Skip to main content
PMC home page
Medline Book to support NIHPA logoLink to Medline Book to support NIHPA
. 2024 Sep;28(55):1–77. doi: 10.3310/SQWY6998

Preventing recurrence of endometriosis-related pain by means of long-acting progestogen therapy: the PRE-EMPT RCT.

Kevin G Cooper, Siladitya Bhattacharya, Jane P Daniels, Versha Cheed, Laura Gennard, Lisa Leighton, Danielle Pirie, Melyda Melyda, Mark Monahan, Annalise Weckesser, Tracy Roberts, Elaine Denny, Laura Ocansey, Clive Stubbs, Emma Cox, Georgina Jones, T Justin Clark, Ertan Saridogan, Janesh K Gupta, Hilary Om Critchley, Andrew Horne, Lee J Middleton
PMCID: PMC11417646  PMID: 39259620

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis affects 1 in 10 women, many of whom have surgery for persistent pain. Recurrence of symptoms following an operation is common. Although hormonal treatment can reduce this risk, there is uncertainty about the best option.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of long-acting progestogen therapy compared with the combined oral contraceptive pill in preventing recurrence of endometriosis-related pain and quality of life.

DESIGN

A multicentre, open, randomised trial with parallel economic evaluation. The final design was informed by a pilot study, qualitative exploration of women's lived experience of endometriosis and a pretrial economic model.

SETTING

Thirty-four United Kingdom hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Women of reproductive age undergoing conservative surgery for endometriosis.

INTERVENTIONS

Long-acting progestogen reversible contraceptive (either 150 mg depot medroxyprogesterone acetate or 52 mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system) or combined oral contraceptive pill (30 µg ethinylestradiol, 150 µg levonorgestrel).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the pain domain of the Endometriosis Health Profile-30 questionnaire at 36 months post randomisation. The economic evaluation estimated the cost per quality-adjusted life-years gained.

RESULTS

Four hundred and five women were randomised to receive either long-acting reversible contraceptive (N = 205) or combined oral contraceptive pill (N = 200). Pain scores improved in both groups (24 and 23 points on average) compared with preoperative values but there was no difference between the two (adjusted mean difference: -0.8, 95% confidence interval -5.7 to 4.2; p = 0.76). The long-acting reversible contraceptive group underwent fewer surgical procedures or second-line treatments compared with the combined oral contraceptive group (73 vs. 97; hazard ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 1.00). The mean adjusted quality-adjusted life-year difference between two arms was 0.043 (95% confidence interval -0.069 to 0.152) in favour of the combined oral contraceptive pill, although this cost an additional £533 (95% confidence interval 52 to 983) per woman.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations include the absence of a no-treatment group and the fact that many women changed treatments over the 3 years of follow-up. Use of telephone follow-up to collect primary outcome data in those who failed to return questionnaires resulted in missing data for secondary outcomes. The COVID pandemic may have affected rates of further surgical treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

At 36 months, women allocated to either intervention had comparable levels of pain, with both groups showing around a 40% improvement from presurgical levels. Although the combined oral contraceptive was cost-effective at a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, the difference between the two was marginal and lower rates of repeat surgery might make long-acting reversible contraceptives preferable to some women.

FUTURE WORK

Future research needs to focus on evaluating newer hormonal preparations, a more holistic approach to symptom suppression and identification of biomarkers to diagnose endometriosis and its recurrence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered as ISRCTN97865475. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN97865475.

FUNDING

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 11/114/01) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 55. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information. The NIHR recognises that people have diverse gender identities, and in this report, the word 'woman' is used to describe patients or individuals whose sex assigned at birth was female, whether they identify as female, male or non-binary.

