Stefany Acosta-Torres1, Tricia Murdock2, Rayna Matsuno3, Anna L Beavis1, Rebecca L Stone1, Stephanie L Wethington1, Kimberly Levinson1, Francis Grumbine1, J Stuart Ferriss1, Edward J Tanner4, Amanda N Fader5. 1. The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2. Department of Pathology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD, USA. 3. Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 4. The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA. 5. The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: afader1@jhmi.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Our objectives were 1) to compare the efficacy of progestin therapy combined with metformin (Prog-Met) to Prog alone as primary fertility sparing treatment in women with atypical hyperplasia/endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (AH/EIN) or early-stage endometrioid carcinoma (EC), and 2) to analyze the proportion of women achieving live birth following treatment. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all reproductive-aged women with AH/IN or EC treated with Prog ± Met from 1999-2018 was conducted. Complete response (CR) was assessed and Kaplan-Meier analysis used to calculate time to CR. Comparison of potential response predictors was performed with multivariable Cox regression models. RESULTS: Ninety-two women met criteria; 59% (n = 54) were treated for AH/EIN and 41% (n = 38) for EC. Their median age, body mass index, and follow up time was 35 years, 37.7 kg/m2, and 28.4 months, respectively. Fifty-eight women (63%) received Prog and 34 (37%) received Prog-Met. Overall, 79% (n = 73) of subjects responded to treatment with a CR of 69% (n = 63). There was no difference in CR (p = 0.90) or time to CR (p = 0.31) between the treatment cohorts. Overall, 22% experienced a disease recurrence. On multivariable analysis, EC histology was the only covariate associated with a decreased Prog response (HR 0.48; p = 0.007). Only 17% of the cohort achieved a live-birth pregnancy, the majority of which required assisted reproductive technologies (81%) and occurred in the Prog treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Our study does not support the use of Prog-Met therapy for treatment of AH/EIN or EC. Additionally, fewer than 20% of women achieved a live-birth pregnancy during the study period, with most requiring ART.
OBJECTIVE: Our objectives were 1) to compare the efficacy of progestin therapy combined with metformin (Prog-Met) to Prog alone as primary fertility sparing treatment in women with atypical hyperplasia/endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (AH/EIN) or early-stage endometrioid carcinoma (EC), and 2) to analyze the proportion of women achieving live birth following treatment. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all reproductive-aged women with AH/IN or EC treated with Prog ± Met from 1999-2018 was conducted. Complete response (CR) was assessed and Kaplan-Meier analysis used to calculate time to CR. Comparison of potential response predictors was performed with multivariable Cox regression models. RESULTS: Ninety-two women met criteria; 59% (n = 54) were treated for AH/EIN and 41% (n = 38) for EC. Their median age, body mass index, and follow up time was 35 years, 37.7 kg/m2, and 28.4 months, respectively. Fifty-eight women (63%) received Prog and 34 (37%) received Prog-Met. Overall, 79% (n = 73) of subjects responded to treatment with a CR of 69% (n = 63). There was no difference in CR (p = 0.90) or time to CR (p = 0.31) between the treatment cohorts. Overall, 22% experienced a disease recurrence. On multivariable analysis, EC histology was the only covariate associated with a decreased Prog response (HR 0.48; p = 0.007). Only 17% of the cohort achieved a live-birth pregnancy, the majority of which required assisted reproductive technologies (81%) and occurred in the Prog treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Our study does not support the use of Prog-Met therapy for treatment of AH/EIN or EC. Additionally, fewer than 20% of women achieved a live-birth pregnancy during the study period, with most requiring ART.