Quantifying procedural pain associated with office gynecologic tract sampling methods.

OBJECTIVE: Emerging technologies may enable detection of endometrial cancer with methods that are less invasive than standard biopsy methods. This study compares patient pain scores among 3 office gynecologic tract sampling methods and explores their potential determinants. METHODS: A prospective study including 3 sampling methods (tampon, Tao brush (TB), endometrial biopsy (EB)) was conducted between December 2015 and August 2017 and included women ≥45 years of age presenting with abnormal uterine bleeding, postmenopausal bleeding, or thickened endometrial stripe. Patients rated pain after each sampling procedure using a 100-point visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: Of 428 enrolled, 190 (44.39%) patients underwent all 3 sampling methods and reported a VAS score for each. Nearly half were postmenopausal (n = 93, 48.9%); the majority were parous (172, 90.5%) of which 87.8% had at least one vaginal delivery. Among the 190 patients, the median (IQR) pain score was significantly lower for sampling via tampon (0 [0,2]) compared to TB (28 [12, 52]) or EB (32 [15, 60]) (both p < 0.001, Wilcoxon signed rank test). Among women who underwent tampon sampling, age and pain scores showed a weak positive correlation (Spearman rank correlation, r = 0.14; p = 0.006); EB sampling was associated with a weak inverse correlation between parity and pain scores (r = -0.14; p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Gynecologic tract sampling using a tampon had significantly lower pain than both EB and TB. Pain with tampon sampling was positively correlated with age and pain with EB sampling was inversely correlated with parity. Pain scores for TB and EB were not significantly related to age, menopausal status, or BMI.

A prospective clinical cohort study of women at increased risk for endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate endometrial cancer (EC) risk assessment and early detection strategies in high-risk populations, we designed a large, prospective cohort study of women undergoing endometrial evaluation to assess risk factors and collect novel biospecimens for future testing of emerging EC biomarkers. Here we report on the baseline findings of this study. METHODS: Women aged ≥45 years were enrolled at the Mayo Clinic from February 2013-June 2018. Risk factors included age, body mass index (BMI), smoking, oral contraceptive and hormone therapy use, and parity. We collected vaginal tampons, endometrial biopsies, and Tao brush samples. We estimated mutually-adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using multinomial logistic regression; outcomes included EC, atypical hyperplasia, hyperplasia without atypia, disordered proliferative endometrium, and polyps, versus normal endometrium. RESULTS: Subjects included 1205 women with a mean age of 55 years; 55% were postmenopausal, and 90% had abnormal uterine bleeding. The prevalence of EC was 4.1% (n = 49), predominantly diagnosed in postmenopausal women (85.7%). Tampons and Tao brushings were obtained from 99% and 68% of women, respectively. Age (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.1-1.2) and BMI (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.1-1.7) were positively associated with EC; atypical hyperplasia (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.0-1.1; OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.5-2.6, respectively), and polyps (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.0-1.1; OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.0-1.3, respectively); hormone therapy use and smoking were inversely associated with EC (OR 0.42, 95%, 0.2-0.9; OR 0.43, 95% CI, 0.2-0.9, respectively). Parity and past oral contraception use were not associated with EC. CONCLUSIONS: Well-established EC risk factors may have less discriminatory accuracy in high-risk populations. Future analyses will integrate risk factor assessment with biomarker testing for EC detection.

Risk assessment of endometrial cancer and endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia in women with abnormal bleeding and implications for clinical management algorithms.

