Estrogen replacement therapy for ovarian carcinoma survivors: A randomized controlled trial

Cancer and Female Sexual Function

Sexual health is a concern that often goes unaddressed among female cancer survivors. Management of these issues depends upon the type of malignancy, stage and other tumor characteristics, treatment, and the history, concerns, and goals of the individual patient.

Menopause hormone treatment after cancer

Regular improvement in survival of women after treatment for cancer has been reached in these last years. Menopause hormone therapy (MHT) remains the most efficient treatment to alleviate climacteric symptoms and improve quality of life in symptomatic women. The long-term effects of estrogen deficiency can be, at least partially, prevented by MHT. However, using MHT in an oncologic context can be associated with contraindications. Patients who have experienced breast cancer frequently face severe climacteric symptoms, but results from randomized trials are not in favor of using MHT in these women. Three randomized trials are available in women treated by MHT after ovarian cancer, and report better survival rates in the active group of treatment, suggesting that, at least in serous high-grade ovarian carcinoma, MHT could be allowed. No robust data are available for MHT after endometrial carcinoma. According to various guidelines, MHT could be possible in low grades with good prognosis. Progestogen, however, is not contraindicated and can help to alleviate climacteric symptoms. Squamous cell cervical carcinoma is not hormone-dependent and therefore patients can be treated with MHT without restrictions, whereas cervical adenocarcinoma is likely to be estrogen-dependent, despite lack of robust data, and thus only progesterone or progestin might be potentially used. It is possible that, in future, better molecular characterization of genomic profiles of various cancers may allow MHT to be used with some patients.

Impact of Hormone Replacement Therapy on the Overall Survival and Progression Free Survival of Ovarian Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Frequently, patients treated for Ovarian Cancer (OC) undergo menopause with subsequent symptoms. This review scrutinised the impact of Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) on the Overall Survival (OS) and Progression-Free Survival (PFS) of patients diagnosed with OC. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in the most popular English databases. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to select publications that evaluate OS and PFS in these patients. End-point analysis targeted values of log(HR) and its Standard Error (SE). Results: Up to 1 September 2022, 11 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Eight publications, totalling 4191 patients, were included in the meta-analyses. Eight studies were considered for the OS analysis and pooled an HR of 0.66 with respective 95% CI between 0.57 and 0.76, with a p-value < 0.00001 at a Z value of 5.7, in favour of the HRT group. Results for PFS showed an overall HR of 0.73 in favour of the HRT group; CI between 0.57 and 0.95, p = 0.02 at a Z value of 2.36. Further subgroup analyses highlighted the non-inferiority of this treatment. Conclusions: Patients treated for OC that receive HRT for menopausal symptoms after various treatments appeared to have better OS than never-users.

Hormone replacement in premenopausal women treated with bilateral oophorectomy for ovarian cancer - a nationwide population-based study

OBJECTIVE

To study the extent of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) dispensing in premenopausal women after being treated with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSOE) for ovarian cancer (OC).

METHODS

Nationwide population- and register-based cohort study including women 18-50 years old, registered in The Swedish Quality Register for Gynecological Cancer (SQRGC), where BSOE was performed due to epithelial (EOC) and non-epithelial ovarian cancers (NEOC) or borderline ovarian tumor (BOT) between 2008 and 2014. Data on HRT dispensing was obtained from the National Prescribed Drug Register analyzed at semi-annual intervals from surgery until end of follow-up December 2015, including a logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

A cohort of 664 women were identified with OC, whereas 396 women had an EOC, 61 a NEOC and 207 a BOT. At surgery 49% of the women were ≤44 years. HRT dispensed to the total cohort varied between 32% and 41% the first five years after surgery. During follow-up at first 0.5-1 year 51% of the women <40 years were dispensed HRT compared to 25% of women ≥40 years. Of women with EOC, 21% dispensed HRT at first 0.5-1 year. In the multivariable regression analysis; age <40 (OR6.17, p < 0.001) and age 40-44 (OR2.95, p < 0.001) as well as BOT histology (OR3.84, p < 0.001) were found significant variables for dispensing of HRT.

CONCLUSION

A majority of premenopausal women undergoing BSOE for OC did not use HRT postoperatively. Our study shows that there is a need to address HRT use after OC treatment in young women to prevent from morbidity and a poorer quality of life.

Eligibility criteria for Menopausal Hormone Therapy (MHT): a position statement from a consortium of scientific societies for the use of MHT in women with medical conditions. MHT Eligibility Criteria Group

This project aims to develop eligibility criteria for menopausal hormone therapy (MHT). The tool should be similar to those already established for contraception A consortium of scientific societies coordinated by the Spanish Menopause Society met to formulate recommendations for the use of MHT by women with medical conditions based on the best available evidence. The project was developed in two phases. As a first step, we conducted 14 systematic reviews and 32 metanalyses on the safety of MHT (in nine areas: age, time of menopause onset, treatment duration, women with thrombotic risk, women with a personal history of cardiovascular disease, women with metabolic syndrome, women with gastrointestinal diseases, survivors of breast cancer or of other cancers, and women who smoke) and on the most relevant pharmacological interactions with MHT. These systematic reviews and metanalyses helped inform a structured process in which a panel of experts defined the eligibility criteria according to a specific framework, which facilitated the discussion and development process. To unify the proposal, the following eligibility criteria have been defined in accordance with the WHO international nomenclature for the different alternatives for MHT (category 1, no restriction on the use of MHT; category 2, the benefits outweigh the risks; category 3, the risks generally outweigh the benefits; category 4, MHT should not be used). Quality was classified as high, moderate, low or very low, based on several factors (including risk of bias, inaccuracy, inconsistency, lack of directionality and publication bias). When no direct evidence was identified, but plausibility, clinical experience or indirect evidence were available, "Expert opinion" was categorized. For the first time, a set of eligibility criteria, based on clinical evidence and developed according to the most rigorous methodological tools, has been defined. This will provide health professionals with a powerful decision-making tool that can be used to manage menopausal symptoms.

