A randomized, double-blind, crossover trial comparing a silicone- versus water-based lubricant for sexual discomfort after breast cancer.
Discomfort during sexual activity is common after breast cancer. Vaginal estrogens are effective but commonly avoided due to systemic absorption. Despite the large commercial market for vaginal lubricants, no randomized studies have compared products. We aimed to compare efficacy and acceptability of two major types of lubricant for discomfort during sexual activity in postmenopausal breast cancer patients. In a single-center, randomized, double-blind, AB/BA crossover design, sexually active postmenopausal breast cancer patients used each lubricant for 4 weeks. The primary patient-reported efficacy outcome was total discomfort related to sexual activity (Fallowfield Sexual Activity Questionnaire Discomfort subscale SAQ-D). Acceptability was measured by patient preference and reported intention to continue using the products. Of 38 women analyzed, over 90 % experienced clinically significant sexually related distress at baseline. Water- and silicone-based lubricants did not differ statistically in efficacy based on total sexual discomfort (difference 0.7, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0-1.4, p = 0.06). In a post hoc analysis, pain/discomfort during penetration improved more during silicone-based lubricant use than during water-based lubricant use (odds ratio 5.4, 95 % CI 1.3-22.1, p = 0.02). All aspects of sexual discomfort measured with diaries were reported more commonly with water- than silicone-based lubricant. Almost twice as many women preferred silicone-based to water-based lubricant than the converse (n = 20, 65 %, vs. n = 11, 35 %). 88 % continued to experience clinically significant sexually related distress despite use of either lubricant. Total sexual discomfort was lower after use of silicone-based lubricant than water-based, but many women continue to experience sexually related distress.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia. hickeym@unimelb.edu.au.|Royal Women's Hospital, Level 7, 20 Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia. hickeym@unimelb.edu.au.
Martha
M
Hickey
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia.|Royal Women's Hospital, Level 7, 20 Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Jennifer L
JL
Marino
Melbourne School of Population and Global Health and Melbourne Clinical and Translational Sciences Platform (MCATS), The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Sabine
S
Braat
Royal Women's Hospital, Level 7, 20 Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Swee
S
Wong
D000328:Adult; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000150:complications*; D018592:Cross-Over Studies; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D004414:Dyspareunia / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000209:etiology; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D054327:Lubricants / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000737:chemistry; D008875:Middle Aged; D017698:Postmenopause; D012828:Silicones; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014867:Water
D054327:Lubricants; D012828:Silicones; D014867:Water
Dyspareunia; Lubrication; Quality of life; Sexual activity; Survivorship