Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Terapia de reemplazo hormonal en pacientes con tratamiento previo para el cáncer endometrial

Información

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008830.pub3Copiar DOI
Base de datos:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Versión publicada:
  1. 15 mayo 2018see what's new
Tipo:
  1. Intervention
Etapa:
  1. Review
Grupo Editorial Cochrane:
  1. Grupo Cochrane de Cáncer ginecológico, neurooncología y otros cánceres

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2018 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

  • Katharine A Edey

    Correspondencia a: Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter, UK

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

  • Stuart Rundle

    Gynaecological Oncology, Northern Gynaecological Oncology Centre, Gateshead, UK

  • Martha Hickey

    The University of Melbourne, The Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia

Contributions of authors

KE was responsible for rewriting the protocol, developing the search strategy, extracting and analysing data, and developing and editing the review.

SR was responsible for data extraction and analysis and writing and editing the results and findings.

MH as an expert in menopause reviewed and edited the review as appropriate and assisted with data analysis.

Sources of support

Internal sources

  • None, Other.

External sources

  • None, Other.

Declarations of interest

KE: none known.

SR: none known.

MH: none known.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Jo Morrison (Co‐ordinating Editor), Clare Jess (Managing Editor) and Jo Platt (Information Specialist) from Cochrane Gynaecological, Neuro‐oncology and Orphan Cancers. We acknowledge Jing Fu, Xue Peng and Lina Hu who wrote the original draft of the protocol.

This project was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), via Cochrane Infrastructure funding to the Cochrane Gynaecological, Neuro‐oncology and Orphan Cancer Group. The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the review authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Systematic Reviews Programme, NIHR, National Health Service or the Department of Health.

We would like to thank the referees for many helpful suggestions and comments, some of these include Fani Kokka, Khadra Galaal, Ben Carter and Katharine Tylko‐Hill.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2018 May 15

Hormone replacement therapy for women previously treated for endometrial cancer

Review

Katharine A Edey, Stuart Rundle, Martha Hickey

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008830.pub3

2016 Jul 26

Hormone replacement therapy for women previously treated for endometrial cancer

Protocol

Katharine A Edey, Stuart Rundle, Martha Hickey

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008830.pub2

2010 Nov 10

Hormone replacement therapy for women previously treated for endometrial cancer

Protocol

Xue Peng, Jing Fu, Hu Lina

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008830

Keywords

MeSH

PICO

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Study flow diagram.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

Study flow diagram.

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Oestrogen replacement therapy compared to placebo for women previously treated for endometrial cancer

Oestrogen replacement therapy compared to placebo for women previously treated for endometrial cancer

Patient or population: women previously treated for endometrial cancer
Setting: oncology follow‐up
Intervention: oestrogen replacement therapy
Comparison: placebo

Outcomes

Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

№ of participants
(studies)

Certainty (quality) of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Risk with placebo

Risk with oestrogen replacement therapy

Rate of symptom relief

Rate of tumour recurrence
follow‐up: median 36 months

Study population

RR 1.17

(0.54 to 2.50)

1236
(1 RCT)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
Very low1,2,3

19 per 1000

14 per 1000
(9 to 40)

Rate of appearance of a new malignancy
follow‐up: median 36 months

Study population

RR 0.80 (0.32 to 2.01)

1236
(1 RCT)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
Very low1,2,3

16 per 1000

13 per 1000
(5 to 33)

Rate of survival: overall survival

The single study did not report overall survival of control and intervention groups individually, though it did report the percentage of participants alive at the end of follow‐up (median follow‐up: 35.7 months; 94.3% in the HRT group and 95.6% in the placebo group).

Rate of survival: progression‐free survival

The study did not report progression‐free survival of control and intervention groups individually, though it did report the percentage of participants alive, with no evidence of disease at the end of follow‐up (median follow‐up: 35.7 months; 95.8% in the HRT group and 96.9% in the placebo group).

*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

CI: confidence interval; RCT: randomised controlled trial; RR: risk ratio.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
Moderate quality: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
Low quality: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
Very low quality: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

1Downgraded one level as the single RCT was closed prior to achieving its accrual goal. This was a serious departure from the study design and a serious risk of bias.

2Downgraded one level as there were insufficient data with respect to allocation concealment and description of the intervention, along with a significant risk of attrition bias.

3Downgraded one level for imprecision, as the single included study was underpowered to detect significant differences in the primary outcomes.

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings for the main comparison. Oestrogen replacement therapy compared to placebo for women previously treated for endometrial cancer