Long-term treatment of residual or recurrent low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma with aromatase inhibitors: A report of two cases and a review of the literature

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.

The prognosis of recurrent low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma: a retrospective cohort study

Background

The prognosis of recurrent low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (LGESS) is little known. This study was to investigate the survival outcomes of a cohort of patients with recurrent LGESS.

Methods

Patients with primary LGESS diagnosed and treated for first recurrence confirmed by histology in the study center from February 2012 to June 2019 were retrospectively included. The progression-free interval (PFI) after the last treatment for first recurrence and overall survival (OS) since the diagnosis of first recurrence, which were followed up to June 1, 2020, were compared between groups of various therapy modalities.

Results

Fifty-six patients were included, and 43 patients (76.8%) had definite follow-up outcomes. The 5-year PFI and OS rates were 30.0% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 29.2–30.8) and 75.0% (68.0–82.0), respectively. In univariate analysis, only fertility-sparing treatment, ovarian preservation and surgical treatment had a significant impact on the PFI (hazard ratio [HR] 4.5, 3.1, and 0.2; 95% CI 1.5–13.1, 1.3–7.3, and 0.1–0.7; and p = 0.006, 0.009 and 0.006, respectively), but no factor was found to be associated with increased mortality risk. After adjusted with hormone treatment or chemotherapy, surgical treatment had significant effectiveness on OS (HR 0.3 and 0.3, 95% CI 0.1–1.0 and 0.1–1.0, p = 0.045 and 0.049, respectively). None of the patients with fertility-sparing treatment had successful conception, and all experienced repeated relapse.

Conclusion

For patients with recurrent LGESS, fertility-sparing treatment or ovarian preservation should not be provided. Surgery is the treatment of choice, and hormone treatment and/or chemotherapy was effective for the survival benefits of surgical treatment.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13023-021-01802-8.

Phase 2 study of anastrozole in patients with estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor positive recurrent low-grade endometrial stromal sarcomas: The PARAGON trial (ANZGOG 0903)

BACKGROUND

Aromatase inhibitors are standard of care for low-grade endometrial stromal sarcomas (LGESS), based on very high response rates reported in retrospective studies. We evaluated the activity of anastrozole in recurrent/metastatic LGESS patients enrolled in PARAGON, a basket trial of anastrozole in estrogen receptor (ER±)/progesterone receptor (PR+) gynecological cancers.

METHOD

An investigator-initiated, single-arm, prospective open-label trial of anastrozole 1 mg/day in patients with ER ± PR + ve LGESS with measurable disease, treated until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was clinical benefit (complete/partial response + stable disease) rate (CBR) at 3 months. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival (PFS), quality of life and toxicity.

RESULTS

15 eligible patients were enrolled. CBR at 3 months was 73% (95% CI: 48-89.1%); unchanged at 6 months. Best response was 26.7%, including complete response in one (6.7%; 95% CI 1.2-29.8%), partial response in three (20%, 95% CI 7.1-45.2%) and stable disease in seven (46.7%). Four patients ceased treatment by 3 months due to progression. Median PFS was not reached (25th percentile: 2.9 months (95% CI: 1.2-NR)). PFS was 73.3%, 73.3% and 66% at 6, 12, and 18 months, respectively. Six patients remained on treatment for an average of 44.2 months (range 34.5-63.6) up until data cut. Toxicity was as expected, with 3 patients stopping due to adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

The 26.7% objective response rate with anastrozole is lower than reported in retrospective series, but the CBR was high and durable. The results underscore the importance of prospective trials in rare cancers.

Survival outcomes and prognostic factors of endometrial stromal sarcoma and undifferentiated uterine sarcoma

PURPOSE

To review the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures of patients diagnosed with Endometrial Stromal Sarcoma (ESS) and Undifferentiated Uterine Sarcoma (USS) at our institution and investigate their clinical outcomes and factors affecting prognosis.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected demographic data, preoperative diagnostic methods and therapeutic management of patients treated for ESS and UUS between January 1995 and December 2019 at Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Spain. Overall survival and disease-free survival were calculated. Cox proportional-hazards regression models were calculated.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients were included in the study, of which 51(81%) had a diagnosis of ESS and 12(19%) of UUS. Twenty patients (31.7%) were diagnosed after a previous non-oncologic surgery, and 12 of them (60%) suffered from tumor disruption. Cytoreductive procedures were needed in 29 patients (46%), and optimal cytoreduction was achieved in 80.9% of the patients. The median follow-up was 7.6 years (IQR = 0.99-14.31). Five-year overall survival was 57.6% (44.2-68.8) and was significantly better for low-grade ESS (LG-ESS) patients (p < 0.01). Five-year disease-free survival was 57.1% (42.8-69.1) and was also significantly higher in LG-ESS cohort (p = 0.03). After multivariate analysis histological type, age, FIGO stage, optimal surgery and mitotic index were found significantly correlated with survival. For high-grade EES (HG-ESS) and USS patients adjuvant radiotherapy also correlated with improved survival.

