Exploring Morphologic and Molecular Aspects of Endometrial Cancer Under Progesterone Treatment in the Context of Fertility Preservation

Fertility-Sparing Approach in Patients with Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer Grade 2 Stage IA (FIGO): A Qualitative Systematic Review

Background

Endometrial cancer (EC) is one of the most common gynecologic malignancy, mostly in postmenopausal women. The gold standard treatment for EC is surgery, but in the early stages, it is possible to opt for conservative treatment. In the last decade, different clinical and pathological markers have been studied to identify women who respond to conservative treatment. A lot of immunohistochemical markers have been evaluated to predict response to progestin treatment, even if their usefulness is still unclear; the prognosis of this neoplasm depends on tumor stage, and a specific therapeutic protocol is set according to the stage of the disease.

Objective

(1) To provide an overview of the conservative management of Stage 1A Grade (G) 2 endometrioid EC (FIGO) and the oncological and reproductive outcomes related; (2) to describe the molecular alterations before and after progestin therapy in patients undergoing conservative treatment.

Materials and Methods

A systematic computerized search of the literature was performed in the main electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane Library), from 2010 to September 2021, in order to evaluate the oncological and reproductive outcomes in patients with G2 stage IA EC who ask for fertility-sparing treatment. The expression of several immunohistochemical markers was evaluated in pretreatment phase and during the follow-up in relation to response to hormonal therapy. Only scientific publications in English were included. The risk of bias assessment was performed. Review authors' judgments were categorized as “low risk,” “high risk,” or “unclear risk” of bias.

Results

Twelve articles were included in the study: 7 observational studies and 5 case series/reports. Eighty-four patients who took progestins (megestrol acetate, medroxyprogesterone acetate, and/or levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices) were analyzed. The publication bias analysis turned out to be “low.” 54/84 patients had a complete response, 23/84 patients underwent radical surgery, and 20/84 had a relapse after conservative treatment. Twenty-two patients had a pregnancy. The length of follow-up was variable, from 6 to 142 months according to the different studies analyzed. Several clinical and pathological markers have been studied to identify women who do not respond to conservative treatment: PR and ER were the most studied predictive markers, in particular PR appeared as the most promising; MMR, SPAG9, Ki67, and Nrf2-survivin pathway provided good results with a significant association with a good response to progestin therapy. However, no reliable predictive markers are currently available to be used in clinical practice.

Conclusions

The conservative treatment may be an option for patients with stage IA G2 EEC who desire to preserve their fertility. The immunohistochemical markers evaluation looks promising in predicting response to conservative treatment. Further large series and randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these results.

Hormone Therapy Effects on the Uterus

The uterus and especially the endometrium are sensitive targets for steroid sex hormones, capable to modify structure and function with promptitude and versatility in order to secure reproductive functions. Hormone therapy is used to counteract deprivation, abnormal, and deleterious functions of "natural" hormones. It is widely prescribed, being used by millions of women all over the world. It seems that most women would use at least some hormone therapy at some point of their life, as contraceptives, ovarian stimulation, replacement therapy, or hormone antitumoral therapy. The diagnosis of uterine tissue, mostly of the frequently performed endometrial biopsies taken from women undergoing hormone therapy, is often confusing and difficult to interpret due to the complexity of histologic changes. Permanently changing hormonal pharmaceutical products, regimens, dosages, as well as new concepts of therapy are challenges for both users and medical prescribers. This chapter addresses the most commonly issues arising from the gynecological pathology interpretation of hormonal therapy effects on the uterus.

Impact of Conservative Managements in Young Women With Grade 2 or 3 Endometrial Adenocarcinoma Confined to the Endometrium

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of ovarian and/or uterine preservation in young patients with grade 2 or 3 endometrial adenocarcinoma confined to the endometrium.

METHODS/MATERIALS

A population-based analysis was conducted. The SEER'17 Database was used to identify women younger than 45 years with grade 2 or 3 endometrial adenocarcinoma confined to the endometrium from 1983 to 2012. A cohort of 1106 women was included: 849 underwent hysterectomy with bilateral adnexectomy, 96 underwent hysterectomy with ovarian preservation, and 49 underwent uterine preservation. The demographics and survival rates according to the type of treatment administered were compared.

RESULTS

The 5-year overall survival probabilities were 94.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 92.8-96.2), 93.8% (95% CI, 85.8-97.4), and 78.2% (95% CI, 62.1-88.1) for patients who underwent hysterectomy with bilateral adnexectomy, ovarian preservation, and uterine preservation, respectively (P < 0.001).The 5-year cancer-related survival probabilities were 99.3% (95% CI, 98.6-99.9), 98.9% (95% CI, 96.9-99.9), and 86.2% (95% CI, 75.7-98.2) for patients who underwent hysterectomy with bilateral adnexectomy, ovarian preservation, and uterine preservation, respectively (P < 0.001).Patients who received uterine conservation had lower disease-specific (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 15.8 95% CI, 5.5-45.2) and overall survival probabilities (aHR, 6.6; 95% CI, 3.3-13.4) than did patients who underwent hysterectomy with or without oophorectomy. Ovarian conservation was not associated with decreased disease-specific (aHR, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.31-6.71) or overall (aHR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.17-1.90) survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Ovarian preservation has no impact on survival probability in patients with grade 2 or 3 endometrial cancer confined to the endometrium. On the contrary, physicians and patients should be aware of the worse prognosis associated with uterine preservation.

Comparison of fertility-sparing treatments in patients with early endometrial cancer and atypical complex hyperplasia: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

There are some fertility-sparing treatments in patients with early endometrial cancer (EEC) or atypical complex hyperplasia (ACH), and the objective is to compare them by evaluating the oncologic and reproductive outcomes.

METHODS

We searched the published literature using Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases up to January 3, 2017, with various combinations of keywords fertility-sparing treatments, progesterone, progestin, intrauterine devices, early endometrial cancer, and atypical complex hyperplasia. The primary endpoint is the complete response (CR) rate, and the secondary endpoints are the partial response (PR) rate, relapse rate (RR), pregnancy rate, and live birth rate.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies containing 1038 women with EEC or ACH were included for review and meta-analysis. The results demonstrated that women with EEC or ACH managed with progestin had a pooled CR rate of 71% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 63-77%). The pooled pregnancy outcomes showed that 34% of women taking progestin treatment for EEC or ACH became pregnant (95% CI: 30-38%); however, only 20% of them delivered live newborns. The pooled CR rate for women using intrauterine device (IUD) was 76% (95% CI: 67-83%), and pooled RR was 9% (95% CI: 5-17%). The pregnancy rate for women whom underwent IUD was 18% (95% CI: 7-37%), and 14% of them delivered live newborns. In patients using progestin plus IUD, the pooled CR rate was 87% (95% CI: 75-93%); among those patients, 40% became pregnant (95% CI: 20-63%), and 35% delivered live newborns. There is no publication bias for the CR rate.

CONCLUSION

For patients with EEC and ACH, treatments with progestin, with or without IUD, or IUD alone can reach good CR rate; however, the pregnancy outcomes might be worse in patients treated with IUD alone. Further randomized-controlled studies are warranted to find out a better solution.