|
|
| |
Current
Thoughts on The Safety of HRT
- Page 2
The WHI study showed an increase
in heart attacks, strokes, and breast cancer although confirming
the decrease in colon cancer, hip fractures and spinal fractures.
These complications were enough for many regulatory bodies
to suggest that HRT was less safe, should be used in the
lowest dose for the shortest possible time and only for
severe vasomotor symptoms. It was claimed that oestrogens
were no longer indicated for prevention of heart attacks
and strokes and should not be first-line treatment for the
prevention of osteoporosis.
These directives were issued
in spite of protest that the WHI used the wrong population
of the wrong age treated with the wrong oestrogens and come
to the wrong conclusions even from their own data.
There were not enough patients in the 50-55 age group to
make any comment about the effect on heart attacks. In a
subsequent WHI publication, it was clear that the increase
cardiovascular complications occurred in women over the
age of 70 and in women who started HRT even in this population
had a non-significant 11% decrease in cardiovascular events
if oestrogen/progestogen therapy was started within 10 years
of the menopause. One of the fundamental errors in this
study is that one dose is not appropriate for all patients.
They used a combination of Premarin with continuous progestogen
as a non-bleeding preparation. The epidemiologists were
not clinicians and were not aware that different women require
different doses by different routes of different combinations
of different hormones for different symptoms with different
surgical status and for different ages.
Although the Premarin/Provera combination was a totally
inappropriate treatment for these older women, it was not
possible to determine whether the increase in complications
in older women were due to the oestrogen or the progestogen
component or a combination of both. Thus the oestrogen-only
study was awaited with great interest particularly as it
had not been stopped. On 3rd March 2003 it was discontinued
with a mid-week Press conference which led to the newspapers
reporting that the oestrogen-only arm of the WHI study was
stopped because of an increase in strokes. The data did
not support that judgement.
Once again if we look at the
patients aged 50-59, we can see there was a decrease in
heart attacks of 42%, a decrease in breast cancer of 28%,
a decrease in colon cancer of 41%, a decrease in deaths
of 27%. There was a slight non-significant increase in strokes
of 8% which was 19 patients in the control group and 19
patients in the active group. This was hardly a reason to
stop the study which, with a few more patients, could have
shown a significant decrease in the incidence of breast
cancer.
There were so many faults in the design of the WHI
study that I believe it will be mostly discredited within
another 2-3 years, particularly as most of the patients
and most of the data from this study are inappropriate for
our practice. They used a treatment we don't use on a group
of patients we don't treat who had no symptoms. Their conclusions
are similar to the statement that we should not perform
an appendicectomy for gallbladder disease.
We know that.
Page 3 >>
John STUDD, DSc, MD, FRCOG
Professor of Gynaecology
18th January 2005
. www.studd.co.uk
Back
to top |
| |
| |
| |
|
|

|