Prevention of postmenopausal bone loss with long-cycle hormone replacement therapy.

OBJECTIVE: Postmenopausal bone loss and osteoporotic fractures can be prevented by hormone replacement therapy (HRT). However, opposed HRT may increase the risk of breast cancer above that associated with estrogen alone and in non-hysterectomized women estrogen substitution alone increases the risk of uterine cancer, which triggered renewed interest in long-cycle HRT regimens (estrogen replacement therapy with progesterone-free intervals up to 6 months). The effects on bone of such long-cycle HRT regimens are unknown. The objective of the present study was to compare the effects on bone and the endometrium of long-cycle HRT and conventional HRT. METHODS: Seventy-three healthy non-hysterectomized postmenopausal women were randomized to either conventional HRT (estradiol (E2) 2 mg/d during 12 days, E2 2 mg/d plus 1 mg/d of norethisterone acetate (NETA) during 10 days, E2 1 mg/d for 6 days) or long-cycle HRT treatment (two cycles with E2 2 mg/d during 28 days, followed by one cycle of conventional HRT and repeated every 3 months). Primary endpoint was the change in bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine (LS) over 24 months. RESULTS: BMD at LS increased significantly versus baseline in both treatment groups (conventional HRT +3.8 +/- 0.6%, long-cycle HRT +3.3 +/- 0.5%, p < 0.0001 for both) with no significant difference between treatment groups over 24 months. Similar significant BMD increases versus baseline were observed at the femoral neck, while biochemical markers of bone turnover (osteocalcin and deoxypyridinoline) were significantly decreased over 24 months. There were no endometrial or breast related adverse events reported. CONCLUSION: Long-cycle HRT may be a valid alternative to conventional HRT with regard to protection against postmenopausal bone loss.

Osteoporosis case finding in the general practice: phalangeal radiographic absorptiometry with and without risk factors for osteoporosis to select postmenopausal women eligible for lumbar spine and hip densitometry.

Mass screening for osteoporosis using DXA measurements at the spine and hip is presently not recommended by health authorities. Instead, risk factor questionnaires and peripheral bone measurements may facilitate the selection of women eligible for axial bone densitometry. The aim of this study was to validate a case finding strategy for postmenopausal women who would benefit most from subsequent DXA measurement by using phalangeal radiographic absorptiometry (RA) alone or in combination with risk factors in a general practice setting. The sensitivity and specificity of this strategy in detecting osteoporosis (T-score < or =2.5 SD at the spine and/or the hip) were compared with those of the current reimbursement criteria for DXA measurements in Switzerland. Four hundred and twenty-three postmenopausal women with one or more risk factors for osteoporosis were recruited by 90 primary care physicians who also performed the phalangeal RA measurements. All women underwent subsequent DXA measurement of the spine and the hip at the Osteoporosis Policlinic of the University Hospital of Berne. They were allocated to one of two groups depending on whether they matched with the Swiss reimbursement conditions for DXA measurement or not. Logistic regression models were used to predict the likelihood of osteoporosis versus "no osteoporosis" and to derive ROC curves for the various strategies. Differences in the areas under the ROC curves (AUC) were tested for significance. In women lacking reimbursement criteria, RA achieved a significantly larger AUC (0.81; 95% CI 0.72-0.89) than the risk factors associated with patients' age, height and weight (0.71; 95% C.I. 0.62-0.80). Furthermore, in this study, RA provided a better sensitivity and specificity in identifying women with underlying osteoporosis than the currently accepted criteria for reimbursement of DXA measurement. In the Swiss environment, RA is a valid case finding tool for patients with risk factors for osteoporosis, especially for those who do not qualify for DXA reimbursement.