Plain language summary

Endometriosis is a condition where cells similar to ones that line the womb are found elsewhere in the body. Endometriosis affects 1 in 10 women, many of whom have surgery for persistent pain. Unfortunately, symptoms often return and some women will need repeat operations. Hormonal contraceptives can prevent the return of endometriosis-related pain: either long-acting reversible contraceptives (injections or a coil, fitted inside the womb) or the combined oral contraceptive pill (often called ‘the pill’). We do not know which is the best option. The aim of this trial was to find out which of these two hormone treatments was more effective in terms of symptom relief, avoidance of further surgery and costs. Four hundred and five women with endometriosis, who were not intending to get pregnant, participated in a clinical trial. Half of the participants took long-acting reversible contraceptives, and the other half took the pill for 3 years following endometriosis surgery. The choice of treatment was made at random by a computer to ensure a fair comparison, although those allocated to the long-acting contraceptive could choose between injections or the coil. Participants completed questionnaires about their symptoms and life quality at intervals up to 3 years. Both treatments were equally good at reducing pain but more women using the pill had repeat operations. The pill was a little more costly overall but associated with a slightly higher quality of life. Both treatments are equally effective in reducing pain up to 3 years after surgery for endometriosis. The differences in costs are small and the choice of treatment should be based on personal preference.

Full text of this article can be found in Bookshelf.