Postoperative Hormone Replacement Therapy and Survival in Women with Ovarian Cancer

The effect of postoperative hormone replacement therapy (HRT) on survival in women with ovarian cancer remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the impact of postoperative HRT on survival in women with ovarian cancer using the nationwide cohort study. Women aged ≤60 and diagnosed with ovarian cancer that received primary surgery were followed-up for 5.6 ± 2.9 years. Mean ages of women administered HRT (the HRT group; n = 263) or not administered HRT (the control group; n = 1521) were 41.5 ± 8.5 and 41.0 ± 11.4 years, respectively. After adjustment for covariables, OS was significantly greater in the HRT group (HR 0.618; 95% CI 0.414−0.922; p = 0.018). Kaplan−Meier curve analysis showed OS was significantly higher in the HRT group (85.3% vs. 76.6%; p = 0.016). The ratio of women with HRT to women without HRT increased significantly with time (restricted mean survival times for OS, p < 0.001). In addition, OS was significantly greater for those that received HRT for >5 years than for those that received HRT for ≤0.5 years (HR 0.234; 95% CI 0.059−0.936; p = 0.040). Postoperative HRT improved survival among women with ovarian cancer. The impact of HRT on survival increased with time and treatment duration.

God, spirituality and religion in women dying from gynecological cancer

Thoughts of death and dying will prevail constantly in the minds of women with gynecologic cancer. Invariably, there is the hope that, when the end comes, there will be 'a good death'. End-of-life decisions, with particular emphasis on what the patient and her family constitute 'a good death' to be, will be influenced by emotional, psychological, mental, physical, spiritual and religious backgrounds. It is important to allow patients to resolve their despair by communicating their innermost thoughts. Spirituality and religious belief are important components that may play major roles in enabling patients to obtain peace and require the participation of all members of the health-care team managing the cases. Clinicians should appreciate the patient's concerns, beliefs, fears, spiritual and religious needs and be sensitive to comments that may indicate spiritual distress. Active listening and supportive dialogue may help patients work through existential issues and find peace. Patients who are in spiritual distress should be referred to certified and trained spiritual care professionals, chaplains, counselors and clergy.

Ovarian Cancer, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Epithelial ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death from gynecologic cancer in the United States and is the country's fifth most common cause of cancer mortality in women. A major challenge in treating ovarian cancer is that most patients have advanced disease at initial diagnosis. These NCCN Guidelines discuss cancers originating in the ovary, fallopian tube, or peritoneum, as these are all managed in a similar manner. Most of the recommendations are based on data from patients with the most common subtypes─high-grade serous and grade 2/3 endometrioid. The NCCN Guidelines also include recommendations specifically for patients with less common ovarian cancers, which in the guidelines include the following: carcinosarcoma, clear cell carcinoma, mucinous carcinoma, low-grade serous, grade 1 endometrioid, borderline epithelial, malignant sex cord-stromal, and malignant germ cell tumors. This manuscript focuses on certain aspects of primary treatment, including primary surgery, adjuvant therapy, and maintenance therapy options (including PARP inhibitors) after completion of first-line chemotherapy.

Management of menopausal symptoms and ovarian function preservation in women with gynecological cancer

Gynecological cancers affect a growing number of women globally, with approximately 1.3 million women diagnosed in 2018. Menopausal symptoms are a significant health concern after treatment for gynecological cancers and may result from oncologic treatments such as premenopausal bilateral oophorectomy, ovarian failure associated with chemotherapy or radiotherapy, and anti-estrogenic effects of maintenance endocrine therapy. Additionally, with the growing availability of testing for pathogenic gene variants such as BRCA1/2 and Lynch syndrome, there is an increasing number of women undergoing risk-reducing oophorectomy, which in most cases will be before age 45 years and will induce surgical menopause. Not all menopausal symptoms require treatment, but patients with cancer may experience more severe symptoms compared with women undergoing natural menopause. Moreover, there is increasing evidence of the long-term implications of early menopause, including bone loss, cognitive decline and increased cardiovascular risk. Systemic hormone therapy is well established as the most effective treatment for vasomotor symptoms and vaginal (topical) estrogen therapy is effective for genitourinary symptoms. However, the role of hormone receptors in many gynecological cancers and their treatment pose a challenge to the management of menopausal symptoms after cancer. Consequently, the use of menopausal hormone therapy in this setting can be difficult for clinicians to navigate and this article aims to provide current, comprehensive guidance for the use of menopausal hormone replacement therapy in women who have had, or are at risk of developing, gynecological cancer to assist with these treatment decisions.

Peri- and postmenopause-diagnosis and interventions interdisciplinary S3 guideline of the association of the scientific medical societies in Germany (AWMF 015/062): short version

This short version of the interdisciplinary S3 guideline "Peri- and Postmenopause-Diagnosis and Interventions" is intended as a decision-making instrument for physicians who counsel peri- and postmenopausal women. It is designed to assist daily practice. The present short version summarizes the full version of the guideline which contains detailed information on guideline methodology, particularly regarding the critical appraisal of the evidence and the assignment of evidence levels. The statements and recommendations of the full version of the guideline are quoted completely in the present short version including levels of evidence (LoE) and grades of recommendation. The classification system developed by the Centre for Evidence-based Medicine in Oxford was used in this guideline.

Menopausal hormone therapy prior to the diagnosis of ovarian cancer is associated with improved survival

PURPOSE

Prior studies of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) and ovarian cancer survival have been limited by lack of hormone regimen detail and insufficient sample sizes. To address these limitations, a comprehensive analysis of 6419 post-menopausal women with pathologically confirmed ovarian carcinoma was conducted to examine the association between MHT use prior to diagnosis and survival.

METHODS

Data from 15 studies in the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium were included. MHT use was examined by type (estrogen-only (ET) or estrogen+progestin (EPT)), duration, and recency of use relative to diagnosis. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the association between hormone therapy use and survival. Logistic regression and mediation analysis was used to explore the relationship between MHT use and residual disease following debulking surgery.

RESULTS

Use of ET or EPT for at least five years prior to diagnosis was associated with better ovarian cancer survival (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.87). Among women with advanced stage, high-grade serous carcinoma, those who used MHT were less likely to have any macroscopic residual disease at the time of primary debulking surgery (p for trend <0.01 for duration of MHT use). Residual disease mediated some (17%) of the relationship between MHT and survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-diagnosis MHT use for 5+ years was a favorable prognostic factor for women with ovarian cancer. This large study is consistent with prior smaller studies, and further work is needed to understand the underlying mechanism.

