Fertility-Sparing Treatment for Early-Stage Cervical, Ovarian, and Endometrial Malignancies.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Nitecki R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7680432 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the presence of sociodemographic and clinical disparities in fertility-sparing treatment and assisted reproductive technology (ART) use among patients with a history of cervical, endometrial, or ovarian cancer.MethodsWe conducted a population-based cohort study of patients aged 18-45 years who were diagnosed with cervical cancer (stage IA, IB), endometrial cancer (grade 1, stage IA, IB), or ovarian cancer (stage IA, IC) between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2015, using linked data from the CCR (California Cancer Registry), the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. The primary outcome was receipt of fertility-sparing treatment , defined as surgical or medical treatment to preserve the uterus and at least one ovary. The secondary outcome was fertility preservation , defined as ART use after cancer diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to estimate odds ratios and 95% CIs for the association between fertility-sparing treatment and exposures of interest: age at diagnosis, race and ethnicity, health insurance, socioeconomic status, rurality, and parity.ResultsWe identified 7,736 patients who were diagnosed with cervical, endometrial, or ovarian cancer with eligible histology. There were 850 (18.8%) fertility-sparing procedures among 4,521 cases of cervical cancer, 108 (7.2%) among 1,504 cases of endometrial cancer, and 741 (43.3%) among 1,711 cases of ovarian cancer. Analyses demonstrated nonuniform patterns of sociodemographic disparities by cancer type for fertility-sparing treatment, and ART. Fertility-sparing treatment was more likely among young patients, overall, and of those in racial and ethnic minority groups among survivors of cervical and ovarian cancer. Use of ART was low (n=52) and was associated with a non-Hispanic White race and ethnicity designation, being of younger age (18-35 years), and having private insurance.ConclusionThis study demonstrates that clinical and sociodemographic disparities exist in the receipt of fertility-sparing treatment and ART use among patients with a history of cervical, endometrial, or ovarian cancer.
| S-EPMC9858239 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThis study investigated the characteristics of progestin-insensitive endometrioid endometrial cancer (EEC) and atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH) patients receiving fertility-sparing treatments and assessed the therapeutic effects of second-line fertility-preserving treatments.MethodsThree hundred and thirty-eight patients with EEC (n=75) or AEH (n=263) receiving fertility-preserving treatment were retrospectively analyzed. 'Progestin-insensitive' was defined as meeting one of the following criteria: 1) presented with progressed disease at any time during conservative treatment, 2) remained with stable disease after 7 months of treatment, and/or 3) did not achieve complete response (CR) after 10 months of treatment. Clinical characteristics and treatment results of progestin-insensitive patients receiving second-line treatment and those of progestin-sensitive patients were compared.ResultsEight-two patients (59 AEH and 23 EEC) were defined as progestin-insensitive and 256 as progestin-sensitive. In multivariate analysis, body mass index ≥28.0 kg/m² (odds ratio [OR]=1.898) and lesion size >2 cm (OR=2.077) were independent predictors of progestin-insensitive status. Compared to AEH patients, progestin-insensitive EEC patients had poorer second-line treatment responses (28-week cumulative CR rate after changing second-line treatment, 56.3% vs. 85.4%, p=0.011). No statistical difference was found in CR rate among different second-line treatments.ConclusionObesity and larger lesion size were independent risk factors associated with progestin-insensitive status. In progestin-insensitive patients receiving second-line treatment, EEC patients had lower CR rate comparing with AEH patients. Further study with larger sample size is needed to evaluate efficacy of different second-line treatments for progestin insensitive patients.
| S-EPMC8192233 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Endometrial cancer (EC) is the fifth most common cancer in women worldwide. Global estimates show rising incidence rates in both developed and developing countries. Most women are diagnosed postmenopausal, but 14-25% of patients are premenopausal and 5% are under 40 years of age. Established risk factors include age and hyperestrogenic status associated with nulliparity, obesity, and metabolic syndrome. Standard treatment for EC, which involves total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, has excellent survival outcomes, particularly for low-grade endometrioid tumors. However, it leads to permanent loss of fertility among women who wish to preserve their reproductive potential. With current trends of reproductive-age women delaying childbearing, rising EC incidence rates, and a growing epidemic of obesity, particularly in developed countries, research on conservative non-surgical treatment approaches remains a top priority. Fertility-sparing treatment predominantly involves the use of oral progestins and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices, which have been shown to be feasible and safe in women with early stage EC and minimal or no myometrial invasion. However, data on the efficacy and safety of conservative management strategies are primarily based on retrospective studies. Randomized clinical trials in younger women and high-risk obese patients are currently underway. Here, we have presented a comprehensive review of the current literature on conservative, fertility-sparing approaches, defining the optimal candidates and evaluating tumor characteristics, reproductive and oncologic outcomes, and ongoing clinical trials. We have also summarized current guidelines and recommendations based on the published literature.
| S-EPMC7393748 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo propose an ideal patient candidate with early-stage cervical cancer for undergoing fertility-sparing trachelectomy.MethodsThis nationwide, multicenter, retrospective study was conducted by the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology involving women aged <45 years with clinical stage I-II cervical cancer who had planned fertility-sparing trachelectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy between 2009 and 2013 (n = 393). Ideal candidates were defined to have a tumor size of ≤2 cm, no lymph node metastasis, no deep stromal invasion, and no high-risk histology (n = 284, 69.6%). Less-ideal candidates were defined to have any one of these four characteristics (n = 109, 30.4%). Propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to assess survival outcomes.ResultsLess-ideal candidates were more likely to undergo hysterectomy conversion (22.9% versus 3.2%), receive postoperative radiotherapy (11.9% versus 0.4%), or chemotherapy (32.1% versus 3.2%) compared with ideal candidates (all, P < 0.05). The weighted model revealed that among those who underwent trachelectomy (ideal candidates, n = 275 and less-ideal candidates, n = 84), less-ideal candidates had significantly decreased disease-free survival (5-year rates: 85.5% versus 95.5%; HR 3.93, 95% CI 1.99-7.74; P < 0.001) and cause-specific survival (92.5% versus 98.6%; HR 5.47, 95% CI 1.68-17.8, P = 0.001) compared with ideal candidates. Similarly, less-ideal candidates were significantly associated with decreased disease-free survival compared with ideal candidates among those who were young age, had small tumors or squamous histology, and underwent surgery alone (all, P < 0.05).ConclusionLess-ideal candidates had approximately four-fold higher recurrence risk and cancer mortality compared with ideal candidates. Ideal candidates for fertility-sparing trachelectomy for early-stage cervical cancer proposed in our study may be useful as the future framework for developing guidelines for fertility-sparing trachelectomy in Japan.
| S-EPMC7526083 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe objective of this study is to evaluate the safety of fertility-sparing surgery (FSS) for early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).MethodsA retrospective analysis was performed to identify patients treated for early-stage EOC and to compare the clinical outcomes of patients treated with FSS and radical surgery (RS).ResultsA total of 1031 patients were treated at two Institutions, 242 with FSS (group A) and 789 with RS (group B). Median duration of follow-up was 11.9 years. At univariate analyses, FSS was associated with decreased risk of relapse (P=0.002) and of tumour-related death (P=0.001). Multivariate analysis did not confirm the independent positive role of FSS neither on relapse-free interval (RFI) nor on cancer-specific survival (CSS). Tumour grade was associated with shorter RFI (P<0.001) and shorter CSS (P=0.001). The type of treatment did not influence CSS or RFI in any grade group. We also found a significant association between low-grade tumours and younger age.ConclusionsFertility-sparing surgery is an adequate treatment for patients with stage I EOC. The clinical outcome of patients with G3 tumours, which is confirmed to be the most important prognostic factor, is not determined by the type of treatment received.
| S-EPMC5023783 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo compare fertility-sparing therapies including oral progestogens, hysteroscopic resection (HR), and the levonorgestrel- releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) in achieving disease regression, recurrence and live birth rate in well differentiate early-stage endometrial carcinoma (eEC) and complex atypical hyperplasia(CAH).Study designThis was a meta-analysis of previous studies focus on the fertility-sparing therapy for well differentiate early-stage endometrial carcinoma (eEC) and complex atypical hyperplasia (CAH).Date sourcesMedline, the Cochrane Library and Embase was searched with the terms and Synonyms: words similar to eEC and CAH with therapies associated with fertility-sparing.Main outcome measuresThe number of all patients accepted fertility sparing therapies, patients got regressed, relapsed and delivered were extracted from each study, and the regression, recurrence, and live birth rate of each study were calculated. The regression, recurrence and live birth rates between each two interventions were compared with the aid of meta-regression in packages of "meta" and "meta for" written in R.ResultsFifty-four studies reported fertility sparing therapies in young women with eEC and CAH were included. Meta-analysis showed that HR followed by progestogens achieved a higher pooled regression (98.06% vs 77.20% P < 0.0001) and live birth rate (52.57% vs 33.38%, P = 0.0944) and a lower recurrence rate compared with oral progestogens alone (4.79% vs 32.17% P = 0.0004). At the same time, the pooled live birth rate (52.57% vs 18.09% P =0.0399) of HR followed by progestogens are significantly higher than the LNG-IUS alone. Which no statistical difference in regression (98.06% vs 94.24%; P = 0.4098) and recurrence rates (4.79% vs 3.90% P = 0.8561) was seen.ConclusionsOf the available fertility-sparing therapeutic options, HR followed by progestogens may be a more effective one.
