Predictive Value of Molecular Subtypes in Premenopausal Women with Hormone Receptor-positive Early Breast Cancer: Results from the ABCSG Trial 5.

PURPOSE: To assess the predictive value of molecular breast cancer subtypes in premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer who received adjuvant endocrine treatment or chemotherapy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Molecular breast cancer subtypes were centrally assessed on whole tumor sections by IHC in patients of the Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group Trial 5 who had received either 5 years of tamoxifen/3 years of goserelin or six cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF). Luminal A disease was defined as Ki67 <20% and luminal B as Ki67 ≥20%. The luminal B/HER2-positive subtype displayed 3+ HER2-IHC or amplification by ISH. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using Cox models adjusted for clinical and pathologic factors. RESULTS: 185 (38%), 244 (50%), and 59 (12%) of 488 tumors were classified as luminal A, luminal B/HER2-negative and luminal B/HER2-positive, respectively. Luminal B subtypes were associated with poor outcome. Patients with luminal B tumors had a significantly shorter RFS [adjusted HR for recurrence: 2.22; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.41-3.49; P = 0.001] and OS (adjusted HR for death: 3.51; 95% CI, 1.80-6.87; P < 0.001). No interaction between molecular subtypes and treatment was observed (test for interaction: P = 0.84 for RFS; P = 0.69 for OS). CONCLUSIONS: Determination of molecular subtypes by IHC is an independent prognostic factor for recurrence and death in premenopausal women with early-stage, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer but is not predictive for outcome of adjuvant treatment with tamoxifen/goserelin or CMF.See related commentary by Hunter et al., p. 5543.

Effect of adjuvant endocrine therapy on hormonal levels in premenopausal women with breast cancer: the ProBONE II study.

Endocrine therapy (ET) is a key treatment modality in hormone receptor positive (HR+) early breast cancer (BC) patients. Although the anticancer activity of adjuvant ET + zoledronic acid (ZOL) has been investigated, the potential effects of ET ± ZOL on endocrine hormones in premenopausal women with HR+ early BC are not well understood. ProBONE II was prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Premenopausal patients with histologically confirmed invasive BC with no evidence of metastases and a T score >-2.5 received ET ± ZOL 4 mg every 3 months for 2 years. Serum levels of estradiol (E2), follicle-stimulating hormone, anti-muellerian hormone (AMH), inhibins A and B, sex hormone-binding globulin, parathyroid hormone, total testosterone, and vitamin D were evaluated at baseline and at every scheduled visit. Of 71 women enrolled, 70 were evaluable (n = 34, ZOL; n = 36, placebo). No statistically significant differences were observed in hormone levels, except E2 and AMH, which showed minor differences. These included decreases in serum E2 levels, which reached a nadir after 3 and 9 months in placebo and ZOL groups, respectively, and decrease in serum AMH levels throughout the study with ZOL, but remained constant with placebo after 6 months. Adverse events in ZOL-treated group were influenza-like illness (32.4 %), bone pain (32.4 %), chills (20.6 %), and nausea (23.5 %). ET ± ZOL was well tolerated. This study showed no influence of ZOL on hormonal level changes that accompany ET, supporting inclusion of ZOL in adjuvant therapy for premenopausal women with HR + BC.

Dor mamária: propedêutica e terapêutica / Breast pain: propaedeutic and therapeutic

Mastalgia é um dos sintomas mais comuns em mulheres, tendo uma prevalência de 41 a 69% e pode se apresentar como um leve desconforto até dor severa, que interfere na qualidade de vida. A principal preocupação das pacientes que consultam por este sintoma é o medo do câncer. Essa é classificada em mastalgia cíclica, acíclica ou extramamária. Cíclica quando se apresenta no período pré-menstrual; na acíclica não há relação com o ciclo e, geralmente, acomete pacientes na pós-menopausa. A extramamária é a dor referida na mama, porém usualmente é de origem musculoesquelética. Na presença de achados clínicos e radiológicos normais, aproximadamente 85% das pacientes melhoram apenas com orientação e tranquilização, não necessitando de medicação. Foi realizada uma revisão sistemática para avaliar as possibilidades terapêuticas e seus níveis de evidência. Os anti-inflamatórios não esteróides tópico, para mastalgia cíclica ou acíclica, e o fitoterâpico Agnus castus, para mastalgia cíclica, demonstraram boa eficácia e tolerabilidade e podem ser usados como medida inicial. O tamoxifeno e o danazol são medicamentos eficazes, porém apresentam mais efeitos colaterais. Para casos especiais, ainda há a alternativa de usar bromocriptina e goserelina. O manejo da dor mamária pode ser sintetizado em três itens: excluir câncer, orientar e tranquilizar ao máximo e medicar ao mínimo.(AU)

