The 2012 hormone therapy position statement of the North American Menopause Society
TL;DR: The more favorable benefit-risk ratio for ET allows more flexibility in extending the duration of use compared with EPT, where the earlier appearance of increased breast cancer risk precludes a recommendation for use beyond 3 to 5 years.
Abstract: Objective: This position statement aimed to update the evidence-based position statement published by The North American Menopause Society (NAMS) in 2010 regarding recommendations for hormone therapy (HT) for postmenopausal women. This updated position statement further distinguishes the emerging differences in the therapeutic benefit-risk ratio between estrogen therapy (ET) and combined estrogen-progestogen therapy (EPT) at various ages and time intervals since menopause onset. Methods: An Advisory Panel of expert clinicians and researchers in the field of women’s health was enlisted to review the 2010 NAMS position statement, evaluate new evidence, and reach consensus on recommendations. The Panel’s recommendations were reviewed and approved by the NAMS Board of Trustees as an official NAMS position statement. Results: Current evidence supports the use of HT for perimenopausal and postmenopausal women when the balance of potential benefits and risks is favorable for the individual woman. This position statement reviews the effects of ET and EPT on many aspects of women’s health and recognizes the greater safety profile associated with ET. Conclusions: Recent data support the initiation of HT around the time of menopause to treat menopause-related symptoms and to prevent osteoporosis in women at high risk of fracture. The more favorable benefit-risk ratio for ET allows more flexibility in extending the duration of use compared with EPT, where the earlier appearance of increased breast cancer risk precludes a recommendation for use beyond 3 to 5 years.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: The literature in both rodents and humans on the role of estrogens and their receptors in the control of energy homeostasis and glucose metabolism in health and metabolic diseases is reviewed.
Abstract: Estrogens play a fundamental role in the physiology of the reproductive, cardiovascular, skeletal, and central nervous systems. In this report, we review the literature in both rodents and humans on the role of estrogens and their receptors in the control of energy homeostasis and glucose metabolism in health and metabolic diseases. Estrogen actions in hypothalamic nuclei differentially control food intake, energy expenditure, and white adipose tissue distribution. Estrogen actions in skeletal muscle, liver, adipose tissue, and immune cells are involved in insulin sensitivity as well as prevention of lipid accumulation and inflammation. Estrogen actions in pancreatic islet β-cells also regulate insulin secretion, nutrient homeostasis, and survival. Estrogen deficiency promotes metabolic dysfunction predisposing to obesity, the metabolic syndrome, and type 2 diabetes. We also discuss the effect of selective estrogen receptor modulators on metabolic disorders.
873 citations
University of Miami1, University of California, Irvine2, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai3, Tulane University4, Baylor College of Medicine5, Oakland University6, University of California, San Diego7, University of Alabama8, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center9, Foundation for Biomedical Research10, Oregon Health & Science University11, University of Chicago12
TL;DR: This CPG is a practical tool that endocrinologists, other health care professionals, health-related organizations, and regulatory bodies can use to reduce the risks and consequences of dyslipidemia.
834 citations
Emory University1, DePaul University2, University of Miami3, Baylor College of Medicine4, Pennsylvania State University5, University of California, Irvine6, Duke University7, University of Colorado Denver8, Medical University of South Carolina9, University of Oklahoma10, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center11, University of Illinois at Chicago12, Tulane University13, University of California, San Francisco14, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai15, Harvard University16, Virginia Commonwealth University17, University of Pennsylvania18, Rush University Medical Center19, Oregon Health & Science University20
TL;DR: This document represents a continuation of the National Lipid Association recommendations developed by a diverse panel of experts who examined the evidence base and provided recommendations regarding the following topics: lifestyle therapies and strategies to improve patient outcomes by increasing adherence and using team-based collaborative care.
690 citations
TL;DR: Assessment of effects of long-term HT on mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, cancer, gallbladder disease, fracture and cognition in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women during and after cessation of treatment found use of combined continuous HT significantly increased the risk of venous thromboembolism.
Abstract: 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.
575 citations
TL;DR: In preparing these international recommendations, experts have taken into account geographical variations in medical care, prevalence of diseases, and country-specific attitudes of the public, medical community and health authorities towards menopause management.
Abstract: The International Menopause Society (IMS) has produced these new 2016 recommendations on women’s midlife health and menopause hormone therapy (MHT) to help guide health-care professionals in optimizing their management of women in the menopause transition and beyond. The term MHT has been used to cover therapies including estrogens, progestogens and combined regimens. For the first time, the 2016 IMS recommendations now include grades of recommendations, levels of evidence and 'good practice points', in addition to section-specific references. Where possible, the recommendations are based on and linked to the evidence that supports them, unless good-quality evidence is absent. Particular attention has been paid to published evidence from 2013 onwards, the last time the IMS recommendations were updated. Databases have been extensively searched for relevant publications using key terms specific to each specialist area within menopause physiology and medicine. Information has also been drawn from int...
575 citations
References
More filters
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
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
"The 2012 hormone therapy position s..." refers background in this paper
...In contrast, both ET and EPT are associated with an initial increase in CHD risk among women who are more distant from menopause at the time of HT initiation.(38,167,168)...
[...]
TL;DR: To critically review the risks and benefits of hormone therapy for asymptomatic postmenopausal women who are considering long-term hormone therapy to prevent disease or to prolong life-long hormone therapy is critically reviewed.
Abstract: ▪Purpose:To critically review the risks and benefits of hormone therapy for asymptomatic postmenopausal women who are considering long-term hormone therapy to prevent disease or to prolong...
2,172 citations
Harvard University1, George Washington University2, University of Tennessee Health Science Center3, National Institutes of Health4, Brown University5, Rutgers University6, University at Buffalo7, Rush University Medical Center8, University of Washington9, University of California, Los Angeles10, Emory University11, University of California, Irvine12, Wake Forest University13, University of Vermont14
TL;DR: Estrogen plus progestin does not confer cardiac protection and may increase the risk of CHD among generally healthy postmenopausal women, especially during the first year after the initiation of hormone use.
Abstract: Background Recent randomized clinical trials have suggested that estrogen plus progestin does not confer cardiac protection and may increase the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). In this report, we provide the final results with regard to estrogen plus progestin and CHD from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI). Methods The WHI included a randomized primary-prevention trial of estrogen plus progestin in 16,608 postmenopausal women who were 50 to 79 years of age at base line. Participants were randomly assigned to receive conjugated equine estrogens (0.625 mg per day) plus medroxyprogesterone acetate (2.5 mg per day) or placebo. The primary efficacy outcome of the trial was CHD (nonfatal myocardial infarction or death due to CHD). Results After a mean follow-up of 5.2 years (planned duration, 8.5 years), the data and safety monitoring board recommended terminating the estrogen-plus-progestin trial because the overall risks exceeded the benefits. Combined hormone therapy was associated with a hazard ratio for CHD of 1.24 (nominal 95 percent confidence interval, 1.00 to 1.54; 95 percent confidence interval after adjustment for sequential monitoring, 0.97 to 1.60). The elevation in risk was most apparent at one year (hazard ratio, 1.81 [95 percent confidence interval, 1.09 to 3.01]). Although higher base-line levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were associated with an excess risk of CHD among women who received hormone therapy, higher base-line levels of C-reactive protein, other biomarkers, and other clinical characteristics did not significantly modify the treatment-related risk of CHD. Conclusions Estrogen plus progestin does not confer cardiac protection and may increase the risk of CHD among generally healthy postmenopausal women, especially during the first year after the initiation of hormone use. This treatment should not be prescribed for the prevention of cardiovascular disease.
1,980 citations
TL;DR: Estrogen plus progestin therapy increased the risk for probable dementia in postmenopausal women aged 65 years or older and did not prevent mild cognitive impairment in these women, supporting the conclusion that the risks of estrogen plus progESTin outweigh the benefits.
Abstract: ContextPostmenopausal women have a greater risk than men of developing Alzheimer
disease, but studies of the effects of estrogen therapy on Alzheimer disease
have been inconsistent. On July 8, 2002, the study drugs, estrogen plus progestin,
in the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) trial were discontinued because of
certain increased health risks in women receiving combined hormone therapy.ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of estrogen plus progestin on the incidence of
dementia and mild cognitive impairment compared with placebo.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThe Women's Health Initiative Memory Study (WHIMS), a randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled clinical trial, began enrolling participants from the Women's
Health Initiative (WHI) estrogen plus progestin trial in May 1996. Of the
4894 eligible participants of the WHI study, 4532 (92.6%) postmenopausal women
free of probable dementia, aged 65 years or older, and recruited from 39 of
40 WHI clinical centers were enrolled in the WHIMS.InterventionParticipants received either 1 daily tablet of 0.625 mg of conjugated
equine estrogen plus 2.5 mg of medroxyprogesterone acetate (n = 2229), or
a matching placebo (n = 2303).Main Outcome MeasuresIncidence of probable dementia (primary outcome) and mild cognitive
impairment (secondary outcome) were identified through a structured clinical
assessment.ResultsThe mean (SD) time between the date of randomization into WHI and the
last Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MSE) for all WHIMS participants
was 4.05 (1.19) years. Overall, 61 women were diagnosed with probable dementia,
40 (66%) in the estrogen plus progestin group compared with 21 (34%) in the
placebo group. The hazard ratio (HR) for probable dementia was 2.05 (95% confidence
interval [CI], 1.21-3.48; 45 vs 22 per 10 000 person-years; P = .01). This increased risk would result in an additional 23 cases
of dementia per 10 000 women per year. Alzheimer disease was the most
common classification of dementia in both study groups. Treatment effects
on mild cognitive impairment did not differ between groups (HR, 1.07; 95%
CI, 0.74-1.55; 63 vs 59 cases per 10 000 person-years; P = .72).ConclusionsEstrogen plus progestin therapy increased the risk for probable dementia
in postmenopausal women aged 65 years or older. In addition, estrogen plus
progestin therapy did not prevent mild cognitive impairment in these women.
These findings, coupled with previously reported WHI data, support the conclusion
that the risks of estrogen plus progestin outweigh the benefits.
1,894 citations