A Patient Registry for the Management of Uterine Fibroids in Canada: Protocol for a Multicenter, Prospective, Noninterventional Study

OUP accepted manuscript

Ulipristal acetate (UPA) is a medical treatment for uterine fibroids and was authorized for surgical pre-treatment in 2012 after the conduct of the PEARL I and II randomized controlled trials and for intermittent treatment after the observational PEARL III and IV trials. However, UPA came into disrepute due to its temporary suspension in 2017 and 2020 because of an apparent association with liver injury. This clinical opinion paper aims to review the process of marketing authorization and implementation of UPA, in order to provide all involved stakeholders with recommendations for the introduction of future drugs. Before marketing authorization, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) states that Phase III registration trials should evaluate relevant outcomes in a representative population, while comparing to gold-standard treatment. This review shows that the representativeness of the study populations in all PEARL trials was limited, surgical outcomes were not evaluated and intermittent treatment was assessed without comparative groups. Implementation into clinical practice was extensive, with 900 000 prescribed treatment cycles in 5 years in Europe and Canada combined. Extremely high costs are involved in developing and evaluating pre-marketing studies in new drugs, influencing trial design and relevance of chosen outcomes, thereby impeding clinical applicability. It is vitally important that the marketing implementation after authorization is regulated in such way that necessary evidence is generated before widespread prescription of a new drug. All stakeholders, from pharmaceutical companies to authorizing bodies, governmental funding bodies and medical professionals should be aware of their role and take responsibility for their part in this process.

Treatment Choices in a National Cohort of Canadian Women With Symptomatic Uterine Fibroids

OBJECTIVES

To describe treatment choices made at the time of enrollment in CAPTURE, a Canadian patient registry for women with symptomatic uterine fibroids (UFs), and to define demographic and clinical characteristics that independently predict these choices.

METHODS

Women arranging appointments for UF care were eligible to enrol. At the time of the enrollment visit, women's self-reported treatment histories were noted, along with their clinical characteristics. Tretment options were discussed and chosen during that visit. Patients could choose medical and/or surgical treatment, or they could opt for no active treatment (i.e., "watchful waiting"); treatment decisions were not binding.

RESULTS

The most common medication proposed and chosen was ulipristal acetate (UPA), and the most common procedure was myomectomy. These treatments were also the most commonly identified in patients' histories. Medication alone and medication in combination with surgery were the most common treatment approaches chosen (46% and 26%, respectively). Surgery alone and watchful waiting were chosen by 14% and 13% of patients, respectively. Significant predictors of active treatment included patient pregnancy plans, overall symptom severity, and prior treatment history (medical and surgical). Other parameters, including patient age and history of specific UF symptoms, appear to influence the choice of medical therapies (UPA, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists, or other options) and procedures (myomectomy or hysterectomy).

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world study documents the patient factors associated with the treatment decisions of women seeking care for symptomatic UFs in contemporary Canadian gynaecology practice. Subsequent analyses will follow the outcomes of these treatments over two years in this population.

Quality of ultrasonography reporting and factors associated with selection of imaging modality for uterine fibroids in Canada: results from a prospective cohort registry

BACKGROUND

Uterine fibroids are common in women and their management is heavily influenced by information gathered through imaging. We aimed to evaluate the type and quality of imaging performed for assessment of uterine fibroids in Canada.

METHODS

Starting in July 2015, premenopausal women with symptomatic fibroids were enrolled in a prospective, noninterventional, observational registry (Canadian Women With Uterine Fibroids Registry [CAPTURE]) that included 19 Canadian sites. Clinical characteristics were extracted from the baseline visit. We evaluated the association between demographic and clinical variables of interest with regard to imaging type using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Of 1493 women, 1148 had ultrasonography, 135 had magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), 80 had other types of imaging and 130 did not have imaging reported within 12 months of the baseline visit. After adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics, patients who underwent MRI had larger fibroids (odds ratio [OR] per 1-cm increase 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.17) and more numerous fibroids (1 v. > 1; OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.14-2.64) compared with those who underwent ultrasonography only. For ultrasonography reporting, quality criteria were met for 268 of 1148 patients (23.3%). There was a difference in the quality of reporting among the 19 sites (p < 0.001). Logistic regression model accounting for within-site variability showed that reporting results from ultrasonography in the province of Quebec were less likely to meet all quality criteria (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.06-0.66) and those from sites in more populated cities (≥ 400 000 inhabitants) were more likely to do so (OR 6.15, 95% CI 2.20-17.18).

INTERPRETATION

We determined that imaging modality for fibroids is associated with patient characteristics. The quality of reporting results for ultrasonography of fibroids in Canada falls short of internationally endorsed guidelines and needs improvement.

STUDY REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT02580578.

Rethinking the Issue of Power Morcellation of Uterine Fibroids: Is Morcellation the Real Problem or Is this Another Symptom of Disparity in Healthcare Provision?

Power morcellation remains one of the most significant developments in minimal access surgery over the past decade, allowing many more patients to benefit from the least invasive surgical route. However, its use is not without controversy, particularly with regards to the risks of an undiagnosed leiomyosarcoma. Increased media and, in particular, on-going social media coverage since events in 2014 have only served to intensify the debate, culminating in the Food and Drug Administration essentially 'banning' its use in the USA. Practice however continues to vary and this technique remains widely used in Europe and in particular the UK. The aim of this article was to review the development of power morcellation in gynaecology and the underlying risks, including that of undiagnosed leiomyosarcoma, as well as appraise the evolving literature on patient awareness and informed consent and the wider implications of morcellation restriction.

Influence of Ethnicity on Clinical Presentation and Quality of Life in Women With Uterine Fibroids: Results From a Prospective Observational Registry

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to evaluate ethnic variations in the clinical presentation of women with uterine fibroids.

METHODS

A total of 996 premenopausal women with symptomatic uterine fibroids were enrolled in a prospective, non-interventional, observational registry at 19 clinical sites across Canada (CAPTURE Registry). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using Uterine Fibroid Symptom and Health-Related Quality of Life Symptom Severity questionnaires and the Aberdeen Menorrhagia Severity Scale (Ruta score). Linear and logistic regression models, adjusted for patient and fibroid characteristics, were used to examine differences among ethnicities for continuous and binary outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

Black women were 4.9 years younger (P < 0.001), were more likely to be nulligravid (P = 0.046), had a 41% longer duration of symptoms before enrolment (P = 0.01), had a 49% larger fibroid volume (P = 0.01), and were more likely to be anemic (P < 0.001) compared with White women. Black women reported lower health-related quality of life scores (-5.19 points; 95% CI -9.90 to -0.48, P = 0.03) compared with White women. East Asian women were 2.0 years younger (P = 0.01), were more likely to be nulligravid (P < 0.001), had a 53% longer duration of symptoms (P = 0.01), had 67% larger fibroid volume (P = 0.01), and were more likely to be anemic (P = 0.003) compared with White women. East Asian women had lower symptom severity scores (-5.95 points; 95% CI -11.16 to -0.75, P = 0.02). Non-White women preferred uterine-preserving treatment options (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Black and East Asian women have an increased burden of disease compared with White women and prefer uterine preservation. There is a discrepancy between disease burden and patient-reported outcomes that may reflect ethnocultural differences in disease experience.