CHC for pelvic pain in women with endometriosis: ineffectiveness or discontinuation due to side-effects
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
STUDY QUESTION: What are the use patterns and factors associated with combined hormonal contraception (CHC) ineffectiveness or discontinuation due to side-effects in patients with endometriosis and pelvic pain? SUMMARY ANSWER: Worse chronic pelvic pain (CPP) severity and pelvic floor myalgia were associated with continuous CHC ineffectiveness, while poorer quality-of-life was associated with continuous CHC discontinuation due to side-effects. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: CHC is a first line of therapy for endometriosis-associated pelvic pain in women. However, some patients state that CHC is ineffective for their pain, while others have to discontinue CHC due to side-effects. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: Analysis of a prospective patient database from a tertiary care referral center for patients with endometriosis and pelvic pain between December 2013 and April 2015 was carried out. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING AND METHODS: A total of 373 patients of reproductive age with endometriosis from the database were included in the study. Data included patient self-reported questionnaires, physical examination findings and validated instruments. There were four variables of interest: history of cyclical CHC ineffectiveness (yes/no), history of cyclical CHC discontinuation due to side-effects (yes/no), history of continuous CHC ineffectiveness (yes/no) and history of continuous CHC discontinuation due to side-effects (yes/no). The primary outcome was CPP severity for the past 3 months (score of 0-10), and secondary outcomes were other pelvic pain scores, quality-of-life on the Endometriosis Health Profile 30 (EHP-30) and underlying conditions including irritable bowel syndrome, painful bladder syndrome, abdominal wall pain, pelvic floor myalgia and depression, anxiety and pain catastrophizing. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: = 0.005). Among the underlying conditions, pelvic floor tenderness (as a marker of pelvic floor myalgia) was associated with CHC ineffectiveness. LIMITATIONS AND REASONS FOR CAUTION: This study involved patient recall and no longitudinal follow-up. Also, we do not have data on the type of side-effect that led to discontinuation. Medication ineffectiveness was reported subjectively by the patient rather than using standardized criteria. Finally, the diagnosis of endometriosis was based on previous surgery or a current nodule or endometrioma on examination/ultrasound; without prospective surgical data on all the patients, it was not possible to do a sub-analysis by current surgical features (e.g. stage). WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: In women with endometriosis, CHC ineffectiveness was associated with worse CPP and pelvic floor myalgia, which suggests myofascial or nervous system contributors to CPP that does not respond to hormonal suppression. A tender pelvic floor, as a sign of pelvic floor myalgia, may be a clinical marker of patients with endometriosis who are less likely to have an optimal response to hormonal suppression. For women who discontinue CHC due to side-effects, research is needed to help alleviate these side-effects as these patients report worse quality-of-life. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This work was supported by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Transitional Open Operating Grant (MOP-142273) as well as BC Women's Hospital and the Women's Health Research Institute. PY is also supported by a Health Professional Investigator Award from the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research. MB/CA has financial affiliations with Abbvie and Allergan; the other authors have no conflicts of interest.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».