Menopausal hormonal therapy in gynaecological cancers: An evidence-based approach for clinical management

Treatment for gynaecological malignancies often requires oophorectomy or loss of ovarian function from adjuvant treatment. Premature or early menopause caused by gynaecological cancer treatment may require menopausal hormonal therapy (MHT) to treat vasomotor symptoms. However, concerns exist due to theoretical risks of stimulation of hormonal-sensitive tumours and hence increasing recurrence risk. There are small numbers of often underpowered fair to poor quality studies indicating that MHT is safe with most gynaecological malignancies. These studies are of variable quality with most being retrospective. We present the available data on this subject relative to the common types of gynaecological cancer.

Effectiveness of CO2 laser on urogenital syndrome in women with a previous gynecological neoplasia: a multicentric study

BACKGROUND

Many women diagnosed with gynecological cancers undergo adjuvant therapy, which may lead to transient or permanent menopause that ultimately leads to urogenital syndrome and vulvovaginal atrophy. Studies advise against the use of estrogen in women with a history of hormone-dependent cancer. One alternative is vaginal microablative fractional CO₂ laser, which promotes tissue regeneration through the production of collagen and elastic fibers.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of CO₂ laser in the treatment of urogenital syndrome-in particular, symptomatic vulvovaginal atrophy in women who have survived gynecological cancers.

METHODS

A retrospective study was carried out, including all patients with a history of gynecological cancers and vulvovaginal atrophy who underwent CO₂ laser treatment between November 2012 and February 2018 in four Italian centers. The study was approved by the local ethics committee of each participating institution. The inclusion criteria were women aged between 18 and 75; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status <2; and history of breast, ovarian, cervical, or uterus cancer. Patients had to have vulvovaginal atrophy and at least one of the following symptoms of urogenital syndrome: vaginal dryness, dyspareunia, vaginal introitus pain, burning, or itching. Three applications were administered at baseline, 30 days, and 60 days. All patients were evaluated before the first laser session, at each session, and 4 weeks after the last session. In particular, patients were asked to indicate the intensity of symptoms before the first session and 4 weeks after the last session, using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scoring from 0 ('no discomfort') to 10 ('maximum discomfort').

RESULTS

A total of 1213 patients underwent CO₂ laser treatment and of these, 1048 were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria in the analysis. Finally, a total of 165 patients were included in the study. The mean age at the time of treatment was 53 years (range 31-73). Dryness improved by 66%, dyspareunia improved by 59%, burning improved by 66%, pain at introitus improved by 54%, and itching improved by 54%. The side effects were evaluated as pain greater than VAS score 6 during and after the treatment period. No side effects were seen in any sessions.

CONCLUSIONS

Fractional microablative CO₂ laser therapy offers an effective strategy in the management of the symptoms of genitourinary syndrome in post-menopausal women and in survivors of gynecological cancer.

Vaginal estrogen use for genitourinary symptoms in women with a history of uterine, cervical, or ovarian carcinoma

Objective

Menopausal symptoms may adversely affect quality of life and health in women diagnosed with a gynecologic malignancy. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of adverse outcomes, including cancer recurrence, venous thromboembolism, and secondary malignancies, among patients with a history of endometrial, ovarian, or cervical cancer prescribed vaginal estrogen for genitourinary syndrome of menopause.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was performed including women who were diagnosed with endometrial, ovarian, or cervical cancer from January 1, 1991 to December 31, 2017 and subsequently treated with vaginal estrogen for genitourinary syndrome of menopause. Patients were included if not undergoing active cancer treatment and were disease-free based on most recent cancer surveillance visit with physical exam and/or imaging. Demographics, oncologic variables, estrogen use, and adverse outcomes were recorded. Descriptive statistics and univariate analysis were performed.

Results

Of 244 women who received vaginal estrogen, 52% (n=127) had a history of endometrial, 25.4% (n=62) cervical, 18.9% (n=46) ovarian cancer, and 3.7% (n=9) low malignant potential tumors. The mean age and body mass index were 55.5±12.5 years and 29.2±8.6 mg/kg2, respectively. With a median follow-up of 80.2 months, the incidence of recurrence for endometrial, ovarian, and cervical cancer was 7.1% (n=9), 18.2% (n=10), and 9.7% (n=6), respectively. In patients with endometrial cancer who recurred, the incidence was 2.4% (n=3) for stage I/II and 4.7% (n=6) for stage III/IV disease. Similarly, recurrence rates for ovarian cancer were 4.3% (n=2) for stage I/II and 17.4% (n=8) for stage III/IV disease. All cervical cancer recurrences were in patients with stage I/II disease. Adverse outcomes including breast cancer (1.6%, n=4), secondary malignancy (2.5%, n=6), and venous thromboembolism (2.5%, n=6) were rare.

Conclusion

In women with a history of endometrial, ovarian, or cervical cancer prescribed vaginal estrogen use for genitourinary syndrome of menopause, adverse outcomes, including recurrence and thromboembolic events, are infrequent. Vaginal estrogen may be considered safe in gynecologic cancer survivors.

European Menopause and Andropause Society (EMAS) and International Gynecologic Cancer Society (IGCS) position statement on managing the menopause after gynecological cancer: focus on menopausal symptoms and osteoporosis

Worldwide, it is estimated that about 1.3 million new gynecological cancer cases are diagnosed each year. For 2018, the predicted annual totals were cervix uteri 569 847, corpus uteri 382 069, ovary 295 414, vulva 44 235, and va​gina 17 600. Treatments include hysterectomy with or without bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. These can result in loss of ovarian function and, in women under the age of 45 years, early menopause. The aim of this position statement is to set out an individualized approach to the management, with or without menopausal hormone therapy, of menopausal symptoms and the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in women with gynecological cancer. Our methods comprised a literature review and consensus of expert opinion. The limited data suggest that women with low-grade, early-stage endometrial cancer may consider systemic or topical estrogens. However, menopausal hormone therapy may stimulate tumor growth in patients with more advanced disease, and non-hormonal approaches are recommended. Uterine sarcomas may be hormone dependent, and therefore estrogen and progesterone receptor testing should be undertaken to guide decisions as to whether menopausal hormone therapy or non-hormonal strategies should be used. The limited evidence available suggests that menopausal hormone therapy, either systemic or topical, does not appear to be associated with harm and does not decrease overall or disease-free survival in women with non-serous epithelial ovarian cancer and germ cell tumors. Caution is required with both systemic and topical menopausal hormone therapy in women with serous and granulosa cell tumors because of their hormone dependence, and non-hormonal options are recommended as initial therapy. There is no evidence to contraindicate the use of systemic or topical menopausal hormone therapy by women with cervical, vaginal, or vulvar cancer, as these tumors are not considered to be hormone dependent.

