Managing thromboembolic risk with menopausal hormone therapy and hormonal contraception in the COVID-19 pandemic: Recommendations from the Spanish Menopause Society, Sociedad Española de Ginecología y Obstetricia and Sociedad Española de Trombosis y Hemostasia

Estrogen-modulating treatment among mid-life women and COVID-19 morbidity and mortality: a multiregister nationwide matched cohort study in Sweden

BACKGROUND

It has been repeatedly shown that men infected by SARS-CoV-2 face a twofold higher likelihood of dying, being hospitalized or admitted to the intensive care unit compared to women, despite taking into account relevant confounders. It has been hypothesized that these discrepancies are related to sex steroid hormone differences with estrogens being negatively correlated with disease severity. The objective of this study was therefore to evaluate COVID-19-related mortality and morbidity among peri- and postmenopausal women in relation to estrogen-containing menopause hormonal treatments (MHT).

METHODS

This is a national register-based matched cohort study performed in Sweden between January 1 to December 31, 2020. Study participants comprised women over the age of 53 years residing in Sweden. Exposure was defined as prescriptions of local estrogens, systemic estrogens with and without progestogens, progestogens alone, or tibolone. MHT users were then compared with a matched cohort of non-users. The primary outcome consisted of COVID-19 mortality, whereas the secondary outcomes included inpatient hospitalizations/outpatient visits and confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Multivariable adjusted Cox regression-derived hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Use of systemic estrogens alone is associated with increased COVID-19 mortality among older women (aHR 4.73, 1.22 to 18.32), but the association is no longer significant when discontinuation of estrogen use is accounted for. An increased risk for COVID-19 infection is further observed for women using combined systemic estrogens and progestogens (aHR 1.06, 1.00 to 1.13) or tibolone (aHR 1.21, 1.01 to 1.45). Use of local estrogens is associated with an increased risk for COVID-19-related death (aHR 2.02,1.45 to 2.81) as well as for all secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic or local use of estrogens does not decrease COVID-19 morbidity and mortality to premenopausal background levels. Excess risk for COVID-19 morbidity and mortality was noted among older women and those discontinuing systemic estrogens. Higher risk for death was also noted among women using local estrogens, for which non-causal mechanisms such as confounding by comorbidity or frailty seem to be the most plausible underlying explanations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DETAILS

Not applicable.

Estrogen-based hormonal therapy and the risk of thrombosis in COVID-19 patients

OBJECTIVE

Estrogen-containing contraceptives and hormone replacement therapy are used commonly, however, the risks of venous and arterial thrombosis imparted by such medications during COVID-19 infection or other similar viral infections remain undescribed.

METHODS

To assess the risk of venous and arterial thrombosis in patients receiving oral estrogen-containing therapy (ECT) with COVID-19 as compared to those receiving non-estrogen-based hormonal therapy, we conducted a multicenter cohort study of 991 patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection, 466 receiving estrogen-containing hormonal therapy, and 525 receiving progestin-only or topical therapy.

RESULTS

The use of estrogen-containing therapy was found to significantly increase the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) following COVID-19 diagnosis after controlling for age (HR 5.46 [95% CI 1.12-26.7, p = .036]). This risk was highest in patients over age 50, with 8.6% of patients receiving estrogen-containing therapy diagnosed with VTE compared to 0.9% of those receiving non-estrogen-based therapies (p = .026). The risk of arterial thrombosis was not significantly associated with oral estrogen use.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that estrogen-containing therapy is associated with a significantly increased risk of VTE in COVID-19 patients, especially in older individuals. These findings may guide provider counseling and management of patients with COVID-19 on estrogen-containing therapy.

Risk of thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19 who are using hormonal contraception

BACKGROUND

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has led to significant mortality and morbidity, including a high incidence of related thrombotic events. There has been concern regarding hormonal contraception use during the COVID-19 pandemic, as this is an independent risk factor for thrombosis, particularly with estrogen-containing formulations. However, higher estrogen levels may be protective against severe COVID-19 disease. Evidence for risks of hormonal contraception use during the COVID-19 pandemic is sparse. We conducted a living systematic review that will be updated as new data emerge on the risk of thromboembolism with hormonal contraception use in patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if use of hormonal contraception increases risk of venous and arterial thromboembolism in women with COVID-19. To determine if use of hormonal contraception increases other markers of COVID-19 severity including hospitalization in the intensive care unit, acute respiratory distress syndrome, intubation, and mortality. A secondary objective is to maintain the currency of the evidence, using a living systematic review approach.

