摘要PS9-48:卵巢功能抑制的乳腺癌患者抑郁、性功能障碍和生活质量:卵巢消融术与GnRH激动剂的横断面研究

Junnnan Xu, T. Sun
{"title":"摘要PS9-48:卵巢功能抑制的乳腺癌患者抑郁、性功能障碍和生活质量:卵巢消融术与GnRH激动剂的横断面研究","authors":"Junnnan Xu, T. Sun","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-66195/v1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Background: Ovarian function suppression is being widely utilized as endocrine therapy to reduce estrogen release in premenopausal breast cancer patients and was achieved either by medical treatment with bilateral oophorectomy, irradiation, or the Gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist. This study aimed to examine whether GnRHa differed from ovarian ablation on depression, sexual dysfunction and quality of life.Methods: The premenopausal breast cancer patients who received ovarian function suppression were enrolled from seven hospital between June 2019 and June 2020. Our independent variable was the type of ovarian suppression, categorized as Ovarian Ablation (OA cohort, n=174) and medical GnRH agonist (GnRHa cohort, n=389). The self-administered questionnaire (OFS-Q5) was developed and used in this study aimed to assess the depression (PHQ-9), sexual dysfunction (FSFI) and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-BR23).Results: In this cross-sectional study, 563 patients with ovarian function suppression completed surveys were collected. The mean sum score of the PHQ-9 tend to be slight decrease in GnRHa cohort than that in ovarian ablation (OA) cohort (11.4 ±5.7 vs. 12.8 ±5.8, OR=1.910, P=0.079). Patients with major depression (PHQ-9≧15) was indicated significantly fewer in GnRHa cohort (31.1% vs 40.2%, P=0.025). The more surprising correlation is less patients with sexual dysfunction (61.5%, FSFI< 23) in OA cohort, a remarkable increase in GnRHa cohort (72.2%, P = 0.011). The ratio of sexual dysfunction remained lower for ovarian ablation women in long-term ovarian suppression (duration of ovarian suppression > 2 years: OA vs GnRHa, OR=1.555, P=0.037). No significantly difference for most subscales of QLQ-BR23 between two cohorts was evident.Conclusions: Our current investigation demonstrate here for the first time that medical GnRHa resulted in favour depression, worse sexual function than those with ovarian ablation, with similar quality of life. This new understanding should help to improve and alleviate adverse effect in patients with diverse ovarian function suppression.","PeriodicalId":20307,"journal":{"name":"Poster Session Abstracts","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Abstract PS9-48: Depression, sexual dysfunction and quality of life among breast cancer patients with ovarian function suppression: A cross sectional study between ovarian ablation verse GnRH agonists\",\"authors\":\"Junnnan Xu, T. Sun\",\"doi\":\"10.21203/rs.3.rs-66195/v1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Background: Ovarian function suppression is being widely utilized as endocrine therapy to reduce estrogen release in premenopausal breast cancer patients and was achieved either by medical treatment with bilateral oophorectomy, irradiation, or the Gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist. This study aimed to examine whether GnRHa differed from ovarian ablation on depression, sexual dysfunction and quality of life.Methods: The premenopausal breast cancer patients who received ovarian function suppression were enrolled from seven hospital between June 2019 and June 2020. Our independent variable was the type of ovarian suppression, categorized as Ovarian Ablation (OA cohort, n=174) and medical GnRH agonist (GnRHa cohort, n=389). The self-administered questionnaire (OFS-Q5) was developed and used in this study aimed to assess the depression (PHQ-9), sexual dysfunction (FSFI) and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-BR23).Results: In this cross-sectional study, 563 patients with ovarian function suppression completed surveys were collected. The mean sum score of the PHQ-9 tend to be slight decrease in GnRHa cohort than that in ovarian ablation (OA) cohort (11.4 ±5.7 vs. 12.8 ±5.8, OR=1.910, P=0.079). Patients with major depression (PHQ-9≧15) was indicated significantly fewer in GnRHa cohort (31.1% vs 40.2%, P=0.025). The more surprising correlation is less patients with sexual dysfunction (61.5%, FSFI< 23) in OA cohort, a remarkable increase in GnRHa cohort (72.2%, P = 0.011). The ratio of sexual dysfunction remained lower for ovarian ablation women in long-term ovarian suppression (duration of ovarian suppression > 2 years: OA vs GnRHa, OR=1.555, P=0.037). No significantly difference for most subscales of QLQ-BR23 between two cohorts was evident.Conclusions: Our current investigation demonstrate here for the first time that medical GnRHa resulted in favour depression, worse sexual function than those with ovarian ablation, with similar quality of life. This new understanding should help to improve and alleviate adverse effect in patients with diverse ovarian function suppression.