-
American Journal of Hematology Jan 2021Primary myelofibrosis (PMF) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) characterized by stem cell-derived clonal myeloproliferation that is often but not always accompanied... (Review)
Review
DISEASE OVERVIEW
Primary myelofibrosis (PMF) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) characterized by stem cell-derived clonal myeloproliferation that is often but not always accompanied by JAK2, CALR, or MPL mutations. Additional disease features include bone marrow reticulin/collagen fibrosis, aberrant inflammatory cytokine expression, anemia, hepatosplenomegaly, extramedullary hematopoiesis (EMH), constitutional symptoms, cachexia, leukemic progression, and shortened survival.
DIAGNOSIS
Bone marrow morphology is the primary basis for diagnosis. Presence of JAK2, CALR, or MPL mutation, expected in around 90% of the patients, is supportive but not essential for diagnosis; these mutations are also prevalent in the closely related MPNs, namely polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET). The 2016 World Health Organization classification system distinguishes "prefibrotic" from "overtly fibrotic" PMF; the former might mimic ET in its presentation. Furthermore, approximately 15% of patients with ET or PV might progress into a PMF-like phenotype (post-ET/PV MF) during their clinical course.
ADVERSE MUTATIONS
SRSF2, ASXL1, and U2AF1-Q157 mutations predict inferior survival in PMF, independent of each other and other risk factors. RAS/CBL mutations predicted resistance to ruxolitinib therapy.
ADVERSE KARYOTYPE
Very high risk abnormalities include -7, inv (3), i(17q), +21, +19, 12p-, and 11q-.
RISK STRATIFICATION
Two new prognostic systems for PMF have recently been introduced: GIPSS (genetically-inspired prognostic scoring system) and MIPSS70+ version 2.0 (MIPSSv2; mutation- and karyotype-enhanced international prognostic scoring system). GIPSS is based exclusively on mutations and karyotype. MIPSSv2 includes, in addition, clinical risk factors. GIPSS features four and MIPSSv2 five risk categories.
RISK-ADAPTED THERAPY
Observation alone is advised for MIPSSv2 "low" and "very low" risk disease (estimated 10-year survival 56%-92%); allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (AHSCT) is the preferred treatment for "very high" and "high" risk disease (estimated 10-year survival 0%-13%); treatment-requiring patients with intermediate-risk disease (estimated 10-year survival 30%) are best served by participating in clinical trials. In non-transplant candidates, conventional treatment for anemia includes androgens, prednisone, thalidomide, and danazol; for symptomatic splenomegaly, hydroxyurea and ruxolitinib; and for constitutional symptoms, ruxolitinib. Fedratinib, another JAK2 inhibitor, has now been FDA-approved for use in ruxolitinib failures. Splenectomy is considered for drug-refractory splenomegaly and involved field radiotherapy for non-hepatosplenic EMH and extremity bone pain.
NEW DIRECTIONS
A number of new agents, alone or in combination with ruxolitinib, are currently under investigation for MF treatment (ClinicalTrials.gov); preliminary results from some of these clinical trials were presented at the 2020 ASH annual meeting and highlighted in the current document.
Topics: Disease-Free Survival; Humans; Mutation; Primary Myelofibrosis; Risk Assessment; Survival Rate
PubMed: 33197049
DOI: 10.1002/ajh.26050 -
Journal of Investigational Allergology... Feb 2021Hereditary angioedema due to C1-esterase inhibitor deficiency (C1-INH-HAE) is a rare autosomal dominant disease. In the last decade, new drugs and new indications for... (Review)
Review
Hereditary angioedema due to C1-esterase inhibitor deficiency (C1-INH-HAE) is a rare autosomal dominant disease. In the last decade, new drugs and new indications for old drugs have played a role in the management of C1-INH-HAE. This review examines current therapy for C1-INH-HAE and provides a brief summary of drugs that are under development. Increased knowledge of the pathophysiology of C1-INH-HAE has been crucial for advances in the field, with inhibition of the kallikrein-kinin system (plasma kallikrein, activated factor XII) as a key area in the discovery of new drugs, some of which are already marketed for treatment of C1-INH-HAE. Pharmacological treatment is based on 3 pillars: treatment of acute angioedema attacks (on-demand treatment), short-term (preprocedure) prophylaxis, and long-term prophylaxis. The 4 drugs that are currently available for the treatment of acute angioedema attacks (purified plasma-derived human C1 esterase inhibitor concentrate, icatibant acetate, ecallantide, recombinant human C1 esterase inhibitor) are all authorized for self-administration, except ecallantide. Purified plasma-derived human C1 esterase inhibitor concentrate is the treatment of choice for short-term prophylaxis. Tranexamic acid, danazol, intravenous and subcutaneous nanofiltered purified plasma-derived human C1 esterase inhibitor concentrate, and lanadelumab can be used for long-term prophylaxis. New drugs are being investigated, mainly as long-term prophylaxis, and are aimed at blocking the kallikrein-kinin system by means of antiprekallikrein, antikallikrein, and anti-activated FXII action.
Topics: Angioedemas, Hereditary; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Bradykinin; Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein; Humans; Kallikrein-Kinin System; Peptides; Recombinant Proteins
PubMed: 33602658
DOI: 10.18176/jiaci.0653 -
International Journal of Environmental... Jan 2021The aim of this review is to clarify the relative association between adenomyosis and infertility and the possible treatment for an infertile patient. Although... (Review)
Review
The aim of this review is to clarify the relative association between adenomyosis and infertility and the possible treatment for an infertile patient. Although adenomyosis is detected more often in women of late reproductive age, its influence on pregnancy rates is important, especially considering the tendency to delay pregnancy among women in developed countries. In this article, we present a critical analysis of the literature data concerning the impact of adenomyosis on fertility. The possible effects of treatment on the pregnancy rate will also be discussed. We conducted a literature search; publications from Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane databases published from 1982 to 2019 were retrieved using terms 'adenomyosis and infertility' and 'adenomyosis and pregnancy outcomes', extensively studied in the aspects of diagnosis, pathogenesis of infertility and possible treatment methods. Molecular studies have given deep insight into the pathogenesis of adenomyosis in the recent few years, but there is a huge discrepancy between in vitro studies and praxis. Oral contraceptive pills, anti-prostaglandins, oral or parenteral progestins, danazol and gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues have all been used to control menstrual pain and menorrhagia in women with adenomyosis, but they temporarily suppress the menstrual cycle. Additionally, endometrial ablation and hysterectomy used to alleviate pain caused by adenomyosis exclude pregnancy planning. The development of imaging techniques-ultrasound and MRI-enables the diagnosis of adenomyosis with very high accuracy nowadays, but the methods of treatment mentioned above have not given satisfactory results in women planning pregnancy. For these patients, the high-intensity-focused ultrasound method (HIFU) and combined treatment before assisted reproductive techniques can prove beneficial in adenomyosis patients.
Topics: Adenomyosis; Dysmenorrhea; Female; Humans; Infertility; Menorrhagia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Rate
PubMed: 33573117
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18031235 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2022Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a serious and potentially life-threatening condition that causes acute attacks of swelling, pain and reduced quality of life. People with... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a serious and potentially life-threatening condition that causes acute attacks of swelling, pain and reduced quality of life. People with Type I HAE (approximately 80% of all HAE cases) have insufficient amounts of C1 esterase inhibitor (C1-INH) protein; people with Type II HAE (approximately 20% of all cases) may have normal C1-INH concentrations, but, due to genetic mutations, these do not function properly. A few people, predominantly females, experience HAE despite having normal C1-INH levels and C1-INH function (rare Type III HAE). Several new drugs have been developed to treat acute attacks and prevent recurrence of attacks. There is currently no systematic review and meta-analysis that included all preventive medications for HAE.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of interventions for the long-term prevention of HAE attacks in people with Type I, Type II or Type III HAE.
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 3 August 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials in children or adults with HAE that used medications to prevent HAE attacks. The comparators could be placebo or active comparator, or both; approved and experimental drug trials were eligible for inclusion. There were no restrictions on dose, frequency or intensity of treatment. The minimum length of four weeks of treatment was required for inclusion; this criterion excluded the acute treatment of HAE attacks.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. HAE attacks (number of attacks per person, per population) and change in number of HAE attacks; 2. mortality and 3. serious adverse events (e.g. hepatic dysfunction, hepatic toxicity and deleterious changes in blood tests). Our secondary outcomes were 4. quality of life; 5. severity of breakthrough attacks; 6. disability and 7. adverse events (e.g. weight gain, mild psychological changes and body hair). We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 15 studies (912 participants) that met the inclusion criteria. The studies included people with Type I and II HAE. The studies investigated avoralstat, berotralstat, subcutaneous C1-INH, plasma-derived C1-INH, nanofiltered C1-INH, recombinant human C1-INH, danazol, and lanadelumab for the prevention of HAE attacks. We did not find any studies on the use of tranexamic acid for prevention of HAE attacks. All drugs except avoralstat reduced the number of HAE attacks compared with placebo. For breakthrough attacks that occurred despite prophylactic treatment, intravenous and subcutaneous forms of C1-INH and lanadelumab reduced attack severity. It is not known whether other drugs have a similar effect, as the severity of breakthrough attacks in people taking drugs other than C1-INH and lanadelumab was not reported. For quality of life, avoralstat, berotralstat, C1-INH (all forms) and lanadelumab increased quality of life compared with placebo; there were no data for danazol. Four studies reported on changes in disability during treatment with C1-INH, berotralstat and lanadelumab; all three drugs decreased disability compared with placebo. Adverse events, including serious adverse events, did not occur at a rate higher than placebo. However, serious adverse event data and other adverse event data were not available for danazol, which prevented us from drawing conclusions about the absolute or relative safety of this drug. No deaths were reported in the included studies. The analysis was limited by the small number of studies, the small number of participants in each study and the lack of data on older drugs, therefore the certainty of the evidence is low. Given the rarity of HAE, it is not surprising that drugs were rarely directly compared, which does not allow conclusions on the comparative efficacy of the various drugs for people with HAE. Finally, we did not identify any studies that included people with Type III HAE. Therefore, we cannot draw any conclusions about the efficacy or safety of any drug in people with this form of HAE.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The available data suggest that berotralstat, C1-INH (subcutaneous, plasma-derived, nanofiltered and recombinant), danazol and lanadelumab are effective in lowering the risk or incidence (or both) of HAE attacks. In addition, C1-INH and lanadelumab decrease the severity of breakthrough attacks (data for other drugs were not available). Avoralstat, berotralstat, C1-INH (all forms) and lanadelumab increase quality of life and do not increase the risk of adverse events, including serious adverse events. It is possible that danazol, subcutaneous C1-INH and recombinant human C1-INH are more effective than berotralstat and lanadelumab in reducing the risk of breakthrough attacks, but the small number of studies and the small size of the studies means that the certainty of the evidence is low. This and the lack of head-to-head trials prevented us from drawing firm conclusions on the relative efficacy of the drugs.
Topics: Adult; Child; Female; Humans; Male; Angioedemas, Hereditary; Quality of Life; Danazol; Complement C1 Inhibitor Protein; Administration, Intravenous; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36326435
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013403.pub2 -
Drugs Nov 2023Adenomyosis, characterized by the growth of endometrial tissue within the uterine wall, poses significant challenges in treatment. The literature primarily focuses on... (Review)
Review
Adenomyosis, characterized by the growth of endometrial tissue within the uterine wall, poses significant challenges in treatment. The literature primarily focuses on managing abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) and dysmenorrhea, the main symptoms of adenomyosis. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and tranexamic acid provide limited support for mild symptoms or symptom re-exacerbation during hormone therapy. The levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) is commonly employed in adenomyosis management, showing promise in symptom improvement and reducing uterine size, despite the lack of standardized guidelines. Dienogest (DNG) also exhibits potential benefits, but limited evidence hinders treatment recommendations. Danazol, while effective, is limited by androgenic side effects. Combined oral contraceptives (COCs) may be less effective than progestins but can be considered for contraception in young patients. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists effectively manage symptoms but induce menopausal symptoms with prolonged use. GnRH antagonists are a recent option requiring further investigation. Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) show promise in alleviating AUB and pelvic pain, but their safety necessitates exploration and limited use within trials for refractory patients. This review highlights the complexity of diagnosing adenomyosis, its coexistence with endometriosis and uterine leiomyomas, and its impact on fertility and quality of life, complicating treatment decisions. It emphasizes the need for research on guidelines for medical management, fertility outcomes, long-term effects of therapies, and exploration of new investigational targets. Future research should optimize therapeutic strategies, expand our understanding of adenomyosis and its management, and establish evidence-based guidelines to improve patient outcomes and quality of life.
Topics: Female; Humans; Adenomyosis; Quality of Life; Uterus; Progestins; Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone; Levonorgestrel
PubMed: 37837497
DOI: 10.1007/s40265-023-01957-7 -
Blood Advances Jul 2023Momelotinib is the first inhibitor of Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) and JAK2 shown to also inhibit activin A receptor type 1 (ACVR1), a key regulator of iron homeostasis, and...
Momelotinib is the first inhibitor of Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) and JAK2 shown to also inhibit activin A receptor type 1 (ACVR1), a key regulator of iron homeostasis, and has demonstrated improvements in splenomegaly, constitutional symptoms, and anemia in myelofibrosis (MF). This long-term analysis pooled data from 3 randomized phase 3 studies of momelotinib (MOMENTUM, SIMPLIFY-1, and SIMPLIFY-2), representing MF disease from early (JAK inhibitor-naive) to late (JAK inhibitor-experienced) stages. Patients in the control arms (danazol in MOMENTUM, ruxolitinib in SIMPLIFY-1, and best available therapy in SIMPLIFY-2) could cross over to receive momelotinib at the end of the 24-week randomized period, and all patients could continue momelotinib treatment after the completion of these studies via an extended access protocol (XAP). Across these studies, 725 patients with MF received momelotinib; 12% remained on therapy for ≥5 years, with a median treatment exposure of 11.3 months (range, 0.1-90.4 months). The most common nonhematologic treatment-emergent adverse event (AE) occurring in ≥20% of patients was diarrhea (any grade, 27% and grade ≥3, 3%). Any-grade thrombocytopenia, anemia, and neutropenia occurred in 25%, 23%, and 7% of patients, respectively. The most common reason for momelotinib discontinuation was thrombocytopenia (4% discontinuation rate). The incidence of AEs of clinical importance (eg, infections, malignant transformation, peripheral neuropathy, and hemorrhage) did not increase over time. This analysis of one of the largest randomized trial databases for a JAK inhibitor to date in MF demonstrated a consistent safety profile of momelotinib without long-term or cumulative toxicity. These trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as: MOMENTUM (#NCT04173494), SIMPLIFY-1 (#NCT01969838), SIMPLIFY-2 (#NCT02101268), and XAP (#NCT03441113).
Topics: Humans; Primary Myelofibrosis; Janus Kinase Inhibitors; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Anemia; Thrombocytopenia
PubMed: 37042865
DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2022009311 -
Fertility and Sterility Oct 2021To quantify the efficacy of medical management of uterine arteriovenous malformation (AVM) and compare efficacy between different classes of medication. In addition, we... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To quantify the efficacy of medical management of uterine arteriovenous malformation (AVM) and compare efficacy between different classes of medication. In addition, we evaluated for factors associated with treatment success and pregnancy outcomes after medical management.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING
Not applicable.
PATIENT(S)
Thirty-two studies representing 121 premenopausal women with medically-treated uterine AVM were identified via database searches of MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and cited references.
INTERVENTION(S)
Medical treatment with progestins, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRH-a), methotrexate, combined hormonal contraception , uterotonics, danazol, or combination of the above.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)
Primary outcome of treatment success was defined as AVM resolution without subsequent procedural interventions. Secondary outcome was treatment complication (readmission or transfusion).
RESULT(S)
The overall success rate of medical management was 88% (106/121). After adjusting for clustering effects, success rates for progestin (82.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 70.1%-90.4%), GnRH-a (89.3%; 99% CI, 71.4%-96.5%) and methotrexate (90.0%; 99% CI, 55.8%-98.8%) were significantly different from the null hypothesis of 50% success. The agents with the lowest adjusted proportion of complications were progestins (10.0%; 99% CI, 3.3%-26.8%) and GnRH-a (10.7%; 99% CI, 3.5%-28.4%). No clinical factors were found to predict treatment success. Twenty-six subsequent pregnancies are described, with no reported recurrences of AVM.
CONCLUSION(S)
Medical management for uterine AVM is a reasonable approach in a well selected patient. These data should be interpreted in the context of significant publication bias.
Topics: Arteriovenous Fistula; Blood Transfusion; Clinical Decision-Making; Female; Humans; Patient Readmission; Patient Selection; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Rate; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome; Uterine Artery; Uterus
PubMed: 34130801
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.05.095 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2022Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is excessive menstrual blood loss that interferes with women's quality of life, regardless of the absolute amount of bleeding. It is a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is excessive menstrual blood loss that interferes with women's quality of life, regardless of the absolute amount of bleeding. It is a very common condition in women of reproductive age, affecting 2 to 5 of every 10 women. Diverse treatments, either medical (hormonal or non-hormonal) or surgical, are currently available for HMB, with different effectiveness, acceptability, costs and side effects. The best treatment will depend on the woman's age, her intention to become pregnant, the presence of other symptoms, and her personal views and preferences.
OBJECTIVES
To identify, systematically assess and summarise all evidence from studies included in Cochrane Reviews on treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB), using reviews with comparable participants and outcomes; and to present a ranking of the first- and second-line treatments for HMB.
METHODS
We searched for published Cochrane Reviews of HMB interventions in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The primary outcomes were menstrual bleeding and satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, adverse events and the requirement of further treatment. Two review authors independently selected the systematic reviews, extracted data and assessed quality, resolving disagreements by discussion. We assessed review quality using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 tool and evaluated the certainty of the evidence for each outcome using GRADE methods. We grouped the interventions into first- and second-line treatments, considering participant characteristics (desire for future pregnancy, failure of previous treatment, candidacy for surgery). First-line treatments included medical interventions, and second-line treatments included both the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) and surgical treatments; thus the LNG-IUS is included in both groups. We developed different networks for first- and second-line treatments. We performed network meta-analyses of all outcomes, except for quality of life, where we performed pairwise meta-analyses. We reported the mean rank, the network estimates for mean difference (MD) or odds ratio (OR), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and the certainty of evidence (moderate, low or very low certainty). We also analysed different endometrial ablation and resection techniques separately from the main network: transcervical endometrial resection (TCRE) with or without rollerball, other resectoscopic endometrial ablation (REA), microwave non-resectoscopic endometrial ablation (NREA), hydrothermal ablation NREA, bipolar NREA, balloon NREA and other NREA.
MAIN RESULTS
We included nine systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Library up to July 2021. We updated the reviews that were over two years old. In July 2020, we started the overview with no new reviews about the topic. The included medical interventions were: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), antifibrinolytics (tranexamic acid), combined oral contraceptives (COC), combined vaginal ring (CVR), long-cycle and luteal oral progestogens, LNG-IUS, ethamsylate and danazol (included to provide indirect evidence), which were compared to placebo. Surgical interventions were: open (abdominal), minimally invasive (vaginal or laparoscopic) and unspecified (or surgeon's choice of route of) hysterectomy, REA, NREA, unspecified endometrial ablation (EA) and LNG-IUS. We grouped the interventions as follows. First-line treatments Evidence from 26 studies with 1770 participants suggests that LNG-IUS results in a large reduction of menstrual blood loss (MBL; mean rank 2.4, MD -105.71 mL/cycle, 95% CI -201.10 to -10.33; low certainty evidence); antifibrinolytics probably reduce MBL (mean rank 3.7, MD -80.32 mL/cycle, 95% CI -127.67 to -32.98; moderate certainty evidence); long-cycle progestogen reduces MBL (mean rank 4.1, MD -76.93 mL/cycle, 95% CI -153.82 to -0.05; low certainty evidence), and NSAIDs slightly reduce MBL (mean rank 6.4, MD -40.67 mL/cycle, -84.61 to 3.27; low certainty evidence; reference comparator mean rank 8.9). We are uncertain of the true effect of the remaining interventions and the sensitivity analysis for reduction of MBL, as the evidence was rated as very low certainty. We are uncertain of the true effect of any intervention (very low certainty evidence) on the perception of improvement and satisfaction. Second-line treatments Bleeding reduction is related to the type of hysterectomy (total or supracervical/subtotal), not the route, so we combined all routes of hysterectomy for bleeding outcomes. We assessed the reduction of MBL without imputed data (11 trials, 1790 participants) and with imputed data (15 trials, 2241 participants). Evidence without imputed data suggests that hysterectomy (mean rank 1.2, OR 25.71, 95% CI 1.50 to 439.96; low certainty evidence) and REA (mean rank 2.8, OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.29 to 5.66; low certainty evidence) result in a large reduction of MBL, and NREA probably results in a large reduction of MBL (mean rank 2.0, OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.53 to 7.23; moderate certainty evidence). Evidence with imputed data suggests hysterectomy results in a large reduction of MBL (mean rank 1.0, OR 14.31, 95% CI 2.99 to 68.56; low certainty evidence), and NREA probably results in a large reduction of MBL (mean rank 2.2, OR 2.87, 95% CI 1.29 to 6.05; moderate certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the true effect for REA (very low certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect on amenorrhoea (very low certainty evidence). Evidence from 27 trials with 4284 participants suggests that minimally invasive hysterectomy results in a large increase in satisfaction (mean rank 1.3, OR 7.96, 95% CI 3.33 to 19.03; low certainty evidence), and NREA also increases satisfaction (mean rank 3.6, OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.33; low certainty evidence), but we are uncertain of the true effect of the remaining interventions (very low certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence suggests LNG-IUS is the best first-line treatment for reducing menstrual blood loss (MBL); antifibrinolytics are probably the second best, and long-cycle progestogens are likely the third best. We cannot make conclusions about the effect of first-line treatments on perception of improvement and satisfaction, as evidence was rated as very low certainty. For second-line treatments, evidence suggests hysterectomy is the best treatment for reducing bleeding, followed by REA and NREA. We are uncertain of the effect on amenorrhoea, as evidence was rated as very low certainty. Minimally invasive hysterectomy may result in a large increase in satisfaction, and NREA also increases satisfaction, but we are uncertain of the true effect of the remaining second-line interventions, as evidence was rated as very low certainty.
Topics: Amenorrhea; Antifibrinolytic Agents; Child, Preschool; Female; Humans; Menorrhagia; Network Meta-Analysis; Progestins; Quality of Life; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 35638592
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013180.pub2