Effects of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system on cardiovascular risk markers in patients with endometriosis: a comparative study with the GnRH analogue

A systematic literature review on patient-reported outcome domains and measures in nonsurgical efficacy trials related to chronic pain associated with endometriosis: an urgent call to action

ABSTRACT

Endometriosis, a common cause for chronic pelvic pain, significantly affects quality of life, fertility, and overall productivity of those affected. Therapeutic options remain limited, and collating evidence on treatment efficacy is complicated. One reason could be the heterogeneity of assessed outcomes in nonsurgical clinical trials, impeding meaningful result comparisons. This systematic literature review examines outcome domains and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in clinical trials. Through comprehensive search of Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL up until July 2022, we screened 1286 records, of which 191 were included in our analyses. Methodological quality (GRADE criteria), information about publication, patient population, and intervention were assessed, and domains as well as PROMs were extracted and analyzed. In accordance with IMMPACT domain framework, the domain pain was assessed in almost all studies (98.4%), followed by adverse events (73.8%). By contrast, assessment of physical functioning (29.8%), improvement and satisfaction (14.1%), and emotional functioning (6.8%) occurred less frequently. Studies of a better methodological quality tended to use more different domains. Nevertheless, combinations of more than 2 domains were rare, failing to comprehensively capture the bio-psycho-social aspects of endometriosis-associated pain. The PROMs used showed an even broader heterogeneity across all studies. Our findings underscore the large heterogeneity of assessed domains and PROMs in clinical pain-related endometriosis trials. This highlights the urgent need for a standardized approach to both, assessed domains and high-quality PROMs ideally realized through development and implementation of a core outcome set, encompassing the most pivotal domains and PROMs for both, stakeholders and patients.

A review of phase II and III drugs for the treatment and management of endometriosis

INTRODUCTION

Endometriosis is an estrogen-dependent disease that gives rise to pelvic pain and infertility. Although estroprogestins and progestins currently stand as the first-line treatments for this condition, demonstrating efficacy in two-thirds of patients, a significant portion of individuals experience only partial relief or symptom recurrence following the cessation of these therapies. The coexistence of superficial, deep endometriosis, and ovarian endometriomas, as three distinct phenotypes with unique pathogenetic and molecular characteristics, may elucidate the current heterogeneous biological response to available therapy.

AREAS COVERED

The objective of this review is to furnish the reader with a comprehensive summary pertaining to phase II-III hormonal treatments for endometriosis.

EXPERT OPINION

Ongoing research endeavors are directed toward the development of novel hormonal options for this benign yet debilitating disease. Among them, oral GnRH antagonists emerge as a noteworthy option, furnishing rapid therapeutic onset without an initial flare-up; these drugs facilitate partial or complete estrogen suppression, and promote prompt ovarian function recovery upon discontinuation, effectively surmounting the limitations associated with previously employed GnRH agonists. Limited evidence supports the use of selective estrogen and progesterone receptor modulators. Consequently, further extensive clinical research is imperative to garner a more profound understanding of innovative targets for novel hormonal options.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues for endometriosis