Breast pain or mastalgia is one of the most common symptoms in women, with a prevalence ranging from 41 to 69%. It presents as a mild discomfort to severe pain, that interferes with the quality of life. The main concern of patients consulting for this symptom is the fear of cancer. It is classified as cyclical, acyclical or extra-mammary. When presented during the premenstrual period, it is cyclical; acyclical, when not cycle-related and usually affects patients in post-menopausal. Extra-mammary is the breast referred pain, but it is usually of muscle-skeptical origin. In the presence of normal clinical and radiological findings, approximately 85% of patients improve only with reassurance, not requiring medication. A systematic review was performed to assess the therapeutic possibilities and their evidence levels. Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, for cyclic or acyclic mastalgia, and the phytotherapic Agnus castus, for cyclic mastalgia, showed good efficacy and tolerability and can be used as an initial measure. Tamoxifen and danazol are effective drugs, but they present more side effects. For special cases, there is the alternative of using bromocriptin and goserelin. Breast pain management can be summarized in three items: exclude cancer, maximum reassurance and minimum medication.(AU)

Ovarian suppression/ablation in premenopausal ER-positive breast cancer patients. Issues and recommendations.

Endocrine therapy remains pivotal in the adjuvant therapy of premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Ovarian ablation, used alone, is effective in delaying recurrence and increasing survival in such women. When added to chemotherapy, it is less clear that this technique is effective, perhaps because of the endocrine ablative effect of chemotherapy. Adjuvant trials comparing ovarian ablation with or without tamoxifen to CMF-type chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluorouracil) suggest that the endocrine therapy is equivalent to or better than this chemotherapy in women whose tumors express estrogen and/or progesterone receptors. Endocrine therapy with ovarian ablation, tamoxifen, or the combination is also useful in the metastatic setting in premenopausal women.

Adjuvant chemotherapy followed by goserelin compared with either modality alone: the impact on amenorrhea, hot flashes, and quality of life in premenopausal patients--the International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VIII.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to compare quality of life (QOL) and menopausal symptoms among premenopausal patients with lymph node-negative breast cancer receiving chemotherapy, goserelin, or their sequential combination, and to investigate differential effects by age. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated QOL data from 874 pre- and perimenopausal women with lymph node-negative breast cancer who were randomly assigned to receive six courses of classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy, ovarian suppression with goserelin for 24 months, or six courses of classical CMF followed by 18 months of goserelin. We report QOL data collected during 3 years after random assignment in patients without disease recurrence. RESULTS: Overall, patients receiving goserelin alone showed a marked improvement or less deterioration in QOL measures over the first 6 months than those patients treated with CMF. There were no differences at 3 years after random assignment according to treatment except for hot flashes. As reflected in the hot flashes scores, patients in all three treatment groups experienced induced amenorrhea, but the onset of ovarian function suppression was slightly delayed for patients receiving chemotherapy. Younger patients (< 40 years) who received goserelin alone returned to their premenopausal status at 6 months after the cessation of therapy, while those who received CMF showed marginal changes from their baseline hot flashes scores. CONCLUSION: Age-adjusted risk profiles that consider patient-reported outcomes enable patients to adapt to their disease and treatment, such as considering the trade-offs between delayed endocrine symptoms, but higher risk of permanent menopause with chemotherapy, and immediate but reversible endocrine symptoms with goserelin, in younger premenopausal patients.

