Article Text

Download PDFPDF

OP020/#524 Heath care resource and cost implications of integration of molecular classification in the management of endometrial cancer
  1. G Hanley1,
  2. E Thompson2,
  3. S Scott3,
  4. M Kinloch4,
  5. J Irving5,
  6. S Leung6,
  7. S Salvador7,
  8. L Helpman8,
  9. D Vicus9,
  10. A Jamieson1,
  11. V Samouëlian10,
  12. S Kean11,
  13. S offman12,
  14. C Parra-Herran13,
  15. A Talhouk14,
  16. M Plante15,
  17. W Gotlieb7,
  18. C Gilks16,
  19. J Kwon1 and
  20. J Mcalpine1
  1. 1University of British Columbia and BC Cancer, Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Vancouver, Canada
  2. 2Molecular Oncology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
  3. 3Dalhousie University, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Halifax, Canada
  4. 4University of Saskatchewan, Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Saskatoon, Canada
  5. 5University of British Columbia, Royal Jubilee Hospital, Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Victoria, Canada
  6. 6University of British Columbia, Genetic Pathology Evaluation Centre, Vancouver, Canada
  7. 7McGill University, Jewish General Hospital, Gynecology Oncology, Montreal, Canada
  8. 8Cheba medical center, Gynecologic Oncology, Ramat Gan, Israel
  9. 9Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Gynecologic Oncology, Toronto, Canada
  10. 10Gynecologic Oncology Service, CHUM, Université de Montréal, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Montreal, Canada
  11. 11University of Manitoba, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gynecologic Oncology, Winnepeg, Canada
  12. 12Dalhousie University, Pathology, Halifax, Canada
  13. 13Brigham and Woman’s Hospital, Pathology, Boston, USA
  14. 14University of British Columbia, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vancouver, Canada
  15. 15Hotel Dieu de Quebec, Gynecology Oncology, Quebec, Canada
  16. 16UBC, Vancouver General Hospital, Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Vancouver, Canada


Objectives Increasing incidence and morbidity of endometrial cancer (EC) has resulted in high systemic cost burdens associated with management. Molecular classification is now being integrated into routine pathologic reporting, providing objective biologically-relevant data to direct care. We assessed the cost implications of this integration in a modern cohort of women with ECs.

Methods 994 women diagnosed with EC across Canada (2016) underwent retrospective molecular classification enabling us to determine their eligibility for current molecular stratification trials and 2020 ESMO/ESTRO/ESP risk group assignment and treatment recommendations. We then calculated cost differences based on molecular subtype/ProMisE-directed change in surgical management, adjuvant therapy, clinic visits, pathology testing, and genetic counseling.

Results Total costs saved, even after correcting for cost of molecular testing for all 994 individuals ($450–575 CAD/test) were $570,744-$747,042 CAD or $574-$752 CAD per capita. If we test MMR and p53 IHC for all patients but perform POLE sequencing only in women where treatment would be altered (e.g., NOT testing POLE in Stage IA Grade 1/2 endometrioid ECs who are usually untreated and stage III/IV ECs where ESMO/ESTRO/ESP recommendations are currently unchanged for POLEmut ECs) total costs saved increases to $720,294-$958,842 or $725-$965/capita. If costs of additional treatment directed by ProMisE are added, such as chemotherapy +/or radiation directed secondary to unveiling high risk molecular subtype, this would be expected to improve outcomes but at an additional cost of $280,908-$826,719 or $282-$832/capita.

Conclusions Molecular classification may tailor treatment with cost savings, while providing an opportunity to improve outcomes at reasonable cost for women with endometrial carcinoma.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.