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is a common gynaecological condition affecting 6 to 11% of reproductive-age women and may cause dyspareunia, dysmenorrhoea, and infertility. One treatment strategy is medical therapy with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHas) to reduce pain due to endometriosis. One of the adverse effects of GnRHas is a decreased bone mineral density. In addition to assessing the effect on pain, quality of life, most troublesome symptom and patients' satisfaction, the current review also evaluated the effect on bone mineral density and risk of adverse effects in women with endometriosis who use GnRHas versus other treatment options.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of GnRH analogues (GnRHas) in the treatment of painful symptoms associated with endometriosis and to determine the effects of GnRHas on bone mineral density of women with endometriosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and the trial registries in May 2022 together with reference checking and contact with study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared GnRHas with other hormonal treatment options, including analgesics, danazol, intra-uterine progestogens, oral or injectable progestogens, gestrinone and also GnRHas compared with no treatment or placebo. Trials comparing GnRHas versus GnRHas in conjunction with add-back therapy (hormonal or non-hormonal) or calcium-regulation agents were also included in this review.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodology as recommended by Cochrane. Primary outcomes are relief of overall pain and the objective measurement of bone mineral density. Secondary outcomes include adverse effects, quality of life, improvement in the most troublesome symptoms and patient satisfaction.  Due to high risk of bias associated with some of the studies, primary analyses of all review outcomes were restricted to studies at low risk of selection bias. Sensitivity analysis including all studies was then performed.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-two studies involving 7355 patients were included. The evidence was very low to low quality: the main limitations of all studies were serious risk of bias due to poor reporting of study methods, and serious imprecision.  Trials comparing GnRHas versus no treatment  We did not identify any studies. Trials comparing GnRHas versus placebo There may be a decrease in overall pain, reported as pelvic pain scores (RR 2.14; 95% CI 1.41 to 3.24, 1 RCT, n = 87, low-certainty evidence), dysmenorrhoea scores (RR 2.25; 95% CI 1.59 to 3.16, 1 RCT, n = 85, low-certainty evidence), dyspareunia scores (RR 2.21; 95% CI 1.39 to 3.54, 1 RCT, n = 59, low-certainty evidence), and pelvic tenderness scores (RR 2.28; 95% CI 1.48 to 3.50, 1 RCT, n = 85, low-certainty evidence) after three months of treatment. We are uncertain of the effect for pelvic induration, based on the results found after three months of treatment (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.79, 1 RCT, n = 81, low-certainty evidence). Besides, treatment with GnRHas may be associated with a greater incidence of hot flushes at three months of treatment (RR 3.08; 95% CI 1.89 to 5.01, 1 RCT, n = 100, low-certainty evidence). Trials comparing GnRHas versus danazol For overall pain, for women treated with either GnRHas or danazol, a subdivision was made between pelvic tenderness, partly resolved and completely resolved. We are uncertain about the effect on relief of overall pain, when a subdivision was made for overall pain (MD -0.30; 95% CI -1.66 to 1.06, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), pelvic pain (MD 0.20; 95% CI -0.26 to 0.66, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), dysmenorrhoea (MD 0.10; 95% CI -0.49 to 0.69, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), dyspareunia (MD -0.20; 95% CI -0.77 to 0.37, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), pelvic induration (MD -0.10; 95% CI -0.59 to 0.39, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), and pelvic tenderness (MD -0.20; 95% CI -0.78 to 0.38, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence) after three months of treatment. For pelvic pain (MD 0.50; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.90, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence) and pelvic induration (MD 0.70; 95% CI 0.21 to 1.19, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), the complaints may decrease slightly after treatment with GnRHas, compared to danazol, for six months of treatment. Trials comparing GnRHas versus analgesics  We did not identify any studies. Trials comparing GnRHas versus intra-uterine progestogens We did not identify any low risk of bias studies. Trials comparing GnRHas versus GnRHas in conjunction with calcium-regulating agents There may be a slight decrease in bone mineral density (BMD) after 12 months treatment with GnRHas, compared to GnRHas in conjunction with calcium-regulating agents for anterior-posterior spine (MD -7.00; 95% CI -7.53 to -6.47, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence) and lateral spine (MD -12.40; 95% CI -13.31 to -11.49, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For relief of overall pain, there may be a slight decrease in favour of treatment with GnRHas compared to placebo or oral or injectable progestogens. We are uncertain about the effect when comparing GnRHas with danazol, intra-uterine progestogens or gestrinone. For BMD, there may be a slight decrease when women are treated with GnRHas, compared to gestrinone. There was a bigger decrease of BMD in favour of GnRHas, compared to GnRHas in conjunction with calcium-regulating agents. However, there may be a slight increase in adverse effects when women are treated with GnRHas, compared to placebo or gestrinone. Due to a very low to low certainty of the evidence, a wide range of outcome measures and a wide range of outcome measurement instruments, the results should be interpreted with caution.

Advances in targeting estrogen synthesis and receptors in patients with endometriosis

INTRODUCTION

Endometriosis is an estrogen-dependent disease on the background of progesterone resistance. Increased estrogen production, low estrogen metabolization, and altered estrogen receptors (ERs) expression contribute to the hyperestrogenic milieu within endometriotic lesions. Since estrogens play a crucial role in the pathogenesis of the disease, inhibition of estrogen production is one of the main targets of available and emerging drugs.

AREAS COVERED

Firstly, we described the molecular alterations responsible for estrogen dependence. Secondly, we reviewed available and emerging treatments that interfere, through central (gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs (GnRH-a), GnRH antagonists) or local mechanisms (aromatase inhibitors (AIs), inhibitors of steroid sulfatase (STS) and hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1 (17β-HSD1)), with estrogen dependence. Finally, we focused on emerging treatments targeting ERs (selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), estrogen receptors agonists, and antagonists).