Zoledronic acid prevents cancer treatment-induced bone loss in premenopausal women receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy for hormone-responsive breast cancer: a report from the Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group.

PURPOSE: Adjuvant therapy for breast cancer can be associated with decreased bone mineral density (BMD) that may lead to skeletal morbidity. This study examined whether zoledronic acid can prevent bone loss associated with adjuvant endocrine therapy in premenopausal patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study is a randomized, open-label, phase III, four-arm trial comparing tamoxifen (20 mg/d orally) and goserelin (3.6 mg every 28 days subcutaneously) +/- zoledronic acid (4 mg intravenously every 6 months) versus anastrozole (1 mg/d orally) and goserelin +/- zoledronic acid for 3 years in premenopausal women with hormone-responsive breast cancer. In a BMD subprotocol at three trial centers, patients underwent serial BMD measurements at 0, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. RESULTS: Four hundred one patients were included in the BMD subprotocol. Endocrine treatment without zoledronic acid led to significant (P < .001) overall bone loss after 3 years of treatment (BMD, -14.4% after 36 months; mean T score reduction, -1.4). Overall bone loss was significantly more severe in patients receiving anastrozole/goserelin (BMD, -17.3%; mean T score reduction, -2.6) compared with patients receiving tamoxifen/goserelin (BMD, -11.6%; mean T score reduction, -1.1). In contrast, BMD remained stable in zoledronic acid-treated patients (P < .0001 compared with endocrine therapy alone). No interactions with age or other risk factors were noted. CONCLUSION: Endocrine therapy caused significant bone loss that increased with treatment duration in premenopausal women with breast cancer. Zoledronic acid 4 mg every 6 months effectively inhibited bone loss. Regular BMD measurements and initiation of concomitant bisphosphonate therapy on evidence of bone loss should be considered for patients undergoing endocrine therapy.

[Drawbacks of ovarian ablation with goserelin in women with breast cancer]. / Efeitos secundários da castração com goserelina em mulheres com cancro da mama.

In the last few years, ovarian ablation with GnRH agonists has been used as first-line adjuvant therapy in pre and perimenopausal breast cancer. These drugs suppress ovarian function in the hypothalamic-pituitary axis and they have adverse effects in other end-organs. A retrospective study was conducted on 35 premenopausal women, with breast cancer, and treated with goserelin, in order to investigate the effects of iatrogenic estrogen suppression. All women complaint of amenorrhea and only half of them referred hot-flashes, weight gain or arthralgias. Hot-flushes and arthralgias remit spontaneously in the end of the treatment. Osteodensitometry was used to access bone mass. There was a reduction in mineral bone mass and T-score at femoral neck and lumbar spine after the treatment with goserelin, but without statistical significance, except for the T-score in lumbar spine.

Physician practices of bone density testing and drug prescribing to prevent or treat osteoporosis during androgen deprivation therapy.

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a strong risk factor for osteoporosis. The current study identified physician practices in preventing or treating osteoporosis during ADT. The practices of interest are the uses of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans, bisphosphonates, calcium or vitamin D supplement, calcitonin, or estrogen. METHODS: A retrospective medical record review was conducted. Patients were included if they had received ADT with goserelin injection for >/= 1 year. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of receiving at least one intervention. RESULTS: Analyses included 184 patients. Most were the elderly with multiple risk factors for osteoporosis. Only 8.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.6-13.0%) of patients received a DXA scan at least once during the past 3 years. Oral and intravenous bisphosphonates were prescribed in 4.9% (95%CI, 1.8-8.0%) and 0.5% (95%CI, 0-2.0%) of patients, respectively, during the past year. Overall, 14.7% of patients (95%CI, 9.5-20.0%) received at least one intervention. Concurrent risk factors for osteoporosis, including smoking, alcoholism, advanced age, low body mass index, long duration of ADT, multiple comorbidities, history of fractures, and steroid use, were not independent predictors of having received interventions. However, bone metastasis was, with a hazard ratio of 5.6 (95%CI, 1.99-15.6%). Primary care physicians provided the greatest number of interventions and cancer-related specialists provided the fewest. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients with prostate carcinoma undergoing ADT did not receive interventions to prevent or treat osteoporosis. Having other concurrent risk factors for osteoporosis was not predictive of receiving these few interventions.

Bone mineral density among premenopausal women with early breast cancer in a randomized trial of adjuvant endocrine therapy.

PURPOSE: To examine the effects on bone mineral density of 2 years of treatment with a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist alone or in combination with tamoxifen or tamoxifen alone in premenopausal breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We recruited 89 women from two centers in Stockholm participating in a randomized multicenter trial of three different endocrine approaches in the adjuvant setting (Zoladex in Premenopausal Patients Trial). The women were assigned to receive the LHRH agonist goserelin with or without tamoxifen, tamoxifen alone, or no endocrine therapy. The treatment was given for 2 years. We measured total-body bone density before start of treatment and at 12, 24, and 36 months. RESULTS: After 2 years of treatment, there was a significant loss of bone mineral density (mean change, -5%; P <.001) in the women receiving goserelin alone. The combined goserelin and tamoxifen treatment, as well as tamoxifen alone, resulted in a lesser but statistically significant decline in bone mineral density (mean change, -1.4%; P =.02; and -1.5%; P <.001). One year after cessation of treatment, the goserelin group alone showed a partial recovery from bone loss (mean change, 1.5%; P =.02). CONCLUSION: Two years of ovarian ablation from goserelin treatment caused a significant reduction in bone mineral density but there was a partial recovery from the bone loss 1 year after cessation of treatment. The addition of tamoxifen seems to partially counteract the demineralizing effects of goserelin.

Adjuvant chemotherapy followed by goserelin versus either modality alone for premenopausal lymph node-negative breast cancer: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Although chemotherapy and ovarian function suppression are both effective adjuvant therapies for patients with early-stage breast cancer, little is known of the efficacy of their sequential combination. In an International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG) randomized clinical trial (Trial VIII) for pre- and perimenopausal women with lymph node-negative breast cancer, we compared sequential chemotherapy followed by the gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist goserelin with each modality alone. METHODS: From March 1990 through October 1999, 1063 patients stratified by estrogen receptor (ER) status and radiotherapy plan were randomly assigned to receive goserelin for 24 months (n = 346), six courses of "classical" CMF (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil) chemotherapy (n = 360), or six courses of classical CMF followed by 18 months of goserelin (CMF --> goserelin; n = 357). A fourth arm (no adjuvant treatment) with 46 patients was discontinued in 1992. Tumors were classified as ER-negative (30%), ER-positive (68%), or ER status unknown (3%). Twenty percent of patients were aged 39 years or younger. The median follow-up was 7 years. The primary outcome was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Patients with ER-negative tumors achieved better disease-free survival if they received CMF (5-year DFS for CMF = 84%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 77% to 91%; 5-year DFS for CMF --> goserelin = 88%, 95% CI = 82% to 94%) than if they received goserelin alone (5-year DFS = 73%, 95% CI = 64% to 81%). By contrast, for patients with ER-positive disease, chemotherapy alone and goserelin alone provided similar outcomes (5-year DFS for both treatment groups = 81%, 95% CI = 76% to 87%), whereas sequential therapy (5-year DFS = 86%, 95% CI = 82% to 91%) provided a statistically nonsignificant improvement compared with either modality alone, primarily because of the results among younger women. CONCLUSIONS: Premenopausal women with ER-negative (i.e., endocrine nonresponsive), lymph node-negative breast cancer should receive adjuvant chemotherapy. For patients with ER-positive (i.e., endocrine responsive) disease, the combination of chemotherapy with ovarian function suppression or other endocrine agents, and the use of endocrine therapy alone should be studied.

Survival analyses from the ZEBRA study. goserelin (Zoladex) versus CMF in premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer.

The Zoladex Early Breast Cancer Research Association (ZEBRA) trial compared the efficacy and tolerability of goserelin (Zoladex) with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy in pre-/perimenopausal women with node-positive early breast cancer. The results of disease-free survival (DFS) analyses have already been published. Here we present an update including data on overall survival (OS) from the ZEBRA trial at a median follow-up of 7.3 years. In patients with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive tumours, non-inferiority of goserelin versus CMF for OS was shown; goserelin was again shown to be equivalent to CMF for DFS. This updated analysis has demonstrated that the two treatments are also equivalent for distant disease-free survival (DDFS). In patients with ER-negative disease, goserelin was inferior to CMF for DFS, DDFS and OS. This follow-up analysis confirms the previously reported outcomes from the ZEBRA trial and demonstrates that goserelin offers an effective alternative to CMF chemotherapy for adjuvant therapy of premenopausal patients with ER-positive, node-positive early breast cancer.

Side effects of adjuvant endocrine treatment in premenopausal breast cancer patients: a prospective randomized study.

PURPOSE: To compare the effect of adjuvant endocrine therapies with and without chemotherapy on physical symptoms, anxiety, and depressive symptoms in premenopausal women with breast cancer in a randomized clinical trial (the Zoladex in Premenopausal Patients trial). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The patients were randomly assigned to goserelin, goserelin plus tamoxifen, tamoxifen alone, or no endocrine therapy. The duration of the endocrine treatment was 2 years. The groups were observed for 3 years after primary treatment (ie, during 2 years of active treatment as well as 1 year after cessation of the adjuvant endocrine therapy). All patients with node-positive disease received adjuvant chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF), which was given concurrently with the endocrine treatment. RESULTS: Patients treated with CMF typically reported higher levels of physical symptoms than did patients who did not receive CMF. It was only among patients who did not receive chemotherapy that the endocrine treatment had differential effects. Goserelin was most burdensome and resulted in similar symptom levels as those of CMF, whereas the side effects of tamoxifen alone were milder. After cessation of the endocrine treatment, the side effects diminished in patients who had not received CMF, whereas patients treated with CMF reported ongoing problems at the 3-year follow-up. In contrast, anxiety and depressive symptoms were not significantly affected by endocrine treatment or chemotherapy during the 3 years of assessment. CONCLUSION: Goserelin and tamoxifen resulted in menopausal symptoms, but these symptoms were reversible. However, women treated with CMF experienced physical symptoms throughout the whole study period.

Luteinising hormone releasing hormone analogues in the treatment of prostate cancer.

The use of the luteinising hormone releasing hormone (LHRH) analogues--goserelin (Zoladex, AstraZeneca) and leuprorelin (Prostap, Wyeth)--is well established and forms the backbone of the treatment of locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer. Comparable efficacy with orchidectomy and, historically, diethylstilbestrol (DES) is accepted, with the advantages of reversibility and limited thromboembolic and cardiovascular toxicity, respectively. Side effects such as hot flushes, loss of libido, lethargy and decreased bone mineral density have recently stimulated more interest in the use of non-steroidal anti-androgens such as bicalutamide (Casodex, AstraZeneca) in locally advanced disease. Although better tolerated, bicalutamide has significant problems with gynaecomastia and breast pain. Maximal androgen blockade using LHRH analogues and their adjuvant use with radiotherapy are discussed, as well as their experimental application in intermittent androgen suppression therapy. Similar side effect profiles are reported for the LHRH analogues but injection tolerability differs with the smaller 23G needle for Prostap 3 compared to the 16G needle for Zoladex LA. There is no evidence to suggest a difference in the efficacy between the LHRH analogues goserelin and leuprorelin, although no direct comparison has yet been undertaken.

Goserelin versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil as adjuvant therapy in premenopausal patients with node-positive breast cancer: The Zoladex Early Breast Cancer Research Association Study.

