310 research outputs found
Primary debulking surgery versus primary neoadjuvant chemotherapy for high grade advanced stage ovarian cancer: Comparison of survivals
The aim of the study was to analyze the overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) of patients with high grade and advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) with at least 60 months of follow-up treated in a single gynecologic oncology institute. We compared primary debulking surgery (PDS) versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus interval debulking surgery (NACT + IDS) stratifying data based on residual disease with the intent to identify the rationale for therapeutic option decision and the role of laparoscopic evaluation of resectability for that intention. This is observational retrospective study on consecutive patients with diagnosis of high grade and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage III/IV EOC referred to our center between January 2008 and May 2012. We selected only patients with a follow-up of at least 60 months. Primary endpoint was to compare PDS versus NACT + IDS in term of progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were PFS and OS stratifying data according to residual disease after surgery in patients receiving PDS versus NACT + IDS. Finally, through Cox hazards models, we tested the prognostic value of different variables (patient age at diagnosis, residual disease after debulking, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) stage, number of adjuvant-chemotherapy cycles) for predicting OS. A total number of 157 patients were included in data analysis. Comparing PDS arm (108 patients) and NACT + IDS arm (49 patients) we found no significant differences in term of OS (41.3 versus 34.5 months, respectively) and PFS (17.3 versus 18.3 months, respectively). According to residual disease we found no significant differences in term of OS between NACT + IDS patients with residual disease = 0 and PDS patients with residual disease = 0 or residual disease = 1, as well as no significant differences in PFS were found comparing NACT + IDS patients with residual disease = 0 and PDS patients with residual disease = 0; contrarily, median PFS resulted significantly lower in PDS patients receiving optimal debulking (residual disease = 1) in comparison to NACT + IDS patients receiving complete debulking (residual disease = 0). PDS arm was affected by a significant higher rate of severe post-operative complications (grade 3 and 4). Diagnostic laparoscopy before surgery was significantly associated with complete debulking. We confirm previous findings concerning the non-superiority of NACT + IDS compared to PDS for the treatment of EOC, even if NACT + IDS treatment was associated with significant lower rate of post-operative complications. On the other hand, selecting patients for NACT + IDS, based on laparoscopic evaluation of resectabilty prolongs the PFS and does not worse the OS compared to the patients not completely debulked with PDS
Endometrial Cancer Risk Prediction According to Indication of Diagnostic Hysteroscopy in Post-Menopausal Women
We conducted a prospective observational study investigating the clinical relevance of
endometrial thickness (ET) and abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) on endometrial cancer (EC) risk in a cohort of postmenopausal patients undergoing diagnostic hysteroscopy and endometrial biopsy. Patients were divided into two groups according to the indication of diagnostic hysteroscopy: ET_Group (asymptomatic patients with endometrial thickness 4 mm) and AUB_Group (patients with a history of abnormal uterine bleeding). We further divided the AUB_Group into two subgroups based on endometrial thickness (AUB_Subgroup1: ET < 4 mm; AUB_Subgroup2: ET 4 mm).
The primary outcome was the risk of endometrial cancer and atypical hyperplasia according to the indications of diagnostic hysteroscopy (AUB, ET 4 mm or both). The secondary outcome was to determine the best cut-o value of endometrial thickness to predict endometrial cancer in asymptomatic postmenopausal women. The prevalence of endometrial cancer and atypical hyperplasia in AUB_Group and ET_Group was 21% and 6.7% respectively. As well as for EC alone, higher prevalence of both conditions was observed in AUB_Subgroup2 (29.3%) in comparison to AUB_Subgroup1 (10.6%; p < 0.001). In asymptomatic patients the cut-o of endometrial thickness
that showed the best sensitivity and specificity to diagnose endometrial cancer (100% and 80% respectively) was 11 mm (AUC of 91.4%; Exp : 1067; CI 95%). In conclusion, considering the high risk of neoplasia, diagnostic hysteroscopy with endometrial biopsy should be mandatory in cases of abnormal uterine bleeding in postmenopausal patients. Moreover, we want to emphasize the need for further evidence stating the clinical relevance of endometrial thickness value in asymptomatic patients and the impact of individual risk factors on endometrial cancer development
Pituitary block with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist during intrauterine insemination cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
BACKGROUND:
Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated the usefulness of pituitary block with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists during intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles, with conflicting results.