EXPERT OPINION

Available treatments interfering with estrogen pathways exert a contraceptive effect, have hypoestrogenic side effects, and cannot prevent or definitively treat the disease. Preclinical and animal studies are focusing on emerging drugs targeting ERs in order to overcome limitations of available treatments. These treatments may represent a promising option, as they may produce a more specific inhibition of disease activity within endometriotic implants, avoiding prolonged hypoestrogenic status and limiting systemic side effects.

Metabolomics profile of 5649 users and non-users of hormonal intrauterine devices in Finland

BACKGROUND

Use of hormonal intrauterine devices has grown during the last decades. Although the hormonal intrauterine devices act mostly via local effects on uterus, measurable concentrations of levonorgestrel are absorbed into the systemic circulation. The possible metabolic changes and large scale biomarker profiles associated with the hormonal intrauterine devices have not yet been studied in detail.

OBJECTIVES

To examine, through the metabolomics approach, the metabolic profile of the hormonal intrauterine device use, its associations as a function of the duration of use, as well as those with after discontinuation of the hormonal intrauterine device use.

STUDY DESIGN

The study consists of cross-sectional analyses of five population-based surveys (FINRISK and FinHealth studies), spanning 1997-2017. All fertile aged (18-49 years) participants in the surveys with available information on hormonal contraceptive use and metabolomics data (n=5649), were included in the study. Altogether 211 metabolic measures in users of hormonal intrauterine devices (n=1006) were compared to those in non-users of hormonal contraception (n=4643) via multivariable linear regression models. In order to allow the comparison across multiple measures, association magnitudes are reported in SD units of difference in biomarker concentration compared to the reference group.

RESULTS

After adjustment for covariates, levels of 141 metabolites differed in current users of hormonal intrauterine devices compared to non-users of hormonal contraception (median difference in biomarker concentration: 0.09 SD): lower levels of particle concentration of larger lipoprotein subclasses, triglycerides, cholesterol and derivatives, apolipoproteins A and B, fatty acids, glycoprotein acetyls and aromatic amino acids. The metabolic pattern of the hormonal intrauterine device use did not change according to the duration of use. When comparing previous users and never-users of hormonal intrauterine devices, no significant metabolic differences emerged.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of hormonal intrauterine devices was associated with several moderate metabolic changes, previously associated with reduced arterial cardiometabolic risk. The metabolic effects were independent of the duration of use of the hormonal intrauterine devices. Moreover, the metabolic profiles were similar after discontinuation of the hormonal intrauterine devices and in never-users.

General practitioners and endometriosis: Level of knowledge and the impact of training

OBJECTIVE

To assess general practitioners' (GPs') knowledge of and practice in the diagnosis and management of endometriosis following the publication of updated French national guidelines in 2017.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A descriptive, anonymous, epidemiological survey of 102 GPs in the Picardie region of France.

RESULTS

Only 25% of the GPs considered that they knew enough about endometriosis for their routine clinical practice. This proportion was 58.9% amongst GPs with an university diploma in gynaecology and 31.4% amongst those participating in continuing medical education courses on gynaecology. Only 19.6% of the GPs were aware of the updated French national guidelines. With regard to five main suggestive, localizing signs of endometriosis, dyspareunia, dysmenorrhoea and infertility were mentioned as being of diagnostic value by 55.9%, 37.3% and 43.1% of the GPs, respectively; in contrast, functional urinary tract disorders and painful defecation were not mentioned very often. GPs with a qualification in gynaecology and those participating in continuing medical education in gynaecology knew more about treating endometriosis.

CONCLUSION

In the Picardie region of France, GPs appear to be only moderately aware of how to manage endometriosis; this probably contributes to the diagnostic delay associated with this condition. GPs with a university diploma in gynaecology and those participating in continuing medical education in gynaecology appeared to have a better grasp of the subject. Continuing medical education on this topic should therefore be promoted and expanded.

Novel drug delivery methods for improving efficacy of endometriosis treatments

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacotherapy has a key role in the management of endometriosis. However, a significant proportion of patients gains only intermittent or limited benefits. In this regard, alternative and novel drug delivery methods are of paramount importance to improve efficacy and compliance of available treatments and develop alternative medical approaches.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to provide the reader with a complete overview of available evidence about alternative and novel drug delivery methods for endometriosis pharmacotherapy and highlight new research lines.

EXPERT OPINION

Progestins and estroprogestins, which represent the first-line therapy, are already available in different formulations, being employed for contraception. Nevertheless, evidence on their adoption is still limited for some drug delivery methods, such as vaginal rings, patches, and subcutaneous implants. Further research is needed to define better their clinical utility in patients with endometriosis. Nanotechnologies have been investigated as novel drug delivery methods able to target the drug at the disease level. However, data are very limited and preliminary, and further research is needed to consider a possible clinical application in endometriosis.

Blood Pressure Dynamics After Pubertal Suppression with Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Analogs Followed by Testosterone Treatment in Transgender Male Adolescents: A Pilot Study

Purpose: We analyzed blood pressure (BP) changes in transgender male adolescents treated with gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs (GnRHa) and after adding testosterone treatment. Methods: This was a retrospective pilot study. Outcome measures included systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) before and after GnRHa initiation and after adding testosterone. Results: Fifteen transgender male adolescents received GnRHa. DBP percentiles increased significantly after GnRHa treatment (from 55.9% ± 26.4 to 73.6% ± 9.4, p = 0.019). BP levels did not meet criteria for hypertension. DBP percentiles were restored after adding testosterone. Conclusion: GnRHa may increase DBP in transgender male adolescents, and testosterone treatment may restore it. Further larger studies are indicated.

Current understanding on pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy and safety of progestins for treating pain associated to endometriosis

INTRODUCTION

Endometriosis is a chronic estrogen and progestogen responsive inflammatory disease associated with pain symptoms and infertility. The medical therapy of endometriosis aims to induce decidualization within the hormonally dependent ectopic endometrium, and it is often administered to ameliorate women' pain symptoms or to prevent post-surgical disease recurrence. A variety of progestins have been used in monotherapy for the medical management of women with endometriosis. Areas covered: This review aims to offer the reader a complete overview of pharmacokinetic (PK) and clinical efficacy of progestins for the treatment of endometriosis. Expert opinion: Each progestin has a distinct PK parameters and pharmacodynamics affinity not only for progesterone receptor, but also for other steroid receptors, such as estrogen, androgen, and glucocorticoid. Moreover, progestins can also be delivered in different formulations. All these characteristics influence their final biological effect. Randomized, controlled, non-blinded studies support the use of oral progestin-only treatment for pelvic pain associated with endometriosis. Currently, the only two progestins approved by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of endometriosis are norethindrone acetate (NETA) and depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA).

[Endometriosis medical treatment: Hormonal treatment for the management of pain and endometriotic lesions recurrence. CNGOF-HAS Endometriosis Guidelines]

The available literature, from 2006 to 2017, on hormonal treatment has been analysed as a contribution to the HAS-CNGOF task force for the treatment of endometriosis. Available data are heterogeneous and the general level of evidence is moderate. Hormonal treatment is usually offered as the primary option to women suffering from endometriosis. It cannot be used in women willing to conceive. In women who have not been operated, the first line of hormonal treatment includes combined oral contraceptives (COC) and the levonorgestrel-releasing intra uterine system (52mg LNG-IUS). As a second line, desogestrel progestin only pills, etonogestrel implants, GnRH analogs (GnRHa) with add back therapy and dienogest can be offered. Add back therapy should include estrogens to prevent bone loss and improve quality of life, it can be introduced before the third month of treatment to prevent side effects. The literature does not support preoperative hormonal treatment for the sole purpose of reducing complications or recurrence, or facilitating surgical procedures. After surgical treatment, hormonal treatment is recommended to prevent pain recurrence and improve quality of life. COCs or LNG IUS are recommended as a first line. To prevent recurrence of endometriomas COC is advised and maintained as long as tolerance is good in the absence of pregnancy plans. In case of dysmenorrhea, postoperative COC should be used in a continuous scheme. GnRHa are not recommended in the sole purpose of reducing endometrioma recurrence risk.

[Medical treatment of endometriosis: Hormonal treatment of pain, impact on evolution and future perspectives]

CONTEXT

Endometriosis is a chronic painful disease, for which hormone therapy is usually offered as a first line option to women not willing to conceive.

OBJECTIVES

To analyse and synthesize the literature, from 2006 onwards, on pain control, and disease evolution in oemn using combined hormonal contraceptives, progestins and GnRH analogs. Data on other current and future treatment perspectives is included as well.