PURPOSE: Current adjuvant therapies have improved survival for premenopausal patients with breast cancer but may have short-term toxic effects and long-term effects associated with premature menopause. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Zoladex Early Breast Cancer Research Association study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of goserelin (3.6 mg every 28 days for 2 years; n = 817) versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy (six 28-day cycles; n = 823) for adjuvant treatment in premenopausal patients with node-positive breast cancer. RESULTS: Analysis was performed when 684 events had been achieved, and the median follow-up was 6 years. A significant interaction between treatment and estrogen receptor (ER) status was found (P =.0016). In ER-positive patients (approximately 74%), goserelin was equivalent to CMF for disease-free survival (DFS) (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.20). In ER-negative patients, goserelin was inferior to CMF for DFS (HR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.27 to 2.44). Amenorrhea occurred in more than 95% of goserelin patients by 6 months versus 58.6% of CMF patients. Menses returned in most goserelin patients after therapy stopped, whereas amenorrhea was generally permanent in CMF patients (22.6% v 76.9% amenorrheic at 3 years). Chemotherapy-related side effects such as nausea/vomiting, alopecia, and infection were higher with CMF than with goserelin during CMF treatment. Side effects related to estrogen suppression were initially higher with goserelin, but when goserelin treatment stopped, reduced to a level below that observed in the CMF group. CONCLUSION: Goserelin offers an effective, well-tolerated alternative to CMF in premenopausal patients with ER-positive and node-positive early breast cancer.

Effect of endocrine treatment on sexuality in premenopausal breast cancer patients: a prospective randomized study.

PURPOSE: To study the sexual effects of the 2-year adjuvant goserelin (Zoladex [Zeneca AB, Södertälje, Sweden]) alone, tamoxifen alone, and Zoladex and tamoxifen in combination (ZT) versus no adjuvant endocrine therapy among premenopausal breast cancer patients with or without chemotherapy in a controlled clinical trial (a European multicenter trial: Zoladex in Premenopausal Breast Cancer Patients). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective study examined several aspects of sexuality through the use of self-administered questionnaires, which were completed by patients at seven points of assessment for 3 years after randomization. RESULTS: Patients treated with chemotherapy had a higher level of sexual dysfunction than did patients who received no systemic treatment. The addition of endocrine treatment did not alter this result. In contrast, among patients who did not receive chemotherapy, Zoladex and ZT produced a significantly higher level of dysfunction from 1 to 2 years after inclusion, as compared with those who received no endocrine treatment. Tamoxifen alone did not produce side effects. After termination of endocrine treatment, sexual dysfunction began to diminish. Those with chemotherapy had high and frequently increasing levels of dysfunction even after 2 to 3 years of independent of endocrine treatment. Zoladex had a negative effect on sexual fear, which was reduced by the addition of tamoxifen. CONCLUSION: Zoladex increased sexual dysfunction during treatment among patients without chemotherapy, but the disturbances of sexual functioning were reversible. The use of adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with continued sexual problems, even at 3 years after randomization.

Goserelin (Zoladex) or orchiectomy in metastatic prostate cancer? A quality of life and cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: We have today two treatment alternatives (orchiectomy or LHRH-analogue) in metastatic prostate cancer offering the same expectations of survival. This study documents the quality of life (QoL) and cost-effectiveness of these alternatives. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 65 consecutive patients treated at the University Hospital of Tromsø (UHT), Norway, between 1994 and 1999 were registered. At evaluation, 45 patients (LHRH-analogue--15 patients, orchiectomy--30 patients) were alive and included in the QoL-study (EORTC QLQ C-30, QoL 15D). 45 patients were followed-up at the UHT and included in the cost-analysis. Costs were calculated for a 36-month interval and converted to British pounds (1 Pound = 13 NOK). A 5% d.r. was employed. RESULTS: The mean QoL (15D) was 76.4 (orchiectomy) and 72 (LHRH) (0-100 scale). Constipation, urinating problems, fatigue, pain and loss of sexual functioning were the dominant symptoms. The treatment costs per patient treated were 8,895 Pounds (orchiectomy) and 10,937 Pounds (LHRH-analogue). The crossover in cost was located at 25 months. A sensitivity analysis varying discount rate (0-10%), drug charges (25-50% off) and treatment time (12-18 months) did not alter the conclusion. CONCLUSION: Orchiectomy is the treatment of choice when life expectancy is more than two years.

Goserelin. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic use in benign gynaecological disorders.

Goserelin is a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogue which, during continuous administration, down-regulates the pituitary-ovarian gonadal axis and reduces levels of the gonadotrophins, luteinising hormone and follicle-stimulating hormone. In women, this results in suppression of ovarian steroidogenesis and a decline in estrogen to levels similar to those observed after menopause or following surgical oophorectomy. Thus, goserelin has a useful role in the management of some benign estrogen-dependent gynaecological disorders. Goserelin is available as a biodegradable sustained release depot 3.6mg injection which is administered every 28 days. In women with endometriosis, monthly injections of depot goserelin were effective in achieving resolution of endometriotic implants and in improving pelvic symptoms, including pain and dyspareunia. Randomised clinical comparisons of depot goserelin with danazol indicate that goserelin is at least as effective as danazol and is better tolerated in the treatment of endometriosis. In the management of uterine leiomyomata (fibroids), goserelin depot injections reduce uterine size and the size of uterine leiomyomata, with maximum clinical benefit achieved approximately 3 to 4 months after initiation of treatment. When used as an adjunctive pretreatment for women undergoing surgical removal of uterine leiomyomata, goserelin was associated with technically easier surgical procedures, reduced intraoperative blood loss and reduced transfusion requirements around the time of surgery. As an alternative to surgery, therapeutic use of goserelin is limited by the rapid regrowth of leiomyomata following cessation of treatment. However, goserelin may be a useful treatment for women approaching menopause, in whom uterine leiomyomata shrink naturally as endogenous estrogen levels decline. In women with dysfunctional uterine bleeding, treatment with depot goserelin before surgery facilitates resection and ablative procedures by suppressing endometrial growth and thinning the endometrial mucosa. Goserelin is also an effective alternative to surgery in this patient group. As adjuvant therapy for women undergoing assisted reproduction procedures, goserelin is associated with reduced cycle cancellation rates and with an increase in the rate of oocyte retrieval. The tolerability profile of goserelin is characterised by adverse effects typical of hypoestrogenism, including hot flushes, loss of libido and loss of bone mineral density. However, concomitant 'add-back' hormone replacement therapy appears to effectively reduce these hypoestrogenic symptoms. In summary, the availability of depot goserelin has broadened the spectrum of effective treatments for benign estrogen-dependent gynaecological disorders. As goserelin is effective as a sustained release depot formulation suitable for administration on a monthly basis, it is also a convenient and practical treatment choice.

Medroxyprogesterone acetate supplementation diminishes the hypoestrogenic side effects of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist without changing its efficacy in endometriosis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of concomitant use of goserelin and medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) in the treatment of endometriosis. DESIGN: Thirty-eight women with laparoscopically confirmed endometriosis were treated with once-a-month s.c. injections of goserelin acetate 3.6 mg (Zoladex depot; Zeneca Pharmaceutics, Cheshire, United Kingdom) randomly combined with either MPA (100 mg daily; n = 19) or a placebo (one tablet daily; n = 19) in a double-blind trial. Symptoms and side effects were monitored for a treatment period of 6 months and a follow-up period of 6 months. Blood and urine samples were collected for the assessment of endocrine and biochemical parameters. A second-look laparoscopy was performed 6 months after the treatment in 29 women. RESULTS: The extent of endometriosis was diminished similarly in both treatment groups, as were pelvic symptoms. Fewer women in the MPA group had hot flushes and sweating at 3 and 6 months of treatment. Sex hormone-binding globulin decreased in the MPA group but not in the placebo group. Consequently, the E2 index (E2/SHBG X 100), reflecting the free fraction of E2, fell more in the placebo group than it did in the MPA group. The increased urinary excretion of calcium observed during placebo treatment was prevented by MPA. CONCLUSION: High-dose MPA combined with a GnRH agonist (GnRH-A) diminished some antiestrogenic effects of the agonist. A reduction in hypoestrogenic side effects and a possible bone-sparing effect can be regarded as beneficial, especially as the good effect of the GnRH-a on endometriotic implants and pelvic symptoms prevailed.