Results from the Estonian postmenopausal hormone therapy trial [ISRCTN35338757]

The benefits and risks of menopause hormone therapy for the cardiovascular system in postmenopausal women: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Menopause hormone therapy (MHT), as an effective method to alleviate the menopause-related symptoms of women, its benefits, risks, and potential influencing factors for the cardiovascular system of postmenopausal women are not very clear.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate cardiovascular benefits and risks of MHT in postmenopausal women, and analyze the underlying factors that affect both.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL databases were searched from 1975 to July 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) that met pre-specified inclusion criteria were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers extracted data independently. A meta-analysis of random effects was used to analyze data.

MAIN RESULTS

This systematic review identified 33 RCTs using MHT involving 44,639 postmenopausal women with a mean age of 60.3 (range 48 to 72 years). There was no significant difference between MHT and placebo (or no treatment) in all-cause death (RR = 0.96, 95%CI 0.85 to 1.09, I2 = 14%) and cardiovascular events (RR = 0.97, 95%CI 0.82 to 1.14, I2 = 38%) in the overall population of postmenopausal women. However, MHT would increase the risk of stroke (RR = 1.23, 95%CI 1.08 to 1.41,I2 = 0%) and venous thromboembolism (RR = 1.86, 95%CI 1.39 to 2.50, I2 = 24%). Compared with placebo, MHT could improve flow-mediated arterial dilation (FMD) (SMD = 1.46, 95%CI 0.86 to 2.07, I2 = 90%), but it did not improve nitroglycerin-mediated arterial dilation (NMD) (SMD = 0.27, 95%CI - 0.08 to 0.62, I2 = 76%). Compared with women started MHT more than 10 years after menopause, women started MHT within 10 years after menopause had lower frequency of all-cause death (P = 0.02) and cardiovascular events (P = 0.002), and more significant improvement in FMD (P = 0.0003). Compared to mono-estrogen therapy, the combination therapy of estrogen and progesterone would not alter the outcomes of endpoint event. (all-cause death P = 0.52, cardiovascular events P = 0.90, stroke P = 0.85, venous thromboembolism P = 0.33, FMD P = 0.46, NMD P = 0.27).

CONCLUSIONS

MHT improves flow-mediated arterial dilation (FMD) but fails to lower the risk of all-cause death and cardiovascular events, and increases the risk of stroke and venous thrombosis in postmenopausal women. Early acceptance of MHT not only reduces the risk of all-cause death and cardiovascular events but also further improves FMD, although the risk of stroke and venous thrombosis is not reduced. There is no difference in the outcome of cardiovascular system endpoints between mono-estrogen therapy and combination therapy of estrogen and progesterone.

Hormone therapy for sexual function in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

The perimenopausal and postmenopausal periods are associated with many symptoms, including sexual complaints. This review is an update of a review first published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the effect of hormone therapy on sexual function in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women.

SEARCH METHODS

On 19 December 2022 we searched the Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS, ISI Web of Science, two trials registries, and OpenGrey, together with reference checking and contact with experts in the field for any additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that compared hormone therapy to either placebo or no intervention (control) using any validated assessment tool to evaluate sexual function. We considered hormone therapy: estrogen alone; estrogen in combination with progestogens; synthetic steroids, for example, tibolone; selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), for example, raloxifene, bazedoxifene; and SERMs in combination with estrogen.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. We analyzed data using mean differences (MDs) and standardized mean differences (SMDs). The primary outcome was the sexual function score. Secondary outcomes were the domains of sexual response: desire; arousal; lubrication; orgasm; satisfaction; and pain. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 36 studies (23,299 women; 12,225 intervention group; 11,074 control group), of which 35 evaluated postmenopausal women; only one study evaluated perimenopausal women. The 'symptomatic or early postmenopausal women' subgroup included 10 studies, which included women experiencing menopausal symptoms (symptoms such as hot flushes, night sweats, sleep disturbance, vaginal atrophy, and dyspareunia) or early postmenopausal women (within five years after menopause). The 'unselected postmenopausal women' subgroup included 26 studies, which included women regardless of menopausal symptoms and women whose last menstrual period was more than five years earlier. No study included only women with sexual dysfunction and only seven studies evaluated sexual function as a primary outcome. We deemed 20 studies at high risk of bias, two studies at low risk, and the other 14 studies at unclear risk of bias. Nineteen studies received commercial funding. Estrogen alone versus control probably slightly improves the sexual function composite score in symptomatic or early postmenopausal women (SMD 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.04 to 0.96; I² = 88%; 3 studies, 699 women; moderate-quality evidence), and probably makes little or no difference to the sexual function composite score in unselected postmenopausal women (SMD 0.64, 95% CI -0.12 to 1.41; I² = 94%; 6 studies, 608 women; moderate-quality evidence). The pooled result suggests that estrogen alone versus placebo or no intervention probably slightly improves sexual function composite score (SMD 0.60, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.04; I² = 92%; 9 studies, 1307 women, moderate-quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of estrogen combined with progestogens versus placebo or no intervention on the sexual function composite score in unselected postmenopausal women (MD 0.08 95% CI -1.52 to 1.68; 1 study, 104 women; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of synthetic steroids versus control on the sexual function composite score in symptomatic or early postmenopausal women (SMD 1.32, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.47; 1 study, 883 women; very low-quality evidence) and of their effect in unselected postmenopausal women (SMD 0.46, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.85; 1 study, 105 women; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of SERMs versus control on the sexual function composite score in symptomatic or early postmenopausal women (MD -1.00, 95% CI -2.00 to -0.00; 1 study, 215 women; very low-quality evidence) and of their effect in unselected postmenopausal women (MD 2.24, 95% 1.37 to 3.11 2 studies, 1525 women, I² = 1%, low-quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of SERMs combined with estrogen versus control on the sexual function composite score in symptomatic or early postmenopausal women (SMD 0.22, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.43; 1 study, 542 women; very low-quality evidence) and of their effect in unselected postmenopausal women (SMD 2.79, 95% CI 2.41 to 3.18; 1 study, 272 women; very low-quality evidence). The observed heterogeneity in many analyses may be caused by variations in the interventions and doses used, and by different tools used for assessment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Hormone therapy treatment with estrogen alone probably slightly improves the sexual function composite score in women with menopausal symptoms or in early postmenopause (within five years of amenorrhoea), and in unselected postmenopausal women, especially in the lubrication, pain, and satisfaction domains. We are uncertain whether estrogen combined with progestogens improves the sexual function composite score in unselected postmenopausal women. Evidence regarding other hormone therapies (synthetic steroids and SERMs) is of very low quality and we are uncertain of their effect on sexual function. The current evidence does not suggest the beneficial effects of synthetic steroids (for example tibolone) or SERMs alone or combined with estrogen on sexual function. More studies that evaluate the effect of estrogen combined with progestogens, synthetic steroids, SERMs, and SERMs combined with estrogen would improve the quality of the evidence for the effect of these treatments on sexual function in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women.

Hormone Therapy for the Primary Prevention of Chronic Conditions in Postmenopausal Persons: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Menopause is defined as the cessation of a person's menstrual cycle. It is defined retrospectively, 12 months after the final menstrual period. Perimenopause, or the menopausal transition, is the few-year time period preceding a person's final menstrual period and is characterized by increasing menstrual cycle length variability and periods of amenorrhea, and often symptoms such as vasomotor dysfunction. The prevalence and incidence of most chronic diseases (eg, cardiovascular disease, cancer, osteoporosis, and fracture) increase with age, and US persons who reach menopause are expected on average to live more than another 30 years.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2017 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of systemic (ie, oral or transdermal) hormone therapy for the prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons and whether outcomes vary by age or by timing of intervention after menopause.

POPULATION

Asymptomatic postmenopausal persons who are considering hormone therapy for the primary prevention of chronic medical conditions.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the use of combined estrogen and progestin for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons with an intact uterus has no net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the use of estrogen alone for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons who have had a hysterectomy has no net benefit.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends against the use of combined estrogen and progestin for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons. (D recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against the use of estrogen alone for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons who have had a hysterectomy. (D recommendation).

Hormone Therapy for the Primary Prevention of Chronic Conditions in Postmenopausal Persons: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

It is uncertain whether hormone therapy should be used for the primary prevention of chronic conditions such as heart disease, osteoporosis, or some types of cancers.

OBJECTIVE

To update evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force on the benefits and harms of hormone therapy in reducing risks for chronic conditions.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and trial registries from January 1, 2016, through October 12, 2021; surveillance through July 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language randomized clinical trials and prospective cohort studies of fair or good quality.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality; meta-analyses when at least 3 similar studies were available.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Morbidity and mortality related to chronic conditions; health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

Twenty trials (N = 39 145) and 3 cohort studies (N = 1 155 410) were included. Participants using estrogen only compared with placebo had significantly lower risks for diabetes over 7.1 years (1050 vs 903 cases; 134 fewer [95% CI, 18-237]) and fractures over 7.2 years (1024 vs 1413 cases; 388 fewer [95% CI, 277-489]) per 10 000 persons. Risks per 10 000 persons were statistically significantly increased for gallbladder disease over 7.1 years (1113 vs 737 cases; 377 more [95% CI, 234-540]), stroke over 7.2 years (318 vs 239 cases; 79 more [95% CI, 15-159]), venous thromboembolism over 7.2 years (258 vs 181 cases; 77 more [95% CI, 19-153]), and urinary incontinence over 1 year (2331 vs 1446 cases; 885 more [95% CI, 659-1135]). Participants using estrogen plus progestin compared with placebo experienced significantly lower risks, per 10 000 persons, for colorectal cancer over 5.6 years (59 vs 93 cases; 34 fewer [95% CI, 9-51]), diabetes over 5.6 years (403 vs 482 cases; 78 fewer [95% CI, 15-133]), and fractures over 5 years (864 vs 1094 cases; 230 fewer [95% CI, 66-372]). Risks, per 10 000 persons, were significantly increased for invasive breast cancer (242 vs 191 cases; 51 more [95% CI, 6-106]), gallbladder disease (723 vs 463 cases; 260 more [95% CI, 169-364]), stroke (187 vs 135 cases; 52 more [95% CI, 12-104]), and venous thromboembolism (246 vs 126 cases; 120 more [95% CI, 68-185]) over 5.6 years; probable dementia (179 vs 91 cases; 88 more [95% CI, 15-212]) over 4.0 years; and urinary incontinence (1707 vs 1145 cases; 562 more [95% CI, 412-726]) over 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Use of hormone therapy in postmenopausal persons for the primary prevention of chronic conditions was associated with some benefits but also with an increased risk of harms.

Bias in animal studies of estrogen effects on cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Randomized controlled trials on menopausal hormone therapy in humans have not confirmed the benefit of estrogens on cardiovascular disease found in animal studies. Flawed methodology or publication bias in animal studies may explain the dicrepancy.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to investigate whether publication of the randomized controlled trials Heart and Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study and Women’s Health Initiative influenced study authors’ assessment of research findings (confirmation bias) as well as to investigate publication bias and small‐study effects in animal studies of estrogen effects on atherosclerosis.

Methods

The data source for this study was PubMed from inception to 2018. We selected animal studies with cardiovascular outcomes comparing 17‐β‐estradiol, its natural metabolites, or conjugated equine estrogen with control. Qualitative data were extracted on authors’ conclusions about estrogen effects on cardiovascular disease, as well as quantitative data for atherosclerosis outcomes. Fixed‐ and random‐effects meta‐analyses were used. Publication bias/small‐study effects were assessed using funnel plots and Egger’s regression. Trim‐and‐fill plots and extrapolation from Egger’s regression were used to adjust for publication bias. The main outcomes and measures were the primary study authors' interpretation of their own results, and estrogen effects on cardiovascular disease in general before and after publication of the Women’s health Initiative study (2003). The effects of estrogens on atherosclerosis were measured as standardized mean difference between intervention and control.

Results

Of 1925 studies retrieved, 360 were eligible for analyses. Study‐specific statements concluded that estrogens were protective against cardiovascular disease in 75% of studies before 2003 and 78% after, but the percentage of general statements about estrogens being cardioprotective changed from 70% to 40%. Meta‐analyses showed less atherosclerosis in estrogen‐treated animals. Extremely skewed funnel plots and P < .01 in Egger’s regression suggested publication bias and/or exaggerated effects in small studies, which was more pronounced after 2002. There was substantial heterogeneity of effects (I² = 68%‐86%) overall and in all subgroups except cynomolgus monkeys (I² = 9%), the only animal subgroup without clear bias. Adjusting for publication bias, overall estimates of estrogen effects on atherosclerosis were close to null effect.

Conclusions

We found substantial evidence of publication bias but not of confirmation bias. Publication bias and flawed small studies may partly explain why findings differ between animal studies and clinical trials on the effect of estrogens on cardiovascular disease.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of effects of menopausal hormone therapy on cardiovascular diseases

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies was conducted to assess the association between menopausal hormone therapy and cardiovascular disease. The PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for articles published from 2000 to 2019, using review methods based on a previous Cochrane review. Quality assessment of RCTs and observational studies was conducted using the Jadad scale and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, respectively. A total of 26 RCTs and 47 observational studies were identified. The study populations in the RCTs were older and had more underlying diseases than those in the observational studies. Increased risks of venous thromboembolism [summary estimate (SE), 95% confidence interval (CI): RCTs, 1.70, 1.33-2.16; observational studies, 1.32, 1.13-1.54] were consistently identified in both study types, whereas an increased risk of stroke in RCTs (SE: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.04-1.25) and a decreased risk of myocardial infarction in observational studies (SE: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.75-0.84) were observed. Differential clinical effects depending on timing of initiation, underlying disease, regimen type, and route of administration were identified through subgroup analyses. These findings suggest that underlying disease and timing of initiation should be carefully considered before starting therapy in postmenopausal women.

Hormone Therapy and Breast Cancer: Emerging Steroid Receptor Mechanisms

Although hormone therapy is widely used by millions of women to relieve symptoms of menopause, it has been associated with several side-effects such as coronary heart disease, stroke and increased invasive breast cancer risk. These side-effects have caused many women to seek alternatives to conventional hormone therapy, including the controversial custom-compounded bioidentical hormone therapy suggested to not increase breast cancer risk. Historically estrogens and the estrogen receptor were considered the principal factors promoting breast cancer development and progression, however, a role for other members of the steroid receptor family in breast cancer pathogenesis is now evident, with emerging studies revealing an interplay between some steroid receptors. In this review, we discuss examples of hormone therapy used for the relief of menopausal symptoms, highlighting the distinction between conventional hormone therapy and custom-compounded bioidentical hormone therapy. Moreover, we highlight the fact that not all hormones have been evaluated for an association with increased breast cancer risk. We also summarize the current knowledge regarding the role of steroid receptors in mediating the carcinogenic effects of hormones used in menopausal hormone therapy, with special emphasis on the influence of the interplay or crosstalk between steroid receptors. Unraveling the intertwined nature of steroid hormone receptor signaling pathways in breast cancer biology is of utmost importance, considering that breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer among women worldwide. Moreover, understanding these mechanisms may reveal novel prevention or treatment options, and lead to the development of new hormone therapies that does not cause increased breast cancer risk.

Prostate cancer screening: what can we learn from randomised trials?

In this article, the principle of randomised trials are first described and then prostate cancer screening trials published to date are evaluated based on these principles. A summary of the randomised prostate cancer screening is provided. The conclusion that can be made from the results of the screening trials, as well as limitations of the evidence and open questions are outlined in the end.

Estrogen alone and health outcomes in black women by African ancestry: a secondary analyses of a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

In postmenopausal black women in the Women's Health Initiative randomized trial, estrogen alone reduced breast cancers but its comprehensive influence on health outcomes in black women is unknown. Therefore, we examined this issue in the Women's Health Initiative overall and by African ancestry.

METHODS

A total of 1,616 black women with prior hysterectomy, including 1,061 with percent African ancestry determination, at 40 US centers were randomly assigned to conjugated equine estrogen (0.625 mg/d) or placebo for 7.2 years' (median) intervention with 13 years' cumulative follow-up. Coronary heart disease (CHD) and breast cancer were primary efficacy and safety outcomes, respectively. A global index also included stroke, colorectal cancer, hip fracture, pulmonary embolism, and death.

RESULTS

Black women in the estrogen-alone group compared with black women in the placebo group had fewer breast cancers (17 vs 40, hazard ratio [HR] 0.47, 95% CI 0.26-0.82). In women with more than 80% African ancestry, breast cancer HR was lower (0.32, 95% CI 0.12-0.86, trend P = 0.04 for ancestry effect). Most other outcomes including CHD, stroke, hip fracture, and the global index were null with estrogen use in black women; a global index effect was more favorable in younger black women (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.43-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

In black postmenopausal women with prior hysterectomy, estrogen alone significantly reduced breast cancer incidence with no adverse influence on CHD, venous thromboembolism, or all-cause mortality. Favorable estrogen-alone global index effects in younger black women warrant further study.

