2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.steroids.2014.06.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Menopausal hormone therapy and cancer: Changing clinical observations of target site specificity

Abstract: Menopausal hormone therapy with estrogen plus progestin or estrogen alone (for women with prior hysterectomy) is still used by millions of women for climacteric symptom management throughout the world. Until 2002, hormone therapy influence on cancer risk and other chronic diseases was determined through observational study reports. Since then, results from the Women's Health Initiative randomized, placebo-controlled hormone therapy trials have substantially changed concepts regarding estrogen plus progestin an… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
13
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 80 publications
(103 reference statements)
2
13
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A recent meta‐analysis found an overall significantly lower risk of colorectal cancer for both types of hormone use (summary HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.79–0.88) and no differences depending on type or duration . In the WHI, because the reduced colorectal cancer incidence did not translate into reduced colorectal cancer mortality, it was interpreted as diagnostic delay rather than a clinically meaningful benefit of HT for preventing colorectal cancer . Observational studies evaluating HT as chemoprevention published after the WHI all reported lower colorectal cancer risk similar to ours .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 61%
“…A recent meta‐analysis found an overall significantly lower risk of colorectal cancer for both types of hormone use (summary HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.79–0.88) and no differences depending on type or duration . In the WHI, because the reduced colorectal cancer incidence did not translate into reduced colorectal cancer mortality, it was interpreted as diagnostic delay rather than a clinically meaningful benefit of HT for preventing colorectal cancer . Observational studies evaluating HT as chemoprevention published after the WHI all reported lower colorectal cancer risk similar to ours .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 61%
“…The publication of results in 2002 from the large-scale randomized clinical trial by the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) proved a great turning point in the debate about the occurrence of breast cancer resulting from HRT in post-menopausal women [ 5 - 7 ]. There was a considerable shift in concepts before and after 2002, and the concept that deserves the most attention is that the administration of estrogen alone does not increase the incidence of breast cancer [ 7 , 8 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The publication of results in 2002 from the large-scale randomized clinical trial by the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) proved a great turning point in the debate about the occurrence of breast cancer resulting from HRT in post-menopausal women [ 5 - 7 ]. There was a considerable shift in concepts before and after 2002, and the concept that deserves the most attention is that the administration of estrogen alone does not increase the incidence of breast cancer [ 7 , 8 ]. However, there have been worries that estrogen does not help prevent cardiovascular diseases and that it increases breast cancer [ 2 ], and so HRT prescriptions have rapidly decreased since the publication of the WHI study [ 1 , 9 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We are thus currently in a situation where reproductive factors representing endogenous exposures to sex hormones do not seem to show meaningful association with CRC risk. In contrast, the former data as well as the data from the WHI study (Chlebowski and Anderson, 2014) show repeatedly that use of external hormones, especially HRT, but also use of oral contraceptives, is associated with significant reduction in CRC risk.…”
mentioning
confidence: 95%