Prospective phase II trial of levonorgestrel intrauterine device: nonsurgical approach for complex atypical hyperplasia and early-stage endometrial cancer

Shannon N Westin, Bryan Fellman, Charlotte C Sun, Russell R Broaddus, Misty L Woodall, Navdeep Pal, Diana L Urbauer, Lois M Ramondetta, Kathleen M Schmeler, Pamela T Soliman, Nicole D Fleming, Jennifer K Burzawa, Alpa M Nick, Andrea M Milbourne, Ying Yuan, Karen H Lu, Diane C Bodurka, Robert L Coleman, Melinda S Yates, Shannon N Westin, Bryan Fellman, Charlotte C Sun, Russell R Broaddus, Misty L Woodall, Navdeep Pal, Diana L Urbauer, Lois M Ramondetta, Kathleen M Schmeler, Pamela T Soliman, Nicole D Fleming, Jennifer K Burzawa, Alpa M Nick, Andrea M Milbourne, Ying Yuan, Karen H Lu, Diane C Bodurka, Robert L Coleman, Melinda S Yates

Abstract

Background: The incidence of complex atypical hyperplasia and early-stage endometrioid endometrial cancer is increasing, in part owing to the epidemic of obesity, which is a risk factor tightly linked to the development of endometrial hyperplasia and cancer. The standard upfront treatment for complex atypical hyperplasia and early-stage endometrial cancer is hysterectomy. However, nonsurgical treatment of early-stage endometrial neoplasia may be necessary owing to medical comorbidities precluding surgery or desired future fertility.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the levonorgestrel intrauterine device to treat complex atypical hyperplasia and grade 1 endometrioid endometrial carcinoma.

Study design: A single-institution, single-arm, phase II study of the levonorgestrel intrauterine device (52 mg levonorgestrel, Mirena) was conducted in patients with complex atypical hyperplasia or grade 1 endometrioid endometrial cancer. The primary endpoint was pathologic response rate at 12 months, including complete or partial response. Quality of life and toxicity were assessed. Molecular analyses for proliferation markers, hormone-regulated genes, and wingless-related integration site pathway activation were performed at baseline and 3 months.

Results: A total of 57 patients were treated (21 endometrial cancer, 36 complex atypical hyperplasia). The median age was 48.0 years, and the median body mass index was 45.5 kg/m2. Of the 47 evaluable patients, 12-month response rate was 83% (90% credible interval, 72.7-90.3)-37 were complete responders (8 endometrial cancer; 29 complex atypical hyperplasia), 2 were partial responders (2 endometrial cancer), 3 had stable disease (2 endometrial cancer; 1 complex atypical hyperplasia), and 5 had progressive disease (3 endometrial cancer; 2 complex atypical hyperplasia). After stratification for histology, the response rate was 90.6% for complex atypical hyperplasia and 66.7% for grade 1 endometrioid endometrial cancer. Notably, 4 patients (9.5%) experienced relapse after the initial response. Adverse events were mild, primarily irregular bleeding and cramping. Quality of life was not negatively affected. At 3 months, exogenous progesterone effect was present in 96.9% of responders (31 of 32) vs 25% of nonresponders (2 of 8) (P=.001). Nonresponders had higher baseline proliferation (Ki67) and lower dickkopf homolog 3 gene expression than responders (P=.023 and P=.030). Nonresponders had significantly different changes in secreted frizzled-related protein 1, frizzled class receptor 8, and retinaldehyde dehydrogenase 2 compared with responders.

Conclusion: The levonorgestrel intrauterine device has a substantial activity in complex atypical hyperplasia and grade 1 endometrioid endometrial cancer, with a modest proportion demonstrating upfront progesterone resistance. Potential biomarkers were identified that may correlate with resistance to therapy; further exploration is warranted.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00788671.

Keywords: complex atypical hyperplasia; conservative; endometrial cancer; endometrial hyperplasia intrauterine device; predictive biomarkers; progesterone.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1.. CONSORT Diagram.
Figure 1.. CONSORT Diagram.
Details describing the number of patients enrolled, treated with levonorgestrel intrauterine device (IUD) on-study, and evaluable at the 12 month time point, including reasons for patients coming off-study or deemed inevaluable.
Figure 2.. Mean SF-36 Subscale Scores for…
Figure 2.. Mean SF-36 Subscale Scores for All Patients.
A) Mean SF-36 scores across all time points and B) Comparison of mean SF-36 scores in responders and non-responders at the 9-month time point.
Figure 2.. Mean SF-36 Subscale Scores for…
Figure 2.. Mean SF-36 Subscale Scores for All Patients.
A) Mean SF-36 scores across all time points and B) Comparison of mean SF-36 scores in responders and non-responders at the 9-month time point.

Source: PubMed

Подписаться