Background: Menopausal symptoms can be very distressing and considerably affect a woman's personal and social life. It is becoming more and more evident that leaving bothersome symptoms untreated in midlife may lead to altered quality of life, reduced work productivity and, possibly, overall impaired health. Hormone therapy (HT) for the relief of menopausal symptoms has been the object of much controversy over the past two decades. At the beginning of the century, a shadow was cast on the use of HT owing to the concern for cardiovascular and cerebrovascular risks, and breast cancer, arising following publication of a large randomized placebo-controlled trial. Findings of a subanalysis of the trial data and extended follow-up studies, along with other more modern clinical trials and observational studies, have provided new evidence on the effects of HT.

Objective And Rationale: The goal of the following paper is to appraise the most significant clinical literature on the effects of hormones in postmenopausal women, and to report the benefits and risks of HT for the relief of menopausal symptoms.

Search Methods: A Pubmed search of clinical trials was performed using the following terms: estrogens, progestogens, bazedoxifene, tibolone, selective estrogen receptor modulators, tissue-selective estrogen complex, androgens, and menopause.

Outcomes: HT is an effective treatment for bothersome menopausal vasomotor symptoms, genitourinary syndrome, and prevention of osteoporotic fractures. Women should be made aware that there is a small increased risk of stroke that tends to persist over the years as well as breast cancer risk with long-term estrogen-progestin use. However, healthy women who begin HT soon after menopause will probably earn more benefit than harm from the treatment. HT can improve bothersome symptoms, all the while conferring offset benefits such as cardiovascular risk reduction, an increase in bone mineral density and a reduction in bone fracture risk. Moreover, a decrease in colorectal cancer risk is obtainable in women treated with estrogen-progestin therapy, and an overall but nonsignificant reduction in mortality has been observed in women treated with conjugated equine estrogens alone or combined with estrogen-progestin therapy. Where possible, transdermal routes of HT administration should be preferred as they have the least impact on coagulation. With combined treatment, natural progesterone should be favored as it is devoid of the antiapoptotic properties of other progestogens on breast cells. When beginning HT, low doses should be used and increased gradually until effective control of symptoms is achieved. Unless contraindications develop, patients may choose to continue HT as long as the benefits outweigh the risks. Regular reassessment of the woman's health status is mandatory. Women with premature menopause who begin HT before 50 years of age seem to have the most significant advantage in terms of longevity.

Wider Implications: In women with bothersome menopausal symptoms, HT should be considered one of the mainstays of treatment. Clinical practitioners should tailor HT based on patient history, physical characteristics, and current health status so that benefits outweigh the risks.

Observational studies, including the observational component of the Women's Health Initiative, consistently found that women who chose to use menopausal hormone therapy (HT) had a reduction in mortality and cardiovascular disease incidence relative to women who did not use HT. Randomized controlled trials have taught us that initiation of HT in older women (> 60 years old) remote from menopause (> 10 years since menopause) potentially has more risk than benefit. Additionally, randomized controlled trials have confirmed observational studies indicating the safety and benefit of HT in young (< 60 years old) recently menopausal women (< 10 years since menopause). In other words, we have come full circle in our understanding of HT, with a caveat concerning initiation in older women. Importantly, the magnitude and types of risk associated with HT are similar to those of other commonly used therapies. These data have led to recommendations that the benefits of HT exceed the risks when initiated in menopausal women younger than 60 years.

In the late 1980s, several observational studies and meta-analyses suggested that hormone replacement therapy (HRT) was beneficial for prevention of osteoporosis, coronary heart disease, dementia and decreased all-cause mortality. In 1992, the American College of Physicians recommended HRT for prevention of coronary disease. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, several randomized trials in older women suggested coronary harm and that the risks, including breast cancer, outweighed any benefit. HRT stopped being prescribed at that time, even for women who had severe symptoms of menopause. Subsequently, reanalyzes of the randomized trial data, using age stratification, as well as newer studies, and meta-analyses have been consistent in showing that younger women, 50-59 years or within 10 years of menopause, have decreased coronary disease and all-cause mortality; and did not have the perceived risks including breast cancer. These newer findings are consistent with the older observational data. It has also been reported that many women who abruptly stopped HRT had more risks, including more osteoporotic fractures. The current data confirm a "timing" hypothesis for benefits and risks of HRT, showing that younger have many benefits and few risks, particularly if therapy is predominantly focused on the estrogen component. We discuss these findings and put into perspective the potential risks of treatment, and suggest that we may have come full circle regarding the use of HRT. In so doing we propose that HRT should be considered as part of a general prevention strategy for women at the onset of menopause.

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.

Importance: Menopausal hormone therapy continues in clinical use but questions remain regarding its risks and benefits for chronic disease prevention.

