Effects of triptorelin versus placebo on the symptoms of endometriosis

Comparative Analysis of Medical Interventions to Alleviate Endometriosis-Related Pain: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background/Objectives: Endometriosis is a chronic condition that affects 6-10% of women of reproductive age, with pain and infertility being its primary symptoms. The most common aspects of pain are overall pelvic pain, dysmenorrhea, and dyspareunia. Our aim was to compare the available medical treatments for endometriosis-related pain. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in three medical databases to assess available drug options for pain management. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating various medical treatments for endometriosis-related pain on different pain scales were included. Results were presented as p-scores and, in cases of placebo controls, as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). From the available data, a network meta-analysis was carried out. Results: The search yielded 1314 records, of which 45 were eligible for data extraction. Eight networks were created, and a total of 16 treatments were analyzed. The highest p-score, meaning greatest pain relief (p-score: 0.618), for the treatment of dysmenorrhea was achieved using gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists for 3 months on a scale of 0-100. Additionally, a p-score of 0.649 was attained following a 6-month treatment with GnRH agonists combined with hormonal contraceptives (CHCs). In the case of dyspareunia on a scale of 0-100 following 3 months of treatment, CHCs (p-score: 0.805) were the most effective, and CHCs combined with aromatase inhibitors (p-score: 0.677) were the best treatment option following 6 months of treatment. In the case of overall pelvic pain, CHCs (p-score: 0.751) yielded the highest p-score on a scale of 0-100 following 3 months of treatment, and progestins combined with aromatase inhibitors (p-score: 0.873) following 6 months of treatment. Progestins (p-score: 0.901) were most effective in cases of overall pelvic pain on a scale of 0-3 following 3 months of treatment. Conclusions: Our network meta-analysis showed that in cases of dysmenorrhea, GnRH agonists supplemented with CHCs reduced pain the most following 3 months of treatment. Regarding dyspareunia CHCs were most effective, and in the case of overall pelvic pain, CHCs or progestins combined with aromatase inhibitors yielded the most desirable results.

A systematic literature review on patient-reported outcome domains and measures in nonsurgical efficacy trials related to chronic pain associated with endometriosis: an urgent call to action

ABSTRACT

Endometriosis, a common cause for chronic pelvic pain, significantly affects quality of life, fertility, and overall productivity of those affected. Therapeutic options remain limited, and collating evidence on treatment efficacy is complicated. One reason could be the heterogeneity of assessed outcomes in nonsurgical clinical trials, impeding meaningful result comparisons. This systematic literature review examines outcome domains and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in clinical trials. Through comprehensive search of Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL up until July 2022, we screened 1286 records, of which 191 were included in our analyses. Methodological quality (GRADE criteria), information about publication, patient population, and intervention were assessed, and domains as well as PROMs were extracted and analyzed. In accordance with IMMPACT domain framework, the domain pain was assessed in almost all studies (98.4%), followed by adverse events (73.8%). By contrast, assessment of physical functioning (29.8%), improvement and satisfaction (14.1%), and emotional functioning (6.8%) occurred less frequently. Studies of a better methodological quality tended to use more different domains. Nevertheless, combinations of more than 2 domains were rare, failing to comprehensively capture the bio-psycho-social aspects of endometriosis-associated pain. The PROMs used showed an even broader heterogeneity across all studies. Our findings underscore the large heterogeneity of assessed domains and PROMs in clinical pain-related endometriosis trials. This highlights the urgent need for a standardized approach to both, assessed domains and high-quality PROMs ideally realized through development and implementation of a core outcome set, encompassing the most pivotal domains and PROMs for both, stakeholders and patients.

Evaluating the safety of high-intensity focused ultrasound treatment for rectal endometriosis: results from a French prospective multicentre study including 60 patients

STUDY QUESTION

Is increasing the intensity of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) by 30% in the treatment of rectal endometriosis a safe procedure?

SUMMARY ANSWER

This study demonstrates the safety of a 30% increase in the intensity of HIFU in the treatment of rectal endometriosis, with no Clavien-Dindo Grade III complications overall, and namely no rectovaginal fistulae.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

A feasibility study including 20 patients with rectal endometriosis demonstrated, with no severe complications, a significant improvement in digestive disorders, dysmenorrhoea, dyspareunia, and health status, although the volume of the endometriosis nodule did not appear to be reduced.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A prospective multicentre cohort study was conducted between 2020 and 2022 with 60 patients with symptomatic rectal endometriosis. Following the failure of medical treatment, HIFU treatment was offered as an alternative to surgery.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

As the main objective of this study was to examine safety, all adverse events observed during the 6 months of follow-up were analysed and graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) and Clavien-Dindo classifications. Secondary objectives included evaluating the evolution of symptoms using validated questionnaires: gynaecological and digestive pain symptoms with a visual analogue scale, health status with the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form (SF-36) questionnaire, average post-operative daily pain level, and analgesic medication required in the 10 days following treatment. MRI was also performed at Day 1 to detect early complications. Finally, we performed a blinded MRI review of the evolution of the nodule at 6 months post-treatment.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The procedure was performed under spinal anaesthesia for 30% of the patients. The median duration of treatment was 32 min. Fifty-five patients left the hospital on Day 1. MRI scans performed on Day 1 did not highlight any early-onset post-operative complication. Using the Clavien-Dindo classification, we listed 56.7% Grade I events, 3.4% Grade II events, and no events Grade III or higher. At 1, 3, and 6 months, all gynaecologic, digestive and general symptoms, as well as health status, had significantly improved. The evolution of the nodule was also significant (P < 0.001) with a 28% decrease in volume.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The main objective was safety and not effectiveness. The study was not randomized and there was no control group.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

HIFU treatment for rectal endometriosis results in an improvement of symptoms with low morbidity; as such, for selected patients, it could be a valuable alternative to surgical approaches following the failure of medical treatment.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The study was funded by the company EDAP TMS. Professors Dubernard and Rousset are consultants for EDAP TMS. Dubernard received travel support from EDAP-TMS. Dr F. Chavrier received industrial grants from EDAP-TMS. He has developed a device for generating focused ultrasonic waves with reduced treatment time. This device has been patented by EDAP-TMS. Dr Lafon received industrial grants from EDAP-TMS; he declares that EDAP-TMS provided funding directly to INSERM to support a young researcher chair in therapeutic ultrasound, which is unrelated to the current study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04494568.

Horizons in Endometriosis: Proceedings of the Montreux Reproductive Summit, 14-15 July 2023

Endometriosis is a complex and chronic gynaecological disorder that affects millions of women worldwide, leading to significant morbidity and impacting reproductive health. This condition affects up to 10% of women of reproductive age and is characterised by the presence of endometrial-like tissue outside the uterus, potentially leading to symptoms such as chronic pelvic pain, dysmenorrhoea, dyspareunia, and infertility. The Montreux summit brought a number of experts in this field together to provide a platform for discussion and exchange of ideas. These proceedings summarise the six main topics that were discussed at this summit to shed light on future directions of endometriosis classification, diagnosis, and therapeutical management. The first question addressed the possibility of preventing endometriosis in the future by identifying risk factors, genetic predispositions, and further understanding of the pathophysiology of the condition to develop targeted interventions. The clinical presentation of endometriosis is varied, and the correlation between symptoms severity and disease extent is unclear. While there is currently no universally accepted optimal classification system for endometriosis, several attempts striving towards its optimisation - each with its own advantages and limitations - were discussed. The ideal classification should be able to reconcile disease status based on the various diagnostic tools, and prognosis to guide proper patient tailored management. Regarding diagnosis, we focused on future tools and critically discussed emerging approaches aimed at reducing diagnostic delay. Preserving fertility in endometriosis patients was another debatable aspect of management that was reviewed. Moreover, besides current treatment modalities, potential novel medical therapies that can target underlying mechanisms, provide effective symptom relief, and minimise side effects in endometriotic patients were considered, including hormonal therapies, immunomodulation, and regenerative medicine. Finally, the question of hormonal substitution therapy after radical treatment for endometriosis was debated, weighing the benefits of hormone replacement.

