scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Jacques E. Rossouw

Bio: Jacques E. Rossouw is an academic researcher from National Institutes of Health. The author has contributed to research in topics: Women's Health Initiative & Randomized controlled trial. The author has an hindex of 8, co-authored 13 publications receiving 5159 citations. Previous affiliations of Jacques E. Rossouw include Memorial Hospital of Rhode Island & Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Garnet L. Anderson1, S. Cummings1, L. S. Freedman1, C. Furberg1, Maureen M. Henderson1, Susan R. Johnson1, L. Kuller1, JoAnn E. Manson1, A. Oberman1, Ross L. Prentice1, Jacques E. Rossouw1, L. Finnegan1, R. Hiatt1, L. Pottern1, J. McGowan1, C. Clifford1, B. Caan1, V. Kipnis1, B. Ettinger1, S. Sidney1, G. Bailey1, Andrea Z. LaCroix1, Anne McTiernan1, Deborah J. Bowen1, C. Chen1, Barbara B. Cochrane1, Julie R. Hunt1, Alan R. Kristal1, Brian J. Lund1, Ruth E. Patterson1, Jeffrey L. Probstfield1, Lesley F. Tinker1, Nicole Urban1, Ching Yun Wang1, Emily White1, J. M. Kotchen1, S. Shumaker1, P. Rautaharju1, F. Rautaharju1, E. Stein1, P. Laskarzewski1, P. Steiner1, K. Sagar1, M. Nevitt1, M. Dockrell1, T. Fuerst1, John H. Himes1, M. Stevens1, F. Cammarata1, S. Lindenfelser1, Bruce M. Psaty1, D. Siscovick1, W. Longstreth1, S. Heckbert1, S. Wassertheil-Smoller1, W. Frishman1, Judy Wylie-Rosett1, D. Barad1, R. Freeman1, S. Miller1, Jennifer Hays1, R. Young1, C. Crowley1, M. A. DePoe1, G. Burke1, E. Paskett1, L. Wagenknecht1, R. Crouse1, L. Parsons1, T. Kotchen1, E. Braunwald1, J. Buring1, C. Hennekens1, J. M. Gaziano1, Annlouise R. Assaf1, R. C. Carleton1, M. Miller1, C. Wheeler1, A. Hume1, M. Pedersen1, O. Strickland1, M. Huber1, V. Porter1, Shirley A.A. Beresford1, V. Taylor1, N. Woods1, J. Hsia1, V. Barnabei1, M. Bovun1, Rowan T. Chlebowski1, R. Detrano1, A. Nelson1, J. Heiner1, S. Pushkin1, B. Valanis1, V. Stevens1, E. Whitlock1, N. Karanja1, A. Clark1 
TL;DR: The rationale for the interventions being studied in each of the CT components and for the inclusion of the OS component is described, including a brief description of the scientific and logistic complexity of the WHI.

2,310 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
04 Apr 2007-JAMA
TL;DR: Whether the effects of hormone therapy on risk of cardiovascular disease vary by age or years since menopause began is explored to explore and women who initiated hormone therapy closer toMenopause tended to have reduced CHD risk compared with the increase inCHD risk among women more distant from menopausal symptoms.
Abstract: ContextThe timing of initiation of hormone therapy may influence its effect on cardiovascular disease.ObjectiveTo explore whether the effects of hormone therapy on risk of cardiovascular disease vary by age or years since menopause began.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsSecondary analysis of the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) randomized controlled trials of hormone therapy in which 10 739 postmenopausal women who had undergone a hysterectomy were randomized to conjugated equine estrogens (CEE) or placebo and 16 608 postmenopausal women who had not had a hysterectomy were randomized to CEE plus medroxyprogesterone acetate (CEE + MPA) or placebo. Women aged 50 to 79 years were recruited to the study from 40 US clinical centers between September 1993 and October 1998.Main Outcome MeasuresStatistical test for trend of the effect of hormone therapy on coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke across categories of age and years since menopause in the combined trials.ResultsIn the combined trials, there were 396 cases of CHD and 327 cases of stroke in the hormone therapy group vs 379 cases of CHD and 239 cases of stroke in the placebo group. For women with less than 10 years since menopause began, the hazard ratio (HR) for CHD was 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-1.16); 10 to 19 years, 1.10 (95% CI, 0.84-1.45); and 20 or more years, 1.28 (95% CI, 1.03-1.58) (P for trend = .02). The estimated absolute excess risk for CHD for women within 10 years of menopause was −6 per 10 000 person-years; for women 10 to 19 years since menopause began, 4 per 10 000 person-years; and for women 20 or more years from menopause onset, 17 per 10 000 person-years. For the age group of 50 to 59 years, the HR for CHD was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.65-1.33) and the absolute excess risk was −2 per 10 000 person-years; 60 to 69 years, 0.98 (95% CI, 0.79-1.21) and −1 per 10 000 person-years; and 70 to 79 years, 1.26 (95% CI, 1.00-1.59) and 19 per 10 000 person-years (P for trend = .16). Hormone therapy increased the risk of stroke (HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.12-1.56). Risk did not vary significantly by age or time since menopause. There was a nonsignificant tendency for the effects of hormone therapy on total mortality to be more favorable in younger than older women (HR of 0.70 for 50-59 years; 1.05 for 60-69 years, and 1.14 for 70-79 years; P for trend = .06).ConclusionsWomen who initiated hormone therapy closer to menopause tended to have reduced CHD risk compared with the increase in CHD risk among women more distant from menopause, but this trend test did not meet our criterion for statistical significance. A similar nonsignificant trend was observed for total mortality but the risk of stroke was elevated regardless of years since menopause. These data should be considered in regard to the short-term treatment of menopausal symptoms.Trial Registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000611

1,571 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
08 Feb 2006-JAMA
TL;DR: Among postmenopausal women, a low-fat dietary pattern did not result in a statistically significant reduction in invasive breast cancer risk over an 8.1-year average follow-up period, and the nonsignificant trends observed indicate that longer, planned, nonintervention follow- up may yield a more definitive comparison.
Abstract: ContextThe hypothesis that a low-fat dietary pattern can reduce breast cancer risk has existed for decades but has never been tested in a controlled intervention trial.ObjectiveTo assess the effects of undertaking a low-fat dietary pattern on breast cancer incidence.Design and SettingA randomized, controlled, primary prevention trial conducted at 40 US clinical centers from 1993 to 2005.ParticipantsA total of 48 835 postmenopausal women, aged 50 to 79 years, without prior breast cancer, including 18.6% of minority race/ethnicity, were enrolled.InterventionsWomen were randomly assigned to the dietary modification intervention group (40% [n = 19 541]) or the comparison group (60% [n = 29 294]). The intervention was designed to promote dietary change with the goals of reducing intake of total fat to 20% of energy and increasing consumption of vegetables and fruit to at least 5 servings daily and grains to at least 6 servings daily. Comparison group participants were not asked to make dietary changes.Main Outcome MeasureInvasive breast cancer incidence.ResultsDietary fat intake was significantly lower in the dietary modification intervention group compared with the comparison group. The difference between groups in change from baseline for percentage of energy from fat varied from 10.7% at year 1 to 8.1% at year 6. Vegetable and fruit consumption was higher in the intervention group by at least 1 serving per day and a smaller, more transient difference was found for grain consumption. The number of women who developed invasive breast cancer (annualized incidence rate) over the 8.1-year average follow-up period was 655 (0.42%) in the intervention group and 1072 (0.45%) in the comparison group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-1.01 for the comparison between the 2 groups). Secondary analyses suggest a lower hazard ratio among adherent women, provide greater evidence of risk reduction among women having a high-fat diet at baseline, and suggest a dietary effect that varies by hormone receptor characteristics of the tumor.ConclusionsAmong postmenopausal women, a low-fat dietary pattern did not result in a statistically significant reduction in invasive breast cancer risk over an 8.1-year average follow-up period. However, the nonsignificant trends observed suggesting reduced risk associated with a low-fat dietary pattern indicate that longer, planned, nonintervention follow-up may yield a more definitive comparison.Clinical Trials RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000611