Postmenopausal hormone therapy and risk of stroke: A pooled analysis of data from population-based cohort studies

BACKGROUND

Recent research indicates a favourable influence of postmenopausal hormone therapy (HT) if initiated early, but not late, on subclinical atherosclerosis. However, the clinical relevance of timing of HT initiation for hard end points such as stroke remains to be determined. Further, no previous research has considered the timing of initiation of HT in relation to haemorrhagic stroke risk. The importance of the route of administration, type, active ingredient, and duration of HT for stroke risk is also unclear. We aimed to assess the association between HT and risk of stroke, considering the timing of initiation, route of administration, type, active ingredient, and duration of HT.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Data on HT use reported by the participants in 5 population-based Swedish cohort studies, with baseline investigations performed during the period 1987-2002, were combined in this observational study. In total, 88,914 postmenopausal women who reported data on HT use and had no previous cardiovascular disease diagnosis were included. Incident events of stroke (ischaemic, haemorrhagic, or unspecified) and haemorrhagic stroke were identified from national population registers. Laplace regression was employed to assess crude and multivariable-adjusted associations between HT and stroke risk by estimating percentile differences (PDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The fifth and first PDs were calculated for stroke and haemorrhagic stroke, respectively. Crude models were adjusted for age at baseline only. The final adjusted models included age at baseline, level of education, smoking status, body mass index, level of physical activity, and age at menopause onset. Additional variables evaluated for potential confounding were type of menopause, parity, use of oral contraceptives, alcohol consumption, hypertension, dyslipidaemia, diabetes, family history of cardiovascular disease, and cohort. During a median follow-up of 14.3 years, 6,371 first-time stroke events were recorded; of these, 1,080 were haemorrhagic. Following multivariable adjustment, early initiation (<5 years since menopause onset) of HT was associated with a longer stroke-free period than never use (fifth PD, 1.00 years; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.57), but there was no significant extension to the time period free of haemorrhagic stroke (first PD, 1.52 years; 95% CI -0.32 to 3.37). When considering timing as a continuous variable, the stroke-free and the haemorrhagic stroke-free periods were maximal if HT was initiated approximately 0-5 years from the onset of menopause. If single conjugated equine oestrogen HT was used, late initiation of HT was associated with a shorter stroke-free (fifth PD, -4.41 years; 95% CI -7.14 to -1.68) and haemorrhagic stroke-free (first PD, -9.51 years; 95% CI -12.77 to -6.24) period than never use. Combined HT when initiated late was significantly associated with a shorter haemorrhagic stroke-free period (first PD, -1.97 years; 95% CI -3.81 to -0.13), but not with a shorter stroke-free period (fifth PD, -1.21 years; 95% CI -3.11 to 0.68) than never use. Given the observational nature of this study, the possibility of uncontrolled confounding cannot be excluded. Further, immortal time bias, also related to the observational design, cannot be ruled out.

CONCLUSIONS

When initiated early in relation to menopause onset, HT was not associated with increased risk of incident stroke, regardless of the route of administration, type of HT, active ingredient, and duration. Generally, these findings held also for haemorrhagic stroke. Our results suggest that the initiation of HT 0-5 years after menopause onset, as compared to never use, is associated with a decreased risk of stroke and haemorrhagic stroke. Late initiation was associated with elevated risks of stroke and haemorrhagic stroke when conjugated equine oestrogen was used as single therapy. Late initiation of combined HT was associated with haemorrhagic stroke risk.

Long-term hormone therapy for perimenopausal and postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND: Hormone therapy (HT) is widely provided for control of menopausal symptoms and has been used for the management and prevention of cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis and dementia in older women. This is an updated version of a Cochrane review first published in 2005. OBJECTIVES: To assess effects of long-term HT (at least 1 year's duration) on mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, cancer, gallbladder disease, fracture and cognition in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women during and after cessation of treatment. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases to September 2016: Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO. We searched the registers of ongoing trials and reference lists provided in previous studies and systematic reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised double-blinded studies of HT versus placebo, taken for at least 1 year by perimenopausal or postmenopausal women. HT included oestrogens, with or without progestogens, via the oral, transdermal, subcutaneous or intranasal route. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the quality of the evidence by using GRADE methods. MAIN RESULTS: We included 22 studies involving 43,637 women. We derived nearly 70% of the data from two well-conducted studies (HERS 1998; WHI 1998). Most participants were postmenopausal American women with at least some degree of comorbidity, and mean participant age in most studies was over 60 years. None of the studies focused on perimenopausal women.In relatively healthy postmenopausal women (i.e. generally fit, without overt disease), combined continuous HT increased the risk of a coronary event (after 1 year's use: from 2 per 1000 to between 3 and 7 per 1000), venous thromboembolism (after 1 year's use: from 2 per 1000 to between 4 and 11 per 1000), stroke (after 3 years' use: from 6 per 1000 to between 6 and 12 per 1000), breast cancer (after 5.6 years' use: from 19 per 1000 to between 20 and 30 per 1000), gallbladder disease (after 5.6 years' use: from 27 per 1000 to between 38 and 60 per 1000) and death from lung cancer (after 5.6 years' use plus 2.4 years' additional follow-up: from 5 per 1000 to between 6 and 13 per 1000).Oestrogen-only HT increased the risk of venous thromboembolism (after 1 to 2 years' use: from 2 per 1000 to 2 to 10 per 1000; after 7 years' use: from 16 per 1000 to 16 to 28 per 1000), stroke (after 7 years' use: from 24 per 1000 to between 25 and 40 per 1000) and gallbladder disease (after 7 years' use: from 27 per 1000 to between 38 and 60 per 1000) but reduced the risk of breast cancer (after 7 years' use: from 25 per 1000 to between 15 and 25 per 1000) and clinical fracture (after 7 years' use: from 141 per 1000 to between 92 and 113 per 1000) and did not increase the risk of coronary events at any follow-up time.Women over 65 years of age who were relatively healthy and taking continuous combined HT showed an increase in the incidence of dementia (after 4 years' use: from 9 per 1000 to 11 to 30 per 1000). Among women with cardiovascular disease, use of combined continuous HT significantly increased the risk of venous thromboembolism (at 1 year's use: from 3 per 1000 to between 3 and 29 per 1000). Women taking HT had a significantly decreased incidence of fracture with long-term use.Risk of fracture was the only outcome for which strong evidence showed clinical benefit derived from HT (after 5.6 years' use of combined HT: from 111 per 1000 to between 79 and 96 per 1000; after 7.1 years' use of oestrogen-only HT: from 141 per 1000 to between 92 and 113 per 1000). Researchers found no strong evidence that HT has a clinically meaningful impact on the incidence of colorectal cancer.One trial analysed subgroups of 2839 relatively healthy women 50 to 59 years of age who were taking combined continuous HT and 1637 who were taking oestrogen-only HT versus similar-sized placebo groups. The only significantly increased risk reported was for venous thromboembolism in women taking combined continuous HT: Their absolute risk remained low, at less than 1/500. However, other differences in risk cannot be excluded, as this study was not designed to have the power to detect differences between groups of women within 10 years of menopause.For most studies, risk of bias was low in most domains. The overall quality of evidence for the main comparisons was moderate. The main limitation in the quality of evidence was that only about 30% of women were 50 to 59 years old at baseline, which is the age at which women are most likely to consider HT for vasomotor symptoms. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Women with intolerable menopausal symptoms may wish to weigh the benefits of symptom relief against the small absolute risk of harm arising from short-term use of low-dose HT, provided they do not have specific contraindications. HT may be unsuitable for some women, including those at increased risk of cardiovascular disease, increased risk of thromboembolic disease (such as those with obesity or a history of venous thrombosis) or increased risk of some types of cancer (such as breast cancer, in women with a uterus). The risk of endometrial cancer among women with a uterus taking oestrogen-only HT is well documented.HT is not indicated for primary or secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease or dementia, nor for prevention of deterioration of cognitive function in postmenopausal women. Although HT is considered effective for the prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis, it is generally recommended as an option only for women at significant risk for whom non-oestrogen therapies are unsuitable. Data are insufficient for assessment of the risk of long-term HT use in perimenopausal women and in postmenopausal women younger than 50 years of age.

Effect of characteristics of women on attendance in blind and non-blind randomised trials: analysis of recruitment data from the EPHT Trial

OBJECTIVES

To analyse the effect of women's characteristics on their willingness to join a blind or a non-blind subtrial or to be excluded by physicians.

DESIGN

Primary prevention trial of postmenopausal hormone therapy (HT). A 2×2, randomised design with a non-blind HT arm or control arm and a blind HT arm or placebo arm.

SETTING

3 clinical centres in Estonia.

METHODS

Interest in joining the trial was asked in a questionnaire together with demographic and health status data. Interested and eligible women were invited to a health examination that also informed whether they belonged to a blind or to a non-blind subtrial; the arm was not revealed. Trial physicians made further exclusions when checking the women's eligibility. Thereafter, informed consent was asked as detailed in the flow chart. Comparisons were made between non-blind and blind subtrials. Analyses were carried out for each of the background variables.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The proportion of willingness, eligibility and attendance.

RESULTS

Women randomised to the non-blind subtrial were more willing to join (relative risk (RR) 1.17) and more likely to be found eligible by physicians (RR 1.10) than women in the blind subtrial, resulting in larger attendance (RR 1.29). Women with higher education were differentially more willing to join the non-blind trial (RR 1.29) than those with basic education (RR 1.08); the differential willingness of never-smokers (RR 1.20) was larger than that of current smokers (RR 1.07). The differential exclusion by physicians by education and smoking were small. Some subjective symptoms (eg, diarrhoea/constipation, stomach pain) had reverse differential effects on attendance in the non-blind subtrial in comparison to the blind subtrial. Menopausal symptoms did not affect the differential interest, eligibility or attendance.

CONCLUSIONS

Blinding in RCT reduces attendance, due to decisions of the women and the trial physicians. Differential attendance by blinding may affect the generalisability of the results from trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN35338757.

Menopausal Hormone Therapy and Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to assess the effect of menopausal hormonal therapy (MHT) on all-cause and cause-specific mortality.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus) from inception until August 2013. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of more than 6 months of duration comparing MHT with no treatment. Pairs of independent reviewers selected trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the random-effects model.

RESULTS

We included 43 RCTs at moderate risk of bias. Meta-analysis showed no effect on mortality (RR 0.99 [95% CI, 0.94-1.05]), regardless of MHT type or history of preexisting heart disease. No association was found between MHT and cardiac death (RR 1.04 [95% CI 0.87-1.23]) or stroke (RR 1.49 [95% CI 0.95-2.31]). Estrogen plus progesterone use was associated with a likely increase in breast cancer mortality (RR 1.96 [95% CI 0.98-3.94]), whereas estrogen use was not. MHT use was not associated with mortality of other types of cancer. In 5 trials, MHT was likely started at a younger age: 2 RCTs with mean age less than 60 and 3 RCTs with MHT started less than 10 years after menopause. Meta-analysis of these 5 RCTs showed a reduction of mortality with MHT (RR 0.70 [95% CI 0.52-0.95]).

CONCLUSION

The current evidence suggests that MHT does not affect the risk of death from all causes, cardiac death and death from stroke or cancer. These data may be used to support clinical and policy deliberations about the role of MHT in the care of symptomatic postmenopausal women.

Hormone therapy for preventing cardiovascular disease in post-menopausal women

BACKGROUND

Evidence from systematic reviews of observational studies suggests that hormone therapy may have beneficial effects in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular disease events in post-menopausal women, however the results of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have had mixed results. This is an updated version of a Cochrane review published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of hormone therapy for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in post-menopausal women, and whether there are differential effects between use in primary or secondary prevention. Secondary aims were to undertake exploratory analyses to (i) assess the impact of time since menopause that treatment was commenced (≥ 10 years versus < 10 years), and where these data were not available, use age of trial participants at baseline as a proxy (≥ 60 years of age versus < 60 years of age); and (ii) assess the effects of length of time on treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases on 25 February 2014: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS. We also searched research and trials registers, and conducted reference checking of relevant studies and related systematic reviews to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs of women comparing orally administered hormone therapy with placebo or a no treatment control, with a minimum of six months follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome. We combined results using random effects meta-analyses, and undertook further analyses to assess the effects of treatment as primary or secondary prevention, and whether treatment was commenced more than or less than 10 years after menopause.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six new trials through this update. Therefore the review includes 19 trials with a total of 40,410 post-menopausal women. On the whole, study quality was good and generally at low risk of bias; the findings are dominated by the three largest trials. We found high quality evidence that hormone therapy in both primary and secondary prevention conferred no protective effects for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, angina, or revascularisation. However, there was an increased risk of stroke in those in the hormone therapy arm for combined primary and secondary prevention (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.41). Venous thromboembolic events were increased (RR 1.92, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.69), as were pulmonary emboli (RR 1.81, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.48) on hormone therapy relative to placebo.The absolute risk increase for stroke was 6 per 1000 women (number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) = 165; mean length of follow-up: 4.21 years (range: 2.0 to 7.1)); for venous thromboembolism 8 per 1000 women (NNTH = 118; mean length of follow-up: 5.95 years (range: 1.0 to 7.1)); and for pulmonary embolism 4 per 1000 (NNTH = 242; mean length of follow-up: 3.13 years (range: 1.0 to 7.1)).We performed subgroup analyses according to when treatment was started in relation to the menopause. Those who started hormone therapy less than 10 years after the menopause had lower mortality (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.95, moderate quality evidence) and coronary heart disease (composite of death from cardiovascular causes and non-fatal myocardial infarction) (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.96; moderate quality evidence), though they were still at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.73, high quality evidence) compared to placebo or no treatment. There was no strong evidence of effect on risk of stroke in this group. In those who started treatment more than 10 years after the menopause there was high quality evidence that it had little effect on death or coronary heart disease between groups but there was an increased risk of stroke (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.38, high quality evidence) and venous thromboembolism (RR 1.96, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.80, high quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review findings provide strong evidence that treatment with hormone therapy in post-menopausal women overall, for either primary or secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease events has little if any benefit and causes an increase in the risk of stroke and venous thromboembolic events.

Gallstone disease and the risk of stroke: a nationwide population-based study

BACKGROUND

Gallstone disease (GD) and stroke share a number of risk factors including diabetes and hyperlipidemia. This nationwide population-based study was designed to estimate the risk of stroke after a diagnosis of GD.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. A total of 135,512 patients with a diagnosis of GD and 271,024 age- and gender-matched non-GD control patients were included to assess the risk of stroke using Cox proportional hazard regression.

RESULTS

During the study period (2000-2003), 12,234 (153.67/10,000 person-years) strokes occurred among the GD patients, and 20,680 (114.83/10,000 person-years) among the controls. The diagnosis of GD carried a higher risk of developing ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.28 and 1.33 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-1.31 and 1.25-1.41, both P < .0001), respectively. Stroke risk was increased in both genders but at a higher rate in younger age. The GD group had significantly higher prevalence rate of comorbidities that are known stroke risk factors, including hypertension, diabetes, and coronary artery disease. Stroke risk was higher in the GD group with or without any of these comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based longitudinal follow-up study, GD carried a significantly higher stroke risk, particularly for younger age with or without stroke risk factors. Stroke preventive measures maybe needed for patients with GD, especially those of younger age and with stroke risk factor(s).

Guidelines for the prevention of stroke in women: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

PURPOSE

The aim of this statement is to summarize data on stroke risk factors that are unique to and more common in women than men and to expand on the data provided in prior stroke guidelines and cardiovascular prevention guidelines for women. This guideline focuses on the risk factors unique to women, such as reproductive factors, and those that are more common in women, including migraine with aura, obesity, metabolic syndrome, and atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

Writing group members were nominated by the committee chair on the basis of their previous work in relevant topic areas and were approved by the American Heart Association (AHA) Stroke Council's Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and the AHA's Manuscript Oversight Committee. The panel reviewed relevant articles on adults using computerized searches of the medical literature through May 15, 2013. The evidence is organized within the context of the AHA framework and is classified according to the joint AHA/American College of Cardiology and supplementary AHA Stroke Council methods of classifying the level of certainty and the class and level of evidence. The document underwent extensive AHA internal peer review, Stroke Council Leadership review, and Scientific Statements Oversight Committee review before consideration and approval by the AHA Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee.

RESULTS

We provide current evidence, research gaps, and recommendations on risk of stroke related to preeclampsia, oral contraceptives, menopause, and hormone replacement, as well as those risk factors more common in women, such as obesity/metabolic syndrome, atrial fibrillation, and migraine with aura.

CONCLUSIONS

To more accurately reflect the risk of stroke in women across the lifespan, as well as the clear gaps in current risk scores, we believe a female-specific stroke risk score is warranted.

Prevalence and risk factors of urinary incontinence among Estonian postmenopausal women

Aims

To estimate the prevalence of urinary incontinence (UI) and to assess its risk factors among postmenopausal Estonian women.

Methods

In 2004, 1363 women participating in the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy Trial were asked at the closure visit to the trial physician about symptoms of UI. The type of incontinence was assessed with the help of a questionnaire, based on recommendations from the working group set up by the Finnish Gynaecological Association. Frequency characteristics were analysed by descriptive statistics. Risk factors were examined using logistic regression.

Results

Mean age of study women was 53.3 years (min = 48, max = 67; SD 4.0). The prevalence of UI was 18.12% (95% CI: 16.07 - 20.17). Stress incontinence was diagnosed in 78.83% (95% CI: 73.32 - 84.33) and urge or mixed incontinence in 21.17% (95% CI: 15.67 - 26.68) of women who reported incontinence. Prevalence of UI slightly increased with age. Women who used hormone therapy (HT) (OR 1.67; 95% CI: 1.17 - 2.39), had had hysterectomy (1.73, 95% CI: 1.06 - 2.83), and those with secondary education (OR 1.87, 95% CI: 1.23 - 2.82) or basic education (OR 3.29, 95% CI: 1.80 - 6.02) had a higher risk for UI. Parity, having a BMI over 30 kg/m², being a smoker or a former smoker, having diabetes and being physically or sexually active, tended to increase the risk of UI.

Conclusions

About one in five postmenopausal women in Estonia reported to have UI. Risk factors linked with UI, its prevalence in other age groups and the impact of UI on quality of life deserve more research.

