In the month of October, the World Day against Osteoporosis was celebrated and the
date is dedicated to the global awareness of its prevention, diagnosis and treatment.
This disease affects about 200 million people worldwide, causing more than 8.9 million
fractures annually.
1
2
Globally, it affects 21.2% of women over 50 years of age.
3
Fractures caused by osteoporosis have great importance not only because of their high
prevalence, but also because of their serious physical, psychosocial and financial
consequences that affect both individuals and their families, the community and health
systems.
Considering these demographic aspects of the disease, the Brazilian Federation of
Gynecology and Obstetrics Associations – FEBRASO - joined other organizations and
medical societies in the campaign, since climacteric women are among the population
most at risk for osteoporosis, who nowadays correspond to a large percentage of patients
in gynecology offices. According to surveys by DataFolha, one of the main institutes
of public opinion in Brazil, eight in every ten women consider the specialty of Gynecology
and Obstetrics as the most important for women's health in Brazil.
4
For brazilian women , Gynecologist-Obstetricians are considered as reference physicians,
whether for treating problems of the specialty, as well as for counseling and guidance
when they need healthcare in another medical specialty.
4
Thus, the gynecologist's office becomes one of the main entry points into the health
system for women, and this professional should become a true sentinel in the screening
for osteoporosis, seeking to identify women at risk for fractures. Therefore, gynecologists
must be prepared for this task and also Also to refer the patient when the osteoporosis
etiology requires joint care with another medical specialty since this disease has
multiple origins and patients often require multidisciplinary follow-up. Thus the
Competence Matrix for Medical Residency Programs in Gynecology and Obstetrics stablished
by FEBRASGO emphasize the attention to climacteric women's health.
5
In addition, Febrasgo created the National Specialized Commission on Osteoporosis,
which has been developing an excellent work, aiming to reinforce the fundamentals
to approach patients at risk for osteoporosis. . With the active participation of
members of that Commission, the Brazilian Osteoporosis Manual was recently launched,
conceived as a practical guidelines for health professionalss.
6
Once the osteoporosis have been identified, it is essential that the physician offer
to the patient all the information about the disease in order that she must be awared
about the risks of suffering fracture. Thousands of women with this silent disease
are unaware of these risks. Currently there are international consensus regards the
necessity of the patients to change her lifestyle, adequate diet, use of calcium and
vitamin D, physical exercise, avoiding alcoholic beverages, among others, in addition
to supplementing with medication when necessary. Several options of pharmacological
treatment are available on the market, such as Hormone Replacement Therapy (HT), Bisphosphonates
(BP), Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulator (SERMs), Denosumab, Teriparatide and others
still being studied. All options have advantages and disadvantages and the choice
will depend on the professional's experience in dealing with each medication, considering
its possible side effects and/or complications of its use. Since the disease has multiple
triggering factors and patients are treated by different medical specialties, drug
therapy has varied according to treatment protocols established by different specialty
societies.
It is known that one of the main trigger for the development of osteoporosis in women
is estrogen deficiency consequent to physiological or induced ovarian failure, which
determines an increase in bone resorption that is not compensated by an equivalent
increase in formation.
7
The medical literature has consistently and significantly shown that HT (encompassing
both estrogenic therapy and estrogen-progestin therapy ) is indicated for climacteric
women when they presented with vasomotor symptoms and genitourinary syndrome of menopause.
Besides that, TH may be considered to be used to prevent bone loss and fragility fractures.
8
9
10
Estrogens have a positive effect on reducing the risk of fractures of the hip, vertebrae
and other related fractures in postmenopausal women. It is the only therapy available
with proven randomized clinical trials presenting effectiveness in reducing fractures,
even in groups of women who do not have an identified risk for fractures or who have
a T-score in the normal or osteopenic range in bone mineral densitometry (BMD).
11
Considering its well-known contraindications,
10
12
the HT in climacteric can be started in women at risk of fractures or osteoporosis
before the age of 60 or within the first ten years after menopause (window of opportunity).
There is an international consensus supported by influential Specialty Societies that
indicate its use, evidently establishing individualized safety criteria for each patient.
9
HT would be the best choice for climacteric women in that period, because in addition
to the undeniable benefits on bone mass, , patients have the opportunity to the additional
benefits offered by HT, such as the prevention or abolition of hot flashes, , protection
against genitourinary syndrome of menopause and its consequences on sexual health,
positive effects on collagen and skin and significantly improving in sleep and quality
of life.
10
Since HT is a routine prescription for gynecologists, it should obviously be the first
choice for these patients, considering the extra benefits mentioned above. However,
contrary to what is expected, an increasing use of BP has been observed as the first
choice among gynecologists rather than HT, even for those climacteric patients considered
within the window of opportunity who do not have any contraindication for its use.
Why gyneologists are missing this opportunity to prescribe HT? Several factors may
be contributing to this behavior. The first to be cited would still be the impact
of the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) study published two decades ago, which raised
fears among physicians and patients about the risk of the association between HT and
breast cancer and cardiovascular diseases.
13
It is known that many patients refuse to use HT for fear of breast cancer, often as
a result of misinformation or because they receive distorted information from their
own doctors , a common fact in current times, where social networks have negatively
contributed to the dissemination of information from unqualified origin that reaches
both, patients and healthcare professionals. It is important that the physician has
up-to-date information on these topics , through reliable sources to better guide
patients about the real risks of its use. The negative impact of the WHI study has
been revised in recent publications as its original data have been reviewed in more
detail. When subdividing patients by age groups and analyzing separately the effects
of therapy with estrogen alone versus the estrogen-progestin combination the results
show that the risks within the window of opportunity period are minimized, with the
benefits of HT being greater than the risks of its use
14
. It should be noted that in the WHI study the mean age of evaluated patients was
63 years (including patients up to 79 years old),
13
therefore, well above the age currently suggested in the international literature
for the introduction of HT. HT may be safe for a period of five years, which can be
extended to ten years, depending on the patient's response to treatment, always under
careful supervision of the attending physician.
10
The fact that hormone doses recommended nowadays are much lower compared to those
used two decades ago should also be taken into account. There are different therapeutic
schemes with proven cost-effectiveness and available in most countries including Brazil.
10
12
There is a worldwide trend towards its use by the non-oral route given the lower risks
and side effects.
In their Medical Residency Program , gynecologists received guidance and practices
for the use of HT, including training to deal with its side effects, especially the
management of abnormal uterine bleeding, which are frequent and constitute additional
difficulties for prescribers from other medical specialties who may assist these patients.
Perhaps this is the main reason for non-gynecological specialists to choose therapies
other than HT therapy and . in this sense, the gynecologist may have an advantage
to safer prescribe the HT. It is worth adding that the possible risks of HT disappear
quickly when its use is discontinued, unlike BP, which prolonged use, particularly
beyond five years, compromises the bone structure and decreases its resistance, with
the risk of significant adverse effects, since its residual effects may persist for
several years after discontinuation.
15
Doctors specialists in Gynecology should reflect on this issue and, in order to avoid
abuses in its prescription, it is good to remember that HT should not be recommended
without a clear indication for its use and must be in accordance with the acceptance
of the patient. and her priorities in terms of health as opposed to personal risks
aiming her quality of life