CONCLUSION

Overall survival and disease-free survival are significantly better in patients with LG-ESS cohort. HG-ESS and UUS show similar survival outcomes. Age, FIGO stage, optimal surgery and histological type were significantly correlated with survival in the global cohort, whilst adjuvant radiotherapy correlated with improved survival in HG-ESS and UUS patients.

Hormonal management of menopausal symptoms in women with a history of gynecologic malignancy

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to review the role of hormone therapy in menopausal patients with breast cancer and gynecologic malignancies.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (via PubMed) using a combination of keywords and database-specific subject headings for the following concepts: menopause, hormone therapy, and cancer. Editorials, letters, case reports, and comments were excluded, as were non-English articles. Additional references were identified by hand-searching bibliographies of included articles. The searches yielded a total of 1,484 citations. All citations were imported into EndNote X9, where they were screened by the authors.

RESULTS

In breast cancer survivors, systemic hormone therapy is not recommended, whereas local low-dose estrogen therapy may be considered after discussion with the patient's oncologist. Among endometrial cancer survivors, hormone therapy is considered safe in low-risk cancers but should be avoided in high-risk subtypes. For survivors of epithelial ovarian cancer and cervical cancer, hormone therapy can be considered, but should be avoided in women with estrogen-sensitive histologic subtypes.

CONCLUSIONS

The risks of hormone therapy should be assessed on an individual basis, with consideration of age, type of hormone therapy, dose, duration of use, regimen, route, and prior exposure. Systemic hormone therapy is not recommended in breast cancer survivors, whereas vaginal low-dose estrogen appears safe. Hormone therapy may be used by endometrial, cervical, and ovarian cancer survivors with low-risk, non-estrogen-receptor-positive subtypes. Video Summary: http://links.lww.com/MENO/A516.

Endometrial stromal sarcoma: A review of rare mesenchymal uterine neoplasm

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to analyze the pathological aspects, diagnosis and treatment of rare mesenchymal uterine tumors.

METHODS

On August 2019, a systematic review of the literature was done on Pubmed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar search engines. The systematic review was carried out in agreement with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes statement (PRISMA). The following words and key phrases have been searched: "endometrial stromal sarcoma", "low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma", "high-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma", "uterine sarcoma", "mesenchymal uterine tumors" and "uterine stromal sarcoma". Across these platforms and research studies, five main aspects were analyzed: the biological characteristics of the neoplasms, the number of cases, the different therapeutic approaches used, the follow-up and the oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 94 studies initially identified, 55 were chosen selecting articles focusing on endometrial stromal sarcoma. Of these fifty-five studies, 46 were retrospective in design, 7 were reviews and 2 randomized phases III trials.

CONCLUSION

Endometrial stromal sarcomas are rare mesenchymal uterine neoplasms and surgery represents the standard treatment. For uterus-limited disease, the remove en bloc with an intact resection of the tumor (without the use of morcellation) is strongly recommended. For advanced-stage disease, the standard surgical treatment is adequate cytoreduction with metastatectomy. Pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy is not recommended in patients with Low-grade Endometrial Stromal Sarcoma (ESS), while is not clear whether cytoreduction of advanced tumors improves patient survival in High-grade ESS. Administration of adjuvant radiotherapy or chemotherapy is not routinely used and its role is still debated.

Ovarian preservation for low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of ovarian preservation on oncologic outcomes for women with low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma of the uterus.

METHODS

A systematic search of the Medline, Embase, Cohrane, and Web of Science databases was performed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Studies including patients with low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma who had hysterectomy were identified. Data on tumor recurrence and death rate were pooled using a random effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 17 studies met the inclusion criteria and reported on 786 patients. Based on available information, ovarian preservation was noted in 190 patients while 501 had bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. A significantly increased tumor recurrence rate was observed in the ovarian preservation group (89/190, 46.8%) compared with the bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy group (121/501, 24.2%) (OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.39 to 5.28). Based on data from 162 patients, no difference in death rate was noted between the ovarian preservation (2/34, 5.9%) and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (9/128, 7%) groups (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.18 to 3.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately one-quarter of patients with low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma were managed with ovarian preservation. These women experienced a higher recurrence rate. Hormone exposure may be responsible for this elevated risk. Given the apparent high salvage rate, however, ovarian preservation may be an option only in a well-informed patient population.