Trial registration

Number: ISRCTN35338757

Hormone therapy for sexual function in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

The perimenopausal and postmenopausal periods are associated with many symptoms, including sexual complaints.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of hormone therapy (HT) on sexual function in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for articles in the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ISI Web of Knowledge and OpenGrey. The last search was performed in December 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing HT to either placebo or no intervention (control). We considered as HT estrogens alone; estrogens in combination with progestogens; synthetic steroids (for example tibolone); or selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) (for example raloxifene, bazedoxifene). Studies of other drugs possibly used in the relief of menopausal symptoms were excluded. We included studies that evaluated sexual function using any validated assessment tool. The primary outcome was a composite score for sexual function and the scores for individual domains (arousal and sexual interest, orgasm, and pain) were secondary outcomes. Studies were selected by two authors independently.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were independently extracted by two authors and checked by a third. Risk of bias assessment was performed independently by two authors. We contacted study investigators as required. Data were analysed using standardized mean difference (SMD) and relative risk (RR). We stratified the analysis by participant characteristics with regard to menopausal symptoms. The overall quality of the evidence for the primary outcome was evaluated using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

The search retrieved 2351 records from which 27 studies (16,393 women) were included. The 'symptomatic or early post-menopausal' subgroup included nine studies: perimenopausal women (one study), up to 36 months postmenopause (one study), up to five years postmenopause (one study), experiencing vasomotor or other menopausal symptoms (five studies), or experiencing hot flushes and sexual dysfunction (one study). The 'unselected postmenopausal women' subgroup included 18 studies, which included women regardless of menopausal symptoms and permitted the inclusion of women with more than five years since the final menstrual period. No studies were restricted to women with sexual dysfunction. Only five studies evaluated sexual function as a primary outcome. Eighteen studies were deemed at high risk of bias, and the other nine studies were at unclear risk of bias. Twenty studies received commercial funding.Findings for sexual function (measured by composite score):For estrogens alone versus control, in symptomatic or early postmenopausal women the SMD and 95% CI were compatible with a small to moderate benefit in sexual function for the HT group (SMD 0.38, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.54, P < 0.00001, 3 studies, 699 women, I² = 55%, high-quality evidence). In unselected postmenopausal women, the 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a small benefit (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.34, P = 0.08, 2 studies, 478 women, I² = 44%, low-quality evidence). The subgroups were not pooled because of considerable heterogeneity.For estrogens combined with progestogens versus control, in symptomatic or early postmenopausal women the 95% CI was compatible with a small to moderate benefit for sexual function in the HT group (SMD 0.42, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.64, P = 0.0003, 1 study, 335 women, moderate-quality evidence). In unselected postmenopausal women, the 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a small benefit (SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.20, P = 0.10, 3 studies, 1314 women, I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence). The subgroups were not pooled because of considerable heterogeneity.For tibolone versus control, in symptomatic or early postmenopausal women the 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a small benefit for sexual function in the HT group (SMD 0.13, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.26, P = 0.05, 1 study, 883 women, low-quality evidence). In unselected postmenopausal women, the 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a moderate benefit (SMD 0.38, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.71, P = 0.03, 2 studies, 142 women, I² = 0%, low-quality evidence). In the combined analysis, the 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a small benefit (SMD 0.17, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.29, P = 0.008, 3 studies, 1025 women, I² = 20%).For SERMs versus control, in symptomatic or early postmenopausal women the 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a moderate benefit for sexual function in the HT group (SMD 0.23, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.50, P = 0.09, 1 study, 215 women, low-quality evidence). In unselected postmenopausal women, the 95% CI was compatible with small harm to a small benefit (SMD 0.04, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.29, P = 0.72, 1 study, 283 women, low-quality evidence). In the combined analysis, the 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a small benefit (SMD 0.13, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.31, P = 0.16, 2 studies, 498 women, I² = 2%).A comparison of SERMs combined with estrogens versus control was only evaluated in symptomatic or early postmenopausal women. The 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a small benefit for sexual function in the HT group (SMD 0.21, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.43, P = 0.05, 1 study, 542 women, moderate-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

HT treatment with estrogens alone or in combination with progestogens was associated with a small to moderate improvement in sexual function, particularly in pain, when used in women with menopausal symptoms or in early postmenopause (within five years of amenorrhoea), but not in unselected postmenopausal women. Evidence regarding other HTs (synthetic steroids and SERMs) is of low quality and we are uncertain of their effect on sexual function. The current evidence does not suggest an important effect of tibolone or of SERMs alone or combined with estrogens on sexual function. More studies evaluating the effect of synthetic steroids, SERMS and the association of SERM + estrogens would improve the quality of the evidence for the effect of these treatments on sexual function in peri and postmenopausal women. Future studies should also evaluate the effect of HT solely among women with sexual complaints.

Effect of hormone replacement therapy on cardiovascular outcomes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is widely used to controlling menopausal symptoms and prevent adverse cardiovascular events. However, the benefit and risk of HRT on cardiovascular outcomes remains controversial.

METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We systematically searched the PubMed, EmBase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for obtaining relevant literature. All eligible trials reported on the effects of HRT on cardiovascular outcomes. We did a random effects meta-analysis to obtain summary effect estimates for the clinical outcomes with use of relative risks calculated from the raw data of included trials. Of 1903 identified studies, we included 10 trials reporting data on 38908 postmenopausal women. Overall, we noted that estrogen combined with medroxyprogesterone acetate therapy as compared to placebo had no effect on coronary events (RR, 1.07; 95%CI: 0.91-1.26; P = 0.41), myocardial infarction (RR, 1.09; 95%CI: 0.85-1.41; P = 0.48), stroke (RR, 1.21; 95%CI: 1.00-1.46; P = 0.06), cardiac death (RR, 1.19; 95%CI: 0.91-1.56; P = 0.21), total death (RR, 1.06; 95%CI: 0.81-1.39; P = 0.66), and revascularization (RR, 0.95; 95%CI: 0.83-1.08; P = 0.43). In addition, estrogen therapy alone had no effect on coronary events (RR, 0.93; 95%CI: 0.80-1.08; P = 0.33), myocardial infarction (RR, 0.95; 95%CI: 0.78-1.15; P = 0.57), cardiac death (RR, 0.86; 95%CI: 0.65-1.13; P = 0.27), total mortality (RR, 1.02; 95%CI: 0.89-1.18; P = 0.73), and revascularization (RR, 0.77; 95%CI: 0.45-1.31; P = 0.34), but associated with a 27% increased risk for incident stroke (RR, 1.27; 95%CI: 1.06-1.53; P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE

Hormone replacement therapy does not effect on the incidence of coronary events, myocardial infarction, cardiac death, total mortality or revascularization. However, it might contributed an important role on the risk of incident stroke.

Hormone therapy for preventing cardiovascular disease in post-menopausal women

BACKGROUND

Evidence from systematic reviews of observational studies suggest that hormone replacement therapy (HT) may have beneficial effects in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events in post-menopausal women. This is an updated version of a Cochrane review first published in 2005 (Gabriel-Sanchez 2005).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of HT for the prevention of CVD in post-menopausal women, and whether there are differential effects between use of single therapy alone compared to combination HT and use in primary or secondary prevention.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases to April 2010: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) on The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of women comparing orally administered HT with placebo with a minimum of six-months follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Risk Ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for each outcome. Results were combined using fixed-effect meta-analyses, and where possible, further stratified analyses conducted to assess the effect of time on treatment. Additionally, univariate meta-regression analyses were undertaken to assess whether length of trial follow-up, single or combination treatment, or whether treatment for primary or secondary prevention were potential predictors for a number of CVD outcomes in the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Four new trials were identified through the update; one trial included in the previous review was excluded. Therefore the review included 13 trials with a total of 38,171 post-menopausal women. Overall, single and combination HT in both primary and secondary prevention conferred no protective effects for all cause mortality, CVD death, non-fatal MI, or angina. There were no significant differences in the number of coronary artery by-pass procedures or angioplasties performed between the trial arms. However there was an increased risk of stroke for both primary and secondary prevention when combination and single HT was combined, RR 1.26 (95% CI 1.11 to 1.43), in venous thromboembolic events, RR 1.89 (95% CI 1.58 to 2.26) and in pulmonary embolism RR 1.84 (95% CI 1.42 to 2.37) relative to placebo. The associated numbers needed-to-harm (NNH) were 164, 109 and 243 for stroke, venous thromboembolism and pulmonary embolism respectively.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with HT in post-menopausal women for either primary or secondary prevention of CVD events is not effective, and causes an increase in the risk of stroke, and venous thromboembolic events. HT should therefore only be considered for women seeking relief from menopausal symptoms. Short-term HT treatment should be at the lowest effective dose, and used with caution in women with predisposing risk factors for CVD events.

Risk-Benefit Analysis of Combination vs. Unopposed HRT in Post-Menopausal Women

Many trials on the use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) have provided contradictory results on its risks and benefits in post-menopausal women. The use of HRT declined globally following publication of the first data from the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) trial in 2002, with the revelation that there was an increased risk of breast cancer and coronary heart disease (CHD) in postmenopausal women taking HRT. Following this, other leading studies published results that were consistent with these findings, which reduced enthusiasm for HRT use. However, recent publications from the International Menopause Society indicate that HRT is the first-line and most effective treatment for menopausal symptoms. Moreover, when the full results of the WHI trial were subsequently published, it appeared that HRT may confer benefits for CHD prevention below age 60. The statements from the British Menopause Society and the International Menopause Society (IMS) published in 2008 also supported this opinion. These revelations renew interest in HRT use. This paper analyzes the effects of combination versus unopposed HRT on osteoporosis, breast and CHD, endometrial cancer induction, venous thromboembolic disease, lipids and lipoproteins, neuroprotection, and cognitive function in post-menopausal women.

