Two-year efficacy and safety of relugolix combination therapy in women with endometriosis-associated pain: SPIRIT open-label extension study.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the efficacy and safety of long-term treatment (up to 2 years) with relugolix combination therapy (CT) in women with moderate to severe endometriosis-associated pain? SUMMARY ANSWER: For up to 2 years, treatment with relugolix CT improved menstrual and non-menstrual pain, dyspareunia, and function in women with endometriosis; after an initial decline of <1%, the mean bone mineral density (BMD) remained stable with continued treatment. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Endometriosis is a chronic condition characterized by symptoms of dysmenorrhea, non-menstrual pelvic pain (NMPP), and dyspareunia, which have a substantial impact on the lives of affected women, their partners, and families. SPIRIT 1 and 2 were phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of once-daily relugolix CT (relugolix 40 mg, oestradiol 1 mg, norethisterone acetate 0.5 mg) in premenopausal women (age 18-50 years) with endometriosis and moderate-to-severe dysmenorrhea and NMPP. These trials demonstrated a significant improvement of dysmenorrhea, NMPP, and dyspareunia in women treated with relugolix CT, with minimal decline (<1%) in BMD versus placebo at 24 weeks. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Patients participating in this open-label, single-arm, long-term extension (LTE) study of the 24-week SPIRIT pivotal studies (SPIRIT 1 and 2) received up to an additional 80 weeks of once-daily oral relugolix CT treatment between May 2018 and January 2023. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Premenopausal women with confirmed endometriosis and moderate to severe dysmenorrhea and NMPP who completed the 24-week pivotal studies (SPIRIT 1 and 2 trials; Giudice et al., 2022) and who met all entry criteria were eligible to enrol. Two-year results were analysed by treatment group based on original randomization in pivotal studies: relugolix CT, delayed relugolix CT (relugolix 40 mg monotherapy for 12 weeks, followed by relugolix CT), or placebo→relugolix CT (placebo for 24 weeks followed by relugolix CT). The primary endpoints of the LTE study were the proportion of dysmenorrhea and NMPP responders at Week 52 and Week 104/end-of-treatment (EOT). A responder was a participant who achieved a predefined, clinically meaningful reduction from baseline in Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores (0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain imaginable) for the specific pain type with no increase in analgesic use. The predefined clinically meaningful threshold for dysmenorrhea was 2.8 points and for NMPP was 2.1 points. Secondary efficacy endpoints included change from baseline in Endometriosis Health Profile-30 (EHP-30) pain domain scores, a measure of the effects of endometriosis-associated pain on daily activities (function), NRS scores for dysmenorrhea, NMPP, dyspareunia, and overall pelvic pain, and analgesic/opioid use. Safety endpoints included adverse events and changes in BMD. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Of 1261 randomized patients, 1044 completed the pivotal studies, 802 enrolled in the LTE, 681 completed 52 weeks of treatment, and 501 completed 104 weeks of treatment. Demographics and baseline characteristics of the extension population were consistent with those of the original randomized population. Among patients randomized to relugolix CT at pivotal study baseline who continued in the LTE (N = 277), sustained improvements in endometriosis-associated pain were demonstrated through 104 weeks. The proportion of responders at Week 104/EOT for dysmenorrhea and NMPP was 84.8% and 75.8%, respectively. Decreases in dyspareunia and improvement in function assessed by EHP-30 pain domain were also sustained over 2 years. At Week 104/EOT, 91% of patients were opioid-free and 75% of patients were analgesic-free. Relugolix CT over 104 weeks was well tolerated with a safety profile consistent with that observed over the first 24 weeks. After initial least squares mean BMD loss <1% at Week 24, BMD plateaued at Week 36 and was sustained for the duration of 104 weeks of treatment. Efficacy and safety results were generally consistent in women in the placebo→relugolix CT and delayed relugolix CT groups. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study was conducted as an open-label study without a control group over the 80 weeks of the extension period. Of the 802 patients who were enrolled in this LTE study, 681 patients (84.9%) and 501 patients (62.5%) of patients completed 52 and 104 weeks of treatment, respectively. In addition, there currently are no comparative data to other hormonal medications. Finally, a third (37.4%) of the study population terminated participation early. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: In conclusion, relugolix CT offers an additional option to help address an important unmet clinical need for effective, safe, and well-tolerated medical treatments for endometriosis that can be used longer-term, reducing the need for opioids and improving quality of life. The findings from this study may help support the care of women with endometriosis seeking longer-term effective medical management of their symptoms. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded by Myovant Sciences GmbH (now Sumitomo Pharma Switzerland GmbH). C.M.B. reports fees from Myovant, grants from Bayer Healthcare, fees from ObsEva, and Chair of ESHRE Endometriosis Guideline Group (all funds went to the University of Oxford); N.P.J. reports personal fees from Myovant Sciences, during the conduct of the study, personal fees from Guerbet, personal fees from Organon, personal fees from Roche Diagnostics; S.A.-S. reports personal fees from Myovant Sciences, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Abbvie, personal fees from UpToDate; J.S.P., and R.B.W. are employees and shareholders of Myovant Sciences; J.C.A.F. and S.J.I. are shareholders of Myovant Sciences (but at time of publicaion are no longer employess of Myovant Sciences); M.S.A. and K.W. have no conflicts to declare; V.M. is a consultant to Myovant; L.C.G. reports personal fees from Myovant Sciences, Inc and Bayer. The authors did not receive compensation for manuscript writing, review, and revision. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03654274.

Non-Invasive Imaging Techniques for Diagnosis of Pelvic Deep Endometriosis and Endometriosis Classification Systems: An International Consensus Statement.

The International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) and International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) group, the European Endometriosis League (EEL), the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), the International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE), the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) and the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) elected an international, multidisciplinary panel of gynecological surgeons, sonographers and radiologists, including a steering committee, which searched the literature for relevant articles in order to review the literature and provide evidence-based and clinically relevant statements on the use of imaging techniques for non-invasive diagnosis and classification of pelvic deep endometriosis. Preliminary statements were drafted based on review of the relevant literature. Following two rounds of revisions and voting orchestrated by chairs of the participating societies, consensus statements were finalized. A final version of the document was then resubmitted to the society chairs for approval. Twenty statements were drafted, of which 14 reached strong and three moderate agreement after the first voting round. The remaining three statements were discussed by all members of the steering committee and society chairs and rephrased, followed by an additional round of voting. At the conclusion of the process, 14 statements had strong and five statements moderate agreement, with one statement left in equipoise. This consensus work aims to guide clinicians involved in treating women with suspected endometriosis during patient assessment, counseling and planning of surgical treatment strategies.

Once daily oral relugolix combination therapy versus placebo in patients with endometriosis-associated pain: two replicate phase 3, randomised, double-blind, studies (SPIRIT 1 and 2).

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis is a common cause of pelvic pain in women, for which current treatment options are suboptimal. Relugolix, an oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor antagonist, combined with estradiol and a progestin, was evaluated for treatment of endometriosis-associated pain. METHODS: In these two replicate, phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials at 219 community and hospital research centres in Africa, Australasia, Europe, North America, and South America, we randomly assigned women aged 18-50 years with surgically or directly visualised endometriosis with or without histological confirmation, or with histological diagnosis alone. Participants were eligible if they had moderate to severe endometriosis-associated pain and, during the 35-day run-in period, a dysmenorrhoea Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) score of 4·0 or higher on two or more days and a mean non-menstrual pelvic pain NRS score of 2·5 or higher, or a mean score of 1·25 or higher that included a score of 5 or more on 4 or more days. Women received (1:1:1) once-daily oral placebo, relugolix combination therapy (relugolix 40 mg, estradiol 1 mg, norethisterone acetate 0·5 mg), or delayed relugolix combination therapy (relugolix 40 mg monotherapy followed by relugolix combination therapy, each for 12 weeks) for 24 weeks. During the double-blind randomised treatment and follow-up period, all patients, investigators, and sponsor staff or representatives involved in the conduct of the study were masked to treatment assignment. The co-primary endpoints were responder rates at week 24 for dysmenorrhoea and non-menstrual pelvic pain, both based on NRS scores and analgesic use. Efficacy and safety were analysed in the modified intent-to-treat population (randomised patients who received ≥1 study drug dose). The studies are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (SPIRIT 1 [NCT03204318] and SPIRIT 2 [NCT03204331]) and EudraCT (SPIRIT 1 [2017-001588-19] and SPIRIT 2 [2017-001632-19]). Eligible patients who completed the SPIRIT studies could enrol in a currently ongoing 80-week open-label extension study (SPIRIT EXTENSION [NCT03654274, EudraCT 2017-004066-10]). Database lock for the on-treatment duration has occurred, and post-treatment follow-up for safety, specificially for bone mineral density and menses recovery, is ongoing at the time of publication. FINDINGS: 638 patients were enrolled into SPIRIT 1 and randomly assigned between Dec 7, 2017, and Dec 4, 2019, to receive relugolix combination therapy (212 [33%]), placebo (213 [33%]), or relugolix delayed combination therapy (213 [33%]). 623 patients were enrolled into SPIRIT 2 and were randomly assigned between Nov 1, 2017 and Oct 4, 2019, to receive relugolix combination therapy (208 [33%]), placebo (208 [33%]), or relugolix delayed combination therapy (207 [33%]). 98 (15%) patients terminated study participation early in SPIRIT 1 and 115 (18%) in SPIRIT 2. In SPIRIT 1, 158 (75%) of 212 patients in the relugolix combination therapy group met the dysmenorrhoea responder criteria compared with 57 (27%) of 212 patients in the placebo group (treatment difference 47·6% [95% CI 39·3-56·0]; p<0·0001). In SPIRIT 2, 155 (75%) of 206 patients in the relugolix combination therapy group were dysmenorrhoea responders compared with 62 (30%) of 204 patients in the placebo group (treatment difference 44·9% [95% CI 36·2-53·5]; p<0·0001). In SPIRIT 1, 124 (58%) of 212 patients in the relugolix combination therapy group met the non-menstrual pelvic pain responder criteria versus 84 (40%) patients in the placebo group (treatment difference 18·9% [9·5-28·2]; p<0·0001). In SPIRIT 2, 136 (66%) of 206 patients were non-menstrual pelvic pain responders in the relugolix combination therapy group compared with 87 (43%) of 204 patients in the placebo group (treatment difference 23·4% [95% CI 13·9-32·8]; p<0·0001). The most common adverse events were headache, nasopharyngitis, and hot flushes. There were nine reports of suicidal ideation across both studies (two in the placebo run-in, two in the placebo group, two in the relugolix combination therapy group, and three in the delayed relugolix combination therapy group). No deaths were reported. Least squares mean percentage change in lumbar spine bone mineral density in the relugolix combination therapy versus placebo groups was -0·70% versus 0·21% in SPIRIT 1 and -0·78% versus 0·02% in SPIRIT 2, and in the delayed relugolix combination group was -2·0% in SPIRIT 1 and -1·9% in SPIRIT 2. Decreases in opioid use were seen in treated patients as compared with placebo. INTERPRETATION: Once-daily relugolix combination therapy significantly improved endometriosis-associated pain and was well tolerated. This oral therapy has the potential to address the unmet clinical need for long-term medical treatment for endometriosis, reducing the need for opioid use or repeated surgical treatment. FUNDING: Myovant Sciences.

Preoperative Ultrasound Scoring of Endometriosis by AAGL 2021 Endometriosis Classification Is Concordant with Laparoscopic Surgical Findings and Distinguishes Early from Advanced Stages.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of preoperative ultrasound (US) in predicting the laparoscopically defined 2021 American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) Endometriosis Staging. DESIGN: Retrospective multicenter study of patients treated at 3 specialized endometriosis centers. SETTING: Three specialized endometriosis surgical centers in São Paulo (Brazil), Barcelona (Spain), and Avellino (Italy) participated. PATIENTS: A total of 878 patients aged 15 to 45 years with no history of pelvic malignancy underwent laparoscopic (LPS) treatment for suspected endometriosis. INTERVENTIONS: Retrospective review of preoperative transvaginal and transabdominal US (index test) assessed for endometriosis at all sites used in the 2021 AAGL Endometriosis Classification and classified patients into AAGL-US stages 1 to 4. Results were compared with reference-standard LPS (AAGL-LPS) staging. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The AAGL-US and AAGL-LPS stage were concordant in 586 cases (66.7%) (weighted kappa [WK] 0.759; intraclass correlation = 0.906), with the highest agreement observed in patients with no endometriosis (n = 70, 75.3% concordance), AAGL-LPS stage 1 (104, 50.7%) and stage 4 disease (358, 88.2%). Endometriosis was most accurately diagnosed in the rectum/sigmoid colon (WK 0.862), bladder (WK 0.911), and ovaries (WK 0.835/0.795 for right/left, respectively) and least accurately diagnosed at superficial peritoneal (WK 0.442), tubal (WK 0.391/0.363 for right/left, respectively), and retrocervical/uterosacral ligament (WK 0.656) sites. CONCLUSION: Sonographic estimation of the 2021 AAGL Endometriosis Staging is greatest in AAGL-LPS stages 1 and 4 and among patients with no endometriosis. US best identifies endometriosis of the ovaries, bladder, and bowel but is more limited for the tubes and superficial peritoneum.

Endometriosis Classification Systems: An International Survey to Map Current Knowledge and Uptake.

OBJECTIVE: In the field of endometriosis, several classification, staging and reporting systems have been developed, but do clinicians routinely use these classification systems, which system do they use and what are the clinicians' motivations? DATA SOURCES: A cross-sectional study was performed to gather data on the current use of endometriosis classification systems, problems encountered and interest in a new simple surgical descriptive system for endometriosis. Of particular focus were three systems most commonly used: the Revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine (rASRM) classification, the Endometriosis Fertility Index (EFI), and the ENZIAN classification. Data were analysed by SPSS. A survey was designed using the online SurveyMonkey tool consisting of 11 questions concerning three domains-participants background, existing classification systems and intentions with regards to a new classification system for endometriosis. Replies were collected between 15 May and 1 July 2020. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: na TABULATION, INTEGRATION AND RESULTS: The final dataset included the replies of 1178 clinicians, including surgeons, gynecologists, reproductive endocrinologists, fertility specialists and sonographers, all managing women with endometriosis in their clinical practice. Overall, 75.5% of the professionals indicate that they currently use a classification system for endometriosis. The rASRM classification system was the best known and used system, the EFI system and ENZIAN system were known by a majority of the professionals but used by only a minority. The lack of clinical relevance was most often selected as a problem with using any system. The findings of the survey suggest that clinicians worldwide are open to using a new classification system for endometriosis that can achieve standardized reporting, and is clinically relevant and simple. The findings therefore support future initiatives for the development of a new descriptive system for endometriosis and provide information on user expectations and conditions for universal uptake of such a system. CONCLUSION: Even with a high uptake of the existing endometriosis classification systems (rASRM, ENZIAN and EFI), most clinicians managing endometriosis would like a new simple surgical descriptive system for endometriosis.

Systematic evaluation of endometriosis by transvaginal ultrasound can accurately replace diagnostic laparoscopy, mainly for deep and ovarian endometriosis.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the sensitivity and the specificity of preoperative transvaginal ultrasound with bowel preparation (TVUS-BP) compared to diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) for the identification of ovarian and deep sites of endometriosis? SUMMARY ANSWER: DL was able to detect retrocervical, ovarian, and bladder endometriosis with similar sensitivity and specificity as TVUS-BP, whereas for vaginal and rectosigmoid endometriosis, DL had lower sensitivity and specificity than TVUS-BP. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: TVUS-BP is a non-invasive examination with good accuracy for diagnosing ovarian and deep endometriosis. DL is expensive and can lead to surgical complications. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This prospective study included a total of 120 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for suspected endometriosis with preoperative imaging (TVUS-BP), including a video of the laparoscopic procedure, between March 2017 and September 2019. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Two radiologists performed preoperative TVUS-BP using the same protocol for diagnosing endometriosis. Two surgeons, who were blinded to the results of the preoperative imaging and clinical data, reviewed the surgical videos from the entry of the abdominal cavity until the surgeon finalized a complete and systematic review prior to beginning any dissection (considered as a DL). A data sheet was used by surgeons and radiologists to record the sites and size of disease involvement, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) stage, and the Enzian score. The surgical visualization of endometriosis lesions that were confirmed by histological analysis was the gold standard. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: DL was able to detect retrocervical, ovarian, and bladder endometriosis with similar sensitivity and specificity as TVUS-BP. DL was not able to detect vaginal endometriosis (sensitivity and specificity 0%): this is compared to a sensitivity and specificity of 85.7% and 99.1%, respectively with the utilization of a preoperative TVUS-BP. In addition, DL was notably poor at detecting rectosigmoid endometriosis, with a sensitivity of 3.7-5.6%, and this compares to 96.3% sensitivity with utilization of a preoperative TVUS (P < 0.001). For the ASRM stage, TVUS-BP results were highly correlated with the degree of endometriosis and pouch of Douglas (POD) obliteration (weighted Kappa of 0.867 and 0.985, respectively). For the Enzian score, there was a substantial correlation between TVUSP-BP and DL for compartment A (weighted Kappa = 0.827), compartment B (weighted Kappa = 0.670), and compartment C (weighted kappa = 0.814). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The number of participants included may be a limitation in this study and, as the evaluators were blinded to the physical exam, the DL accuracy could be underestimated. As biopsies of pelvic organs were obtained only if there was a suspicion of endometriosis, the gold standard was not always applicable. This aspect could underestimate the prevalence of lesions and overestimate the sensitivity and the specificity of both the TVUS-BP and the DL. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Preoperative TVUS-BP was accurate in identifying all sites of ovarian and deep endometriosis that were evaluated. It had significantly higher sensitivity than DL in detecting rectosigmoid endometriosis and predicting intraoperative ASRM staging and the Enzian score. These results suggest that TVUS-BP can replace DL for the diagnosis and treatment planning for patients with ovarian and deep endometriosis. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The authors declare no source of funding or conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Immunolocalization of stem/progenitor cell biomarkers Oct-4, C-kit and Musashi-1 in endometriotic lesions.

BACKGROUND: Human endometrium harbors stem/progenitor cells (SPCs) that may contribute to the establishment of endometriosis when seeded outside the uterus. Oct-4, C-kit and Musashi-1 are some of the many proteins used to characterize SPCs, but their association with endometriosis is uncertain. OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN: In this study, specimens of normal endometrium (n = 12), eutopic endometrium from women with endometriosis (n = 9), superficial peritoneal endometriosis (SUP, n = 12) and deep endometriosis (DE, n = 13) lesions were evaluated for localization and intensity of immunostaining for Oct-4, C-kit and Musashi-1. RESULTS: The three markers were abundantly expressed in normal endometrium, eutopic endometrium from endometriosis patients, SUP and DE specimens. Oct-4 and C-kit expression did not vary across groups as regards intensity or frequency. C-kit staining signal was seldom detected in vascular endothelium of normal or eutopic endometrium from endometriosis patients; however, it was positive in 67% of the SUP lesions and in 25% of the DE lesions (p = 0.042). Musashi-1 was expressed in some endometriotic glands as cell clusters, but its signal was similar between the four types of tissue (p = 0.971) CONCLUSION: The wide distribution of Oct-4, C-kit and Musashi-1 in endometria of patients with and without endometriosis and in SUP and DE endometriotic lesions suggests that these markers are not suitable for the in situ characterization of endometrial SPCs and should not be taken as surrogates for the study of SPCs in the pathogenesis of endometriosis.

How to minimize bleeding in laparoscopic myomectomy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Laparoscopic myomectomy is a common surgical procedure for symptomatic myomas. However, bleeding control during surgery may pose a challenge. Therefore, the aim of this study was to review recent evidence regarding interventions to control bleeding during laparoscopic myomectomy. RECENT FINDINGS: The use of vasopressin resulted in less blood loss compared to placebo. Barbed sutures reduced blood loss compared to conventional sutures. Intravenous infusion of tranexamic acid (TXA) in the intraoperative period of large myomectomies showed no significant difference compared to placebo. Uterine artery occlusion (UAO) and emergency uterine artery embolization were reported to be feasible and may reduce and treat bleeding before conversion to laparotomy. SUMMARY: Several methods can control bleeding during laparoscopic myomectomy. Vasopressin and barbed sutures resulted in decreased blood loss, and TXA did not have an impact on bleeding control. The use of UAO and emergency embolization techniques can contribute to the control of bleeding; however, further studies are needed to prove the efficacy of these and other agents.

Reductions in endometriosis-associated pain among women treated with elagolix are consistent across a range of baseline characteristics reflective of real-world patients.

BACKGROUND: Elagolix is an oral, gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor antagonist, that significantly reduces dysmenorrhea and non-menstrual pelvic pain (NMPP) in women with moderate to severe endometriosis-associated pain. METHODS: Data were pooled from two 6-month, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies (Elaris Endometriosis [EM]-I and II) in which 2 doses of elagolix were evaluated (150 mg once daily and 200 mg twice daily). Pooled data from > 1600 women, aged 18-49, were used to evaluate the efficacy of elagolix and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in prespecified subgroups of women with various baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 1686 women treated, 1285 (76.2%) completed the studies. The percentages of women with clinically meaningful reductions in dysmenorrhea and NMPP were generally consistent by subgroup. Significant treatment by subgroup interaction was demonstrated for dysmenorrhea response in baseline analgesic use (p < 0.01) and previous history of pregnancy (p < 0.05) subgroups, and for NMPP response in the baseline NMPP score (p < 0.05) and history of pregnancy (p < 0.05) subgroups. Patient-reported reduction in pain at month 3 was significant across all subgroups taking elagolix 200 mg BID, and significant across most subgroups with elagolix 150 mg QD. Women across subgroups experienced improvement within each domain of the Endometriosis Health Profile-30 (EHP-30), although significant treatment by subgroup interactions were observed in several categories. CONCLUSIONS: Elagolix was effective in reducing dysmenorrhea and NMPP, and improving HRQoL, compared with placebo across numerous subgroups of women with various baseline characteristics, covering a broad segment of the endometriosis disease and patient types. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01620528 ; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01931670 .

AAGL 2021 Endometriosis Classification: An Anatomy-based Surgical Complexity Score.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To develop a new endometriosis classification system for scoring intraoperative surgical complexity and to examine its correlation with patient-reported pain and infertility. DESIGN: Multicenter study of patients treated at 3 recognized endometriosis centers. SETTING: Three specialized endometriosis surgical centers in São Paulo, Brazil and Barcelona, Spain. PATIENTS: Patients aged 15 to 45 years with histologically proven endometriosis and no history of pelvic malignancy underwent laparoscopic treatment of endometriosis. INTERVENTIONS: Demographic data and clinical history, including dysmenorrhea, noncyclic pelvic pain, dyspareunia, dysuria and dyschezia, were prospectively recorded. All patients were staged surgically according to the new 2021 American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) and revised American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) classification systems. The staging for each system was compared against a 4-level surgical complexity scale defined by the most complex procedure performed. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 1224 patients undergoing surgery met inclusion criteria. The AAGL score discriminated between 4 stages of surgical complexity with high reproducibility (κ = 0.621), whereas the ASRM score discriminated between the complexity stages with poor reproducibility (κ = 0.317). The AAGL staging system correlated with dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, dyschezia, total pain score, and infertility comparably with the ASRM staging system. CONCLUSION: The AAGL 2021 Endometriosis Classification allows for identifying objective intraoperative findings that reliably discriminate surgical complexity levels better than the ASRM staging system. The AAGL severity stage correlates comparably with pain and infertility symptoms with the ASRM stage.

An International Terminology for Endometriosis, 2021.

OBJECTIVE: Different classification systems have been developed for endometriosis, using different definitions for the disease, the different subtypes, symptoms and treatments. In addition, an International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility Care has been published in 2017 by the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ICMART) in collaboration with other organisations. An international working group convened over the development of a classification or descriptive system for endometriosis. As a basis for such system, a terminology for endometriosis was considered a condition sine qua non. The aim of the current study was to develop a set of terms and definitions be prepared on endometriosis that would be the basis for standardization in disease description, classification and research. DATA SOURCES: The working group listed a number of terms relevant to be included in the terminology, documented currently used and published definitions, and discussed and adapted them until consensus was reached within the working group. Following stakeholder review, further terms were added, and definitions further clarified. Although definitions were collected through published literature, the final set of terms and definitions is to be considered consensus-based. After finalization of the first draft, the members of the international societies and other stakeholders were consulted for feedback and comments, which lead to further adaptations. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: na TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: A list of 49 terms and definitions in the field of endometriosis is presented, including a definition for endometriosis and its subtypes, different locations, interventions, symptoms and outcomes. Endometriosis is defined as a disease characterized by the presence of endometrium-like epithelium and/or stroma outside the endometrium and myometrium, usually with an associated inflammatory process. CONCLUSION: The current paper outlines a list of 49 terms and definitions in the field of endometriosis. The application of the defined terms aims to facilitate harmonization in endometriosis research and clinical practice. Future research may require further refinement of the presented definitions.

Endometriosis Classification, Staging and Reporting Systems: A Review on the Road to a Universally Accepted Endometriosis Classification.

