Literature DB >> 23975691

LNG-IUS versus oral progestogen treatment for endometrial hyperplasia: a long-term comparative cohort study.

Ioannis D Gallos1, Preeti Krishan, Manjeet Shehmar, Raji Ganesan, Janesh K Gupta.   

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION: What are the regression and hysterectomy rates for women treated with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) compared with oral progestogens for endometrial hyperplasia (EH)? SUMMARY ANSWER: The LNG-IUS achieves higher regression and lower hysterectomy rates than oral progestogens in the treatment of complex and atypical hyperplasia. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The LNG-IUS and oral progestogens are both equally used to treat women with EH. There is uncertainty about whether the LNG-IUS is a better therapy for EH. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This comparative cohort study included 344 women recruited from August 1998 until December 2010. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,
METHODS: Women with complex non-atypical or atypical EH were treated with the LNG-IUS (n = 250) or oral progestogens (n = 94) in a tertiary referral hospital. We evaluated the proportion of women who regressed or underwent hysterectomy after treatment with the LNG-IUS compared with oral progestogens by logistic regression adjusting for confounding. The time from diagnosis to regression was explored through a survival analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The follow-up rate was 95.3%. The mean length of follow-up in the two groups was 66.9 ± SD 35.1 months for the LNG-IUS and 87.2 ± SD 45.5 months for the oral progestogen group. Regression of hyperplasia was achieved in 94.8% (237/250) of patients with the LNG-IUS compared with 84.0% (79/94) of patients treated with oral progestogens (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 3.04, 95% CI 1.36-6.79, P = 0.001). Hysterectomy rates were lower in the LNG-IUS group during follow-up (22.1, 55/250 versus 37.2%, 35/94, adjusted OR = 0.48, 95% CI 0.28-0.81, P < 0.004). Endometrial cancer was diagnosed in 8 (33%) women who had hysterectomy because of a failure to regress to normal histology during follow-up (n = 24). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The observational design cannot exclude residual confounding from unmeasured variables. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
FINDINGS: In treating EH, LNG-IUS achieves higher regression rates and lower hysterectomy rates than oral progestogens and should be the first-line therapy. Failure to achieve regression carries a high risk of underlying endometrial cancer and hysterectomy is advised.

Entities:  

Keywords:  LNG-IUS; endometrial hyperplasia; oral progestogens; prospective cohort study

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23975691     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/det320

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  15 in total

1.  Downregulation of FOXO1 mRNA levels predicts treatment failure in patients with endometrial pathology conservatively managed with progestin-containing intrauterine devices.

Authors:  Henry D Reyes; Matthew J Carlson; Eric J Devor; Yuping Zhang; Kristina W Thiel; Megan I Samuelson; Megan McDonald; Shujie Yang; Jean-Marie Stephan; Erica C Savage; Donghai Dai; Michael J Goodheart; Kimberly K Leslie
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-10-30       Impact factor: 5.482

Review 2.  Updates in office hysteroscopy: a practical decalogue to perform a correct procedure.

Authors:  Salvatore Giovanni Vitale; Simone Bruni; Benito Chiofalo; Gaetano Riemma; Ricardo Bassil Lasmar
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2020-02-01

3.  Progestin-releasing intrauterine device insertion plus palliative radiotherapy in frail, elderly uterine cancer patients unfit for radical treatment.

Authors:  Gabriella Macchia; Francesco Deodato; Savino Cilla; Francesco Legge; Vito Carone; Vito Chiantera; Vincenzo Valentini; Alessio Giuseppe Morganti; Gabriella Ferrandina
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2016-03-29       Impact factor: 2.967

Review 4.  Current Issues in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Endometrial Carcinoma.

Authors:  J Stubert; B Gerber
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.915

5.  Progestin therapy for obese women with complex atypical hyperplasia: levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device vs systemic therapy.

Authors:  Rachel S Mandelbaum; Marcia A Ciccone; David J Nusbaum; Mahdi Khoshchehreh; Heena Purswani; Elise B Morocco; Meghan B Smith; Shinya Matsuzaki; Christina E Dancz; Begum Ozel; Lynda D Roman; Richard J Paulson; Koji Matsuo
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-01-21       Impact factor: 8.661

6.  Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system for endometrial hyperplasia.

Authors:  Theresa Mittermeier; Charlotte Farrant; Michelle R Wise
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-09-06

Review 7.  Surveillance and Care of the Gynecologic Cancer Survivor.

Authors:  Stephanie S Faubion; Kathy L MacLaughlin; Margaret E Long; Sandhya Pruthi; Petra M Casey
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2015-07-24       Impact factor: 2.681

8.  HE4 is a novel tissue marker for therapy response and progestin resistance in medium- and low-risk endometrial hyperplasia.

Authors:  Anne Ørbo; Marit Arnes; Lena Myreng Lyså; Christer Borgfeldt; Bjørn Straume
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2016-08-18       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 9.  Femilis(®) 60 Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System-A Review of 10 Years of Clinical Experience.

Authors:  Dirk Wildemeersch; Amaury Andrade; Norman Goldstuck
Journal:  Clin Med Insights Reprod Health       Date:  2016-08-09

Review 10.  Fertility preservation in women with cervical, endometrial or ovarian cancers.

Authors:  Michael Feichtinger; Kenny A Rodriguez-Wallberg
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol Res Pract       Date:  2016-07-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.