Menopausal hormone therapy and breast cancer risk: a population-based cohort study of 1.3 million women in Norway.

BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.

Contraceptives and Thrombosis: An Intertwined Revolutionary Road.

The development of oral contraceptives (OCs) began in 1921 and continued in the following years until the first regulatory approval from the Food and Drug Administration was granted in 1960. However, it took several years to realize that OCs presented an important but not frequent risk of venous thrombosis. Several reports ignored this dangerous effect and only in 1967 the Medical Research Council clearly stated this as an important risk. Later, research led to the formulation of second-generation OCs containing progestins, which nevertheless presented an increased thrombotic risk. In early 1980s, OCs containing third-generation progestins were introduced into the market. Only in 1995, it became clear that these new compounds induced a higher thrombotic risk than that related to the second-generation progestins. It appeared clear that the modulating action of progestins was against the procoagulant activity of estrogens. Lastly, at the end of the 2000s, OCs containing natural estrogens and a fourth-generation progestin (dienogest) became available. The prothrombotic effect of those natural products was not different from that of preparations containing second-generation progestins. Moreover, research over the years has produced much data on risk factors associated with OCs use such as age, obesity, cigarette smoking, and thrombophilia. These findings allowed us to better assess the individual thrombotic risk (both arterial and thrombotic) of each woman before offering an OC. Furthermore, research has shown that in high-risk people the use of single progestin is not dangerous as far as thrombosis is concerned. In conclusion, the OCs road has been long and difficult but has led to a great and unthinkable scientific and social enrichment since the 1960s.

Treatments of unscheduled vaginal bleeding due to progestin-only contraception.

OBJECTIVES: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows: To evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and side effects associated with the usage of different treatments for unscheduled vaginal bleeding in premenopausal women using progestin-only pills.

Hormonal Contraceptive Use Is Associated With a Decreased Incidence of Hypothyroidism.

OBJECTIVE: Hypothyroidism is one of the most common endocrine disorders affecting 5 to 10 times more women than men. Given this higher incidence in women, it is possible that hormonal differences or medications more commonly used by women may play a role in the risk of developing hypothyroidism. We hypothesized that hormonal contraception affects the risk of developing hypothyroidism. METHODS: Using the TriNetX database, we developed a case-control study and identified women aged 18 to 45 years in 4 distinct groups: (1) estrogen-progestin contraceptive (EPC) use, (2) progestin-only contraceptive (POC) use, (3) progestin-containing intrauterine device (IUD) use, and (4) controls. For each group, we ascertained data including the diagnosis of hypothyroidism, alcohol use, tobacco use, and body mass index. RESULTS: We identified 18 578 patients with sufficient data: EPC use, n = 5849; POC use, n = 5052; IUD use, n = 1000; and controls, n = 6677. A total of 118 individuals (1.8%) in the control group and 165 individuals (1.4%) who received hormonal contraception developed hypothyroidism. After using a logistic model to account for cofounding variables, all forms of hormonal contraception (EPC, POC, and IUD) had a protective effect against the diagnosis of hypothyroidism. POC and IUD uses had the greatest protective effect, with odds ratios of 0.14 and 0.12, respectively. EPC had a less pronounced but still significant effect, with an odds ratio of 0.30 (P < .001). CONCLUSION: This study of >18 000 women and the risk of developing hypothyroidism demonstrates a protective effect of hormonal contraceptive use. Our data, both unadjusted and adjusted using a logistic model to account for cofounding variables, suggest that the use of hormonal contraception, in any form, decreases the risk of developing hypothyroidism.

Ultra-low-dose continuous combined estradiol and dydrogesterone in postmenopausal women: A pooled safety and tolerability analysis.

Objective: To assess the safety and tolerability of ultra-low dose estradiol and dydrogesterone (E0.5 mg/D2.5 mg) among postmenopausal women. Methods: This pooled analysis of data from three clinical studies assessed the effects of continuous combined ultra-low-dose estradiol and dydrogesterone among postmenopausal women. Participants received E0.5 mg/D2.5 mg or placebo for 13 weeks (double-blind, randomized, European study), E0.5 mg/D2.5 mg or placebo for 12 weeks (double-blind, randomized, Chinese study), or E0.5 mg/D2.5 mg for 52 weeks (open-label, European study). Safety outcomes included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), treatment-emergent serious adverse events (TESAEs), treatment discontinuation due to a TEAE, and adverse events of special interest (AESIs). Results: Overall, 1027 women were included in the pooled analysis (E0.5 mg/D2.5 mg, n = 736; placebo, n = 291). Mean treatment exposure was 288.9 days in the E0.5 mg/D2.5 mg group and 86.6 days in the placebo group. The proportion of women experiencing ≥1 TEAE was similar in the E0.5 mg/D2.5 mg and placebo groups (50.1% vs 49.5%, respectively). TESAEs occurred in 12 (1.6%) women receiving E0.5 mg/D2.5 mg and 9 (3.1%) women receiving placebo. Discontinuation of study treatment was infrequent in both groups (E0.5 mg/D2.5 mg: 1.5%; placebo: 2.4%). The occurrence of breast pain was more common in the E0.5 mg/D2.5 mg group than in the placebo group (2.0% vs 0.3%) as was uterine hemorrhage (6.5% vs 2.4%). The incidence of acne, hypertrichoses and weight increased was similar between groups. Conclusions: Across three studies, ultra-low-dose estradiol plus dydrogesterone was well tolerated among postmenopausal women, with no increase in TEAEs or TESAEs compared with placebo.

