Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate and endometrial cancer: A multicenter case-control study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the associations between depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) and endometrial cancer. METHODS: This multicenter case-control study was conducted among tertiary hospitals in Thailand. Patients were women with endometrial cancer. Controls were women admitted for other conditions, matched for age within 5 years of the patients' age. The controls had to have no abnormal vaginal bleeding, history of hysterectomy, or cancers of the other organs. A standardized questionnaire was used to gather information. Conditional logistic regression was applied to calculate adjusted odds ratio (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: During 2015 to 2021, 378 patients and 1134 controls were included. Ever use of DMPA was associated with a 70% decreased overall risk of endometrial cancer (aOR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.21-0.42]). Endometrial cancer risk declined by 3% (aOR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.96-0.98]) for every 3 months of DMPA use. The magnitude of the decline in endometrial cancer risk did not vary appreciably by cancer subtypes (aOR, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.17-0.41] and 0.38 [95% CI, 0.22-0.65] for low-grade and high-grade tumors, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate use was inversely associated with endometrial cancer risk in a duration-dependent manner. This association was independent of cancer subtype.

Lidocaine Spray Versus Paracervical Block During Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure: A Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare the effectiveness of pain control between lidocaine spray (LS) and paracervical block (PB) with lidocaine during the loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted on 132 women who underwent LEEP of the cervix. The participants were randomly allocated to either a PB group or a LS group. The PB group participants were anesthetized by PB using 10 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 of epinephrine. The LS group participants were locally anesthetized with four puffs (40 mg) of 10% LS, which was applied thoroughly to the cervix. Pain scores, using 10-cm visual analog scales, were obtained and compared for participants in both groups during anesthesia, during excision and 30 minutes after excision. RESULTS: A total of 132 LEEPs were performed with 66 in LS group and 66 in PB group. The mean (SD) pain scores during excision were 5.2 (2.4) in the LS group and 4.2 (3.3) in the PB group (mean difference = 1.1, 95% CI = 0.8 to 2.1, p = .033), which was within the nonclinically significant margin of this study. The baseline pain score after speculum examination was not significantly different in both groups. There was no adverse effect in the LS group compared with eight cases in the PB group (tinnitus, numbness, palpitation or tachycardia, and hypertension). CONCLUSIONS: The local 40 mg of 10% LS can be used to substitute for PB for pain control during LEEP of the cervix. It also resulted in fewer adverse effects.

Detection of recurrence in a surveillance program for epithelial ovarian cancer.

Ovarian cancer patients need a surveillance program for the detection of tumor progression after completion of treatment. The methods generally consist of history taking, physical examination, tumor marker monitoring and imaging. However, the details of recurrence detection with each method are not well defined. To clarify this issue, ovarian cancer patients who achieved complete or partial responses and developed tumor progression at the follow up time between January 2004 and December 2010 in University Hospital Chiang Mai, Thailand, were reviewed. Clinical data, CA 125 level and imaging results at the tumor progression time were recorded and analyzed. There were 144 ovarian cancer patients meeting the inclusion criteria with the mean age of 51 years and 62.5% of them were in an advanced stage. Complete response was achieved in 89 patients (61.8%) after primary treatment. The median progression free survival and overall survival were 15.5 months and 37.5 months, respectively. Abnormal symptoms presented in 49.3% of the studied patients and 59.7% developed physical examination abnormalities. In addition, CA 125 was elevated in 89.6% while in 74.3% of tumor progression was identified by CT-scan. Short treatment time period and a high level of CA 125 were significant independent prognostic factors in these patients. In conclusion, careful history taking, physical examination and monitoring of CA 125 levels are important methods for tumor progression detection in a surveillance program for epithelial ovarian cancer patients.

Can an appointment-letter intervention increase pap smear screening in Samliem, Khon Kaen, Thailand?

Our objective was to assess the efficiency of an appointment-letter intervention aimed to increase uptake of cervical cancer screening in women between 35 and 65 years of age. From January, 2007, we randomly recruited 320 women, not screened for at least 5 years, from the Samliem inner-city community, Khon Kaen, Northeast Thailand. A total of 150 women 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60 and 65 years of age were assigned to the intervention group according to Thai National Cancer Institute's ( TNCI) strategy. A further 170 women between 36-39, 41-44, 46-49, 51-54, 56-59 and 61-64 years of age were assigned to the control group. Baseline interviews were conducted for all women in both groups by one of the researchers in January, who also provided culturally-sensitive health education emphasizing the need for screening. Then appointment letters were sent only to women in the intervention group in February, with the last date for an appointment being March 31st. In April of 2007, immediately post-intervention, screening-coverage interviews were performed in both groups for comparison. There was a significant increase in the Pap smear screening-coverage rate in the intervention group compared with the control group (44.67% vs. 25.88%, p=0.001). Therefore, the appointment-letter intervention produced a significant effect on increasing Pap smear coverage in this group of women.

Can a home-visit invitation increase Pap smear screening in Samliem, Khon Kaen, Thailand?

Our objective was to assess the efficiency of a home-visit invitation aimed to increase uptake of cervical cancer screening in women between 35 and 60 years of age. From May, 2006, we conducted a quasi-randomized trial to determine if an in-home education and invitation intervention would increase uptake of cervical cancer screening. We randomly recruited 304 women from the Samliem inner-city community, Khon Kaen, Northeast Thailand, and assigned participants to either the intervention or control zone. Baseline screening coverage interviews were then performed: 58 of 158 women in the intervention zone and 46 of 146 in the control zone were excluded from the study because of having had a Pap smear within 5 years, but these were included in the final analysis. First, 100 women in the intervention group were visited in their homes by one of the researchers, who provided culturally-sensitive health education that emphasized the need for screening. Four months later, post-intervention, screening-coverage interviews were again performed in both groups, in combination with the same health education for 100 women in the control group for a comparison. There was no difference in the baseline Pap smear screening-coverage rate in the intervention vs. control zones (36.7 vs. 31.5%, p=0.339). One hundred women in the intervention group completed the intervention interviews and after four months, 100 women in the intervention group and 100 in the control group also completed the post-intervention interviews. The increased screening-coverage rate in the intervention zone was similar to that of the control zone (43.6 vs. 34.9%, p=0.119); however, there was a borderline significant increase in the intervention zone compared with baseline (36.7 to 43.6%, p=0.070). Therefore, home visit education and invitation intervention produced only a nominal effect on increasing Pap smear coverage within a 4-month study period.