Optimising health after early menopause.

The typical age at menopause is 50-51 years in high-income countries. However, early menopause is common, with around 8% of women in high-income countries and 12% of women globally experiencing menopause between the ages of 40 years and 44 years. Menopause before age 40 years (premature ovarian insufficiency) affects an additional 2-4% of women. Both early menopause and premature ovarian insufficiency can herald an increased risk of chronic disease, including osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease. People who enter menopause at younger ages might also experience distress and feel less supported than those who reach menopause at the average age. Clinical practice guidelines are available for the diagnosis and management of premature ovarian insufficiency, but there is a gap in clinical guidance for early menopause. We argue that instead of distinct age thresholds being applied, early menopause should be seen on a spectrum between premature ovarian insufficiency and menopause at the average age. This Series paper presents evidence for the short-term and long-term consequences of early menopause. We offer a practical framework for clinicians to guide diagnosis and management of early menopause, which considers the nature and severity of symptoms, age and medical history, and the individual's wishes and priorities to optimise their quality of life and short-term and long-term health. We conclude with recommendations for future research to address key gaps in the current evidence.

Female reproductive histories and the risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: Female reproductive factors may influence the development of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) through the female hormonal environment, but studies on this topic are limited. This study aimed to assess whether age at menarche, number of children, infertility, miscarriage, stillbirth and age at natural menopause were associated with the risk of COPD. METHODS: Women from three cohorts with data on reproductive factors, COPD and covariates were included. Cause specific Cox regression models were adjusted for birth year, race, educational level, body mass index and pack years of smoking, stratified by asthma, and incorporating interaction between birth year and time. Between cohort differences and within cohort correlations were taken into account. RESULTS: Overall, 2 83 070 women were included and 10 737 (3.8%) developed COPD after a median follow-up of 11 (IQR 10-12) years. Analyses revealed a U shaped association between age at menarche and COPD (≤11 vs 13: HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.23; ≥16 vs 13: HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.27). Women with three or more children (3 vs 2: HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.17; ≥4 vs 2: HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.40), multiple miscarriages (2 vs 0: HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.32; ≥3 vs 0: HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.43) or stillbirth (1 vs 0: HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.53; ≥2 vs 0: HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.10) were at a higher risk of COPD. Among postmenopausal women, earlier age at natural menopause was associated with an increased risk of COPD (<40 vs 50-51: HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.63 to 1.75; 40-44 vs 50-51: HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.38 to 1.47). CONCLUSIONS: Multiple female reproductive factors, including age at menarche, number of children, miscarriage, stillbirth, and age at natural menopause were associated with the risk of COPD.

Association of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss with the risk of dementia.

Emerging evidence has shown the association between female reproductive histories (e.g., menarche age, parity, premature and early menopause) and the risk of dementia. However, little attention has been given to infertility and pregnancy loss. To examine the associations of infertility, recurrent miscarriages, and stillbirth with the risk of dementia, this study used data from four cohorts in the International Collaboration for a Life Course Approach to Reproductive Health and Chronic Disease Events. Women with data on at least one of the reproductive exposures of interest, dementia, and all covariates were included. Histories of infertility, miscarriage, and stillbirth were self-reported. Dementia (including Alzheimer's disease) was identified through surveys, aged care, pharmaceutical, hospital, and death registry data. Cause-specific Cox regression models were used to estimate the hazard ratios of dementia, accounting for well-established risk factors of dementia, study variability, and within-study correlation. Overall, 291,055 women were included at a median (interquartile range) age of 55.0 (47.0-62.0) at baseline. During the median (interquartile range) follow-up period of 13.0 (12.0-14.0) years, 3334 (1.2%) women developed dementia. Compared to women without stillbirth, a history of recurrent stillbirths (≥ 2) was associated with 64% higher risk of dementia (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.64, 95% confidence interval: 1.46-1.85). Compared to women without miscarriage, women with recurrent miscarriages (≥ 3) were at 22% higher risk of dementia (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.22, 95% confidence interval: 1.19-1.25). These findings suggest that recurrent stillbirths is a risk factor for dementia and may need to be considered in risk assessment of dementia in women.

Meat consumption and incident type 2 diabetes: an individual-participant federated meta-analysis of 1·97 million adults with 100 000 incident cases from 31 cohorts in 20 countries.

BACKGROUND: Meat consumption could increase the risk of type 2 diabetes. However, evidence is largely based on studies of European and North American populations, with heterogeneous analysis strategies and a greater focus on red meat than on poultry. We aimed to investigate the associations of unprocessed red meat, processed meat, and poultry consumption with type 2 diabetes using data from worldwide cohorts and harmonised analytical approaches. METHODS: This individual-participant federated meta-analysis involved data from 31 cohorts participating in the InterConnect project. Cohorts were from the region of the Americas (n=12) and the Eastern Mediterranean (n=2), European (n=9), South-East Asia (n=1), and Western Pacific (n=7) regions. Access to individual-participant data was provided by each cohort; participants were eligible for inclusion if they were aged 18 years or older and had available data on dietary consumption and incident type 2 diabetes and were excluded if they had a diagnosis of any type of diabetes at baseline or missing data. Cohort-specific hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were estimated for each meat type, adjusted for potential confounders (including BMI), and pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis, with meta-regression to investigate potential sources of heterogeneity. FINDINGS: Among 1 966 444 adults eligible for participation, 107 271 incident cases of type 2 diabetes were identified during a median follow-up of 10 (IQR 7-15) years. Median meat consumption across cohorts was 0-110 g/day for unprocessed red meat, 0-49 g/day for processed meat, and 0-72 g/day for poultry. Greater consumption of each of the three types of meat was associated with increased incidence of type 2 diabetes, with HRs of 1·10 (95% CI 1·06-1·15) per 100 g/day of unprocessed red meat (I2=61%), 1·15 (1·11-1·20) per 50 g/day of processed meat (I2=59%), and 1·08 (1·02-1·14) per 100 g/day of poultry (I2=68%). Positive associations between meat consumption and type 2 diabetes were observed in North America and in the European and Western Pacific regions; the CIs were wide in other regions. We found no evidence that the heterogeneity was explained by age, sex, or BMI. The findings for poultry consumption were weaker under alternative modelling assumptions. Replacing processed meat with unprocessed red meat or poultry was associated with a lower incidence of type 2 diabetes. INTERPRETATION: The consumption of meat, particularly processed meat and unprocessed red meat, is a risk factor for developing type 2 diabetes across populations. These findings highlight the importance of reducing meat consumption for public health and should inform dietary guidelines. FUNDING: The EU, the Medical Research Council, and the National Institute of Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre.