Oncological and reproductive outcomes of endometrial atypical hyperplasia and endometrial cancer patients undergoing conservative therapy with hysteroscopic resection: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Our objective was to conduct a systematic review and meta‐analysis of studies evaluating the oncological and reproductive outcomes of patients with endometrial atypical hyperplasia (AH) and endometrioid endometrial cancer (EEC) undergoing conservative therapy with hysteroscopic resection (HR). Material and methods This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) statement for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses. The study strictly followed the methodological framework proposed by the Cochrane Handbook and was retrospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023469986). Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, from inception to October 10, 2023. A checklist based on items of the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and the Methodological Index for Non‐randomized Studies was used for quality assessment. The primary end points for this meta‐analysis were complete response (CR), pregnancy, and live birth rates following HR‐based therapy in patients with EEC or AH. The secondary end point was the recurrence rate (RR). Results Twenty‐one articles involving 407 patients with clinical stage IA, low or intermediate grade, EEC, and 444 patients with AH managed with HR‐based conservative treatment were included for this systematic review. CR to HR‐based conservative therapy was achieved in 88.6% of patients with EEC and 97.0% of patients with AH. Of these, 30.6% and 24.2%, respectively, had live births. The overall pooled disease RR was 18.3% and 10.8% in patients with EEC and AH, respectively. Further subset analyses revealed that EEC patients with body mass index (BMI) ≤28 kg/m2 had higher CR rates as well as higher chances of pregnancy and live birth (91.6% CR, 32.9% pregnancy, 31.1% live birth) compared with patients with BMI >28 kg/m2 (86.4% CR, 28.4% pregnancy, 23.0% live birth). The HR followed by oral progestogen subgroup had higher CR rates and higher chances of pregnancy and live birth (91.8% CR, 36.3% pregnancy, 28.2% live birth) than the HR followed by the levonorgestrel intrauterine system subgroup (82.5% CR, 25.3% pregnancy, 16.3% live birth). Conclusions Hysteroscopic resection followed by progestins appears to be a promising choice for fertility‐sparing treatment in young patients with AH and EEC, with effective and safe responses. The live birth rate remains to be improved by providing medical guidance and encouragement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.041 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".