Dataset Information

Improving response to progestin treatment of low-grade endometrial cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

This review examines how response rates to progestin treatment of low-grade endometrial cancer can be improved. In addition to providing a brief overview of the pathogenesis of low-grade endometrial cancer, we discuss limitations in the current classification of endometrial cancer and how stratification may be refined using molecular markers to reproducibly identify 'low-risk' cancers which may represent the best candidates for progestin therapy. We also discuss constraints in current approaches to progestin treatment of low-grade endometrial cancer and perform a systematic review of predictive biomarkers.

Methods

PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies reporting pre-treatment biomarkers associated with outcome in women with low-grade endometrial cancer or endometrial hyperplasia with an intact uterus who received progestin treatment. Studies of fewer than 50 women were excluded. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID 152374). A descriptive synthesis of pre-treatment predictive biomarkers reported in the included studies was conducted.

Results

Of 1908 records reviewed, 19 studies were included. Clinical features such as age or body mass index cannot predict progestin response. Lesions defined as 'low-risk' by FIGO criteria (stage 1A, grade 1) can respond well; however, the reproducibility and prognostic ability of the current histopathological classification system is suboptimal. Molecular markers can be reproducibly assessed, have been validated as prognostic biomarkers, and may inform patient selection for progestin treatment. DNA polymerase epsilon (POLE)-ultramutated tumors and a subset of p53 wild-type or DNA mismatch repair (MMR)-deficient tumors with 'low-risk' features (eg, progesterone and estrogen receptor-positive) may have improved response rates, though this needs to be validated.

Discussion

Molecular markers can identify cases which may be candidates for progestin treatment. More work is needed to validate these biomarkers and potentially identify new ones. Predictive biomarkers are anticipated to inform future research into progestin treatment of low-grade endometrial cancer and ultimately improve patient outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Baxter E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8445150 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveProgestin based therapy is the preferred option for fertility-sparing treatment of reproductive-age women with preserved fertility in endometrial hyperplasia (EH) or early endometrial cancer (EEC). Our objective was to investigate whether metformin could enhance the efficacy of progestin-based therapies by meta-analysis.MethodsWe conducted a meta-analysis of randomized or non-randomized controlled trials by searching of PubMed, Embase, Web of science, and Cochrane database from inception to November 8, 2022. The results of enrolled studies were pooled using meta-analysis to estimate the effect of progestin plus metformin on remission, recurrence, pregnancy rate and live birth rate.ResultsIn the analysis of progestin administered systemically or locally, complete response (CR) was significantly higher in progestin plus metformin versus progestin alone in the EH group (pooled OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.29 to 3.34, P=0.003), in the EEC group (pooled OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.13 to 3.05, P=0.01), but not in EEC and EH group (pooled OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.21, P=0.07). In the analysis of progestin administered systemically, complete response was improved in progestin plus metformin versus progestin alone, in the EH group (pooled OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.45 to 4.21, P=0.0009), in the EEC group (pooled OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.18 to 3.71, P=0.01), and in the EEC and EH group (pooled OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.16 to 3.54, P=0.01). The relapse rates of patients with EEC and EH were not different (pooled OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.20, P=0.13). For obstetric outcomes, the addition of metformin improved pregnancy rate (pooled OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.42, P=0.05), but not live birth rate (pooled OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.45 to 2.01, P=0.89).ConclusionFor fertility-sparing management, compared to progestin alone, the outcomes of patients with endometrial hyperplasia and early endometrial cancer were more improved with progestin plus metformin because progestin plus metformin increases the rate of remission and pregnancy.