European Menopause and Andropause Society (EMAS) and International Gynecologic Cancer Society (IGCS) position statement on managing the menopause after gynecological cancer: focus on menopausal symptoms and osteoporosis

INTRODUCTION

Worldwide, it is estimated that about 1.3 million new gynecological cancer cases are diagnosed each year. For 2018, the predicted annual totals were cervix uteri 569,847, corpus uteri 382,069, ovary 295,414, vulva 44,235 and va​gina 17,600. Treatments include hysterectomy with or without bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, radiotherapy and chemotherapy. These can result in loss of ovarian function and, in women under the age of 45, early menopause.

AIM

The aim of this position statement is to set out an individualized approach to the management, with or without menopausal hormone therapy, of menopausal symptoms and the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in women with gynecological cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature review and consensus of expert opinion.

SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS

The limited data suggest that women with low-grade, early-stage endometrial cancer may consider systemic or topical estrogens. However, menopausal hormone therapy may stimulate tumor growth in patients with more advanced disease, and non-hormonal approaches are recommended. Uterine sarcomas may be hormone dependent, and therefore estrogen and progesterone receptor testing should be undertaken to guide decisions as to whether menopausal hormone therapy or non-hormonal strategies should be used. The limited evidence available suggests that menopausal hormone therapy, either systemic or topical, does not appear to be associated with harm and does not decrease overall or disease-free survival in women with non-serous epithelial ovarian cancer and germ cell tumors. Caution is required with both systemic and topical menopausal hormone therapy in women with serous and granulosa cell tumors because of their hormone dependence, and non-hormonal options are recommended as initial therapy. There is no evidence to contraindicate the use of systemic or topical menopausal hormone therapy by women with cervical, vaginal or vulvar cancer, as these tumors are not considered to be hormone dependent.

Management of genitourinary syndrome of menopause in female cancer patients: a focus on vaginal hormonal therapy

Genitourinary syndrome of menopause is a condition describing the hypoestrogenic effects on the female genitals and lower urinary tract leading to symptoms such as vaginal dryness, vulvar and vaginal burning, dyspareunia and dysuria. Genitourinary syndrome of menopause is experienced by over half of postmenopausal women, and is even more pervasive in women with cancer. Due to treatments such as surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, and hormonal therapy, women may experience early menopause resulting in earlier and more severe symptoms. Understanding the scope of this issue in female breast and gynecologic cancer survivors and identifying treatment options for this complex patient population are paramount. Tailored patient treatments include nonhormonal therapies (vaginal moisturizers, lubricants, pelvic floor physical therapy, dilator therapy, counseling), systemic and local hormonal therapies. Consensus recommendations by medical societies and associated evidence are reviewed, with emphasis on safety and efficacy of local vaginal hormonal therapies, and management variations noted depending on cancer type and characteristics. With knowledge and understanding of the unmet need associated with under-recognition and under-treatment of genitourinary syndrome of menopause, providers caring for women with cancer are in a position to improve the quality of life of their patients by providing safe and effective treatments.

Hormone replacement therapy after surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Women who have undergone surgical treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) may develop menopausal symptoms due to immediate loss of ovarian function following surgery and chemotherapy. Women may experience vasomotor symptoms, sleep disturbance, difficulty concentrating, sexual dysfunction, vaginal symptoms and accelerated osteoporosis. Although hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is the most effective treatment to relieve these symptoms, its safety has been questioned for women with EOC.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of HRT for menopausal symptoms in women surgically treated for EOC.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 6), MEDLINE via Ovid (1946 to 12 June 2019) and Embase via Ovid (1980 to 2019, week 23). We also handsearched conference reports and trial registries. There was no language restriction.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with participants of any age and menopausal status who had undergone surgery for EOC and, after diagnosis and treatment, used any regimen and duration of HRT compared with placebo or no hormone therapy. We also included trials comparing different regimens or duration of administration of HRT.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified studies that met the inclusion criteria. They used Covidence to extract study characteristics, outcome data and to assess methodological quality of the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Our search strategy identified 2617 titles, of which 2614 titles were excluded. Three studies, involving 350 women, met our inclusion criteria. Two of the studies included pre and postmenopausal women, and the third only included premenopausal women. The overall age range of those women included in the studies was 20 to 89.6 years old, with a median follow-up ranging from 31.4 months to 19.1 years. The geographical distribution of participants included Europe, South Africa and China. All stages and histological subtypes were included in two of the studies, but stage IV disease had been excluded in the third. The three included studies used a variety of HRT regimens (conjugated oestrogen with or without medroxyprogesterone and with or without nylestriol) and HRT administrations (oral, patch and implant), In all studies, the comparisons were made versus women who had not received HRT. The studies were at low or unclear risk of selection and reporting bias, and at high risk of performance, detection and attrition bias. The certainty of the evidence was low for overall survival and progression-free survival, and very low for quality-of-life assessment, incidence of breast cancer, transient ischaemic attack (TIA), cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and myocardial infarction (MI). Meta-analysis of these studies showed that HRT may improve overall survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 0.93; 350 participants, 3 studies; low-certainty evidence). Quality-of-life assessment by use of the EORTC-C30 questionnaire was performed only in one study. We are uncertain whether HRT improves or reduces quality of life as the certainty of the evidence was assessed as very low (mean difference (MD) 13.67 points higher, 95% CI 9.26 higher to 18.08 higher; 1 study; 75 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Likewise, HRT may make little or no difference to progression-free survival (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.01; 275 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether HRT improves or reduces the incidence of breast cancer (risk ratio (RR) 2.00, 95% CI 0.19 to 21.59; 225 participants, 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence); TIA (RR 5.00, 95% CI 0.24 to 102.42; 150 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence); CVA (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.88; 150 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence); and MI (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.10; 150 participants, 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). The incidence of gallstones was not reported in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Hormone replacement therapy may slightly improve overall survival in women who have undergone surgical treatment for EOC, but the certainty of the evidence is low. HRT may make little or no difference to quality of life, incidence of breast cancer, TIA, CVA and MI as the certainty of the evidence has been assessed as very low. There may be little or no effect of HRT use on progression-free survival. The evidence in this review is limited by imprecision and incompleteness of reported relevant outcomes and therefore the results should be interpreted with caution. Future well-designed RCTs are required as this is an important area to women experiencing menopausal symptoms following surgical treatment for ovarian cancer, especially as doctors are often reluctant to prescribe HRT in this scenario. The evidence in this review is too limited to support or refute that HRT is very harmful in this population.