Variability of bothersome menopausal symptoms over time--a longitudinal analysis using the Estonian postmenopausal hormone therapy trial (EPHT)

BACKGROUND

Very little data are available on the natural course or level of disturbance of vasomotor symptoms among middle-aged women. Using readily collected trial data we studied the persistence of vasomotor symptoms among untreated women.

METHODS

In a trial comparing combined hormone therapy to placebo or no treatment (control groups), a cohort of women aged 50-59 at recruitment were followed annually by questionnaires. Women in the control groups (n = 486) were grouped by the number of years followed, with the prevalence and severity of symptoms calculated both cross-sectionally and longitudinally.

RESULTS

About two thirds of the women (67%) reported vasomotor symptoms and half (46%) bothersome symptoms at recruitment. In the cross-sectional analysis, their prevalence declined between recruitment and 1-year follow-up (32% bothersome symptoms) and 2-year follow-up (27%). Thereafter it remained about the same level. In the longitudinal analysis, there was a notable variation in the prevalence of disturbing vasomotor symptoms over time, time entering the study and the compliance to the surveys. In the two groups having most follow-up times, the proportion of women with bothersome symptoms first increased and then decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a notable variability in the development of disturbing vasomotor symptoms over time in a selected group of women aged 50-59. Population-based follow-up studies of untreated women would be useful to estimate the symptom burden.

Long term hormone therapy for perimenopausal and postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

Hormone therapy (HT) is widely used for controlling menopausal symptoms and has also been used for the management and prevention of cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis and dementia in older women. This is an updated version of a Cochrane review first published in 2005.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of long term HT on mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, cancer, gallbladder disease, fractures, cognition and quality of life in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women, both during HT use and after cessation of HT use.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases to February 2012: Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised double-blind studies of HT versus placebo, taken for at least one year by perimenopausal or postmenopausal women. HT included oestrogens, with or without progestogens, via oral, transdermal, subcutaneous or intranasal routes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios (RRS) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Where findings were statistically significant, we calculated the absolute risk (AR) in the intervention group (the overall risk of an event in women taking HT).

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-three studies involving 42,830 women were included. Seventy per cent of the data were derived from two studies (WHI 1998 and HERS 1998). Most participants were postmenopausal American women with at least some degree of co-morbidity, and the mean participant age in most studies was over 60 years. None of the studies focused on perimenopausal women. In relatively healthy postmenopausal women (that is generally fit, without overt disease) combined continuous HT significantly increased the risk of a coronary event (after one year's use: AR 4 per 1000, 95% CI 3 to 7), venous thrombo-embolism (after one year's use: AR 7 per 1000, 95% CI 4 to 11), stroke (after three years' use: AR 18 per 1000, 95% CI 14 to 23), breast cancer (after 5.6 years' use: AR 23 per 1000, 95% CI 19 to 29), gallbladder disease (after 5.6 years' use: AR 27 per 1000, 95% CI 21 to 34) and death from lung cancer (after 5.6 years' use plus 2.4 years' additional follow-up: AR 9 per 1000, 95% CI 6 to 13). Oestrogen-only HT significantly increased the risk of venous thrombo-embolism (after one to two years' use: AR 5 per 1000, 95% CI 2 to 10; after 7 years' use: AR 21 per 1000, 95% CI 16 to 28), stroke (after 7 years' use: AR 32 per 1000, 95% CI 25 to 40) and gallbladder disease (after seven years' use: AR 45 per 1000, 95% CI 36 to 57) but did not significantly increase the risk of breast cancer. Among women aged over 65 years who were relatively healthy and taking continuous combined HT, there was a statistically significant increase in the incidence of dementia (after 4 years' use: AR 18 per 1000, 95% CI 11 to 30). Among women with cardiovascular disease, long term use of combined continuous HT significantly increased the risk of venous thrombo-embolism (at one year: AR 9 per 1000, 95% CI 3 to 29). Women taking HT had a significantly decreased incidence of fractures with long term use (after 5.6 years of combined HT: AR 86 per 1000, 95% CI 79 to 84; after 7.1 years' use of oestrogen-only HT: AR 102 per 1000, 95% CI 91 to 112). Risk of fracture was the only outcome for which there was strong evidence of clinical benefit from HT. There was no strong evidence that HT has a clinically meaningful impact on the incidence of colorectal cancer.One trial analysed subgroups of 2839 relatively healthy 50 to 59 year old women taking combined continuous HT and 1637 taking oestrogen-only HT versus similar-sized placebo groups. The only significantly increased risk reported was for venous thrombo-embolism in women taking combined continuous HT: their absolute risk remained low, at less than 1/500. However, other differences in risk cannot be excluded as this study was not designed to have the power to detect differences between groups of women within 10 years of the menopause.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

HT is not indicated for primary or secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease or dementia, nor for preventing deterioration of cognitive function in postmenopausal women. Although HT is considered effective for the prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis, it is generally recommended as an option only for women at significant risk, for whom non-oestrogen therapies are unsuitable. There are insufficient data to assess the risk of long term HT use in perimenopausal women or postmenopausal women younger than 50 years of age.

Randomised health services studies

The randomised controlled (or clinical) trial (RCT) is recognized as the most valid among the study designs. The use of RCT in research is widespread and well formalised. In contrast, implementations of new methods and policies in routine health care are commonly lacking a formalised design, impairing the ability to evaluate and improve health care. Use of experimental designs in health care is possible at the implementation phase of clinical or preventive action or more broad process-of-care. We propose the terminology randomised health services studies (RHS) to denote the use of a randomised design with observations in routine health care, regardless of whether randomisation is done at individual, population or process level. In contrast to RCT, the RHS should be based on the same regulative actions, funding mechanisms and ethical framework as routine health care itself. This commentary discusses the different basis, practicalities, and formalities that distinguish the RHS from the RCT. Development of a formalised framework for RHS, including distinct registration, could contribute to an increased use of valid methods in effectiveness research, thus gaining better and more direct evidence on routine medical practice.

Results from a blind and a non-blind randomised trial run in parallel: experience from the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial

BACKGROUND

The Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial assigned 4170 potential participants prior to recruitment to blind or non-blind hormone therapy (HT), with placebo or non-treatment the respective alternatives. Before having to decide on participation, women were told whether they had been randomised to the blind or non-blind trial. Eligible women who were still willing to join the trial were recruited. After recruitment participants in the non-blind trial (N = 1001) received open-label HT or no treatment, participants in the blind trial (N = 777) remained blinded until the end of the trial. The aim of this paper is to analyse the effect of blinding on internal and external validity of trial outcomes.

METHODS

Effect of blinding was calculated as the hazard ratio of selected chronic diseases, total mortality and all outcomes. For analysing the effect of blinding on external validity, the hazard ratios from women recruited to the placebo arm and to the non-treatment arm were compared with those not recruited; for analysing the effect of blinding on internal validity, the hazard ratios from the blind trial were compared with those from the non-blind trial.

RESULTS

The women recruited to the placebo arm had less cerebrovascular disease events (HR 0.43; 95% CI: 0.26-0.71) and all outcomes combined (HR 0.76; 95% CI: 0.63-0.91) than those who were not recruited. Among women recruited or not recruited to the non-treatment arm, no differences were observed for any of the outcomes studied.Among women recruited to the trial, the risk for coronary heart disease events (HR 0.77; 95% CI: 0.64-0.93), cerebrovascular disease events (HR 0.66; 95%CI: 0.47-0.92), and all outcomes combined (HR 0.82; 95% CI: 0.72-0.94) was smaller among participants in the blind trial than in the non-blind trial. There was no difference between the blind and the non-blind trial for total cancer (HR 0.95; 95% CI: 0.64-1.42), bone fractures (0.93; 95% CI: 0.74-1.16), and total mortality (HR 1.03; 95% CI: 0.53-1.98).

CONCLUSIONS

The results from blind and non-blind trials may differ, even if the target population is the same. Blinding may influence both internal and external validity. The effect of blinding may vary for different outcome events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

[ISRCTN35338757].

The effect of hormone therapy on women's quality of life in the first year of the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy trial

BACKGROUND

For postmenopausal women, the main reason to start hormone therapy (HT) is to reduce menopausal symptoms and to improve quality of life (QOL). The aim of this study was to analyse the impact of HT on different aspects of symptom experience and QOL during a randomised trial. A total of 1823 postmenopausal women were recruited into the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) trial in 1999-2001. Women were randomised to blind HT, open-label HT, placebo or non-treatment arm. After one year in the trial, a questionnaire was mailed and 1359 women (75%) responded, 686 in the HT arms and 673 in the non-HT arms. Mean age at filling in the questionnaire was 59.8 years. The questionnaire included Women's Health Questionnaire (WHQ) to assess menopause specific QOL of middle-aged women together with a 17-item questionnaire on symptoms related to menopause, a question about painful intercourse, and a question about women's self-rated health.

