Endometrial stripe thickness: a preoperative marker to identify patients with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia who may benefit from sentinel lymph node mapping and biopsy.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of our study was to identify preoperative factors in patients with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia that are associated with concurrent endometrial cancer to select patients who may benefit from sentinel lymph node (SLN) assessment at the time of hysterectomy. METHODS: Retrospective single institution cohort study of patients with a preoperative diagnosis of endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia who underwent hysterectomy with or without staging from January 2010 to July 2020. Modified Poisson regression was used to calculate risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Of 378 patients with a preoperative diagnosis of endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia, 275 (73%) had endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia and 103 (27%) had invasive cancer on final pathology. Age (p=0.003), race (p=0.02), and hypertension (p=0.02) were significantly associated with concurrent endometrial cancer. The median preoperative endometrial stripe was significantly greater in the endometrial cancer group (14 mm (range 10-19)) than in the endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia group (11 mm (range 8-16); p=0.002). A preoperative endometrial stripe ≥20 mm was associated with double the risk of endometrial cancer on final pathology (crude RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.9) and preoperative endometrial stripe ≥15 mm was 2.5 times more likely to be associated with high risk Mayo criteria on final pathology (crude RR 2.5, 95% CI 1.2 to 5.2). Of those with concurrent endometrial cancer, 5% were stage IB, 29% had tumors >2 cm, and 1% had grade 3 histology. Only 3% of all patients underwent lymph node evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of patients with a preoperative diagnosis of endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia, less than a third had invasive cancer and even fewer had pathologic features considered high risk for nodal metastasis, arguing against the use of routine SLN dissection in these patients. Endometrial stripe ≥15 mm may be a useful preoperative marker to identify patients at higher risk for concurrent endometrial cancer and may be an important criterion for use of selective SLN dissection in carefully selected patients with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia.

Evaluating meaningful levels of financial toxicity in gynecologic cancers.

OBJECTIVE: The Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) is a validated instrument measuring the economic burden experienced by patients with cancer. We evaluated the frequency of financial toxicity at different COST levels and stratified risk factors and associations with cost-coping strategies by financial toxicity severity. METHODS: We analyzed previously collected survey data of gynecologic oncology patients from two tertiary care institutions. Both surveys included the COST tool and questions assessing economic and behavioral cost-coping strategies. We adapted a proposed grading scale to define three groups: no/mild, moderate, and severe financial toxicity and used χ2, Fisher's exact test, and Wilcoxon rank sum test to compare groups. We used Poisson regression to calculate crude and adjusted risk ratios for cost-coping strategies, comparing patients with moderate or severe to no/mild financial toxicity. RESULTS: Among 308 patients, 14.9% had severe, 32.1% had moderate, and 52.9% had no/mild financial toxicity. Younger age, non-white race, lower education, unemployment, lower income, use of systemic therapy, and shorter time since diagnosis were associated with worse financial toxicity (all p<0.05). Respondents with moderate or severe financial toxicity were significantly more likely to use economic cost-coping strategies such as changing spending habits (adjusted risk ratio (aRR) 2.7, 95% CI 1.8 to 4.0 moderate; aRR 3.6, 95% CI 2.4 to 5.4 severe) and borrowing money (aRR 5.5, 95% CI 1.8 to 16.5 moderate; aRR 12.7, 95% CI 4.3 to 37.1 severe). Those with severe financial toxicity also had a significantly higher risk of behavioral cost-coping through medication non-compliance (aRR 4.6, 95% CI 1.2 to 18.1). CONCLUSIONS: Among a geographically diverse cohort of gynecologic oncology patients, nearly half reported financial toxicity (COST <26), which was associated with economic cost-coping strategies. In those 14.9% of patients reporting severe financial toxicity (COST <14) there was also an increased risk of medication non-compliance, which may lead to worse health outcomes in this group.

Adoption of enhanced recovery after laparotomy in gynecologic oncology.

INTRODUCTION: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways combine a comprehensive set of peri-operative practices that have been demonstrated to hasten patient post-operative recovery. We aimed to evaluate the adoption of ERAS components and assess attitudes towards ERAS among gynecologic oncologists. METHODS: We developed and administered a cross-sectional survey of attending, fellow, and resident physicians who were members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology in January 2018. The χ2 test was used to compare adherence to individual components of ERAS. RESULTS: There was a 23% survey response rate and we analyzed 289 responses: 79% were attending physicians, 57% were from academic institutions, and 64% were from institutions with an established ERAS pathway. Respondents from ERAS institutions were significantly more likely to adhere to recommendations regarding pre-operative fasting for liquids (ERAS 51%, non-ERAS 28%; p<0.001), carbohydrate loading (63% vs 16%; p<0.001), intra-operative fluid management (78% vs 32%; p<0.001), and extended duration of deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis for malignancy (69% vs 55%; p=0.003). We found no difference in the use of mechanical bowel preparation, use of peritoneal drainage, or use of nasogastric tubes between ERAS and non-ERAS institutions. Nearly all respondents (92%) felt that ERAS pathways were safe. DISCUSSION: Practicing at an institution with an ERAS pathway increased adoption of many ERAS elements; however, adherence to certain guidelines remains highly variable. Use of bowel preparation, nasogastric tubes, and peritoneal drainage catheters remain common. Future work should identify barriers to the implementation of ERAS and its components.