Risk of Endometriosis and Subsequent Ovary and Breast Cancers in Nurses: A Population-Based Cohort Study in Taiwan

The association between endometriosis and risk of endometrial cancer and breast cancer: a meta-analysis

Purpose

Endometriosis (EMS) is confirmed pathophysiologically to be an estrogen-dependent disease, similar to endometrial hyperplasia/cancer and breast cancer. Epidemiological and biological data on endometriosis might explain links between endometriosis and these cancers. We sought to identify the differences in the risk of endometrial cancer and breast cancer between women with and women without endometriosis.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and four Chinese databases (CNKI, VIP, WanFang, CBM) to identify relevant studies published online between January 2011 and March 2021. In our meta-analysis, we used the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) to evaluate the design and quality of all studies, and we calculated the pooled risk ratio (RR) using the random model. The Q test and I2 were used to evaluate the degree of heterogeneity of eligible studies. We used funnel plots and Begg’s and Egger’s tests to assess publication bias.

Results

Of the 1369 articles, we finally included 14 cohort studies and seven case–control studies. Data from large cohort and case–control studies indicate that women with endometriosis had an increased risk of both endometrial cancer [RR, 1.662; 95% CI, (1.148–2.407)] and breast cancer [RR, 1.082; 95% CI, (1.001–1.169)].

Conclusion

Endometriosis can increase the risk of endometrial cancer and breast cancer, and women with endometriosis are recommended to receive routine screening in long-term management.

The relation between endometrioma and ovarian cancer

INTRODUCTION

The relationship between endometrioma and ovarian cancer is a topic of discussion in the field of endometriosis and to date it is still debated whether ovarian endometriosis may represent a risk factor for ovarian cancers.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature search was carried out using Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline and Google Scholar up to October 2020. Primary outcome of interest was ovarian cancer incidence in patients with endometriosis. Secondary outcome was ovarian cancer prognosis in patients with endometriosis compared to patient without endometriosis.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Patients with ovarian endometriosis has a slight increase risk of developing ovarian cancer (merely 1.8%), being the general population risk for ovarian cancer 1.31%. In patient at postmenopausal age, long-lasting endometriosis, early-age diagnosis, infertility and/or infertility treatment the risk of developing ovarian cancer is higher. Endometriosis-related ovarian cancers are generally clear cell and endometrioid and are diagnosed at early stage compared to non-endometriosis related ovarian cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

The lifetime risk for ovarian cancer is low in endometriosis patients in general and higher in subgroups of patients allowing a tailored management based on patient characteristics. Endometriosis is a chronic disease negatively affecting the quality of life, nonetheless, concerns on ovarian cancer should be avoided in order to reduce the burden of the disease on women's health.

Further evidence that endometriosis is related to tubal and ovarian cancers: A study of 271,444 inpatient women

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate associations between endometriosis and tubal and ovarian cancers in a large population-based study.

METHODS

The Health Care Cost and Utilization Project - National Inpatient Sample databases from 2005 to 2014 were used in this study. Data on patients with a diagnosis of tubal or ovarian cancer and endometriosis (overall and subtypes including adenomyosis and pelvic endometriosis) using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition, Clinical Modification codes were extracted. Logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate associations between tubal and ovarian cancers and endometriosis. Adjustment was made for age, race, median income level, payment plan, hospital location and obesity.

RESULTS

Of 38,800,139 women aged >18 years who were hospitalized between 2005 and 2014, 271,444 women with adenomyosis and/or pelvic endometriosis, 4289 women with tubal cancer and 133,253 women with ovarian cancer were identified. The rate of tubal cancer was three-fold higher in women with endometriosis compared with women without endometriosis (0.03 % vs 0.01 %). The odds ratio (OR) adjusted for age, race, obesity, income and insurance type was 4.02 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 3.17-5.11; p < 0.01]. The rate of tubal cancer was higher in women with adenomyosis (0.04 % vs 0.01 %; adjusted OR 4.88, 95 % CI 3.66-6.50; p < 0.01) and women with pelvic endometriosis (0.02 % vs 0.01 %; adjusted OR 2.80, 95 % CI 1.84-4.27; p < 0.01) compared with women without these conditions. Similar associations were found between ovarian cancer and pelvic endometriosis and ovarian cancer and adenomyosis.

CONCLUSION

Both pelvic endometriosis and adenomyosis are strongly associated with tubal and ovarian cancers.

Endometriosis-associated epithelial ovarian cancer: Primary synchronous different cellular type on each ovary

OBJECTIVE

Endometriosis-associated epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is a specific category of EOC, containing either endometrioid or clear cell carcinoma subtype. The characteristic of endometriosis-associated EOC includes an early stage at the diagnosis, presence of single histology type, and better prognosis. The synchronous two subtypes of endometriosis-associated EOC and presentation of far-advanced stage status at the initial diagnosis is rarely reported.

CASE REPORT

We reported a 60-year-old postmenopausal woman with FIGO IA endometriosis-associated endometrioid carcinoma at right ovary and FIGO IVA endometriosis-associated clear cell carcinoma at left ovary, right tube, omentum, lymph node and cytology of pleural effusion and ascites treated with optimal debulking surgery and dose-intensity taxane/platinum based chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

This case report confirms the long-term concept that clear cell carcinoma has much more aggressive behavior than endometrioid cell carcinoma does, regardless of association of endometriosis or not.

Endometriosis and cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is an often chronic, inflammatory gynaecologic condition affecting 190 million women worldwide. Studies have reported an elevated cancer risk among patients with endometriosis. However, prior research has included methodologic issues that impede valid and robust interpretation.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

We conducted a meta-analysis of studies investigating the association between endometriosis and cancer risk and analysed the results by methodologic characteristics. We discuss the implications of cancer screening in patients and management challenges faced by clinicians.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched PubMed and Embase databases for eligible studies from inception through 24 October 2019. We included cohort and case-control studies examining the association between endometriosis and cancer risk; cross-sectional studies and case reports were excluded. Publications had to present risk/rate/odds estimates with 95% CI. Random effects meta-analysis was used to estimate summary relative risks (SRR) and CIs. Heterogeneity across studies was assessed by the Q test and I2 statistics, and publication bias using Egger's and Begg's tests. Risk of bias and quality of the included studies were assessed using the risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool.

OUTCOMES

Forty-nine population-based case-control and cohort studies were included. Twenty-six studies were scored as having a 'serious'/'critical' risk of bias, and the remaining 23 'low'/'moderate'. Cancer-specific analyses showed a positive association between endometriosis and ovarian cancer risk (SRR = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.68-2.22; n = 24 studies) that was strongest for clear cell (SRR = 3.44, 95% CI = 2.82-4.42; n = 5 studies) and endometrioid (SRR = 2.33, 95% CI = 1.82-2.98; n = 5 studies) histotypes (Pheterogeneity < 0.0001), although with significant evidence of both heterogeneity across studies and publication bias (Egger's and Begg's P-values < 0.01). A robust association was observed between endometriosis and thyroid cancer (SRR = 1.39, 95% CI =1.24-1.57; n = 5 studies), a very small association with breast cancer (SRR = 1.04, 95% CI =1.00-1.09; n = 20 studies) and no association with colorectal cancer (SRR = 1.00, 95% CI =0.87-1.16; n = 5 studies). The association with endometrial cancer was not statistically significant (SRR = 1.23, 95% CI =0.97-1.57; n = 17 studies) overall and wholly null when restricted to prospective cohort studies (SRR = 0.99, 95% CI =0.72-1.37; n = 5 studies). The association with cutaneous melanoma was also non-significant (SRR = 1.17, 95% CI =0.97-1.41; n = 7 studies) but increased in magnitude and was statistically significant when restricted to studies with low/moderate risk of bias (SRR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.24-2.36, n = 2 studies). The most robust finding both in terms of statistical significance and magnitude of effect was an inverse association with cervical cancer (SRR = 0.68, 95% CI =0.56-0.82; n = 4 studies); however, this result has a high potential to reflect heightened access to detection of dysplasia for women who reached an endometriosis diagnosis and is thus likely not causal. Several additional cancer types were explored based on <4 studies.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

Endometriosis was associated with a higher risk of ovarian and thyroid, and minimally (only 4% greater risk) with breast cancer, and with a lower risk of cervical cancer. However, this meta-analysis confirms that: a majority of studies had severe/critical risk of bias; there is impactful heterogeneity across studies-and for ovarian cancer, publication bias; and causal inference requires temporality, which in many studies was not considered. We discuss the implications of these potential associations from the perspectives of patients with endometriosis, clinicians involved in their care, and scientists investigating their long-term health risks.