Objective: To report a comprehensive, integrated overview of findings from the 2 Women's Health Initiative (WHI) hormone therapy trials with extended postintervention follow-up. DESIGN, SETTING,

And Participants: A total of 27,347 postmenopausal women aged 50 to 79 years were enrolled at 40 US centers.

Interventions: Women with an intact uterus received conjugated equine estrogens (CEE; 0.625 mg/d) plus medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA; 2.5 mg/d) (n = 8506) or placebo (n = 8102). Women with prior hysterectomy received CEE alone (0.625 mg/d) (n = 5310) or placebo (n = 5429). The intervention lasted a median of 5.6 years in CEE plus MPA trial and 7.2 years in CEE alone trial with 13 years of cumulative follow-up until September 30, 2010.

Main Outcomes And Measures: Primary efficacy and safety outcomes were coronary heart disease (CHD) and invasive breast cancer, respectively. A global index also included stroke, pulmonary embolism, colorectal cancer, endometrial cancer, hip fracture, and death.

Results: During the CEE plus MPA intervention phase, the numbers of CHD cases were 196 for CEE plus MPA vs 159 for placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 1.18; 95% CI, 0.95-1.45) and 206 vs 155, respectively, for invasive breast cancer (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.01-1.53). Other risks included increased stroke, pulmonary embolism, dementia (in women aged ≥65 years), gallbladder disease, and urinary incontinence; benefits included decreased hip fractures, diabetes, and vasomotor symptoms. Most risks and benefits dissipated postintervention, although some elevation in breast cancer risk persisted during cumulative follow-up (434 cases for CEE plus MPA vs 323 for placebo; HR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.11-1.48]). The risks and benefits were more balanced during the CEE alone intervention with 204 CHD cases for CEE alone vs 222 cases for placebo (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.78-1.14) and 104 vs 135, respectively, for invasive breast cancer (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.61-1.02); cumulatively, there were 168 vs 216, respectively, cases of breast cancer diagnosed (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65-0.97). Results for other outcomes were similar to CEE plus MPA. Neither regimen affected all-cause mortality. For CEE alone, younger women (aged 50-59 years) had more favorable results for all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and the global index (nominal P < .05 for trend by age). Absolute risks of adverse events (measured by the global index) per 10,000 women annually taking CEE plus MPA ranged from 12 excess cases for ages of 50-59 years to 38 for ages of 70-79 years; for women taking CEE alone, from 19 fewer cases for ages of 50-59 years to 51 excess cases for ages of 70-79 years. Quality-of-life outcomes had mixed results in both trials.

Conclusions And Relevance: Menopausal hormone therapy has a complex pattern of risks and benefits. Findings from the intervention and extended postintervention follow-up of the 2 WHI hormone therapy trials do not support use of this therapy for chronic disease prevention, although it is appropriate for symptom management in some women.

Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000611.

Background: Menopause hormone therapy (MHT), as an effective method to alleviate the menopause-related symptoms of women, its benefits, risks, and potential influencing factors for the cardiovascular system of postmenopausal women are not very clear.

Objectives: To evaluate cardiovascular benefits and risks of MHT in postmenopausal women, and analyze the underlying factors that affect both.

Search Strategy: The EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL databases were searched from 1975 to July 2022.

Selection Criteria: Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) that met pre-specified inclusion criteria were included.

Data Collection And Analysis: Two reviewers extracted data independently. A meta-analysis of random effects was used to analyze data.

Main Results: This systematic review identified 33 RCTs using MHT involving 44,639 postmenopausal women with a mean age of 60.3 (range 48 to 72 years). There was no significant difference between MHT and placebo (or no treatment) in all-cause death (RR = 0.96, 95%CI 0.85 to 1.09, I = 14%) and cardiovascular events (RR = 0.97, 95%CI 0.82 to 1.14, I = 38%) in the overall population of postmenopausal women. However, MHT would increase the risk of stroke (RR = 1.23, 95%CI 1.08 to 1.41,I = 0%) and venous thromboembolism (RR = 1.86, 95%CI 1.39 to 2.50, I = 24%). Compared with placebo, MHT could improve flow-mediated arterial dilation (FMD) (SMD = 1.46, 95%CI 0.86 to 2.07, I = 90%), but it did not improve nitroglycerin-mediated arterial dilation (NMD) (SMD = 0.27, 95%CI - 0.08 to 0.62, I = 76%). Compared with women started MHT more than 10 years after menopause, women started MHT within 10 years after menopause had lower frequency of all-cause death (P = 0.02) and cardiovascular events (P = 0.002), and more significant improvement in FMD (P = 0.0003). Compared to mono-estrogen therapy, the combination therapy of estrogen and progesterone would not alter the outcomes of endpoint event. (all-cause death P = 0.52, cardiovascular events P = 0.90, stroke P = 0.85, venous thromboembolism P = 0.33, FMD P = 0.46, NMD P = 0.27).

