Explore the vast range of titles available.

Endometrial cancer is the most common gynaecological cancer in high income countries and its incidence is rising globally. Although an ageing population and fewer benign hysterectomies have contributed to this trend, the growing prevalence of obesity is the major underlying cause. Obesity poses challenges for diagnosis and treatment and more research is needed to offer primary prevention to high-risk women and to optimise endometrial cancer survivorship. Early presentation with postmenopausal bleeding ensures most endometrial cancers are cured by hysterectomy but those with advanced disease have a poor prognosis. Minimally invasive surgical staging and sentinel-lymph-node biopsy provides a low morbidity alternative to historical surgical management without compromising oncological outcomes. Adjuvant radiotherapy reduces loco-regional recurrence in intermediate-risk and high-risk cases. Advances in our understanding of the molecular biology of endometrial cancer have paved the way for targeted chemotherapeutic strategies, and clinical trials will establish their benefit in adjuvant, advanced, and recurrent disease settings in the coming years.

Iron deficiency is one of the leading contributors to the global burden of disease, and particularly affects children, premenopausal women, and people in low-income and middle-income countries. Anaemia is one of many consequences of iron deficiency, and clinical and functional impairments can occur in the absence of anaemia. Iron deprivation from erythroblasts and other tissues occurs when total body stores of iron are low or when inflammation causes withholding of iron from the plasma, particularly through the action of hepcidin, the main regulator of systemic iron homoeostasis. Oral iron therapy is the first line of treatment in most cases. Hepcidin upregulation by oral iron supplementation limits the absorption efficiency of high-dose oral iron supplementation, and of oral iron during inflammation. Modern parenteral iron formulations have substantially altered iron treatment and enable rapid, safe total-dose iron replacement. An underlying cause should be sought in all patients presenting with iron deficiency: screening for coeliac disease should be considered routinely, and endoscopic investigation to exclude bleeding gastrointestinal lesions is warranted in men and postmenopausal women presenting with iron deficiency anaemia. Iron supplementation programmes in low-income countries comprise part of the solution to meeting WHO Global Nutrition Targets.

Key Clinical PointsPostmenopausal OsteoporosisFragility fractures are very common among postmenopausal women and are associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and health care expenditures.Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is recommended in postmenopausal women 65 years of age or older and postmenopausal women younger than 65 years of age who have risk factors.Osteoporosis is diagnosed on the basis of a fragility fracture or a DXA T score of −2.5 or less.Treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis is recommended for patients who have any of the following findings: a fragility fracture (or fractures), particularly of the hip or spine, regardless of the patient’s bone mineral density; a T score of −2.5 or less at the lumbar spine, total hip, or femoral neck; or a high 10-year fracture risk (hip fracture risk of ≥3% or major osteoporotic fracture risk of ≥20%) according to the fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX).Evaluation should include risk stratification (based on the T score, presence of fractures, and FRAX score) to categorize candidates who meet treatment thresholds as “high risk” or “very high risk.”The selection of therapy must include consideration of coexisting conditions and contraindications, but anabolic agents are the preferred first line of treatment in women at very high risk.

Iron deficiency anaemia (IDA) is a major cause of morbidity and burden of disease worldwide. It can generally be diagnosed by blood testing and remedied by iron replacement therapy (IRT) using the oral or intravenous route. The many causes of iron deficiency include poor dietary intake and malabsorption of dietary iron, as well as a number of significant gastrointestinal (GI) pathologies. Because blood is iron-rich it can result from chronic blood loss, and this is a common mechanism underlying the development of IDA—for example, as a consequence of menstrual or GI blood loss.Approximately a third of men and postmenopausal women presenting with IDA have an underlying pathological abnormality, most commonly in the GI tract. Therefore optimal management of IDA requires IRT in combination with appropriate investigation to establish the underlying cause. Unexplained IDA in all at-risk individuals is an accepted indication for fast-track secondary care referral in the UK because GI malignancies can present in this way, often in the absence of specific symptoms. Bidirectional GI endoscopy is the standard diagnostic approach to examination of the upper and lower GI tract, though radiological scanning is an alternative in some situations for assessing the large bowel. In recurrent or refractory IDA, wireless capsule endoscopy plays an important role in assessment of the small bowel.IDA may present in primary care or across a range of specialties in secondary care, and because of this and the insidious nature of the condition it has not always been optimally managed despite the considerable burden of disease— with investigation sometimes being inappropriate, incorrectly timed or incomplete, and the role of IRT for symptom relief neglected. It is therefore important that contemporary guidelines for the management of IDA are available to all clinicians. This document is a revision of previous British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines, updated in the light of subsequent evidence and developments.