Non-classical estrogen signaling in ovarian cancer improves chemo-sensitivity and patients outcome

Deficiency in homologous recombination repair (HRR) is frequently associated with hormone-responsive cancers, especially the epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) which shows defects of HRR in up to half of cases. However, whether there are molecular connections between estrogen signaling and HRR deficiency in EOC remains unknown. Methods: We analyzed the estrogen receptor α (ERα) binding profile in EOC cell lines and investigated its association with genome instability, HRR deficiency and sensitivity to chemotherapy using extensive public datasets and in vitro/in vivo experiments. Results: We found an inverse correlation between estrogen signaling and HRR activity in EOC, and the genome-wide collaboration between ERα and the co-repressor CtBP. Though the non-classical AP-1-mediated ERα signaling, their targets were highly enriched by HRR genes. We found that depleting ERα in EOC cells up-regulates HRR activity and HRR gene expression. Consequently, estrogen signaling enhances the sensitivity of ovarian cancer cells to chemotherapy agents in vitro and in vivo. Large-scale analyses further indicate that estrogen replacement and ESR1 expression are associated with chemo-sensitivity and the favorable survival of EOC patients. Conclusion: These findings characterize a novel role of ERα in mediating the molecular connection between hormone and HRR in EOC and encourage hormone replacement therapy for EOC patients.

A systematic review and meta-regression analysis to examine the 'timing hypothesis' of hormone replacement therapy on mortality, coronary heart disease, and stroke

Background

The 'Timing Hypothesis' states that the benefits and harms of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) are related to the proximity with which it is begun following the onset of menopause. The primary aim of this analysis was to test for heterogeneity of treatment effect for HRT using Chi² and I² tests for younger versus older initiators of HRT. The secondary aim was to perform a meta-regression with mean age at trial baseline as the covariate for various outcomes.

Methods

Younger initiation trials were defined as those with mean age of participants <60 years and older initiation trials were those with mean age >60 years. The primary endpoints included all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, coronary heart disease (CHD) events (a composite of cardiac mortality and nonfatal myocardial (MI)), and a composite of stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA) and systemic embolism.

Results

Thirty-one RCTs were identified comparing HRT users to nonusers (n = 40,521). There was significant heterogeneity of treatment effect between younger versus older HRT initiators for all-cause mortality (Chi² = 9.74, p = 0.002, I² = 89.7%), cardiac mortality (Chi² = 4.04, p = 0.04, I² = 75.2%), and CHD events (Chi² = 3.06, p = 0.08, I² = 67.3%). Both groups experienced an increase in stroke, TIA and systemic embolism (1112/18,774 in the HRT group versus 734/18,070 in the control group; OR = 1.52; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.38-1.67). When performing the meta-regression, as age increased the treatment effect of HRT was increased for stroke, TIA and systemic embolism (point estimate 0.006 with a standard error of 0.002) (p = 0.0003).

Conclusion

Younger initiation of HRT may be effective in reducing death and cardiac events. However, younger HRT initiators remained at an increased risk of stroke, TIA and systemic embolism and this risk increased as average age increased. Younger menopausal women using HRT to treat vasomotor symptoms do not appear to be at an increased risk of dying or experiencing CHD events.

Hormone Replacement Therapy in Cancer Survivors - Review of the Literature

Rapid advance in oncology leads to increasing survival of oncologic patients. More and more of them live long enough to reach either the natural age of menopause or, as a side effect of their oncotherapy, experience the cessation of gonadal function, leading to premature ovarian insufficiency, with disturbing vasomotor symtoms and long-term negative cardiovascular and skeletal effects. Thus, an ever increasing number of cancer survivors search endocrinologic help in the form of hormone replacement therapy (HRT). The misinterpretation of the WHI (Women's Health Initiative) Study has lead to an irrational fear of female hormone replacement, both by the general population and medical professionals. It has seemed the logical and safe conclusion to many physicians to avoid HRT, supposing that this attitude definitely causes no harm, whereas the decision of prescribing estrogen alone or with progestins might bear oncologic and thromboembolic risks and may even lead to litigation in case of a potentially related complication. However, it was known even before the WHI results that premature menopause and hypogonadism decreases the life expectancy of women by years through its skeletal and cardiovascular effects, and this negative effect correlates with the length of the hypoestrogenaemic period. Therefore, the denial of HRT also needs to be supported by evidence and should be weighed againts the risks of HRT. Yet, the oncologic risk of HRT is extremely difficult to assess. In this work we review the latest evidence from in vitro experiments to clinical studies, regarding HRT in survivors of gynecologic and non-gynecologic cancers. Based on our literature research, we group tumours regarding the oncologic risk of properly chosen female hormone replacement therapy in cancer survivors as follows: ’HRT is advanageous’ (e.g. endometrial cancer type I, cervical adenocarcinoma, haematologic malignancies, local cutaneous malignant melanoma, colorectal cancer, hepatocellular cancer); ’HRT is neutral’ (e.g. BRCA 1/2 mutation carriers without cancer, endometrial cancer type II, uterinal carcinosarcoma and adenosarcoma, certain types of ovarian cancer, cervical, vaginal and vulvar squamous cell carcinoma, prolactinoma, kidney cancer, pancreatic cancer, thyroid cancer); ’HRT is relatively contraindicated’ for various reasons (e.g. leiomyosarcoma, certain types of ovarian tumours, brain tumours, advanced metastatic malignant melanoma, lung cancer, gastric cancer, bladder cancer); ’HRT is diasadvantageous and thus contraindicated’ (e.g. breast cancer, endometrial stroma sarcoma, meningioma, glioma, hormone receptor positive gastric and bladder cancer).

The role of menopausal hormone therapy in women with or at risk of ovarian and breast cancers: Misconceptions and current directions

For women who are candidates for menopausal hormone therapy (MHT), estrogen can provide relief from symptomatic menopause, decrease rates of chronic illnesses, and improve health-related quality of life. However, confusion surrounds the evidence regarding the impact of exogenous estrogen and progesterone on the breast and ovary. Available data regarding the risks of MHT (estrogen and/or progestin) related to the development of breast and ovarian cancer are often inconsistent or incomplete. Modern molecular and genetic techniques have improved our understanding of the heterogeneity of breast and ovarian cancer. This enhanced understanding of the disease has impacted our understanding of carcinogenesis. Treatment options have evolved to be more targeted toward hormonal therapy for certain subtypes of disease, whereas cytotoxic chemotherapy remains the standard for other histological and molecular subtypes. The role of MHT in the breast and ovarian cancer survivor, as well as women who are at high risk for the development of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, remains controversial despite evidence that this treatment can improve quality of life and survival outcomes. Through this article, we examine the evidence for and against the use of MHT with a focus on women who have or are at high risk for breast and ovarian cancer.

Gynecologists are afraid of prescribing hormone replacement to endometrial/ovarian cancer survivors despite national guidelines-a survey in Sweden

BACKGROUND

Prolonged survival in ovarian and endometrial cancer patients increases the importance of paying attention to quality of life. Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) after gynecologic cancer has been controversial. With this survey, we sought to describe Swedish gynecologists' and gynecologic oncologists' attitudes towards prescribing HRT to these cancer survivors and see if prescribing practice is consistent with the available evidence and national guidelines.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A web-based survey containing three hypothetical cases with a total of 15 questions was distributed to gynecologists and gynecologic oncologists in Sweden. Respondents were asked about their HRT prescription practices in endometrial/ovarian cancer patients with moderate to severe menopausal symptoms.

RESULTS

In total 262 gynecologists and 24 gynecologic oncologists answered the survey. In the low-risk endometrial cancer case a majority of the gynecologists (55%) and gynecologic oncologists (66.7%) would prescribe local estrogen. A total of 30% of the gynecologists would prescribe estrogen replacement therapy (ERT) in the high-risk endometrial cancer case compared to 58.3% of the gynecologic oncologists. The gynecologic oncologists felt more comfortable treating patients with endometrial cancer than did gynecologists, and the gynecologists were more likely to read the national guidelines. In the ovarian cancer case, 63.7% of the gynecologists would prescribe HRT compared to 92% of the gynecologic oncologists.

CONCLUSION

Swedish gynecologic oncologists have a more favorable attitude towards HRT for endometrial/ovarian cancer patients and feel more comfortable treating their patients than do gynecologists. This study illustrates a need for education in these matters in order not to withhold HRT from women due to doctors' sometimes unjustified anxiety.

Management of sexuality, intimacy, and menopause symptoms in patients with ovarian cancer

Issues of sexuality, intimacy, and early menopause significantly impact the quality of life of patients following the diagnosis and treatment of ovarian cancer. These are undertreated problems. Successful treatment requires the provider's awareness of the problem, ability to identify it, and willingness to treat it. Unfortunately many providers do not address these issues in the pretreatment or perioperative period. Furthermore, patients do not often alert their providers to their symptoms. While systemic hormone therapy may improve many of the issues, they are not appropriate for all patients given their action on estrogen receptors. However, other nonhormonal treatments exist including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, antiepileptics, natural remedies, and pelvic floor physical therapy. In addition psychological care and the involvement of the partner can be helpful in managing the sexual health concerns of these patients. At the time of diagnosis or at initial consultation, women should be informed of the potential physiologic, hormonal, and psychosocial effects of ovarian cancer on sexuality and that there is a multimodal approach to dealing with symptoms.

Management of menopausal symptoms in women with gynecologic cancers

OBJECTIVE

Women with gynecologic malignancies will be cured or may become long-term survivors. Management of menopausal symptoms is important in addressing their quality of life. We review the benefit and safety of hormone therapy use in these patients.

METHODS

MEDLINE was searched for studies on menopause management published in English through December of 2016.

RESULTS

Available data suggest that short-term use of hormone therapy in gynecologic cancer patients who do not have an estrogen-dependent malignancy do not adversely impact oncologic outcome and results in improvement of menopausal vasomotor and genitourinary symptoms. Evidence regarding safety of hormone therapy use in women with estrogen-dependent gynecologic malignances is currently lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

Candidates for hormone therapy in gynecologic oncology include women with menopausal symptoms diagnosed with low-grade, early-stage endometrial cancer, cervical, vulvar and vaginal cancer, and ovarian cancer.

Efficacy of Postoperative Hormone Replacement Therapy on Prognosis of Patients with Serous Ovarian Carcinoma

Background:

Ovarian cancer is the most common cause of gynecological cancer-associated death. Iatrogenic menopause might adversely affect the quality of life and health outcomes in young female cancer survivors. We evaluated whether postoperative hormone replacement therapy (HRT) had a negative influence on the progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with papillary serous ovarian cancer (SOC).

Methods:

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with papillary SOC, treated from January 1980 to December 2009, who suffered from menopause with or without HRT. Clinical characteristics of patients were compared between the two groups (HRT and non-HRT). Blood samples were collected from all the participants to detect serum cancer antigen (CA) 125. Hazard ratios with 95% confidential intervals for each variable were calculated by univariable and multivariable conditional Logistic regression analyses.

Results:

Among 112 identified patients, 31 were HRT users and 81 were not. The two groups did not significantly differ in median age at diagnosis (t = 0.652, P = 0.513), International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage (χ² = 0.565, P = 0.754), differentiation (χ² = 1.728, P = 0.422), resection status (χ² = 0.070, P = 0.791), relapse (χ² = 0.109, P = 0.741), chemotherapy course (t = −1.079, P = 0.282), follow-up interval (t = 0.878, P = 0.382), or PFS (t = 0.580, P = 0.562). Median Kupperman score at the onset of HRT was 30.81 and 12.19 after the therapy (t = 3.302, P = 0.001). According to the analysis, the strongest independent variables in predicting PFS were FIGO stage and disease that was not optimally debulked.

Conclusions:

Postoperative HRT is not a prognostic factor for PFS of patients with papillary SOC. However, multicenter studies are needed to verify and extend our findings.

Long-term hormone therapy for perimenopausal and postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND: Hormone therapy (HT) is widely provided for control of menopausal symptoms and has been used for the management and prevention of cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis and dementia in older women. This is an updated version of a Cochrane review first published in 2005. OBJECTIVES: To assess effects of long-term HT (at least 1 year's duration) on mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, cancer, gallbladder disease, fracture and cognition in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women during and after cessation of treatment. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases to September 2016: Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO. We searched the registers of ongoing trials and reference lists provided in previous studies and systematic reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised double-blinded studies of HT versus placebo, taken for at least 1 year by perimenopausal or postmenopausal women. HT included oestrogens, with or without progestogens, via the oral, transdermal, subcutaneous or intranasal route. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the quality of the evidence by using GRADE methods. MAIN RESULTS: We included 22 studies involving 43,637 women. We derived nearly 70% of the data from two well-conducted studies (HERS 1998; WHI 1998). Most participants were postmenopausal American women with at least some degree of comorbidity, and mean participant age in most studies was over 60 years. None of the studies focused on perimenopausal women.In relatively healthy postmenopausal women (i.e. generally fit, without overt disease), combined continuous HT increased the risk of a coronary event (after 1 year's use: from 2 per 1000 to between 3 and 7 per 1000), venous thromboembolism (after 1 year's use: from 2 per 1000 to between 4 and 11 per 1000), stroke (after 3 years' use: from 6 per 1000 to between 6 and 12 per 1000), breast cancer (after 5.6 years' use: from 19 per 1000 to between 20 and 30 per 1000), gallbladder disease (after 5.6 years' use: from 27 per 1000 to between 38 and 60 per 1000) and death from lung cancer (after 5.6 years' use plus 2.4 years' additional follow-up: from 5 per 1000 to between 6 and 13 per 1000).Oestrogen-only HT increased the risk of venous thromboembolism (after 1 to 2 years' use: from 2 per 1000 to 2 to 10 per 1000; after 7 years' use: from 16 per 1000 to 16 to 28 per 1000), stroke (after 7 years' use: from 24 per 1000 to between 25 and 40 per 1000) and gallbladder disease (after 7 years' use: from 27 per 1000 to between 38 and 60 per 1000) but reduced the risk of breast cancer (after 7 years' use: from 25 per 1000 to between 15 and 25 per 1000) and clinical fracture (after 7 years' use: from 141 per 1000 to between 92 and 113 per 1000) and did not increase the risk of coronary events at any follow-up time.Women over 65 years of age who were relatively healthy and taking continuous combined HT showed an increase in the incidence of dementia (after 4 years' use: from 9 per 1000 to 11 to 30 per 1000). Among women with cardiovascular disease, use of combined continuous HT significantly increased the risk of venous thromboembolism (at 1 year's use: from 3 per 1000 to between 3 and 29 per 1000). Women taking HT had a significantly decreased incidence of fracture with long-term use.Risk of fracture was the only outcome for which strong evidence showed clinical benefit derived from HT (after 5.6 years' use of combined HT: from 111 per 1000 to between 79 and 96 per 1000; after 7.1 years' use of oestrogen-only HT: from 141 per 1000 to between 92 and 113 per 1000). Researchers found no strong evidence that HT has a clinically meaningful impact on the incidence of colorectal cancer.One trial analysed subgroups of 2839 relatively healthy women 50 to 59 years of age who were taking combined continuous HT and 1637 who were taking oestrogen-only HT versus similar-sized placebo groups. The only significantly increased risk reported was for venous thromboembolism in women taking combined continuous HT: Their absolute risk remained low, at less than 1/500. However, other differences in risk cannot be excluded, as this study was not designed to have the power to detect differences between groups of women within 10 years of menopause.For most studies, risk of bias was low in most domains. The overall quality of evidence for the main comparisons was moderate. The main limitation in the quality of evidence was that only about 30% of women were 50 to 59 years old at baseline, which is the age at which women are most likely to consider HT for vasomotor symptoms. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Women with intolerable menopausal symptoms may wish to weigh the benefits of symptom relief against the small absolute risk of harm arising from short-term use of low-dose HT, provided they do not have specific contraindications. HT may be unsuitable for some women, including those at increased risk of cardiovascular disease, increased risk of thromboembolic disease (such as those with obesity or a history of venous thrombosis) or increased risk of some types of cancer (such as breast cancer, in women with a uterus). The risk of endometrial cancer among women with a uterus taking oestrogen-only HT is well documented.HT is not indicated for primary or secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease or dementia, nor for prevention of deterioration of cognitive function in postmenopausal women. Although HT is considered effective for the prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis, it is generally recommended as an option only for women at significant risk for whom non-oestrogen therapies are unsuitable. Data are insufficient for assessment of the risk of long-term HT use in perimenopausal women and in postmenopausal women younger than 50 years of age.

Hormone therapy for ovarian cancer survivors: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Hormone therapy (HT) alleviates menopausal symptoms, but there is a lack of consensus regarding its use among premenopausal ovarian cancer survivors.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed the literature and searched the Medline (1966-2014), Scopus (2004-2014), Popline (1974-2014), ClinicalTrials.gov (2008-2014), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials CENTRAL (1999-2014) databases and the reference lists of electronically retrieved studies. Statistical meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1 software.

RESULTS

Six studies were included in our systematic review, which involved 1,521 women. Among them, 451 women (29.6%) received HT, whereas the remaining 1,070 women (70.4%) did not receive any treatment. We noticed a statistically significant reduction of ovarian cancer-related deaths among women who received HT (odds ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.28-0.80); however, disease recurrence rates did not differ between the two groups (odds ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.45-1.14). Studies included in the present systematic review did not report a significant difference in overall survival and disease-free survival rates among women receiving HT and controls.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of meta-analysis, HT does not influence the odds of ovarian cancer recurrence; however, this conclusion must be confirmed separately because of significant limitations in the methodological quality of the studies included.

Menopausal hormone therapy in cancer survivors: A narrative review of the literature

Decision making regarding the use of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) for the treatment of bothersome menopausal symptoms in a cancer survivor can be complex, and includes assessment of its impact on disease-free or overall survival. Estrogen receptors are present in several cancer types, but this does not always result in estrogen-mediated tumor proliferation and adverse cancer-related outcomes. Estrogen may even be protective against certain cancers. Menopausal hormone therapy is associated with an increased risk of recurrence and mortality after diagnosis of some cancer types, but not others. We provide a narrative review of the medical literature regarding the risk of cancer recurrence and associated mortality with initiation of MHT after the diagnosis of breast, gynecologic, lung, colorectal, hematologic cancers, and melanoma. Menopausal hormone therapy may be considered for management of bothersome menopausal symptoms in women with some cancer types (e.g., colorectal and hematologic cancer, localized melanoma, and most cervical, vulvar and vaginal cancers), while nonhormonal treatment options may be preferred for others (e.g., breast cancer). In women with other cancer types, recommendations are less straightforward, and the use of MHT must be individualized.

Hormone therapy after prophylactic risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in women who have BRCA gene mutation

Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation have substantially higher risk for developing not only breast and ovarian cancers, but also for primary peritoneal, Fallopian tube, colonic, pancreatic cancers, uterine papillary serous adenocarcinoma and malignant melanoma. The risk for ovarian cancer ranges from 39 to 49% by 70 years of age in BRCA1 mutation carriers and from 11 to 18% for those with a BRCA2 mutation, whilst breast cancer increases similarly within women who have either the BRCA1 mutation or the BRCA2 mutation, from about 20% in women in their forties, 37% by the age of 50 years, 55% by 60 years and more than 70% by the age of 70 years. Prophylactic risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRBSO) provides significantly greater benefits with the view of reducing the risk for gynecological and breast cancer (decreasing ovarian cancer risk by 85-95%, breast cancer risk by about 53-68% and removes occult or undetected cancers in 2-18% of such women) compared to other conservative options, namely screening/surveillance or use of chemopreventative agents. RRBSO will result in significant menopausal symptoms, increased risk for bone mineral loss, increasing risk for osteopenia and osteoporosis, and cognitive dysfunction. Risk for cardiovascular disease is also increased if the procedure is performed in women less than 50 years of age. This article analyzes the role of RRBSO in women with BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations with no personal history of breast cancer and the impact of hormone therapy on risk for breast and gynecological cancers if used after the procedure to alleviate the resulting menopausal symptoms.

Adjuvant Hormone Therapy May Improve Survival in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Results of the AHT Randomized Trial

PURPOSE

To assess the effects of adjuvant hormone therapy (AHT) on survival and disease outcome in women with epithelial ovarian cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Participants were premenopausal and postmenopausal women who had been diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer (any International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage) 9 or fewer months previously. Ineligible patients included those with deliberately preserved ovarian function, with a history of a hormone-dependent malignancy, or with any contraindications to hormone-replacement therapy. Patients were centrally randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either AHT for 5 years after random assignment or no AHT (control). Main outcome measures were overall survival (OS), defined as time from random assignment to death (any cause), and relapse-free survival, defined as time from random assignment to relapse or death (any cause). Patients who continued, alive and relapse free, were censored at their last known follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients (n = 75, AHT; n = 75, control) were randomly assigned from 1990 to 1995 from 19 centers in the United Kingdom, Spain, and Hungary; all patients were included in intention-to-treat analyses. The median follow-up in alive patients is currently 19.1 years. Of the 75 patients with AHT, 53 (71%) have died compared with 68 (91%) of 75 patients in the control group. OS was significantly improved in patients who were receiving AHT (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.90; P = .011). A similar effect was seen for relapse-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.97; P = .032). Effects remained after adjustment for known prognostic factors.

CONCLUSION

These results show that women who have severe menopausal symptoms after ovarian cancer treatment can safely take hormone-replacement therapy, and this may, in fact, infer benefits in terms of OS in addition to known advantages in terms of quality of life.

Surveillance and Care of the Gynecologic Cancer Survivor

BACKGROUND

Care of the gynecologic cancer survivor extends beyond cancer treatment to encompass promotion of sexual, cardiovascular, bone, and brain health; management of fertility, contraception, and vasomotor symptoms; and genetic counseling.

METHODS

This is a narrative review of the data and guidelines regarding care and surveillance of the gynecologic cancer survivor. We searched databases including PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus using the search terms gynecologic cancer, cancer surveillance, and cancer survivor and reached a consensus for articles chosen for inclusion in the review based on availability in the English language and publication since 2001, as well as key older articles, consensus statements, and practice guidelines from professional societies. However, we did not undertake an extensive systematic search of the literature to identify all potentially relevant studies, nor did we utilize statistical methods to summarize data. We offer clinical recommendations for the management of gynecologic cancer survivors based on review of evidence and our collective clinical experience.

RESULTS

Key messages include the limitations of laboratory studies, including CA-125, and imaging in the setting of gynecologic cancer surveillance, hormonal and non-hormonal management of treatment-related vasomotor symptoms and genitourinary syndrome of menopause, as well as recommendations for general health screening, fertility preservation, and contraception.

CONCLUSIONS

A holistic approach to care extending beyond cancer treatment alone benefits gynecologic cancer survivors. In addition to surveillance for cancer recurrence and late treatment side effects, survivors benefit from guidance on hormonal, contraceptive, and fertility management and promotion of cardiovascular, bone, brain, and sexual health.