Dataset Information

Summary of the Proceedings of the Basic Science of Uterine Fibroids Meeting: New Developments February 28, 2020.

ABSTRACT: Scientists from multiple basic disciplines and an international group of physician-scientists from the field of obstetrics and gynecology presented recent studies and discussed new and evolving theories of uterine fibroid etiology, growth and development at The Basic Science of the Uterine Fibroids meeting, sponsored by the Campion Fund and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. The purpose was to share up-to date knowledge and to stimulate new concepts regarding the basic molecular biology and pathophysiology of uterine fibroids, and to promote future collaborations. The meeting was held at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences in North Carolina on February 28, 2020. Speakers reviewed recent advances in cellular and molecular processes that contribute to fibroid growth and new opportunities for treatment. At the conclusion of the conference, attendees identified important new directions for future research.

SUBMITTER: Leppert PC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8192074 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Summary of the Proceedings of the Basic Science of Uterine Fibroids Meeting: New Developments February 28, 2020.

Leppert Phyllis C PC Al-Hendy Ayman A Baird Donna D DD Bulun Serdar S Catherino William W Dixon Darlene D Ducharme Merrick M Harmon Quaker E QE Jayes Friederike L FL Paul Emmanuel E Perucho Aymara Mas AM Segars James J Simón Carlos C Stewart Elizabeth A EA Teixeira Jose J Tinelli Andrea A Tschumperlin Daniel D Zota Ami R AR

F&S science 20201107 1

Scientists from multiple basic disciplines and an international group of physician-scientists from the field of obstetrics and gynecology presented recent studies and discussed new and evolving theories of uterine fibroid etiology, growth and development at The Basic Science of the Uterine Fibroids meeting, sponsored by the Campion Fund and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. The purpose was to share up-to date knowledge and to stimulate new concepts regarding the basic mole ...[more]

PMID: 34124698

Similar Datasets

Project description:What is this summary about? This is a summary of a research study (known as a clinical trial) called the LIBERTY extension study. The LIBERTY extension study is a long-term study looking at how well a medicine called relugolix combination therapy worked in reducing blood loss during menstrual periods in women with uterine fibroids with heavy menstrual periods. Women were included in the extension study if they finished the 24-week LIBERTY 1 or LIBERTY 2 studies. Heavy menstrual periods were considered to be menstrual blood loss of about one-third of a cup of blood (80 ml) per cycle for two cycles or about two-thirds of a cup of blood (160 ml) during one cycle. The LIBERTY extension study also looked at whether relugolix combination therapy was safe to take for up to 1 year. What were the results? Out of 770 total women with uterine fibroids with heavy menstrual bleeding who took part in the LIBERTY 1 and LIBERTY 2 studies, 476 took part in the LIBERTY extension study. From the start of the LIBERTY 1 and LIBERTY 2 studies through the end of the LIBERTY extension: 163 women took relugolix combination therapy for 52 weeks 149 women took relugolix alone for 12 weeks followed by relugolix combination therapy for 40 weeks 164 women took placebo for 24 weeks followed by relugolix combination therapy for 28 weeks The LIBERTY extension study showed that most women in all three treatment groups responded to relugolix combination therapy by having less bleeding during their menstrual periods, having improved anemia symptoms, and having stable bone mineral loss. Side effects were similar across treatment groups, and the most common side effects were headaches and hot flushes. What do the results mean? Women with uterine fibroids with heavy menstrual bleeding taking relugolix combination therapy may have fewer uterine fibroid bleeding symptoms for up to 1 year of treatment. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03049735 (ClinicalTrials.gov) (LIBERTY 1) Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03103087 (ClinicalTrials.gov) (LIBERTY 2) Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03412890 (ClinicalTrials.gov) (LIBERTY extension study).

