Management of Endometrial Cancer Precursors in the Military Health System: A Survey-Based Study

Le résumé fourni par la source

INTRODUCTION: Endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN) and atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH) are precancerous pathologies which carry a 40-50% concurrent cancer incidence. National guidelines recommend an individualized approach to gynecologic oncologist (GO) referral for a new EIN-AEH diagnosis. With the risk of underlying carcinoma, exactly who should manage EIN-AEH is controversial. In the military health system, gynecologic specialists (GS) may be remote with significant barriers to GO consultation, presenting a complex medical and social burden with potential impact to mission readiness. To our knowledge, no study has evaluated EIN-AEH practice patterns in the military health system. As practice patterns may vary, we surveyed EIN-AEH management by active duty GS and GO. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An observational, voluntary, tri-service, survey-based study was conducted (eIRB protocol #966986) using two web-based surveys designed by military GO: one completed by active duty GS, the other by active duty GO. Demographics examining influential factors were collected. Surveys examined attitudes and practice patterns regarding referral and management of EIN-AEH. Univariate analysis was performed. RESULTS: Of eligible physicians, 72 of 269 GS (26.8%) and 18 of 19 GO (94.7%) responded. More than 80% of GS/GO completed military medical training (81.9% vs. 88.9%), 72.2% vs. 61.1% were specialty-specific board-certified, 72.2% vs. 88.9% had a CONUS assignment, and 52.8% vs. 100% were part of large gynecologic surgery and obstetrics (GS&O) departments, respectively. Most GS (61.1%) had access to a GO at their facility or within 60 miles and 56.9% had no formal EIN-AEH policy. Half of GS (50%) were willing to manage EIN-AEH in an appropriately counseled and biopsied patient; however, less than a quarter (23.6%) felt comfortable with fertility-sparing management. Most GS (68%) were willing to perform EIN-AEH surgical management if GO back-up was available and 83.5% of GOs indicated willingness to provide virtual consultation. When offered co-management with GO virtual consultation, GS expressed a 3-fold increased comfort with hysterectomy surgical management, including those stationed overseas (OR = 3.10; 95% CI = 1.55-6.21, P < .0014; overseas P = NS), and an 8-fold increased comfort with fertility-sparing management (OR = 7.86; 95% CI = 3.73-16.4, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Management and referral of EIN-AEH by military GS varies widely with no policy at most facilities. A solution is needed, particularly in remote and overseas locations, to reduce medical, health system and social burden, and to conserve the fighting strength.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.