Systemic Progestins and Progestin-Releasing Intrauterine Device Therapy for Premenopausal Patients With Endometrial Intraepithelial Neoplasia.
Journal
Obstetrics and gynecology
ISSN: 1873-233X
Titre abrégé: Obstet Gynecol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0401101
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 05 2023
01 05 2023
Historique:
received:
04
11
2022
accepted:
12
01
2023
medline:
1
5
2023
pubmed:
7
4
2023
entrez:
6
4
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To estimate trends in use and outcomes of progestin therapy for premenopausal patients with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia. The MarketScan Database was used to identify patients aged 18-50 years with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia from 2008 to 2020. Primary treatment was classified as hysterectomy or progestin-based therapy. Within the progestin group, treatment was classified as systemic therapy or progestin-releasing intrauterine device (IUD). The trends in use of progestins and the pattern of progestin use were examined. A multivariable logistic regression model was fit to examine the association between baseline characteristics and the use of progestins. The cumulative incidence of hysterectomy, uterine cancer, and pregnancy since initiation of progestin therapy was analyzed. A total of 3,947 patients were identified. Hysterectomy was performed in 2,149 (54.4%); progestins were used in 1,798 (45.6%). Use of progestins increased from 44.2% in 2008 to 63.4% in 2020 ( P =.002). Among the progestin users, 1,530 (85.1%) were treated with systemic progestin, and 268 (14.9%) were treated with progestin-releasing IUD. Among progestin users, use of IUD increased from 7.7% in 2008 to 35.6% in 2020 ( P <.001). Hysterectomy was ultimately performed in 36.0% (95% CI 32.8-39.3%) of those who received systemic progestins compared with 22.9% (95% CI 16.5-30.0%) of those treated with progestin-releasing IUD ( P <.001). Subsequent uterine cancer was documented in 10.5% (95% CI 7.6-13.8%) of those who received systemic progestins compared with 8.2% (95% CI 3.1-16.6%) of those treated with progestin-releasing IUD ( P =.24). Venous thromboembolic complications occurred in 27 (1.5%) of those treated with progestins; the venous thromboembolism (VTE) rate was similar for oral progestins and progestin-releasing IUD. The rate of conservative treatment with progestins in premenopausal individuals with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia has increased over time, and among progestin users, progestin-releasing IUD use is increasing. Progestin-releasing IUD use may be associated with a lower rate of hysterectomy and a similar rate of VTE compared with oral progestin therapy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37023446
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005124
pii: 00006250-990000000-00743
doi:
Substances chimiques
Progestins
0
Levonorgestrel
5W7SIA7YZW
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
979-987Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Financial Disclosure Yukio Suzuki reports receiving payment from The Japan Society for Menopause and Women's Health (JMWH Bayer Grant 2022) and from Honjo (JMSA Scholarship 2022). They received a Honjo-JMSA Scholarship and a JMWH Bayer Grant from the Japan Society for Menopause and Women's Health. Jason D. Wright has received royalties from UpToDate and research support from Merck. The other authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest.
Références
National Cancer Institute, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Cancer stat facts: uterine cancer. Accessed September 1, 2022. https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/corp.html
SEER*explorer: an interactive website for SEER cancer statistics. Surveillance Research Program NCI. Accessed September 1, 2022. https://seer.cancer.gov/statistics-network/explorer/overview.html
Setiawan VW, Yang HP, Pike MC, McCann SE, Yu H, Xiang Y-B, et al. Type I and II endometrial cancers: have they different risk factors? J Clin Oncol 2013;31:2607–18. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.48.2596
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.48.2596
Kurman RJ, Kaminski PF, Norris HJ. The behavior of endometrial hyperplasia: a long-term study of “untreated” hyperplasia in 170 patients. Cancer 1985;56:403–12. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19850715)56:2<403::aid-cncr2820560233>3.0.co;2-x
doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19850715)56:2<403::aid-cncr2820560233>3.0.co;2-x
Lacey JV, Sherman ME, Rush BB, Ronnett BM, Ioffe OB, Duggan MA, et al. Absolute risk of endometrial carcinoma during 20-year follow-up among women with endometrial hyperplasia. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:788–92. doi: 10.1200/jco.2009.24.1315
doi: 10.1200/jco.2009.24.1315
Zhang C, Wang EY, Liu F, Sung CJ, Quddus MR, Ou J, et al. Routine histologic features in complex atypical hyperplasia can predict the presence of endometrial carcinoma: a clinicopathological study of 222 cases. Hum Pathol 2018;80:40–6. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2018.03.009
doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2018.03.009
Endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia. Committee Opinion No. 631. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2015;125:1272–8. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000465189.50026.20
doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000465189.50026.20
Trimble CL, Method M, Leitao M, Lu K, Ioffe O, Hampton M, et al. Management of endometrial precancers. Obstet Gynecol 2012;120:1160–75. doi: 10.1097/aog.0b013e31826bb121
doi: 10.1097/aog.0b013e31826bb121
Pal N, Broaddus RR, Urbauer DL, Balakrishnan N, Milbourne A, Schmeler KM, et al. Treatment of low-risk endometrial cancer and complex atypical hyperplasia with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device. Obstet Gynecol 2018;131:109–16. doi: 10.1097/aog.0000000000002390
doi: 10.1097/aog.0000000000002390
Novikova OV, Nosov VB, Panov VA, Novikova EG, Krasnopolskaya KV, Andreeva YY, et al. Live births and maintenance with levonorgestrel IUD improve disease-free survival after fertility-sparing treatment of atypical hyperplasia and early endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2021;161:152–9. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.01.001
doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.01.001
Mandelbaum RS, Ciccone MA, Nusbaum DJ, Khoshchehreh M, Purswani H, Morocco EB, et al. Progestin therapy for obese women with complex atypical hyperplasia: levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device vs systemic therapy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2020;223:103.e1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.12.273
doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.12.273
Baker J, Obermair A, Gebski V, Janda M. Efficacy of oral or intrauterine device-delivered progestin in patients with complex endometrial hyperplasia with atypia or early endometrial adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis and systematic review of the literature. Gynecol Oncol 2012;125:263–70. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.11.043
doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.11.043
IBM. IBM MarketScan databases for life sciences researchers. Accessed August 1, 2022. https://www.ibm.com/products/marketscan-research-databases
Yang BY, Gulinazi Y, Du Y, Ning C-C, Cheng Y-L, Shan W-W, et al. Metformin plus megestrol acetate compared with megestrol acetate alone as fertility-sparing treatment in patients with atypical endometrial hyperplasia and well-differentiated endometrial cancer: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2020;127:848–57. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.16108
doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.16108
Marnach ML, Butler KA, Henry MR, Hutz CE, Langstraat CL, Lohse CM, et al. Oral progestogens versus levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system for treatment of endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2017;26:368–73. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2016.5774
doi: 10.1089/jwh.2016.5774
Wei J, Zhang W, Feng L, Gao W. Comparison of fertility-sparing treatments in patients with early endometrial cancer and atypical complex hyperplasia: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017;96:e8034. doi: 10.1097/md.0000000000008034
doi: 10.1097/md.0000000000008034
Mittermeier T, Farrant C, Wise MR. Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system for endometrial hyperplasia. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2020, Issue 9. Art. No.: CD012658. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012658.pub2
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012658.pub2
Luo L, Luo B, Zheng Y, Zhang H, Li J, Sidell N. Oral and intrauterine progestogens for atypical endometrial hyperplasia. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2018, Issue 12. Art. No.: CD009458. doi: 10.1002/14651858.cd009458.pub3
doi: 10.1002/14651858.cd009458.pub3
Giampaolino P, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Mollo A, Raffone A, Travaglino A, Boccellino A, et al. Hysteroscopic endometrial focal resection followed by levonorgestrel intrauterine device insertion as a fertility-sparing treatment of atypical endometrial hyperplasia and early endometrial cancer: a retrospective study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2019;26:648–56. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2018.07.001
doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2018.07.001
Zhou H, Cao D, Yang J, Shen K, Lang J. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist combined with a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system or letrozole for fertility-preserving treatment of endometrial carcinoma and complex atypical hyperplasia in young women. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2017;27:1178–82. doi: 10.1097/igc.0000000000001008
doi: 10.1097/igc.0000000000001008
Ørbo A, Vereide A, Arnes M, Pettersen I, Straume B. Levonorgestrel-impregnated intrauterine device as treatment for endometrial hyperplasia: a national multicentre randomised trial. BJOG 2014;121:477–86. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12499
doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12499
Trimble CL, Kauderer J, Zaino R, Silverberg S, Lim PC, Burke JJ II, et al. Concurrent endometrial carcinoma in women with a biopsy diagnosis of atypical endometrial hyperplasia. Cancer 2006;106:812–9. doi: 10.1002/cncr.21650
doi: 10.1002/cncr.21650