| S-EPMC5593673 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFertility-sparing treatments (FSTs) have played a crucial role in the management of early-stage cervical cancer (ECC). The guidelines have recognized various approaches, depending on the tumor stage and other risk factors such as histotype and lymphovascular positivity. Much more debate has centered around the boundary within which these treatments should be considered. Indeed, these are methods to be reserved for ECC, but tumor size may represent the most significant limitation. In particular, there is no consensus on the strategy to be adopted in the case of ECC ≥ 2 cm. Therefore, this systematic review was to collect the literature evidence regarding the management of these patients.MethodsFollowing the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, we systematically searched the Pubmed and Scopus databases was conducted in April 2022, from the date of the first publication. We made no limitation on the country. We included all studies containing data on disease-free survival, overall survival, recurrence rate (RR), or complete response rate (CRR) to chemotherapy.ResultsTwenty-six studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, and 691 patients were analyzed regarding FST. Surgery-based FST showed an RR of between 0 and 42.9%, which drops to 12.9% after excluding the vaginal or minimally invasive approaches. Furthermore, papers regarding FST based on the neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) approach showed a CRR of between 21.4 and 84.5%, and an RR of between 0 and 22.2% CONCLUSION: This paper focused on the significant heterogeneity present in the clinical management of FST of ECC ≥ 2 cm. Nevertheless, from an oncological point of view, approaches limited to the minimally invasive or vaginal techniques showed the highest RR. Vice versa, the lack of standardization of NACT schemes and the wealth of confounders to be attributed to the histological features of the tumor make it difficult, if not impossible, to set a standard of treatment.
| S-EPMC9640451 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this study was to investigate how much the risks of recurrence and death are increased as a consequence of selecting fertility-sparing surgery (FSS) in young women with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).MethodsAfter a central pathological review and search of the medical records from 14 collaborating hospitals, a non-randomized, observational cohort study was conducted between 1987 and 2015, including 1183 women with stage I EOC. Finally, a total of 285 patients with stage I EOC at reproductive age were recruited. Oncologic outcomes were compared between the FSS (N = 101) and radical surgery (RS) group (N = 184) using a propensity score (PS)-matching technique to adjust for relevant risk factors: the age, substage, histological type, grade, CA125 values, ascites cytology, ascites volume, and chemotherapy.ResultsDuring 66.0 months (median) of follow-up, 42 patients (14.7%) developed recurrence, and 31 patients (10.9%) died. In the original cohort, there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) or recurrence-free survival (RFS) between the FSS and RS groups {Log-rank: OS (P = 0.838), RFS (P = 0.377)}. In the PS-matched cohort after adjustment for multiple clinicopathologic factors, there was no significant difference in RFS or OS between the FSS and RS groups {RFS (FSS vs. RS), HR: 1.262 (95% CI: 0.559-2.852), P = 0. 575; OS (FSS vs. RS), HR: 1.206 (95% CI: 0.460-3.163), P = 0.704}.ConclusionsAfter adjustment for clinicopathologic factors, FSS in itself may not worsen the oncologic outcome in young women with early-stage EOC. A large-scale clinical study is necessary to validate the findings.
| S-EPMC6921416 | biostudies-literature
Project description:•A case of grade 2 endometrial adenocarcinoma in a young woman desiring fertility-sparing treatment•Successful conservative management of refractory endometrial adenocarcinoma with dual progestin therapy•A brief review of conservative management in endometrial adenocarcinoma.
| S-EPMC5554929 | biostudies-other
Project description:Endometrial cancer occurs in up to 29% of women before 40 years of age. Seventy percent of these patients are nulliparous at the time. Decision making regarding fertility preservation in early stage endometrial cancer (ES-EC) is, therefore, a big challenge since the decision between the risk of cancer progression and a chance to parenthood needs to be made. Sixty-two percent of women with complete remission of ES-EC after fertility-sparing treatment (FST) report to have a pregnancy wish which, if not for FST, they would not be able to fulfil. The aim of this review was to identify and summarise the currently established biomolecular and genetic prognostic factors that can facilitate decision making for FST in ES-EC. A comprehensive search strategy was carried out across four databases; Cochrane, Embase, MEDLINE, and PubMed; they were searched between March 1946 and 22nd December 2022. Thirty-four studies were included in this study which was conducted in line with the PRISMA criteria checklist. The final 34 articles encompassed 9165 patients. The studies were assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP). PTEN and POLE alterations we found to be good prognostic factors of ES-EC, favouring FST. MSI, CTNNB1, and K-RAS alterations were found to be fair prognostic factors of ES-EC, favouring FST but carrying a risk of recurrence. PIK3CA, HER2, ARID1A, P53, L1CAM, and FGFR2 were found to be poor prognostic factors of ES-EC and therefore do not favour FST. Clinical trials with bigger cohorts are needed to further validate the fair genetic prognostic factors. Using the aforementioned good and poor genetic prognostic factors, we can make more confident decisions on FST in ES-EC.
| S-EPMC8910305 | biostudies-literature