RELEVANCE OF OVARIAN PRESERVATION IN YOUNG WOMEN WITH EARLY-STAGE ENDOMETRIAL CANCER AFTER HORMONAL AND SURGICAL TREATMENT: A COMPREHENSIVE LITERATURE REVIEW

Karlygash N. Tazhibayeva, Assel Sadykova, Sayakhat T. Olzhayev, B. Adzhibaev, A. Mussina, M. Khassanova, K. Baimukhametov, M. АDIYEV

2024

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.52532/2521-6414-2024-1-71-57-64
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Relevance: Ovarian preservation in young women with early-stage endometrial cancer after surgical treatment has been conventionally associated with complications. Nevertheless, recent randomized studies suggest a different perspective. The study aimed to clarify the occurrence of complications, in particular relapses, associated with ovarian preservation in young women after hormonal and surgical treatment for early-stage endometrial cancer. Methods: The analysis included articles published in full text over the past 10 years. We identified relevant observations from studies using a comprehensive search in the following databases: PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library. The search strategy included terms related to endometrial cancer: premenopausal, young woman, endometrial cancer, ovarian conservation. The study followed the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews. Results: A total of 178 articles were studied, of which 111 articles (literature reviews and meta-analyses) (62%) described the cases of ovarian preservation. Of these, 84 were excluded for various reasons; 29 eligible articles were included in this analysis. Notably, factors such as younger age (P<0.0001), later year of diagnosis (P=0.03), residence in Central and Southern Europe and the United States (P=0.02), and lower-grade tumors in Asian countries (P<0.002) correlated with the desire of women to preserve their ovaries. The conducted literature review showed that ovarian preservation did not significantly affect cancer-specific survival (risk ratio (HR) =0.78, 95% CI 0.17-2.74) or overall survival (HR=0.78, 95% CI 0.24-1.75). This study’s results remained practically unchanged even after excluding women after radiation and hormone therapy. Conclusion: This literature review revealed no statistically significant difference in relapse-free survival between patients after ovarian preservation at stage IA and partially at stage II com-pared to those after bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy.