Live Birth Rate in Patients With Premature Ovarian Insufficiency During Long-Term Follow-Up Under Hormone Replacement With or Without Ovarian Stimulation.

We analyzed data from 466 patients with premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) who wished to have a biological child and were followed up while undergoing hormone replacement (HR) therapy with or without ovarian stimulation (OS) between April 2014 and December 2020. OS was conducted in 6891 cycles in 429 patients (Group OS), whereas only HR (Group HR) was conducted in 1117 cycles in 37 patients. The follicle growth rate was 48.3% (207/429) per patient in Group OS and 5.4% (2/37) in Group HR (p<0.01). There were 51 live births (LBs) in 50 patients during follow-up. In Group OS, the LB rate was 5.8% (47/807) in cycles where in vitro fertilization (IVF) and embryo transfer were attempted (Group IVF), and 1.3% (3/236) in cycles where intrauterine insemination/timed intercourse was attempted (p<0.01). No pregnancies occurred in Group HR. Among the patients in Group IVF, the LB rate was significantly higher in patients aged <35 years at the initiation of follow-up than in patients who started at later ages (p<0.01). Among the cases who achieved an LB, 39 were patients with idiopathic POI (Group IVF-1, n=297) and seven were patients who had undergone surgical treatment for benign ovarian tumors (Group IVF-2, n=50); however, no LBs occurred in patients who had undergone treatment for malignancy (n=17), and only one in patients with chromosomal abnormalities (n=22). The LB rate per case in the patients in Group IVF-1 and those aged <35 years at the start of follow-up (Group IVF-1-a) was 24.1% (26/108), which was higher than those of the other age groups. The LB rate per case in the patients in Group IVF-1-a with <4 years of amenorrhea was 37.3% (19/51), and that in the patients in Group IVF-2 with <4 years of amenorrhea was 21.2% (7/33). These results suggest that infertility treatment is possible in some patients with POI, especially those that can be classified in Group IVF-1-a and Group IVF-2 with <4 years of amenorrhea. Therefore, OS combined with HR therapy should be considered for such patients before attempts at oocyte donation.

Forty-year trends in menopausal hormone therapy use and breast cancer incidence among postmenopausal black and white women.

After reports from the Women's Health Initiative randomized trial evaluating estrogen plus progestin, there was a sudden, substantial, and sustained decrease in all categories of menopausal hormone therapy, and the first reduction in age-adjusted breast cancer incidence in more than 20 years was seen in 2003-2004 among US women 50 years of age or older. Subsequent trends in breast cancer incidence have been described, but most reports have not focused on the postmenopausal age group or fully engaged the potential influence of reduced hormone therapy on breast cancer incidence trends by race/ethnicity. To address this gap, this commentary examines trends for annual age-adjusted breast cancer incidence over a 40-year period from 1975 to 2015 for white and black women on the basis of findings from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 9 registries. Overall, the sharp decline in breast cancer incidence seen in 2003-2004 was followed in the subsequent decade by a continued low breast cancer incidence plateau in white women that has largely persisted. In contrast, a new discordance between breast cancer incidence trends in black and white women has emerged. In the 2005-2015 decade, a sustained increase in breast cancer incidence in black women has resulted in annual incidence rates comparable, for the first time, to those in white women. This commentary explores the hypothesis that the over-decade-long and discordant changes in breast cancer incidence rates in postmenopausal black and white women are, to a large extent, associated with changes in hormone therapy use in these 2 groups.

Hormone therapy for first-line management of menopausal symptoms: Practical recommendations.

Hormone therapy use has undergone dramatic changes over the past 20 years. Widespread use of hormone therapy in the 1980s and 1990s came to an abrupt halt in the early 2000s after initial findings of the Women's Health Initiative trial were published and the study was terminated. Since then, much has been learned about the characteristics of women most likely to benefit from hormone therapy. There is general agreement that women younger than 60 years or who initiate hormone therapy within 10 years of menopause onset gain short-term benefit in terms of symptomatic relief and long-term benefit in terms of protection from chronic diseases that affect postmenopausal women. Despite accumulating evidence in support of hormone therapy for symptomatic menopausal women, the slow response by the medical community has led to a 'large and unnecessary burden of suffering' by women worldwide. Greater efforts are clearly needed to educate physicians and medical students about the pathophysiology of menopause and the role of hormone therapy in supporting women through the transition. This article provides a brief historical perspective of events that led to the backlash against hormone therapy, explores the current position of guideline groups, and provides practical recommendations to guide first-line management of symptomatic menopausal women.

Menopausal hormone therapy trends before versus after 2002: impact of the Women's Health Initiative Study Results.

OBJECTIVE: To better understand how to educate patients and providers about study findings relevant to treatment guidelines, we assessed pre- versus post-Women's Health Initiative (WHI) differences in menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) initiation and continuation and their correlates, and in women's reasons for initiation and discontinuation. METHODS: We analyzed survey data from up to 14 approximately annual visits over 17 years (1996-2013) from 3,018 participants in the Study of Women's Health Across the Nation, a prospective cohort study. We used logistic regression to compare pre- versus post-WHI associations of covariates with MHT initiation and continuation, and to compare pre- versus post-WHI reasons for initiation and continuation. RESULTS: MHT initiation dropped from 8.6% pre-WHI to 2.8% post-WHI (P < 0.0001), and the corresponding decrease in MHT continuation was 84.0% to 62.0% (P < 0.0001). Decreases in MHT initiation and continuation occurred across a range of participant subgroups, consistent with wide dissemination of post-WHI recommendations. However, contrary to current guidelines, we found large declines in MHT use in subgroups for whom MHT is often recommended, that is, younger women and those with more vasomotor symptoms. Post-WHI, women's reasons for MHT initiation and discontinuation reflected concerns highlighted by WHI results. The largest declines in initiation reasons were for reducing risks of osteoporosis and heart disease, whereas the largest increases in discontinuation reasons were for media reports and provider advice. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate post-WHI recommendations for MHT use were widely adopted. MHT risks documented in older women, however, may have led younger symptomatic women to forgo MHT for symptom relief.

Postmenopausal health interventions: Time to move on from the Women's Health Initiative?

Menopause is a critical period during which, without timely interventions, increased risks of cardiovascular and metabolic diseases, osteoporosis, sexual dysfunction and premature cognitive decline will contribute to diminished quality-of-life in women. Hormone therapy (HT) used to be the standard of care for managing vasomotor symptoms and prevention of chronic diseases until publication of the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) in 2002. Concerned about risks highlighted in WHI publications, many symptomatic women promptly ceased HT which resulted in increased vasomotor symptoms, osteoporosis-related-fractures and insomnia. Data from post-hoc WHI analyses and newer clinical trials consistently show reductions in coronary heart disease and mortality when estrogen therapy is initiated soon after menopause, whereas administration in later years and/or in combination with progesterone carries increased risks. However, no validated primary preventive strategies are available for younger postmenopausal women (<60 years), highlighting the need to re-evaluate the use of estrogen alone for which the risk-benefit balance appears positive. In contrast, in older women (>60 years), risks associated with oral HT exceed benefits; however transdermal estrogen may offer a safer alternative and should be further evaluated. Alternative therapies such as phytoestrogens and non-hormonal prescriptions may be beneficial for older women or those who are unsuitable for HT. Long-term head-to-head comparisons of HT with alternative interventions are warranted to confirm their efficacy for chronic disease prevention.

Evolution of postmenopausal hormone therapy between 2002 and 2009.

OBJECTIVE: The results of the Women's Health Initiative led to a sharp decline in postmenopausal hormone therapy use. Subsequently, treatment guidelines were revised to recommend hormone therapy at the lowest effective dose for the shortest possible duration. The objective of this analysis was to assess trends in nationwide hormone therapy prescription claims from 2002 to 2009. METHODS: This study was a retrospective database analyses of pharmacy claims from MedImpact Healthcare Systems Inc. Data from women with claims for oral or transdermal hormone therapy were analyzed to assess trends in hormone therapy claims, including route of administration, dose, and physician specialty. RESULTS: By the end of 2002, the total number of hormone therapy claims dropped approximately 30% from 2002 second quarter claims. This trend continued during the next 7 years, and by 2009, hormone therapy claims were reduced by more than 70%. The proportion of low-dose oral claims rose fourfold, whereas the proportion of standard/high-dose claims decreased 30%. The proportion of claims for transdermal formulations more than doubled, and the proportion of claims for low-dose transdermal hormone therapy increased 10-fold. Although reductions in overall claims, routes of administration, and dose categories were similar between physician specialties, obstetrician/ gynecologists prescribed transdermal hormone therapy nearly twice as often as all other types of providers. CONCLUSIONS: Since the publication of the Women's Health Initiative results, there has been a sustained decrease in hormone therapy claims. The proportional use of low-dose oral and transdermal formulations has increased, but as of 2009, claims for these formulations accounted for approximately one in four total hormone therapy claims.

[Towards an optimization of the modulation of the estrogen receptor during menopausal hormonal therapy]. / Vers une optimisation de la modulation du récepteur des œstrogènes dans le traitement hormonal de la ménopause.

Women now live more than a third of their lives after the onset of menopause. The decline in endogenous estrogen production during this period is accompanied by functional disorders that affect quality of life. These symptoms may be relieved by menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) initially based on the administration of equine conjugated estrogens (mainly in the United States, oral route) or the natural estrogen, 17ß-estradiol (in Europe, transdermal route). Estrogen receptor α (ERα), but not ERß, mediates most of the physiological effects of estrogens. ERα belongs to the superfamily of nuclear receptors and regulates the transcription of genes via its activation functions AF1 and AF2. In addition to these classical genomic actions, estrogens can activate a subpopulation of ERα present at the cell membrane and thereby induce rapid signals. In this review, we will summarize the evolution of MHTs in last decades, as well as treatments that use various selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs). Next, we will describe recent advances in the understanding of the mechanisms of estrogen action, in particular the respective roles of nuclear and membrane ERα as well as the potential implications for future therapies.

Trends in oral and vaginally administered estrogen use among US women 50 years of age or older with commercial health insurance.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to provide information through 2015 about use in the United States of estrogen products, including orally and vaginally administered products, in postmenopausal women. METHODS: We used prescription claims for US commercial health insurance to calculate, in women 50 years of age or older (n = 12,007,364), the age-standardized and age-specific annual prevalence of estrogen use, by formulation and route of administration, for the period 2006 through 2015. RESULTS: The age-standardized annual prevalence of a prescription claim for oral estrogens declined over time, from 83 per 1,000 women in 2007 to 42 per 1,000 women in 2015. The age-standardized annual prevalence of a prescription claim for vaginal estrogens peaked in 2011, at 42 per 1,000 women, before declining to 35 per 1,000 women in 2015. The age-standardized annual prevalence of a prescription claim for transdermal estrogen fluctuated between 15 and 17 per 1,000 women. In age groups under 65 years of age, annual prevalence rates for vaginal rings and inserts declined over the latter half of the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses of US prescription claims data between 2006 and 2015 for women 50 years of age or older showed declining use of oral estrogen generally and vaginally administered estrogen products specifically in age groups less than 65 years of age.

Estudio de la reserva funcional ovárica / No disponible

No disponible

Risk of Stroke With Various Types of Menopausal Hormone Therapies: A National Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Double-blind randomized studies on the effects of oral postmenopausal hormone therapies were stopped mainly because of increased risk of stroke. We aimed to assess the risk of all strokes and various subtypes associated with hormone therapy and explore the influence of regimens and routes of administration. METHODS: A national historical cohort of women aged 51 to 70 years from 1995 to 2010 was established by linking 5 Danish registries. The National Registry of Medicinal Product Statistics provided information on hormone therapy exposure and the National Patient or Cause of Death Registries supplied data regarding stroke diagnoses (ischemic/hemorrhagic/subarachnoid hemorrhage). Multiply adjusted rate ratios with time-varying covariates were fitted in Poisson regression models. RESULTS: Of the 980 003 included women, 20 199 suffered a stroke (78% ischemic, 12% hemorrhagic, and 10% subarachnoid hemorrhage). In total, 36% of women used hormone therapy. Current use conferred a relative rate of 1.16 (95% confidence interval, 1.12-1.22). Compared with never users, the increased rate ratio of all stroke with continuous, cyclic combined estrogen/progestin, and estrogen only oral therapies were 1.29 (95% confidence interval, 1.21-1.37), 1.11 (95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.20), and 1.18 (95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.26), respectively. The increased risk was because of ischemic stroke, but not hemorrhagic stroke. Transdermal application of hormone therapy was not associated with risk of stroke. Vaginal estrogen was associated with a decreased risk of stroke. CONCLUSIONS: In a national setting, we found an increased risk of stroke, based on ischemic stroke, with oral hormone therapies that was comparable to findings from randomized studies. We found no risk of stroke with transdermal application and a reduced risk with vaginal estrogen.

Hormone-replacement therapy: current thinking.

For several decades, the role of hormone-replacement therapy (HRT) has been debated. Early observational data on HRT showed many benefits, including a reduction in coronary heart disease (CHD) and mortality. More recently, randomized trials, including the Women's Health Initiative (WHI), studying mostly women many years after the the onset of menopause, showed no such benefit and, indeed, an increased risk of CHD and breast cancer, which led to an abrupt decrease in the use of HRT. Subsequent reanalyzes of data from the WHI with age stratification, newer randomized and observational data and several meta-analyses now consistently show reductions in CHD and mortality when HRT is initiated soon after menopause. HRT also significantly decreases the incidence of various symptoms of menopause and the risk of osteoporotic fractures, and improves quality of life. In younger healthy women (aged 50-60 years), the risk-benefit balance is positive for using HRT, with risks considered rare. As no validated primary prevention strategies are available for younger women (<60 years of age), other than lifestyle management, some consideration might be given to HRT as a prevention strategy as treatment can reduce CHD and all-cause mortality. Although HRT should be primarily oestrogen-based, no particular HRT regimen can be advocated.

Time trends in breast cancer and menopause hormone therapy use in New Zealand.

OBJECTIVE: The publication of preliminary findings from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) Study in 2002 suggested an increased risk of breast cancer among users of menopause hormone therapy (MHT). This resulted world-wide in a rapid and significant decline in the use of hormone therapy. It was later claimed that breast cancer incidence rates had fallen as a result of lower rates of hormone therapy use. Our aim was to investigate whether there was an association between changes in the use of hormone therapy and rates of breast cancer diagnosis in New Zealand subsequent to the publication of the WHI. METHOD: Validated prescription usage data along with breast cancer screening and cancer registration data were accessed. Time trends extending for 8 years after the publication of the WHI were assessed. RESULTS: The use of hormone therapy for managing menopausal symptoms fell by about 70% following the controversy about its safety. Breast cancer registration rates among women aged 50-59 years had started to fall in advance of this change in prescribing. Changes in other age groups appear to coincide with changes in the screening eligibility for the national breast screening program rather than use of hormone therapy. CONCLUSION: The time trend analysis does not support an association between changes in hormone therapy use and the incidence rate of breast cancer.