Project description:BackgroundUterine fibroids are the most common benign uterine tumours present in women of reproductive age. Mifepristone (RU-486) competitively binds and inhibits progesterone receptors. Studies have suggested that fibroid growth depends on the sexual steroids. Mifepristone has been shown to decrease fibroid size. This review summarises the effects of mifepristone treatment on fibroids and the associated adverse effects as described in randomised controlled trials.ObjectivesTo determine the efficacy and safety of mifepristone for the management of uterine fibroids in pre-menopausal women.Search methodsWe searched the specialised register of the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility (Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and subfertility Review Group), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 4), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL (to November 2011). We handsearched a number of journals, and searched reference lists, databases of ongoing trials and the Internet. There were no language restrictions.Selection criteriaOnly truly randomised controlled trials of mifepristone versus other forms of medical therapy or placebo in pre-menopausal women with confirmed uterine fibroids were included.Data collection and analysisFour authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Data were analysed using the Peto odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous data and the weighted mean differences for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Meta-analyses were performed using the fixed-effect model.Main resultsThree studies involving 112 participants were included. Comparison interventions included different dosages of mifepristone, placebo and vitamin B tablets. There is evidence that treatment with mifepristone relieves heavy menstrual bleeding compared with placebo (Peto OR 17.84; 95% CI 6.72 to 47.38; 2 RCTs, 77 women, I(2) = 0%). Three studies (Bagaria 2009; Engman 2009; Fiscella 2006) were included in the meta-analysis of this comparison. There was no evidence of an effect of mifepristone on the fibroid volume (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.02; 95% CI -0.38 to 0.41; 99 women). Two studies (Bagaria 2009; Fiscella 2006) were included in the meta-analysis of this comparison. There was no evidence of an effect of mifepristone on uterine volume (mean difference (MD) -77.24; 95% CI -240.62 to 86.14; 72 women). The pooled data suggest an increased adverse event (abnormal endometrial histology) in the mifepristone group compared to placebo (OR 31.65; 95% CI 4.83 to 207.35; 2 RCTs; 54 women; I(2) = 0%). Only one study (Bagaria 2009) reported endometrial hyperplasia at the end of the therapy (12/19 women in the mifepristone group versus 0/16 in the placebo group; OR 55.0; 95% CI 2.86 to 105.67). Engman 2009 found a significantly higher rate of cystic glandular dilatation in women in the mifepristone group (5/8 women biopsied) compared with the placebo group (1/11 women biopsied) (OR 16.67; 95% CI 1.36 to 204.03). One study (Fiscella 2006) suggested significant improvements (P < 0.001) for specific quality of life outcomes.Authors' conclusionsMifepristone reduced heavy menstrual bleeding and improved fibroid-specific quality of life. However, it was not found to reduce fibroid volume. Further well-designed, adequately powered RCTs are needed before a recommendation can be made on the use of mifepristone for the treatment of uterine fibroids.

Project description:BackgroundUterine fibroids are the most common non-malignant growths in women of childbearing age. They are associated with heavy menstrual bleeding and subfertility. Herbal preparations are commonly used as alternatives to surgical procedures.ObjectivesTo assess the benefits and risks of herbal preparations for uterine fibroids.Search strategyAuthors searched following electronic databases: the Trials Registers of the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group and the Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 3), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Chinese Biomedical Database, the Traditional Chinese Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System (TCMLARS), AMED, and LILACS. The searches ended on 31st December 2008.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials comparing herbal preparations with no intervention, placebo, medical treatment or surgical procedures in women with uterine fibroids. We also included trials of herbal preparations with or without conventional therapy.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors collected data independently. We assessed trial risk of bias according to our methodological criteria . We presented dichotomous data as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD), both with 95% confidence intervals (CI).Main resultsWe included two randomised trials (involved 150 women) with clear description of randomisation methods. The methodological risk of bias of the trials varied. There were variations in the tested herbal preparations, and the treatment duration was six months. The outcomes available were not the primary outcomes selected for this review, such as symptom relief or the need for surgical treatment; trials mainly reported outcomes in terms of shrinkage of the fibroids.Compared with mifepristone, Huoxue Sanjie decoction showed no significant difference in the disappearance of uterine fibroids, number of patients with shrinking of uterine fibroids or average volume of uterine fibroids, but less effective than mifepristone on reducing average size of uterus (mean difference 23.23 cm(3),95% confidence interval 17.85 to 28.61). There was no significant difference between Nona Roguy herbal product and GnRH agonist in average volume of uterine fibroids or size of uterus. No serious adverse effects from herbal preparations was reported.Authors' conclusionsCurrent evidence does not support or refute the use of herbal preparations for treatment of uterine fibroids due to insufficient studies of large sample and high quality. Further high quality trials evaluating clinically relevant outcomes are warranted.

Dataset Information

Summary of the Proceedings of the Basic Science of Uterine Fibroids Meeting: New Developments February 28, 2020.

Publications

Summary of the Proceedings of the Basic Science of Uterine Fibroids Meeting: New Developments February 28, 2020.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets