CESP, Fac. de médecine - Univ. Paris-Sud, Fac. de médecine - UVSQ, INSERM, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif 94805, France.
Gustave Roussy, Villejuif F-94805, France.
Hum Reprod Update. 2021 Feb 19;27(2):393-420. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmaa045.
Endometriosis is an often chronic, inflammatory gynaecologic condition affecting 190 million women worldwide. Studies have reported an elevated cancer risk among patients with endometriosis. However, prior research has included methodologic issues that impede valid and robust interpretation.
We conducted a meta-analysis of studies investigating the association between endometriosis and cancer risk and analysed the results by methodologic characteristics. We discuss the implications of cancer screening in patients and management challenges faced by clinicians.
We searched PubMed and Embase databases for eligible studies from inception through 24 October 2019. We included cohort and case-control studies examining the association between endometriosis and cancer risk; cross-sectional studies and case reports were excluded. Publications had to present risk/rate/odds estimates with 95% CI. Random effects meta-analysis was used to estimate summary relative risks (SRR) and CIs. Heterogeneity across studies was assessed by the Q test and I2 statistics, and publication bias using Egger's and Begg's tests. Risk of bias and quality of the included studies were assessed using the risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool.
Forty-nine population-based case-control and cohort studies were included. Twenty-six studies were scored as having a 'serious'/'critical' risk of bias, and the remaining 23 'low'/'moderate'. Cancer-specific analyses showed a positive association between endometriosis and ovarian cancer risk (SRR = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.68-2.22; n = 24 studies) that was strongest for clear cell (SRR = 3.44, 95% CI = 2.82-4.42; n = 5 studies) and endometrioid (SRR = 2.33, 95% CI = 1.82-2.98; n = 5 studies) histotypes (Pheterogeneity < 0.0001), although with significant evidence of both heterogeneity across studies and publication bias (Egger's and Begg's P-values < 0.01). A robust association was observed between endometriosis and thyroid cancer (SRR = 1.39, 95% CI =1.24-1.57; n = 5 studies), a very small association with breast cancer (SRR = 1.04, 95% CI =1.00-1.09; n = 20 studies) and no association with colorectal cancer (SRR = 1.00, 95% CI =0.87-1.16; n = 5 studies). The association with endometrial cancer was not statistically significant (SRR = 1.23, 95% CI =0.97-1.57; n = 17 studies) overall and wholly null when restricted to prospective cohort studies (SRR = 0.99, 95% CI =0.72-1.37; n = 5 studies). The association with cutaneous melanoma was also non-significant (SRR = 1.17, 95% CI =0.97-1.41; n = 7 studies) but increased in magnitude and was statistically significant when restricted to studies with low/moderate risk of bias (SRR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.24-2.36, n = 2 studies). The most robust finding both in terms of statistical significance and magnitude of effect was an inverse association with cervical cancer (SRR = 0.68, 95% CI =0.56-0.82; n = 4 studies); however, this result has a high potential to reflect heightened access to detection of dysplasia for women who reached an endometriosis diagnosis and is thus likely not causal. Several additional cancer types were explored based on <4 studies.
Endometriosis was associated with a higher risk of ovarian and thyroid, and minimally (only 4% greater risk) with breast cancer, and with a lower risk of cervical cancer. However, this meta-analysis confirms that: a majority of studies had severe/critical risk of bias; there is impactful heterogeneity across studies-and for ovarian cancer, publication bias; and causal inference requires temporality, which in many studies was not considered. We discuss the implications of these potential associations from the perspectives of patients with endometriosis, clinicians involved in their care, and scientists investigating their long-term health risks.
子宫内膜异位症是一种常见的慢性、炎症性妇科疾病,影响着全球 1.9 亿女性。研究报告称,子宫内膜异位症患者的癌症风险升高。然而,先前的研究存在方法学问题,阻碍了对其的有效和稳健的解释。
我们对研究子宫内膜异位症与癌症风险之间关联的研究进行了荟萃分析,并按方法学特征对结果进行了分析。我们讨论了对患者进行癌症筛查的影响和临床医生面临的管理挑战。
我们在 PubMed 和 Embase 数据库中检索了从成立到 2019 年 10 月 24 日的合格研究。我们纳入了队列研究和病例对照研究,以调查子宫内膜异位症与癌症风险之间的关联;排除了横断面研究和病例报告。出版物必须提出具有 95%置信区间的风险/比率/优势比估计值。使用随机效应荟萃分析来估计汇总相对风险(SRR)和置信区间。通过 Q 检验和 I2 统计量评估研究之间的异质性,并通过 Egger 检验和 Begg 检验评估发表偏倚。使用非随机干预研究的偏倚风险(ROBINS-I)工具评估纳入研究的偏倚风险和质量。
共纳入了 49 项基于人群的病例对照和队列研究。26 项研究被评为“严重/关键”偏倚风险,其余 23 项为“低/中度”偏倚风险。癌症特异性分析显示,子宫内膜异位症与卵巢癌风险之间存在正相关(SRR=1.93,95%CI=1.68-2.22;n=24 项研究),其中透明细胞癌(SRR=3.44,95%CI=2.82-4.42;n=5 项研究)和子宫内膜样癌(SRR=2.33,95%CI=1.82-2.98;n=5 项研究)组织学类型最强(P 异质性<0.0001),尽管存在显著的研究间异质性和发表偏倚证据(Egger 检验和 Begg 检验 P 值<0.01)。子宫内膜异位症与甲状腺癌之间存在稳健的关联(SRR=1.39,95%CI=1.24-1.57;n=5 项研究),与乳腺癌的关联很小(SRR=1.04,95%CI=1.00-1.09;n=20 项研究),与结直肠癌无关联(SRR=1.00,95%CI=0.87-1.16;n=5 项研究)。总体而言,子宫内膜异位症与子宫内膜癌的关联无统计学意义(SRR=1.23,95%CI=0.97-1.57;n=17 项研究),当仅限于前瞻性队列研究时则完全没有关联(SRR=0.99,95%CI=0.72-1.37;n=5 项研究)。子宫内膜异位症与皮肤黑色素瘤之间的关联也无统计学意义(SRR=1.17,95%CI=0.97-1.41;n=7 项研究),但当仅限于低/中度偏倚风险的研究时,其关联程度增加且具有统计学意义(SRR=1.71,95%CI=1.24-2.36,n=2 项研究)。在统计学意义和效应幅度方面,最稳健的发现是与宫颈癌呈负相关(SRR=0.68,95%CI=0.56-0.82;n=4 项研究);然而,这一结果很可能反映了患有子宫内膜异位症的女性更易获得对异常增生的检测,因此可能并非因果关系。还根据<4 项研究探讨了其他几种癌症类型。
子宫内膜异位症与卵巢癌和甲状腺癌的风险增加相关,与乳腺癌的风险仅增加 4%(风险稍高),与宫颈癌的风险降低相关。然而,本荟萃分析证实:大多数研究存在严重/关键的偏倚风险;研究之间存在显著的异质性,对于卵巢癌,还存在发表偏倚;在许多研究中,因果关系需要考虑时间顺序,但时间顺序并未被考虑。我们从子宫内膜异位症患者、参与其护理的临床医生以及调查其长期健康风险的科学家的角度讨论了这些潜在关联的影响。