SEARCH METHODS

⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Global Index Medicus, Global Health, and Scopus from inception on March 2023, and monitored the literature monthly. We updated the search strategies with new terms and added the database Global Index Medicus in lieu of LILACS.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all published and ongoing studies of patients with COVID-19 comparing outcomes of those on hormonal contraception versus those not on hormonal contraception. This included case series and non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSI).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One review author extracted study data and this was checked by a second author. Two authors individually assessed risk of bias for the comparative studies using the ROBINS-I tool and a third helped reconcile differences. For the living systematic review, we will publish updates to our synthesis every six months. In the event that we identify a study with a more rigorous study design than the current included evidence prior to the planned six-month update, we will expedite the synthesis publication.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three comparative NRSIs with 314,704 participants total and two case series describing 13 patients. The three NRSIs had serious to critical risk of bias in several domains and low study quality. Only one NRSI ascertained current use of contraceptives based on patient report; the other two used diagnostic codes within medical records to assess hormonal contraception use, but did not confirm current use nor indication for use. None of the NRSIs included thromboembolism as an outcome. Studies were not similar enough in terms of their outcomes, interventions, and study populations to combine with meta-analyses. We therefore narratively synthesized all included studies. Based on results from one NRSI, there may be little to no effect of combined hormonal contraception use on odds of mortality for COVID-19 positive patients (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.40; 1 study, 18,892 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Two NRSIs examined hospitalization rates for hormonal contraception users versus non-users. Based on results from one NRSI, the odds of hospitalization for COVID-19 positive combined hormonal contraception users may be slightly decreased compared with non-users for patients with BMI under 35 kg/m2 (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.97; 1 study, 295,689 participants; very low-certainty evidence). According to results of the other NRSI assessing use of any type of hormonal contraception, there may be little to no effect on hospitalization rates for COVID-19 positive individuals (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.44; 1 study, 123 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We included two case series because no comparative studies directly assessed thromboembolism as an outcome. In a case series of six pediatric COVID-19 positive patients with pulmonary embolism, one (older than 15 years of age) was using combined hormonal contraception. In a second case series of seven COVID-19 positive patients with cerebral venous thrombosis, one was using oral contraceptives. One comparative study and one case series reported on intubation rates, but the evidence for both is very uncertain. In the comparative study of 123 COVID-19 positive patients (N = 44 using hormonal contraception and N = 79 not using hormonal contraception), no patients in either group required intubation. In the case series of seven individuals with cerebral venous thromboembolism, one oral contraceptive user and one non-user required intubation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are no comparative studies assessing risk of thromboembolism in COVID-19 patients who use hormonal contraception, which was the primary objective of this review. Very little evidence exists examining the risk of increased COVID-19 disease severity for combined hormonal contraception users compared to non-users of hormonal contraception, and the evidence that does exist is of very low certainty. The odds of hospitalization for COVID-19 positive users of combined hormonal contraceptives may be slightly decreased compared with those of hormonal contraceptive non-users, but the evidence is very uncertain as this is based on one study restricted to patients with BMI under 35 kg/m2. There may be little to no effect of combined hormonal contraception use on odds of intubation or mortality among COVID-19 positive patients, and little to no effect of using any type of hormonal contraception on odds of hospitalization and intubation for COVID-19 patients. We noted no large effect for risk of increased COVID-19 disease severity among hormonal contraception users. We specifically noted gaps in pertinent data collection regarding hormonal contraception use such as formulation, hormone doses, and duration or timing of contraceptive use. Differing estrogens may have different thrombogenic potential given differing potency, so it would be important to know if a formulation contained, for example, ethinyl estradiol versus estradiol valerate. Additionally, we downgraded several studies for risk of bias because information on the timing of contraceptive use relative to COVID-19 infection and method adherence were not ascertained. No studies reported indication for hormonal contraceptive use, which is important as individuals who use hormonal management for medical conditions like heavy menstrual bleeding might have different risk profiles compared to individuals using hormones for contraception. Future studies should focus on including pertinent confounders like age, obesity, history of prior venous thromboembolism, risk factors for venous thromboembolism, and recent pregnancy.

Risk of thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19 who are using hormonal contraception

BACKGROUND

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has led to significant mortality and morbidity, including a high incidence of related thrombotic events. There has been concern regarding hormonal contraception use during the COVID-19 pandemic, as this is an independent risk factor for thrombosis, particularly with estrogen-containing formulations. However, higher estrogen levels may be protective against severe COVID-19 disease. Evidence for risks of hormonal contraception use during the COVID-19 pandemic is sparse. We therefore conducted a living systematic review that will be updated as new data emerge on the risk of thromboembolism with hormonal contraception use in patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if use of hormonal contraception increases risk of venous and arterial thromboembolism in women with COVID-19. To determine if use of hormonal contraception increases other markers of COVID-19 severity including hospitalization in the intensive care unit, acute respiratory distress syndrome, intubation, and mortality. A secondary objective is to maintain the currency of the evidence, using a living systematic review approach.

SEARCH METHODS

⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, Global Health, and Scopus from inception to search update in March 2022. For the living systematic review, we monitored the literature monthly.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all published and ongoing studies of patients with COVID-19 comparing outcomes of those on hormonal contraception versus those not on hormonal contraception. This included case series and non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSI).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One review author extracted study data and this was checked by a second author. Two authors individually assessed risk of bias for the comparative studies using the ROBINS-I tool and a third author helped reconcile differences. For the living systematic review, we will publish updates to our synthesis every six months. In the event that we identify a study with a more rigorous study design than the current included evidence prior to the planned six-month update, we will expedite the synthesis publication.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three comparative NRSIs with 314,704 participants total and two case series describing 13 patients. The three NRSIs had serious to critical risk of bias in several domains and low study quality. Only one NRSI ascertained current use of contraceptives based on patient report; the other two used diagnostic codes within medical records to assess hormonal contraception use, but did not confirm current use nor indication for use. None of the NRSIs included thromboembolism as an outcome. Studies were not similar enough in terms of their outcomes, interventions, and study populations to combine with meta-analyses. We therefore narratively synthesized all included studies. Based on results from one NRSI, there may be little to no effect of combined hormonal contraception use on odds of mortality for COVID-19 positive patients (odds ratio (OR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 2.40; 1 study, 18,892 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Two NRSIs examined hospitalization rates for hormonal contraception users versus non-users. Based on results from one NRSI, the odds of hospitalization for COVID-19 positive combined hormonal contraception users may be slightly decreased compared with non-users for patients with body mass index (BMI) under 35 kg/m2 (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.97; 1 study, 295,689 participants; very low-certainty evidence). According to results of the other NRSI assessing use of any type of hormonal contraception, there may be little to no effect on hospitalization rates for COVID-19 positive individuals (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.44; 1 study, 123 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We included two case series because no comparative studies directly assessed thromboembolism as an outcome. In a case series of six pediatric COVID-19 positive patients with pulmonary embolism, one (older than 15 years of age) was using combined hormonal contraception. In a second case series of seven COVID-19 positive patients with cerebral venous thrombosis, one was using oral contraceptives. One comparative study and one case series reported on intubation rates, but the evidence for both is very uncertain. In the comparative study of 123 COVID-19 positive patients (N = 44 using hormonal contraception and N = 79 not using hormonal contraception), no patients in either group required intubation. In the case series of seven individuals with cerebral venous thromboembolism, one oral contraceptive user and one non-user required intubation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are no comparative studies assessing risk of thromboembolism in COVID-19 patients who use hormonal contraception, which was the primary objective of this review. Very little evidence exists examining the risk of increased COVID-19 disease severity for combined hormonal contraception users compared to non-users of hormonal contraception, and the evidence that does exist is of very low certainty. The odds of hospitalization for COVID-19 positive users of combined hormonal contraceptives may be slightly decreased compared with those of hormonal contraceptive non-users, but the evidence is very uncertain as this is based on one study restricted to patients with BMI under 35 kg/m2. There may be little to no effect of combined hormonal contraception use on odds of intubation or mortality among COVID-19 positive patients, and little to no effect of using any type of hormonal contraception on odds of hospitalization and intubation for COVID-19 patients. At a minimum, we noted no large effect for risk of increased COVID-19 disease severity among hormonal contraception users. We specifically noted gaps in pertinent data collection regarding hormonal contraception use such as formulation, hormone doses, and duration or timing of contraceptive use. Differing estrogens may have different thrombogenic potential given differing potency, so it would be important to know if a formulation contained, for example, ethinyl estradiol versus estradiol valerate. Additionally, we downgraded several studies for risk of bias because information on the timing of contraceptive use relative to COVID-19 infection and method adherence were not ascertained. No studies reported indication for hormonal contraceptive use, which is important as individuals who use hormonal management for medical conditions like heavy menstrual bleeding might have different risk profiles compared to individuals using hormones for contraception. Future studies should focus on including pertinent confounders like age, obesity, history of prior venous thromboembolism, risk factors for venous thromboembolism, and recent pregnancy.

Premenopausal and postmenopausal women during the COVID-19 pandemic

The current global COVID-19 mortality rate is estimated to be around 3.4%; however, it is dependent on age, sex, and comorbidities. Epidemiological evidence shows gender disparities in COVID-19 severity and fatality, with non-menopausal females having milder severity and better outcomes than age-matched males. However, the difference vanishes when comparing postmenopausal women with age-matched men. It has been suggested that, to some extent, this is due to the protective role of female hormones, such as anti-Müllerian hormone and oestradiol (E2), in non-menopausal women. Oestrogens have been hypothesized to be crucial in modulating viral infection and the progression of the disease via an action on immune/inflammatory responses and angiotensin-converting enzyme type 2 expression. Hence, the most likely explanation is that, because the levels of oestrogen in females after menopause decrease, oestrogen no longer offers a beneficial effect as seen in younger females. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the serious negative effects arising from the state of E2 deficiency. Therefore, hormone replacement therapy gains further support as the damaging effect of the decline in ovarian function affects many biological systems, and recently with the COVID-19 pandemic, oestrogen's vital role within the immune system has become quite clear. However, additional clinical investigations regarding hormone replacement therapy are urgently needed to further verify the protective and therapeutic effects of E2 on menopausal women with COVID-19.

Sex hormones and immune system: Menopausal hormone therapy in the context of COVID-19 pandemic

The fatal outcomes of COVID-19 are related to the high reactivity of the innate wing of immunity. Estrogens could exert anti-inflammatory effects during SARS-CoV-2 infection at different stages: from increasing the antiviral resistance of individual cells to counteracting the pro-inflammatory cytokine production. A complex relationship between sex hormones and immune system implies that menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) has pleiotropic effects on immunity in peri- and postmenopausal patients. The definite immunological benefits of perimenopausal MHT confirm the important role of estrogens in regulation of immune functionalities. In this review, we attempt to explore how sex hormones and MHT affect immunological parameters of the organism at different level (in vitro, in vivo) and what mechanisms are involved in their protective response to the new coronavirus infection. The correlation of sex steroid levels with severity and lethality of the disease indicates the potential of using hormone therapy to modulate the immune response and increase the resilience to adverse outcomes. The overall success of MHT is based on decades of experience in clinical trials. According to the current standards, MHT should not be discontinued in COVID-19 with the exception of critical cases.

Hormonal therapies and venous thrombosis: Considerations for prevention and management

Background

Venous thromboses are well‐established complications of hormonal therapy. Thrombosis risk is seen with both hormonal contraceptive agents and with hormone replacement therapy for menopause and gender transition. Over the past several decades, large epidemiological studies have helped better define these risks.

Objectives

To review and discuss the differences in thrombosis risk of the many of hormonal preparations available as well as their interaction with patient‐specific factors.

Methods

We conducted a narrative review of the available literature regarding venous thrombosis and hormonal therapies including for contraception, menopausal symptoms, and gender transition.

Results

Thrombosis risk with estrogen‐containing compounds increases with increasing systemic dose of estrogen. While progesterone‐only–containing products are not associated with thrombosis, when paired with estrogen in combined oral contraceptives, the formulation of progesterone does impact the risk. These components, along with patient‐specific factors, may influence the choice of hormonal preparation. For patients who develop thrombosis on hormonal treatment, anticoagulation is protective against future thrombosis. Duration of anticoagulation is dependent on ongoing and future hormone therapy choice. Finally, the optimal management of hormone therapy for individuals diagnosed with prothrombotic illnesses such as COVID‐19 remains unclear.

Conclusions

When contemplating hormonal contraception or hormone replacement therapy, clinicians must consider a variety of factors including hormone type, dose, route, personal and family history of thrombosis, and other prothrombotic risk factors to make informed, personalized decisions regarding the risk of venous thrombosis.

Basic mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 infection. What endocrine systems could be implicated?

Although SARS-CoV-2 viral attacks starts by the interaction of spike protein (S Protein) to ACE2 receptor located at the cell surface of respiratory tract and digestive system cells, different endocrine targets, endocrine organs and metabolic conditions are of fundamental relevance for understanding disease progression and special outcomes, in particular those of fatal consequences for the patient. During pandemic, moreover, a specific phenotype of COVID-19 metabolic patient has been described, characterized by being at particular risk of worse outcomes. In the present paper we describe the mechanism of viral interaction with endocrine organs, emphasizing the specific endocrine molecules of particular relevance explaining COVID-19 disease evolution and outcomes.