A review of phase II and III drugs for the treatment and management of endometriosis

INTRODUCTION

Endometriosis is an estrogen-dependent disease that gives rise to pelvic pain and infertility. Although estroprogestins and progestins currently stand as the first-line treatments for this condition, demonstrating efficacy in two-thirds of patients, a significant portion of individuals experience only partial relief or symptom recurrence following the cessation of these therapies. The coexistence of superficial, deep endometriosis, and ovarian endometriomas, as three distinct phenotypes with unique pathogenetic and molecular characteristics, may elucidate the current heterogeneous biological response to available therapy.

AREAS COVERED

The objective of this review is to furnish the reader with a comprehensive summary pertaining to phase II-III hormonal treatments for endometriosis.

EXPERT OPINION

Ongoing research endeavors are directed toward the development of novel hormonal options for this benign yet debilitating disease. Among them, oral GnRH antagonists emerge as a noteworthy option, furnishing rapid therapeutic onset without an initial flare-up; these drugs facilitate partial or complete estrogen suppression, and promote prompt ovarian function recovery upon discontinuation, effectively surmounting the limitations associated with previously employed GnRH agonists. Limited evidence supports the use of selective estrogen and progesterone receptor modulators. Consequently, further extensive clinical research is imperative to garner a more profound understanding of innovative targets for novel hormonal options.

Clinical Efficacy, Pharmacokinetics, and Safety of the Available Medical Options in the Treatment of Endometriosis-Related Pelvic Pain: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

In this scoping review, we sought to identify published studies evaluating the drugs currently used in the treatment of endometriosis-related pelvic pain, with reflection on their chemical properties, pharmacokinetics, safety profile, and clinical efficacy.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted with the use of the PubMed and EMBASE electronic databases, focusing on identifying articles published in English between January 1990 and 2023.

RESULTS

Based on the included studies, current therapy options for the treatment of endometriosis-related pain identified and reviewed in this article were: (1) non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; (2) combined oral contraceptive (COCs); (3) progestins; (4) gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists and antagonists; (5) aromatase inhibitors (AIs); (6) selective estrogen and progesterone receptor modulators; and (7) levonorgestrel-intrauterine device.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the published evidence, clinicians should consider NSAIDs, COCs, and progestins as the first-line medical therapies. Compared with second-line options, such as GnRH agonists/antagonists or AIs, the abovementioned first-line options are well tolerated, efficacious, and exhibit lower overall price. Future research priorities should be to identify novel target therapies and to evaluate the effects of available drugs through different routes of administration.

Unmet Needs of Australians in Endometriosis Research: A Qualitative Study of Research Priorities, Drivers, and Barriers to Participation in People with Endometriosis

Background and Objectives: Endometriosis causes significant personal and societal burden. Despite this, research funding lags behind other chronic conditions. Determining where to prioritise these limited funds is therefore vital. Research priorities may also differ between individuals with endometriosis and clinicians/researchers. The aim of this research project is to explore research priorities and factors shaping participation in endometriosis research from the perspective of people with endometriosis in Australia. Materials and Methods: Four focus groups involving 30 people with endometriosis were conducted and analysed using qualitative inductive content analysis. Results: Two categories were developed from the data: unmet research needs and motivators and barriers to participation in endometriosis research. Participants expressed interest in developing non-invasive diagnostic tools and a more multidisciplinary or holistic approach to treatment. Participants urgently desired research on treatment options for symptom management, with many prioritising non-hormonal treatments, including medicinal cannabis and complementary medicine. Others prioritised research on the causes of endometriosis over research on treatments to assist with prevention and eventual cure of the disease. The main drivers for participating in endometriosis research were hope for symptom improvement and a reduction in time to diagnosis. Research design features that were important in supporting participation included ease of access to testing centres (e.g., for blood tests) and sharing test results and automated data collection reminders, with simple stra-tegies to record data measurements. Research incentives for younger people with endometriosis and a broad dissemination of information about research projects was considered likely to increase participant numbers. Barriers included time commitments, a lack of flexibility around research appointments for data collection, travel or work commitments, concerns about the safety of some products, and trying to conceive a child. Conclusions: People with endometriosis were open to participating in research they felt aligned with their needs, with a significant focus on diagnostic tools and symptom relief. However, researchers must co-design approaches to ensure convenience and flexibility for research participation.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues for endometriosis

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is a common gynaecological condition affecting 6 to 11% of reproductive-age women and may cause dyspareunia, dysmenorrhoea, and infertility. One treatment strategy is medical therapy with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHas) to reduce pain due to endometriosis. One of the adverse effects of GnRHas is a decreased bone mineral density. In addition to assessing the effect on pain, quality of life, most troublesome symptom and patients' satisfaction, the current review also evaluated the effect on bone mineral density and risk of adverse effects in women with endometriosis who use GnRHas versus other treatment options.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of GnRH analogues (GnRHas) in the treatment of painful symptoms associated with endometriosis and to determine the effects of GnRHas on bone mineral density of women with endometriosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and the trial registries in May 2022 together with reference checking and contact with study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared GnRHas with other hormonal treatment options, including analgesics, danazol, intra-uterine progestogens, oral or injectable progestogens, gestrinone and also GnRHas compared with no treatment or placebo. Trials comparing GnRHas versus GnRHas in conjunction with add-back therapy (hormonal or non-hormonal) or calcium-regulation agents were also included in this review.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodology as recommended by Cochrane. Primary outcomes are relief of overall pain and the objective measurement of bone mineral density. Secondary outcomes include adverse effects, quality of life, improvement in the most troublesome symptoms and patient satisfaction.  Due to high risk of bias associated with some of the studies, primary analyses of all review outcomes were restricted to studies at low risk of selection bias. Sensitivity analysis including all studies was then performed.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-two studies involving 7355 patients were included. The evidence was very low to low quality: the main limitations of all studies were serious risk of bias due to poor reporting of study methods, and serious imprecision.  Trials comparing GnRHas versus no treatment  We did not identify any studies. Trials comparing GnRHas versus placebo There may be a decrease in overall pain, reported as pelvic pain scores (RR 2.14; 95% CI 1.41 to 3.24, 1 RCT, n = 87, low-certainty evidence), dysmenorrhoea scores (RR 2.25; 95% CI 1.59 to 3.16, 1 RCT, n = 85, low-certainty evidence), dyspareunia scores (RR 2.21; 95% CI 1.39 to 3.54, 1 RCT, n = 59, low-certainty evidence), and pelvic tenderness scores (RR 2.28; 95% CI 1.48 to 3.50, 1 RCT, n = 85, low-certainty evidence) after three months of treatment. We are uncertain of the effect for pelvic induration, based on the results found after three months of treatment (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.79, 1 RCT, n = 81, low-certainty evidence). Besides, treatment with GnRHas may be associated with a greater incidence of hot flushes at three months of treatment (RR 3.08; 95% CI 1.89 to 5.01, 1 RCT, n = 100, low-certainty evidence). Trials comparing GnRHas versus danazol For overall pain, for women treated with either GnRHas or danazol, a subdivision was made between pelvic tenderness, partly resolved and completely resolved. We are uncertain about the effect on relief of overall pain, when a subdivision was made for overall pain (MD -0.30; 95% CI -1.66 to 1.06, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), pelvic pain (MD 0.20; 95% CI -0.26 to 0.66, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), dysmenorrhoea (MD 0.10; 95% CI -0.49 to 0.69, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), dyspareunia (MD -0.20; 95% CI -0.77 to 0.37, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), pelvic induration (MD -0.10; 95% CI -0.59 to 0.39, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), and pelvic tenderness (MD -0.20; 95% CI -0.78 to 0.38, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence) after three months of treatment. For pelvic pain (MD 0.50; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.90, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence) and pelvic induration (MD 0.70; 95% CI 0.21 to 1.19, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), the complaints may decrease slightly after treatment with GnRHas, compared to danazol, for six months of treatment. Trials comparing GnRHas versus analgesics  We did not identify any studies. Trials comparing GnRHas versus intra-uterine progestogens We did not identify any low risk of bias studies. Trials comparing GnRHas versus GnRHas in conjunction with calcium-regulating agents There may be a slight decrease in bone mineral density (BMD) after 12 months treatment with GnRHas, compared to GnRHas in conjunction with calcium-regulating agents for anterior-posterior spine (MD -7.00; 95% CI -7.53 to -6.47, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence) and lateral spine (MD -12.40; 95% CI -13.31 to -11.49, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For relief of overall pain, there may be a slight decrease in favour of treatment with GnRHas compared to placebo or oral or injectable progestogens. We are uncertain about the effect when comparing GnRHas with danazol, intra-uterine progestogens or gestrinone. For BMD, there may be a slight decrease when women are treated with GnRHas, compared to gestrinone. There was a bigger decrease of BMD in favour of GnRHas, compared to GnRHas in conjunction with calcium-regulating agents. However, there may be a slight increase in adverse effects when women are treated with GnRHas, compared to placebo or gestrinone. Due to a very low to low certainty of the evidence, a wide range of outcome measures and a wide range of outcome measurement instruments, the results should be interpreted with caution.

