biopsy with Pipelle versus diagnostic dilatation and curettage. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2014;26(2):145–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Gungorduk K, Asicioglu O, Ertas IE, Ozdemir IA, Ulker MM, Yildirim G, et al. Comparison of the histopathological diagnoses of preoperative dilatation and curettage and Pipelle biopsy. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2014;35(5):539–43.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Kazandi M, Okmen F, Ergenoglu AM, Yeniel AO, Zeybek B, Zekioglu O, et al. Comparison of the success of histopathological diagnosis with dilatation-curettage and Pipelle endometrial sampling. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;32(8):790–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Guido RS, Kanbour-Shakir A, Rulin MC, Christopherson WA. Pipelle endometrial sampling. Sensitivity in the detection of endometrial cancer. J Reprod Med. 1995;40(8):553–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Ben-baruch G, Seidman DS, Schiff E, Moran O, Menczer J. Outpatient endometrial sampling with the Pipelle curette. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 1994;37(4):260–2.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Du J, Li Y, Lv S, Wang Q, Sun C, Dong X, He M, Ulain Q, Yuan Y, et al. Endometrial sampling devices for early diagnosis of endometrial lesions. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2016;142:2515–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Visser NCM, Reijnen C, Massuger L, Nagtegaal ID, Bulten J, Pijnenborg JMA. Accuracy of endometrial sampling in endometrial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Chir Belg. 2017;130(4):803–13.

    Google Scholar 

  50. McCluggage WG. My approach to the interpretation of endometrial biopsies and curettings. J Clin Pathol. 2006;59(8):801–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Guidos BJ, Selvaggi SM. Detection of endometrial adenocarcinoma with the ThinPrep Pap test. Diagn Cytopathol. 2000;23:260.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Schorge JO, Hossein Saboorian M, Hynan L, Ashfaq R. ThinPrep detection of cervical and endometrial adenocarcinoma: a retrospective cohort study. Cancer. 2002;96:338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Lindor NM, Petersen GM, Hadley DW, Kinney AY, Miesfeldt S, Lu KH, et al. Recommendations for the care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to Lynch syndrome: a systematic review. JAMA. 2006;296:1507.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Pilarski R, Stephens JA, Noss R, Fisher JL, Prior TW. Predicting PTEN mutations: an evaluation of Cowden syndrome and Bannayan-Riley-Ruvalcaba syndrome clinical features. J Med Genet. 2011;48:505.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Tan MH, Mester JL, Ngeow J, Rybicki LA, Orloff MS, Eng C. Lifetime cancer risks in individuals with germline PTEN mutations. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18:400.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Barakat RR, Gilewski TA, Almadrones L, Saigo PE, Venkatraman E, Hudis C, et al. Effect of adjuvant tamoxifen on the endometrium in women with breast cancer: a prospective study using office endometrial biopsy. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(20):3459–63.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Gerber B, Krause A, Muller H, Reimer T, Kulz T, Makovitzky J, et al. Effects of adjuvant tamoxifen on the endometrium in postmenopausal women with breast cancer: a prospective long-term study using transvaginal ultrasound. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(20):3464–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Yang X, Ma K, Chen R, Zhao J, Wu C, Zhang N, et al. Liquid-based endometrial cytology associated with curettage in the investigation of endometrial carcinoma in a population of 1987 women. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2017;296(1):99–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Wang Y, Li L, Douville C, Cohen JD, Yen TT, Kinde I, Sundfelt K, et al. Evaluation of liquid from the Papanicolaou test and other liquid biopsies for the detection of endometrial and ovarian cancers. Sci Transl Med. 2018;10(433):eaap8793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Kinde I, Bettegowda C, Wang Y, Wu J, Agrawal N, Shih MI, et al. Evaluation of DNA from the Papanicolaou test to detect ovarian and endometrial cancers. Sci Transl Med. 2013;5:167ra4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Smith RA, Andrews KS, Brooks D, Fedewa SA, Manassaram-Baptiste D, Saslow D, et al. Cancer screening in the United States, 2017: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67(2):100–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Section of Gynecologic Oncology, De La Salle Health Sciences Institute, De La Salle University Medical Center, Dasmariñas City, Philippines

    Angelito Magno

  2. Department of Fetal Medicine, Rainbow Hospital, New Delhi, India

    Nidhi Arora

Authors
  1. Angelito Magno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nidhi Arora
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Babu Jagjivan Ram Memorial Hospital, New Delhi, India

    Sumita Mehta

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University College of Medical Sciences and Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, New Delhi, India

    Anshuja Singla

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Magno, A., Arora, N. (2019). Role of Screening Modalities in Endometrial Cancer Detection. In: Mehta, S., Singla, A. (eds) Preventive Oncology for the Gynecologist. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3438-2_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3438-2_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-3437-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-3438-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation