Fertility preservation in women with malignant and borderline ovarian tumors: Experience of the French ESGO-certified center and pregnancy-associated cancer network (CALG).

OBJECTIVE: To describe strategy and results of fertility preservation (FP) in patients with malignant and borderline ovarian tumors. METHODS: Consecutive cohort study of 43 women with malignant or borderline ovarian tumors who underwent FP between February 2013 and July 2019. The study was conducted in national expert center in Tenon University Hospital, Sorbonne University: French ESGO-certified ovarian cancer center and pregnancy-associated cancer network (CALG). Main outcome measure was FP technique proposed by multidisciplinary committee, FP technique used, time after surgery, number of fragments, histology and follicle density (if ovarian tissue freezing), number of expected, retrieved and frozen oocytes (if ovarian stimulation). RESULTS: Pathological diagnosis was malignant epithelial ovarian tumor in five women (11.6%), rare malignant ovarian tumor in 14 (32.6%), borderline in 24 (55.8%), and mostly unilateral (79.1%) and stage I (76.7%). Mean age at diagnosis was 26.8 ± 6.9 years and mean tumor size 109.7 ± 61 mm. Before FP, mean AFC was 11.0 ± 6.1 and AMH levels were 2.7 ± 4.6 ng/mL. Six ovarian tissue-freezing procedures were performed (offered to 13). Twenty-four procedures of ovarian stimulation and oocyte freezing were performed after surgical treatment for 19 women (offered to 28) with a median interval of 188 days. The mean number of mature oocytes retrieved per stimulation was 12.4 ± 12.8. At least 10 mature oocytes were frozen for 52.6% of the women. No FP was offered to five women. CONCLUSION: Oocyte and ovarian tissue cryopreservation should be offered to patients with malignant and borderline ovarian tumors. More data are needed to confirm ovarian stimulation and ovarian tissue grafting safety.

[New medical treatments for painful endometriosis: CNGOF-HAS Endometriosis Guidelines]. / Place des nouveaux traitements médicaux dans l'endométriose douloureuse, RPC Endométriose CNGOF-HAS.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this work is to evaluate the place of new treatments in the management of endometriosis outside the context of infertility. METHODS: A review of the literature was conducted by consulting Medline data until July 2017. RESULTS: Dienogest is effective compared to placebo in short term (NP2) and long term (NP4) for the treatment of painful endometriosis. In comparison with GnRH agonists, dienogest is also effective in terms of decreased pain and improved quality of life in non-operated patients (NP2) as well as for recurrence of lesions and symptomatology postoperatively (NP2). Data on GnRH antagonists, selective progesterone receptor modulators as well as selective inhibitors (anti-TNF-α, matrix metalloprotease inhibitors, angiogenesis growth factor inhibitors) are insufficient to provide evidence of interest in clinical practice for the management of painful endometriosis (NP3). CONCLUSION: Dienogest is recommended as second-line therapy for the management of painful endometriosis (Grade B). Because of lack of evidence, aromatase inhibitors, elagolix, SERM, SPRM and anti-TNF-α are not recommended for the management of painful endometriosis (Grade C).

[Endometriosis medical treatment: Hormonal treatment for the management of pain and endometriotic lesions recurrence. CNGOF-HAS Endometriosis Guidelines]. / Traitement médical de l'endométriose : prise en charge de la douleur et de l'évolution des lésions par traitement hormonal. RPC Endométriose CNGOF-HAS.

The available literature, from 2006 to 2017, on hormonal treatment has been analysed as a contribution to the HAS-CNGOF task force for the treatment of endometriosis. Available data are heterogeneous and the general level of evidence is moderate. Hormonal treatment is usually offered as the primary option to women suffering from endometriosis. It cannot be used in women willing to conceive. In women who have not been operated, the first line of hormonal treatment includes combined oral contraceptives (COC) and the levonorgestrel-releasing intra uterine system (52mg LNG-IUS). As a second line, desogestrel progestin only pills, etonogestrel implants, GnRH analogs (GnRHa) with add back therapy and dienogest can be offered. Add back therapy should include estrogens to prevent bone loss and improve quality of life, it can be introduced before the third month of treatment to prevent side effects. The literature does not support preoperative hormonal treatment for the sole purpose of reducing complications or recurrence, or facilitating surgical procedures. After surgical treatment, hormonal treatment is recommended to prevent pain recurrence and improve quality of life. COCs or LNG IUS are recommended as a first line. To prevent recurrence of endometriomas COC is advised and maintained as long as tolerance is good in the absence of pregnancy plans. In case of dysmenorrhea, postoperative COC should be used in a continuous scheme. GnRHa are not recommended in the sole purpose of reducing endometrioma recurrence risk.

[Management of painful endometriosis in adolescents: CNGOF-HAS Endometriosis Guidelines]. / Traitement médical de l'endométriose douloureuse chez l'adolescente, RPC Endométriose CNGOF-HAS.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the literature on the treatment of adolescent painful endometriosis. METHOD: This work is based on a Review of the literature between January 2006 and December 2017. The Medline (Pubmed) and Cochrane database were searched for meta-analyzes, randomized trials, literature reviews, controlled, not controlled and retrospective studies published on the subject. Studies concerning adolescent's dysmenorrhea without endometriosis were excluded. RESULTS: Study quality is heterogeneous. Dienogest and GnRH agonists (GnRHa) are the only treatments specifically evaluated for the treatment of adolescent endometriosis. They reduce the pain associated with endometriosis. Combined oral contraceptives have not been studied in the context of endometriosis but they are effective on dysmenorrhea. Add back therapy, containing estrogens improves bone mineral density and quality of life for young women treated with GnRHa. CONCLUSION: Medical treatment of endometriosis in adolescent is associated with risks related to the young age. The therapeutic strategy should take into account the adverse effects of each treatment.

[Medical treatment for the management of painful endometriosis without infertility: CNGOF-HAS Endometriosis Guidelines]. / Traitement médical de l'endométriose douloureuse sans infertilité, RPC Endométriose CNGOF-HAS.

OBJECTIVE: To provide clinical practice guidelines for the management of painful endometriosis in women without infertility. METHODS: Systematic review of the literature literature since 2006, level of evidence rating, external proofreading and grading of the recommendation grade by an expert group according to HAS methodology. RESULTS: Combined hormonal contraceptives (COP) and the levonorgestrel-releasing intra-uterin system (LNG-IUS) are recommended as first-line hormonal therapies for the treatment of painful endometriosis (grade B). Second-line therapy relies on oral desogestrel microprogestative, etonogestrel-releasing implant, GnRH analogs (GnRHa) and dienogest (grade C). It is recommended to use add-back therapy containing estrogen in association with GnRHa (grade B). After endometriosis surgery, hormonal treatment relying on COP or LNG-IUS is recommended to prevent pain recurrence (grade B). COP is recommended to reduce the risk of endometrioma recurrence after surgery (grade B) but the prescription of GnRHa is not recommended (grade C). Continuous COP is recommended in case of dysmenorrhea (grade B). GnRHa is not recommended as first line endometriosis treatment for adolescent girl because of the risk of bone demineralization (grade B). The management of endometriosis-induced chronic pain requires an interdisciplinary evaluation. Physical therapies improving the quality of life such as yoga, relaxation or osteopathy can be proposed (expert agreement). Promising medical alternatives are currently under preclinical and clinical evaluation.