MAURICIO SIMOES ABRAO
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Departamento de Obstetrícia e Ginecologia, Faculdade de Medicina - Docente
LIM/58 - Laboratório de Ginecologia Estrutural e Molecular, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina
LIM/58 - Laboratório de Ginecologia Estrutural e Molecular, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina
20 resultados
Resultados de Busca
Agora exibindo 1 - 10 de 20
- Endometriosis classification systems: an international survey to map current knowledge and uptake(2022) ZONDERVAN, Krina T.; MISSMER, Stacey; ABRAO, Mauricio S.; I, Jon Einarsson; HORNE, Andrew W.; JOHNSON, Neil P.; LEE, Ted T. M.; PETROZZA, John; TOMASSETTI, Carla; VERMEULEN, Nathalie; GRIMBIZIS, Grigoris; WILDE, Rudy L. deBackground: In the field of endometriosis, several classification, staging and reporting systems have been developed and published, but there are no data on the uptake of these systems in clinical practice. Objectives: The objective of the current study was to examine whether clinicians routinely use the existing endometriosis classification systems, which system do they use and what are the clinicians' motivations? Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed to gather data on the current use of endometriosis classification systems, problems encountered and interest in a new simple surgical descriptive system for endometriosis. Of particular focus were three systems most commonly used: the Revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine (rASRM) classification, the Endometriosis Fertility Index (EFI), and the ENZIAN classification. Data were analysed by SPSS. A survey was designed using the online SurveyMonkey tool consisting of 11 questions concerning three domains-participants' background, existing classification systems and intentions with regards to a new classification system for endometriosis. Replies were collected between 15 May and 1 July 2020. Main outcome measures: Uptake, feedback and future intentions. Results: The final dataset included the replies of 1178 clinicians, including surgeons, gynaecologists, reproductive endocrinologists, fertility specialists and sonographers, all managing women with endometriosis in their clinical practice. Overall, 75.5% of the professionals indicate that they currently use a classification system for endometriosis. The rASRM classification system was the best known and used system, the EFI system and ENZIAN system were known by a majority of the professionals but used by only a minority. The lack of clinical relevance was most often selected as a problem with using any system. The findings of the survey suggest that clinicians worldwide are open to using a new classification system for endometriosis that can achieve standardised reporting, and is clinically relevant and simple. Conclusions: Even with a high uptake of the existing endometriosis classification systems (rASRM, ENZIAN and EFI), most clinicians managing endometriosis would like a new simple surgical descriptive system for endometriosis. What is new? The findings therefore support future initiatives for the development of a new descriptive system for endometriosis and provide information on user expectations and conditions for universal uptake of such a system.
- Surgical Classification of Endometriosis(2022) NOGUEIRA NETO, Joao; ABRAO, Mauricio Simoes; SCHOR, Eduardo; ROSA-E-SILVA, Julio Cesar
- Regarding ""AAGL 2021 Endometriosis Classification: An Anatomy-based Surgical Complexity Score"" Reply(2022) ABRAO, Mauricio S.; ANDRES, Marina Paula; NETO, Joao Siufi; MILLER, Charles E.; GINGOLD, Julian A.; RIUS, Mariona; CARMONA, Francisco
- The microbiome and endometriosis(2022) MIYASHIRA, Carlos H.; OLIVEIRA, Fernanda Reali; ANDRES, Marina Paula; GINGOLD, Julian A.; ABRAO, Mauricio SimoesThe objective of this study was to systematically review the literature on the human microbiome in association with endometriosis. PubMed/Medline, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched for literature published from 1986 to August 2021. All human studies that assessed the microbiome using 16S rRNA sequencing or shotgun sequencing in women with endometriosis were included. Two reviewers independently abstracted data from the selected articles into tables. To assess the quality of included studies, the National Institutes of Health Study Quality Assessment Tools were utilized. This review included 12 case-control studies. Included studies compared the microbiome from various anatomical sources (fecal, vaginal, cervical, peritoneal, endometrial, and intra-lesional) between patients with endometriosis and a heterogeneous set of control patients. Study quality ranged from poor to good, with 8 of 