SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2020
Ovarian suppression for adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cytokines and Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor as Biomarkers of Cognitive Impairment Related to Breast Cancer and Its Treatments: A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluation of Ovarian Function Suppression Failure in Premenopausal Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer.Cancers · 2026Article
- Adjuvant ovarian function suppression and aromatase inhibitors in premenopausal patients with hormone receptor and HER2 positive breast cancer, by timing of chemotherapy and trastuzumab and response to neoadjuvant therapy.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2026Article
- Thioredoxin-1 Regulates Microglia Polarization to Ameliorate Neuroinflammation and Cognitive Impairment Following Tumor-Therapeutic Ovariectomy.Endocrine, metabolic & immune disorders drug targets · 2026Article
- Docetaxel Resistance in Breast Cancer: Current Insights and Future Directions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Current Endocrine Therapy in Hormone-Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer: From Tumor Biology to the Rationale for Therapeutic Tunning.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Impact of risk and lifestyle factors on therapy goals in the treatment of breast cancer and gynecological cancer patients with integrative medicine.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
- Clinical Management of Ovarian Function Suppression in Premenopausal Women With Breast Cancer: A Survey of Members of ASCO.JCO oncology practice · 2025Article
- Clinical Utility of Integrated Multidisciplinary Patient-Centered Information in Breast Cancer Care: A Mixed Methods Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Long-term outcomes of bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in women with personal history of breast cancer.BMJ oncology · 2025Article
- Review
- Safety and efficacy of topical testosterone in breast cancer patients receiving ovarian suppression and aromatase inhibitor therapy.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2024Article
- Letrozole delays acquisition of water maze task in female BALB/c mice: Possible involvement of anxiety.Hormones and behavior · 2024Article
- Empowerment-Led Guided Self-Help Intervention for Symptom Burden in Breast Cancer Women Treated With Ovarian Function Suppression: A Randomized Trial Protocol.World journal of oncology · 2024Article
- Prevention and Co-Management of Breast Cancer-Related Osteoporosis Using Resveratrol.Nutrients · 2024Review
- Article
- Selection of appropriate biomarkers to monitor effectiveness of ovarian function suppression in pre-menopausal patients with ER+ breast cancer.NPJ breast cancer · 2024Review
- Therapeutic evolution in HR+/HER2- breast cancer: from targeted therapy to endocrine therapy.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Review
- A narrative review: research progress of adjuvant intensive endocrine therapy for early breast cancer.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2024Review
- Targeting sex steroid biosynthesis for breast and prostate cancer therapy.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundApproximately 80% of breast cancers amongst premenopausal women are hormone receptor-positive. Adjuvant endocrine therapy is an integral component of care for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer and in premenopausal women includes oestrogen receptor blockade with tamoxifen, temporary suppression of ovarian oestrogen synthesis by luteinising hormone releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists, and permanent interruption of ovarian oestrogen synthesis with oophorectomy or radiotherapy. Recent international consensus statements recommend single-agent tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors with ovarian function suppression (OFS) as the current standard adjuvant endocrine therapy for premenopausal women (often preceded by chemotherapy). This review examined the role of adding OFS to another treatment (i.e. chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, or both) or comparing OFS to no further adjuvant treatment.
objectivesTo assess effects of OFS for treatment of premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. SEARCH
methodsFor this review update, we searched the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 8), the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and ClinicalTrials.gov on 26 September 2019. We screened the reference lists of related articles, contacted trial authors, and applied no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised trials assessing any method of OFS, that is, oophorectomy, radiation-induced ovarian ablation, or LHRH agonists, as adjuvant treatment for premenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. We included studies that compared (1) OFS versus observation, (2) OFS + chemotherapy versus chemotherapy, (3) OFS + tamoxifen versus tamoxifen, and (4) OFS + chemotherapy + tamoxifen versus chemotherapy + tamoxifen. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Hazard ratios (HRs) were derived for time-to-event outcomes, and meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effect model. The primary outcome measures were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Toxicity, contralateral breast cancer, and second malignancy were represented as risk ratios (RRs), and quality of life data were extracted when provided. MAIN
resultsThis review update included 15 studies involving 11,538 premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer; these studies were conducted from 1978 to 2014. Some of these treatments are not current standard of care, and early studies did not assess HER2 receptor status. Studies tested OFS versus observation (one study), OFS plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy (six studies), OFS plus tamoxifen versus tamoxifen (six studies), and OFS plus chemotherapy and tamoxifen versus chemotherapy and tamoxifen (two studies). Of those studies that reported the chemotherapy regimen, an estimated 72% of women received an anthracycline. The results described below relate to the overall comparison of OFS versus no OFS. High-certainty evidence shows that adding OFS to treatment resulted in a reduction in mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 0.94; 11 studies; 10,374 women; 1933 reported events). This treatment effect was seen when OFS was added to observation, to tamoxifen, or to chemotherapy and tamoxifen. The effect on mortality was not observed when OFS was added to chemotherapy without tamoxifen therapy (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.09; 5 studies; 3087 women; median follow-up: range 7.7 to 12.1 years). The addition of OFS resulted in improved DFS (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.90; 10 studies; 8899 women; 2757 reported events; high-certainty evidence). The DFS treatment effect persisted when OFS was added to observation, to tamoxifen, and to chemotherapy and tamoxifen. The effect on DFS was reduced when OFS was added to chemotherapy without tamoxifen therapy (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.01; 5 studies; 2450 women). Heterogeneity was low to moderate across studies for DFS and OS (respectively). Evidence suggests that adding OFS slightly increases the incidence of hot flushes (grade 3/4 or any grade; risk ratio (RR) 1.60, 95% CI 1.41 to 1.82; 6 studies; 5581 women; low-certainty evidence, as this may have been under-reported in these studies). Two other studies that could not be included in the meta-analysis reported a higher number of hot flushes in the OFS group than in the no-OFS group. Seven studies involving 5354 women collected information related to mood; however this information was reported as grade 3 or 4 depression, anxiety, or neuropsychiatric symptoms, or symptoms were reported without the grade. Two studies reported an increase in depression, anxiety, and neuropsychiatric symptoms in the OFS group compared to the no-OFS group, and five studies indicated an increase in anxiety in both treatment groups (but no difference between groups) or no difference overall in symptoms over time or between treatment groups. A single study reported bone health as osteoporosis (defined as T score < -2.5); this limited evidence suggests that OFS increases the risk of osteoporosis compared to no-OFS at median follow-up of 5.6 years (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.10 to 28.82; 2011 women; low-certainty evidence). Adding OFS to treatment likely reduces the risk of contralateral breast cancer (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.97; 9 studies; 9138 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Quality of life was assessed in five studies; four studies used validated tools, and the fifth study provided no information on how data were collected. Two studies reported worse quality of life indicators (i.e. vaginal dryness, day and night sweats) for women receiving OFS compared to those in the no-OFS group. The other two studies indicated worsening of symptoms (e.g. vasomotor, gynaecological, vaginal dryness, decline in sexual interest, bone and joint pain, weight gain); however these side effects were reported in both OFS and no-OFS groups. The study that did not use a validated quality of life tool described no considerable differences between groups. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThis review found evidence that supports adding OFS for premenopausal women with early, hormone receptor-positive breast cancers. The benefit of OFS persisted when compared to observation, and when added to endocrine therapy (tamoxifen) or chemotherapy and endocrine therapy (tamoxifen). The decision to use OFS may depend on the overall risk assessment based on tumour and patient characteristics, and may follow consideration of all side effects that occur with the addition of OFS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.