Hormone therapy following surgery in low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma: Is it related to a decrease in recurrence rate?

BACKGROUND

Low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (LGESS) is, in most cases, a slow-growing malignancy; however, it is related with high recurrence rates. The aim of this study is to determine which factors may be associated with the recurrence rate of LGESS.

METHODS

The clinicopathological features and treatment options in 37 patients with LGESS were evaluated.

RESULTS

All patients underwent the hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Additionally, lymphadenectomy was performed in 56.8% (n = 21) of the patients. Among the patients who underwent lymphadenectomy, 14.3% (n = 3) had lymph node metastasis. The disease was limited to the uterus in 75.7% of patients. Treatment following surgery was radiotherapy in three patients, chemotherapy in seven patients, hormone therapy in 12 patients, and chemotherapy plus hormone therapy in one patient. Megestrol acetate was used in all patients who received hormone therapy. Median follow-up time was 96 months. The 5-year disease-free survival and disease-specific survival were 72% and 97%, respectively. The recurrence rate was 27%. Only hormone therapy following surgery was significantly associated with a lower recurrence rate, even in patients with stage 1 disease. None of the patients treated with hormone therapy following surgery had recurrence, whereas recurrence occurred in 38.5% of the patients who underwent surgery only (p = 0.039).

CONCLUSION

Hormone therapy after surgery should be considered a viable option for decreasing the LGESS recurrence rate, regardless of the disease stage.

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.

Effects of leuprorelin for the treatment of recurrent gynecological cancer by assessment including self-administered quality-of-life questionnaire

AIM

To investigate the effects of leuprorelin using a self-administered quality-of-life (QOL) questionnaire in patients with recurrent gynecological cancer.

METHODS

Records of patients who received 3.75 mg leuprorelin every 4 weeks for the treatment of recurrent gynecological cancer were retrospectively reviewed. The physical domain of the QOL questionnaire, Care Notebook, was used to assess physical symptoms. Symptom deterioration was defined as a ≥10-point increase in baseline score; otherwise, symptoms were defined as controlled. Radiological and serological responses were evaluated according to the 2011 Gynecological Cancer Intergroup criteria.

RESULTS

From 2007 to 2015, 25 patients were administered leuprorelin for the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer, granulosa cell tumor, endometrial cancer, endometrial stromal sarcoma and clear cell cervical cancer (in 13, 3, 6, 2 and 1 patients, respectively). Twenty patients had received a median of three lines (range 1-12 lines) of chemotherapy. Ten patients had progressive disease during their previous round of chemotherapy. Twenty patients completed the questionnaire every 4 weeks. Following leuprorelin treatment for 8 weeks, the symptom and disease control rates were 65% (13/20) and 44% (11/25), respectively. Two patients, one each with granulosa cell tumor and endometrial cancer, had stable disease at 6 months. Among the 20 patients who completed the QOL questionnaire, symptom control and disease control at 8 weeks showed a significant correlation (P = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

Leuprorelin had minimal anticancer activity. The physical domain of the QOL questionnaire could be used to assess effects of hormonal treatment.

The 2017 hormone therapy position statement of The North American Menopause Society