Conclusions: MHT improves flow-mediated arterial dilation (FMD) but fails to lower the risk of all-cause death and cardiovascular events, and increases the risk of stroke and venous thrombosis in postmenopausal women. Early acceptance of MHT not only reduces the risk of all-cause death and cardiovascular events but also further improves FMD, although the risk of stroke and venous thrombosis is not reduced. There is no difference in the outcome of cardiovascular system endpoints between mono-estrogen therapy and combination therapy of estrogen and progesterone.

Importance: Postmenopausal status coincides with increased risks for chronic conditions such as heart disease, osteoporosis, cognitive impairment, or some types of cancers. Previously, hormone therapy was used for the primary prevention of these chronic conditions. Objective: To update evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force on the benefits and harms of hormone therapy in reducing risks for chronic conditions. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and trial registries from June 1, 2011, through August 1, 2016. Surveillance for new evidence in targeted publications was conducted through July 1, 2017. Study Selection: English-language randomized clinical trials reporting health outcomes. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality; meta-analyses when at least 3 similar studies were available. Main Outcomes and Measures: Beneficial or harmful changes in risks for various chronic conditions. Results: Eighteen trials (n = 40 058; range, 142-16 608; mean age, 53-79 years) were included. Women using estrogen-only therapy compared with placebo had significantly lower risks, per 10 000 person-years, for diabetes (-19 cases [95% CI, -34 to -3]) and fractures (-53 cases [95% CI, -69 to -39]). Risks were statistically significantly increased, per 10 000 person-years, for gallbladder disease (30 more cases [95% CI, 16 to 48]), stroke (11 more cases [95% CI, 2 to 23]), venous thromboembolism (11 more cases [95% CI, 3 to 22]), and urinary incontinence (1261 more cases [95% CI, 880 to 1689]). Women using estrogen plus progestin compared with placebo experienced significantly lower risks, per 10 000 person-years, for colorectal cancer (-6 cases [95% CI, -9 to -1]), diabetes (-14 cases [95% CI, -24 to -3), and fractures (-44 cases [95% CI, -71 to -13). Risks, per 10 000 person-years, were significantly increased for invasive breast cancer (9 more cases [95% CI, 1 to 19]), probable dementia (22 more cases [95% CI, 4 to 53]), gallbladder disease (21 more cases [95% CI, 10 to 34]), stroke (9 more cases [95% CI, 2 to 19]), urinary incontinence (876 more cases [95% CI, 606 to 1168]), and venous thromboembolism (21 more cases [95% CI, 12 to 33]). Conclusions and Relevance: Hormone therapy for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in menopausal women is associated with some beneficial effects but also with a substantial increase of risks for harms. The available evidence regarding benefits and harms of early initiation of hormone therapy is inconclusive.

Menopause, the permanent cessation of menstruation, is due to ovarian failure, which may lead to oestrogen deficiency diseases, particularly osteoporosis, cardiovascular disease and cerebrovascular disease. Mortality and morbidity caused by these conditions can be modified by using hormone replacement therapy, but the benefits of this therapy must be weighed against the increased risk of breast cancer and the symptomatic side-effects the treatment may cause. The combination of transdermal oestrogen and natural progesterone offers the most favourable risk-to-benefit profile.

Importance: Postmenopausal status coincides with increased risks for chronic conditions such as heart disease, osteoporosis, cognitive impairment, or some types of cancers. Previously, hormone therapy was used for the primary prevention of these chronic conditions. Objective: To update evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force on the benefits and harms of hormone therapy in reducing risks for chronic conditions. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and trial registries from June 1, 2011, through August 1, 2016. Surveillance for new evidence in targeted publications was conducted through July 1, 2017. Study Selection: English-language randomized clinical trials reporting health outcomes. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality; meta-analyses when at least 3 similar studies were available. Main Outcomes and Measures: Beneficial or harmful changes in risks for various chronic conditions. Results: Eighteen trials (n = 40 058; range, 142-16 608; mean age, 53-79 years) were included. Women using estrogen-only therapy compared with placebo had significantly lower risks, per 10 000 person-years, for diabetes (-19 cases [95% CI, -34 to -3]) and fractures (-53 cases [95% CI, -69 to -39]). Risks were statistically significantly increased, per 10 000 person-years, for gallbladder disease (30 more cases [95% CI, 16 to 48]), stroke (11 more cases [95% CI, 2 to 23]), venous thromboembolism (11 more cases [95% CI, 3 to 22]), and urinary incontinence (1261 more cases [95% CI, 880 to 1689]). Women using estrogen plus progestin compared with placebo experienced significantly lower risks, per 10 000 person-years, for colorectal cancer (-6 cases [95% CI, -9 to -1]), diabetes (-14 cases [95% CI, -24 to -3), and fractures (-44 cases [95% CI, -71 to -13). Risks, per 10 000 person-years, were significantly increased for invasive breast cancer (9 more cases [95% CI, 1 to 19]), probable dementia (22 more cases [95% CI, 4 to 53]), gallbladder disease (21 more cases [95% CI, 10 to 34]), stroke (9 more cases [95% CI, 2 to 19]), urinary incontinence (876 more cases [95% CI, 606 to 1168]), and venous thromboembolism (21 more cases [95% CI, 12 to 33]). Conclusions and Relevance: Hormone therapy for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in menopausal women is associated with some beneficial effects but also with a substantial increase of risks for harms. The available evidence regarding benefits and harms of early initiation of hormone therapy is inconclusive.