Are sex hormones promising candidates to explain sex disparities in the COVID-19 pandemic?

Emerging evidence suggests that the novel Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is deadlier for men than women both in China and in Europe. Male sex is a risk factor for COVID-19 mortality. The meccanisms underlying the reduced morbidity and lethality in women are currently unclear, even though hypotheses have been posed (Brandi and Giustina in Trends Endocrinol Metab. 31:918-27, 2020). This article aims to describe the role of sex hormones in sex- and gender-related fatality of COVID-19. We discuss the possibility that potential sex-specific mechanisms modulating the course of the disease include both the androgen- and the estrogen-response cascade. Sex hormones regulate the respiratory function, the innate and adaptive immune responses, the immunoaging, the cardiovascular system, and the entrance of the virus in the cells. Recommendations for the future government policies and for the management of COVID-19 patients should include a dimorphic approach for males and females. As the estrogen receptor signaling appears critical for protection in women, more studies are needed to translate the basic knowledge into clinical actions. Understanding the etiological bases of sexual dimorphism in COVID-19 could help develop more effective strategies in individual patients in both sexes, including designing a good vaccine.

Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Gynecological Health: An Integrative Review

OBJECTIVE

 To analyze the existing scientific literature to find out if the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has an effect on gynecological health.

SEARCH STRATEGY

 We performed an integrative review of articles published between April 2020 and April 2021 on the PubMed, SciELO, and LILACS databases, using COVID-19 and the following relevant terms: Menstrual change; Ovarian function; Violence against women; Contraception; HPV; Mental health; and Urogynecology.

SELECTION CRITERIA

 Among the eligible studies found, editorials and primary research articles, which describe the dynamics between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) infection (the cause of the COVID-19 pandemic) and gynecological health, were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

 Through qualitative synthesis, data were extracted from the included publications and from guidelines of national and international societies of gynecology.

MAIN RESULTS

 The 34 publications included in the present study showed that some factors of the SARS-CoV-2 infection, and, consequently, the COVID-19 pandemic, might be associated with menstrual abnormalities, effects on contraception, alterations in steroid hormones, changes in urogynecological care, effects on women's mental health, and negative impact on violence against women.

CONCLUSION

 The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the health of women. The scientific community encourages the development of recommendations for specialized care for women and strategies to prevent and respond to violence during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Thromboembolism and Oral Contraceptives During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Disproportionality Analysis Within the Spanish Pharmacovigilance Database

Background

Thromboembolic events (TEs) are known to be a severe complication for COVID-19. They are associated with a systemic inflammatory response syndrome with coagulation cascade activation.

Objective

The aim of this study was to determine a potential association between the COVID-19 pandemic and the increment of the risk of suspected TEs in women on systemic hormonal contraceptives (SHCs).

Patients and Methods

This study utilised a case/non-case approach in the Spanish Pharmacovigilance Database, which includes more than 290,000 cases of suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The reporting odds ratio (ROR) was calculated during an initial pandemic period in 2020 compared with a pre-pandemic period in 2019 and an additional control period in 2018.

Results

While there was a decreased number of ADR notifications for any medications and for any type of ADR in patients on SHCs during the pandemic period, the TE ROR for all SHCs was higher in the 2020 pandemic period [ROR = 11.8 (5.6–24.7)] relative to the pre-pandemic period in 2019 [ROR = 6.3 (3.2–12.5)] and the additional control period in 2018 [ROR = 4.6. (2.1–9.9)]. In contrast, ROR for progestogen-only contraceptives was lower during the pandemic as compared with the two control periods.

Conclusion

The reported disproportionality of TEs in women on SHCs rose during the pandemic period. This suggests a potential interaction of the drug (SHC) with COVID-19, which led to an increased risk of TEs in women exposed to both factors. This should be taken into consideration in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Contraception in the COVID-19 pandemic: recommendations from the Korean society of contraception and reproductive health

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with a systemic inflammatory response that activates coagulation in symptomatic patients. In addition, a rare form of thrombosis has been reported in people who received the COVID-19 vaccine, most of whom were women younger than 50 years of age. Considering that hormonal contraceptive methods that are widely used by women of childbearing age increase the risk of thrombosis, the development of guidelines for the use of hormonal contraceptives in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic is necessary. In this context, the Korean Society of Contraception and Reproductive Health provides guidelines for issues regarding contraception and reproductive health during the pandemic.

