Measurement of changes in uterine and fibroid volume during treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB).

study questionDoes application of an unbiased method for analysis of magnetic resonance (MR) images reveal any effect on uterine or fibroid volume from treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) with three 12-week courses of the selective progesterone receptor modulator ulipristal acetate (SPRM-UPA)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Application of an unbiased method for analysis of MR images showed that treatment of HMB with SPRM-UPA was not associated with a significant reduction in the volume of the uterus or in the volume of uterine fibroids. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: SPRM-UPA shows therapeutic efficacy for treating HMB. However, the mechanism of action (MoA) is not well understood and there have been mixed reports, using potentially biased methodology, regarding whether SPRM-UPA has an effect on the volume of the uterus and fibroids. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: In a prospective clinical study (with no comparator), 19 women with HMB were treated over a period of 12 months with SPRM-UPA and uterine and fibroid size were assessed with high resolution structural MRI and stereology. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING

methodsA cohort of 19 women aged 38-52 years (8 with and 11 without fibroids) were treated with three 12-week courses of 5 mg SPRM-UPA given daily, with four weeks off medication in-between treatment courses. Unbiased estimates of the volume of uterus and total volume of fibroids were obtained at baseline, and after 6 and 12 months of treatment, by using the Cavalieri method of modern design-based stereology in combination with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Bland-Altman plots showed good intra-rater repeatability and good inter-rater reproducibility for measurement of the volume of both fibroids and the uterus. For the total patient cohort, two-way ANOVA did not show a significant reduction in the volume of the uterus after two or three treatment courses of SPRM-UPA ( LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study has been performed in a relatively small cohort of women and simulations that have subsequently been performed using the acquired data have shown that for three time points and a group size of up to 50, with alpha (Type I Error) and beta (Type II Error) set to 95% significance and 80% power, respectively, at least 35 patients would need to be recruited in order for the null hypothesis (that there is no significant reduction in total fibroid volume) to be potentially rejected. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE

findingsThe imaging protocol that we have developed represents a generic paradigm for measuring the volume of the uterus and uterine fibroids that can be readily incorporated in future studies of medical treatments of HMB. In the present study, SPRM-UPA failed to produce a significant reduction in the volume of the uterus or the total volume of fibroids (which were present in approximately half of the patients) after either two or three 12-week courses of treatment. This finding represents a new insight in respect of the management of HMB using treatment strategies that target hormone-dependence. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The UPA Versus Conventional Management of HMB (UCON) trial was funded by the EME Programme (Medical Research Council (MRC) and National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR)) (12/206/52). The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, or Department of Health and Social Care.Medical Research Council (MRC) Centre grants to the Centre for Reproductive Health (CRH) (G1002033 and MR/N022556/1) are also gratefully acknowledged. H.C. has clinical research support for laboratory consumables and staff from Bayer AG and provides consultancy advice (All paid to Institution) for Bayer AG, PregLem SA, Gedeon Richter, Vifor Pharma UK Ltd, AbbVie Inc., and Myovant Sciences GmbH. H.C. has received royalties from UpToDate for an article on abnormal uterine bleeding. L.W. has received grant funding from Roche Diagnostics (Paid to Institution). All other authors have no conflicts to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study reported here is an embedded mechanism of action study (no comparator) within the UCON clinical trial (registration ISRCTN: 20426843).