12 studies rated fair. Multiple studies reported a different distribution of bacteria among women with endometriosis across anatomical sites, but the results were highly heterogeneous. Pseudomonas was overrepresented in peritoneal fluid among women with endometriosis across multiple studies but was also observed to be increased in vaginal, endometrial, and intra-lesional samples. Among bacteria noted across different anatomical samples, Gardnerella was found to be increased in cervical but decreased in endometrial, fecal, and vaginal samples of patients with endometriosis, while Atopium was found to be decreased in vaginal and cervical samples from patients with endometriosis. Sphingobium was found to be increased in vagina, endometrium, and peritoneal fluid from patients with endometriosis. Streptococcus was found to be increased in peritoneal, endometrial, and cervical samples from women with endometriosis. Microbiomal comparisons stratified by endometriosis stage or site of endometriosis involvement were limited and highly heterogeneous. Lay summary The microbiome, a group of bacteria found in a particular place in the body, has been shown to vary when patients have some diseases, such as cancer or inflammatory bowel disease. Less is known about the microbiome in patients with endometriosis. This review looked at existing studies comparing the bacteria found in patients with endometriosis and others without. Twelve studies were found that assessed the bacteria from swabs collected from different places, including the vagina, cervix, endometrium, peritoneum, feces, and endometriosis lesions themselves. Most of the studies found higher or lower levels of specific bacteria at each of these places, but the findings were often inconsistent. The findings were probably limited by the small numbers of patients involved and variations in the groups studied. More research is needed to find out which bacteria are over- and underrepresented in patients with endometriosis and where they are found.
- Endometriosis Classification Systems: An International Survey to Map Current Knowledge and Uptake(2022) ZONDERVAN, Krina T.; MISSMER, Stacey; ABRAO, Mauricio S.; I, Jon Einarsson; HORNE, Andrew W.; JOHNSON, Neil P.; LEE, Ted T. M.; PETROZZA, John; TOMASSETTI, Carla; VERMEULEN, Nathalie; GRIMBIZIS, Grigoris; WILDE, Rudy Leon DeObjective: In the field of endometriosis, several classification, staging and reporting systems have been developed, but do clinicians routinely use these classification systems, which system do they use and what are the clinicians' motivations? Data sources: A cross-sectional study was performed to gather data on the current use of endometriosis classification systems, problems encountered and interest in a new simple surgical descriptive system for endometriosis. Of particular focus were three systems most commonly used: the Revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine (rASRM) classification, the Endometriosis Fertility Index (EFI), and the ENZIAN classification. Data were analysed by SPSS. A survey was designed using the online SurveyMonkey tool consisting of 11 questions concerning three domains-participants background, existing classification systems and intentions with regards to a new classification system for endometriosis. Replies were collected between 15 May and 1 July 2020. Methods of study selection: na Tabulation, integration and results: The final dataset included the replies of 1178 clinicians, including surgeons, gynecologists, reproductive endocrinologists, fertility specialists and sonographers, all managing women with endometriosis in their clinical practice. Overall, 75.5% of the professionals indicate that they currently use a classification system for endometriosis. The rASRM classification system was the best known and used system, the EFI system and ENZIAN system were known by a majority of the professionals but used by only a minority. The lack of clinical relevance was most often selected as a problem with using any system. The findings of the survey suggest that clinicians worldwide are open to using a new classification system for endometriosis that can achieve standardized reporting, and is clinically relevant and simple. The findings therefore support future initiatives for the development of a new descriptive system for endometriosis and provide information on user expectations and conditions for universal uptake of such a system. Conclusion: Even with a high uptake of the existing endometriosis classification systems (rASRM, ENZIAN and EFI), most clinicians managing endometriosis would like a new simple surgical descriptive system for endometriosis. (C) 2022 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of AAGL.
- Once daily oral relugolix combination therapy versus placebo in patients with endometriosis-associated pain: two replicate phase 3, randomised, double-blind, studies (SPIRIT 1 and 2)(2022) GIUDICE, Linda C.; AS-SANIE, Sawsan; FERREIRA, Juan C. Arjona; BECKER, Christian M.; ABRAO, Mauricio S.; LESSEY, Bruce A.; BROWN, Eric; DYNOWSKI, Krzysztof; WILK, Krzysztof; LI, Yulan; MATHUR, Vandana; WARSI, Qurratul Ann; WAGMAN, Rachel B.; JOHNSON, Neil P.Background Endometriosis is a common cause of pelvic pain in women, for which current treatment options are suboptimal. Relugolix, an oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor antagonist, combined with estradiol and a progestin, was evaluated for treatment of endometriosis-associated pain. Methods In these two replicate, phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials at 219 community and hospital research centres in Africa, Australasia, Europe, North America, and South America, we randomly assigned women aged 18-50 years with surgically or directly visualised endometriosis with or without histological confirmation, or with histological diagnosis alone. Participants were eligible if they had moderate to severe endometriosis-associated pain and, during the 35-day run-in period, a dysmenorrhoea Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) score of 4.0 or higher on two or more days and a mean non-menstrual pelvic pain NRS score of 2.5 or higher, or a mean score of 1.25 or higher that included a score of 5 or more on 4 or more days. Women received (1:1:1) once-daily oral placebo, relugolix combination therapy (relugolix 40 mg, estradiol 1 mg, norethisterone acetate 0.5 mg), or delayed relugolix combination therapy (relugolix 40 mg monotherapy followed by relugolix combination therapy, each for 12 weeks) for 24 weeks. During the double-blind randomised treatment and follow-up period, all patients, investigators, and sponsor staff or representatives involved in the conduct of the study were masked to treatment assignment. The co-primary endpoints were responder rates at week 24 for dysmenorrhoea and non-menstrual pelvic pain, both based on NRS scores and analgesic use. Efficacy and safety were analysed in the modified intent-to-treat population (randomised patients who received >= 1 study drug dose). The studies are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (SPIRIT 1 [NCT03204318] and SPIRIT 2 [NCT03204331]) and EudraCT (SPIRIT 1 [2017-001588-19] and SPIRIT 2 [2017-001632-19]). Eligible patients who completed the SPIRIT studies could enrol in a currently ongoing 80-week open-label extension study (SPIRIT EXTENSION [NCT03654274, EudraCT 2017-004066-10]). Database lock for the on-treatment duration has occurred, and post-treatment follow-up for safety, specificially for bone mineral density and menses recovery, is ongoing at the time of publication. Findings 638 patients were enrolled into SPIRIT 1 and randomly assigned between Dec 7, 2017, and Dec 4, 2019, to receive relugolix combination therapy (212 [33%]), placebo (213 [33%]), or relugolix delayed combination therapy (213 [33%]). 623 patients were enrolled into SPIRIT 2 and were randomly assigned between Nov 1, 2017 and Oct 4, 2019, to receive relugolix combination therapy (208 [33%]), placebo (208 [33%]), or relugolix delayed combination therapy (207 [33%]). 98 (15%) patients terminated study participation early in SPIRIT 1 and 115 (18%) in SPIRIT 2. In SPIRIT 1, 158 (75%) of 212 patients in the relugolix combination therapy group met the dysmenorrhoea responder criteria compared with 57 (27%) of 212 patients in the placebo group (treatment difference 47.6% [95% CI 39.3-56.0]; p<0.0001). In SPIRIT 2, 155 (75%) of 206 patients in the relugolix combination therapy group were dysmenorrhoea responders compared with 62 (30%) of 204 patients in the placebo group (treatment difference 44.9% [95% CI 36.2-53.5]; p<0.0001). In SPIRIT 1, 124 (58%) of 212 patients in the relugolix combination therapy group met the non-menstrual pelvic pain responder criteria versus 84 (40%) patients in the placebo group (treatment difference 18.9% [9.5-28.2]; p<0.0001). In SPIRIT 2, 136 (66%) of 206 patients were non-menstrual pelvic pain responders in the relugolix combination therapy group compared with 87 (43%) of 204 patients in the placebo group (treatment difference 23.4% [95% CI 13.9-32.8]; p<0.0001). The most common adverse events were headache, nasopharyngitis, and hot flushes. There were nine reports of suicidal ideation across both studies (two in the placebo run-in, two in the placebo group, two in the relugolix combination therapy group, and three in the delayed relugolix combination therapy group). No deaths were reported. Least squares mean percentage change in lumbar spine bone mineral density in the relugolix combination therapy versus placebo groups was -0.70% versus 0.21% in SPIRIT 1 and -0.78% versus 0.02% in SPIRIT 2, and in the delayed relugolix combination group was -2.0% in SPIRIT 1 and -1.9% in SPIRIT 2. Decreases in opioid use were seen in treated patients as compared with placebo. Interpretation Once-daily relugolix combination therapy significantly improved endometriosis-associated pain and was well tolerated. This oral therapy has the potential to address the unmet clinical need for long-term medical treatment for endometriosis, reducing the need for opioid use or repeated surgical treatment.
- Endometriosis classification systems: an international survey to map current knowledge and uptake(dagger)(double dagger)(2022) ZONDERVAN, Krina T.; MISSMER, Stacey; ABRAO, Mauricio S.; I, Jon Einarsson; HORNE, Andrew W.; JOHNSON, Neil P.; LEE, Ted T. M.; PETROZZA, John; TOMASSETTI, Carla; VERMEULEN, Nathalie; GRIMBIZIS, Grigoris; WILDE, Rudy Leon DeSTUDY QUESTION Which classification system for endometriosis do clinicians use most frequently, and why? SUMMARY ANSWER Even with a high uptake of the three existing endometriosis classification systems, most clinicians managing endometriosis would like a new simple surgical descriptive system for endometriosis. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY In the field of endometriosis, several classifications, staging and reporting systems have been developed and published, but there are no data on the uptake of these systems in clinical practice. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A survey was designed using the online SurveyMonkey tool consisting of 11 questions concerning three domains-participants background, existing classification systems and intentions with regards to a new classification system for endometriosis. Replies were collected between 15 May and 1 July 2020. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS A cross-sectional study was performed to gather data on the current use of endometriosis classification systems, problems encountered and interest in a new simple surgical descriptive system for endometriosis. The particular focus was on the three systems most commonly used: the Revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine (rASRM) classification, the endometriosis fertility index (EFI), and the ENZIAN classification. Data were analysed to detect statistically significant differences among user groups. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE The final dataset included the replies of 1178 clinicians, including surgeons, gynaecologists, reproductive endocrinologists, fertility specialists and sonographers, all managing women with endometriosis in their clinical practice. Overall, 75.5% of the professionals indicate that they currently use a classification system for endometriosis. The rASRM classification system was the best known and used system, while the EFI system and ENZIAN system were known by a majority of the professionals but used by only a minority. The lack of clinical relevance was most often selected as a problem with using any system. The vast majority of respondents replied positively to the question on whether they would use a simple surgical descriptive system available for endometriosis, if available. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION While the total number of respondents was acceptable, some regions/professions were not sufficiently represented to draw conclusions. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The findings of the survey suggest that clinicians worldwide are open to using a new classification system for endometriosis that can achieve standardized reporting and is clinically relevant and simple. The findings therefore support future initiatives for the development of a new descriptive system for endometriosis and provide information on user expectations and conditions for universal uptake of such a system. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The meetings and activities of the working group were funded by the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists, European Society for Gynecological Endoscopy, ESHRE and World Endometriosis Society. A.W.H. reports grant funding from the MRC, NIHR, CSO, Roche Diagnostics, Astra Zeneca, Ferring, Charles Wolfson Charitable Trust, Standard Life, and consultancy fees from Roche Diagnostics, AbbVie, Nordic Pharma and Ferring, outside the submitted work. In addition, A.W.H. has a patent Serum biomarker for endometriosis pending. He is Chair of TSC for STOP-OHSS and CERM trials and Chair of RCOG Academic Board 2018-2021. M.A. reports being member of the executive board and vice president of AAGL. N.P.J. reports personal fees from Abbott, Guerbet, Myovant Sciences, Vifor Pharma, Roche Diagnostics outside the submitted work; he is also President of the World Endometriosis Society and chair of the trust board. S.M. reports grants from AbbVie, DoD, NIH and Marriot Family Foundation, honoraria from University British Columbia and WERF, support for speaking at conferences (ESHRE, CanSAGE, Endometriosis UK, UEARS, IFFS, IASP, National Endometriosis Network UK) participation on Advisory Boards from AbbVie and Roche, outside the submitted work. She also discloses having a leadership or fiduciary role in SWHR, WERF, WES, ASRM and ESHRE. C.T. reports grants, consulting and speakers' fees non-financial support and other from Merck SA, non-financial support and other consulting fees from Gedeon Richter and Nordic Pharma, and support for meeting attendance non-financial support from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work and without private revenue. K.T.Z. reports grants from Bayer Healthcare, MDNA Life Sciences, Volition Rx, and Evotec (Lab282-Partnership programme with Oxford University), non-financial support from AbbVie Ltd, all outside the submitted work; and is a Board member (Secretary) of the World Endometriosis Society and World Endometriosis Research Foundation. J.P. reports personal fees from Hologic, Inc., outside the submitted work; he is also a member of the executive boards of ASRM and SRS. The other authors had nothing to disclose.
- Strengths and limitations of diagnostic tools for endometriosis and relevance in diagnostic test accuracy research(2022) PASCOAL, E.; WESSELS, J. M.; AAS-ENG, M. K.; ABRAO, M. S.; CONDOUS, G.; JURKOVIC, D.; ESPADA, M.; EXACOUSTOS, C.; FERRERO, S.; GUERRIERO, S.; HUDELIST, G.; MALZONI, M.; REID, S.; TANG, S.; TOMASSETTI, C.; SINGH, S. S.; BOSCH, T. van den; LEONARDI, M.Endometriosis is a chronic systemic disease that can cause pain, infertility and reduced quality of life. Diagnosing endometriosis remains challenging, which yields diagnostic delays for patients. Research on diagnostic test accuracy in endometriosis can be difficult due to verification bias, as not all patients with endometriosis undergo definitive diagnostic testing. The purpose of this State-of-the-Art Review is to provide a comprehensive update on the strengths and limitations of the diagnostic modalities used in endometriosis and discuss the relevance of diagnostic test accuracy research pertaining to each. We performed a comprehensive literature review of the following methods: clinical assessment including history and physical examination, biomarkers, diagnostic imaging, surgical diagnosis and histopathology. Our review suggests that, although non-invasive diagnostic methods, such as clinical assessment, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging, do not yet qualify formally as replacement tests for surgery in diagnosing all subtypes of endometriosis, they are likely to be appropriate for advanced stages of endometriosis. We also demonstrate in our review that all methods have strengths and limitations, leading to our conclusion that there should not be a single gold-standard diagnostic method for endometriosis, but rather, multiple accepted diagnostic methods appropriate for different circumstances. (c) 2022 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
conferenceObject SPIRIT long-term extension study: two-year efficacy and safety of relugolix combination therapy in women with endometriosis-associated pain(2022) BECKER, C.; AS-SANIE, S.; ABRAO, M. S.; BROWN, E.; FERREIRA, J. C. Arjona; WAGMAN, R. B.; WANG, F.; PERRY, J. S.; JOHNSON, N.; GIUDUCE, L. C.- Invariant Natural Killer T-cells and their subtypes may play a role in the pathogenesis of endometriosis(2022) CORREA, Frederico J. S.; ANDRES, Marina Paula; ROCHA, Taina Pezzin; CARVALHO, Ana Eduarda Z.; ALOIA, Thiago P. A.; CORPA, Marcus V. N.; KALLAS, Esper G.; MANGUEIRA, Cristovao L. P.; BARACAT, Edmund C.; I, Karina Carvalho; ABRAO, Mauricio S.Objective: To evaluate the frequencies of iNKT cells and their subsets in patients with deep endometriosis. Methods: A case-control study was conducted between 2013 and 2015, with 73 patients distributed into two groups: 47 women with a histological diagnosis of endometriosis and 26 controls. Peripheral blood, endometriosis lesions, and healthy peritoneal samples were collected on the day of surgery to determine the frequencies of iNKT cells and subtypes via flow cytometry analysis. Results: The authors observed a lower number of iNKT (p = 0.01) and Double-Negative (DN) iNKT cells (p = 0.02) in the blood of patients with endometriosis than in the control group. The number of DN iNKT IL-17+ cells in the secretory phase was lower in the endometriosis group (p = 0.049). There was an increase in the secretion of IL-17 by CD4+ iNKT cells in the blood of patients with endometriosis and severe dysmenorrhea (p = 0.038), and severe acyclic pelvic pain (p = 0.048). Patients with severe dysmenorrhea also had a decreased number of CD4+ CCR7+ cells (p = 0.022). Conclusion: The decreased number of total iNKT and DN iNKT cells in patients with endometriosis suggests that iNKT cells play a role in the pathogenesis of endometriosis and can be used to develop new diagnostic and therapeutic agents.