Endometrial Cancer Screening, Diagnosis, and Prognosis
Customize your policy alerts
Sign up for Aetna Policy 0769 alerts
Get alerted when Policy 0769 changes without checking for updates manually.
Monitor payer policy activity
Clinical policy governing medically necessary and investigational tests and procedures for screening, diagnosis, and prognosis of endometrial cancer, applicable to Aetna-covered persons and providers submitting claims under this policy.
No material clinical or coverage changes in this revision.
Coverage Criteria — Medically Necessary and Investigational
Medically necessary
Aetna considers the following medically necessary:
Supports CPT 58100, 58110, 58558 when selection criteria are met.
Supports CPT 38792, 38900, 78195 and related codes when clinically indicated.
Experimental / Investigational (Not covered)
Aetna considers the following experimental and investigational because effectiveness has not been established:
These items are listed as experimental/investigational and not established as effective for screening, diagnosis, or prognosis.
When further evaluation is indicated after endometrial sampling
Covered when ANY of the following clinical indications are present:
In asymptomatic postmenopausal women with endometrial stripe <5 mm and no risk factors, biopsy is not indicated; persistent symptoms despite negative biopsy warrant additional evaluation (eg, hysteroscopy with curettage).
Surveillance in Lynch syndrome
Covered when ALL of the following are met:
Document family/personal history and tumor testing used to evaluate for Lynch syndrome when requesting surveillance.
Evidence summaries and coverage-relevant conclusions
Summary of evidence-based findings and conclusions reported in the document:
See systematic and discovery studies; further validation required.
Findings stronger in postmenopausal women and in some subgroups.
Existing data are mechanistic and require in-vivo confirmation.
ICG and cervical injection techniques improved overall and bilateral detection versus other tracers; studies include FIRES and multiple meta-analyses.
Evidence summaries (diagnosis/prognosis)
Summaries of evidence-based findings and authors' conclusions
ICG had the highest detection rates compared with blue dye and technetium-99; SLN mapping associated with similar survival/recurrence outcomes and increased likelihood of receiving adjuvant therapy.
Most biomarker findings are preliminary and not ready for routine clinical use.
Measurement of endometrial thickness by transvaginal ultrasonography (TVUS) for the purpose of screening asymptomatic postmenopausal women who are not receiving hormone replacement therapy is not supported as an effective screening strategy. Systematic reviews pooling data from multiple studies (32 studies, 11,100 women) found a low prevalence of (pre-)malignancy (pooled prevalence ~0.62%) and summary diagnostic estimates that do not justify routine screening: for a 5 mm cut-off pooled sensitivity and specificity were variable (summary sensitivity ~0.83, specificity ~0.72), while other thresholds showed trade-offs between sensitivity and specificity. Consequently, routine endometrial-thickness measurement in asymptomatic postmenopausal women without HRT is not recommended as a screening test for endometrial carcinoma or atypical hyperplasia.
Transvaginal ultrasound measurement of endometrial thickness is not justified as a screening test for endometrial carcinoma or atypical endometrial hyperplasia in asymptomatic postmenopausal women not using hormone replacement therapy. The pooled evidence demonstrates limited predictive value across evaluated cut-offs and a low population prevalence of disease, and claims billed as screening (ICD-10 Z12.79) are listed as not covered for the indications addressed in this policy.
Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy/mapping for endometrial carcinoma remains an area of active investigation. Earlier systematic reviews and meta-analyses report variable detection rates and sensitivities (e.g., pooled detection ~78% and sensitivity ~93% in some series), and expert reviews (UpToDate) and guideline statements historically considered SLN biopsy investigational for endometrial cancer. Although more recent studies (summarized elsewhere in this policy) support SLN mapping with cervical indocyanine green (ICG) injection as a technique with high detection and diagnostic accuracy, the literature also documents heterogeneity between studies and the need for further investigation to establish standard clinical utility and optimal procedural technique.
Data on telomerase inhibition derive from short-term in-vitro, mono-cellular experiments showing that telomerase inhibition (for example, with imetelstat) can reduce epithelial cell telomerase activity and proliferation and disrupt glandular architecture in culture. These mechanistic and preclinical findings cannot be extrapolated to support clinical treatment without confirmatory in-vivo studies and additional translational evidence.
The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidance cited in the policy does not include DNA methylation testing, single nucleotide polymorphism testing, or anti-Müllerian hormone measurement as recommended routine tools for screening or diagnosis of endometrial cancer. Systematic reviews of DNA methylation studies report high pooled sensitivity but relatively low specificity and emphasize the need for standardized targets and methods before clinical adoption.