OBJECTIVE: In the field of endometriosis, several classification, staging and reporting systems have been developed. Which endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems have been published and validated for use in clinical practice? DATA SOURCES: A systematic PUBMED literature search was performed. Data were extracted and summarized. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: na TABULATION, INTEGRATION AND RESULTS: Twenty-two endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems have been published between 1973 and 2021, each developed for specific, and different, purposes. There still is no international agreement on how to describe the disease. Studies evaluating the different systems are summarized showing a discrepancy between the intended and the evaluated purpose, and a general lack of validation data confirming a correlation with pain symptoms or quality of life for any of the current systems. A few studies confirm the value of the ENZIAN system for surgical description of deep endometriosis. With regards to infertility, the endometriosis fertility index has been confirmed valid for its intended purpose. CONCLUSION: Of the 22 endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems identified in this historical overview, only a few have been evaluated for the purpose for which they were developed. The literature search was limited to PUBMED. Unpublished classification, staging or reporting systems, or those published in books were not considered. It can be concluded that there is no international agreement on how to describe endometriosis or how to classify it, and that most classification/staging systems show no or very little correlation with patient outcomes. This overview of existing systems is a first step in working towards a universally accepted endometriosis classification.

Treatment of Endometriosis-Associated Pain with Elagolix, an Oral GnRH Antagonist.

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis is a chronic, estrogen-dependent condition that causes dysmenorrhea and pelvic pain. Elagolix, an oral, nonpeptide, gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist, produced partial to nearly full estrogen suppression in previous studies. METHODS: We performed two similar, double-blind, randomized, 6-month phase 3 trials (Elaris Endometriosis I and II [EM-I and EM-II]) to evaluate the effects of two doses of elagolix - 150 mg once daily (lower-dose group) and 200 mg twice daily (higher-dose group) - as compared with placebo in women with surgically diagnosed endometriosis and moderate or severe endometriosis-associated pain. The two primary efficacy end points were the proportion of women who had a clinical response with respect to dysmenorrhea and the proportion who had a clinical response with respect to nonmenstrual pelvic pain at 3 months. Each of these end points was measured as a clinically meaningful reduction in the pain score and a decreased or stable use of rescue analgesic agents, as recorded in a daily electronic diary. RESULTS: A total of 872 women underwent randomization in Elaris EM-I and 817 in Elaris EM-II; of these women, 653 (74.9%) and 632 (77.4%), respectively, completed the intervention. At 3 months, a significantly greater proportion of women who received each elagolix dose met the clinical response criteria for the two primary end points than did those who received placebo. In Elaris EM-I, the percentage of women who had a clinical response with respect to dysmenorrhea was 46.4% in the lower-dose elagolix group and 75.8% in the higher-dose elagolix group, as compared with 19.6% in the placebo group; in Elaris EM-II, the corresponding percentages were 43.4% and 72.4%, as compared with 22.7% (P<0.001 for all comparisons). In Elaris EM-I, the percentage of women who had a clinical response with respect to nonmenstrual pelvic pain was 50.4% in the lower-dose elagolix group and 54.5% in the higher-dose elagolix group, as compared with 36.5% in the placebo group (P<0.001 for all comparisons); in Elaris EM-II, the corresponding percentages were 49.8% and 57.8%, as compared with 36.5% (P=0.003 and P<0.001, respectively). The responses with respect to dysmenorrhea and nonmenstrual pelvic pain were sustained at 6 months. Women who received elagolix had higher rates of hot flushes (mostly mild or moderate), higher levels of serum lipids, and greater decreases from baseline in bone mineral density than did those who received placebo; there were no adverse endometrial findings. CONCLUSIONS: Both higher and lower doses of elagolix were effective in improving dysmenorrhea and nonmenstrual pelvic pain during a 6-month period in women with endometriosis-associated pain. The two doses of elagolix were associated with hypoestrogenic adverse effects. (Funded by AbbVie; Elaris EM-I and EM-II ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01620528 and NCT01931670 .).

Endometrioma, the follicular fluid inflammatory network and its association with oocyte and embryo characteristics.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the association between endometrioma-affected ovaries, their follicular fluid inflammatory microenvironment, and ovary-specific oocyte and embryo yield and quality? DESIGN: Exposure-matched prospective cohort study conducted at a university-affiliated infertility clinic. Thirty-four women presenting for oocyte retrieval were enrolled between 2012 and 2013: women with unilateral endometrioma and no other observed peritoneal or deep lesions (n = 10) and women with no signs or symptoms of endometriosis (n = 24). Follicular fluid was aspirated at the time of oocyte retrieval. Samples from each ovary were analysed using a 27-plex immunoassay panel. The associations were evaluated by ovary-specific endometrioma exposure status (affected, unaffected, unexposed) with cytokine levels, oocyte yield and embryo quality. RESULTS: Levels of interleukin (IL)-8 and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 were higher in fluid obtained from endometrioma-affected ovaries compared with the unexposed ovaries from women without endometriosis, with intermediate levels observed in the contralateral unaffected ovaries. More modest differences were observed for IL-1ß and IL-6. The affected ovaries of women with endometriosis yielded fewer oocytes (mean ± SD = 4.6 ± 2.3) compared with both the unaffected (6.0 ± 3.8) and unexposed (7.9 ± 5.6) ovaries. After adjusting for potential confounders and variables generated in a cytokine principal components analysis, oocyte yield remained slightly lower for the endometrioma-affected ovaries compared with unexposed ovaries. No informative differences among ovary groups for embryo quality parameters were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the inflammatory milieu of ovarian endometriosis is strongly localized and has a more modestly systemic effect. The effect of endometriomas on infertility, however, cannot be entirely explained by increased inflammation.

Optimizing Perioperative Outcomes with Selective Bowel Resection Following an Algorithm Based on Preoperative Imaging for Bowel Endometriosis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To validate the algorithm for selective bowel surgery based on preoperative imaging by comparing the perioperative outcomes of patients who undergo each type of bowel surgery for deep bowel disease, and secondarily to evaluate the incidence, factors, and subsequent outcomes when the actual procedure performed deviated from the preoperative surgical plan. DESIGN: Retrospective study comparing 3 surgical interventions in an intention-to-treat analysis. SETTING: Tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS: Women with significant pain (visual analog scale [VAS] >7) who were diagnosed with bowel endometriosis from preoperative imaging and underwent laparoscopic surgery for bowel endometriosis at a large referral center between 2014 and 2017. INTERVENTION: Laparoscopic shaving, disc resection, or full-segment resection and reanastomosis of bowel endometriosis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 172 patients (mean age, 36.6 ± 5.2 years) underwent bowel surgery for endometriosis (n = 30 shaving, 71 disc, and 71 segmental resection). Total operative time was similar in the 3 group, but the mean length of hospital stay was longer in the segmental group (5.3 ± 1.0 days) compared with the disc group (4.6 ± 0.9 days) and the shaving group (3.8 ± 1.5 days) (p = .001). The surgical procedure was performed as planned according to the clinical algorithm in 86.5% of patients. Adherence to the proposed clinical algorithm resulted in a low incidence of overall complications (8.7% of total complications, 4.6% of minor complications, and 3.5% of major complications). The incidence of minor complications was higher in the segmental group (9.9%) compared with the discoid group (1.4%) and the shaving group (0%) (p = .0236), whereas the incidence of major complications were similar across the 3 groups (3.3%, 2.8%, and 4.2%, respectively; p = .899). There was a significantly higher frequency of pseudomembranous colitis in the segmental resection group (7 patients; 9.9%) compared with the discoid group (n = 1; 1.4%) and shaving group (0%) (p = .04). Owing to discrepancies between preoperative imaging and intraoperative findings after dissection and mobilization, deviation from the planned procedure occurred in a total of 25 of 172 cases (14.5%), with a less extensive procedure actually performed in 21 of 25 (84%) of the deviated cases. One of the 4 cases (25%) that involved a more extensive procedure resulted in a major complication of rectovaginal fistula. CONCLUSION: Selective bowel resection algorithm provides a systematic approach to the surgical management of patients with bowel endometriosis. Adherence to the surgical plan according to the preoperative imaging and criteria outlined in the algorithm can be accomplished in the majority of patients; however, the surgical team should be aware that upstaging or downstaging may be required, depending on the intraoperative findings. When feasible, the team should opt for a less extensive procedure to avoid complications associated with more radical surgery.

Ignored Because It Is Benign - It Is Time to Treat Endometriosis as if It Were Cancer.

We are proposing a shift in mindset in the field of endometriosis, whereby care for patients with endometriosis mirrors that of patients with gynaecological cancer. To achieve this, we advocate for the recognition of complex benign gynaecology as a subspecialty. Since the establishment of gynaecological oncology as a subspecialty, outcomes for patients with ovarian cancer have improved, with their care managed by multidisciplinary teams in specialized units. Despite the marked difference in the primary treatment goal between these two conditions, they share common diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. We believe that care management by a multidisciplinary team of dedicated and specialized health care professionals will lead to improved outcomes, including improved quality of life, for people living with endometriosis.

Structured Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Reports for Patients with Suspected Endometriosis: Guide for Imagers and Clinicians.

In this article we propose a structured imaging report applied to ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in patients with suspected endometriosis.

mRNA levels of low-density lipoprotein receptors are overexpressed in the foci of deep bowel endometriosis.