Advances in targeting estrogen synthesis and receptors in patients with endometriosis

INTRODUCTION

Endometriosis is an estrogen-dependent disease on the background of progesterone resistance. Increased estrogen production, low estrogen metabolization, and altered estrogen receptors (ERs) expression contribute to the hyperestrogenic milieu within endometriotic lesions. Since estrogens play a crucial role in the pathogenesis of the disease, inhibition of estrogen production is one of the main targets of available and emerging drugs.

AREAS COVERED

Firstly, we described the molecular alterations responsible for estrogen dependence. Secondly, we reviewed available and emerging treatments that interfere, through central (gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs (GnRH-a), GnRH antagonists) or local mechanisms (aromatase inhibitors (AIs), inhibitors of steroid sulfatase (STS) and hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1 (17β-HSD1)), with estrogen dependence. Finally, we focused on emerging treatments targeting ERs (selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), estrogen receptors agonists, and antagonists).

EXPERT OPINION

Available treatments interfering with estrogen pathways exert a contraceptive effect, have hypoestrogenic side effects, and cannot prevent or definitively treat the disease. Preclinical and animal studies are focusing on emerging drugs targeting ERs in order to overcome limitations of available treatments. These treatments may represent a promising option, as they may produce a more specific inhibition of disease activity within endometriotic implants, avoiding prolonged hypoestrogenic status and limiting systemic side effects.

Hormonal treatments for endometriosis: The endocrine background

Endometriosis is a benign uterine disorder characterized by menstrual pain and infertility, deeply affecting women's health. It is a chronic disease and requires a long term management. Hormonal drugs are currently the most used for the medical treatment and are based on the endocrine pathogenetic aspects. Estrogen-dependency and progesterone-resistance are the key events which cause the ectopic implantation of endometrial cells, decreasing apoptosis and increasing oxidative stress, inflammation and neuroangiogenesis. Endometriotic cells express AMH, TGF-related growth factors (inhibin, activin, follistatin) CRH and stress related peptides. Endocrine and inflammatory changes explain pain and infertility, and the systemic comorbidities described in these patients, such as autoimmune (thyroiditis, arthritis, allergies), inflammatory (gastrointestinal/urinary diseases) and mental health disorders.The hormonal treatment of endometriosis aims to block of menstruation through an inhibition of hypothalamus-pituitary-ovary axis or by causing a pseudodecidualization with consequent amenorrhea, impairing the progression of endometriotic implants. GnRH agonists and antagonists are effective on endometriosis by acting on pituitary-ovarian function. Progestins are mostly used for long term treatments (dienogest, NETA, MPA) and act on multiple sites of action. Combined oral contraceptives are also used for reducing endometriosis symptoms by inhibiting ovarian function. Clinical trials are currently going on selective progesterone receptor modulators, selective estrogen receptor modulators and aromatase inhibitors. Nowadays, all these hormonal drugs are considered the first-line treatment for women with endometriosis to improve their symptoms, to postpone surgery or to prevent post-surgical disease recurrence. This review aims to provide a comprehensive state-of-the-art on the current and future hormonal treatments for endometriosis, exploring the endocrine background of the disease.

The efficacy and safety of triptorelin-therapy following conservative surgery for deep infiltrating endometriosis: A multicenter, prospective, non-interventional study in China

Triptorelin is one of the most commonly used gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists and has been used in the treatment of deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of up to 24 weeks of triptorelin treatment after conservative surgery for DIE.This prospective, non-interventional study was performed in 18 tertiary hospitals in China. Premenopausal women aged ≥18 years treated with triptorelin 3.75 mg once every 28 days for up to 24 weeks after conservative surgery for DIE were included. Endometriosis symptoms were assessed, using a visual analogue scale (0-10 cm) or numerical range (0-10), at baseline (pre-surgery) and routine visits 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months after surgery. Changes in symptom intensity over time were primary outcome measures.A total of 384 women (mean [standard deviation] age, 33.4 [6.2] years) were analyzed. Scores for all symptoms (pelvic pain, dysmenorrhea, ovulation pain, dyspareunia, menorrhagia, metrorrhagia, and gastrointestinal and urinary symptoms) assessed decreased from baseline over 24 months. Cumulative improvement rates in pelvic pain, dysmenorrhoa, ovulation pain, and dyspareunia were 74.4%, 83.6%, 55.1%, and 66.9%, respectively. The 24-month cumulative recurrence rate (≥1 symptom) was 22.2%. The risk of symptom recurrence was higher in patients with ≥2 versus 1 lesion (odds ratio [OR] 2.539; 95% CI: 1.458-4.423; P = .001) and patients with moderate (OR 5.733; 95% CI: 1.623-20.248; P = .007) or severe (OR 8.259; 95% CI: 2.449-27.851; P = .001) pain versus none/mild pain. Triptorelin was well tolerated without serious adverse events.Triptorelin after conservative surgery for DIE improved symptoms over 24 months of follow up. The recurrence rate of symptoms was low and triptorelin was generally well tolerated.Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01942369.

Assessment of Two Formulations of Triptorelin in Chinese Patients with Endometriosis: A Phase 3, Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

This phase 3, randomized, open-label, active-controlled, multicenter study investigated the efficacy of triptorelin pamoate prolonged-release (PR) 3-month in Chinese patients with endometriosis by demonstrating the noninferiority of the 3-month formulation to the standard of care, triptorelin acetate PR 1-month.

METHODS

The trial was conducted in 24 clinical centers in China, and included 300 Chinese women (18-45 years) with endometriosis and regular menstrual cycles who required treatment with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist for 6 months. One group of patients (n = 150) was treated with triptorelin pamoate PR 3-month (15 mg per injection, once every 12 weeks), and the other (n = 150) with triptorelin acetate PR 1-month (3.75 mg per injection, once every 4 weeks). The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with estradiol (E2) concentrations suppressed to castration levels (≤ 184 pmol/L, or 50 pg/mL) after 12 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

Triptorelin pamoate PR 3-month was noninferior to triptorelin acetate PR 1-month for the treatment of endometriosis: over 98% of patients in both groups were chemically castrated at week 12. Both formulations were also equally efficacious in reducing endometriosis-associated pelvic pain, and reducing serum concentrations of E2, luteinizing hormone, and follicle-stimulating hormone over time. No new safety concerns were identified.

CONCLUSION

Triptorelin pamoate PR 3-month is a valid alternative to triptorelin acetate PR 1-month for the treatment of Chinese women with endometriosis, with fewer injections and a potentially lower burden of care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03232281.

Symptom control after different duration of triptorelin treatment following conservative surgery for deep infiltrating endometriosis: Post-hoc analysis of a multicentre, prospective, real-world study

Triptorelin has been used after surgery in deep infiltrating endometriosis. This post-hoc analysis aimed to evaluate symptom control between patients receiving 1-3 triptorelin injections and those receiving 4-6 injections within 24 months of conservative surgery for deep infiltrating endometriosis, in the real-world.Included patients were divided into two groups (received up to 3 months injections in group A, 4-6 injections in group B) based on the numbers of triptorelin (Diphereline, 3.75 mg intramuscular injection once every 28 days for up to 24 weeks) administration. Evolution in score of pain intensity at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months after primary triptorelin administration and symptom improvement/recurrence rates between two groups were compared. Symptoms of pain intensity were assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS) with a range from 0 to 10 cm. An improvement in symptoms was defined as a reduction of at least 3 cm or 3 units from pre-surgery levels.156 patients in group A and 228 in group B. Pain symptom score (mean ± standard deviation) diminished to a nadir at 3-months for group A and 6-months for group B; at 6-months nadir scores were significantly lower in group B (0.9 ± 1.7 vs 0.4 ± 1.2 respectively, P = .002). No significant difference for pain symptom scores between both groups at 24-months (P = .269). The 6-month and 24-month cumulative improvement rates of pain (80.6% vs 89.8%, P = .014 and 82.6% vs 90.7%, P = .025) and gastro-intestinal symptoms (61.0% vs 80.8%, P = .022 and 61.0% vs 83.3%, P = .008) were significantly higher in group B, whereas there was no significant difference in rates of menstrual disorders and urinary symptoms. There is no significant difference for 12-months and 24-months cumulative recurrence rates of total symptoms between both groups (11.3% vs 13.8%, P = .568 and 16.1% vs 26.0%, P = .094).In women with deep infiltrating endometriosis, longer treatment with triptorelin following conservative surgery was associated with a decrease in symptom intensity and greater improvement of pain symptoms in the short-term and greater improvement of gastro-intestinal symptoms in the long-term.Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01942369.

Approaching ovarian endometrioma with medical therapy

Endometriosis is a chronic inflammatory gynecological disorder associated with pelvic pain symptoms and infertility. Ovarian cysts (endometriomas) are the most common localization of endometriosis in the pelvis. Considering non-invasive methods, transvaginal ultrasound has high sensitivity and specificity for endometrioma diagnosis. Laparoscopic removal of endometrioma is related to a damage to the ovarian reserve and should be limited to patients with suspicious cysts or unresponsive to medical treatment. The main goal of medical therapy of symptomatic endometrioma is the control of pain symptoms, while no benefits have been demonstrated in terms of improving fertility rates of women seeking pregnancy. The aim of medical treatment is the inhibition of ovulation, stop of menstruation and achievement of a stable hypo-hormonal milieu. Estroprogestins and progestins are indicated by guidelines as first line medications for symptomatic patients. Several hormonal treatments have been proposed for the treatment of symptomatic endometriomas. In particular, dienogest, a relatively new progestin, has shown promising results. Medical treatment should be conceived as a long-term treatment. Safety, tolerability, a low percentage of side effects and an easy route of administration are essential for patient acceptance and adherence to therapy.

Medical therapy options for endometriosis related pain, which is better? A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Our objective was to assess and rank different pharmacological interventions for relieving endometriosis-related pain. We conducted an online bibliographic search in different databases from their inception until March 2019. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed different medical therapies in the management of endometriosis-related pain. We applied this network meta-analysis (NMA) based on the frequentist approach using statistical package "netmeta" (version 1.0-1) in R software. Our main outcomes were the change in severity of pelvic pain, dysmenorrhea score, non-menstrual pelvic pain score, and dyspareunia score. Overall, 36 RCTs were included in this study (patients no. = 7942). Dienogest (0.94), combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs) (0.782), and elagolix (0.38) were the highest-ranked interventions for reducing the severity of pelvic pain at three months, while at six months, gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues (0.75), levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) (0.73), and dienogest (0.65) were linked to more reduction in pelvic pain. The ranking p-score showed that GnRH analogues was the highest-ranked treatment for reducing dysmenorrhea at 3 months (1.00), while CHCs were the highest-ranked treatment at 6 months (0.97), followed by GnRH analogues (0.89). GnRH analogues (0.63) and elagolix (0.54) at three months while desogestrel (0.94) and CHCs (0.91) at six months were the highest-ranked treatment to reduce non-menstrual pelvic pain. GnRH analogues and elagolix were the highest-ranked pharmacologic therapies for reducing dyspareunia. In conclusion, CHCs, GnRH analogues, progesterone, and elagolix were the best approaches in reducing the pain of endometriosis.

[Endometriosis medical treatment: Hormonal treatment for the management of pain and endometriotic lesions recurrence. CNGOF-HAS Endometriosis Guidelines]

The available literature, from 2006 to 2017, on hormonal treatment has been analysed as a contribution to the HAS-CNGOF task force for the treatment of endometriosis. Available data are heterogeneous and the general level of evidence is moderate. Hormonal treatment is usually offered as the primary option to women suffering from endometriosis. It cannot be used in women willing to conceive. In women who have not been operated, the first line of hormonal treatment includes combined oral contraceptives (COC) and the levonorgestrel-releasing intra uterine system (52mg LNG-IUS). As a second line, desogestrel progestin only pills, etonogestrel implants, GnRH analogs (GnRHa) with add back therapy and dienogest can be offered. Add back therapy should include estrogens to prevent bone loss and improve quality of life, it can be introduced before the third month of treatment to prevent side effects. The literature does not support preoperative hormonal treatment for the sole purpose of reducing complications or recurrence, or facilitating surgical procedures. After surgical treatment, hormonal treatment is recommended to prevent pain recurrence and improve quality of life. COCs or LNG IUS are recommended as a first line. To prevent recurrence of endometriomas COC is advised and maintained as long as tolerance is good in the absence of pregnancy plans. In case of dysmenorrhea, postoperative COC should be used in a continuous scheme. GnRHa are not recommended in the sole purpose of reducing endometrioma recurrence risk.

[Medical treatment of endometriosis: Hormonal treatment of pain, impact on evolution and future perspectives]

CONTEXT

Endometriosis is a chronic painful disease, for which hormone therapy is usually offered as a first line option to women not willing to conceive.

OBJECTIVES

To analyse and synthesize the literature, from 2006 onwards, on pain control, and disease evolution in oemn using combined hormonal contraceptives, progestins and GnRH analogs. Data on other current and future treatment perspectives is included as well.

SOURCES

Medline (Pubmed), the Cochrane Library, and endometriosis treatment recommendations published by European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), National Institute for health and Care Excellence (NICE), American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) and Société des Obstétriciens et Gynécologues du Canada (SOGC).

STUDY SELECTION

Meta-analysis and clinical trials are included.

RESULTS

Study quality is heterogeneous in general. Hormone therapy inconstantly allows pain relief and prevention of endometrioma and rectovaginal wall nodules recurrence. Available molecules and routes of administration as well as risk benefit balance are evaluated. Data on future perspectives are limited to date and do not allow use in routine.

CONCLUSION

Hormonal treatment of endometriosis relies on combined hormonal contraceptives (using different routes of administration), progestins and particularly the levonorgestrel-releasing IUS, and GnRH analogs as a last option, in combination with an add-back therapy. Promising alternatives are currently under preclinical and clinical evaluation.

A self-administered questionnaire to measure the painful symptoms of endometriosis: Results of a modified DELPHI survey of patients and physicians

PURPOSE

To develop a questionnaire based on patients' verbal descriptors, to measure the painful symptoms of endometriosis.

METHODS

We performed a two-round modified DELPHI procedure mixing endometriosis patients and physicians to select a set of statements to describe the painful symptoms of endometriosis. Each panelist rated each statement based on diagnosis validity and clarity. The clinicians were experts in endometriosis management selected from various geographic regions in France. Patients were women with surgically confirmed endometriosis who volunteered from a patient association and from the recruitment of the participating physicians. The first round questions were derived from words and phrases in narratives of pain by endometriosis patients.

RESULTS

Overall, 76 experts were invited, and of these 56 (74%), comprising 33 patients and 23 gynecologists, responded to the first round questionnaire, and 40 (71.4%) to the second round. Among the 48 statements assessed in the first-round questionnaire, 11 were selected after completion of the two round DELPHI procedure. After discussion and rewording of some items, a total of 21 questions were selected during a final face-to-face meeting. The content of the final questionnaire is organized according to four dimensions: (i) spontaneous pelvic pain and dysmenorrhea, (ii) dyspareunia, (iii) painful bowel symptoms, (iv) and other symptoms. We also provide an English (UK) version produced using several steps of translation and back-translation.

CONCLUSIONS

The questionnaire has content validity to measure the subjective experiences of patients with painful endometriosis and can provide a solid basis on which to develop an efficient patient-centered outcome to measure the painful symptoms in therapeutic or in diagnostic studies of endometriosis.

Analogs of Luteinizing Hormone-Releasing Hormone in the Treatment of Endometriosis

Agonists of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) induce a reversible hypoestrogenic state through the down-regulation of LHRH receptors and desensitization of the pituitary. Since endometrial implants are estrogen sensitive, LHRH agonists have frequently been used for medical treatment of endometriosis. Nowadays, LHRH agonists can be considered in general as a second-line medical treatment for endometriosis-related symptoms, as oral therapy with dienogest is as effective and has fewer side effects. However, therapy with LHRH agonists for 3-6 months prior to in vitro fertilization remains the treatment of choice in patients with endometriosis, as it significantly increases pregnancy rates.

LHRH agonists are used prior to surgery and as an adjuvant after an operation to prevent recurrence or prolong disease-free intervals. Adverse effects of LHRH agonists are due to hypoestrogenism and include hot flushes, vaginal dryness, loss of libido, sleep disturbances and a diminished bone density which limits the duration of their administration to 6 months. For long-term treatment, add-back of estrogen and/or progestin,/or progestin only with or without bisphosphonates, can be used, but existing studies only cover a 12-month period of treatment.

LHRH antagonists competitively block the pituitary receptors for LHRH. Consequently, a partial pharmacological hypophysectomy with a reduction of the estrogen levels to a desired level is possible if LHRH antagonists are adequately dosed. As endometriotic implants require relatively high levels of estrogen, partially lower plasma levels of estrogens are sufficient to prevent the loss of bone density. A long-term treatment without add-back therapy is also possible.

Measures used to assess chronic pelvic pain in randomized controlled clinical trials: a systematic review

RATIONALE

Many types of pain assessment are available to researchers carrying out clinical trials in chronic pelvic pain (CPP), ranging from a single-item scale to multidimensional inventories.

AIM

Our objective was to investigate which assessments of pain are more commonly used in clinical trials on CPP.

METHOD

We have reviewed articles published between 1991 and 2014. A total of 74 studies out of 1299 original research articles reviewed met the selection criteria by containing at least one method of pain assessment. The selected studies were classified according to the dimensions of pain evaluated, the type of scale and the descriptors used.

RESULTS

The instruments most frequently used were single-item VAS and Biberoglu and Behrman pain score, while multidimensional inventories were used in few studies. The results of clinical studies in CPP are more frequently based on one-dimensional measurements. Valuable results from clinical studies in CPP might have been omitted because of incomplete outcome measurements.

CONCLUSION

We believe the authors of clinical studies should report their results in a comprehensive way including in the outcomes of the measurement of one-dimensional and multidimensional pain characteristics.

Triptorelin for the treatment of endometriosis

INTRODUCTION

Over the past 30 years, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRH-a) have been used to induce a hypoestrogenic status in women with endometriosis with the aim to cause an improvement in pain symptoms similar to that observed after menopause. Triptorelin is one of the most commonly used GnRH-a.

AREAS COVERED

This review offers an explanation of the mechanism of action, of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of triptorelin and gives the readers a complete overview of the studies on the clinical efficacy, tolerability and safety of this agent in patients with endometriosis.

EXPERT OPINION

The studies reviewed in the current manuscript demonstrate the efficacy of triptorelin in improving pain symptoms caused by endometriosis. Further, this effect is confirmed by the reduction in the volume of the endometriotic nodules during treatment. Future research should evaluate whether the pre-operative administration of triptorelin prior to surgical excision of endometriomas may be useful in preserving the ovarian reserve.

Systematic review of endometriosis pain assessment: how to choose a scale?

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies concerning endometriosis and pain have been reported. However, there is no consensus on the best method to evaluate pain in endometriosis and many scales have been used. Moreover, there are only a few descriptions of minimal clinically important differences after treatment (MCID) to evaluate variations in pain. In our study, we aim to identify pain scales used in endometriosis pain treatment, to address their strong and weak points and to define which would be the ideal scale to help clinicians and researchers to evaluate endometriosis-related pain.

METHODS

A search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was carried out for publications in English, French or Portuguese from 1980 to December 2012, for the words: endometriosis, treatment, pain. Studies were selected if they studied an endometriosis treatment and a pain scale was specified. A quantitative and a qualitative analysis of each scale was performed to define strong and weak points of each scale (systematic registration number: CRD42013005336).

RESULTS

A total of 736 publications were identified. After excluding duplications and applying inclusion criteria 258 studies remained. We found that the visual analog scale (VAS) is the most frequently used scale. Both VAS and the numerical rating scale (NRS) show a good balance between strong and weak points in comparison with others such as the Biberoglu and Behrman scale. Concerning MCID, only VAS, NRS and Brief Pain Inventory scales have reported MCID and, among these, only VAS MCID has been studied in endometriosis patients (VAS MCID = 10 mm). Adding the Clinical Global Impression score (CGI) to the pain scale allows calculation of the MCID.

CONCLUSIONS

When using pain scales their strengths and weaknesses must be known and included in the analysis. VAS is the most frequently used pain scale and, together with NRS, seems the best adapted for endometriosis pain measurement. The use of VAS or NRS for each type of typical pain related to endometriosis (dysmenorrhea, deep dyspareunia and non-menstrual chronic pelvic pain), combined with the CGI and a quality-of-life scale will provide both clinicians and researchers with tools to evaluate treatment response.

The Place of Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonists in the Management of Endometriosis

Purpose

This review focuses on the use of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, a typically marginalized class of drugs, and describes their role in the management of endometriosis, with special interest in 4 regions: Western Europe, Eastern Europe, the Middle East and China.

Methods

The authors met in Dubai in November 2012 for a consensus meeting on the use of GnRH agonists in the 4 regions. The meeting was based on a review of the published regional guidelines for endometriosis and a selective literature search of articles published in the past 5 years that focused on the use of GnRH agonists in endometriosis.

Results

The guidelines place GnRH agonists as a second-line option for the management of pain in deep infiltrating endometriosis and to improve fertility in women planning to undergo in vitro fertilization. Published articles and personal evidence presented at the meeting suggest that surgery for endometriomas should be delayed as long as possible to conserve ovarian function and that GnRH agonist therapy after surgery may reduce their recurrence. However, although add-back therapy is advocated with the use of GnRH agonists, there is no consensus on when this should be started.

Conclusions

There are important regional differences in cultural sensitivities to diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis, as well as a diverging approach to surgery. Given the limitations and conflicts in the diagnosis and management of endometriosis, it is essential that the available drugs, including the GnRH agonists, are used in the most appropriate settings.

Will GnRH antagonists assist in the treatment of benign gynaecological diseases?

While GnRH agonists have become well-established tools for preoperative treatment of uterine fibroids or postoperative treatment in endometriosis for 3-6 months, GnRH antagonists seem to offer important advantages due to their specific pharmacological mode of action. Avoiding any flare-up effect, it seems to be possible to reduce treatment time to about only 2-4 weeks in the case of fibroids to obtain a clinically relevant reduction in size. Furthermore, due to the classic competitive receptor blockade induced by GnRH antagonists, it is feasible to preserve residual oestradiol secretion for a period of 8 weeks in patients with endometriosis. Endometriosis patients undergoing this treatment reported a symptom-free period, with no signs of mood changes, hot flushes, loss of libido, vaginal dryness or other symptoms. Serum oestradiol oscillated around a mean level of 50 pg/ml during therapy. Sequential administration of the GnRH antagonist cetrorelix (Cetrotide), in a 3 mg dosage once weekly over 8 weeks in the case of endometriosis or administration every 4th day for a time span of 2-4 weeks for fibroids, creates a new opportunity for medical treatment. Although 3 mg of cetrorelix acetate obviously acts as an intermediate depot preparation, results obtained so far are very preliminary.

Aberrant expression of apoptosis-related molecules in endometriosis: a possible mechanism underlying the pathogenesis of endometriosis

Endometriosis, a disease affecting 3% to 10% of women of reproductive age, is characterized by the ectopic growth of endometrial tissue under the influence of estrogen. It is also becoming recognized as a condition in which ectopic endometrial cells exhibit abnormal proliferative and apoptotic regulation in response to appropriate stimuli. Apoptosis plays a critical role in maintaining tissue homeostasis and represents a normal function to eliminate excess or dysfunctional cells. Accumulated evidence suggests that, in healthy women, endometrial cells expelled during menstruation do not survive in ectopic locations because of programmed cell death, while decreased apoptosis may lead to the ectopic survival and implantation of these cells, resulting in the development of endometriosis. Both the inability of endometrial cells to transmit a "death" signal and the ability of endometrial cells to avoid cell death have been associated with increased expression of antiapoptotic factors and decreased expression of preapoptotic factors. Further investigations may elucidate the role of apoptosis-associated molecules in the pathogenesis of endometriosis. Medical treatment with apoptosis-inducing agents may be novel and promising therapeutic strategy for endometriosis.

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues for pain associated with endometriosis

EDITORIAL NOTE

See https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37341141/ for a more recent review that covers this topic and has superseded this review.

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is a common gynaecological condition, characterised by the presence of endometrial tissue in sites other than the uterine cavity (excluding adenomyosis) that frequently presents with pain. The gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHas) comprise one intervention that has been offered for pain relief in pre-menopausal women. GnRHas can be administered intranasally, by subcutaneous, or intramuscular injection. They are thought to result in down regulation of the pituitary and induce a hypogonadotrophic hypogonadal state.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of GnRHas in the treatment of the painful symptoms associated with endometriosis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group specialist register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PSYCInfo and CINAHL were conducted in April 2010 to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs of GnRHas as treatment for pain associated with endometriosis versus no treatment, placebo, danazol, intra-uterine progestagens, or other GnRHas were included. Trials using add-back therapy, oral contraceptives, surgical intervention, GnRH antagonists or complementary therapies were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Quality assessment and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. The primary outcome was pain relief. Relative risk was used as the measure of effect for dichotomous data. For continuous data, mean differences or standardised mean differences were used.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty one trials (n=4935 women) were included. The evidence suggested that GnRHas were more effective at symptom relief than no treatment/placebo. There was no statistically significant difference between GnRHas and danazol for dysmenorrhoea RR 0.98 (95%CI 0.92 to 1.04; P = 0.53). This equates to 3 fewer women per 1000 (95%CI 12 to 6) with symptomatic pain relief in the GnRHa group. More adverse events were reported in the GnRHa group. There was a benefit in overall resolution for GnRHas RR1.10 (95%CI 1.01 to 1.21, P=0.03) compared with danazol. There was no statistically significant difference in overall pain between GnRHas and levonorgestrel SMD -0.25 (95%CI -0.60 to 0.10, P=0.46). Evidence was limited on optimal dosage or duration of treatment for GnRHas. No route of administration appeared superior to another.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

GnRHas appear to be more effective at relieving pain associated with endometriosis than no treatment/placebo. There was no evidence of a difference in pain relief between GnRHas and danazol although more adverse events reported in the GnRHa groups. There was no evidence of a difference in pain relief between GnRHas and levonorgestrel and no studies compared GnRHas with analgesics.

Current pharmacotherapy for endometriosis

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Medical therapy is the most commonly used treatment for endometriosis. In particular, the administration of hormonal therapies aims to improve symptoms with minimal adverse effects.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

Observational and randomized studies evaluating the efficacy of medical therapy on symptoms associated with endometriosis were reviewed. We searched Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library up to December 2009.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

The reader will obtain information on the available medical therapies used to treat endometriosis-related symptoms either after surgery or as an alternative to the surgical excision of endometriosis. The effectiveness of therapies, the dose of drugs, the length of treatment and the adverse effects are examined.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Medical therapies can efficaciously reduce the severity of pain symptoms caused by endometriosis. Recurrence of symptoms is common after discontinuation of medical therapies; therefore, the choice of the therapy should be based not only on the improvements of symptoms but also on the potential adverse effects and patients' satisfaction.

Pharmacological treatment of endometriosis: experience with aromatase inhibitors

Current treatment of endometriosis is mainly based on surgery and ovarian suppressive agents. In the last 10 years, it has been demonstrated that aromatase P450, a key enzyme for estrogen biosynthesis, may have a pathogenic role in endometriosis because it is aberrantly expressed in endometriotic implants and in eutopic endometrium of women with endometriosis. Therefore, inhibition of aromatase activity may represent a new therapeutic option for endometriosis. Case reports and observational studies have shown that pain symptoms caused by endometriosis quickly improve after administration of aromatase inhibitors. Limited data are available on the long-term course of pain symptoms after completion of treatment with aromatase inhibitors; however, some recent studies suggest that symptoms may recur at short-term follow-up. A range of results are reported on the effects of aromatase inhibitors on endometriotic lesions, with some authors describing improvements and other authors reporting persistence of pelvic lesions at second-look laparoscopy after treatment. No severe adverse effect has been reported during treatment with aromatase inhibitors both in pre- and postmenopausal women. On the basis of the available data, administration of aromatase inhibitors should now be offered only to the small number of women who have severe pain despite previous surgical and hormonal therapies. Further research in the form of randomized controlled trials will be required before recommending the routine use of these agents.

Endometriosis: current therapies and new pharmacological developments

Endometriosis is a chronic inflammatory condition that is responsive to management with steroids. The establishment of a steady hormonal environment and inhibition of ovulation can temporarily suppress ectopic implants and reduce inflammation as well as associated pain symptoms. In terms of pharmacological management, the currently available agents are not curative, and treatment often needs to be continued for years or until pregnancy is desired. Similar efficacy has been observed from the various therapies that have been investigated for endometriosis. Accordingly, combined oral contraceptives and progestins, based on their favourable safety profile, tolerability and cost, should be considered as first-line options, as an alternative to surgery and for post-operative adjuvant use. In situations where progestins and oral contraceptives prove ineffective, are poorly tolerated or are contraindicated, gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues, danazol or gestrinone may be used. Future therapeutic options for managing endometriosis must compare favourably against existing agents before they can be considered for inclusion into current practice. Finally, as reproductive prognosis is not ameliorated by medical treatment, it is not indicated for women seeking conception.

The effect of surgery for symptomatic endometriosis: the other side of the story

BACKGROUND

Surgery is often considered the best treatment option in women with symptomatic endometriosis. However, extent and duration of the therapeutic benefit are still poorly defined.

METHODS

The best available evidence on surgery for endometriosis-associated pain has been reviewed to estimate the effect size of interventions in the most frequently encountered clinical conditions.

RESULTS

Methodological drawbacks limit considerably the validity of observational, non-comparative studies on the effect of laparoscopy for stage I-IV disease. As indicated by the results of three RCTs, the absolute benefit increase of destruction of lesions compared with diagnostic only operation in terms of proportion of women reporting pain relief was between 30% and 40% after short follow-up periods. The effect size tended to decrease with time and the re-operation rate, based on long-term follow-up studies, was as high as 50%. In most case series on excisional surgery for rectovaginal endometriosis, substantial short-term pain relief was experienced by approximately 70-80% of the subjects who continued the study. However, at 1 year follow-up, approximately 50% of the women needed analgesics or hormonal treatments. Major complications were observed in 3-10% of the patients. Medium-term recurrence of lesions was observed in approximately 20% of the cases, and around 25% of the women underwent repetitive surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain recurrence and re-operation rates after conservative surgery for symptomatic endometriosis are high and probably underestimated. Clinicians and patients should be aware that the expected benefit is operator-dependent.

[Endometriosis and pelvic pain: epidemiological evidence of the relationship and implications]

The relationship between chronic pelvic pain symptoms and endometriosis is unclear because painful symptoms are frequent in women without this pathology, and because asymptomatic forms of endometriosis exist. Our comprehensive review attempts to clarify the links between the characteristics of lesions and the semiology of chronic pelvic pain symptoms. Based on randomized trials against placebo, endometriosis appears to be responsible for chronic pelvic pain symptoms in more than half of confirmed cases. A causal association between severe dysmenorrhoea and endometriosis is very probable. This association is independent of the macroscopic type of the lesions or their anatomical locations and may be related to recurrent cyclic microbleeding in the implants. Endometriosis-related adhesions may also cause severe dysmenorrhoea. There are histological and physiopathological arguments for the responsibility of deeply infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) in severe chronic pelvic pain symptoms. DIE-related pain may be in relation with compression or infiltration of nerves in the subperitoneal pelvic space by the implants. The painful symptoms caused by DIE present particular characteristics, being specific to involvement of precise anatomical locations (severe deep dyspareunia, painful defecation) or organs (functional urinary tract signs, bowel signs). They can thus be described as "location indicating pain". A precise semiological analysis of the chronic pelvic pain symptoms characteristics is useful for the diagnosis and therapeutic.

Uterine ultrasonographic changes during endometriosis treatment: a comparison between levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices and a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist

We compared the effects of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices (LNG-IUD) and a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) on uterine volume, uterine arteries pulsatility index (PI) and endometrial thickness before and after six months of endometriosis treatment. Sixty women aged 18-40 y were allocated randomly to one of two groups: LNG-IUDs were inserted in 30 women, and GnRHa monthly injections were performed on the other 30. All 60 women were submitted to transvaginal 2-D ultrasound scans on the day that the treatment started and then six months later. Measurements of uterine arteries PI, uterine volume and endometrial thickness were performed at both evaluations. The use of LNG-IUDs significantly decreased endometrial thickness (pre = 6.08 +/- 3.00 mm, post = 2.7 +/- 0.98 mm; mean +/- SD), as did the use of GnRHa (pre = 6.96 +/- 3.82 mm, post = 3.23 +/- 2.32 mm). The uterine volume decreased in the GnRHa group (pre = 86.67 +/- 28.38 cm(3), post = 55.27 +/- 25.52 cm(3)), but not in the LNG-IUD group (pre = 75.77 +/- 20.88 cm(3), post = 75.97 +/- 26.62 cm(3)). Uterine arteries PI increased for both groups; however, the increase was higher in the GnRHa group (0.99 +/- 0.84 vs. 0.38 +/- 0.84, p = 0.007; PI increase in GnRHa and in LNG-IUD groups, respectively). In conclusion, levonorgestrel released directly onto the endometrium by the LNG-IUD induced smaller uterine changes than did the hypoestrogenism induced by GnRHa. Nevertheless, both promoted similar effects on endometrial thickness.

Ovulation suppression for endometriosis

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is the finding of endometrial glands or stroma in sites other than the uterine cavity. Endometriosis appears to be an oestrogen dependent condition. This hormonal dependency has prompted the therapeutic use of ovulation suppression agents, in an effort to improve subsequent fertility.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of ovulation suppression agents, including danazol, progestins and oral contraceptives, in the treatment of endometriosis-associated subfertility in improving pregnancy outcomes including live birth.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Sub-fertility Group's specialised register of trials (searched October 5th, 2007) the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2007), MEDLINE (1966-October 2007), EMBASE (1980 - October 2007) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing an ovulation suppression agent with placebo or no treatment, or a suppressive agent with danazol or a GnRH with oral contraception in women with endometriosis. A total of twenty three RCTs comparing an ovulation suppression agent with placebo or no treatment, or a suppressive agent with danazol or a GnRH with oral contraception were identified.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed quality. We contacted study authors for additional information. Quality was assessed by of method of randomization,allocation concealment, blinding, completeness of follow-up, presence or absence of crossover and co-intervention. 2 x 2 tables were generated for all relevant outcomes. Odds ratios were generated using the Peto modified Mantel-Haenszel technique. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I(2) test of heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis was conducted on those couples clearly identifiable as infertile or wanting to conceive.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty four trials were included. The odds ratio for pregnancy following ovulation suppression versus placebo or no treatment for all women randomised was 0.79 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.14), P = 0.21 and 0.80 (95% CI 0.51 to 1.24), P = 0.32 respectively for subfertile couples only despite the use of a variety of suppression agents. There was no evidence of benefit from the treatment. The common odds ratio for pregnancy following all agents versus danazol for all women randomised was 1.38 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.82), P = 0.02 and OR 1.37 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.99), P = 0.10 for subfertile couples only. When GnRHa and danazol were directly compared, OR was 1.45 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.95) P = 0.01 for all women randomised and OR 1.63( 95% CI 1.12 to 2.37), P = 0.01 for subfertile couples only in favour of GnRH. No effect was observed for GnRH compared with oral contraception; OR 0.99 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.89), P = 0.98 for all women randomised and OR 0.79 ( 95% CI 0.37 to 1.69), P = 0.55. In all analyses the data were statistically homogeneous (I(2)=0%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence of benefit in the use of ovulation suppression in subfertile women with endometriosis who wish to conceive.

Application of the nuclear factor-kappaB inhibitor BAY 11-7085 for the treatment of endometriosis: an in vitro study

Most of the current medical treatments for endometriosis aim to downregulate estrogen activity. However, a high recurrence rate after medical treatment has been the most significant problem. BAY 11-7085, a soluble inhibitor of NK-kappaB activation, has been shown to inhibit cell proliferation and induce apoptosis of a variety of cells. To examine the potential application of BAY 11-7085 in the treatment of endometriosis, we investigated the effects of this agent on the cell proliferation and apoptosis of cultured ovarian endometriotic cyst stromal cells (ECSCs) by a modified methylthiazole tetrazolium assay, a 5-bromo-2'-deoxyuridine incorporation assay, and internucleosomal DNA fragmentation assays. The effect of BAY 11-7085 on the cell cycle of ECSCs was also determined by flow cytometry. The expression of apoptosis-related molecules was examined in ECSCs with Western blot analysis. BAY 11-7085 significantly inhibited the cell proliferation and DNA synthesis of ECSCs and induced apoptosis and the G0/G1 phase cell cycle arrest of these cells. Additionally, downregulation of the B-cell lymphoma/leukemia-2 (Bcl-2) and Bcl-X(L) expression with simultaneous activation of caspase-3, -8, and -9 was observed in ECSCs after treatment with BAY 11-7085. These results suggest that BAY 11-7085 induces apoptosis of ECSCs by suppressing antiapoptotic proteins, and that caspase-3-, -8-, and -9-mediated cascades are involved in this mechanism. Therefore, BAY 11-7085 could be used as a therapeutic agent for the treatment of endometriosis.

GnRH analogs: options for endometriosis-associated pain treatment

While none of the currently available treatment options for endometriosis pain resolved the underlying disease process, there are growing numbers of medical alternatives available. Medical options include the GnRH agonists and antagonists. Review of these treatments in the management of endometriosis pain and the insight often to the etiology of endometriosis are presented for discussion.

Management of the pain associated with endometriosis: an update of the painful problems

Endometriosis is a condition characterized by ectopic endometrial tissues located outside of the uterus, most commonly found on the pelvic peritoneum or ovary. Endometriosis, which occurs in 7-10% of women in the general population and 71-87% of women with chronic pelvic pain, is associated with dysmenorrhea, chronic pelvic pain, and infertility. There is considerable debate about the effectiveness of various interventions for endometriosis. This review discusses the benefits and drawbacks of pharmacologic and surgical treatments for the pain associated with endometriosis. Laparoscopic surgery has been demonstrated to relieve the pain associated with endometriosis. Hormonal therapies, such as gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues or the weak androgen danazol, have also been effective at relieving the pain associated with endometriosis. Oral contraceptives appear to be as effective as GnRH analogues for pain relief. Although both surgical and pharmacologic treatments have been effective for relief of the pain associated with endometriosis, the recurrence rate remains significant. The management of pain associated with endometriosis has thus not been satisfied. Larger unified clinical trials are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of new treatments in managing the pain associated with endometriosis.

A randomized study comparing triptorelin or expectant management following conservative laparoscopic surgery for symptomatic stage III-IV endometriosis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the role of adjuvant treatment with gonadotropin-releasing-hormone agonist (GnRHa) following conservative surgical treatment of endometriosis.

STUDY DESIGN

Sixty patients in the reproductive age (mean age 28.6 years), with symptomatic stages III and IV endometriosis following laparoscopic surgery and without previous hormonal treatment were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, controlled trial to compare the effects of 3-month treatment with triptorelin depot-3.75 i.m. (30 patients) versus expectant management using placebo injection (30 patients).

RESULTS

Six patients (one in triptorelin group and five in placebo group) were lost at follow-up, the remaining 54 were suitable for analysis. Pelvic pain persistence or recurrence, endometrioma relapses and pregnancy rate were evaluated during a 5-year follow-up. The results of 29 cases treated with triptorelin and 25 that received placebo did not show significant differences in pain recurrence (P=1, RR=0.94, 95% CI=0.57-1.55), endometrioma relapse (P=0.67, RR=1.29, 95% CI=0.66-2.50), and pregnancy rate in infertile women (P=0.80, RR=0.81, 95% CI=0.37-1.80). Curves of time of pain recurrence and pregnancy during 5-year follow-up did not show significant differences between the two groups (P=0.79 and P=0.51, respectively, using Mantel-Haenzsel logrank test).

CONCLUSION

Triptorelin treatment after operative laparoscopy for stage III/IV endometriosis does not appear to be superior to expectant management in terms of prevention of symptoms recurrence and endometrioma relapse, and has no influence on pregnancy rate in endometriosis-associated infertility.

β-Hydroxyisovalerylshikonin induces apoptosis and G0/G1 cell-cycle arrest of endometriotic stromal cells: a preliminary in vitro study

BACKGROUND

Most of the current medical treatments for endometriosis aim to down-regulate the estrogen activity. However, a high recurrence rate after medical treatments has been the most significant problem. Beta-hydroxyisovalerylshikonin (beta-HIVS) is an ATP non-competitive inhibitor of protein-tyrosine kinases and is considered an apoptosis-inducing agent. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of beta-HIVS on the proliferation, cell cycle and apoptosis of endometriotic stromal cells.

METHODS

We investigated the effects of beta-HIVS on cultured ovarian endometriotic cyst stromal cells (ECSC) by a modified methylthiazoletetrazolium (MTT) assay, a 5-bromo-2'-deoxyuridine (BrdU) incorporation assay and internucleosomal DNA fragmentation assays. The effect of beta-HIVS on the cell cycle of ECSC was determined by flow cytometry. The expression of apoptosis-related molecules was examined in ECSC using western blot analysis.

RESULTS

Beta-HIVS significantly inhibited the proliferation and DNA synthesis of ECSC and induced apoptosis and G0/G1 phase cell-cycle arrest of these cells. Down-regulation of the B-cell lymphoma/leukaemia-2 (Bcl-2) expression with the activation of caspase-3, caspase-8 and caspase-9 was observed in ECSC after beta-HIVS treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that beta-HIVS induces apoptosis of ECSC by suppressing anti-apoptotic proteins. Although our present findings are preliminary, beta-HIVS could potentially be a therapeutic agent for the treatment of endometriosis.

Bufalin induces apoptosis and the G0/G1 cell cycle arrest of endometriotic stromal cells: a promising agent for the treatment of endometriosis

Most of the current medical treatments for endometriosis aim to down-regulate the estrogen activity. However, a high recurrence rate after medical treatments has been the most significant problem. Bufalin is a major digoxin-like immunoreactive component isolated from the skin and parotid venom glands of toad and is considered an apoptosis-inducing agent. To apply bufalin to the medical treatment of endometriosis, we investigated the effects of this agent on the cell proliferation and apoptosis of cultured ovarian endometriotic cyst stromal cells (ECSC) by a modified methylthiazoletetrazolium (MTT) assay, a 5-bromo-2'-deoxyuridine (BrdU) incorporation assay and internucleosomal DNA fragmentation assays. The effect of bufalin on the cell cycle of ECSC was also determined by flow cytometry. The expression of apoptosis- and cell cycle-related molecules was also examined in ECSC using Western blot analysis. Bufalin significantly inhibited the cell proliferation and DNA synthesis of ECSC and induced apoptosis and the G0/G1 phase cell cycle arrest of these cells. The down-regulation of the cyclin A, Bcl-2, and Bcl-X(L) expression with the simultaneous up-regulation of the p21 and Bax expression, and caspase-9 activation was observed in ECSC after bufalin treatment. It is suggested that bufalin induces apoptosis of ECSC by simultaneously suppressing anti-apoptotic proteins and inducing pro-apoptotic proteins. Caspase-9-mediated cascade is involved in this mechanism. Therefore, bufalin could be used as a therapeutic agent for the treatment of endometriosis.

Endometriosis and pelvic pain: epidemiological evidence of the relationship and implications

The relationship between chronic pelvic pain symptoms and endometriosis is unclear because painful symptoms are frequent in women without this pathology, and because asymptomatic forms of endometriosis exist. Our comprehensive review attempts to clarify the links between the characteristics of lesions and the semiology of chronic pelvic pain symptoms. Based on randomized trials against placebo, endometriosis appears to be responsible for chronic pelvic pain symptoms in more than half of confirmed cases. A causal association between severe dysmenorrhoea and endometriosis is very probable. This association is independent of the macroscopic type of the lesions or their anatomical locations and may be related to recurrent cyclic micro-bleeding in the implants. Endometriosis-related adhesions may also cause severe dysmenorrhoea. There are histological and physiopathological arguments for the responsibility of deeply infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) in severe chronic pelvic pain symptoms. DIE-related pain may be in relation with compression or infiltration of nerves in the sub-peritoneal pelvic space by the implants. The painful symptoms caused by DIE present particular characteristics, being specific to involvement of precise anatomical locations (severe deep dyspareunia, painful defecation) or organs (functional urinary tract signs, bowel signs). They can thus be described as location indicating pain. A precise semiological analysis of the chronic pelvic pain symptoms characteristics is useful for the diagnosis and therapeutic management of endometriosis in a context of pain.