Hormone Therapy in the Era of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Review

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted the medical, social, and reproductive health of millions of people since its outbreak. The causative virus transmits, reproduces, and manifests through the respiratory tract. COVID-19 can invade any system of the body, including the cardiovascular and endocrine systems, through a secondary immune response. In particular, because the fatality rate is high in those over the age of 50 years, special attention is required during the medical care of this population. However, considering the benefit of therapy and the risk of COVID-19, high-quality evidence regarding individualized management in relation to hormone therapy is still insufficient in the field of gynecology. Furthermore, this review aims to serve as a reference for clinical application by analyzing and summarizing the results of studies reported to date regarding female hormone therapy in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Adherence of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pharmacologic Treatments of Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 to Trustworthy Standards: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

The COVID-19 pandemic created the need for rapid and urgent guidance for clinicians to manage COVID-19 among patients and prevent transmission.

OBJECTIVE

To appraise the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) using the National Academy of Medicine (NAM) criteria.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to December 14, 2020, and a search of related articles to February 28, 2021, that included CPGs developed by societies or by government or nongovernment organizations that reported pharmacologic treatments of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Teams of 2 reviewers independently abstracted data and assessed CPG quality using the 15-item National Guideline Clearinghouse Extent of Adherence to Trustworthy Standards (NEATS) instrument.

FINDINGS

Thirty-two CPGs were included in the review. Of these, 25 (78.1%) were developed by professional societies and emanated from a single World Health Organization (WHO) region. Overall, the CPGs were of low quality. Only 7 CPGs (21.9%) reported funding sources, and 12 (37.5%) reported conflicts of interest. Only 5 CPGs (15.6%) included a methodologist, described a search strategy or study selection process, or synthesized the evidence. Although 14 CPGs (43.8%) made recommendations or suggestions for or against treatments, they infrequently rated confidence in the quality of the evidence (6 of 32 [18.8%]), described potential benefits and harms (6 of 32 [18.8%]), or graded the strength of the recommendations (5 of 32 [15.6%]). External review, patient or public perspectives, or a process for updating were rare. High-quality CPGs included a methodologist and multidisciplinary collaborations involving investigators from 2 or more WHO regions.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this review, few COVID-19 CPGs met NAM standards for trustworthy guidelines. Approaches that prioritize engagement of a methodologist and multidisciplinary collaborators from at least 2 WHO regions may lead to the production of fewer, high-quality CPGs that are poised for updates as new evidence emerges.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42021245239.

COVID-19, gender and estroprogestins, what do we know?

The new coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has rapidly spread all around the world, eliciting many questions and doubts about the pathogenesis of the disease and treatment. Mortality has been related to a prothrombotic state. Risk factors for the infection and for severe forms of COVID-19 have still to be defined. According to data collected, women appear to be less prone to severe forms of the disease and their mortality was lower than for men. The role of female hormones in the modulation of inflammation may be the reason behind this gender gap.Considering the prothrombotic state activated by the virus, hormone therapies have been placed under investigation as possible increasing risk factors for severe forms. Moreover, new vaccines and their rare thrombotic side effects have increased the concern about this issue.The goal of this review is to go over the mechanisms that lead up to thrombosis during COVID-19, trying to explain the possible reasons why women seem to be naturally protected. The expert opinions about whether to continue/discontinue hormonal therapies are reviewed. Moreover, available data about the so-called 'vaccine induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopaenia' caused by vaccines against COVID-19 are discussed.

Role of Short-Term Estradiol Supplementation in Symptomatic Postmenopausal COVID-19 Females: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background:

Protective role of estrogen in COVID-19 was speculated once the epidemiological studies reported increased susceptibility of estrogen-deficient population – males and postmenopausal females to severe disease category and involvement of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptors and renin–angiotensin– aldosterone system in pathophysiology.

Materials & Methods:

An open-label randomized controlled trial was planned to assess the efficacy of short-course oral estradiol in preventing the clinical progression to severe disease and reduce case-fatality rate and the hospital stay duration in estrogen-deficient postmenopausal women. The intervention group (n = 40) received 2 mg per day of estradiol valerate per orally for 7 days along with the standard care, while the control group (n = 40) received only the standard care.

Results:

A significant difference was observed in the rate of reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction negativization in the intervention versus control group at day 5 and day 7 of admission (42.5% vs. 15%, P = 0.007; 72.5% versus 50%, P = −0.026). No significant difference was noted in the duration of hospitalization (P = 0.213). A significant decrease was noted in the mean values of inflammatory biomarkers – D-dimer, lactate dehydrogenase, and C-reactive protein on day 5 in the intervention group. Interleukin-6 also showed a declining trend on day 5 in the intervention group, while a rising trend was noted in the control arm. Only one case (2.5%) in the intervention group while seven in the control group (17.5%) progressed to the moderate category; however, the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.057).

Conclusion

Oral estradiol in postmenopausal females can be a novel and efficient option for managing nonsevere COVID-19 infection.

COVID-19 chez les femmes utilisant un traitement hormonal: quelles préventions?

La mortalité de l’infection SARS-Cov-2 semble plus élevée chez les hommes comparativement aux femmes.

Les femmes ont une réponse immunitaire plus efficace, intense et prolongée à la fois vis-à-vis de l’immunité humorale (stimulée par l’estradiol) mais aussi cellulaire induisant des niveaux élevées d’anticorps.

L’expression de l’enzyme de conversion de l’angiotensine II est stimulée par les estrogènes.

L’infection par elle-même entraine des modifications de la coagulation.

Les traitements hormonaux (contraception estroprogestative, traitement hormonal de ménopause, traitement hormonal adjuvant dans un contexte de cancer du sein) modifient la coagulation.

Des recommandations de sociétés savantes ont été émises afin de prévenir les évènements thromboemboliques chez les femmes utilisatrices de ces traitements hormonaux.



An oral combined contraceptive user with elevated D-dimer post COVID-19: a case report

BACKGROUND

This case discusses the challenges created by COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) in the area of hormonal contraception, highlighting the contraception knowledge gap for women in their post COVID-19 period, especially if they had high D-dimer levels.

CASE PRESENTATION

This case involves a thirty-eight-year-old woman taking combined oral contraception (desogestrel/ethinyl oestradiol tablets) with a history of varicose veins. She recovered from a COVID-19 infection in November 2020. She presented to the emergency room with right lower-limb pain below the knee and progressive swelling for five days in February 2021. Physical examination of the lower limb showed mild swelling and tenderness of the right leg compared to the left leg. D-Dimer was elevated (1.06 mcg/mL FEU). COVID-19 screening was negative. A Doppler scan to exclude DVT was performed considering the clinical picture and high D-dimer level. There was no evidence of DVT in the right limb. She was reassured and discharged with instructions on when to visit the emergency room. The D-dimer had decreased to 0.53 mcg/mL FEU in March 2021. She booked an appointment with family medicine clinics because she was concerned about the continuation of combined oral contraception (desogestrel/ethinyl oestradiol tablets) with high D-dimer and risk of thrombosis. The follow-up D-dimer level in May 2021 was normal (0.4 mcg/mL FEU). The patient preferred to continue taking oral contraception.

CONCLUSION

An evidence-based consensus is needed to guide clinicians in providing contraception counselling for such patients.

Impact of the Lockdown Due to COVID-19 Pandemic in the Use of Combined Hormonal Oral Contraception in Spain - Results of a National Survey: Encovid

Objective

To know the contraceptive behaviour of Spanish women who use combined oral contraception (COC) during the period of lockdown due to COVID-19.

Methods

Cross-sectional, descriptive study of a sample of Spanish women who use COC based on a survey conducted through social networks using the online platform Survey Monkey. The survey was conducted during the period of home confinement.

Results

A total of 1407 women answered the survey and 937 were valid for the analysis. A total of 675 women (71.8%) were confined all day at home. During confinement 96,6% of women continued to use the COC, 53.5% responded that their sexual activity decreased during this time and 54% that their physical activity had decreased. A significant percentage of women (10.3%) recognized a worsening of premenstrual symptoms.

Conclusion

Despite the lockdown and the decrease in the frequency of sexual intercourse, the Spanish women who use COC did not abandon its use during the period of time analysed.

Combined hormonal contraception and COVID-19

Aim: This article reviews the possibility of using combined hormonal contraception during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: narrative reviewResults: The factors that protect women from the severity of the disease are analysed, as well as the risk factors for the use of this type of contraception, especially related to the increased risk of a thrombotic event in patients affected by the disease. Finally, the information available on the guidelines for action in patients with COVID-19 using combined hormonal contraception is collected.Conclusions: We can continue to prescribe and use hormonal methods with EE.