There are many options available to address the quality of life and health concerns of menopausal women. The principal indication for hormone therapy (HT) is the treatment of vasomotor symptoms, and benefits generally outweigh risks for healthy women with bothersome symptoms who elect HT at the time of menopause. Although HT increases the risk of coronary heart disease, recent analyses confirm that this increased risk occurs principally in older women and those a number of years beyond menopause. These findings do not support a role for HT in the prevention of heart disease but provide reassurance regarding the safety of use for hot flushes and night sweats in otherwise healthy women at the menopausal transition. An increased risk of breast cancer with extended use is another reason short-term treatment is advised. Hormone therapy prevents and treats osteoporosis but is rarely used solely for this indication. If only vaginal symptoms are present, low-dose local estrogen therapy is preferred. Contraindications to HT use include breast or endometrial cancer, cardiovascular disease, thromboembolic disorders, and active liver disease. Alternatives to HT should be advised for women with or at increased risk for these disorders. The lowest effective estrogen dose should be provided for the shortest duration necessary because risks increase with increasing age, time since menopause, and duration of use. Women must be informed of the potential benefits and risks of all therapeutic options, and care should be individualized, based on a woman's medical history, needs, and preferences.

Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is given to relieve the climacteric symptoms of menopause. Use of HRT reduced after a report from the Women's Health Initiative linked it to an increased risk of breast cancer. This association has been confirmed in several other studies, including the Million Women Study. The risk of breast cancer is greater for formulations that contain both estrogen and progesterone, compared with estrogen alone. The breast cancer risk associated with HRT is higher for estrogen receptor-positive cancers than for estrogen receptor-negative cancers, and for low-grade cancers compared with high-grade cancers. After cessation of HRT the increased risk of breast cancer dissipates within 2 years. The rapidity of the decline suggests that a proportion of breast cancers that are hormone dependent will regress if the hormonal stimulation is removed. In evaluating a woman who is considering HRT, factors that have been associated with an increased risk include the initiation of hormone use immediately after menopause, a lean body mass and high mammographic breast density.

The exact duration of hormone therapy use associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer, however, is unknown. 3. Dementia. In the Women’s Health Initiative Memory Study (WHIMS), 4,532 generally healthy postmenopausal women 65 years of age and older were studied, of whom 35% were 70 to 74 years of age and 18% were 75 or older. After an average follow-up of 4 years, 40 women being treated with CE/MPA (1.8%, n=2,229) and 21 women in the placebo group (0.9%, n=2,303) received diagnoses of probable dementia. The relative risk for CE/MPA versus placebo was 2.05 (95% confidence interval 1.21 to 3.48), and was similar for women with and without histories of menopausal hormone use before WHIMS. The absolute risk of probable dementia for CE/MPA versus placebo was 45 versus 22 cases per 10,000 women-years, and the absolute excess risk for CE/MPA was 23 cases per 10,000 women-years. It is unknown whether these findings apply to younger postmenopausal women. (See CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, CLINICAL STUDIES and PRECAUTIONS, Geriatric Use.) It is unknown whether these findings apply to estrogen alone therapy. 4. Gallbladder disease. A 2- to 4-fold increase in the risk of gallbladder disease requiring surgery in postmenopausal women receiving estrogens has been reported. 5. Hypercalcemia. Estrogen administration may lead to severe hypercalcemia in patients with breast cancer and bone metastases. If hypercalcemia occurs, use of the drug should be stopped and appropriate measures taken to reduce the serum calcium level. 6. Visual abnormalities. Retinal vascular thrombosis has been reported in patients receiving estrogens. Discontinue medication pending examination if there is sudden partial or complete loss of vision, or a sudden onset of proptosis, diplopia, or migraine. If examination reveals papilledema or retinal vascular lesions, estrogens should be permanently discontinued.