Background: Endometrial cytology by direct intrauterine sampling is the most common test for an initial evaluation of the endometrium in Japan. However, its diagnostic value for endometrial cancer remains unknown. Here, we assess the correlation between cytopathology and histopathology to evaluate the diagnostic value of cytology for endometrial cancer. Methods: Patients with histologically confirmed endometrial cancer and controls with a normal endometrium confirmed by hysterectomy had all undergone preoperative endometrial cytology between 2001 and 2010 at our eight institutions and were retrospectively analyzed. The cytological results were compared by clinical stage, histological type, differentiation, and sampling instrument. Results: We analyzed 1,441 endometrial cancer and 1,361 control cases. Endometrial cytology detected cancer in 1,279 (916 positive and 363 suspicious) cases with a sensitivity (positive plus suspicious cases) of 88.8% and a specificity of 98.5%. The positive rate was high in advanced-stage, nonendometrioid, and undifferentiated cases, but there was no significant difference in sensitivity between these clinical conditions. Conclusion: Endometrial cytology shows a relatively high sensitivity and specificity for endometrial cancer, and neither statistical measure is significantly affected by clinical stage, histological type, differentiation, sample numbers, or sampling instrument. These findings form a superior dataset for evaluating the efficacy of endometrial cytology. © 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel

1.
Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A: Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 2014;64:9-29.
2.
Matsuda A, Matsuda T, Shibata A, Katanoda K, Sobue T, Nishimoto H: Cancer incidence and incidence rates in Japan in 2007: a study of 21 population-based cancer registries for the Monitoring of Cancer Incidence in Japan (MCIJ) project. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2013;43:328-336.
3.
Kobayashi TK, Norimatsu Y, Buccoliero AM: Cytology of the body of the uterus; in Gray W, Kocjan G (eds): Diagnostic Cytopathology, ed 3. London, Churchill Livingstone, 2010, pp 689-719.
4.
Nishimura Y, Watanabe J, Jobo T, Hattori M, Arai T, Kuramoto H: Cytologic scoring of endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the endometrium. Cancer 2005;105:8-12.
5.
Tajima M, Inamura M, Nakamura M, Sudo Y, Yamagishi K: The accuracy of endometrial cytology in the diagnosis of endometrial adenocarcinoma. Cytopathology 1998;9:369-380.
6.
Bistoletti P, Hjerpe A, Möllerström G: Cytological diagnosis of endometrial cancer and preinvasive endometrial lesions. A comparison of the Endo-Pap sampler with fractional curettage. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1988;67:343-345.
7.
LaPolla JP, Nicosia S, McCurdy C, Songster C, Ruffolo E, Roberts WS, Hoffman MS, Fiorica JV, Cavanagh D: Experience with the EndoPap device for the cytologic detection of uterine cancer and its precursors: a comparison of the EndoPap with fractional curettage or hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990;163:1055-1059, discussion 1059-1060.
8.
Byrne AJ: Endocyte endometrial smears in the cytodiagnosis of endometrial carcinoma. Acta Cytol 1990;34:373-381.
9.
Smith RA, Manassaram-Baptiste D, Brooks D, Cokkinides V, Doroshenk M, Saslow D, Wender RC, Brawley OW: Cancer screening in the United States, 2014: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin 2014;64:30-51.
10.
Stovall TG, Photopulos GJ, Poston WM, Ling FW, Sandles LG: Pipelle endometrial sampling in patients with known endometrial carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol 1991;77:954-956.
11.
Goldchmit R, Katz Z, Blickstein I, Caspi B, Dgani R: The accuracy of endometrial Pipelle sampling with and without sonographic measurement of endometrial thickness. Obstet Gynecol 1993;82:727-730.
12.
Guido RS, Kanbour-Shakir A, Rulin MC, Christopherson WA: Pipelle endometrial sampling. Sensitivity in the detection of endometrial cancer. J Reprod Med 1995;40:553-555.
13.
Buccoliero AM, Gheri CF, Castiglione F, Garbini F, Barbetti A, Fambrini M, Bargelli G, Pappalardo S, Taddei A, Boddi V, Scarselli GV, Marchionni M, Taddei GL: Liquid-based endometrial cytology: cyto-histological correlation in a population of 917 women. Cytopathology 2007;18:241-249.
14.
Tanriverdi HA, Barut A, Gun BD, Kaya E: Is Pipelle biopsy really adequate for diagnosing endometrial disease? Med Sci Monit 2004;10:CR271-CR274.
15.
Kondo E, Tabata T, Koduka Y, Nishiura K, Tanida K, Okugawa T, Sagawa N: What is the best method of detecting endometrial cancer in outpatients? Endometrial sampling, suction curettage, endometrial cytology. Cytopathology 2008;19:28-33.
16.
Frable WJ: Screening for endometrial cancer? Cancer 2008;114:219-221.
17.
Robertson G: Screening for endometrial cancer. Med J Aust 2003;178:657-659.
18.
Vuento MH, Pirhonen JP, Mäkinen JI, Tyrkkö JE, Laippala PJ, Grönroos M, Salmi TA: Screening for endometrial cancer in asymptomatic postmenopausal women with conventional and colour Doppler sonography. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999;106:14-20.
19.
Smith-Bindman R, Weiss E, Feldstein V: How thick is too thick? When endometrial thickness should prompt biopsy in postmenopausal women without vaginal bleeding. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004;24:558-565.
20.
Ciatto S, Cecchini S, Bonardi R, Grazzini G, Mazzotta A, Zappa M: A feasibility study of screening for endometrial carcinoma in postmenopausal women by ultrasonography. Tumori 1995;81:334-337.
21.
Gerber B, Krause A, Müller H, Reimer T, Külz T, Kundt G, Friese K: Ultrasonographic detection of asymptomatic endometrial cancer in postmenopausal patients offers no prognostic advantage over symptomatic disease discovered by uterine bleeding. Eur J Cancer 2001;37:64-71.
22.
Nakagawa-Okamura C, Sato S, Tsuji I, Kuramoto H, Tsubono Y, Aoki D, Jobo T, Oomura M, Hisamichi S, Yajima A: Effectiveness of mass screening for endometrial cancer. Acta Cytol 2002;46:277-283.
23.
Yanoh K, Hirai Y, Sakamoto A, Aoki D, Moriya T, Hiura M, Yamawaki T, Shimizu K, Nakayama H, Sasaki H, Tabata T, Ueda M, Udagawa Y, Norimatsu Y: New terminology for intrauterine endometrial samples: a group study by the Japanese Society of Clinical Cytology. Acta Cytol 2012;56:233-241.
24.
Yanoh K, Norimatsu Y, Hirai Y, Takeshima N, Kamimori A, Nakamura Y, Shimizu K, Kobayashi TK, Murata T, Shiraishi T: New diagnostic reporting format for endometrial cytology based on cytoarchitectural criteria. Cytopathology 2009;20:388-394.
25.
Kipp BR, Medeiros F, Campion MB, Distad TJ, Peterson LM, Keeney GL, Halling KC, Clayton AC: Direct uterine sampling with the Tao brush sampler using a liquid-based preparation method for the detection of endometrial cancer and atypical hyperplasia: a feasibility study. Cancer 2008;114:228-235.
26.
Yanoh K, Norimatsu Y, Munakata S, Yamamoto T, Nakamura Y, Murata T, Kobayashi TK, Hirai Y: Evaluation of endometrial cytology prepared with the Becton Dickinson SurePath method: a pilot study by the Osaki Study Group. Acta Cytol 2014;58:153-161.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.