RESULTS

After one year in the trial, fewer women in the HT arms reported hot flashes, trouble sleeping, and sweating on the symptom questionnaire. According to WHQ, women in the HT arms had fewer vasomotor symptoms, sleep problems, and problems with sexual behaviour, but more menstrual symptoms; HT had no effect on depression, somatic symptoms, memory, attractiveness, or anxiety. A smaller proportion of women reported painful intercourse in the HT arms. There were no significant differences between the trial arms in women's self-rated subjective health.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from the EPHT trial confirm that HT is not justified for treating symptoms, other than vasomotor symptoms, among postmenopausal women. WHQ proved to be a useful and sensitive tool to assess QOL in this age group of women.

Hormone therapy and stroke: is it all about timing?

Although women have a lower incidence of stroke than men in most age groups, women have an overall increased lifetime risk of stroke. Women also have unique risk factors for stroke, including the menopausal transition, the existence of debilitating vasomotor symptoms for some women, and the issues related to hormonal treatment for those symptoms. Although the initial studies of hormone therapy (HT) use in postmenopausal women suggested significant protection against heart disease, there was no obvious protection against stroke. Randomized trials of HT for secondary prevention showed a lack of benefit for both heart disease and stroke, and the suggestion of some early risk after initiation. However, the Women's Health Initiative (WHI), a primary prevention study of the impact of HT on women aged 50 to 79 years, showed an increased risk of stroke, whether the HT was estrogen alone or estrogen combined with progestin. Therefore, HT is not recommended for stroke prevention, and it appears to cause harm. The reason for this increased stroke risk is not understood, but some have suggested that the initiation of HT closest to the time of menopausal transition should decrease the risk. Although there was a lower risk of heart disease when HT was initiated earlier, the risk appeared to be the same for stroke regardless of the timing. This was shown in both the WHI and the Nurses' Health Study cohorts. Therefore, more research is needed to understand the mechanisms for the increased stroke risk and to identify those who may be at risk because of HT for vasomotor symptoms, atrophic vaginitis, or osteoporosis, the three remaining indications for HT use in women. Trials are under way to assess the intermediate outcomes of HT on subclinical vascular disease in perimenopausal/early postmenopausal women.

Guidelines for the primary prevention of stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

This guideline provides an overview of the evidence on established and emerging risk factors for stroke to provide evidence-based recommendations for the reduction of risk of a first stroke.

METHODS

Writing group members were nominated by the committee chair on the basis of their previous work in relevant topic areas and were approved by the American Heart Association (AHA) Stroke Council Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and the AHA Manuscript Oversight Committee. The writing group used systematic literature reviews (covering the time since the last review was published in 2006 up to April 2009), reference to previously published guidelines, personal files, and expert opinion to summarize existing evidence, indicate gaps in current knowledge, and when appropriate, formulate recommendations using standard AHA criteria (Tables 1 and 2). All members of the writing group had the opportunity to comment on the recommendations and approved the final version of this document. The guideline underwent extensive peer review by the Stroke Council leadership and the AHA scientific statements oversight committees before consideration and approval by the AHA Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee.

RESULTS

Schemes for assessing a person's risk of a first stroke were evaluated. Risk factors or risk markers for a first stroke were classified according to potential for modification (nonmodifiable, modifiable, or potentially modifiable) and strength of evidence (well documented or less well documented). Nonmodifiable risk factors include age, sex, low birth weight, race/ethnicity, and genetic predisposition. Well-documented and modifiable risk factors include hypertension, exposure to cigarette smoke, diabetes, atrial fibrillation and certain other cardiac conditions, dyslipidemia, carotid artery stenosis, sickle cell disease, postmenopausal hormone therapy, poor diet, physical inactivity, and obesity and body fat distribution. Less well-documented or potentially modifiable risk factors include the metabolic syndrome, excessive alcohol consumption, drug abuse, use of oral contraceptives, sleep-disordered breathing, migraine, hyperhomocysteinemia, elevated lipoprotein(a), hypercoagulability, inflammation, and infection. Data on the use of aspirin for primary stroke prevention are reviewed.

CONCLUSIONS

Extensive evidence identifies a variety of specific factors that increase the risk of a first stroke and that provide strategies for reducing that risk.

The effects of postmenopausal hormone therapy on social activity, partner relationship, and sexual life - experience from the EPHT trial

BACKGROUND

With the exception of sexual functioning and weight, social and behavioural effects of postmenopausal hormone therapy (HT) have not been reported from trials. This paper reports such results from the EPHT-trial in Estonia.

METHODS

A randomized trial, with a blind and non-blind sub-trial in Estonia. From 1999-2001, 1778 women were recruited. The mean follow-up was 3.6 years. Women's experiences were asked in the first and final study year by mailed questionnaires (74 and 81% response rates). Comparisons of the groups were made by cross-tabulation and logistic regression, adjusting for age.

RESULTS

There were no differences between the HT and non-HT groups in regard to being employed, the extent of social involvement or marital status or opinions on aging. There was no difference in the frequency of free-time exercise, or overweight. Some of the indicators suggested less sexual inactivity, but the differences were small.

CONCLUSION

In a trial setting, postmenopausal hormone therapy did not influence work or social involvement or health behaviour.

Long term hormone therapy for perimenopausal and postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

Hormone therapy (HT) is widely used for controlling menopausal symptoms and has also been used for the management and prevention of cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis and dementia in older women. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review first published in 2005.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of long-term HT on mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, cancer, gallbladder disease, cognition, fractures and quality of life.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the following databases to November 2007: Trials Register of the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Biological Abstracts. Also relevant non-indexed journals and conference abstracts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised double-blind trials of HT versus placebo, taken for at least one year by perimenopausal or postmenopausal women. HT included oestrogens, with or without progestogens, via oral, transdermal, subcutaneous or transnasal routes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Nineteen trials involving 41,904 women were included. In relatively healthy women, combined continuous HT significantly increased the risk of venous thrombo-embolism or coronary event (after one year's use), stroke (after three years), breast cancer and gallbladder disease. Long-term oestrogen-only HT significantly increased the risk of venous thrombo-embolism, stroke and gallbladder disease (after one to two years, three years and seven years' use respectively), but did not significantly increase the risk of breast cancer. The only statistically significant benefits of HT were a decreased incidence of fractures and (for combined HT) colon cancer, with long-term use. Among women aged over 65 who were relatively healthy (i.e. generally fit, without overt disease) and taking continuous combined HT, there was a statistically significant increase in the incidence of dementia. Among women with cardiovascular disease, long-term use of combined continuous HT significantly increased the risk of venous thrombo-embolism.One trial analysed subgroups of 2839 relatively healthy 50 to 59 year old women taking combined continuous HT and 1637 taking oestrogen-only HT, versus similar-sized placebo groups. The only significantly increased risk reported was for venous thrombo-embolism in women taking combined continuous HT: their absolute risk remained low, at less than 1/500. However, this study was not powered to detect differences between groups of younger women.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

HT is not indicated for the routine management of chronic disease. We need more evidence on the safety of HT for menopausal symptom control, though short-term use appears to be relatively safe for healthy younger women.

Experiences of a long-term randomized controlled prevention trial in a maiden environment: Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy trial

Background

Preventive drugs require long-term trials to show their effectiveness or harms and often a lot of changes occur during post-marketing studies. The purpose of this article is to describe the research process in a long-term randomized controlled trial and discuss the impact and consequences of changes in the research environment.

Methods

The Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy trial (EPHT), originally planned to continue for five years, was planned in co-operation with the Women's International Study of Long-Duration Oestrogen after Menopause (WISDOM) in the UK. In addition to health outcomes, EPHT was specifically designed to study the impact of postmenopausal hormone therapy (HT) on health services utilization.

Results

After EPHT recruited in 1999–2001 the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) in the USA decided to stop the estrogen-progestin trial after a mean of 5.2 years in July 2002 because of increased risk of breast cancer and later in 2004 the estrogen-only trial because HT increased the risk of stroke, decreased the risk of hip fracture, and did not affect coronary heart disease incidence. WISDOM was halted in autumn 2002. These decisions had a major influence on EPHT.

Conclusion

Changes in Estonian society challenged EPHT to find a balance between the needs of achieving responses to the trial aims with a limited budget and simultaneously maintaining the safety of trial participants. Flexibility was the main key for success. Rapid changes are not limited only to transiting societies but are true also in developed countries and the risk must be included in planning all long-term trials.

The role of ethical and data monitoring committees in situations with emerging new data from other studies needs specification. Longer funding for preventive trials and more flexibility in budgeting are mandatory. Who should prove the effectiveness of an (old) drug for a new preventive indication? In preventive drug trials companies may donate drugs but they take a financial risk, especially with licensed drugs. Public funding is crucial to avoid commercial biases. Legislation to share the costs of large post-marketing trials as well as regulation of manufacturer's participation is needed. [ISRCTN35338757]

Symptom reporting and quality of life in the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy Trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to determine the effect of postmenopausal hormone therapy on women's symptom reporting and quality of life in a randomized trial.