The studies evaluated for emerging biomarkers and molecular assays are limited by small sample sizes, homogeneous (mostly Caucasian) study populations, retrospective designs, and heterogeneous methodologies (including differences in sample type, assay methods, and lack of standardized expression cut-offs). These limitations reduce generalizability and preclude definitive conclusions about clinical performance and utility.
Use of the listed biomarker and molecular tests (including but not limited to circulating YKL-40, HE4, urine microRNAs, DNA methylation panels, circulating and tissue microRNA markers, circular RNAs, telomere/telomerase measures, metabolomics, SNP and polymorphism testing, AMH, NGAL, L1CAM, UBE2C, WNT5a, and ZEB1) for screening, diagnosis, or prognosis of endometrial cancer is considered experimental / investigational and not medically necessary because effectiveness and clinical validity have not been established.
Routine transvaginal ultrasonography (TVUS) measurement of endometrial thickness as a screening tool in asymptomatic postmenopausal women (not on hormone replacement therapy) is not supported by the evidence. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses demonstrate low prevalence of occult malignancy and variable diagnostic performance at commonly evaluated thresholds (for example, the 5 mm threshold does not reliably exclude disease in all series), and therefore TVUS-based endometrial thickness screening is not recommended.
Biomarkers and genetic polymorphisms (including various microRNAs, FTO rs9939609, and other polymorphisms) demonstrate biological associations with endometrial carcinogenesis or risk in exploratory and retrospective studies, and some show mechanistic plausibility. However, these findings are preliminary, heterogeneous across studies, and lack the prospective validation and standardized assays necessary for routine clinical implementation.
Immunohistochemistry for PTEN (protein phosphatase and tensin homolog) has demonstrated low diagnostic accuracy in meta-analyses comparing benign versus pre-malignant endometrial hyperplasia (pooled AUC ~0.657 and sensitivity/specificity estimates that are limited). Authors of systematic reviews note variability in definitions of PTEN loss and recommend reevaluation of routine PTEN IHC use pending further evidence.
MicroRNA markers are not currently feasible for routine diagnostic use. The literature lacks fully characterized, standardized extraction and assay methods, and there are no well-established expression cut-off points linked to clinical decision thresholds; many studies are retrospective, small, and heterogeneous, limiting their immediate clinical applicability.
Coding — CPT/HCPCS/ICD and Related Notes
| 38792 | Injection procedure; radioactive tracer for identification of sentinel node. |
| 38900 | Intraoperative identification (eg, mapping) of sentinel lymph node(s) includes injection of non-radioactive dye. |
| 58100 | Endometrial sampling (biopsy) with or without endocervical sampling, without cervical dilation, any method. |
| 58110 | Endometrial sampling (biopsy) performed in conjunction with colposcopy. |
| 58558 | Hysteroscopy, surgical; with sampling (biopsy) of endometrium and/or polypectomy, with or without D & C. |
| 78195 | Lymphatics and lymph nodes imaging [sentinel lymph node biopsy]. |
| 81321 | PTEN gene analysis; full sequence analysis. |
| 81322 | PTEN gene analysis; known familial variant. |
| 81323 | PTEN gene analysis; duplication/deletion variant. |
| 86305 | Human epididymis protein 4 (HE4). |
| No codes listed |
Provider Actions, Prior Authorization, and Documentation
Prior authorization / coverage note — document indication and selection criteria
Certain CPT/HCPCS codes (for example, 38792, 38900, 58100, 58110, 58558, 78195 and selected molecular/pathology codes) are listed in the policy as covered when the policy’s selection/clinical criteria are met; when requesting coverage or authorization, document the diagnostic indication and which selection criteria apply.
- Support prior authorization requests with documentation of the clinical indication (e.g., abnormal uterine bleeding, surveillance for Lynch syndrome) and the specific selection criteria met.
- If submitting codes for SLN mapping or sentinel-node imaging (e.g., 38792, 38900, 78195), reference the clinical staging indication and intraoperative mapping technique used.
SLN mapping — prior authorization considerations and documentation
SLN biopsy/mapping for endometrial carcinoma is discussed as investigational/ needing further study in background reviews; when used, the policy notes SLN mapping should be supported by documentation of investigational status or trial enrollment where applicable.
- If using SLN mapping in a setting considered investigational at the time, document rationale (clinical trial enrollment or supporting evidence) when requesting authorization.
- Include details of injection technique (e.g., cervical ICG) and planned staging approach to support clinical justification.
Prior authorization — evidence summary does not specify payer mandates
The policy does not list payer-specific prior-authorization codes or mandates; it summarizes evidence supporting SLN mapping (standardized cervical ICG injection and high diagnostic accuracy) but does not convert that evidence into explicit authorization requirements.
- When seeking authorization for SLN mapping, include study-relevant technique details (ICG cervical injection, planned ultrastaging) and clinical staging indication since no payer-specific codes/mands are provided in the bulletin.
- Provide documentation of mapping method and expected pathology processing to align with evidence cited (e.g., hematoxylin & eosin with ultrastaging and cytokeratin IHC for negative SLNs).
No specific prior authorization requirements stated in this policy excerpt
The bulletin excerpts do not state specific prior authorization requirements for SLN mapping or for the molecular/biomarker tests described; do not assume automatic prior‑authorization rules from this policy text alone.
- If an individual payer (not documented in this policy excerpt) requires prior authorization, follow that payer’s administrative process and provide clinical documentation as noted in the policy.
- For investigational biomarker testing, include protocol/consent or research documentation if applicable.
No prior authorization specified for biomarker testing in these excerpts
The extracted sections do not describe any specific prior‑authorization requirements for biomarker testing; when ordering investigational biomarker or molecular assays, document study details and clinical rationale to support testing.
- Include study/sample details (assay type, sample size, marker panel) and a clinical interpretation plan in the record when investigational biomarkers are performed.
- Confirm and follow any separate payer-specific prior authorization processes that may apply to genetic/molecular testing.
Prior authorization note — bulletin is informational; verify payer rules
This Clinical Policy Bulletin is informational about benefits administration and does not state specific prior authorization mandates in the extracted portions; verify payer-specific authorization rules before submission.
- Treat the bulletin as guidance for clinical coverage stance; contact the member’s plan for any required prior authorization steps or forms.
- Document the clinical indication and selection criteria in the chart to support any authorization request.
No action specified
(No additional provider action specified in this excerpt.)
No step‑therapy required for SLN mapping — treat as alternative staging strategy
No step therapy or sequential treatment requirements are described for SLN mapping; the policy discusses SLN mapping as an alternative staging strategy (often using ICG cervical injection) rather than a step in a therapy sequence.
- Do not interpret the policy as imposing step‑therapy; document the clinical staging indication and mapping technique when requesting authorization or submitting claims.
- If using SLN mapping instead of full lymphadenectomy, document rationale and planned intraoperative/pathology procedures.
No step‑therapy requirements for diagnostic/prognostic tests in excerpt
No step therapy requirements are described for diagnostic or prognostic modalities in this policy excerpt; ordering clinicians should document clinical indications and any investigational status when applicable.
- For molecular or experimental diagnostics, include research/protocol details and clinical rationale in the medical record to support medical necessity or investigational use.
- Follow payer-specific administrative rules for prior authorization or coverage determinations.
No step‑therapy for biomarker/molecular testing — document study details and limitations
No step therapy requirements are described for biomarker or molecular testing in the provided section; when ordering such tests, document study details, assay type, and clinical rationale in the record.
- Document sample size, assay platform, and identified markers when performing investigational biomarker testing.
- Provide justification for clinical use versus research and note limitations cited in the policy (small cohorts, heterogeneous methods).
Document diagnostic indication when billing endometrial sampling
Endometrial sampling codes (for example, CPT 58100, 58110, 58558) are covered when selection criteria are met; providers must document the diagnostic indication (e.g., abnormal uterine bleeding) to support medical necessity.
- When billing endometrial sampling, include clinical indication in the chart (abnormal uterine bleeding, surveillance for Lynch syndrome, postmenopausal bleeding, etc.).
- If billing for screening (ICD-10 Z12.79), note that this encounter code is listed as not covered in the policy and may be denied.
Document Lynch‑syndrome surveillance (annual sampling and TVUS starting 30–35 yrs)
For women with Lynch syndrome, document annual endometrial sampling and transvaginal ultrasound beginning at age 30–35, and include family/personal history or tumor testing consistent with Lynch syndrome to support surveillance coding and medical necessity.
- Document family and personal history and any tumor testing used to evaluate for Lynch syndrome.
- Record that surveillance is being performed annually beginning at age 30–35 as indicated by guidelines cited in the policy.
Document SLN mapping technique and pathology processing (ICG, ultrastaging, IHC)
When performing SLN mapping, document intraoperative technique (standardized cervical injection of indocyanine green when used), mapping results, and pathology processing (H&E staining with ultrastaging and cytokeratin IHC on negative SLNs) in the operative and pathology reports.
- Record injection tracer and site (e.g., ICG — cervical injection), number and laterality of mapped SLNs, and any completion lymphadenectomy performed.