740 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
05 Mar 2008-JAMA
TL;DR: The Women's Health Initiative trial of estrogen plus progestin vs placebo was stopped early, because the overall health risks of hormone therapy exceeded its benefits, indicating that the risks of CEE plus MPA exceed the benefits for chronic disease prevention.
Abstract: Context The Women's Health Initiative (WHI) trial of estrogen plus progestin vs placebo was stopped early, after a mean 5.6 years of follow-up, because the overall health risks of hormone therapy exceeded its benefits. Objective To report health outcomes at 3 years (mean 2.4 years of follow-up) after the intervention was stopped. Design, Setting, and Participants The intervention phase was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of conjugated equine estrogens (CEE) 0.625 mg daily plus medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) 2.5 mg daily, in 16 608 women aged 50 through 79 years, recruited by 40 centers from 1993 to 1998. The postintervention phase commenced July 8, 2002, and included 15 730 women. Main Outcome Measures Semi-annual monitoring and outcomes ascertainment continued per trial protocol. The primary end points were coronary heart disease and invasive breast cancer. A global index summarizing the balance of risks and benefits included the 2 primary end points plus stroke, pulmonary embolism, endometrial cancer, colorectal cancer, hip fracture, and death due to other causes. Results The risk of cardiovascular events after the intervention was comparable by initial randomized assignments, 1.97% (annualized rate) in the CEE plus MPA (343 events) and 1.91% in the placebo group (323 events). A greater risk of malignancies occurred in the CEE plus MPA than in the placebo group (1.56% [n = 281] vs 1.26% [n = 218]; hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.48). More breast cancers were diagnosed in women who had been randomly assigned to receive CEE plus MPA vs placebo (0.42% [n = 79] vs 0.33% [n = 60]; HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.91-1.78) with a modest trend toward a lower HR during the follow-up after the intervention. All-cause mortality was somewhat higher in the CEE plus MPA than in the placebo group (1.20% [n = 233] vs 1.06% [n = 196]; HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.95-1.39). The global index of risks and benefits was unchanged from randomization through March 31, 2005 (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.03-1.21), indicating that the risks of CEE plus MPA exceed the benefits for chronic disease prevention. Conclusions The increased cardiovascular risks in the women assigned to CEE plus MPA during the intervention period were not observed after the intervention. A greater risk of fatal and nonfatal malignancies occurred after the intervention in the CEE plus MPA group and the global risk index was 12% higher in women randomly assigned to receive CEE plus MPA compared with placebo. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000611

366 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Among postmenopausal women, a low-fat dietary pattern did not result in a statistically significant reduction in invasive breast cancer risk over an 8.1-year average follow-up period, and the nonsignificant trends observed indicate that longer, planned, nonintervention follow- up may yield a more definitive comparison.
Abstract: Despite a longstanding belief that a low-fat diet can reduce the risk of breast cancer, no controlled intervention trials have been reported. This randomized, controlled, primary prevention trial, based on the Women's Health Initiative cohort, enrolled 48,835 postmenopausal women 50 to 79 years of age at 40 U.S. clinical centers in the years 1993-2005. Forty percent of participants received a diet designed to lower the intake of total fat to 20% of energy, provide at least 5 servings daily of fruit and vegetables, and include at least 6 daily servings of grains. There was no explicit weight loss goal. The remaining 60% of women continued on their usual diets. The intervention group took part in an intensive behavioral modification program administered by a specially trained nutritionist. Participants received an individualized goal of total fat grams based on height and were trained to monitor their dietary intake. The comparison women were given informational materials, including dietary guidelines. At baseline, dietary and other variables, including body weight, were nearly identical in the intervention and control groups. Women in the diet group had a small decrease in energy consumption. The difference between groups in change from baseline in the percentage of energy from fat ranged from 10.7% after 12 months to 8.1% at year 6. The intervention group ate more fruits and vegetables, but there was less difference in grain consumption. The annualized incidence rate of invasive breast cancer during an average follow up of 8.1 years was 0.42% in the intervention group and 0.45% in the comparison group. The hazard ratio was 0.91% with a 95% confidence interval of 0.83 to 1.01. Rates of total cancer (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer), breast cancer mortality, and total mortality all were slightly lower for the intervention group, but the differences were not significant at the 0.05 level. Women who actively participated in the dietary intervention program and those consuming a high-fat diet at baseline had lower hazard ratios. The breast cancer risk also was lower in women with a relatively high baseline percentage of energy from fat. Tumor grade and size, lymph node status, and stage of breast cancers all were similar in the intervention and comparison groups. A lower hazard ratio was noted for progesterone receptor-negative tumors, but there was no apparent association with estrogen receptor status. A low-fat diet failed to lessen the risk of invasive breast cancer in this large trial of postmenopausal women during a follow up averaging approximately 8 years. Nevertheless, the trends observed, although not statistically significant, warrant longer-term studies. Any beneficial effects of reduced fat intake might take years to fully emerge.

344 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
17 Jul 2002-JAMA
TL;DR: Overall health risks exceeded benefits from use of combined estrogen plus progestin for an average 5.2-year follow-up among healthy postmenopausal US women, and the results indicate that this regimen should not be initiated or continued for primary prevention of CHD.
Abstract: Context Despite decades of accumulated observational evidence, the balance of risks and benefits for hormone use in healthy postmenopausal women remains uncertain Objective To assess the major health benefits and risks of the most commonly used combined hormone preparation in the United States Design Estrogen plus progestin component of the Women's Health Initiative, a randomized controlled primary prevention trial (planned duration, 85 years) in which 16608 postmenopausal women aged 50-79 years with an intact uterus at baseline were recruited by 40 US clinical centers in 1993-1998 Interventions Participants received conjugated equine estrogens, 0625 mg/d, plus medroxyprogesterone acetate, 25 mg/d, in 1 tablet (n = 8506) or placebo (n = 8102) Main outcomes measures The primary outcome was coronary heart disease (CHD) (nonfatal myocardial infarction and CHD death), with invasive breast cancer as the primary adverse outcome A global index summarizing the balance of risks and benefits included the 2 primary outcomes plus stroke, pulmonary embolism (PE), endometrial cancer, colorectal cancer, hip fracture, and death due to other causes Results On May 31, 2002, after a mean of 52 years of follow-up, the data and safety monitoring board recommended stopping the trial of estrogen plus progestin vs placebo because the test statistic for invasive breast cancer exceeded the stopping boundary for this adverse effect and the global index statistic supported risks exceeding benefits This report includes data on the major clinical outcomes through April 30, 2002 Estimated hazard ratios (HRs) (nominal 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) were as follows: CHD, 129 (102-163) with 286 cases; breast cancer, 126 (100-159) with 290 cases; stroke, 141 (107-185) with 212 cases; PE, 213 (139-325) with 101 cases; colorectal cancer, 063 (043-092) with 112 cases; endometrial cancer, 083 (047-147) with 47 cases; hip fracture, 066 (045-098) with 106 cases; and death due to other causes, 092 (074-114) with 331 cases Corresponding HRs (nominal 95% CIs) for composite outcomes were 122 (109-136) for total cardiovascular disease (arterial and venous disease), 103 (090-117) for total cancer, 076 (069-085) for combined fractures, 098 (082-118) for total mortality, and 115 (103-128) for the global index Absolute excess risks per 10 000 person-years attributable to estrogen plus progestin were 7 more CHD events, 8 more strokes, 8 more PEs, and 8 more invasive breast cancers, while absolute risk reductions per 10 000 person-years were 6 fewer colorectal cancers and 5 fewer hip fractures The absolute excess risk of events included in the global index was 19 per 10 000 person-years Conclusions Overall health risks exceeded benefits from use of combined estrogen plus progestin for an average 52-year follow-up among healthy postmenopausal US women All-cause mortality was not affected during the trial The risk-benefit profile found in this trial is not consistent with the requirements for a viable intervention for primary prevention of chronic diseases, and the results indicate that this regimen should not be initiated or continued for primary prevention of CHD

14,646 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
19 Aug 1998-JAMA
TL;DR: Treatment with oral conjugated equine estrogen plus medroxyprogesterone acetate did not reduce the overall rate of CHD events in postmenopausal women with established coronary disease and the treatment did increase the rate of thromboembolic events and gallbladder disease.
Abstract: Context.—Observational studies have found lower rates of coronary heart disease (CHD) in postmenopausal women who take estrogen than in women who do not, but this potential benefit has not been confirmed in clinical trials.Objective.—To determine if estrogen plus progestin therapy alters the risk for CHD events in postmenopausal women with established coronary disease.Design.—Randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled secondary prevention trial.Setting.—Outpatient and community settings at 20 US clinical centers.Participants.—A total of 2763 women with coronary disease, younger than 80 years, and postmenopausal with an intact uterus. Mean age was 66.7 years.Intervention.—Either 0.625 mg of conjugated equine estrogens plus 2.5 mg of medroxyprogesterone acetate in 1 tablet daily (n=1380) or a placebo of identical appearance (n=1383). Follow-up averaged 4.1 years; 82% of those assigned to hormone treatment were taking it at the end of 1 year, and 75% at the end of 3 years.Main Outcome Measures.—The primary outcome was the occurrence of nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) or CHD death. Secondary cardiovascular outcomes included coronary revascularization, unstable angina, congestive heart failure, resuscitated cardiac arrest, stroke or transient ischemic attack, and peripheral arterial disease. All-cause mortality was also considered.Results.—Overall, there were no significant differences between groups in the primary outcome or in any of the secondary cardiovascular outcomes: 172 women in the hormone group and 176 women in the placebo group had MI or CHD death (relative hazard [RH], 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80-1.22). The lack of an overall effect occurred despite a net 11% lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level and 10% higher high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level in the hormone group compared with the placebo group (each P<.001). Within the overall null effect, there was a statistically significant time trend, with more CHD events in the hormone group than in the placebo group in year 1 and fewer in years 4 and 5. More women in the hormone group than in the placebo group experienced venous thromboembolic events (34 vs 12; RH, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.50-5.58) and gallbladder disease (84 vs 62; RH, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.00-1.92). There were no significant differences in several other end points for which power was limited, including fracture, cancer, and total mortality (131 vs 123 deaths; RH, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.84-1.38).Conclusions.—During an average follow-up of 4.1 years, treatment with oral conjugated equine estrogen plus medroxyprogesterone acetate did not reduce the overall rate of CHD events in postmenopausal women with established coronary disease. The treatment did increase the rate of thromboembolic events and gallbladder disease. Based on the finding of no overall cardiovascular benefit and a pattern of early increase in risk of CHD events, we do not recommend starting this treatment for the purpose of secondary prevention of CHD. However, given the favorable pattern of CHD events after several years of therapy, it could be appropriate for women already receiving this treatment to continue.

5,991 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Food in the Anthropocene : the EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems focuses on meat, fish, vegetables and fruit as sources of protein.

4,710 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jan 2011-Stroke
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provided evidence-based recommendations for the prevention of future stroke among survivors of ischemic stroke or transient ischemi-chemic attack, including the control of risk factors, intervention for vascular obstruction, antithrombotic therapy for cardioembolism, and antiplatelet therapy for noncardioembolic stroke.
Abstract: The aim of this updated guideline is to provide comprehensive and timely evidence-based recommendations on the prevention of future stroke among survivors of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack. The guideline is addressed to all clinicians who manage secondary prevention for these patients. Evidence-based recommendations are provided for control of risk factors, intervention for vascular obstruction, antithrombotic therapy for cardioembolism, and antiplatelet therapy for noncardioembolic stroke. Recommendations are also provided for the prevention of recurrent stroke in a variety of specific circumstances, including aortic arch atherosclerosis, arterial dissection, patent foramen ovale, hyperhomocysteinemia, hypercoagulable states, antiphospholipid antibody syndrome, sickle cell disease, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, and pregnancy. Special sections address use of antithrombotic and anticoagulation therapy after an intracranial hemorrhage and implementation of guidelines.

