Estimating risk of endometrial malignancy and other intracavitary uterine pathology in women without abnormal uterine bleeding using IETA-1 multinomial regression model: validation study

R Heremans, L Wynants, L Valentin, F P G Leone, M A Pascual, R Fruscio, A C Testa, F Buonomo, S Guerriero, E Epstein, T Bourne, D Timmerman, T Van den Bosch*, IETA consortium

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the ability of the International Endometrial Tumor Analysis (IETA)-1 polynomial regression model to estimate the risk of endometrial cancer (EC) and other intracavitary uterine pathology in women without abnormal uterine bleeding. Methods: This was a retrospective study, in which we validated the IETA-1 model on the IETA-3 study cohort (n = 1745). The IETA-3 study is a prospective observational multicenter study. It includes women without vaginal bleeding who underwent a standardized transvaginal ultrasound examination in one of seven ultrasound centers between January 2011 and December 2018. The ultrasonography was performed either as part of a routine gynecological examination, during follow-up of non-endometrial pathology, in the work-up before fertility treatment or before treatment for uterine prolapse or ovarian pathology. Ultrasonographic findings were described using IETA terminology and were compared with histology, or with results of clinical and ultrasound follow-up of at least 1 year if endometrial sampling was not performed. The IETA-1 model, which was created using data from patients with abnormal uterine bleeding, predicts four histological outcomes: (1) EC or endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN); (2) endometrial polyp or intracavitary myoma; (3) proliferative or secretory endometrium, endometritis, or endometrial hyperplasia without atypia; and (4) endometrial atrophy. The predictors in the model are age, body mass index and seven ultrasound variables (visibility of the endometrium, endometrial thickness, color score, cysts in the endometrium, non-uniform echogenicity of the endometrium, presence of a bright edge, presence of a single dominant vessel). We analyzed the discriminative ability of the model (area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC); polytomous discrimination index (PDI)) and evaluated calibration of its risk estimates (observed/expected ratio). Results: The median age of the women in the IETA-3 cohort was 51 (range, 20–85) years and 51% (887/1745) of the women were postmenopausal. Histology showed EC or EIN in 29 (2%) women, endometrial polyps or intracavitary myomas in 1094 (63%), proliferative or secretory endometrium, endometritis, or hyperplasia without atypia in 144 (8%) and endometrial atrophy in 265 (15%) women. The endometrial sample had insufficient material in five (0.3%) cases. In 208 (12%) women who did not undergo endometrial sampling but were followed up for at least 1 year without clinical or ultrasound signs of endometrial malignancy, the outcome was classified as benign. The IETA-1 model had an AUC of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.73–0.89, n = 1745) for discrimination between malignant (EC or EIN) and benign endometrium, and the observed/expected ratio for EC or EIN was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.32–0.82). The model was able to categorize the four histological outcomes with considerable accuracy: the PDI of the model was 0.68 (95% CI, 0.62–0.73) (n = 1532). The IETA-1 model discriminated very well between endometrial atrophy and all other intracavitary uterine conditions, with an AUC of 0.96 (95% CI, 0.95–0.98). Including only patients in whom the endometrium was measurable (n = 1689), the model's AUC was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.75–0.91), compared with 0.62 (95% CI, 0.52–0.73) when using endometrial thickness alone to predict malignancy (difference in AUC, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.08–0.32). In postmenopausal women with measurable endometrial thickness (n = 848), the IETA-1 model gave an AUC of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.71–0.91), while endometrial thickness alone gave an AUC of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.60–0.81) (difference in AUC, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.01–0.20). Conclusion: The IETA-1 model discriminates well between benign and malignant conditions in the uterine cavity in patients without abnormal bleeding, but it overestimates the risk of malignancy. It also discriminates well between the four histological outcome categories.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)556-563
Number of pages8
JournalUltrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
Volume63
Issue number4
Early online date5 Nov 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2024

Keywords

  • Endometrium
  • asymptomatic diseases
  • decision support techniques
  • diagnosis
  • endometrial neoplasms
  • incidental findings
  • ultrasonography

Cite this