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20307,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Poster Session Abstracts\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Poster Session Abstracts\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-66195/v1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Poster Session Abstracts","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-66195/v1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:卵巢功能抑制被广泛应用于绝经前乳腺癌患者的内分泌治疗,以减少雌激素的释放,并通过双侧卵巢切除术、照射或促性腺激素释放激素(GnRH)激动剂等药物治疗来实现。本研究旨在探讨GnRHa与卵巢消融术在抑郁、性功能障碍和生活质量方面是否存在差异。方法:选取2019年6月至2020年6月在7家医院接受卵巢功能抑制治疗的绝经前乳腺癌患者。我们的自变量是卵巢抑制的类型,分为卵巢消融术(OA队列,n=174)和药物GnRH激动剂(GnRHa队列,n=389)。本研究采用自填问卷(OFS-Q5)评估抑郁症(PHQ-9)、性功能障碍(FSFI)和生活质量(EORTC QLQ-BR23)。结果:本横断面研究共收集563例卵巢功能抑制患者完成问卷调查。GnRHa组PHQ-9平均总分较OA组略有下降(11.4±5.7比12.8±5.8,OR=1.910, P=0.079)。重度抑郁症(PHQ-9≧15)患者在GnRHa组中明显减少(31.1% vs 40.2%, P=0.025)。更令人惊讶的相关性是OA队列中出现性功能障碍的患者较少(61.5%,FSFI< 23),而GnRHa队列中出现性功能障碍的患者显著增加(72.2%,P = 0.011)。长期卵巢抑制的卵巢消融女性的性功能障碍比例仍然较低(卵巢抑制持续时间:OA vs GnRHa, OR=1.555, P=0.037)。QLQ-BR23大部分分量表在两组间无显著差异。结论:我们目前的研究首次表明,与卵巢消融术相比,医学GnRHa导致抑郁,性功能更差,但生活质量相似。这一新认识将有助于改善和减轻多种卵巢功能抑制患者的不良反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Abstract PS9-48: Depression, sexual dysfunction and quality of life among breast cancer patients with ovarian function suppression: A cross sectional study between ovarian ablation verse GnRH agonists
Background: Ovarian function suppression is being widely utilized as endocrine therapy to reduce estrogen release in premenopausal breast cancer patients and was achieved either by medical treatment with bilateral oophorectomy, irradiation, or the Gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist. This study aimed to examine whether GnRHa differed from ovarian ablation on depression, sexual dysfunction and quality of life.Methods: The premenopausal breast cancer patients who received ovarian function suppression were enrolled from seven hospital between June 2019 and June 2020. Our independent variable was the type of ovarian suppression, categorized as Ovarian Ablation (OA cohort, n=174) and medical GnRH agonist (GnRHa cohort, n=389). The self-administered questionnaire (OFS-Q5) was developed and used in this study aimed to assess the depression (PHQ-9), sexual dysfunction (FSFI) and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-BR23).Results: In this cross-sectional study, 563 patients with ovarian function suppression completed surveys were collected. The mean sum score of the PHQ-9 tend to be slight decrease in GnRHa cohort than that in ovarian ablation (OA) cohort (11.4 ±5.7 vs. 12.8 ±5.8, OR=1.910, P=0.079). Patients with major depression (PHQ-9≧15) was indicated significantly fewer in GnRHa cohort (31.1% vs 40.2%, P=0.025). The more surprising correlation is less patients with sexual dysfunction (61.5%, FSFI< 23) in OA cohort, a remarkable increase in GnRHa cohort (72.2%, P = 0.011). The ratio of sexual dysfunction remained lower for ovarian ablation women in long-term ovarian suppression (duration of ovarian suppression > 2 years: OA vs GnRHa, OR=1.555, P=0.037). No significantly difference for most subscales of QLQ-BR23 between two cohorts was evident.Conclusions: Our current investigation demonstrate here for the first time that medical GnRHa resulted in favour depression, worse sexual function than those with ovarian ablation, with similar quality of life. This new understanding should help to improve and alleviate adverse effect in patients with diverse ovarian function suppression.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Abstract PS6-01: How low is low risk: MINDACT updated outcome and treatment benefit in patients considered clinical low risk and stratified by genomic signature, age and nodal status Abstract PS14-01: Radium-223 in women with HR-positive bone-metastatic breast cancer receiving endocrine therapy: International phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial Abstract PS6-25: Cts5 tested in a Brazilian population: A tool that can predict global survival in early breast cancer ER+/HER2-, as well as the response to extended endocrine therapy Abstract PS1-32: A multicentre prospective feasibility study of carbon dye tattooing of biopsied axillary node and surgical localisation in breast cancer patients Abstract PS12-09: Pre-operative pembrolizumab (Pembro) with radiation therapy (RT) in patients with operable triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC)
×
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