Risk of Stroke in Women Using Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine Device for Contraception.

BACKGROUND: The commonly used combined hormonal contraceptives with progestins and ethinylestradiol are associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke (IS). Progestin-only preparations, including levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices (LG-IUDs), are not associated with an increased risk, and in smaller studies, the risk is even reduced. The risk of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) has never been investigated. We studied the risk of IS and ICH in women using LG-IUDs compared with women not using hormonal contraceptives. METHODS: In this Danish historical cohort study (2004-2021), we followed nonpregnant women (18-49 years) registering incident IS and ICH in relation to use of LG-IUDs/nonuse of hormonal contraceptives utilizing Danish high-quality registries with nationwide coverage. Poisson regression models adjusting for age, ethnicity, education, calendar year, and medication use for risk factors were applied. RESULTS: A total of 1 681 611 nonpregnant women contributed 11 971 745 person-years (py) of observation. Mean age at inclusion was 30.0 years; mean length of follow-up was 7.1 years; 2916 women (24.4 per 100 000 py) had IS; 367 (3.1 per 100 000 py) had ICH. Of these, 364 784 were users of LG-IUD contributing 1 720 311 py to the investigation; mean age at start of usage was 34.6 years. Nonusers of hormonal contraceptives contributed 10 251 434 py; mean age at inclusion was 30.0 years. The incidence rate of IS/ICH among LG-IUD users was 19.2/3.0 and among nonusers, it was 25.2/3.1 per 100 000 py. After adjustment, incidence rate ratio for IS was 0.78 (CI, 0.70-0.88), and for ICH it was 0.94 (CI, 0.69-1.28). CONCLUSIONS: The use of LG-IUD was associated with a 22% lower incidence rate of IS without raising the incidence rate of ICH. The finding raises the question of whether levonorgestrel, in addition to its contraceptive properties, could have the potential to prevent IS.

Levonorgestrel vs. Copper Intrauterine Devices for Emergency Contraception.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, more intrauterine device (IUD) users select levonorgestrel IUDs than copper IUDs for long-term contraception. Currently, clinicians offer only copper IUDs for emergency contraception because data are lacking on the efficacy of the levonorgestrel IUD for this purpose. METHODS: This randomized noninferiority trial, in which participants were unaware of the group assignments, was conducted at six clinics in Utah and included women who sought emergency contraception after at least one episode of unprotected intercourse within 5 days before presentation and agreed to placement of an IUD. We randomly assigned participants in a 1:1 ratio to receive a levonorgestrel 52-mg IUD or a copper T380A IUD. The primary outcome was a positive urine pregnancy test 1 month after IUD insertion. When a 1-month urine pregnancy test was unavailable, we used survey and health record data to determine pregnancy status. The prespecified noninferiority margin was 2.5 percentage points. RESULTS: Among the 355 participants randomly assigned to receive levonorgestrel IUDs and 356 assigned to receive copper IUDs, 317 and 321, respectively, received the interventions and provided 1-month outcome data. Of these, 290 in the levonorgestrel group and 300 in the copper IUD group had a 1-month urine pregnancy test. In the modified intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses, pregnancy rates were 1 in 317 (0.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01 to 1.7) in the levonorgestrel group and 0 in 321 (0%; 95% CI, 0 to 1.1) in the copper IUD group; the between-group absolute difference in both analyses was 0.3 percentage points (95% CI, -0.9 to 1.8), consistent with the noninferiority of the levonorgestrel IUD to the copper IUD. Adverse events resulting in participants seeking medical care in the first month after IUD placement occurred in 5.2% of participants in the levonorgestrel IUD group and 4.9% of those in the copper IUD group. CONCLUSIONS: The levonorgestrel IUD was noninferior to the copper IUD for emergency contraception. (Supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02175030.).

Repeated exposure to physiologically effective doses of contraceptive hormones ethinyl estradiol or levonorgestrel do not alter the reinforcing effects of a brief visual stimulus in ovary-intact rats.

Estradiol and progesterone potentiate and attenuate reward processes, respectively. Despite these well-characterized effects, there is minimal research on the effects of synthetic estrogens (e.g., ethinyl estradiol, or EE) and progestins (e.g., levonorgestrel, or LEVO) contained in clinically-utilized hormonal contraceptives. The present study characterized the separate effects of repeated exposure to EE or LEVO on responding maintained by a reinforcing visual stimulus. Forty ovary-intact female Sprague-Dawley rats received either sesame oil vehicle (n = 16), 0.18 µg/day EE (n = 16), or 0.6 µg/day LEVO (n = 8) subcutaneous injections 30-min before daily one-hour sessions. Rats' responding was maintained by a 30-sec visual stimulus on a Variable Ratio-3 schedule of reinforcement. The day after rats' last session, we determined rats estrous cycle phase via vaginal cytology before sacrifice and subsequently weighing each rat's uterus to further verify the contraceptive hormone manipulation. The visual stimulus functioned as a reinforcer, but neither EE nor LEVO enhanced visual stimulus maintained responding. Estrous cytology was consistent with normal cycling in vehicle rats and halting of normal cycling in EE and LEVO rats. EE increased uterine weights consistent with typical uterotrophic effects observed with estrogens, further confirming the physiological impacts of our EE and LEVO doses. In conclusion, a physiologically effective dose of neither EE nor LEVO did not alter the reinforcing efficacy of a visual stimulus reinforcer. Future research should characterize the effects of hormonal contraceptives on responding maintained by other reinforcer types to determine the generality of the present findings.

Treatment outcomes according to various progestin treatment strategies in patients with atypical hyperplasia/endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia - Multicenter retrospective study (KGOG2033).

OBJECTIVE: To investigate pathologic complete response (pCR) and recurrence outcomes using various progestin treatment strategies in patients with atypical hyperplasia/endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (AH/EIN). METHODS: Medical records of patients diagnosed with AH/EIN and undergoing follow-up endometrial biopsy after progestin treatment between 2011 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical factors and treatment outcomes were analyzed according to initial progestin treatment (oral progestin [OP], levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device [LNG-IUD], and combination), OP dose, and maintenance treatment using Pearson's χ2, Fisher's exact test, and Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Of 124 patients included, 74, 37, and 13 were in the OP, LNG-IUD, and combination groups, respectively. The pCR rate was 79.8% and recurrence rate was 21.2%. The pCR rates within 3 and 6 months were significantly higher in the OP group than in the LNG-IUD group, but were not significantly different within 12 and 24 months. Recurrence rate was significantly higher in the OP group than in the LNG-IUD group. The pCR rate and recurrence rate had no significant differences between the combination group and the other groups. Excluding the LNG-IUD group, 53 and 34 patients received low- and high-dose OP, respectively. The pCR and recurrence rates were comparable between the low- and high-dose OP groups. Maintenance therapy was significantly associated with lower recurrence rate. CONCLUSIONS: Although OP alone achieved more short-term pCR than the other groups, more recurrences occurred after pCR than LNG-IUD alone. High-dose OP as well as combination of OP and LNG-IUD did not increase pCR or reduce recurrence. Maintenance therapy may reduce the recurrence rate after pCR.

Assessing ovarian stimulation with letrozole and levonorgestrel intrauterine system after combined fertility-sparing approach for atypical endometrial lesions: a retrospective case-control study.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Is ovarian stimulation with levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) in situ and co-treatment with letrozole safe and effective in patients undergoing fertility-sparing combined treatment for atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH) or early endometrial cancer limited to the endometrium? DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study recruiting women who had undergone fertility-sparing 'combined' treatment and ovarian stimulation with letrozole and LNG-IUS in situ. The 'three steps' hysteroscopic technique was used. Once complete response was achieved, the ovaries were stimulated, and mature oocytes cryopreserved. The LNG-IUS was removed, and embryos transferred. A comparative analysis was conducted between the two control groups of the initial outcomes of ART (number of oocytes and MII oocytes retrieved): healthy infertile women undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI (control group A); and patients diagnosed with breast cancer who underwent ovarian stimulation with letrozole (control group B). RESULTS: Of the 75 patients analysed, 15 underwent oocyte cryopreservation after achieving a complete response to fertility-sparing treatment (study group); 30 patients in control group A and B, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed in retrieved oocytes and mature oocytes between the study and control groups. In the nine patients who underwent embryo transfer, clinical pregnancy (55.6%), cumulative live birth (44.4%) and miscarriage (20%) rates were reported. In three patients with AEH, recurrence occurred (12%) at 3, 6 and 16 months after removing the LNG-IUS to attempt embryo transfer, respectively. CONCLUSION: Fertility-sparing hysteroscopic combined treatment and subsequent ovarian stimulation with letrozole and LNG-IUS in situ could be suggested to women with AEH or early endometrial cancer who ask for future fertility preservation.

