-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2015Uterine fibroids (also known as leiomyomas) are the most common benign pelvic tumours among women. They may be asymptomatic, or may be associated with pelvic symptoms... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Uterine fibroids (also known as leiomyomas) are the most common benign pelvic tumours among women. They may be asymptomatic, or may be associated with pelvic symptoms such as bleeding and pain. Medical treatment of this condition is limited and gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues are the most effective agents. Long-term treatment with such agents, however, is restricted due to their adverse effects. The addition of other medications during treatment with GnRH analogues, a strategy known as add-back therapy, may limit these side effects. There is concern, however, that add-back therapy may also limit the efficacy of the GnRH analogues and that it may not be able to completely prevent their adverse effects.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the short-term (within 12 months) effectiveness and safety of add-back therapy for women using GnRH analogues for uterine fibroids associated with excessive uterine bleeding, pelvic pain, or urinary symptoms.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched electronic databases including the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL, PsycINFO; and electronic registries of ongoing trials including ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials, World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. All searches were from database inception to 16 June 2014.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included women with uterine fibroids experiencing irregular or intense uterine bleeding, cyclic or non-cyclic pelvic pain, or urinary symptoms, and that compared treatment with a GnRH analogue plus add-back therapy versus a GnRH analogue alone or combined with placebo were eligible for inclusion.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently reviewed the identified titles and abstracts for potentially eligible records. Two review authors reviewed eligible studies and independently extracted data. Two authors independently assessed the studies' risk of bias. They assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria.
MAIN RESULTS
Fourteen RCTs were included in the review. Data were extracted from 12 studies (622 women). The primary outcome was quality of life (QoL).Add-back therapy with medroxyprogesterone (MPA): no studies reported QoL or uterine bleeding. There was no evidence of effect in relation to bone mass (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.62 to 1.38, 1 study, 16 women, P = 0.45, low quality evidence) and MPA was associated with a larger uterine volume (mean difference (MD) 342.19 cm(3), 95% CI 77.58 to 606.80, 2 studies, 32 women, I(2) = 0%, low quality evidence).Tibolone: this was associated with a higher QoL but the estimate was imprecise and the effect could be clinically insignificant, small or large (SMD 0.47, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.85, 1 study, 110 women, P = 0.02, low quality evidence). It was also associated with a decreased loss of bone mass, which could be insignificant, small or moderate (SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.7, 3 studies, 160 women, I(2) = 7%, moderate quality evidence). Tibolone may, however, have been associated with larger uterine volumes (MD 23.89 cm(3), 95% CI= 8.13 to 39.66, 6 studies, 365 women, I(2) = 0%, moderate quality evidence) and more uterine bleeding (results were not combined but three studies demonstrated greater bleeding with tibolone while two other studies demonstrated no bleeding in either group). Four studies (268 women; not pooled owing to extreme heterogeneity) reported a large benefit on vasomotor symptoms in the tibolone group.Raloxifene: there was no evidence of an effect on QoL (SMD 0.11, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.34, 1 study, 74 women, P = 0.62, low quality evidence), while there was a beneficial impact on bone mass (SMD 1.01, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.45, 1 study, 91 women, P < 0.00001, low quality evidence). There was no clear evidence of effect on uterine volume (MD 27.1 cm(3), 95% CI -17.94 to 72.14, 1 study, 91 women, P = 0.24, low quality evidence), uterine bleeding or severity of vasomotor symptoms (MD 0.2 hot flushes/day, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.74, 1 study, 91 women, P = 0.46, low quality evidence).Estriol: no studies reported QoL, uterine size, uterine bleeding or vasomotor symptoms. Add-back with estriol may have led to decreased loss of bone mass, from results of a single study (SMD 3.93, 95% CI 1.7 to 6.16, 1 study, 12 women, P = 0.0005, low quality evidence).Ipriflavone: no studies reported QoL, uterine size or uterine bleeding. Iproflavone was associated with decreased loss of bone mass in a single study (SMD 2.71, 95% CI 2.14 to 3.27, 1 study, 95 women, P < 0.00001, low quality evidence); there was no evidence of an effect on the rate of vasomotor symptoms (RR 0.67, 95% Cl 0.44 to 1.02, 1 study, 95 women, P = 0.06, low quality evidence).Conjugated estrogens: no studies reported QoL, uterine size, uterine bleeding or vasomotor symptoms. One study suggested that adding conjugated estrogens to GnRH analogues resulted in a larger decrease in uterine volume in the placebo group (MD 105.2 cm(3), 95% CI 27.65 to 182.75, 1 study, 27 women, P = 0.008, very low quality evidence).Nine of 12 studies were at high risk of bias in at least one domain, most commonly lack of blinding. All studies followed participants for a maximum of six months. This short-term follow-up is usually insufficient to observe any significant effect of the treatment on bone health (such as the occurrence of fractures), limiting the findings.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There was low or moderate quality evidence that tibolone, raloxifene, estriol and ipriflavone help to preserve bone density and that MPA and tibolone may reduce vasomotor symptoms. Larger uterine volume was an adverse effect associated with some add-back therapies (MPA, tibolone and conjugated estrogens). For other comparisons, outcomes of interest were not reported or study findings were inconclusive.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Estriol; Female; Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone; Humans; Isoflavones; Leiomyoma; Medroxyprogesterone; Norpregnenes; Quality of Life; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Uterine Hemorrhage; Uterine Neoplasms
PubMed: 25793972
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010854.pub2 -
European Journal of Cancer Prevention :... Nov 2015To evaluate all the in-vitro raloxifene (RAL) mechanisms of action on normal, Ishikawa, and different endometrium-derived cell lines to explain the in-vivo RAL... (Review)
Review
Could in-vitro studies on Ishikawa cell lines explain the endometrial safety of raloxifene? Systematic literature review and starting points for future oncological research.
To evaluate all the in-vitro raloxifene (RAL) mechanisms of action on normal, Ishikawa, and different endometrium-derived cell lines to explain the in-vivo RAL endometrial effects, a systematic literature search was performed in the electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE ScienceDirect, and the Cochrane Library for the time period between 2002 and 2012. Outcomes were considered in relation to in-vitro stimulatory, inhibitory, or neutral actions of RAL in Ishikawa cell lines compared with different endometrial-derived cell lines (both cancerous and normal endometrium). We also considered all the RAL molecular mechanisms responsible for the in-vitro effects observed. More than 150 articles were available in the scientific database literature, but only 21 fulfilled our selection criteria. Although in-vitro studies appear to yield conflicting results, most evidence has shown that RAL seems to induce endometrial cell mitochondria-mediated apoptosis, and to inhibit estrogen-related cell proliferation and endometrial carcinogenesis by inducing antiangiogenic factors, and reducing cytoskeletal reorganization. If the endometrial safety profile of RAL is confirmed, in the near future, selective estrogen receptor modulators could represent an efficient alternative adjuvant treatment to tamoxifen (TAM) in women with breast cancer considered to be at an increased risk of endometrial disease. The confirmation of the endometrial safety profile could enable the proposal of RAL by clinicians as the most appropriate treatment for BRCA1-2 patients after prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy.
Topics: Apoptosis; Breast Neoplasms; Cell Line, Tumor; Cell Proliferation; Endometrial Neoplasms; Endometrium; Female; Humans; In Vitro Techniques; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators
PubMed: 25536299
DOI: 10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000107 -
Clinical Interventions in Aging 2014To systematically review the literature describing the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of raloxifene for postmenopausal Japanese women with osteoporosis or low bone... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To systematically review the literature describing the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of raloxifene for postmenopausal Japanese women with osteoporosis or low bone mass (osteopenia).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Medline via PubMed and Embase was systematically searched using prespecified terms. Retrieved publications were screened and included if they described randomized controlled trials or observational studies of postmenopausal Japanese women with osteoporosis or osteopenia treated with raloxifene and reported one or more outcome measures (change in bone mineral density [BMD]; fracture incidence; change in bone-turnover markers, hip structural geometry, or blood-lipid profile; occurrence of adverse events; and change in quality of life or pain). Excluded publications were case studies, editorials, letters to the editor, narrative reviews, or publications from non-peer-reviewed journals; multidrug, multicountry, or multidisease studies with no drug-, country-, or disease-level analysis; or studies of participants on dialysis.
RESULTS
Of the 292 publications retrieved, 15 publications (seven randomized controlled trials, eight observational studies) were included for review. Overall findings were statistically significant increases in BMD of the lumbar spine (nine publications), but not the hip region (eight publications), a low incidence of vertebral fracture (three publications), decreases in markers of bone turnover (eleven publications), improved hip structural geometry (two publications), improved blood-lipid profiles (five publications), a low incidence of hot flushes, leg cramps, venous thromboembolism, and stroke (12 publications), and improved quality of life and pain relief (one publication).
CONCLUSION
Findings support raloxifene for reducing vertebral fracture risk by improving BMD and reducing bone turnover in postmenopausal Japanese women with osteoporosis or osteopenia. Careful consideration of fracture risk and the risk-benefit profile of antiosteoporosis medications is required when managing patients with osteoporosis.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Biomarkers; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Bone Diseases, Metabolic; Female; Fractures, Bone; Hip Joint; Humans; Lipids; Lumbar Vertebrae; Middle Aged; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Quality of Life; Raloxifene Hydrochloride; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 25395843
DOI: 10.2147/CIA.S70307