Current Treatment Options: Uterine Sarcoma

OPINION STATEMENT

The cornerstone of treatment for uterine sarcoma, regardless of histologic type, remains en bloc surgical resection with total hysterectomy. In the case of incidental diagnosis during another procedure, such as myomectomy, where a hysterectomy was not performed initially, completion hysterectomy or cervical remnant removal is recommended. The completion of additional surgical procedures, including bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and lymphadenectomy, remains nuanced. Bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy remains controversial in the setting of most subtypes of uterine sarcoma, except in the case of hormone-receptor positivity, such as in low grade endometrial stromal sarcoma, where it is indicated as part of definitive surgical treatment. In the absence of apparent nodal involvement, we do not recommend performing universal lymphadenectomy for patients with sarcoma. We recommend systemic therapy for patients with extra-uterine or advanced stage disease, high-grade histology, and recurrence. The most active chemotherapy regimens for advanced, high-grade disease remain doxorubicin or gemcitabine and docetaxol combination therapy. A notable exception is low grade endometrial stromal sarcoma, where we recommend anti-hormonal therapy in the front-line setting. Radiation therapy is reserved for selected cases where it can aid in palliating symptoms.

Hormone Therapy Reduces Recurrence in Stage II-IV Uterine Low-Grade Endometrial Stromal Sarcomas: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (LG-ESS) is a rare and indolent malignancy. Hormone therapy has been reported as an adjuvant treatment for LG-ESS, although its effectiveness is controversial. Here we aimed to investigate the effects of postoperative hormone therapy on recurrence in patients with uterine LG-ESS. Between January 2010 and December 2019, a total of 152 patients (23 with and 129 without fertility-sparing) with a diagnosis of primary uterine LG-ESS confirmed by pathologists were enrolled in this study. In the cohort without fertility-sparing, 22 (17.7%) patients had recurrence, and the median disease-free survival (DFS) was 47 (2-130) months; only one of these patients died of LG-ESS. No significant difference was found in recurrence between the groups with and without hormone therapy (p=0.802). However, subgroup analysis showed that hormone therapy decreased the recurrence rate in stage II-IV (p=0.001, HR 0.144, 95% CI: 0.038-0.548), but not in stage I disease (p=0.256). High-dose progestins notably reduced recurrence (p=0.012, HR 0.154, 95% CI: 0.036-0.660), whereas non-progestin therapy marginally influenced recurrence (p=0.054) compared with no hormone therapy in stage II-IV disease. Moreover, hormone therapy within 12 months was effective in reducing recurrence (p=0.038, HR 0.241, 95% CI: 0.063-0.922). Ovarian preservation (p=0.004, HR 6.250, 95% CI: 1.786-21.874) and negative expression of ER/PR (p=0.000, HR 23.249, 95% CI: 4.912-110.026) were high-risk factors for recurrence in patients without fertility-sparing. In the fertility-sparing cohort, 15 (65.2%) patients experienced recurrence, and the median DFS was 24 (3-107) months. Six patients successfully delivered healthy fetuses, and five received hormone therapy. Twelve patients finally accepted hysterectomy after repeated recurrence, and only two of them had given birth before surgery. Patients who received hormone therapy showed longer DFS, although this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.466). In conclusion, postoperative hormone therapy reduces recurrence in patients with stage II–IV uterine LG-ESS without fertility-sparing, and high-dose treatment with progestins within 12 months is recommended. Bilateral oophorectomy can also reduce the risk of recurrence. Patients with fertility-sparing have a high risk of recurrence and poor pregnancy outcomes, and hormone therapy may be a reasonable choice in postoperative management.

New Insights into Hormonal Therapies in Uterine Sarcomas

Simple Summary

Uterine sarcomas are rare mesenchymal malignant cancers, and surgery represents the mainstay of treatment for early-stage disease. In metastatic setting, uterine sarcomas’ treatment includes palliative surgery, a metastases resection, chemotherapy and targeted therapy. Hormonal therapies may also represent an effective option. Frequently, ER and PR are highly expressed in uterine sarcomas patients and they represent a favourable prognostic factor associated with improved overall survival. The scope of the present review is to report the existing evidence and future perspectives on hormonal therapy in uterine sarcomas, with a special focus on aromatase inhibitors, progestins and gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues, in order to clarify their potential role in daily clinical practice.