- Include pathology protocol: H&E staining, ultrastaging, and immunohistochemistry for cytokeratin on negative SLNs as described in the FIRES study.
No explicit procedural authorization requirements stated — document clinical/test details
The extracted excerpts do not state explicit documentation or procedural authorization requirements beyond the clinical and technique details referenced in the evidence summaries; focus documentation on clinical indication, technique, and study/test details when applicable.
- For investigational biomarker tests, document study/sample details, assay type, and limitations to support interpretation and any investigational claims.
- Ensure operative and pathology reports fully describe mapping technique and specimen handling to align with evidence summaries.
Document study details for investigational biomarker testing (sample size, assay, markers, limitations)
When investigational biomarker testing is performed, document study details in the clinical record: sample sizes, assay type/platform, identified markers, and study limitations to support interpretation and potential research use.
- Record the assay platform (for example, HPLC-TQ/MS for targeted metabolomics), the markers tested (e.g., ceramides, acylcarnitines), and the reference study cohort size.
- Note limitations cited in the policy (small cohorts, heterogeneous methods) in the clinical record to contextualize test results.
Providers are responsible for medical decisions; bulletin is informational
Treating providers are solely responsible for medical advice and treatment; the Clinical Policy Bulletin is informational and does not replace clinical judgment or constitute a contract or offer of coverage.
- Make treatment decisions based on the patient’s clinical needs and current standards of care; use the bulletin to guide coverage discussions but confirm benefits with the payer.
- Keep complete documentation to support medical necessity and any coverage determinations.
Exclude screening code Z12.79 — billing as screening may be denied
Do not bill screening encounter code Z12.79 for endometrial cancer when the service is being provided as diagnostic or surveillance for symptoms/risk; the policy lists Z12.79 as not covered and claims billed as screening may be denied.
- If the patient has symptoms (e.g., any postmenopausal bleeding) or surveillance indications (e.g., Lynch syndrome), use the appropriate diagnostic or surveillance ICD-10 code rather than Z12.79.
- Review payor coverage guidance before submitting claims that might be interpreted as screening.
Escalate evaluation for persistent symptoms; biopsy indicated for any postmenopausal bleeding
If symptoms persist despite a negative outpatient endometrial biopsy, pursue further evaluation; in asymptomatic postmenopausal women an endometrial stripe <5 mm generally does not require biopsy, but any postmenopausal bleeding—even one drop—constitutes an indication for biopsy.
- Document persistence of symptoms when pursuing additional sampling or hysteroscopy with curettage.
- Record endometrial stripe measurement and rationale when deciding whether to proceed to biopsy in asymptomatic patients.
SLN mapping evidence present but no explicit prior‑authorization mandates in text
The policy provides evidence on SLN mapping accuracy and feasibility but does not specify provider prior‑authorization or documentation mandates for SLN mapping; follow local payer processes and document clinical justification and mapping technique.
- Provide technique and pathology details (ICG cervical injection, ultrastaging) when requesting authorization or submitting claims for SLN mapping.
- If the payer requires prior authorization, supply the evidence-based justification described in the policy (detection and diagnostic accuracy data).
No explicit denial triggers listed — missing documentation or non‑covered codes may cause denials
The excerpts do not identify explicit denial triggers for the procedures/tests discussed; however, lack of required documentation or use of codes listed as not covered (e.g., screening code Z12.79) may lead to denials.
- Ensure documentation of medical necessity and selection criteria when billing to avoid administrative denials.
- Avoid billing investigational biomarker tests with standard coverage codes unless payer guidance permits and documentation is provided.
Investigational biomarkers — no explicit coverage requirements stated; document details
The policy excerpts do not state specific authorization or coverage requirements for investigational biomarkers; treat these assays as investigational and provide full documentation of study/testing details and clinical rationale when ordered.
- Include assay method, markers tested, and study limitations in the medical record for investigational biomarkers.
- Confirm any separate payer preauthorization requirements for molecular or genetic tests prior to ordering.
Definitions and Device/Term Descriptions
OpenPayer is powered by Trek Health's payer performance platform. Trek continuously ingests, validates, and normalizes Transparency in Coverage data alongside payer policies and other commercial payer data to create a structured payer intelligence foundation. OpenPayer uses this foundation to deliver personalized search results, dynamically generated policy pages, and tailored policy monitoring based on each user's payers, specialties, billing codes, and areas of interest. The same intelligence powers broader payer performance workflows, including reimbursement benchmarking, contract evaluation, payer negotiations, and financial decision-making.