A 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system vs bipolar radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation in women with heavy menstrual bleeding: long-term follow-up of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The symptom of heavy menstrual bleeding has a substantial impact on professional, physical, and social functioning. In 2021, results from a randomized controlled trial comparing a 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation as treatments for women with heavy menstrual bleeding were published. Both treatment strategies were equally effective in treating heavy menstrual bleeding during 2-year follow-up. However, long-term results are also relevant for both patients and healthcare providers. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess long-term differences in reintervention risk and menstrual blood loss in women with the symptom of heavy menstrual bleeding treated according to a strategy starting with a 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system or radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation. STUDY DESIGN: This study was a long-term follow-up study of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (MIRA trial), in which women were allocated to either a 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (n=132) or radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation (n=138). Women from the original trial were contacted to fill out 6 questionnaires. The primary outcome was the reintervention rate after allocated treatment. Secondary outcomes included surgical reintervention rate, menstrual bleeding measured by the Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart, (disease-specific) quality of life, sexual function, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: From the 270 women who were randomized in the original trial, 196 (52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system group: n=94; radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation group: n=102) participated in this long-term follow-up study. Mean follow-up duration was 7.4 years (range, 6-9 years). The cumulative reintervention rate (including both medical and surgical reinterventions) was 40.0% (34/85) in the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system group and 28.7% (27/94) in the radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation group (relative risk, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-2.10). The cumulative rate of surgical reinterventions only was significantly higher among patients with a treatment strategy starting with a 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system compared with radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation (35.3% [30/85] vs 19.1% [18/94]; relative risk, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-3.10). However, the hysterectomy rate was similar (11.8% [10/94] in the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system group and 18.1% [17/102] in the radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation group; relative risk, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-1.34). Most reinterventions occurred during the first 24 months of follow-up. A total of 171 Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart scores showed a median bleeding score of 0.0. No clinically relevant differences were found regarding quality of life, sexual function, and patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: The overall risk of reintervention after long-term follow-up was not different between women treated according to a treatment strategy starting with a 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and those treated using a strategy starting with radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation. However, women allocated to a treatment strategy starting with a 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system had a higher risk of surgical reintervention, which was driven by an increase in subsequent endometrial ablation. Both treatment strategies were effective in lowering menstrual blood loss over the long term. The results of this long-term follow-up study can support physicians in optimizing the counseling of women with heavy menstrual bleeding, thus promoting informed decision-making regarding choice of treatment.

Medical Management of Endometriosis in Adolescent and Young Adult Women: A Review of 91 Cases of Biopsy-Confirmed Endometriosis.

OBJECTIVES: To characterise contemporary trends in the hormonal management of endometriosis in adolescent and young adult patients with biopsy-proven endometriosis. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of women aged 14-25 years who underwent laparoscopy for pelvic pain with biopsy-proven endometriosis between January 2011 and September 2020 at an academic tertiary hospital system. The final sample included 91 patients with biopsy-confirmed endometriosis. RESULTS: Combined oral contraceptives (COCs) were the most common initial treatment (64% of patients). Progestin-only formulations (low- and high-dose norethindrone acetate) were offered to younger patients (age 15.9 ± 2.7 years) than those offered COCs (19.9 ± 3.3 years) and levonorgestrel intrauterine devices (LNG-IUDs) (21.9 ± 1.7 years). Current treatments varied widely and included COCs (32%), LNG-IUDs (18%), oral progestins (low- and high-dose norethindrone, medroxyprogesterone) (14%), elagolix (9%), and leuprolide (8%). Oral adjuncts to LNG-IUD were common: usually low- or high-dose norethindrone (37% of patients with an LNG-IUD), but also included progesterone, COCs, and elagolix. CONCLUSIONS: Oral progestins, LNG-IUDs, and COCs were the mainstay of initial treatment. Subsequent treatments varied widely and included COCs, LNG-IUDs, oral progestins, elagolix, leuprolide, and combinations of these agents. We observed that most young women switched between therapies, suggesting that a personalised approach is often used to determine treatment plans among the wide range of options currently available. This study helps define the spectrum of treatment regimens for endometriosis in adolescent females.

Fertility-sparing re-treatment for endometrial cancer and atypical endometrial hyperplasia patients with progestin-resistance: a retrospective analysis of 61 cases.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the oncological and reproductive outcomes of fertility-preserving re-treatment in progestin-resistant endometrial carcinoma (EC) and atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH) women who desire to maintain their fertility. METHODS: Our study included 61 progestin-resistant EC/AEH patients. These patients underwent treatment with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) solely or a combination of GnRHa with levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUD) or aromatase inhibitor (AI). Histological evaluations were performed every 3-4 months. Upon achieving complete remission (CR), we recommended maintenance treatments including LNG-IUD, cyclical oral contraceptives, or low-dose cyclic progestin until they began attempting conception. Regular follow-up was conducted for all patients. The chi-square method was utilized to compare oncological and fertility outcomes, while the Cox proportional hazards regression analysis helped identify risk factors for CR, recurrence, and pregnancy. RESULTS: Overall, 55 (90.2%) patients achieved CR, including 90.9% of AEH patients and 89.7% of EC patients. The median re-treatment time was 6 months (ranging from 3 to 12 months). The CR rate for GnRHa alone, GnRHa + LNG-IUD and GnRHa + AI were 80.0%, 91.7% and 93.3%, respectively. After a median follow-up period of 36 months (ranging from 3 to 96 months), 19 women (34.5%) experienced recurrence, 40.0% in AEH and 31.4% in EC patients, with the median recurrence time of 23 months (ranging from 6 to 77 months). Among the patients who achieved CR, 39 expressed a desire to conceive, 20 (51.3%) became pregnant, 11 (28.2%) had successfully deliveries, 1 (5.1%) was still pregnant, while 8 (20.5%) suffered miscarriages. CONCLUSION: GnRHa-based fertility-sparing treatment exhibited promising oncological and reproductive outcomes for progestin-resistant patients. Future larger multi-institutional studies are necessary to confirm these findings.

Long-term efficacy and safety of levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system in the treatment of adenomyosis: evidence mapping.

PURPOSE: To summarize evidence on levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) in the treatment of adenomyosis (AM) and to identify potential research gaps. METHODS: Search was conducted in MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CBM, CNKI, and Wanfang. We included studies investigating patients with AM treated with LNG-IUS combined with conservative therapy. RESULTS: Thirty-nine studies compared LNG-IUS with other conservative therapeutic drugs. The most common comparison was GnRH-a + LNG-IUS vs. LNG-IUS alone, followed by LNG-IUS vs. mifepristone, expected treatment, and GnRH-a. GnRH-a + LNG-IUS was more beneficial in reducing the intensity of dysmenorrhea than LNG-IUS alone at the 6-month follow-up in patients with an enlarged uterus and moderate to severe dysmenorrhea. Large and well-designed studies are needed to confirm the efficacy of LNG-IUS and GnRH-a on reducing uterine volume at 6-month follow-up. Thirty-two studies investigated LNG-IUS as the postoperative management. The most common comparison was surgical excision + LNG-IUS vs. surgical excision. Results showed VAS scores were lower in the surgical excision + LNG-IUS group than in the surgical excision group at the 1-year follow-up. Evidence on endometrial thickness, quality of life, adverse events and beneficial effect at 3 and 5 years are needed. CONCLUSIONS: Combined GnRH-a and LNG-IUS treatment was more efficacious than LNG-IUS alone for patients with an enlarged uterus and moderate to severe dysmenorrhea. Moreover, LNG-IUS seemed to show potential long-term benefits in postoperative therapy, warranting further meta-analysis for confirmation.

The personal experience of female obstetricians and gynaecologists with contraceptive use influences the guidance and prescription of contraceptive methods: a web-survey.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of the personal experience of female obstetricians and gynaecologists (Obst/Gyns) who utilise contraceptive methods on the provision of these methods. METHODS: An anonymous online web-based survey was carried out with female Obst/Gyns. The instrument contained questions about their current and previous contraceptive methods use, factors that influenced the choice and satisfaction with the ongoing method, as well as the occurrence of adverse events. They were also asked whether the experience of any adverse events influenced their decision in prescribing any particular contraceptive method. RESULTS: 476/9000 (5.3%) female Obst/Gyns answered the survey. The most common contraceptive in use was the 52-mg levonorgestrel-intrauterine device (52-mg LNG-IUD) (34%), followed by non-Long-Acting Reversible Contraception hormonal methods (21.2%). More than half of the respondents (57.6%) reported having some adverse effects and 18.7% reported that the personal experience of an adverse effect with the use of a contraceptive method influenced the prescription of that method. CONCLUSION: Half of female Obst/Gyns encountered adverse events linked to contraceptive usage. Additionally, almost one-fifth believe that their own encounter with adverse effects from a contraceptive method impacts their decision to prescribe the same method.

Almost one-fifth of the female obstetrics and gynaecologists that answered the online survey reported that the personal experience of an adverse effect with the use of a contraceptive method influenced the prescription of that method.

Usage of the levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system in perimenopause.

Levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system have excellent contraceptive efficacy with simultaneous lowering of menstruation's blood loss. It could be used for therapy of endometrial hyperplasia in perimenopause. In position of gestagen part of the hormone replacement therapy it has high control of endometrial proliferation. It is conjoined with the zero increasing of risk of thromboembolic disease in combination with transdermal oestrogen's application.

Female sexual function in women using LARC methods.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess sexual function (SF) and quality of life (QoL) among women using copper intrauterine devices (Cu-IUD), levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) or etonogestrel(ENG)-releasing subdermal implant. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study involving 213 women who are sexually active, using Cu-IUD, LNG-IUS or ENG implant for at least one year. SF assessment was carried out through the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and QoL was made through The Short Form Health Research. RESULTS: Frequency of sexual dysfunction score in Cu-IUD users was 33.8%; 47.2% in LNG-IUS users and 47.8% in ENG-implant users, without difference between groups. Desire domain had higher score in Cu-IUD users (Cu-IUD:4.20 ± 1.15 × LNG-IUS:3.76 ± 1.17 × ENG-implant:3.63 ± 1.15; p = .009). Between Cu-IUD and LNG-IUS users there was no difference in FSFI score. Total FSFI score was higher in Cu-IUD group when compared only to ENG-implant (Cu-IUD:27.48 ± 6.14 × Implant:25.07 ± 6.89; p = .029). Regarding the QoL score, difference was found only in general health domain (Cu-IUD:65.22 ± 14.91 × LNG-IUS:62.61 ± 19.04 × Implant:58.33 ± 16.46; p = .034), with lower score for implant group. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in the SF total score between the users of Cu-IUD, LNG-IUS and ENG implant. However, the score of the FSFI desire domain and general health status were higher among users of the Cu-IUD.

Adenomyosis: Diagnosis and Management.

Adenomyosis is a clinical condition where endometrial glands are found in the myometrium of the uterus. One in three patients with adenomyosis is asymptomatic, but the rest may present with heavy menstrual bleeding, pelvic pain, or infertility. Heavy menstrual bleeding is the most common symptom. Adenomyosis is distinct from endometriosis (the presence of endometrial glands outside of the uterus), but the two conditions often occur simultaneously. Risk factors for developing adenomyosis include increasing age, parity, and history of uterine procedures. Most patients are diagnosed from 40 to 50 years of age, but younger patients with infertility are increasingly being diagnosed with adenomyosis as imaging modalities improve. Diagnosis of adenomyosis begins with clinical suspicion and is confirmed with transvaginal ultrasonography and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging. Treatment of adenomyosis typically starts with hormonal menstrual suppression. Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systems have shown some effectiveness. Patients with adenomyosis may ultimately have a hysterectomy if symptoms are not controlled with medical therapy.

Sexually transmitted infections among women randomised to depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, a copper intrauterine device or a levonorgestrel implant.

OBJECTIVES: Reproductive aged women are at risk of pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections (STI). Understanding drivers of STI acquisition, including any association with widely used contraceptives, could help us to reduce STI prevalence and comorbidities. We compared the risk of STI among women randomised to three contraceptive methods. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis to assess the risk of chlamydia and gonorrhoea in a clinical trial evaluating HIV risk among 7829 women aged 16-35 randomised to intramuscular depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA-IM), a copper intrauterine device (IUD) or a levonorgestrel (LNG) implant. We estimated chlamydia and gonorrhoea prevalences by contraceptive group and prevalence ratios (PR) using log-binomial regression. RESULTS: At baseline, chlamydia and gonorrhoea prevalences were 18% and 5%, respectively. Final visit chlamydia prevalence did not differ significantly between DMPA-IM and copper IUD groups or between copper IUD and LNG implant groups. The DMPA-IM group had significantly lower risk of chlamydia compared with the LNG implant group (PR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.95). Final visit gonorrhoea prevalence differed significantly only between the DMPA-IM and the copper IUD groups (PR 0.67, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.87). CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that chlamydia and gonorrhoea risk may vary with contraceptive method use. Further investigation is warranted to better understand the mechanisms of chlamydia and gonorrhoea susceptibility in the context of contraceptive use.

Complete pathological response following levonorgestrel intrauterine device in clinically stage 1 endometrial adenocarcinoma: Results of a randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Intrauterine levonorgestrel (LNG-IUD) is used to treat patients with endometrial adenocarcinoma (EAC) and endometrial hyperplasia with atypia (EHA) but limited evidence is available on its effectiveness. The study determined the extent to which LNG-IUD with or without metformin (M) or weight loss (WL) achieves a pathological complete response (pCR) in patients with EAC or EHA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase II randomized controlled clinical trial enrolled patients with histologically confirmed, clinically stage 1 FIGO grade 1 EAC or EHA; a body mass index > 30 kg/m2; a depth of myometrial invasion of less than 50% on MRI; a serum CA125 ≤ 30 U/mL. All patients received LNG-IUD and were randomized to observation (OBS), M (500 mg orally twice daily), or WL (pooled analysis). The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients developing a pCR (defined as absence of any evidence of EAC or EHA) after 6 months. RESULTS: From December 2012 to October 2019, 165 patients were enrolled and 154 completed the 6-months follow up. Women had a mean age of 53 years, and a mean BMI of 48 kg/m2. Ninety-six patients were diagnosed with EAC (58%) and 69 patients with EHA (42%). Thirty-five participants were randomized to OBS, 36 to WL and 47 to M (10 patients were withdrawn). After 6 months the rate of pCR was 61% (95% CI 42% to 77%) for OBS, 67% (95% CI 48% to 82%) for WL and 57% (95% CI 41% to 72%) for M. Across the three treatment groups, the pCR was 82% and 43% for EHA and EAC, respectively. CONCLUSION: Complete response rates at 6 months were encouraging for patients with EAC and EHA across the three groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: U.S. National Library of Medicine, NCT01686126.

Live births and maintenance with levonorgestrel IUD improve disease-free survival after fertility-sparing treatment of atypical hyperplasia and early endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Our objectives were to (1) compare different regimens of hormonal therapy (HT) in young women with atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH) and early endometrial cancer (EC), (2) assess reproductive and oncologic outcomes and (3) explore possible predictors of complete response (CR) and disease free survival (DFS). METHODS: Reproductive age women with AEH and Grade 1-2 endometrioid EC with no or minimal myometrial invasion on MRI treated with different regimens of HT were prospectively analyzed. Treatment protocols included levonorgestrel intrauterine device (LNG IUD), gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (aGnRH) or high-dose oral medroxyprogesteron acetate (MPA) separately and in combinations. RESULTS: Total of 418 patients with AEH (n = 228) and EC (n = 190) aged 19-46 years received HT. Overall CR rate was 96% in AEH and 88% in EC patients (р < 0.001). None of the regimens used in AEH (LNG IUD + 2 D&C vs. LNG IUD + aGnRH vs. LNG IUD + 3 D&C) was found inferior to the others (CR of 98%, 95%, 100%, respectively, p > 0.05) except for MPA alone (CR 87%, р = 0.009). Out of four HT regimens used in EC LNG IUD + aGnRH+3 D&C was superior to all others (CR 96%, р = 0.026) where 2 D&Cs were performed or oral MPA was prescribed. The median follow-up for 339 patients was 33 months (range: 3-136), 68% of patients (n = 232) attempted conception, 38% (n = 89) of them used ART. The birth rate was 42% (n = 97). The rate of recurrence was 26% (50/196) in AEH group and 36% (51/143) in EC group (p = 0.05). Birth after treatment (HR = 0.24) or LNG IUD maintenance (HR = 0.18) were associated with superior DFS (p < 0.001 for both). ART use did not influence DFS. CONCLUSION: Hormonal therapy of AEH and early EC with LNG IUD is superior to MPA-containing regimens, however still carries high risk of recurrence. Post-treatment pregnancy rates are satisfactory and can be further improved by broader ART use which was proven safe. Initial diagnosis of AEH, post-treatment child birth and LNG IUD maintenance were associated with decreased rates of recurrence.

Optimal duration of fertility-sparing hormonal treatment for early-stage endometrioid endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the oncologic outcomes of long-term fertility-sparing treatment (FST) in patients with early-stage endometrial cancer (EC) and to determine the optimal duration of FST that would not hamper survival outcomes. METHODS: Patients undergoing FST for presumed stage IA, grade 1 EC between 2005 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Oncologic outcomes were compared between the group with ≤6 months of FST and the group with >6 months of FST. Segmented regression analysis was used to estimate the dynamic changes in cumulative complete response (CR) rates according to FST duration. RESULTS: A total of 122 patients received oral progestin, with concurrent levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device use in 108 (88.5%) and 105 (86.1%) achieved CR with a median time to achieve CR of 10 (3-42) months. Of the patients not achieving CR at 6 months of FST, 95.1% (78/82) continued further FST. The overall CR rate (88.9% [32/36] vs. 84.9% [73/86], P = 0.436] was not significantly different between the groups with ≤6 and > 6 months of FST. The changes in cumulative CR rates were significantly different between the two segments divided by 15 months from the initial FST (P = 0.0015, segmented regression analysis). The overall progressive disease (PD) rate was 3.3% (4/122), and PD was first detected during 9-12 months of FST. CONCLUSION: Patients not achieving CR and not showing PD at 6 months of FST could continue further FST. If disease progression is excluded, 15 months of FST can be considered as the cutoff for the optimal FST duration.

Continued medical treatment for persistent early endometrial cancer in young women.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of continuing medical therapy in patients who did not achieve complete response (CR) despite 9 months of progestin treatment. We also sought to determine the prognostic factors associated with achieving CR among these patients. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 51 patients with presumed stage IA, grade 1 or 2 endometrioid adenocarcinoma who had persistent disease on biopsy performed at 9-12 months after at least 9 months of progestin-based therapy. Data on clinicopathological factors and oncological and obstetrical outcomes following continuous hormonal treatment were extracted from the patients' medical records and analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses for predicting CR were performed. RESULTS: Thirty-seven (72.5%) of 51 patients achieved CR after prolonged fertility-sparing treatment. Median time to CR from starting initial progestin was 17.3 months (range, 12.1-91.7 months). On univariate analysis, history of polycystic ovarian syndrome, histologic grade 2, and not achieving partial response (PR) until 12 months were significantly associated with failure to CR (odds ratio [OR], 6.188, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.405-27.244, p = 0.018; OR, 9.722, 95% CI, 1.614-58.581, p = 0.013; and OR, 21.750, 95% CI, 4.016-117.783, p < 0.001, respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed that not achieving PR until 12 months was an independent prognostic factor predicting failure to CR after prolonged progestin therapy (OR, 21.803, 95% CI, 3.601-132.025, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Continued medical treatment is effective for persistent early endometrial carcinoma after at least 9 months of progestin therapy in young women who want to preserve their fertility.

Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system versus oral medroxyprogesterone acetate in infertile women with endometrial hyperplasia without atypia.

RESEARCH QUESTION: How does use of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) in infertile women with endometrial hyperplasia without atypia affect endometrial hyperplasia regression and pregnancy rates compared with oral medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA)? DESIGN: This prospective cohort study included 215 infertile women with an indication for assisted reproductive technology (ART) and a diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia without atypia. Endometrial hyperplasia was diagnosed by hysteroscopic endometrial biopsy. At the time of first- and second-line treatment, patients were offered therapy with either oral MPA 10 mg daily or LNG-IUS. Follow-up biopsies were scheduled after 90 days' treatment. After endometrial hyperplasia regression, patients were admitted to IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics and confounders including age at diagnosis, body mass index and duration of infertility did not differ between LNG-IUS users and control participants and were accounted for using propensity score weighting. Endometrial hyperplasia regression rate at first follow-up was higher in the LNG-IUS group than the oral progestins group (28/28, 100% and 110/187, 58.8%; P < 0.001), while that after second-line treatment was comparable between the two groups (89/91, 97.8% and 122/124, 98.4%; P = 0.22). Clinical pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate and cumulative live birth rate following ART in patients ever receiving LNG-IUS were similar to those of patients receiving only MPA (34% versus 39.5%, 22.6% versus 34.7% and 26.4% versus 25.8%). CONCLUSION: Endometrial hyperplasia regression is greater in women receiving LNG-IUS compared with oral MPA, while live birth rates following ART are comparable between the two groups. The use of LNG-IUS does not jeopardize the chances of pregnancy in women seeking fertility treatment.

Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system versus endometrial ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding.

BACKGROUND: Heavy menstrual bleeding affects the physical functioning and social well-being of many women. The levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and endometrial ablation are 2 frequently applied treatments in women with heavy menstrual bleeding. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system with endometrial ablation in women with heavy menstrual bleeding. STUDY DESIGN: This multicenter, randomized controlled, noninferiority trial was performed in 26 hospitals and in a network of general practices in the Netherlands. Women with heavy menstrual bleeding, aged 34 years and older, without a pregnancy wish or intracavitary pathology were randomly allocated to treatment with either the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (Mirena) or endometrial ablation, performed with a bipolar radiofrequency device (NovaSure). The primary outcome was blood loss at 24 months, measured with a Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart score. Secondary outcomes included reintervention rates, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and sexual function. RESULTS: We registered 645 women as eligible, of whom 270 women provided informed consent. Of these, 132 women were allocated to the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (baseline Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart score, 616) and 138 women to endometrial ablation (baseline Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart score, 630). At 24 months, mean Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart scores were 64.8 in the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system group and 14.2 in the endometrial ablation group (difference, 50.5 points; 95% confidence interval, 4.3-96.7; noninferiority, P=.87 [25 Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart point margin]). Compared with 14 women (10%) in the endometrial ablation group, 34 women (27%) underwent a surgical reintervention in the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system group (relative risk, 2.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.49-4.68). There was no significant difference in patient satisfaction and quality of life between the groups. CONCLUSION: Both the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and endometrial ablation strategies lead to a large decrease in menstrual blood loss in women with heavy menstrual bleeding, with comparable quality of life scores after treatment. Nevertheless, there was a significant difference in menstrual blood loss in favor of endometrial ablation, and we could not demonstrate noninferiority of starting with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Women who start with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system, a reversible and less invasive treatment, are at an increased risk of needing additional treatment compared with women who start with endometrial ablation. The results of this study will enable physicians to provide women with heavy menstrual bleeding with the evidence to make a well-informed decision between the 2 treatments.