Investigator

Gillian E. Hanley

Associate Professory · University of British Columbia, Obstetrics & Gynaecology

About

GEHGillian E. Hanley
Papers(4)
Evaluating Ovarian Ca…Examining indicators …Bone health after RRB…Metformin use and sur…
Collaborators(10)
Paramdeep KaurJanice KwonJean RichardsonLesa DawsonMalcolm C. PikeMichael R. LawMinh Tung PhungRafael MezaRamlogan SowamberRona Cheifetz
Institutions(5)
University Of British…University Of Souther…Memorial University o…Memorial Sloan Ketter…University of Wiscons…

Papers

Evaluating Ovarian Cancer Risk–Reducing Salpingectomy Acceptance: A Survey

Abstract With evidence that salpingectomy is effective in preventing high-grade serous carcinoma, it is time to consider offering this procedure to people at higher-than-average lifetime risk for ovarian cancer, despite not having a pathogenic genetic variant that increases the risk for ovarian cancer. This targeted approach has potential to be effective at reducing ovarian cancer incidence, and unlike opportunistic salpingectomy, it is focused on people with an increased lifetime risk of ovarian cancer. However, the acceptability of this approach within the population of potential patients remains unknown. We conducted an online survey of adults in British Columbia, Canada, who were defined as “at risk” for ovarian cancer (i.e., people born with ovaries). Participants completed a questionnaire on demographics, ovarian cancer risk and protective factors, concerns about risk-reducing salpingectomy (RSS), and the risk they considered high enough to warrant RRS. We included 211 participants. Among these participants, 42% (n = 88) indicated that they would consider RRS at any lifetime risk or any risk above the population average. Another 20 participants chose risks between 1.5% and 4% for a cumulative 51% of the sample choosing risks below thresholds for oophorectomy. In contrast, 6% (n = 12) indicated that they would not consider the procedure at any risk level. None of the factors collected were associated with the likelihood that a person would find RRS acceptable. Overall, our participants showed broad interest in RRS as an ovarian cancer prevention strategy. These results suggest that there would likely be uptake if RRS was offered. Significance: This study found that many participants were willing to consider RRS to prevent ovarian cancer. Further research on RRS should be undertaken to understand how this can be best used for ovarian cancer prevention.

Examining indicators of early menopause following opportunistic salpingectomy: a cohort study from British Columbia, Canada

The fallopian tube may often be the site of origin for the most common and lethal form of ovarian cancer, high-grade serous ovarian cancer. As a result, many colleges of obstetrics and gynecology, which include the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, are recommending surgical removal of the fallopian tube (bilateral salpingectomy) at the time of other gynecologic surgeries (particularly hysterectomy and tubal sterilization) in women at general population risk for ovarian cancer, collectively referred to as opportunistic salpingectomy. Previous research has illustrated no increased risk of complications after opportunistic salpingectomy. However, most studies that have examined potential hormonal consequences of opportunistic salpingectomy have had limited follow-up time and have focused on surrogate hormonal markers. We examine whether there are differences in physician visits for menopause and filling a prescription for hormone replacement therapy among women who undergo opportunistic salpingectomy in the population of British Columbia, Canada. We identified all women who were ≤50 years old in British Columbia who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy from 2008-2014. We compared women who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy at hysterectomy with women who underwent hysterectomy alone and women who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy for sterilization with women who underwent tubal ligation. We used Cox Proportional hazards models to model time to physician visits for menopause and for filling a prescription for hormone replacement therapy. We calculated adjusted hazards ratios for these outcomes and adjusted for other gynecologic conditions, surgical approach, and patient age. We performed an age-stratified analysis (<40, 40-44, 45-49 years) and conducted a sensitivity analysis that included only women with ≥5 years of follow up. We included 41,413 women in the study. There were 6861 women who underwent hysterectomy alone, 6500 who underwent hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy, 4479 who underwent hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, 18,621 who underwent tubal ligation, and 4952 who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy for sterilization. In women who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy, there was no difference in time to the first physician visit related to menopause for both women who underwent hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.88-1.09) and women who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy for sterilization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.10). There was also no difference in time to filling a prescription for hormone replacement therapy for women who underwent hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy or opportunistic salpingectomy for sterilization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.92; and adjusted hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.89-1.12; respectively). In contrast, we report significantly increase hazards for time to physician visit for menopause (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.95; 95% confidence interval, 1.78, 2.13) and filling a prescription for hormone replacement therapy (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.80; 95% confidence interval, 3.45, 4.18) among women who underwent hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. There were no increased hazards for physician visits for menopause or initiation of hormone replacement therapy among women who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy in any of the age-stratified analyses, nor among women with at least 5 years of follow up. Our results reveal no indication of an earlier age of onset of menopause among the population of women who underwent hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy and opportunistic salpingectomy for sterilization as measured by physician visits for menopause and initiation of hormone replacement therapy. Our findings are reassuring, given that earlier age at menopause is associated with increased mortality rates, particularly from cardiovascular disease.

Metformin use and survival in people with ovarian cancer: A population-based cohort study from British Columbia, Canada

There is an active debate regarding whether metformin use improves survival in people with ovarian cancer. We examined this issue using methods designed to avoid immortal time bias-as bias that occurs when participants in a study cannot experience the outcome for a certain portion of the study time. We used time-dependent analyses to study the association between metformin use for all 4,951 patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 1997 through 2018 in the province of British Columbia, Canada. Cox proportional hazards models were run to estimate the association between metformin and survival in the full cohort of ovarian cancer patients and among a cohort restricted to patients with diabetes. Metformin use was associated with a 17 % better ovarian cancer survival in the full cohort (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.83 (95 %CI 0.67, 1.02)), and a 16 % better ovarian cancer survival for serous cancers patient's cohort (aHR = 0.84 (95 %CI 0.66, 1.07)), although both were not significant. However, a statistically significant protective effect was observed when restricting to the diabetic cohort (aHR = 0.71 (95 %CI 0.54-0.91)), which was also seen among serous cancers (aHR = 0.73 (95 %CI 0.54-0.98)). Metformin use was associated with improved ovarian cancer survival. The lack of statistical significance in the full cohort may reflect that diabetes is associated with reduced cancer survival, and thus diabetes itself may offset the benefit of metformin when examining the full cohort. Future research should examine metformin use among non-diabetic ovarian cancer patients.

156Works
4Papers
15Collaborators
British ColumbiaOvarian NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsAnxiety DisordersPelvic Inflammatory DiseaseEndometriosisNeoplasmsBreast Neoplasms

Positions

2022–

Associate Professory

University of British Columbia · Obstetrics & Gynaecology

2014–

Assistant Professor

The University of British Columbia · Obstetrics & Gynaecology

Education

2011

PhD

University of British Columbia · School of Population and Public Health

2005

MA

McMaster University · Economics

2004

BSc

Dalhousie University · Biology and Economics

Country

CA

Keywords
reproductive healthsafe prescriptiongynecologic cancer preventionpregnancy
Links & IDs