Abstract

Uterine sarcoma (US) is a rare mesenchymal malignant cancer type, accounting for 3–7% of uterine malignancies. US prognosis is still poor due to high local and distant recurrence rates. As for molecular features, US may present variable oestrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) expressions, mostly depending on histotype and grading. Surgery represents the mainstay of treatment for early-stage disease, while the role of adjuvant chemotherapy or local radiotherapy is still debated and defined on the basis of histotype, tumour grading and stage. In metastatic setting, uterine sarcomas’ treatment includes palliative surgery, a metastases resection, chemotherapy, hormonal therapy and targeted therapy. As for the chemotherapy regimen used, drugs that are considered most effective are doxorubicin (combined with ifosfamide or alone), gemcitabine combined with docetaxel and, more recently, trabectedin or pazopanib. Hormonal therapies, including aromatase inhibitors (AIs), progestins and gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRH-a) may also represent an effective option, in particular for low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (LGESS), due to their favourable toxicity profile and patients’ compliance, while their role is still under investigation in uterine leiomyosarcoma (uLMS), high-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (HGESS), undifferentiated uterine sarcoma (USS) and other rarer US. The present review aims to analyse the existing evidence and future perspectives on hormonal therapies in US, in order to clarify their potential role in daily clinical practice.

Hormonal Therapy for Gynecological Cancers: How Far Has Science Progressed toward Clinical Applications?

Simple Summary

The most common therapies for severe and recurrent gynecological cancers are hormone therapy and chemotherapy, and responsiveness to therapy is a key component in prognosis and survivability. Hormone therapy has recently been demonstrated to be an excellent cancer treatment approach. Hormone treatment for gynecological cancers is taking drugs that decrease hormone levels or impede their biological activity, halting or slowing cancer progression. Hormone therapy works by suppressing the multiplication of cancer cells triggered by hormones. Hormonal therapy, such as progestogens or tamoxifen, is frequently recommended for patients with hormone-sensitive recurrent or metastatic gynecological cancers, but response rates and therapeutic effects are inconsistent. Therefore, we discuss the pathogenesis of gynecological malignancies from the hormonal landscape and the use of hormonal therapies toward clinical applications.

Abstract

In recent years, hormone therapy has been shown to be a remarkable treatment option for cancer. Hormone treatment for gynecological cancers involves the use of medications that reduce the level of hormones or inhibit their biological activity, thereby stopping or slowing cancer growth. Hormone treatment works by preventing hormones from causing cancer cells to multiply. Aromatase inhibitors, anti-estrogens, progestin, estrogen receptor (ER) antagonists, GnRH agonists, and progestogen are effectively used as therapeutics for vulvar cancer, cervical cancer, vaginal cancer, uterine cancer, and ovarian cancer. Hormone replacement therapy has a high success rate. In particular, progestogen and estrogen replacement are associated with a decreased incidence of gynecological cancers in women infected with human papillomavirus (HPV). The activation of estrogen via the transcriptional functionality of ERα may either be promoted or decreased by gene products of HPV. Hormonal treatment is frequently administered to patients with hormone-sensitive recurring or metastatic gynecologic malignancies, although response rates and therapeutic outcomes are inconsistent. Therefore, this review outlines the use of hormonal therapy for gynecological cancers and identifies the current knowledge gaps.

Does Hormone Replacement Therapy Impact the Prognosis in Endometrial Cancer Survivors? A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) on the prognosis in endometrial cancer (EC) survivors.

METHODS

The research was conducted using the following electronic databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), Web of Science, ClinicalTrial.gov, and Cochrane Library. We performed a review of studies published from January 1986 to January 2019. We selected studies that included EC patients submitted to surgery with curative intent and postoperative use of HRT.

RESULT

Seven of 1,332 abstracts considered were eligible: 4 retrospective series, 1 prospective study, 1 randomized controlled trial, and 1 population study. Globally in the observed studies there was not a significant increase in the recurrence rate, measured by the relative risk, in the EC survivors using HRT compared with the controls in tumour stages I and II. The bias was that HRT was prescribed only to low-risk patients, who were young and had a low stage of disease.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review shows that HRT use had no negative effect on prognosis in EC survivors in tumour stages I and II.

Optimization of the Therapeutic Approach to Patients with Sarcoma: Delphi Consensus

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) constitute a heterogeneous group of rare solid tumors associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The evaluation and treatment of STS require a multidisciplinary team with extensive experience in the management of these types of tumors. National and international clinical practice guidelines for STS do not always provide answers to a great many situations that specialists have to contend with in their everyday practice. This consensus provides a series of specific recommendations based on available scientific evidence and the experience of a group of experts to assist in decision-making by all the specialists involved in the management of STS.

Imaging in gynecological disease (15): clinical and ultrasound characteristics of uterine sarcoma

OBJECTIVE

To describe the clinical and ultrasound characteristics of uterine sarcomas.

METHODS

This was a retrospective multicenter study. From the databases of 13 ultrasound centers, we identified patients with a histological diagnosis of uterine sarcoma with available ultrasound reports and ultrasound images who had undergone preoperative ultrasound examination between 1996 and 2016. As the first step, each author collected information from the original ultrasound reports from his/her own center on predefined ultrasound features of the tumors and by reviewing the ultrasound images to identify information on variables not described in the original report. As the second step, 16 ultrasound examiners reviewed the images electronically in a consensus meeting and described them using predetermined terminology.

RESULTS

We identified 116 patients with leiomyosarcoma, 48 with endometrial stromal sarcoma and 31 with undifferentiated endometrial sarcoma. Median age of the patients was 56 years (range, 26-86 years). Most patients were symptomatic at diagnosis (164/183 (89.6%)), the most frequent presenting symptom being abnormal vaginal bleeding (91/183 (49.7%)). Patients with endometrial stromal sarcoma were younger than those with leiomyosarcoma and undifferentiated endometrial sarcoma (median age, 46 years vs 57 and 60 years, respectively). According to the assessment by the original ultrasound examiners, the median diameter of the largest tumor was 91 mm (range, 7-321 mm). Visible normal myometrium was reported in 149/195 (76.4%) cases, and 80.0% (156/195) of lesions were solitary. Most sarcomas (155/195 (79.5%)) were solid masses (> 80% solid tissue), and most manifested inhomogeneous echogenicity of the solid tissue (151/195 (77.4%)); one sarcoma was multilocular without solid components. Cystic areas were described in 87/195 (44.6%) tumors and most cyst cavities had irregular walls (67/87 (77.0%)). Internal shadowing was observed in 42/192 (21.9%) sarcomas and fan-shaped shadowing in 4/192 (2.1%). Moderate or rich vascularization was found on color-Doppler examination in 127/187 (67.9%) cases. In 153/195 (78.5%) sarcomas, the original ultrasound examiner suspected malignancy. Though there were some differences, the results of the first and second steps of the analysis were broadly similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Uterine sarcomas typically appear as solid masses with inhomogeneous echogenicity, sometimes with irregular cystic areas but only very occasionally with fan-shaped shadowing. Most are moderately or very well vascularized. Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Hormonal therapy in uterine sarcomas

Uterine sarcomas (USs) are a group of rare but aggressive uterine malignancies, accounting for only 1% of the malignant tumors of female reproductive organs. Due to the high rate of recurrence and metastasis, the prognosis of USs is poor. Given the high mortality rate and limited clinical benefit of surgery and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, hormonal therapy has shown good prospects in recent years. Hormonal agents include progestins, aromatase inhibitors (AIs), and gonadotropin‐releasing hormone analogue (GnRH‐a). According to the literature, hormonal therapy has been confirmed effective for recurrent, metastatic or unresectable low‐grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (LGESS) and hormone receptor positive (ER+/PR+) uterine leiomyosarcoma (uLMS) with favorable tolerance and compliance. Besides, hormonal therapy can also be used in patients with early‐staged disease who desire to preserve fertility. However, due to the rarity of USs, the rationale of hormonal therapy is generally extrapolated from data of hormone‐sensitive breast cancer, and present studies of hormonal therapy in USs were almost limited to case reports and small‐sized retrospective studies. Therefore, further systematic researches and standardized clinical trials are needed to establish the optimal hormonal therapy regimen of USs. Herein, we reviewed the existing studies related to the hormonal therapy in USs in order to provide reference for clinical management in specific settings.

Systemic treatment in adult uterine sarcomas

Uterine sarcomas (US) are rare mesenchymal tumours of the uterus and are divided mainly into uterine leiomyosarcoma (uLMS), low grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (LG-ESS), high grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (HG-ESS), adenosarcomas and high grade undifferentiated sarcoma (HGUS). US are often high-grade tumours with a high local recurrence rate and metastatic risk. We here discuss the current standard of care and knowledge of systemic therapy for adult uterine sarcomas, in particular uLMS, LG-ESS, HG-ESS and HGUS, in both the adjuvant as well as the metastatic setting.

Practice guidelines for management of uterine corpus cancer in Korea: a Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology Consensus Statement

Clinical practice guidelines for gynecologic cancers have been developed by many organizations. Although these guidelines have much in common in terms of the practice of standard of care for uterine corpus cancer, practice guidelines that reflect the characteristics of patients and healthcare and insurance systems are needed for each country. The Korean Society of Gynecologic Oncology (KSGO) published the first edition of practice guidelines for gynecologic cancer treatment in late 2006; the second edition was released in July 2010 as an evidence-based recommendation. The Guidelines Revision Committee was established in 2015 and decided to produce the third edition of the guidelines as an advanced form based on evidence-based medicine, considering up-to-date clinical trials and abundant qualified Korean data. These guidelines cover screening, surgery, adjuvant treatment, and advanced and recurrent disease with respect to endometrial carcinoma and uterine sarcoma. The committee members and many gynecologic oncologists derived key questions from the discussion, and a number of relevant scientific literatures were reviewed in advance. Recommendations for each specific question were developed by the consensus conference, and they are summarized here, together with other details. The objective of these practice guidelines is to establish standard policies on issues in clinical areas related to the management of uterine corpus cancer based on the findings in published papers to date and the consensus of experts as a KSGO Consensus Statement.

Fertility-sparing management of low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma: analysis of an institutional series and review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

Low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (LG-ESS) is a rare malignancy, often occurring before menopause. There is no consensus regarding its optimal management. Total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy precludes future fertility and may thus be undesirable by women wishing to maintain their reproductive potential. However, experience of fertility-sparing management in LG-ESS is very limited. In this paper, the disease outcome is presented in six young women with LG-ESS conservatively treated by combined hysteroscopic resection and hormonal therapy.

STUDY DESIGN

From October 2009 to February 2013, at the Gynecologic Oncology Department of the National Cancer Institute of Naples, six women, with early-stage LG-ESS aged 18-40 years who desired childbearing and/or retaining their fertility, were enrolled into a pilot study of fertility-sparing management. Diagnosis of LG-ESS was made on specimens from hysteroscopic resection performed on a presumed benign lesion. All patients were planned to be treated with adjuvant megestrol acetate for two years. Hormonal therapy was started within 6 weeks from the hysteroscopic resection, with orally megestrol acetate at 40mg daily, increasing gradually according to patient's tolerance to the recommended total dose of 160mg daily.

RESULTS

All patients were submitted to hysteroscopic resection in a one-step procedure. Five patients started megestrol acetate within 6 weeks from the hysteroscopic resection (one patient did not start hormonal therapy because of early pregnancy after the hysteroscopic resection). Hormonal therapy was well tolerated; one patient stopped megestrol acetate after 12 months because of self-supporting strong desire to conceive; the other four patients regularly completed the hormonal therapy. To date, all patients show no evidence of disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Although fertility-sparing management is not the current standard of care for young women with early-stage LG-ESS, our preliminary data are promising. Larger series with a longer follow-up are needed to further assess safety and efficacy of combined hysteroscopic resection and hormonal therapy.

Current and advancing systemic treatment options for soft tissue sarcomas

INTRODUCTION

Soft tissue sarcomas are a collection of rare malignancies, the treatment of which has evolved over time. Although cytotoxic chemotherapy remains the cornerstone of management of metastatic disease, many new treatments have been developed or show great promise in the treatment of soft tissue sarcoma. Research into the different underlying pathogenesis of individual subtypes has driven progress in treatment. This has allowed development of treatments targeted to specific subtypes of sarcoma.

AREAS COVERED

We provide a review of the current field of systemic therapy in soft tissue sarcoma. This is followed by an in-depth analysis of recent developments in treatment, as well as new treatments that are aimed at specific subtypes of sarcoma, and the biological rationale behind these therapies. We also look in detail at the promising new agents currently in development.

EXPERT OPINION

Much progression has been made in treatment of soft tissue sarcomas with multiple exciting new treatments in development. However outcomes in general remain poor. Further research into the underlying pathogenesis of soft tissue sarcomas may help deliver more effective systemic therapies. Increased collaboration between basic science, translational and clinical investigators is required at national and international levels to maximise progress.

Hormonal treatments in metastatic endometrial stromal sarcomas: the 10-year experience of the sarcoma unit of Royal Marsden Hospital

Background

Hormonal manipulation is sometimes recommended in the treatment of metastatic endometrial stromal sarcoma, but there are few data assessing the efficacy of endocrine therapies in this subtype of uterine sarcomas.

Methods

We performed a retrospective electronic medical record review of patients with metastatic ESS treated with a hormonal agent at Royal Marsden Hospital between 1999 and 2011. We assessed progression-free survival (PFS), objective response and toxicity profile among patients with measurable disease.

Results

Thirteen patients with metastatic ESS were treated with hormonal therapies. Hormone receptor status (estrogen and progesterone receptors) was assessed in 9 out of 13 patients and in all of them it was moderately to strongly positive. Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) were prescribed as first endocrine line in 11/13 patients and progestins in the remainder, while in 2^nd line treatment AIs were prescribed in 7/10 patients, followed by progestins and GnRH analogues. Median PFS for 1^stline was 4.0 years (95% CI: 2.4 – 5.5 years) with 5-year progression-free rate of 30.8% (95% CI: 5.7 – 55.9%), both of which reflect the indolent natural history of ESS. Best objective response was partial response (PR) in 6/13 patients (46.2%; 95% CI: 19.2 – 74.9) and clinical benefit rate (defined as complete response + PR + stable disease ≥6 months) was 92.4% (95% CI: 64.0 – 99.8%; 12/13 patients). Median PFS for 2^nd line was 3.0 years (95% CI: 2.0 – 4.1 years) with 2-year progression-free rate of 88.9% (95% CI: 68.3 – 100.0).

Conclusions

In this cohort of metastatic ESS patients, 1st line endocrine treatment achieved objective response in 46.2% of them and clinical benefit in 92.4%. Tamoxifen and hormone replacement therapy should not be prescribed in patients with ESS due to their detrimental effects. Until more solid data are available, a reasonable recommendation would be that 1^st line treatment with an endocrine treatment, preferably with an AI. Moreover, in view of the positive outcomes of our patients that received 2^nd/3^rdline endocrine treatments, all available hormonal options should be used in sequence in the management of ESS.

Molecular mechanisms of endometrial stromal sarcoma and undifferentiated endometrial sarcoma as premises for new therapeutic strategies

Endometrial stromal sarcoma (ESS) and undifferentiated endometrial sarcoma (UES) are very rare gynecologic malignancies. Due to the rarity and heterogeneity of these tumors, little is known about their epidemiology, pathogenesis, and molecular pathology. Our previous studies have described deregulation of histone deacetylases expression in ESS/UES samples. Some of these enzymes can be inhibited by substances which are already approved for treatment of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. On the basis of published data, they may also provide a therapeutic option for ESS/UES patients. Our review focuses on molecular mechanisms of ESS/UES. It describes various aspects with special emphasis on alteration of histone deacetylation and its possible relevance for novel therapies.

Reversion of Hormone Treatment Resistance with the Addition of an mTOR Inhibitor in Endometrial Stromal Sarcoma

Background. Endometrial stromal sarcomas (ESS) are a subtype of gynaecological sarcomas characterized by the overexpression of hormone receptors. Hormone treatment is widely used in ESS but primary or acquired resistance is common. The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway has been suggested to play a key role in the mechanisms of hormone resistance. Recent studies in breast and prostate cancer demonstrate that this resistance can be reversed with the addition of an mTOR inhibitor. This phenomenon has never been reported in ESS. Methods. We report the outcome of one patient with pretreated, progressing low grade metastatic ESS treated with medroxyprogesterone acetate in combination with the mTOR inhibitor sirolimus. Results. Partial response was achieved following the addition of sirolimus to the hormone treatment. Response has been maintained for more than 2 years with minimal toxicity and treatment is ongoing. Conclusion. This case suggests that the resistance to the hormone manipulation in ESS can be reversed by the addition of an mTOR pathway inhibitor. This observation is highly encouraging and deserves further investigation.

Treatment of hormone positive uterine leiomyosarcoma with aromatase inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have not been used consistently as part of the management of hormone receptor positive uterine leiomyosarcomas (ULMS). As a result, the published data regarding the efficacy of AIs in this subtype of ULMS are sparse.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective electronic medical record review of patients with ULMS treated with an AI, in the 1st or the 2nd line setting, at the Sarcoma Unit of the Royal Marsden Hospital between 2001 and 2012. We assessed progression-free survival (PFS), objective response and toxicities and explored the correlation of the intensity of the hormone receptor status, as well as of the grade with PFS.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients with measurable advanced ULMS were treated with an AI in our unit. All of them were oestrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) positive. Letrozole was used in all patients as 1st line endocrine therapy, while exemestane was mainly prescribed as 2nd line (83%). Median PFS in 1st line was 14 months (95% CI: 0 - 30 months), and prolonged PFS was more likely to be observed in patients with low grade compared to high grade ULMS (20 months vs. 11 months), and in moderately/strongly ER positive compared to weakly ER positive ULMS (20 months vs. 12 months). Best response was partial response (PR) in 2/16 patients (12.5%) and clinical benefit (CB), defined as complete response (CR) + PR + stable disease ≥6 months, was observed in 10/16 patients (CB rate (CBR) 62.5%). Median duration of 2nd line was 3 months and median PFS was not reached. The 1-year progression-free rate for the 2nd line AI was 80%. Best response was PR in one patient and CBR was 50%. AIs were well tolerated in both lines of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population of patients with hormone positive ULMS, AIs achieved a significant CBR (62.5%) in 1st line, which was retained in 2nd line (CBR: 50%). The relatively prolonged median PFS (14 months), along with the favourable toxicity profile could place AIs among the first choices of systemic treatment in hormone positive ULMS, preferably in strongly positive (>90%), and/ or low grade and low volume disease.

Hormonal treatment in recurrent and metastatic gynaecological cancers: a review of the current literature

For many years hormonal treatment has played a role in the treatment of a selected group of patients with a variety of recurrent or metastatic gynaecological cancers, including ovarian and endometrial carcinomas, endometrial stromal sarcomas and granulosa cell tumours. Hormonal agents that are typically used include luteinizing-hormone-releasing hormone analogues, progestogens, selective oestrogen-receptor-modulating drugs such as tamoxifen, and more recently aromatase inhibitors. The rates of response to these drugs differ considerably depending on the tumour type, disease grade and stage as well as the type of drug used. Patients with granulosa cell tumours and endometrial stromal sarcomas have the highest response rates; owing to the rarity of these tumour types, the documented response rates are based on case reports and small series. Response rates in patients with recurrent and metastatic endometrial and ovarian carcinoma have been lower. It has been suggested that patients with well-differentiated and hormone-receptor-positive carcinomas are more likely to benefit from hormonal treatment. However, the data to support this are limited, and at times conflicting, with very few prospective studies to date. This review updates the evidence for the use of hormonal treatment in patients with potentially hormone responsive recurrent and metastatic gynaecological cancers.

Estrogen therapy in gynecological cancer survivors

Treatment of gynecological cancer has significant impact on a woman's quality of life because it commonly includes removal of the uterus and ovaries, both being the core of a woman's femininity, whilst irradiation and chemotherapy, be they as primary therapy or when indicated as postoperative adjuvant therapy, will lead to ablation of ovarian function if the ovaries had not been removed. This will lead to an acute onset of menopausal symptoms, which may be more debilitating than those occurring as a result of natural aging, and of which hot flushes, night sweats, insomnia, mood swings, vaginal dryness, decreased libido, malaise and a general feeling of apathy are the most common. About 25% of gynecological cancers will occur in pre- and perimenopausal women, a large percentage of whom will become menopausal as a result of their treatment. There are also the gynecological cancer survivors who are not rendered menopausal as a result of the treatment strategy but who will become menopausal because of natural aging. Concern among the medical attendants of these women is whether use of estrogen therapy or estrogen and progestogens for their menopausal symptoms will reactivate tumor deposits and therefore increase the rate of recurrence and, as a result, decrease overall survival among these women. Yet the data that are available do not support this concern. There are eight retrospective studies and only one randomized study that have analyzed outcome in endometrial cancer survivors who used hormone therapy after their surgery, whilst, among ovarian cancer survivors, there are four retrospective studies and one randomized study. The studies do suffer from small numbers and, although the studies pertaining to endometrial cancer analyze mostly women with early-stage disease, a number of the studies in both the endometrial and ovarian cancer survivors do have a sizeable follow-up. These studies seem to support that estrogen therapy after the treatment for gynecological cancer does not impact negatively on outcome in endometrial and ovarian cancer survivors and that estrogen therapy can be considered as a plausible therapeutic option in survivors who are debilitated by their menopausal symptoms. It is prudent not to offer estrogen therapy to survivors of endometrial stromal sarcoma and women with granulosa cell tumors of the ovaries. Vulval, vaginal and cervical cancers are not considered hormone-dependent and therefore estrogen therapy can be given.