References

  1. Prescott J, Farland LV, Tobias DK, Gaskins AJ, Spiegelman D, Chavarro JE, et al. A prospective cohort study of endometriosis and subsequent risk of infertility. Hum Reprod 2016;31:1475–82. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dew085. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  2. Rodriguez MA, Afari N, Buchwald DS; National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Working Group on Urological Chronic Pelvic Pain. Evidence for overlap between urological and nonurological unexplained clinical conditions. J Urol 2009;182:2123–31. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.07.036. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  3. Tirlapur SA, Kuhrt K, Chaliha C, Ball E, Meads C, Khan KS. The ‘evil twin syndrome’ in chronic pelvic pain: a systematic review of prevalence studies of bladder pain syndrome and endometriosis. Int J Surg 2013;11:233–7. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2013.02.003. [DOI] [PubMed]
  4. Chiaffarino F, Cipriani S, Ricci E, Roncella E, Mauri PA, Parazzini F, Vercellini P. Endometriosis and inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review of the literature. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2020;252:246–51. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.06.051. [DOI] [PubMed]
  5. DiVasta AD, Zimmerman LA, Vitonis AF, Fadayomi AB, Missmer SA. Overlap between irritable bowel syndrome diagnosis and endometriosis in adolescents. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021;19:528–37.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.03.014. [DOI] [PubMed]
  6. Singh SS, Missmer SA, Tu FF. Endometriosis and pelvic pain for the gastroenterologist. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2022;51:195–211. doi: 10.1016/j.gtc.2021.10.012. [DOI] [PubMed]
  7. Upson K, Missmer SA. Epidemiology of adenomyosis. Semin Reprod Med 2020;38:89–107. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1718920. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  8. Zondervan KT, Becker CM, Missmer SA. Endometriosis. N Engl J Med 2020;382:1244–56. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1810764. [DOI] [PubMed]
  9. Eltabbakh GH, Bower NA. Laparoscopic surgery in endometriosis. Minerva Ginecol 2008;60:323–30. [PubMed]
  10. Nnoaham KE, Hummelshoj L, Webster P, d’Hooghe T, de Cicco Nardone F, de Cicco Nardone C, et al. Impact of endometriosis on quality of life and work productivity: a multicenter study across ten countries. Fertil Steril 2011;96:366–73.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.05.090. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  11. Jones GL, Kennedy SH, Jenkinson C. Health-related quality of life measurement in women with common benign gynecologic conditions: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;187:501–11. doi: 10.1067/mob.2002.124940. [DOI] [PubMed]
  12. Simoens S, Dunselman G, Dirksen C, Hummelshoj L, Bokor A, Brandes I, et al. The burden of endometriosis: costs and quality of life of women with endometriosis and treated in referral centres. Hum Reprod 2012;27:1292–9. doi: 10.1093/humrep/des073. [DOI] [PubMed]
  13. Becker CM, Bokor A, Heikinheimo O, Horne A, Jansen F, Kiesel L, et al., ESHRE Endometriosis Guideline Group. ESHRE guideline: endometriosis. Hum Reprod Open 2022;2022:hoac009. doi: 10.1093/hropen/hoac009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  14. Kuznetsov L, Dworzynski K, Davies M, Overton C, Guideline C. Diagnosis and management of endometriosis: summary of NICE guidance. BMJ 2017;358:j3935. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j3935. [DOI] [PubMed]
  15. Gupta D, Hull ML, Fraser I, Miller L, Bossuyt PM, Johnson N, Nisenblat V. Endometrial biomarkers for the non-invasive diagnosis of endometriosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;2016:CD012165. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012165. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  16. Nisenblat V, Bossuyt PM, Shaikh R, Farquhar C, Jordan V, Scheffers CS, et al. Blood biomarkers for the non-invasive diagnosis of endometriosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;2016:CD012179. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012179. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  17. Liu E, Nisenblat V, Farquhar C, Fraser I, Bossuyt PM, Johnson N, Hull ML. Urinary biomarkers for the non-invasive diagnosis of endometriosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015;2015:CD012019. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  18. Khan KS, Tryposkiadis K, Tirlapur SA, Middleton LJ, Sutton AJ, Priest L, et al. MRI versus laparoscopy to diagnose the main causes of chronic pelvic pain in women: a test-accuracy study and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2018;22:1–92. doi: 10.3310/hta22400. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  19. Lamvu G, Carrillo J, Ouyang C, Rapkin A. Chronic pelvic pain in women: a review. JAMA 2021;325:2381–91. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.2631. [DOI] [PubMed]
  20. American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Revised American Society for reproductive medicine classification of endometriosis. Fertil Steril 1997;67:817–21. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(97)81391-x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  21. Schliep KC, Mumford SL, Peterson CM, Chen Z, Johnstone EB, Sharp HT, et al. Pain typology and incident endometriosis. Hum Reprod 2015;30:2427–38. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dev147. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  22. Duffy JMN, Arambage K, Correa FJS, Olive D, Farquhar C, Garry R, et al. Laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;4:CD011031. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011031.pub2. [DOI] [PubMed]
  23. Burks C, Lee M, DeSarno M, Findley J, Flyckt R. Excision versus ablation for management of minimal to mild endometriosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2021;28:587–97. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2020.11.028. [DOI] [PubMed]
  24. Vercellini P, Crosignani PG, Abbiati A, Somigliana E, Viganò P, Fedele L. The effect of surgery for symptomatic endometriosis: the other side of the story. Hum Reprod Update 2009;15:177–88. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmn062. [DOI] [PubMed]
  25. Cheong Y, Tay P, Luk F, Gan HC, Li TC, Cooke I. Laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis: how often do we need to re-operate? J Obstet Gynaecol 2008;28:82–5. doi: 10.1080/01443610701811761. [DOI] [PubMed]
  26. Shakiba K, Bena JF, McGill KM, Minger J, Falcone T. Surgical treatment of endometriosis: a 7-year follow-up on the requirement for further surgery. Obstet Gynecol 2008;111:1285–92. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181758ec6. [DOI] [PubMed]
  27. Saraswat L, Ayansina D, Cooper KG, Bhattacharya S, Horne AW, Bhattacharya S. Impact of endometriosis on risk of further gynaecological surgery and cancer: a national cohort study. BJOG 2018;125:64–72. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.14793. [DOI] [PubMed]
  28. Chiu CC, Hsu TF, Jiang LY, Chan IS, Shih YC, Chang YH, et al. Maintenance therapy for preventing endometrioma recurrence after endometriosis resection surgery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2022;29:602–12. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2021.11.024. [DOI] [PubMed]
  29. Valle RF, Sciarra JJ. Endometriosis: treatment strategies. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2003;997:229–39. doi: 10.1196/annals.1290.026. [DOI] [PubMed]
  30. Vercellini P, Crosignani PG, Fadini R, Radici E, Belloni C, Sismondi P. A gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist compared with expectant management after conservative surgery for symptomatic endometriosis. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999;106:672–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1999.tb08366.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  31. Crosignani PG, Luciano A, Ray A, Bergqvist A. Subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate versus leuprolide acetate in the treatment of endometriosis-associated pain. Hum Reprod 2006;21:248–56. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dei290. [DOI] [PubMed]
  32. Vercellini P, Frontino G, De Giorgi O, Aimi G, Zaina B, Crosignani PG. Comparison of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device versus expectant management after conservative surgery for symptomatic endometriosis: a pilot study. Fertil Steril 2003;80:305–9. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(03)00608-3. [DOI] [PubMed]
  33. Harada T, Momoeda M, Taketani Y, Hoshiai H, Terakawa N. Low-dose oral contraceptive pill for dysmenorrhea associated with endometriosis: a placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized trial. Fertil Steril 2008;90:1583–8. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.08.051. [DOI] [PubMed]
  34. Koga K, Takemura Y, Osuga Y, Yoshino O, Hirota Y, Hirata T, et al. Recurrence of ovarian endometrioma after laparoscopic excision. Hum Reprod 2006;21:2171–4. doi: 10.1093/humrep/del125. [DOI] [PubMed]
  35. Vercellini P, Somigliana E, Daguati R, Vigano P, Meroni F, Crosignani PG. Postoperative oral contraceptive exposure and risk of endometrioma recurrence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008;198:504.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.11.010. [DOI] [PubMed]
  36. Seracchioli R, Mabrouk M, Manuzzi L, Vicenzi C, Frasca C, Elmakky A, Venturoli S. Post-operative use of oral contraceptive pills for prevention of anatomical relapse or symptom-recurrence after conservative surgery for endometriosis. Hum Reprod 2009;24:2729–35. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dep259. [DOI] [PubMed]
  37. Koga K, Takamura M, Fujii T, Osuga Y. Prevention of the recurrence of symptom and lesions after conservative surgery for endometriosis. Fertil Steril 2015;104:793–801. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.08.026. [DOI] [PubMed]
  38. Abou-Setta AM, Houston B, Al-Inany HG, Farquhar C. Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) for symptomatic endometriosis following surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;1:CD005072. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005072.pub3. [DOI] [PubMed]
