31
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Association of Menopausal Hormone Therapy With Breast Cancer Incidence and Mortality During Long-term Follow-up of the Women’s Health Initiative Randomized Clinical Trials

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          What is the association of estrogen plus progestin or estrogen alone with breast cancer incidence and breast cancer mortality? In long-term follow up of 2 placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials involving 27 347 postmenopausal women, prior randomized use of conjugated equine estrogen (CEE), compared with placebo, among women with prior hysterectomy was significantly associated with lower risk of breast cancer (annualized incidence, 0.30% vs 0.37%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.78); and breast cancer mortality (annualized mortality, 0.031% vs 0.046%; HR, 0.60), whereas prior randomized use of CEE plus medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), compared with placebo, among women with an intact uterus, was significantly associated with higher risk of breast cancer (annualized incidence, 0.45% vs 0.36%; HR, 1.28) and no significant difference in breast cancer mortality (annualized mortality, 0.045% vs 0.035%; HR, 1.35). Among postmenopausal women, prior randomized use of CEE in women with prior hysterectomy was significantly associated with a lower risk of breast cancer incidence and mortality, whereas prior randomized use of CEE plus MPA in women with an intact uterus was significantly associated with a higher risk of breast cancer incidence and no significant difference in breast cancer mortality. The influence of menopausal hormone therapy on breast cancer remains unsettled with discordant findings from observational studies and randomized clinical trials. To assess the association of prior randomized use of estrogen plus progestin or prior randomized use of estrogen alone with breast cancer incidence and mortality in the Women’s Health Initiative clinical trials. Long-term follow-up of 2 placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials that involved 27 347 postmenopausal women aged 50 through 79 years with no prior breast cancer and negative baseline screening mammogram. Women were enrolled at 40 US centers from 1993 to 1998 with follow-up through December 31, 2017. In the trial involving 16 608 women with a uterus, 8506 were randomized to receive 0.625 mg/d of conjugated equine estrogen (CEE) plus 2.5 mg/d of medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) and 8102, placebo. In the trial involving 10 739 women with prior hysterectomy, 5310 were randomized to receive 0.625 mg/d of CEE alone and 5429, placebo. The CEE-plus-MPA trial was stopped in 2002 after 5.6 years’ median intervention duration, and the CEE-only trial was stopped in 2004 after 7.2 years’ median intervention duration. The primary outcome was breast cancer incidence (protocol prespecified primary monitoring outcome for harm) and secondary outcomes were deaths from breast cancer and deaths after breast cancer. Among 27 347 postmenopausal women who were randomized in both trials (baseline mean [SD] age, 63.4 years [7.2 years]), after more than 20 years of median cumulative follow-up, mortality information was available for more than 98%. CEE alone compared with placebo among 10 739 women with a prior hysterectomy was associated with statistically significantly lower breast cancer incidence with 238 cases (annualized rate, 0.30%) vs 296 cases (annualized rate, 0.37%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65-0.93; P  = .005) and was associated with statistically significantly lower breast cancer mortality with 30 deaths (annualized mortality rate, 0.031%) vs 46 deaths (annualized mortality rate, 0.046%; HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.37-0.97; P  = .04). In contrast, CEE plus MPA compared with placebo among 16 608 women with a uterus was associated with statistically significantly higher breast cancer incidence with 584 cases (annualized rate, 0.45%) vs 447 cases (annualized rate, 0.36%; HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.13-1.45; P  < .001) and no significant difference in breast cancer mortality with 71 deaths (annualized mortality rate, 0.045%) vs 53 deaths (annualized mortality rate, 0.035%; HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.94-1.95; P = .11). In this long-term follow-up study of 2 randomized trials, prior randomized use of CEE alone, compared with placebo, among women who had a previous hysterectomy, was significantly associated with lower breast cancer incidence and lower breast cancer mortality, whereas prior randomized use of CEE plus MPA, compared with placebo, among women who had an intact uterus, was significantly associated with a higher breast cancer incidence but no significant difference in breast cancer mortality. This study reports 20-year breast cancer incidence among participants in Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) trials randomized to conjugated equine estrogen (CEE) alone or with medroxyprogesterone acetate vs placebo.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Influence of estrogen plus progestin on breast cancer and mammography in healthy postmenopausal women: the Women's Health Initiative Randomized Trial.

          The Women's Health Initiative trial of combined estrogen plus progestin was stopped early when overall health risks, including invasive breast cancer, exceeded benefits. Outstanding issues not previously addressed include characteristics of breast cancers observed among women using hormones and whether diagnosis may be influenced by hormone effects on mammography. To determine the relationship among estrogen plus progestin use, breast cancer characteristics, and mammography recommendations. Following a comprehensive breast cancer risk assessment, 16 608 postmenopausal women aged 50 to 79 years with an intact uterus were randomly assigned to receive combined conjugated equine estrogens (0.625 mg/d) plus medroxyprogesterone acetate (2.5 mg/d) or placebo from 1993 to 1998 at 40 clinical centers. Screening mammography and clinical breast examinations were performed at baseline and yearly thereafter. Breast cancer number and characteristics, and frequency of abnormal mammograms by estrogen plus progestin exposure. In intent-to-treat analyses, estrogen plus progestin increased total (245 vs 185 cases; hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; weighted P<.001) and invasive (199 vs 150 cases; HR, 1.24; weighted P =.003) breast cancers compared with placebo. The invasive breast cancers diagnosed in the estrogen plus progestin group were similar in histology and grade but were larger (mean [SD], 1.7 cm [1.1] vs 1.5 cm [0.9], respectively; P =.04) and were at more advanced stage (regional/metastatic 25.4% vs 16.0%, respectively; P =.04) compared with those diagnosed in the placebo group. After 1 year, the percentage of women with abnormal mammograms was substantially greater in the estrogen plus progestin group (716 [9.4%] of 7656) compared with placebo group (398 [5.4%] of 7310; P<.001), a pattern which continued for the study duration. Relatively short-term combined estrogen plus progestin use increases incident breast cancers, which are diagnosed at a more advanced stage compared with placebo use, and also substantially increases the percentage of women with abnormal mammograms. These results suggest estrogen plus progestin may stimulate breast cancer growth and hinder breast cancer diagnosis.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Type and timing of menopausal hormone therapy and breast cancer risk: individual participant meta-analysis of the worldwide epidemiological evidence

            (2019)
            Summary Background Published findings on breast cancer risk associated with different types of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) are inconsistent, with limited information on long-term effects. We bring together the epidemiological evidence, published and unpublished, on these associations, and review the relevant randomised evidence. Methods Principal analyses used individual participant data from all eligible prospective studies that had sought information on the type and timing of MHT use; the main analyses are of individuals with complete information on this. Studies were identified by searching many formal and informal sources regularly from Jan 1, 1992, to Jan 1, 2018. Current users were included up to 5 years (mean 1·4 years) after last-reported MHT use. Logistic regression yielded adjusted risk ratios (RRs) comparing particular groups of MHT users versus never users. Findings During prospective follow-up, 108 647 postmenopausal women developed breast cancer at mean age 65 years (SD 7); 55 575 (51%) had used MHT. Among women with complete information, mean MHT duration was 10 years (SD 6) in current users and 7 years (SD 6) in past users, and mean age was 50 years (SD 5) at menopause and 50 years (SD 6) at starting MHT. Every MHT type, except vaginal oestrogens, was associated with excess breast cancer risks, which increased steadily with duration of use and were greater for oestrogen-progestagen than oestrogen-only preparations. Among current users, these excess risks were definite even during years 1–4 (oestrogen-progestagen RR 1·60, 95% CI 1·52–1·69; oestrogen-only RR 1·17, 1·10–1·26), and were twice as great during years 5–14 (oestrogen-progestagen RR 2·08, 2·02–2·15; oestrogen-only RR 1·33, 1·28–1·37). The oestrogen-progestagen risks during years 5–14 were greater with daily than with less frequent progestagen use (RR 2·30, 2·21–2·40 vs 1·93, 1·84–2·01; heterogeneity p<0·0001). For a given preparation, the RRs during years 5–14 of current use were much greater for oestrogen-receptor-positive tumours than for oestrogen-receptor-negative tumours, were similar for women starting MHT at ages 40–44, 45–49, 50–54, and 55–59 years, and were attenuated by starting after age 60 years or by adiposity (with little risk from oestrogen-only MHT in women who were obese). After ceasing MHT, some excess risk persisted for more than 10 years; its magnitude depended on the duration of previous use, with little excess following less than 1 year of MHT use. Interpretation If these associations are largely causal, then for women of average weight in developed countries, 5 years of MHT, starting at age 50 years, would increase breast cancer incidence at ages 50–69 years by about one in every 50 users of oestrogen plus daily progestagen preparations; one in every 70 users of oestrogen plus intermittent progestagen preparations; and one in every 200 users of oestrogen-only preparations. The corresponding excesses from 10 years of MHT would be about twice as great. Funding Cancer Research UK and the Medical Research Council.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Test of the National Death Index and Equifax Nationwide Death Search.

              The authors compared the ability of the National Death Index and the Equifax Nationwide Death Search to ascertain deaths of participants in the Nurses' Health Study. Each service was sent information on 197 participants aged 60-68 years in 1989 whose deaths were reported by kin or postal authorities and 1,997 participants of the same age who were known to be alive. Neither service was aware of the authors' information regarding participants' vital status. The sensitivity of the National Death Index was 98 percent and that of Equifax was 79 percent. Sensitivity was similar for women aged 65-68 years; however, for women aged 61-64 years, the sensitivity of the National Death Index was 97.7 percent compared with 60.2 percent for Equifax. The specificity of both services was approximately 100 percent. The contrast between the sources of these databases and the matching algorithms they employ has implications for researchers and for those planning health data systems.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA
                JAMA
                American Medical Association (AMA)
                0098-7484
                July 28 2020
                July 28 2020
                : 324
                : 4
                : 369
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Lundquist Institute for Biomedical Innovation at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, California
                [2 ]Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Division of Public Health Sciences, Seattle, Washington
                [3 ]Division of Public Health Sciences, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
                [4 ]Stanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
                [5 ]Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
                [6 ]Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
                [7 ]Department of Oncology, Karmanos Cancer Institute at Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan
                [8 ]Department of Family, Population and Preventive Medicine, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York
                [9 ]Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis
                [10 ]Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York
                [11 ]College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus
                [12 ]Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Florida Health Internal Medicine, Gainesville
                Article
                10.1001/jama.2020.9482
                7388026
                32721007
                17040c3f-d4c5-4aad-8cc7-1f32a5b5a099
                © 2020

                Comments

                Comment on this article