Lindsey Buckingham1, Ashley Haggerty2, Ashley Graul2, Mark Morgan2, Robert Burger2, Emily Ko2, Uduak Andy2, Robert Giuntoli2. 1. University of Pennsylvania Health System, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, Third Floor, West Pavilion, Philadelphia 19104, PA, USA. Electronic address: Lindsey.buckingham@uphs.upenn.edu. 2. University of Pennsylvania Health System, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, Third Floor, West Pavilion, Philadelphia 19104, PA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine a baseline and five-year follow up sexual function score in women undergoing hysterectomy for endometrial cancer. METHODS: A cross-section of endometrial cancer patients receiving care from 2006 to 2010 was identified. Patients were surveyed during academic year 2011 using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ). Respondents were re-surveyed in 2016. The PISQ was also administered at a single time point to a control group of urogynecology patients. Statistical analyses were conducted using STATA software, version 13.1. RESULTS: 129 endometrial cancer and 63 matched urogynecology patients responded to an initial survey and sufficiently answered the PISQ. There was no statistical difference in BMI, race, diabetes, or smoking history between groups. In 2011, 62.5% of endometrial cancer patients versus 72.6% of urogynecology patients reported sexual activity (p = 0.166). Median PISQ score for these groups was 33 [IQR 29-38] and 32 [IQR 28-37] respectively (p = 0.472). Twenty-nine (22%) endometrial cancer patients sufficiently answered the initial and 5-year follow up PISQ to be included in follow up analysis. Median PISQ score at five years was not significantly different from baseline: 31 [IQR 27-39] versus 33 [IQR 31-38] (p = 0.299). With multivariable modeling, no demographic or clinical characteristics of endometrial cancer patients were independently associated with sexual function (p = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Sexual function for endometrial cancer patients was not significantly different from women treated for benign disease. Sexual function also remained stable for endometrial cancer patients regardless of time from initial treatment. Further prospective studies are needed to better characterize sexual function in endometrial cancer survivors.
OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine a baseline and five-year follow up sexual function score in women undergoing hysterectomy for endometrial cancer. METHODS: A cross-section of endometrial cancerpatients receiving care from 2006 to 2010 was identified. Patients were surveyed during academic year 2011 using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ). Respondents were re-surveyed in 2016. The PISQ was also administered at a single time point to a control group of urogynecology patients. Statistical analyses were conducted using STATA software, version 13.1. RESULTS: 129 endometrial cancer and 63 matched urogynecology patients responded to an initial survey and sufficiently answered the PISQ. There was no statistical difference in BMI, race, diabetes, or smoking history between groups. In 2011, 62.5% of endometrial cancerpatients versus 72.6% of urogynecology patients reported sexual activity (p = 0.166). Median PISQ score for these groups was 33 [IQR 29-38] and 32 [IQR 28-37] respectively (p = 0.472). Twenty-nine (22%) endometrial cancerpatients sufficiently answered the initial and 5-year follow up PISQ to be included in follow up analysis. Median PISQ score at five years was not significantly different from baseline: 31 [IQR 27-39] versus 33 [IQR 31-38] (p = 0.299). With multivariable modeling, no demographic or clinical characteristics of endometrial cancerpatients were independently associated with sexual function (p = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Sexual function for endometrial cancerpatients was not significantly different from women treated for benign disease. Sexual function also remained stable for endometrial cancerpatients regardless of time from initial treatment. Further prospective studies are needed to better characterize sexual function in endometrial cancer survivors.
Authors: Thais Sousa Rodrigues Guedes; Marcello Barbosa Otoni Gonçalves Guedes; Rebeca de Castro Santana; José Felipe Costa da Silva; Amanda Almeida Gomes Dantas; Mirari Ochandorena-Acha; Marc Terradas-Monllor; Javier Jerez-Roig; Dyego Leandro Bezerra de Souza Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-21 Impact factor: 4.614