Subsequent Development of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer After Ovarian Surgery for Benign Ovarian Tumor: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Purpose

The goal of the current study is to determine the risk of subsequent development of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) in women after ovarian surgery for benign ovarian tumors.

Patients and Methods

We conducted the nationwide population-based historic cohort study using the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) of Taiwan. Eleven thousand six hundred twenty women who underwent ovarian surgery for ovarian benign diseases were analyzed. The collected data included age, types of ovarian surgery, medical history by Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), infertility (yes/no), pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) (yes/no), tubal ligation (yes/no), total/subtotal hysterectomy (TH/STH) (yes/no), and endometrioma (yes/no). We used the Kaplan-Meier method and the Log-rank test to evaluate the risk factors. Cox proportional hazard methods were used to evaluate risk factors for the subsequent development of EOC. Multivariate analysis using Cox stepwise forward regression was conducted for the covariate selected in univariate analysis. Hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using the Wald test.

Results

Subsequent EOC incidence rate (IR, incidence per 10,000 person-years) of women after ovarian surgery for benign ovarian tumors was 2.98. Separating into four groups based on different age, IR of EOC was 1.57 (<30 years), 4.71 (30-39 years), 3.59 (40-49 years) and 0.94 (≥50 years), respectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses identified only high level of CCI (≥2 or more) as an independent risk factor for subsequent development of EOC in women after ovarian surgery for benign ovarian tumors (HR 59.17, 95% CI 7.50-466.80 in women with CCI level of 2 and HR 190.68, 95% CI 24.33-2494.19, in women with CCI level ≥3, respectively).

Conclusion

Our results, if confirmed, suggest that women with other comorbidities (CCI) should be well informed that they may have a higher risk of subsequent development of EOC when ovarian surgery is planned even though the final pathology showed a benign ovarian tumor.

Comparing Paclitaxel-Carboplatin with Paclitaxel-Cisplatin as the Front-Line Chemotherapy for Patients with FIGO IIIC Serous-Type Tubo-Ovarian Cancer

The use of weekly chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with advanced-stage serous-type epithelial Tubo-ovarian cancer (ETOC), and primary peritoneal serous carcinoma (PPSC) is acceptable as the front-line postoperative chemotherapy after primary cytoreductive surgery (PCS). The main component of dose-dense chemotherapy is weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m²), but it would be interesting to know what is the difference between combination of triweekly cisplatin (20 mg/m²) or triweekly carboplatin (carboplatin area under the curve 5-7 mg/mL per min [AUC 5-7]) in the dose-dense paclitaxel regimen. Therefore, we compared the outcomes of women with Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIC ETOC and PPSC treated with PCS and a subsequent combination of dose-dense weekly paclitaxel and triweekly cisplatin (paclitaxel–cisplatin) or triweekly carboplatin using AUC 5 (paclitaxel–carboplatin). Between January 2010 and December 2016, 40 women with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IIIC EOC, FTC, or PPSC were enrolled, including 18 treated with paclitaxel–cisplatin and the remaining 22 treated with paclitaxel–carboplatin. There were no statistically significant differences in disease characteristics of patients between two groups. Outcomes in paclitaxel–cisplatin group seemed to be little better than those in paclitaxel–carboplatin (median progression-free survival [PFS] 30 versus 25 months as well as median overall survival [OS] 58.5 versus 55.0 months); however, neither reached a statistically significant difference. In terms of adverse events (AEs), patients in paclitaxel–carboplatin group had more AEs, with a higher risk of neutropenia and grade 3/4 neutropenia, and the need for a longer period to complete the front-line chemotherapy, and the latter was associated with worse outcome for patients. We found that a period between the first-time chemotherapy to the last dose (6 cycles) of chemotherapy >21 weeks was associated with a worse prognosis in patients compared to that ≤21 weeks, with hazard ratio (HR) of 81.24 for PFS and 9.57 for OS. As predicted, suboptimal debulking surgery (>1 cm) also contributed to a worse outcome than optimal debulking surgery (≤1 cm) with HR of 14.38 for PFS and 11.83 for OS. Based on the aforementioned findings, both regimens were feasible and effective, but maximal efforts should be made to achieve optimal debulking surgery and following the on-schedule administration of dose-dense weekly paclitaxel plus triweekly platinum compounds. Randomized trials validating the findings are warranted.