HONOLULU – Women at high risk for ovarian cancer who undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) or interval salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy (ISDO) experience significant reductions in cancer distress, according to preliminary findings from the WISP (Women Choosing Surgical Prevention) study.
Sharon Worcester/MDedge News
Dr. Karen H. Lu
However, those who choose RRSO experience worse menopausal symptoms and higher rates of regret, Karen H. Lu, MD, reported at the Society of Gynecologic Oncology’s Annual Meeting on Women’s Cancer. Of 183 women enrolled to date in the prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter study, 91 underwent RRSO and 92 underwent ISDO at a median age of 40.9 and 37.5 years, respectively. Significant decreases in cancer-related distress as measured using the Impact of Event scale were seen in both groups at 6-month follow-up after surgery: The mean scores in the RRSO arm were 19.6 at baseline and 10.9 at 6 months, and in the ISDO arm they were 20.8 and 14.0, respectively.
The decrease in scores at 6 months did not differ significantly between study arms, but women in the RRSO arm had a significantly increased incidence of hot flashes, night sweats, vaginal dryness, and weight gain after surgery, said Dr. Lu, professor and chair in the department of gynecologic oncology and reproductive medicine and the J. Taylor Wharton Distinguished Chair in Gynecologic Oncology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
“There was a significant difference in quality of life physical scores in RRSO versus the salpingectomy arm,” she said, adding that no difference was seen between the groups in quality of life mental scores.
The level of decision regret was significantly higher in the women who underwent RRSO (scores,14.1 vs. 8.7 on the 100-point scale), she noted.
“We hypothesized that use of HRT [hormone replacement therapy] after RRSO may have accounted for this difference, and looked at the two subsets,” she said. “Within the RRSO group, 25% did not go on HRT, and while higher than ISDO scores, these scores did not account for the large difference in decision regret.”
About half of the women had a history of breast cancer.
“Clinically, this agrees with what we see in that women with a prior history of breast cancer have less angst about undergoing RRSO,” she said, adding that 75% of women in the RRSO arm did go on HRT, and “these women represent the majority of our ‘previvors’ – healthy women with no history of cancer who struggle with the RRSO decision and who are able to take HRT.”
“Interestingly, compared to ISDO, RRSO women on HRT had the highest decisional regret,” she said.
An analysis of numerous possible predictors of decisional regret showed that only baseline depression score was a significant independent predictor, she noted.
Study participants are premenopausal women aged 30-50 years who have a high risk of ovarian cancer because of a pathogenic germline mutation in an ovarian cancer predisposition gene, and a normal CA125 and transvaginal ultrasound within 6 months before enrollment. All receive scripted counseling about the recommended age for oophorectomy and can choose their study arm. Planned enrollment at nine participating U.S. centers is 270 women.
The RRSO and ISDO arms at current enrollment are statistically similar with respect to mutation type, education level, breast cancer history, and first/second-degree ovarian cancer, but significantly more women in the ISDO arm had undergone risk-reducing mastectomy (51% vs. 35%), Dr. Lu noted, adding that to date no ovarian cancers have been identified at initial surgery, between surgeries, or at the time of completion oophorectomy in the ISDO patients – although only two women in that arm have undergone completion oophorectomy.
In the RRSO arm, one high-grade serous tubal intraepithelial neoplasia (STIC) was found at the time of surgery in a PALB2 mutation carrier.
“We believe this is the first report of a STIC in a PALB2 carrier. This woman was 39 years old with a strong family history of breast and ovarian cancer,” she said.
The findings suggest that “for these high-risk women who underwent ISDO ... the option encouraged them to undergo limited but potentially lifesaving surgical prophylaxis at an earlier age rather than wait to undergo full surgical prophylaxis at the upper-accepted age limit due to fear of early menopause,” Dr. Lu said.
Safety continues to be closely monitored in this study and the use of ISDO outside of the clinical trial setting is not recommended, she added, noting that an expansion of both WISP and the TUBA trial, for which preliminary results showing similar outcomes were also presented at the SGO meeting, is planned.
Dr. Lu reported having no disclosures.
SOURCE: Lu KH et al. SGO 2019, Late-Breaking Abstract 3.