STUDY QUESTION: Is mRNA expression of LDL receptors altered in deep bowel endometriotic foci? SUMMARY ANSWER: mRNA expression of LDL receptors is up-regulated in deep bowel endometriotic foci of patients with endometriosis. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Several studies have demonstrated the overexpression of low-density lipoprotein receptors in various tumour cell lines and endometriosis has similar aspects to cancer, mainly concerning the pathogenesis of both diseases. This is the first study we know of to investigate lipoprotein receptors expression in deep endometriosis with bowel involvement. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: During 2014-2015, an exploratory case-control study was conducted with 39 patients, including 20 women with a histological diagnosis of deep endometriosis compromising the bowel and 19 women without endometriosis who underwent laparoscopic tubal ligation. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Peripheral blood samples were collected on the day of surgery for lipid profile analysis, and samples of endometrial tissue and of bowel endometriotic lesions were also collected. The tissue samples were sent for histopathological analysis and for LDL-R and LRP-1 gene expression screening using quantitative real-time PCR. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Patients with deep endometriosis had lower LDL-cholesterol than patients without the disease (119 ± 23 versus 156 ± 35; P = 0.001). Gene expression analysis of LDL receptors revealed that LDL-R was more highly expressed in endometriotic lesions when compared to the endometrium of the same patient but not more than in the endometrium of women without endometriosis (0.027 ± 0.022 versus 0.012 ± 0.009 versus 0.019 ± 0.01, respectively; P < 0.001). LRP-1 was more highly expressed in endometriotic lesions, both when compared with the endometrium of the same patient and when compared with the endometrium of patients without the disease (0.307 ± 0.207 versus 0.089 ± 0.076 and versus 0.126 ± 0.072, respectively; P < 0.001). The study also showed that LDL-R gene expression in the endometrium of women with endometriosis was higher during the secretory phase of the menstrual cycle (P = 0.001). LRP-1 gene expression was increased during the secretory phase in the endometrium of women without the disease (P = 0.008). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: In the endometriotic lesions, the presence of fibrosis is substantial, restricting access to the stromal and glandular components of the lesion. Despite that, we found that LDL receptor mRNA was overexpressed. Future studies may perform laser microdissection to isolate the area of interest in the target tissue, excluding fibrosis contamination. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study supports the feasibility of LDL-R targeted therapy in the treatment of deep endometriosis. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This study was supported by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP #2011/17245-0). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

World Endometriosis Society consensus on the classification of endometriosis.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the global consensus on the classification of endometriosis that considers the views of women with endometriosis? SUMMARY ANSWER: We have produced an international consensus statement on the classification of endometriosis through systematic appraisal of evidence and a consensus process that included representatives of national and international, medical and non-medical societies, patient organizations, and companies with an interest in endometriosis. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Classification systems of endometriosis, developed by several professional organizations, traditionally have been based on lesion appearance, pelvic adhesions, and anatomic location of disease. One system predicts fertility outcome and none predicts pelvic pain, response to medications, disease recurrence, risks for associated disorders, quality of life measures, and other endpoints important to women and health care providers for guiding appropriate therapeutic options and prognosis. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A consensus meeting, in conjunction with pre- and post-meeting processes, was undertaken. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: A consensus meeting was held on 30 April 2014 in conjunction with the World Endometriosis Society's 12th World Congress on Endometriosis. Rigorous pre- and post-meeting processes, involving 55 representatives of 29 national and international, medical and non-medical organizations from a range of disciplines, led to this consensus statement. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 28 consensus statements were made. Of all, 10 statements had unanimous consensus, however none of the statements was made without expression of a caveat about the strength of the statement or the statement itself. Two statements did not achieve majority consensus. The statements covered women's priorities, aspects of classification, impact of low resources, as well as all the major classification systems for endometriosis. Until better classification systems are developed, we propose a classification toolbox (that includes the revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine and, where appropriate, the Enzian and Endometriosis Fertility Index staging systems), that may be used by all surgeons in each case of surgery undertaken for women with endometriosis. We also propose wider use of the World Endometriosis Research Foundation Endometriosis Phenome and Biobanking Harmonisation Project surgical and clinical data collection tools for research to improve classification of endometriosis in the future, of particular relevance when surgery is not undertaken. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This consensus process differed from that of formal guideline development, although based on the same available evidence. A different group of international experts from those participating in this process may have yielded subtly different consensus statements. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This is the first time that a large, global, consortium-representing 29 major stake-holding organizations, from 19 countries - has convened to systematically evaluate the best available evidence on the classification of endometriosis and reach consensus. In addition to 21 international medical organizations and companies, representatives from eight national endometriosis organizations were involved, including lay support groups, thus generating and including input from women who suffer from endometriosis in an endeavour to keep uppermost the goal of optimizing quality of life for women with endometriosis. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The World Endometriosis Society convened and hosted the consensus meeting. Financial support for participants to attend the meeting was provided by the organizations that they represented. There was no other specific funding for this consensus process. Mauricio Abrao is an advisor to Bayer Pharma, and a consultant to AbbVie and AstraZeneca; G David Adamson is the Owner of Advanced Reproductive Care Inc and Ziva and a consultant to Bayer Pharma, Ferring, and AbbVie; Deborah Bush has received travel grants from Fisher & Paykel Healthcare and Bayer Pharmaceuticals; Linda Giudice is a consultant to AbbVie, Juniper Pharmaceutical, and NextGen Jane, holds research grant from the NIH, is site PI on a clinical trial sponsored by Bayer, and is a shareholder in Merck and Pfizer; Lone Hummelshoj is an unpaid consultant to AbbVie; Neil Johnson has received conference expenses from Bayer Pharma, Merck-Serono, and MSD, research funding from AbbVie, and is a consultant to Vifor Pharma and Guerbet; Jörg Keckstein has received a travel grant from AbbVie; Ludwig Kiesel is a consultant to Bayer Pharma, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Gedeon Richter, and Shionogi, and holds a research grant from Bayer Pharma; Luk Rombauts is an advisor to MSD, Merck Serono, and Ferring, and a shareholder in Monash IVF. The following have declared that they have nothing to disclose: Kathy Sharpe Timms; Rulla Tamimi; Hugh Taylor. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.