Elagolix Plus Add-Back Consistently Improves Uterine Fibroids-Associated Bleeding and Nonbleeding Symptoms Across Subpopulations [ID: 1368059]

J. Simon, S. Jewell, Moming Li, J. Ng, B. Pinsky
{"title":"Elagolix Plus Add-Back Consistently Improves Uterine Fibroids-Associated Bleeding and Nonbleeding Symptoms Across Subpopulations [ID: 1368059]","authors":"J. Simon, S. Jewell, Moming Li, J. Ng, B. Pinsky","doi":"10.1097/01.aog.0000931260.84787.fb","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION: Patients with heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) associated with uterine fibroids (UFs) have significantly improved menstrual blood loss (MBL) when taking elagolix+estradiol/norethindrone acetate add-back therapy (ELA+AB) versus placebo. However, data on the effect of ELA+AB on nonbleeding symptoms are limited. METHODS: This post hoc analysis from the duplicate, IRB-approved, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 6-month, phase 3 Elaris UF-1 and UF-2 studies (NCT02654054 and NCT02691494) evaluated the Patients Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Patients rated symptom change for menstrual bleeding (MB) and nonbleeding symptoms on a 7-point scale from “very much improved” (1) to “very much worse” (7). RESULTS: By 6 months, scores for the PGIC-MB and the domains of “abdominal or pelvic pain,” “abdominal or pelvic pressure,” “abdominal or pelvic cramping,” “back pain,” and “abdominal bloating” were significantly better (P<.001 for all; no adjustment for multiple comparisons were made) in the ELA+AB versus placebo groups, regardless of patient age (<40 years, 40 to <45 years, ≥45 years), baseline MBL (less than median [187.0 mL], greater than or equal to median), International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification (0–3, 4, 5–8), or baseline uterine volume (less than median [356.5 cm3], greater than or equal to median). Patients receiving ELA+AB reported PGIC domain scores that consistently exceeded “minimally improved” (≤3) and often reached or exceeded “much improved” (≤2) by 6 months. CONCLUSION: ELA+AB provides better bleeding and nonbleeding symptom improvement versus placebo for patients with HMB associated with UFs, regardless of subpopulation investigated. In all populations, PGIC-MB and domain scores consistently reached or exceeded “much improved” by 6 months with ELA+AB.","PeriodicalId":19405,"journal":{"name":"Obstetrics & Gynecology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obstetrics & Gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aog.0000931260.84787.fb","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Patients with heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) associated with uterine fibroids (UFs) have significantly improved menstrual blood loss (MBL) when taking elagolix+estradiol/norethindrone acetate add-back therapy (ELA+AB) versus placebo. However, data on the effect of ELA+AB on nonbleeding symptoms are limited. METHODS: This post hoc analysis from the duplicate, IRB-approved, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 6-month, phase 3 Elaris UF-1 and UF-2 studies (NCT02654054 and NCT02691494) evaluated the Patients Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Patients rated symptom change for menstrual bleeding (MB) and nonbleeding symptoms on a 7-point scale from “very much improved” (1) to “very much worse” (7). RESULTS: By 6 months, scores for the PGIC-MB and the domains of “abdominal or pelvic pain,” “abdominal or pelvic pressure,” “abdominal or pelvic cramping,” “back pain,” and “abdominal bloating” were significantly better (P<.001 for all; no adjustment for multiple comparisons were made) in the ELA+AB versus placebo groups, regardless of patient age (<40 years, 40 to <45 years, ≥45 years), baseline MBL (less than median [187.0 mL], greater than or equal to median), International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification (0–3, 4, 5–8), or baseline uterine volume (less than median [356.5 cm3], greater than or equal to median). Patients receiving ELA+AB reported PGIC domain scores that consistently exceeded “minimally improved” (≤3) and often reached or exceeded “much improved” (≤2) by 6 months. CONCLUSION: ELA+AB provides better bleeding and nonbleeding symptom improvement versus placebo for patients with HMB associated with UFs, regardless of subpopulation investigated. In all populations, PGIC-MB and domain scores consistently reached or exceeded “much improved” by 6 months with ELA+AB.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Elagolix Plus Add-Back持续改善子宫肌瘤相关出血和非出血症状[j]
子宫肌瘤(UFs)相关的重度月经出血(HMB)患者在接受elagolix+雌二醇/醋酸去甲炔诺酮加回治疗(ELA+AB)时,与安慰剂相比,月经失血量(MBL)显著改善。然而,ELA+AB对非出血症状的影响数据有限。方法:这项来自重复、irb批准、随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、6个月的3期Elaris UF-1和UF-2研究(NCT02654054和NCT02691494)的事后分析评估了患者整体变化印象(PGIC)。患者对月经出血(MB)和非出血症状的症状变化进行评分,评分范围为7分,从“非常改善”(1)到“非常恶化”(7)。结果:6个月时,pgc -MB和“腹部或盆腔疼痛”、“腹部或盆腔压力”、“腹部或盆腔痉挛”、“背痛”和“腹胀”的评分明显改善(P< 0.05)。001代表所有人;ELA+AB组与安慰剂组相比,无论患者年龄(<40岁,40至<45岁,≥45岁),基线MBL(小于中位数[187.0 mL],大于或等于中位数),国际妇产科学联合会(FIGO)分类(0 - 3,4,5 - 8),或基线子宫体积(小于中位数[356.5 cm3],大于或等于中位数)。接受ELA+AB治疗的患者报告PGIC结构域评分在6个月时持续超过“最低改善”(≤3),并经常达到或超过“非常改善”(≤2)。结论:与安慰剂相比,ELA+AB对合并UFs的HMB患者的出血和非出血症状改善更好,无论调查的亚群如何。在所有人群中,pgc - mb和域评分在ELA+AB治疗6个月后一直达到或超过“显著改善”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Author Agreement. A Prospective Study to Assess for Histologic Changes on Vulvar Biopsies in Postmenopausal Women With Lichen Sclerosus Treated With Fractionated CO2 Laser Therapy [ID: 1339895] Prescribing Patterns for Postpartum Contraception Among Breastfeeding Patients Insured Under Medicaid [ID: 1375071] Evaluation of Perioperative Factors Contributing to Organ Space Surgical Site Infection After Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy [ID: 1374862] Delays in Diagnosis and Treatment of Appendicitis in Females [ID: 1375790]
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1