One in five people are at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and aortic valve stenosis due to high lipoprotein(a). Lipoprotein(a) concentrations are lowest in people from east Asia, Europe, and southeast Asia, intermediate in people from south Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America, and highest in people from Africa. Concentrations are more than 90% genetically determined and 17% higher in post-menopausal women than in men. Individuals at a higher cardiovascular risk should have lipoprotein(a) concentrations measured once in their lifetime to inform those with high concentrations to adhere to a healthy lifestyle and receive medication to lower other cardiovascular risk factors. With no approved drugs to lower lipoprotein(a) concentrations, it is promising that at least five drugs in development lower concentrations by 65–98%, with three currently being tested in large cardiovascular endpoint trials. This Review covers historical perspectives, physiology and pathophysiology, genetic evidence of causality, epidemiology, role in familial hypercholesterolaemia and diabetes, management, screening, diagnosis, measurement, prevention, and future lipoprotein(a)-lowering drugs.

Ovarian cancer continues to have a poor prognosis with the majority of women diagnosed with advanced disease. Therefore, we undertook the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) to determine if population screening can reduce deaths due to the disease. We report on ovarian cancer mortality after long-term follow-up in UKCTOCS. In this randomised controlled trial, postmenopausal women aged 50–74 years were recruited from 13 centres in National Health Service trusts in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Exclusion criteria were bilateral oophorectomy, previous ovarian or active non-ovarian malignancy, or increased familial ovarian cancer risk. The trial management system confirmed eligibility and randomly allocated participants in blocks of 32 using computer generated random numbers to annual multimodal screening (MMS), annual transvaginal ultrasound screening (USS), or no screening, in a 1:1:2 ratio. Follow-up was through national registries. The primary outcome was death due to ovarian or tubal cancer (WHO 2014 criteria) by June 30, 2020. Analyses were by intention to screen, comparing MMS and USS separately with no screening using the versatile test. Investigators and participants were aware of screening type, whereas the outcomes review committee were masked to randomisation group. This study is registered with ISRCTN, 22488978, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00058032. Between April 17, 2001, and Sept 29, 2005, of 1 243 282 women invited, 202 638 were recruited and randomly assigned, and 202 562 were included in the analysis: 50 625 (25·0%) in the MMS group, 50 623 (25·0%) in the USS group, and 101 314 (50·0%) in the no screening group. At a median follow-up of 16·3 years (IQR 15·1–17·3), 2055 women were diagnosed with tubal or ovarian cancer: 522 (1·0%) of 50 625 in the MMS group, 517 (1·0%) of 50 623 in the USS group, and 1016 (1·0%) of 101 314 in the no screening group. Compared with no screening, there was a 47·2% (95% CI 19·7 to 81·1) increase in stage I and 24·5% (−41·8 to –2·0) decrease in stage IV disease incidence in the MMS group. Overall the incidence of stage I or II disease was 39·2% (95% CI 16·1 to 66·9) higher in the MMS group than in the no screening group, whereas the incidence of stage III or IV disease was 10·2% (−21·3 to 2·4) lower. 1206 women died of the disease: 296 (0·6%) of 50 625 in the MMS group, 291 (0·6%) of 50 623 in the USS group, and 619 (0·6%) of 101 314 in the no screening group. No significant reduction in ovarian and tubal cancer deaths was observed in the MMS (p=0·58) or USS (p=0·36) groups compared with the no screening group. The reduction in stage III or IV disease incidence in the MMS group was not sufficient to translate into lives saved, illustrating the importance of specifying cancer mortality as the primary outcome in screening trials. Given that screening did not significantly reduce ovarian and tubal cancer deaths, general population screening cannot be recommended. National Institute for Health Research, Cancer Research UK, and The Eve Appeal.

Osteoporosis is the most common metabolic bone disease in the USA and the world. It is a subclinical condition until complicated by fracture(s). These fractures place an enormous medical and personal burden on individuals who suffer from them and take a significant economic toll. Any new fracture in an adult aged 50 years or older signifies imminent elevated risk for subsequent fractures, particularly in the year following the initial fracture. What a patient perceives as an unfortunate accident may be seen as a sentinel event indicative of bone fragility and increased future fracture risk even when the result of considerable trauma. Clinical or subclinical vertebral fractures, the most common type of osteoporotic fractures, are associated with a 5-fold increased risk for additional vertebral fractures and a 2- to 3-fold increased risk for fractures at other sites. Untreated osteoporosis can lead to a vicious cycle of recurrent fracture(s), often resulting in disability and premature death. In appropriate patients, treatment with effective antifracture medication prevents fractures and improves outcomes. Primary care providers and medical specialists are critical gatekeepers who can identify fractures and initiate proven osteoporosis interventions. Osteoporosis detection, diagnosis, and treatment should be routine practice in all adult healthcare settings. The Bone Health and Osteoporosis Foundation (BHOF) – formerly the National Osteoporosis Foundation – first published the Clinician’s Guide in 1999 to provide accurate information on osteoporosis prevention and treatment. Since that time, significant improvements have been made in diagnostic technologies and treatments for osteoporosis. Despite these advances, a disturbing gap persists in patient care. At-risk patients are often not screened to establish fracture probability and not educated about fracture prevention. Most concerning, the majority of highest risk women and men who have a fracture(s) are not diagnosed and do not receive effective, FDA-approved therapies. Even those prescribed appropriate therapy are unlikely to take the medication as prescribed. The Clinician’s Guide offers concise recommendations regarding prevention, risk assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and men aged 50 years and older. It includes indications for bone densitometry as well as fracture risk thresholds for pharmacologic intervention. Current medications build bone and/or decrease bone breakdown and dramatically reduce incident fractures. All antifracture therapeutics treat but do not cure the disease. Skeletal deterioration resumes sooner or later when a medication is discontinued—sooner for nonbisphosphonates and later for bisphosphonates. Even if normal BMD is achieved, osteoporosis and elevated risk for fracture are still present. The diagnosis of osteoporosis persists even if subsequent DXA T-scores are above − 2.5. Ongoing monitoring and strategic interventions will be necessary if fractures are to be avoided. In addition to pharmacotherapy, adequate intake of calcium and vitamin D, avoidance of smoking and excessive alcohol intake, weight-bearing and resistance-training exercise, and fall prevention are included in the fracture prevention armamentarium. Where possible, recommendations in this guide are based on evidence from RCTs; however, relevant published data and guidance from expert clinical experience provides the basis for recommendations in those areas where RCT evidence is currently deficient or not applicable to the many osteoporosis patients not considered for RCT participation due to age and morbidity.

Management of postmenopausal osteoporosis includes nonpharmacologic treatment (e.g., weightbearing exercise and fall-prevention strategies) and pharmacologic treatment. Bisphosphonates are considered first-line treatment in most women; benefits and rare potential risks are discussed. Foreword This Journal feature begins with a case vignette highlighting a common clinical problem. Evidence supporting various strategies is then presented, followed by a review of formal guidelines, when they exist. The article ends with the authors’ clinical recommendations. Stage A 73-year-old asymptomatic white woman with a history of a Colles fracture of the left radius 10 years earlier presents for evaluation. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry reveals a bone mineral density (BMD) T score of −2.8 in the lumbar spine and −2.5 in the total hip. How should this case be managed? The Clinical Problem Osteoporosis results in 1.5 million fractures per year in the United States, with the vast majority occurring in postmenopausal women. The disease is characterized by skeletal fragility and microarchitectural deterioration. The conceptual definition of osteoporosis links the high risk of postmenopausal fractures to low BMD . . .