Explore the vast range of titles available.

AbstractObjectiveTo assess the risks of breast cancer associated with different types and durations of hormone replacement therapy (HRT).DesignTwo nested case-control studies.SettingUK general practices contributing to QResearch or Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), linked to hospital, mortality, social deprivation, and cancer registry (QResearch only) data.Participants98 611 women aged 50-79 with a primary diagnosis of breast cancer between 1998 and 2018, matched by age, general practice, and index date to 457 498 female controls.Main outcome measuresBreast cancer diagnosis from general practice, mortality, hospital, or cancer registry records. Odds ratios for HRT types, adjusted for personal characteristics, smoking status, alcohol consumption, comorbidities, family history, and other prescribed drugs. Separate results from QResearch or CPRD were combined.ResultsOverall, 33 703 (34%) women with a diagnosis of breast cancer and 134 391 (31%) controls had used HRT prior to one year before the index date. Compared with never use, in recent users (<5 years) with long term use (≥5 years), oestrogen only therapy and combined oestrogen and progestogen therapy were both associated with increased risks of breast cancer (adjusted odds ratio 1.15 (95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.21) and 1.79 (1.73 to 1.85), respectively). For combined progestogens, the increased risk was highest for norethisterone (1.88, 1.79 to 1.99) and lowest for dydrogesterone (1.24, 1.03 to 1.48). Past long term use of oestrogen only therapy and past short term (<5 years) use of oestrogen-progestogen were not associated with increased risk. The risk associated with past long term oestrogen-progestogen use, however, remained increased (1.16, 1.11 to 1.21). In recent oestrogen only users, between three (in younger women) and eight (in older women) extra cases per 10 000 women years would be expected, and in oestrogen-progestogen users between nine and 36 extra cases per 10 000 women years. For past oestrogen-progestogen users, the results would suggest between two and eight extra cases per 10 000 women years.ConclusionThis study has produced new generalisable estimates of the increased risks of breast cancer associated with use of different hormone replacement preparations in the UK. The levels of risks varied between types of HRT, with higher risks for combined treatments and for longer duration of use.

It is important to monitor the association between menopausal hormone therapy (HT) use and breast cancer (BC) risk with contemporary estimates, and specifically focus on HT types and new drugs. We estimated hazard ratios (HR) of BC risk according to HT type, administration route and individual drugs, overall and stratified by body mass index (BMI), molecular subtype and detection mode, with non-HT use as reference. We included 1,275,783 women, 45+ years, followed from 2004, for a median of 12.7 years. Oral oestrogen combined with daily progestin was associated with the highest risk of BC (HR 2.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.31-2.54), with drug-specific HRs ranging from Cliovelle®: 1.63 (95% CI 1.35-1.96) to Kliogest®: 2.67 (2.37-3.00). Vaginal oestradiol was not associated with BC risk. HT use was more strongly associated with luminal A cancer (HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.86-2.09) than other molecular subtypes, and more strongly with interval (HR 2.00, 95% CI: 1.83-2.30) than screen-detected (HR 1.33, 95% CI 1.26-1.41) BC in women 50-71 years. HRs for HT use decreased with increasing BMI. The use of oral and transdermal HT was associated with an increased risk of BC. The associations varied according to HT type, individual drugs, molecular subtype, detection mode and BMI.

In this study of Danish women, oral contraceptive pills containing estrogen and progestin were associated with increased risks of stroke and myocardial infarction (MI). Variations in risk according to estrogen dose and progestin type were modest. The risk of thromboembolic complications with the use of hormonal contraception is an important issue scientifically and is relevant for counseling women about contraceptive options. Several studies have assessed the risk of venous thromboembolism associated with the use of newer hormonal contraceptive products, (i.e., those from the past 10 years) 1 – 8 but few studies have examined thrombotic stroke and myocardial infarction, and the results of available studies have been conflicting. 7 – 20 Although arterial complications are less frequent than venous complications among young women, the short-term and long-term consequences of arterial complications are often more serious. In addition to oral contraceptive . . .