SOURCES

Medline (Pubmed), the Cochrane Library, and endometriosis treatment recommendations published by European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), National Institute for health and Care Excellence (NICE), American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) and Société des Obstétriciens et Gynécologues du Canada (SOGC).

STUDY SELECTION

Meta-analysis and clinical trials are included.

RESULTS

Study quality is heterogeneous in general. Hormone therapy inconstantly allows pain relief and prevention of endometrioma and rectovaginal wall nodules recurrence. Available molecules and routes of administration as well as risk benefit balance are evaluated. Data on future perspectives are limited to date and do not allow use in routine.

CONCLUSION

Hormonal treatment of endometriosis relies on combined hormonal contraceptives (using different routes of administration), progestins and particularly the levonorgestrel-releasing IUS, and GnRH analogs as a last option, in combination with an add-back therapy. Promising alternatives are currently under preclinical and clinical evaluation.

The endocrine dyscrasia that accompanies menopause and andropause induces aberrant cell cycle signaling that triggers re-entry of post-mitotic neurons into the cell cycle, neurodysfunction, neurodegeneration and cognitive disease

This article is part of a Special Issue "SBN 2014". Sex hormones are physiological factors that promote neurogenesis during embryonic and fetal development. During childhood and adulthood these hormones support the maintenance of brain structure and function via neurogenesis and the formation of dendritic spines, axons and synapses required for the capture, processing and retrieval of information (memories). Not surprisingly, changes in these reproductive hormones that occur with menopause and during andropause are strongly correlated with neurodegeneration and cognitive decline. In this connection, much evidence now indicates that Alzheimer's disease (AD) involves aberrant re-entry of post-mitotic neurons into the cell cycle. Cell cycle abnormalities appear very early in the disease, prior to the appearance of plaques and tangles, and explain the biochemical, neuropathological and cognitive changes observed with disease progression. Intriguingly, a recent animal study has demonstrated that induction of adult neurogenesis results in the loss of previously encoded memories while decreasing neurogenesis after memory formation during infancy mitigated forgetting. Here we review the biochemical, epidemiological and clinical evidence that alterations in sex hormone signaling associated with menopause and andropause drive the aberrant re-entry of post-mitotic neurons into an abortive cell cycle that leads to neurite retraction, neuron dysfunction and neuron death. When the reproductive axis is in balance, gonadotropins such as luteinizing hormone (LH), and its fetal homolog, human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), promote pluripotent human and totipotent murine embryonic stem cell and neuron proliferation. However, strong evidence supports menopausal/andropausal elevations in the LH:sex steroid ratio as driving aberrant mitotic events. These include the upregulation of tumor necrosis factor; amyloid-β precursor protein processing towards the production of mitogenic Aβ; and the activation of Cdk5, a key regulator of cell cycle progression and tau phosphorylation (a cardinal feature of both neurogenesis and neurodegeneration). Cognitive and biochemical studies confirm the negative consequences of a high LH:sex steroid ratio on dendritic spine density and human cognitive performance. Prospective epidemiological and clinical evidence in humans supports the premise that rebalancing the ratio of circulating gonadotropins:sex steroids reduces the incidence of AD. Together, these data support endocrine dyscrasia and the subsequent loss of cell cycle control as an important etiological event in the development of neurodegenerative diseases including AD, stroke and Parkinson's disease.

The Impact of Endometriosis across the Lifespan of Women: Foreseeable Research and Therapeutic Prospects

In addition to estrogen dependence, endometriosis is characterized by chronic pelvic inflammation. The impact of the chronic pelvic inflammatory state on other organ systems and women's health is unclear. Endometriosis associated chronic inflammation and potential adverse health effects across the lifespan render it imperative for renewed research vigor into the identification of novel biomarkers of disease and therapeutic options. Herein we propose a number of opportunities for research and development of new therapeutics to address the unmet needs in the treatment of endometriosis per se and its ancillary risks for other diseases in women across the lifespan.

Systematic review of endometriosis pain assessment: how to choose a scale?

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies concerning endometriosis and pain have been reported. However, there is no consensus on the best method to evaluate pain in endometriosis and many scales have been used. Moreover, there are only a few descriptions of minimal clinically important differences after treatment (MCID) to evaluate variations in pain. In our study, we aim to identify pain scales used in endometriosis pain treatment, to address their strong and weak points and to define which would be the ideal scale to help clinicians and researchers to evaluate endometriosis-related pain.

METHODS

A search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was carried out for publications in English, French or Portuguese from 1980 to December 2012, for the words: endometriosis, treatment, pain. Studies were selected if they studied an endometriosis treatment and a pain scale was specified. A quantitative and a qualitative analysis of each scale was performed to define strong and weak points of each scale (systematic registration number: CRD42013005336).

RESULTS

A total of 736 publications were identified. After excluding duplications and applying inclusion criteria 258 studies remained. We found that the visual analog scale (VAS) is the most frequently used scale. Both VAS and the numerical rating scale (NRS) show a good balance between strong and weak points in comparison with others such as the Biberoglu and Behrman scale. Concerning MCID, only VAS, NRS and Brief Pain Inventory scales have reported MCID and, among these, only VAS MCID has been studied in endometriosis patients (VAS MCID = 10 mm). Adding the Clinical Global Impression score (CGI) to the pain scale allows calculation of the MCID.

CONCLUSIONS

When using pain scales their strengths and weaknesses must be known and included in the analysis. VAS is the most frequently used pain scale and, together with NRS, seems the best adapted for endometriosis pain measurement. The use of VAS or NRS for each type of typical pain related to endometriosis (dysmenorrhea, deep dyspareunia and non-menstrual chronic pelvic pain), combined with the CGI and a quality-of-life scale will provide both clinicians and researchers with tools to evaluate treatment response.

ESHRE guideline: management of women with endometriosis

STUDY QUESTION

What is the optimal management of women with endometriosis based on the best available evidence in the literature?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Using the structured methodology of the Manual for ESHRE Guideline Development, 83 recommendations were formulated that answered the 22 key questions on optimal management of women with endometriosis.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis (2005) has been a reference point for best clinical care in endometriosis for years, but this guideline was in need of updating.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This guideline was produced by a group of experts in the field using the methodology of the Manual for ESHRE Guideline Development, including a thorough systematic search of the literature, quality assessment of the included papers up to January 2012 and consensus within the guideline group on all recommendations. To ensure input from women with endometriosis, a patient representative was part of the guideline development group. In addition, patient and additional clinical input was collected during the scoping and review phase of the guideline.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

NA.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The guideline provides 83 recommendations on diagnosis of endometriosis and on the treatment of endometriosis-associated pain and infertility, on the management of women in whom the disease is found incidentally (without pain or infertility), on prevention of recurrence of disease and/or painful symptoms, on treatment of menopausal symptoms in patients with a history of endometriosis and on the possible association of endometriosis and malignancy.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

We identified several areas in care of women with endometriosis for which robust evidence is lacking. These areas were addressed by formulating good practice points (GPP), based on the expert opinion of the guideline group members.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Since 32 out of the 83 recommendations for the management of women with endometriosis could not be based on high level evidence and therefore were GPP, the guideline group formulated research recommendations to guide future research with the aim of increasing the body of evidence.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The guideline was developed and funded by ESHRE, covering expenses associated with the guideline meetings, with the literature searches and with the implementation of the guideline. The guideline group members did not receive payment. All guideline group members disclosed any relevant conflicts of interest (see Conflicts of interest).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NA.

The use of gonadotropin releasing hormone analogues in adolescent and young patients with endometriosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Endometriosis is increasingly being recognized and diagnosed in adolescents. As a result of this earlier diagnosis, treatment with agents like gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) begins earlier and may last longer. Long-term effects of GnRHa treatment for endometriosis are of concern when treating adolescents.

RECENT FINDINGS

GnRHas are used for adolescents with surgically confirmed endometriosis. GnRHa treatment is effective for pain reduction, but is associated with menopausal symptoms and decreases in bone density. Different regimens of hormonal add-back therapy have been studied in adults to attempt to prevent these side-effects.

SUMMARY

GnRHa therapy is a highly effective, nonsurgical treatment option for many adolescents with endometriosis, but is accompanied by side-effects of bone loss and menopausal symptoms. Side-effects may be decreased by introducing appropriate add-back therapy. Monitoring of bone density by DXA is recommended for prolonged use of GnRHa in adolescents.

Analysis of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in women with endometriosis

Objectives

To compare the efficacy, safety and other clinical benefits of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) and gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRH-a) in women with endometriosis.

Methods

A systematic search was carried out using the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, MEDLINE™ and EMBASE databases for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the use of the LNG-IUS and GnRH-a in premenopausal women with endometriosis.

Results

Five RCTs studies were identified. A meta-analysis showed that, in women with endometriosis, both the LNG-IUS and GnRH-a reduced pain visual analogue scale scores (weighted mean difference [WMD] 0.03 [95% confidence interval [CI] −0.53, 0.59]), serum levels of CA125 (WMD −12.29 [95% CI −29.90, 3.32]), and American Society of Reproductive Medicine staging scores (WMD 1.10 [95% CI −27.98, 30.18]). Psychological and general wellbeing index scores were increased (WMD 1.50 [95% CI −6.19, 9.19]). Levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were also significantly reduced in patients treated with the LNG-IUS (WMD 39.30 [95% CI 6.74, 71.86]).

Conclusions

The LNG-IUS had clinical efficacy equivalent to that of GnRH-a but may have some clinical advantages over GnRH-a in the treatment of endometriosis-associated symptoms. These observations will require further verification in additional studies employing larger patient populations.

Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) for symptomatic endometriosis following surgery

BACKGROUND

Various options exist for treating endometriosis, including surgical, medical, such as ovarian suppression, or a combination of these strategies. Surgical treatment of endometriosis aims to remove visible areas of endometriosis. The aim of medical therapy is to inhibit growth of endometriotic implants by induction of a hypo-estrogenic state. Treatment with a hormone-releasing intrauterine device, using levonorgestrel (LNG-IUD), has also been suggested.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether postoperative LNG-IUD insertion in women with endometriosis improves pain and reduces recurrence of symptoms compared with no postoperative treatment, postoperative insertion of a placebo, or postoperative therapy.

SEARCH METHODS

The following databases were searched from inception to June 2012: Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. EMBASE was searched from 2010 to June 2012. The citation lists of relevant publications, review articles, abstracts of scientific meetings, and included studies were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were included if they compared women undergoing surgical treatment for endometriosis with uterine preservation and then randomised within three months to LNG-IUD insertion versus no postoperative treatment, placebo (inert IUD), or other treatment. Diagnostic laparoscopy alone was not considered suitable treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted data to allow for an intention-to-treat analysis. For dichotomous data, the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects method. For continuous data, the mean difference (MD) and 95% CI were calculated using the inverse variance random-effects method.

MAIN RESULTS

Three randomised controlled trials were included. In two trials, there was a statistically significant reduction in the recurrence of painful periods in the LNG-IUD group compared with expectant management (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.60, 95 women, I(2) = 0%, moderate strength of evidence). The proportion of women who were satisfied with their treatment was also higher in the LNG-IUD group but did not reach statistical significance (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.82, 95 women, I(2) = 0%). The number of women reporting a change in menstruation was significantly higher in the LNG-IUD group (RR 37.80, 95% CI 5.40 to 264.60, 95 women, I(2) = 0%) but the number of women not completing the allocated treatment did not differ between groups (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.08 to 5.25, I(2) = 43%).In one trial, women receiving LNG-IUD noted lower pain scores compared with women receiving gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists (MD -0.16, 95% CI -2.02 to 1.70, 40 women) but this did not reach statistical significance.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited but consistent evidence showing that postoperative LNG-IUD use reduces the recurrence of painful periods in women with endometriosis. Further well-designed RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.

Tumor necrosis factor-induced cerebral insulin resistance in Alzheimer's disease links numerous treatment rationales

The evident limitations of the amyloid theory of the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease are increasingly putting alternatives in the spotlight. We argue here that a number of independently developing approaches to therapy-including specific and nonspecific anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents, apolipoprotein E mimetics, leptin, intranasal insulin, the glucagon-like peptide-1 mimetics and glycogen synthase kinase-3 (GSK-3) antagonists-are all part of an interlocking chain of events. All these approaches inform us that inflammation and thence cerebral insulin resistance constitute the pathway on which to focus for a successful clinical outcome in treating this disease. The key link in this chain presently absent is a recognition by Alzheimer's research community of the long-neglected history of TNF induction of insulin resistance. When this is incorporated into the bigger picture, it becomes evident that the interventions we discuss are not competing alternatives but equally valid approaches to correcting different parts of the same pathway to Alzheimer's disease. These treatments can be expected to be at least additive, and conceivably synergistic, in effect. Thus the inflammation, insulin resistance, GSK-3, and mitochondrial dysfunction hypotheses are not opposing ideas but stages of the same fundamental, overarching, pathway of Alzheimer's disease pathogenesis. The insight this provides into progenitor cells, including those involved in adult neurogenesis, is a key part of this approach. This pathway also has therapeutic implications for other circumstances in which brain TNF is pathologically increased, such as stroke, traumatic brain injury, and the infectious disease encephalopathies.

Is TNF a link between aging-related reproductive endocrine dyscrasia and Alzheimer's disease?

This commentary addresses a novel mechanism by which aging-related changes in reproductive hormones could mediate their action in the brain. It presents the evidence that dyotic endocrine signals modulate the expression of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and related cytokines, and that these cytokines are a functionally important downstream link mediating neurodegeneration and dysfunction. This convergence of dyotic signaling on TNF-mediated degeneration and dysfunction has important implications for understanding the pathophysiology of AD, stroke, and traumatic brain disease, and also for the treatment of these diseases.

Is abnormal eutopic endometrium the cause of endometriosis? The role of eutopic endometrium in pathogenesis of endometriosis

Endometriosis (EM) is one of the most common diseases which severely affect the health and reproductive function of women of childbearing age. There are fundamental abnormal changes within the eutopic endometrium of women with endometriosis compared to normal endometrium of women without endometriosis. Eutopic endometrium shows enhanced ability of proliferation, implantation and angiogenesis, and greater probability of escaping the unfavorable conditions of the ectopic environment. Therefore, the character of eutopic endometrium determines the fate of the backward-flowing endometrial tissue – to live or to die. The abnormal endometrial tissue in EM patients flows backward to the pelvic cavity, completing a 3-step procedure of pathogenesis (attachment-aggression-angiogenesis), and ultimately develops into EM. Abnormal eutopic endometrium may also play important roles in endometriosis-associated infertility. This recognition regarding the pathogenesis of endometriosis ultimately will help to discover new methods for diagnosis and treatment. Endometrial markers for micro-invasive diagnosis and direct treatment of eutopic endometrium as the origin of the disease should be further investigated.

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues for pain associated with endometriosis

EDITORIAL NOTE

See https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37341141/ for a more recent review that covers this topic and has superseded this review.

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is a common gynaecological condition, characterised by the presence of endometrial tissue in sites other than the uterine cavity (excluding adenomyosis) that frequently presents with pain. The gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHas) comprise one intervention that has been offered for pain relief in pre-menopausal women. GnRHas can be administered intranasally, by subcutaneous, or intramuscular injection. They are thought to result in down regulation of the pituitary and induce a hypogonadotrophic hypogonadal state.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of GnRHas in the treatment of the painful symptoms associated with endometriosis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group specialist register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PSYCInfo and CINAHL were conducted in April 2010 to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs of GnRHas as treatment for pain associated with endometriosis versus no treatment, placebo, danazol, intra-uterine progestagens, or other GnRHas were included. Trials using add-back therapy, oral contraceptives, surgical intervention, GnRH antagonists or complementary therapies were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Quality assessment and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. The primary outcome was pain relief. Relative risk was used as the measure of effect for dichotomous data. For continuous data, mean differences or standardised mean differences were used.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty one trials (n=4935 women) were included. The evidence suggested that GnRHas were more effective at symptom relief than no treatment/placebo. There was no statistically significant difference between GnRHas and danazol for dysmenorrhoea RR 0.98 (95%CI 0.92 to 1.04; P = 0.53). This equates to 3 fewer women per 1000 (95%CI 12 to 6) with symptomatic pain relief in the GnRHa group. More adverse events were reported in the GnRHa group. There was a benefit in overall resolution for GnRHas RR1.10 (95%CI 1.01 to 1.21, P=0.03) compared with danazol. There was no statistically significant difference in overall pain between GnRHas and levonorgestrel SMD -0.25 (95%CI -0.60 to 0.10, P=0.46). Evidence was limited on optimal dosage or duration of treatment for GnRHas. No route of administration appeared superior to another.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

GnRHas appear to be more effective at relieving pain associated with endometriosis than no treatment/placebo. There was no evidence of a difference in pain relief between GnRHas and danazol although more adverse events reported in the GnRHa groups. There was no evidence of a difference in pain relief between GnRHas and levonorgestrel and no studies compared GnRHas with analgesics.