Table 1 Comparison of epidemiological characteristics between endometrial carcinoma patients with or without leiomyomas, adenomyosis or endometriosis.

From: Co-existence of leiomyomas, adenomyosis and endometriosis in women with endometrial cancer

CharacteristicEC patients without Leiomyomas (n = 582)EC patients with Leiomyomas (n = 817)bPEC patients without adenomyosis (n = 827)EC patients with adenomyosis (n = 572)bPEC Patients without endometriosis (n = 1220)EC patients with endometriosis (n = 179)bP
aN (%)aN (%)aN (%)aN. (%)aN (%)aN (%)
Mean age at EC diagnosis (range)60.7 (26.4–80.0)61.6 (28.9–80.0)0.0261.6 (26.4–80.0)60.8 (31.9–80.0)0.261.9 (26.4–80.0)57.0 (28.9–78.9)5.0 × 10−11
Body Mass Index
<25138 (23.8)209 (25.6) 211 (25.7)136 (23.8) 292 (24.1)55 (30.7) 
25–29.9153 (26.4)202 (24.8) 225 (27.4)130 (22.8) 311 (25.6)44 (24.6) 
≥30289 (49.8)401 (49.2)0.6385 (46.9)305 (53.4)0.05610 (50.3)80 (44.7)0.03
Oral Contraceptive use
never198 (34.0)258 (31.6) 307 (37.1)149 (26.1) 402 (33.0)54 (30.2) 
ever384 (66.0)558 (68.4)0.4520 (62.9)422 (73.9)6.6 × 10−5817 (67.0)125 (69.8)0.3
Parity
089 (15.3)158 (19.3) 182 (22.0)65 (11.4) 205 (16.8)42 (23.5) 
164 (11.0)76 (9.3) 86 (10.4)54 (9.4) 112 (9.2)28 (15.6) 
≥2429 (73.7)583 (71.4)0.01559 (67.6)453 (79.2)1.9 × 10−9903 (74.0)109 (60.9)0.07
Age at Menarche
≤11108 (18.8)206 (25.4) 180 (21.9)134 (23.7) 272 (22.5)42 (23.5) 
12–13284 (49.4)382 (47.1) 398 (48.5)268 (47.4) 577 (47.8)89 (49.7) 
≥14183 (31.8)223 (27.5)0.004243 (29.6)163 (28.8)0.9358 (29.7)48 (26.8)1
Smoking
never369 (63.5)539 (66.0) 523 (63.3)385 (67.3) 792 (65.0)116 (64.8) 
ever212 (36.5)278 (34.0)0.6303 (36.7)187 (32.7)0.1427 (35.0)63 (35.2)0.7
cFamily History any cancer (FDR &/or SDR)
no213 (36.6)285 (34.9) 295 (35.7)203 (35.5) 445 (36.5)53 (29.6) 
yes369 (63.4)532 (65.1)0.6532 (64.3)369 (64.5)0.9775 (63.5)126 (70.4)0.06
  1. EC, endometrial carcinoma; FDR, first-degree relative, SDR, second-degree relative.
  2. aNs may not sum to the total because of missing or unknown data; proportions (%) sum to 100% of observations with data available and excludes missing/unknowns.
  3. bP-values are from logistic models comparing presence of a condition versus not; models are adjusted for age at EC diagnosis and presence of the other two gynecologic conditions; p-values for BMI, Parity and age at menarche represent trend across ordered groups.
  4. cFamily history of cancer reported in at least one FDR or SDR.