OBJECTIVE:
The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs was to evaluate the effectiveness of GnRH antagonist administration as an intervention to improve the success of IUI cycles.
SEARCH STRATEGY:
Electronic databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Sciencedirect) and clinical registers were searched from their inception until October 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA:
Randomised controlled trials of infertile women undergoing one or more IUI stimulated cycles with GnRH antagonists compared with a control group.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:
The primary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy/live birth rate (OPR/LBR) and clinical pregnancy rate (CPR). Pooled results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) or mean differences with 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Sources of heterogeneity were investigated through sensitivity and subgroups analysis. The body of evidence was rated using GRADE methodology. Publication bias was assessed with funnel plot, Begg's and Egger's tests.
MAIN RESULTS:
Fifteen RCTs were included (3253 IUI cycles, 2345 participants). No differences in OPR/LBR (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.82-1.57, P = 0.44) and CPR (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.97-1.69, P = 0.08) were found. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses did not provide statistical changes in pooled results. The body of evidence was rated as low (GRADE 2/4). No publication bias was detected.
CONCLUSION:
Pituitary block with GnRH antagonists does not improve OPR/LBR and CPR in women undergoing IUI cycles.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT:
Pituitary block with GnRH antagonists does not improve the success of IUI cycles
Fertility Counseling Pattern over Time in Young Patients with Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis at a Large Comprehensive Cancer Center
Background: One main issue to be considered in young patients diagnosed with early breast cancer (BC) is the impact of oncological treatments on fertility and future chances of conception. Current guidelines recommend a comprehensive addressing of oncofertility as part of the management of premenopausal BC patients, including counselling on available assisted reproduction technologies and fertility preservation (FP) strategies. The COVID-19 pandemic represented a potential hurdle to the integration of these procedures into clinical practice. This study aims to describe the time-related evolution in addressing oncofertility issues. Methods: This retrospective mono-institutional observational study considered 206 patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) or adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET), diagnosed with breast cancer at the age of 40 or younger in the years 2014-2015 and 2020-2021. Timerelated evolution in addressing oncofertility during oncological consultations and adoption of a fertility or ovarian function preservation (OFP) method were analyzed comparing the two different timeframes. Results: Comparing the two cohorts 2014-2015 and 2020-2021, we found a significant difference in the presence of fertility discussion records (37.4% vs 57.9%, p < 0.01), and in the application of OFP/FP techniques (54.5 vs 78.5%, p < 0.01). In the two cohorts there was a significant difference in OFP (57.6% vs 70%, p = 0.03) and FP techniques application rates (5.1% vs 19.6%, p < 0.01). In the study population, age at diagnosis resulted to influence clinicians' approach towards counseling and/or OFP/FP strategies (87.3% in patients <35 years old (yo) vs 56.7% in older patients, p < 0.01). In the 2020-2021 cohort, age resulted less influential in the choice of using an OFP/FP strategy (87% vs 72.1%, p = 0.18). A higher rate of documented fertility discussion and/or OFP/FP techniques application was recorder in patients who had not had children before BC diagnosis (80.6% vs 64.5%, p = 0.02). When considering only the 2020-2021 timeframe, parity no longer significantly affected the prescription of an OFP/FP strategy (80.4% vs 78.3%, p = 0.93). Conclusions: This study on real world data demonstrates the progressive evolution in the way clinicians approach oncofertility issues, showing a greater attention across years, with more BC patients receiving a dedicated counseling, despite the COVID-19 pandemic
- …