  39. Brown J, Kives S, Akhtar M. Progestagens and anti-progestagens for pain associated with endometriosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;2012:CD002122. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002122.pub2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  40. Yap C, Furness S, Farquhar C. Pre and post operative medical therapy for endometriosis surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004;2004:CD003678. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003678.pub2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  41. Darba J, Marsa A. Economic implications of endometriosis: a review. Pharmacoeconomics 2022;40:1143–58. doi: 10.1007/s40273-022-01211-0. [DOI] [PubMed]
  42. Grand TS, Basarir H, Jackson LJ. The cost-effectiveness of oral contraceptives compared to ‘no hormonal treatment’ for endometriosis-related pain: an economic evaluation. PLOS ONE 2019;14:e0210089. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210089. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  43. Middleton LJ, Daniels JP, Weckesser A, Bhattacharya S; PRE-EMPT Trial Collaborative Group. Preventing recurrence of endometriosis by means of long-acting progestogen therapy (PRE-EMPT): report of an internal pilot, multi-arm, randomised controlled trial incorporating flexible entry design and adaption of design based on feasibility of recruitment. Trials 2017;18:121. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-1864-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  44. Denny E, Weckesser A, Jones G, Bibila S, Daniels J, Bhattacharya S, et al. Women’s experiences of medical treatment for endometriosis and its impact on PRE-EMPT trial participation: a qualitative study. Pilot Feasibility Stud 2018;4:168. doi: 10.1186/s40814-018-0358-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  45. Daniels JP, Clark TJ, Bhattacharya S, editors. BSGE Survey of Current Post-operative Hormonal Treatment for Endometriosis. BSGE Conference Proceedings. British Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy, 19–20 April 2012.
  46. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. NICE Clinical Knowledge Summaries: Endometriosis. London: NICE; 2014.
  47. Patsopoulos NA. A pragmatic view on pragmatic trials. Dialogues Clin Neurosci 2011;13:217–24. doi: 10.31887/DCNS.2011.13.2/npatsopoulos. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  48. DeMets DL, Lan KK. Interim analysis: the alpha spending function approach. Stat Med 1994;13:1341–52. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780131308. [DOI] [PubMed]
  49. Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D, Sloan J. Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 2008;61:102–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012. [DOI] [PubMed]
  50. Riessman CK. Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2008.
  51. Bryman A. Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2016.
  52. Noble H, Smith J. Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research. Evid Based Nurs 2015;18:34–5. doi: 10.1136/eb-2015-102054. [DOI] [PubMed]
  53. Wu L, Wu Q, Liu L. Oral contraceptive pills for endometriosis after conservative surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Endocrinol 2013;29:883–90. doi: 10.3109/09513590.2013.819085. [DOI] [PubMed]
  54. Vercellini P, De Matteis S, Somigliana E, Buggio L, Frattaruolo MP, Fedele L. Long-term adjuvant therapy for the prevention of postoperative endometrioma recurrence: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013;92:8–16. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01470.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  55. Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, Kamlet MS, Russell LB. Recommendations of the panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 1996;276:1253–8. [PubMed]
  56. Damocles Study Group NHSHTAP. A proposed charter for clinical trial data monitoring committees: helping them to do their job well. Lancet 2005;365:711–22. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)17965-3. [DOI] [PubMed]
  57. Joint Formulary Committee. British National Formulary 78. London: British Medical Association and Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain; 2019.
  58. Jones G, Jenkinson C, Kennedy S. Evaluating the responsiveness of the Endometriosis Health Profile Questionnaire: the EHP-30. Qual Life Res 2004;13:705–13. doi: 10.1023/B:QURE.0000021316.79349.af. [DOI] [PubMed]
  59. Jones G, Jenkinson C, Taylor N, Mills A, Kennedy S. Measuring quality of life in women with endometriosis: tests of data quality, score reliability, response rate and scaling assumptions of the Endometriosis Health Profile Questionnaire. Hum Reprod 2006;21:2686–93. doi: 10.1093/humrep/del231. [DOI] [PubMed]
  60. Krupp LB, LaRocca NG, Muir-Nash J, Steinberg AD. The fatigue severity scale. Application to patients with multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus erythematosus. Arch Neurol 1989;46:1121–3. doi: 10.1001/archneur.1989.00520460115022. [DOI] [PubMed]
  61. Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res 2011;20:1727–36. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  62. van Hout B, Janssen MF, Feng YS, Kohlmann T, Busschbach J, Golicki D, et al. Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health 2012;15:708–15. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.008. [DOI] [PubMed]
  63. Al-Janabi H, Flynn TN, Coast J. Development of a self-report measure of capability wellbeing for adults: the ICECAP-A. Qual Life Res 2012;21:167–76. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9927-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  64. Brown H, Prescott R. Applied Mixed Models in Medicine. Chichester: Wiley; 2006.
  65. Cro S, Morris TP, Kenward MG, Carpenter JR. Sensitivity analysis for clinical trials with missing continuous outcome data using controlled multiple imputation: a practical guide. Stat Med 2020;39:2815–42. doi: 10.1002/sim.8569. [DOI] [PubMed]
  66. Peto R, Pike MC, Armitage P, Breslow NE, Cox DR, Howard SV, et al. Design and analysis of randomized clinicaltrials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. 1. Introduction and design. Br J Cancer 1976;34:585–612. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1976.220. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  67. White IR, Horton NJ, Carpenter J, Pocock SJ. Strategy for intention to treat analysis in randomised trials with missing outcome data. BMJ 2011;342:d40. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d40. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  68. Sanghera S, Barton P, Bhattacharya S, Horne AW, Roberts TE; PRE-EMPT Research Group. Pharmaceutical treatments to prevent recurrence of endometriosis following surgery: a model-based economic evaluation. BMJ Open 2016;6:e010580. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010580. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  69. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. NICE Health Technology Evaluations: The Manual. London: NICE; 2022.
  70. Morris S, Devlin NJ, Parkin DW, editors. Economic Analysis in Health Care. Chichester: Wiley; 2007.
  71. Manca A, Hawkins N, Sculpher MJ. Estimating mean QALYs in trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis: the importance of controlling for baseline utility. Health Econ 2005;14:487–96. doi: 10.1002/hec.944. [DOI] [PubMed]
  72. Jones G, Kennedy S, Barnard A, Wong J, Jenkinson C. Development of an endometriosis quality-of-life instrument: the Endometriosis Health Profile-30. Obstet Gynecol 2001;98:258–64. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(01)01433-8. [DOI] [PubMed]
  73. Office for National Statistics. Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings. London: ONS; 2022.
  74. NHS England. National Cost Collection: National Schedule of NHS costs - Year 2020-21 - NHS trust and NHS foundation trusts. London: NHS England; 2021.URL: https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/2020-21-national-cost-collection-data-publication/ (accessed 23 July 2024).
  75. Jones K, Weatherly HLA, Birch S, Castelli A, Chalkley MJ, Dargan A, et al. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care Manual. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit; 2022.
  76. Joint Formulary Committee. British National Formulary 84. London: Pharmaceutical Press; 2022.
  77. Rubin DB. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. Chichester: Wiley; 2004.
  78. Faria R, Gomes M, Epstein D, White IR. A guide to handling missing data in cost-effectiveness analysis conducted within randomised controlled trials. Pharmacoeconomics 2014;32:1157–70. doi: 10.1007/s40273-014-0193-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  79. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015.
  80. Black WC. The CE plane: a graphic representation of cost-effectiveness. Med Decis Making 1990;10:212–4. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9001000308. [DOI] [PubMed]
  81. Fenwick E, Byford S. A guide to cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Br J Psychiatry 2005;187:106–8. doi: 10.1192/bjp.187.2.106. [DOI] [PubMed]
  82. NHS. Overview: Endometriosis. URL: www.nhs.uk/conditions/endometriosis (accessed 20 March 2023).
  83. Petrou S, Murray L, Cooper P, Davidson LL. The accuracy of self-reported healthcare resource utilization in health economic studies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2002;18:705–10. doi: 10.1017/s026646230200051x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  84. Zakhari A, Delpero E, McKeown S, Tomlinson G, Bougie O, Murji A. Endometriosis recurrence following post-operative hormonal suppression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2021;27:96–107. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmaa033. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  85. Grandi G, Barra F, Ferrero S, Sileo FG, Bertucci E, Napolitano A, Facchinetti F. Hormonal contraception in women with endometriosis: a systematic review. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2019;24:61–70. doi: 10.1080/13625187.2018.1550576. [DOI] [PubMed]
  86. Barra F, Scala C, Ferrero S. Current understanding on pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy and safety of progestins for treating pain associated to endometriosis. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2018;14:399–415. doi: 10.1080/17425255.2018.1461840. [DOI] [PubMed]
  87. Giudice LC, As-Sanie S, Arjona Ferreira JC, Becker CM, Abrao MS, Lessey BA, et al. 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). Lancet 2022;399:2267–79. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00622-5. [DOI] [PubMed]
  88. Muzii L, Di Tucci C, Achilli C, Di Donato V, Musella A, Palaia I, Panici PB. Continuous versus cyclic oral contraceptives after laparoscopic excision of ovarian endometriomas: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016;214:203–11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.08.074. [DOI] [PubMed]

RESOURCES