Clinical Experience, Pathophysiology, and Considerations in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of Hypercoagulopathy of COVID-19: A Review Study

Since the emergence of the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, an increasing number of reports and studies have tried to warn the medical community about the thrombotic complications of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It is suggested that the hyperinflammatory response and endothelial injury, especially in patients with severe disease, lead to a hypercoagulable state. Sudden deaths occurring in some patients also point to fulminant arrhythmias and massive pulmonary embolism (PE). Several expert panels have published recommendations regarding the prophylaxis and treatment of such complications. Nonetheless, there are limited high-quality studies for evidence-based decision-making, and most of these recommendations have arisen from descriptive studies, and optimal anticoagulant agents and dosages are yet to be designated. The coagulopathy persists after the acute phase of the illness, and some panels recommend the continuation of deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis for several days after regaining the normal daily activities by the patient. Here, we review the incidence and possible mechanisms of thrombotic complications, and present a summary of the considerations for the prophylaxis and treatment of such complications in the adult population.

Beliefs, knowledge and the impact of COVID19 on menopause therapies in Spanish women: COMEM-treatment study

OBJECTIVE

To study what women think about menopause treatments and assess their knowledge about them. To analyze adherence to treatment during COVID-19 confinement as a secondary objective.

METHODS

A multi-center cross-sectional observational study was conducted using a survey of 2500 women between January and June 2019. This was administered following a non-probability sampling procedure including women between 35 and 75 years. An extension study was conducted during the coronavirus pandemic, between March and June 2020.

RESULTS

The responses of 2355 surveyed women were analyzed. Of this sample, 42% knew about menopause hormone therapy (MHT). The most frequently identified indication was the treatment of hot flashes (65.6%). The MHT risks most frequently perceived were weight gain (24.2%) and breast cancer (21.7%); the main reason for rejecting MHT was a lack of information (96.1%). Comparative analyses were conducted according to age, menopausal status, type of menopause, place of residence, type of health care and level of education. During the coronavirus confinement period, 85 women using MHT were located, of which 84.7% continued it.

CONCLUSIONS

Women hold certain false beliefs about menopause, and their knowledge of the available treatments is somewhat limited. Adherence to MHT during the COVID-19 confinement in Spain has been high.

COVID-19 and Menstrual Status: Is Menopause an Independent Risk Factor for SARS Cov-2?

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has shown a definite association with gender, a predilection for males in terms of morbidity and mortality. The indirect evidence of the protective effect of estrogen has been shown by Channappanavar, in the animal model and Ding T. in a multihospital study from China, suggesting menopause as independent risk factor and estrogen is negatively correlated with severity.

OBJECTIVE

Study the clinical profile and outcomes in premenopausal and menopausal. Covid-19-infected women and analyzed the effect of menstrual status on the outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study conducted on 147 mild and moderate category COVID-19 females admitted between May and August 2020 using hospital records and telephonic follow-up. Two groups formed based on menstrual status: group-1 (premenopausal/estrogenic) and Group-2 (menopausal/hypoestrogenic). Hospital stay duration was considered as primary, while the category of disease on admission, clinical course, the requirement of oxygen, and mortality and residual symptoms were taken as a secondary outcome to compare the groups.

RESULTS

Overall Group-1 had significantly more of mild disease, while Group-2 had moderate cases (39 [76.5%] vs. 14 [14.6%] P < 0.01). Menopausal group has significantly more requirement of oxygen (32 [62.7%] vs. 20 [20.8%]), ventilation (14 [27.5%] vs. 1 [1%]) progression-to-severe disease (23.5% vs. 7.3%) and prolonged hospital stay ([14.1 ± 8.9 vs. 8.6 ± 3.9 days] P < 0.01). However, multivariate logistic regression failed to show a significant association between hospital stay and progression with menopause. Ferritin and residual symptoms found significantly higher in menopausal.

CONCLUSIONS

No definite association was found between menopause and COVID-19 outcome with hospital stay duration or disease progression in our study.

Risk of venous thromboembolism in users of contraception and menopausal hormone therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVES

The outbreak of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is a public health emergency of international concern. Inflammatory changes are part of COVID-19 pathophysiology and this might generate a higher thromboembolic risk in patients using combined hormonal contraception and menopausal hormone therapy. We aimed to discuss the main aspects related to this issue and propose management strategies for women affected by COVID-19.

METHODS

This narrative review collected information from several articles published since the beginning of the outbreak of the new coronavirus disease about the pathophysiology, stage of the disease, the occurrence of thrombotic events, and the risk of thromboembolism in users of contraception and hormonal therapy.

RESULTS

This article consolidates clinical parameters about the risk of venous thromboembolism in users of contraception and menopausal hormone therapy emphasizing the probable increase of that risk in women with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 and bringing safer recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

In this scenario, apart from the fundamental orientations of preventive measures, like social isolation and hygiene, it is important that all female health professionals have knowledge of the new rules and adopt safety measures, especially on the prescription of hormonal therapy and contraception.