AbstractObjectiveTo assess the effect of contemporary menopausal hormone therapy on the risk of cardiovascular disease according to the route of administration and combination of hormones.DesignNationwide register based emulated target trial.SettingSwedish national registries.Participants919 614 women aged 50-58 between 2007 and 2020 without hormone therapy use in the previous two years, identified from the Swedish population.Interventions138 nested trials were designed, starting each month from July 2007 until December 2018. Using the prescription registry data for that specific month, women who had not used hormone therapy in the previous two years were assigned to one of eight treatment groups: oral combined continuous, oral combined sequential, oral unopposed oestrogen, oral oestrogen with local progestin, tibolone, transdermal combined, transdermal unopposed oestrogen, or non-initiators of menopausal hormone therapy.Main outcome measuresHazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals were estimated for venous thromboembolism, as well as for ischaemic heart disease, cerebral infarction, and myocardial infarction separately and as a composite cardiovascular disease outcome. Treatment effects were estimated by contrasting initiators and non-initiators in observational analogues to “intention-to-treat” analyses and continuous users versus never users in “per protocol” analyses.ResultsA total of 77 512 women were initiators of any menopausal hormone therapy and 842 102 women were non-initiators. 24 089 women had an event recorded during the follow-up: 10 360 (43.0%) had an ischaemic heart disease event, 4098 (17.0%) had a cerebral infarction event, 4312 (17.9%) had a myocardial infarction event, and 9196 (38.2%) had a venous thromboembolic event. In intention-to-treat analyses, tibolone was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (hazard ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.11 to 2.08) compared with non-initiators. Initiators of tibolone or oral oestrogen-progestin therapy had a higher risk of ischaemic heart disease (1.46 (1.00 to 2.14) and 1.21 (1.00 to 1.46), respectively). A higher risk of venous thromboembolism was observed for oral continuous oestrogen-progestin therapy (1.61, 1.35 to 1.92), sequential therapy (2.00, 1.61 to 2.49), and oestrogen-only therapy (1.57, 1.02 to 2.44). Additional results in per protocol analyses showed that use of tibolone was associated with a higher risk of cerebral infarction (1.97, 1.02 to 3.78) and myocardial infarction (1.94, 1.01 to 3.73).ConclusionsUse of oral oestrogen-progestin therapy was associated with an increased risk of heart disease and venous thromboembolism, whereas the use of tibolone was associated with an increased risk of ischaemic heart disease, cerebral infarction, and myocardial infarction but not venous thromboembolism. These findings highlight the diverse effects of different hormone combinations and administration methods on the risk of cardiovascular disease.

In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving women with vaginal bleeding in early pregnancy, treatment with progesterone during the first trimester did not result in a significantly higher incidence of live births than placebo.

AbstractObjectivesTo evaluate the clinical effectiveness of long acting progestogens compared with the combined oral contraceptive pill in preventing recurrence of endometriosis related pain.DesignThe PRE-EMPT (preventing recurrence of endometriosis) pragmatic, parallel group, open label, randomised controlled trial.Setting34 UK hospitals.Participants405 women of reproductive age undergoing conservative surgery for endometriosis.InterventionsParticipants were randomised in a 1:1 ratio using a secure internet facility to a long acting progestogen (depot medroxyprogesterone acetate or levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system) or the combined oral contraceptive pill.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was pain measured three years after randomisation using the pain domain of the Endometriosis Health Profile 30 (EHP-30) questionnaire. Secondary outcomes (evaluated at six months, one, two, and three years) included the four core and six modular domains of the EHP-30, and treatment failure (further therapeutic surgery or second line medical treatment).Results405 women were randomised to receive a long acting progestogen (n=205) or combined oral contraceptive pill (n=200). At three years, there was no difference in pain scores between the groups (adjusted mean difference −0.8, 95% confidence interval −5.7 to 4.2, P=0.76), which had improved by around 40% in both groups compared with preoperative values (an average of 24 and 23 points for long acting progestogen and combined oral contraceptive pill groups, respectively). Most of the other domains of the EHP-30 also showed improvement at all time points compared with preoperative scores, without evidence of any differences between groups. Women randomised to a long acting progestogen underwent fewer surgical procedures or second line treatments compared with those randomised to the combined oral contraceptive pill group (73 v 97; hazard ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 1.00).ConclusionsPostoperative prescription of a long acting progestogen or the combined oral contraceptive pill results in similar levels of improvement in endometriosis related pain at three years, with both groups showing around a 40% improvement compared with preoperative levels. While women can be reassured that both options are effective, the reduced risk of repeat surgery for endometriosis and hysterectomy might make long acting reversible progestogens preferable for some.Trial registrationISRCTN registry ISRCTN97865475.

Objectives To evaluate the risk of venous thromboembolic events associated with the use of progestin-only contraception and whether that risk differs with the mode of drug delivery (oral, intrauterine, or depot injection).Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies.Data sources Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and reference lists of relevant reviews.Study selection Randomised controlled trials and case-control, cohort, and cross sectional studies with venous thromboembolic outcome for progestin-only contraception reported relative to a non-hormone comparator group.Data extraction Data were extracted by two independent investigators, and consensus for inclusion was reached after assessment by additional investigators.Results Among the 2022 unique references identified by all searches, eight observational studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. A total of 147 women across all studies were diagnosed with a venous thromboembolic event while taking progestin-only contraception, and the summary measure for the adjusted relative risk of a venous thromboembolic episode for users versus non-users of a progestin-only contraceptive was, based on the random effects model, 1.03 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.39). Subgroup analysis confirmed there was no association between venous thromboembolic risk and progestin-only pills (relative risk 0.90 (0.57 to 1.45)) or a progestin intrauterine device (0.61 (0.24 to 1.53)). The relative risk of a venous thromboembolic event for users of an injectable progestin versus non-users was 2.67 (1.29 to 5.53).Conclusions Published data assessing the risk of venous thromboembolism in women prescribed progestin-only contraception are limited. In this meta-analysis of eight observational studies, the use of progestin-only contraception was not associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism compared with non-users of hormonal contraception. The potential association between injectable progestins and thrombosis requires further study.