4,545 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
14 Apr 2004-JAMA
TL;DR: The use of conjugated equine estrogen (CEE) increases the risk of stroke, decreases therisk of hip fracture, and does not affect CHD incidence in postmenopausal women with prior hysterectomy over an average of 6.8 years, indicating no overall benefit.
Abstract: Author(s): Anderson, Garnet L; Limacher, Marian; Assaf, Annlouise R; Bassford, Tamsen; Beresford, Shirley AA; Black, Henry; Bonds, Denise; Brunner, Robert; Brzyski, Robert; Caan, Bette; Chlebowski, Rowan; Curb, David; Gass, Margery; Hays, Jennifer; Heiss, Gerardo; Hendrix, Susan; Howard, Barbara V; Hsia, Judith; Hubbell, Allan; Jackson, Rebecca; Johnson, Karen C; Judd, Howard; Kotchen, Jane Morley; Kuller, Lewis; LaCroix, Andrea Z; Lane, Dorothy; Langer, Robert D; Lasser, Norman; Lewis, Cora E; Manson, JoAnn; Margolis, Karen; Ockene, Judith; O'Sullivan, Mary Jo; Phillips, Lawrence; Prentice, Ross L; Ritenbaugh, Cheryl; Robbins, John; Rossouw, Jacques E; Sarto, Gloria; Stefanick, Marcia L; Van Horn, Linda; Wactawski-Wende, Jean; Wallace, Robert; Wassertheil-Smoller, Sylvia; Women's Health Initiative Steering Committee | Abstract: Despite decades of use and considerable research, the role of estrogen alone in preventing chronic diseases in postmenopausal women remains uncertain.To assess the effects on major disease incidence rates of the most commonly used postmenopausal hormone therapy in the United States.A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled disease prevention trial (the estrogen-alone component of the Women's Health Initiative [WHI]) conducted in 40 US clinical centers beginning in 1993. Enrolled were 10 739 postmenopausal women, aged 50-79 years, with prior hysterectomy, including 23% of minority race/ethnicity.Women were randomly assigned to receive either 0.625 mg/d of conjugated equine estrogen (CEE) or placebo.The primary outcome was coronary heart disease (CHD) incidence (nonfatal myocardial infarction or CHD death). Invasive breast cancer incidence was the primary safety outcome. A global index of risks and benefits, including these primary outcomes plus stroke, pulmonary embolism (PE), colorectal cancer, hip fracture, and deaths from other causes, was used for summarizing overall effects.In February 2004, after reviewing data through November 30, 2003, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) decided to end the intervention phase of the trial early. Estimated hazard ratios (HRs) (95% confidence intervals [CIs]) for CEE vs placebo for the major clinical outcomes available through February 29, 2004 (average follow-up 6.8 years), were: CHD, 0.91 (0.75-1.12) with 376 cases; breast cancer, 0.77 (0.59-1.01) with 218 cases; stroke, 1.39 (1.10-1.77) with 276 cases; PE, 1.34 (0.87-2.06) with 85 cases; colorectal cancer, 1.08 (0.75-1.55) with 119 cases; and hip fracture, 0.61 (0.41-0.91) with 102 cases. Corresponding results for composite outcomes were: total cardiovascular disease, 1.12 (1.01-1.24); total cancer, 0.93 (0.81-1.07); total fractures, 0.70 (0.63-0.79); total mortality, 1.04 (0.88-1.22), and the global index, 1.01 (0.91-1.12). For the outcomes significantly affected by CEE, there was an absolute excess risk of 12 additional strokes per 10 000 person-years and an absolute risk reduction of 6 fewer hip fractures per 10 000 person-years. The estimated excess risk for all monitored events in the global index was a nonsignificant 2 events per 10 000 person-years.The use of CEE increases the risk of stroke, decreases the risk of hip fracture, and does not affect CHD incidence in postmenopausal women with prior hysterectomy over an average of 6.8 years. A possible reduction in breast cancer risk requires further investigation. The burden of incident disease events was equivalent in the CEE and placebo groups, indicating no overall benefit. Thus, CEE should not be recommended for chronic disease prevention in postmenopausal women.

4,298 citations