METHODS

1823 women participated in the Estonian Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy (EPHT) Trial between 1999 and 2004. Women were randomized to open-label continuous combined hormone therapy or no treatment, or to blind hormone therapy or placebo. The average follow-up period was 3.6 years. Prevalence of symptoms and quality of life according to EQ-5D were assessed by annually mailed questionnaires.

RESULTS

In the hormone therapy arms, less women reported hot flushes (OR 0.20; 95% CI: 0.14-0.28), sweating (OR 0.56; 95% CI: 0.44-0.72), and sleeping problems (OR 0.66; 95% CI: 0.52-0.84), but more women reported episodes of vaginal bleeding (OR 19.65; 95% CI: 12.15-31.79). There was no difference between the trial arms in the prevalence of other symptoms over time. Quality of life did not depend on hormone therapy use.

CONCLUSION

Postmenopausal hormone therapy decreased vasomotor symptoms and sleeping problems, but increased episodes of vaginal bleeding, and had no effect on quality of life.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN35338757.

Muscular transcriptome in postmenopausal women with or without hormone replacement

The loss of muscle mass and strength with aging is well characterized, but our knowledge of the molecular mechanisms underlying the development of sarcopenia remains incomplete. Although menopause is often accompanied with first signs of age-associated changes in muscle structure and function, the effects of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) or menopause-related decline in estrogen production in the muscles of postmenopausal women is not well understood. Furthermore the knowledge of the global transcriptional changes that take place in skeletal muscle in relation to estrogen status has thus far been completely lacking. We used a randomized double-blinded study design together with an explorative microarray experiment to characterize possible effects of continuous, combined HRT and estrogen deprivation on the skeletal muscle of fifteen women. Here, we report the differential response of both Gene Ontology-annotated biological processes and some individual genes responding differentially to the use or non-use of HRT. Our results revealed transcription level changes in, for example, muscle protein and energy metabolism. In particular, the ubiquitine-proteosome system was found to be effected at several levels. HRT seemed to partially counteract the postmenopause-related transcriptional changes. Our results suggest that during the early postmenopausal years, when there is no counteracting medication available, muscle transcriptome changes notably, whereas HRT appears to slow down this phenomenon and could therefore aid in maintaining proper muscle mass and function after menopause.

Issues concerning the use of hormone replacement therapy and risk of fracture: a population-based, nested case-control study

AIMS

To investigate the effect of duration, how recently it has been used, and age at start of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and the risk of bone fracture.

METHODS

A population-based, nested case-control study was conducted in Lombardia, Northern Italy. The 78,294 women aged 45-75 years who received at least one HRT prescription during 1998-2000 were followed until 2005. Cases were women who experienced bone fracture during follow-up. Up to six controls were randomly selected for each case from the cohort after matching for age and date of cohort entry. The odds ratio of fracture associated with the use of HRT was estimated by conditional logistic regression.

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred and seventy-four cases and 6760 controls were included. Compared with women who took HRT for less than 2 months, those who were treated for more than 20 months had an odds ratio (OR) of 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.65, 0.99). This risk reduction was still significant among current HRT users (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.55, 0.90) and in women who began therapy at the age of 55-65 years (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42, 0.94) or 65-75 years (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32, 0.99). There was no statistical evidence of a protective effect for women who had stopped treatment more than 6 months previously or those who began HRT at the age of 45-55 years.

CONCLUSIONS

HRT should be continued for long periods to achieve an optimal protection from fracture. The fracture reducing potential of HRT seems to disappear after a few months without treatment and might mainly act in women who begin therapy at older age.

Main morbidities recorded in the women's international study of long duration oestrogen after menopause (WISDOM): a randomised controlled trial of hormone replacement therapy in postmenopausal women

OBJECTIVE

To assess the long term risks and benefits of hormone replacement therapy (combined hormone therapy versus placebo, and oestrogen alone versus combined hormone therapy).

DESIGN

Multicentre, randomised, placebo controlled, double blind trial.

SETTING

General practices in UK (384), Australia (91), and New Zealand (24).

PARTICIPANTS

Postmenopausal women aged 50-69 years at randomisation. At early closure of the trial, 56,583 had been screened, 8980 entered run-in, and 5692 (26% of target of 22,300) started treatment.

INTERVENTIONS

Oestrogen only therapy (conjugated equine oestrogens 0.625 mg orally daily) or combined hormone therapy (conjugated equine oestrogens plus medroxyprogesterone acetate 2.5/5.0 mg orally daily). Ten years of treatment planned.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

major cardiovascular disease, osteoporotic fractures, and breast cancer.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

other cancers, death from all causes, venous thromboembolism, cerebrovascular disease, dementia, and quality of life.

RESULTS

The trial was prematurely closed during recruitment, after a median follow-up of 11.9 months (interquartile range 7.1-19.6, total 6498 women years) in those enrolled, after the publication of early results from the women's health initiative study. The mean age of randomised women was 62.8 (SD 4.8) years. When combined hormone therapy (n=2196) was compared with placebo (n=2189), there was a significant increase in the number of major cardiovascular events (7 v 0, P=0.016) and venous thromboembolisms (22 v 3, hazard ratio 7.36 (95% CI 2.20 to 24.60)). There were no statistically significant differences in numbers of breast or other cancers (22 v 25, hazard ratio 0.88 (0.49 to 1.56)), cerebrovascular events (14 v 19, 0.73 (0.37 to 1.46)), fractures (40 v 58, 0.69 (0.46 to 1.03)), and overall deaths (8 v 5, 1.60 (0.52 to 4.89)). Comparison of combined hormone therapy (n=815) versus oestrogen therapy (n=826) outcomes revealed no significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Hormone replacement therapy increases cardiovascular and thromboembolic risk when started many years after the menopause. The results are consistent with the findings of the women's health initiative study and secondary prevention studies. Research is needed to assess the long term risks and benefits of starting hormone replacement therapy near the menopause, when the effect may be different.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 63718836.

Do Finnish women using hormone replacement therapy need more information about risks

OBJECTIVE

In 1998, the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) in 2002 and the Million Women Study (MWS) in 2003 have shown a need for re-evaluation of the benefits and adverse reactions of hormone replacement therapy (HRT). Consequently the authorities in Europe and USA have issued new recommendations against the use of HRT. The aim of this study was to examine women's perceptions of HRT since the publication of the Women's Health Initiative study and the Million Women Study, and the kind of sources women use to obtain information about HRT.

METHOD

The data was collected with questionnaire survey in the autumn 2003 among 315 women using HRT.

RESULTS

One third of the respondents (35%) had experienced fears concerning HRT use, and more than half (52%) reported that the debate in the media had markedly influenced them; they have experienced fears or worries, considered discontinuation or discussed with the physician. Whereas the most common source of information concerning the benefits of HRT was the physician (74%), the most common source of information concerning the risks of HRT was the media (78%).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that women using HRT should get more information about the risks from health care professionals. Physicians and pharmacists have an opportunity to alleviate fears and to help women to critically evaluate the information they get from the media. Such discussions are also important to women who have been using HRT for years.

Long term hormone therapy for perimenopausal and postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

Hormone therapy (HT) is widely used for controlling menopausal symptoms. It has also been used for the management and prevention of cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis and dementia in older women but the evidence supporting its use for these indications is largely observational.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of long-term HT on mortality, heart disease, venous thromboembolism, stroke, transient ischaemic attacks, breast cancer, colorectal cancer, ovarian cancer, endometrial cancer, gallbladder disease, cognitive function, dementia, fractures and quality of life.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the following databases up to November 2004: the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Biological Abstracts. Relevant non-indexed journals and conference abstracts were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised double-blind trials of HT (oestrogens with or without progestogens) versus placebo, taken for at least one year by perimenopausal or postmenopausal women.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Fifteen RCTs were included. Trials were assessed for quality and two review authors extracted data independently. They calculated risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes. Clinical heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis for most outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

All the statistically significant results were derived from the two biggest trials. In relatively healthy women, combined continuous HT significantly increased the risk of venous thromboembolism or coronary event (after one year's use), stroke (after 3 years), breast cancer (after 5 years) and gallbladder disease. Long-term oestrogen-only HT also significantly increased the risk of stroke and gallbladder disease. Overall, the only statistically significant benefits of HT were a decreased incidence of fractures and colon cancer with long-term use. Among relatively healthy women over 65 years taking continuous combined HT, there was a statistically significant increase in the incidence of dementia. Among women with cardiovascular disease, long-term use of combined continuous HT significantly increased the risk of venous thromboembolism. No trials focussed specifically on younger women. However, one trial analysed subgroups of 2839 relatively healthy 50 to 59 year-old women taking combined continuous HT and 1637 taking oestrogen-only HT, versus similar-sized placebo groups. The only significantly increased risk reported was for venous thromboembolism in women taking combined continuous HT; their absolute risk remained very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

HT is not indicated for the routine management of chronic disease. We need more evidence on the safety of HT for menopausal symptom control, though short-term use appears to be relatively safe for healthy younger women.