To prevent the occurrence of a luteinizing hormone surge during assisted reproductive technology cycles, clinicians commonly utilize gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues or progestin. However, there is a paucity of data directly comparing the reliability and efficacy of these strategies. This retrospective study compares ovarian stimulation outcomes in intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles using either a progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol or a GnRH antagonist protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation, conducted between January 2022 and November 2023. A total of 385 patients were analyzed, with 150 receiving the PPOS protocol and 235 receiving the GnRH antagonist protocol. There were no significant differences in oocyte yield, embryo quality, fertilization rates, or pregnancy outcomes between the two groups. Multiple regression analysis revealed that the type of stimulation protocol was not associated with live birth rates (LBR). However, longer infertility duration ( p  = 0.011) and diminished ovarian reserve ( p  < 0.001) were linked to lower LBR. Conversely, a higher number of good-quality embryos ( p  = 0.003), increased blastocyst formation rates ( p  = 0.003), and two-embryo transfers ( p  = 0.003) were associated with improved LBR. These findings suggest that the PPOS protocol is an effective approach for ovarian stimulation in ICSI cycles, demonstrating comparable outcomes to GnRH antagonists across multiple outcome measures.

AbstractObjectiveTo assess the risk of intracranial meningioma associated with oral contraceptives containing desogestrel, levonorgestrel, or levonorgestrel combined with oestrogen.DesignCase-control study.SettingFrench national health data system (Système National des Données de Santé).Participants8391 women living in France who required surgery for intracranial meningioma in 2020-23. Each patient was matched to 10 women without intracranial meningioma (controls) on year of birth and area of residence.Main outcome measureRisk of intracranial meningioma associated with oral contraceptives containing desogestrel 75µg, levonorgestrel 30µg, or levonorgestrel 50-150 µg combined with oestrogen, and duration of use: short term use was defined by one or more dispensations within the year before the index date only, and prolonged use was defined by continuous use of one year or more (up to seven or more years of continuous use). Conditional logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios.Results92 301 women, mean age 59.7 years (standard deviation 12.9 years), were included. Among 8391women who had undergone surgery for intracranial meningioma, 287 (3.4%) used desogestrel 75µg (v 2769/83 910 (3.3%) controls), 17 (0.2%) used levonorgestrel 30 µg (v 140 (0.2%)), and 157 (1.9%) used levonorgestrel combined with oestrogen (v 1933 (2.3%)). In analyses of desogestrel according to duration of use, the odds ratio for risk of intracranial meningioma for short term use was 1.02 (95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.34) and for prolonged use was 1.32 (1.14 to 1.53). Risk was driven by more than five continuous years of use: odds ratio 1.51 (1.17 to 1.94) for five to seven years and 2.09 (1.51 to 2.90) for ≥7 years. Excess risk was greater in women with meningiomas located in the middle or anterior part of the skull base (1.90 (1.47 to 2.46) and 1.50 (1.17 to 1.93), respectively) and in those who had previously used a progestogen of known associated increased risk (3.30 (2.64 to 4.11)). Results showed no excess risk of intracranial meningioma for levonorgestrel (alone or combined with oestrogen) regardless of duration of use. The estimated number needed to harm with desogestrel was 67 300 women for one intracranial meningioma requiring surgery. Risk was no longer observed one year after discontinuation of desogestrel.ConclusionsThe results showed a small increased risk of intracranial meningioma in women who had used desogestrel 75 µg for more than five continuous years, but no risk in users of levonorgestrel (alone or combined with oestrogen).

Endometrial cancer (EC) in young women of reproductive age is a relatively rare diagnosis. However, since in the modern era women delay their childbearing for a variety of social reasons, more and more women in the near future will be nulliparous and have a diagnosis of EC at the same time. Hence, a more conservative approach of EC is desirable to preserve fertility of these women, without compromising their survival. Recently, the number of studies reporting encouraging results on fertility-sparing management of EC with high dose of progestins is increasing. It seems that preserving the uterus and the ovaries in a carefully selected patient with EC confers only a very small risk combined with an enormous benefit. Selection of women suitable for such a conservative approach, as well as method of treatment, follow-up, recurrence, obstetric outcomes, and survival rates are very important parameters when consulting women with EC wishing to preserve their fertility. In this article, we try to elucidate all the previously mentioned aspects and formulate clinical recommendations, based on published data, about the most proper approach and consultation of these patients.