The 2017 Hormone Therapy Position Statement of The North American Menopause Society (NAMS) updates the 2012 Hormone Therapy Position Statement of The North American Menopause Society and identifies future research needs. An Advisory Panel of clinicians and researchers expert in the field of women's health and menopause was recruited by NAMS to review the 2012 Position Statement, evaluate new literature, assess the evidence, and reach consensus on recommendations, using the level of evidence to identify the strength of recommendations and the quality of the evidence. The Panel's recommendations were reviewed and approved by the NAMS Board of Trustees.Hormone therapy (HT) remains the most effective treatment for vasomotor symptoms (VMS) and the genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) and has been shown to prevent bone loss and fracture. The risks of HT differ depending on type, dose, duration of use, route of administration, timing of initiation, and whether a progestogen is used. Treatment should be individualized to identify the most appropriate HT type, dose, formulation, route of administration, and duration of use, using the best available evidence to maximize benefits and minimize risks, with periodic reevaluation of the benefits and risks of continuing or discontinuing HT.For women aged younger than 60 years or who are within 10 years of menopause onset and have no contraindications, the benefit-risk ratio is most favorable for treatment of bothersome VMS and for those at elevated risk for bone loss or fracture. For women who initiate HT more than 10 or 20 years from menopause onset or are aged 60 years or older, the benefit-risk ratio appears less favorable because of the greater absolute risks of coronary heart disease, stroke, venous thromboembolism, and dementia. Longer durations of therapy should be for documented indications such as persistent VMS or bone loss, with shared decision making and periodic reevaluation. For bothersome GSM symptoms not relieved with over-the-counter therapies and without indications for use of systemic HT, low-dose vaginal estrogen therapy or other therapies are recommended.This NAMS position statement has been endorsed by Academy of Women's Health, American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, American Association of Nurse Practitioners, American Medical Women's Association, American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Asociación Mexicana para el Estudio del Climaterio, Association of Reproductive Health Professionals, Australasian Menopause Society, Chinese Menopause Society, Colegio Mexicano de Especialistas en Ginecologia y Obstetricia, Czech Menopause and Andropause Society, Dominican Menopause Society, European Menopause and Andropause Society, German Menopause Society, Groupe d'études de la ménopause et du vieillissement Hormonal, HealthyWomen, Indian Menopause Society, International Menopause Society, International Osteoporosis Foundation, International Society for the Study of Women's Sexual Health, Israeli Menopause Society, Japan Society of Menopause and Women's Health, Korean Society of Menopause, Menopause Research Society of Singapore, National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health, SOBRAC and FEBRASGO, SIGMA Canadian Menopause Society, Società Italiana della Menopausa, Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, South African Menopause Society, Taiwanese Menopause Society, and the Thai Menopause Society. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists supports the value of this clinical document as an educational tool, June 2017. The British Menopause Society supports this Position Statement.

Endometrial stromal sarcoma in combination with mixed type endometrial carcinomas: A case report and literature review

RATIONALE

Endometrial stromal sarcoma (ESS) is rare, representing only approximately 0.2% of all uterine malignancies. Mixed type endometrial carcinomas (MT-ECs) are rare tumors with both type I and II features, and are difficult to diagnose. Cases of ESS and MT-ECs coexisting in the same patient are extremely rare. This study aimed to describe a case of ESS in combination with MT-ECs in a 47-year-old premenopausal woman.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A woman presented to the hospital complaining of occasional abdominal pain and had high tumor markers: cancer antigen (CA) 19-9 (263.6 U/mL) and CA 125 (428.0 U/mL). Transvaginal ultrasound examination revealed a complex mass (12.3 × 9.1 × 6.3 cm) with solid and cystic components on the right rear wall of the uterus. Abdominopelvic computed tomography images showed a pelvic cystic-solid mixed mass. The patient underwent an exploratory midline laparotomy. The mass was hypothesized to be malignant on the uterine posterior wall. Tumor deposits were found on bilateral parametrium. On peritoneal implantation, multiple metastases were seen on the serosal surface of the bowel and greater omentum. A frozen section revealed a spindle cell sarcoma.

DIAGNOSES

Pathological reports following surgery revealed concurrent ESS and MT-ECs.

INTERVENTIONS

The patient underwent a total abdominal hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, total omentectomy, and macroscopic clearance of the tumor. Adjuvant chemotherapy was given.

OUTCOMES

The patient was still alive when this report was written.

LESSONS

Considering the rarity of ESS in combination with MT-ECs, this study presented an overview of the literature and discussed a number of histological and clinical issues. Nevertheless, etiology and pathogenesis of these tumors need further investigation.

Uterine sarcoma Part II-Uterine endometrial stromal sarcoma: The TAG systematic review

Endometrial stromal tumors are rare uterine tumors (<1%). Four main categories include endometrial stromal nodule, low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (LG-ESS), high-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (HG-ESS), and uterine undifferentiated sarcoma (UUS). This review is a series of articles discussing the uterine sarcomas. LG-ESS, a hormone-dependent tumor harboring chromosomal rearrangement, is an indolent tumor with a favorable prognosis, but characterized by late recurrences even in patients with Stage I disease, suggesting the requirement of a long-term follow-up. Patients with HG-ESS, based on the identification of YWHAE-NUTM2A/B (YWHAE-FAM22A/B) gene fusion, typically present with advanced stage diseases and frequently have recurrences, usually within a few years after initial surgery. UUS is, a high-grade sarcoma, extremely rare, lacking a specific line of differentiation, which is a diagnosis of exclusion (the wastebasket category, which fails to fulfill the morphological and immunohistochemical criteria of translocation-positive ESS). Surgery is the main strategy in the management of uterine sarcoma. Due to rarity, complex biological characteristics, and unknown etiology and risk factors of uterine sarcomas, the role of adjuvant therapy is not clear. Only LG-ESS might respond to progestins or aromatase inhibitors.