BACKGROUND: Most endometrial cancer cases are preceded by abnormal uterine bleeding, offering a potential opportunity for early detection and cure of endometrial cancer. Although clinical guidelines exist for diagnostic workup of abnormal uterine bleeding, consensus is lacking regarding optimal management for women with abnormal bleeding to diagnose endometrial cancer. OBJECTIVE: We report the baseline data from a prospective clinical cohort study of women referred for endometrial evaluation at the Mayo Clinic, designed to evaluate risk stratification in women at increased risk for endometrial cancer. Here, we introduce a risk-based approach to evaluate diagnostic tests and clinical management algorithms in a population of women with abnormal bleeding undergoing endometrial evaluation at the Mayo Clinic. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 1163 women aged ≥45 years were enrolled from February 2013 to May 2019. We evaluated baseline absolute risks and 95% confidence intervals of endometrial cancer and endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia according to clinical algorithms for diagnostic workup of women with postmenopausal bleeding (assessment of initial vs recurrent bleeding episode and endometrial thickness measured through transvaginal ultrasound). We also evaluated risks among women with postmenopausal bleeding according to baseline age (<60 vs 60+ years) as an alternative example. For this approach, biopsy would be conducted for all women aged 60+ years and those aged <60 years with an endometrial thickness of >4 mm. We assessed the clinical efficiency of each strategy by estimating the percentage of women who would be referred for endometrial biopsy, the percentage of cases detected and missed, and the ratio of biopsies per case detected. RESULTS: Among the 593 women with postmenopausal bleeding, 18 (3.0%) had endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia, and 47 (7.9%) had endometrial cancer, and among the 570 premenopausal women with abnormal bleeding, 8 (1.4%) had endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia, and 7 (1.2%) had endometrial cancer. Maximum risk was noted in women aged 60+ years (17.7%; 13.0%-22.3%), followed by those with recurrent bleeding (14.7%; 11.0%-18.3%). Among women with an initial bleeding episode for whom transvaginal ultrasound was recommended, endometrial thickness did not provide meaningful risk stratification: risks of endometrial cancer and endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia were nearly identical in women with an endometrial thickness of >4 mm (5.8%; 1.3%-10.3%) and ≤4 mm (3.6%; 0.9%-8.6%). In contrast, among those aged <60 years with an endometrial thickness of >4 mm, the risk of endometrial cancer and endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia was 8.4% (4.3%-12.5%), and in those with an endometrial thickness of ≤4 mm, the risk was 0% (0.0%-3.0%; P=.01). The most efficient strategy was to perform biopsy in all women aged 60+ years and among those aged <60 years with an endometrial thickness of >4 mm, with the lowest percentage referred to biopsy while still detecting all cases. CONCLUSION: Existing clinical recommendations for endometrial cancer detection in women with abnormal bleeding are not consistent with the underlying risk. Endometrial cancer risk factors such as age can provide important risk stratification compared with the assessment of recurrent bleeding. Future research will include a formal assessment of clinical and epidemiologic risk prediction models in our study population as well as validation of our findings in other populations.

Tiger-Striped PASH: Recognition of a Unique Morphology Allows for a Zippered-Up Diagnosis of Pseudoangiomatous Stromal Hyperplasia of Breast.

Pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia (PASH) of the breast is histologically characterized by anastomosing and slit-like spaces invested by collagenous stroma and lined by flattened, spindle cells. These clear spaces that may mimic microscopic vascular channels do not contain red blood cells. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) studies may also help to confirm a diagnosis of PASH, with the spindled cells marking positively with CD34 and PR while demonstrating no reactivity with more specific endothelial antigens such as CD31 and ERG. In the current case, a 39-year-old female was diagnosed with cellular PASH of the right breast with unique histological patterns showing "tiger-striped" and "zippered" histologies. To our knowledge, this is the first report of these unique variant PASH morphologies.

Tao brush endometrial cytology is a sensitive diagnostic tool for cancer and hyperplasia among women presenting to clinic with abnormal uterine bleeding.

BACKGROUND: Abnormal uterine bleeding requires the investigation of the endometrium. Histology is typically used but there remains room for the improvement and use of cytology. METHODS: Women presenting for clinically indicated office endometrial biopsy were prospectively enrolled. Tao endometrial brushing and office endometrial biopsy were performed, and surgical procedure if clinically indicated. Tao brush cytology specimens were blindly reviewed by up to three pathologists, consensus obtained, and scored as: benign, atypical (favor benign), suspicious, positive for malignancy, or non-diagnostic. Cytology and histology were compared to surgical pathology to determine sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values to detect AH (atypical hyperplasia) or EC (endometrial cancer). RESULTS: Clinical indications of 197 enrolled patients included postmenopausal bleeding (90, 45.7%), abnormal uterine bleeding (94, 47.7%), and abnormal endometrium on ultrasound without bleeding (13, 6.6%). Of the 197 patients, 185 (93.9%) had cytology score consensus and a total of 196 (99.5%) had consensus regarding cytology positivity. Surgical pathology diagnoses (N = 85) were 13 (15.3%) FIGO grade 1 or 2 EC, 3 (3.5%) AH, and 69 (81.2%) benign endometrium. Sensitivity and specificity to detect EC or AH were 93.7% and 100%, respectively, via endometrial biopsy; 87.5% and 63.8%, respectively, via endometrial cytology when scores of malignancy, suspicious, or atypical were considered positive. CONCLUSIONS: In a high-risk population, Tao brush endometrial cytology showed high sensitivity to detect AH and EC comparable to biopsy histology when considering scores of malignancy, suspicious, atypical, and non-diagnostic. Revisiting the potential value of endometrial cytology in the contemporary era of endometrial diagnostic workup is warranted.