Abnormal Uterine Bleeding Associated With Hormonal Contraception.

Abnormal uterine bleeding is a common and bothersome symptom in people using hormonal contraception, and it can lead to discontinuation of reliable methods of contraception and unintended pregnancies. Clinicians should counsel individuals about the potential for abnormal bleeding at initiation of the contraceptive method. After considering and excluding other potential causes of abnormal uterine bleeding, clinicians can offer treatment options specific to each hormonal contraceptive method. This article includes algorithms to help clinicians treat abnormal uterine bleeding in people using levonorgestrel intrauterine devices, depo-medroxyprogesterone acetate, progestin implant, progestin-only pills, and combined hormonal contraception. For patients with levonorgestrel intrauterine devices, physicians should first ensure that the device is correctly placed within the uterus, then consider nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs as a first-line treatment for abnormal uterine bleeding; estradiol can be used if nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are ineffective. For depo-medroxyprogesterone acetate or progestin implant users, combined oral contraceptives or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may be considered. For patients using norethindrone progestin-only pills, changing to drospirenone progesterone-only pills may help reduce the bleeding. In people using combined hormonal contraception, it may be helpful to increase estrogen content from 20 mcg to 35 mcg per day, decrease the hormone-free interval (from seven to four or five days) in people using cyclic contraception, or start a trial of low-dose doxycycline. For continuous combined contraception users, adding a hormone-free interval of four or five days can help regulate bleeding patterns.

Menopausal hormone therapy and risk of venous thromboembolism: The story so far.

Menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) is known to increase the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and less frequently cerebral vein thrombosis, but the absolute risk for a given patient is very low. After starting MHT, the risk of VTE seems to be at its highest, declining to the non-HRT user baseline level of risk after stopping. Whether estrogen-only or estrogen-progestin HRT combination is linked to a similar risk of VTE is unclear from the available evidence. The aim of this study is to evaluate the risks of developing VTE in relation to different types as well as different modes of administration of MHT through a database search including PubMed, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and others in order to provide the women carers with the up-to-date and evidence-based guidelines and recommendations while counseling the post-menopausal women enquiring on use of hormonal therapies either to alleviate the menopausal symptoms or to prevent the long-term sequelae of estrogen deficiency.

On sait que l'hormonothérapie ménopausique (MHT) augmente le risque de thromboembolie veineuse (TEV), qui comprend la thrombose veineuse profonde, l'embolie pulmonaire et, moins fréquemment, la thrombose veineuse cérébrale, mais le risque absolu pour un patient donné est très faible. Après le début du MHT, le risque de TEV semble être à son plus haut niveau, diminuant jusqu'au niveau de risque de base des non-utilisatrices de THS après l'arrêt. Les preuves disponibles ne permettent pas de savoir si un THS à base d'œstrogène seul ou d'association œstroprogestative est lié à un risque similaire de TEV. Le but de cette étude est d'évaluer les risques de développer une TEV par rapport à différents types ainsi qu'à différents modes d'administration du MHT grâce à une recherche dans des bases de données comprenant PubMed, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library et autres afin de fournir aux femmes les soignants avec les lignes directrices et recommandations à jour et fondées sur des preuves tout en conseillant les femmes ménopausées qui se renseignent sur l'utilisation de thérapies hormonales, soit pour soulager les symptômes de la ménopause, soit pour prévenir les séquelles à long terme d'une carence en œstrogènes.

Combined and progestagen-only hormonal contraceptives and breast cancer risk: A UK nested case-control study and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Current or recent use of combined oral contraceptives (containing oestrogen+progestagen) has been associated with a small increase in breast cancer risk. Progestagen-only contraceptive use is increasing, but information on associated risks is limited. We aimed to assess breast cancer risk associated with current or recent use of different types of hormonal contraceptives in premenopausal women, with particular emphasis on progestagen-only preparations. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Hormonal contraceptive prescriptions recorded prospectively in a UK primary care database (Clinical Practice Research Datalink [CPRD]) were compared in a nested case-control study for 9,498 women aged <50 years with incident invasive breast cancer diagnosed in 1996 to 2017, and for 18,171 closely matched controls. On average, 7.3 (standard deviation [SD] 4.6) years of clinical records were available for each case and their matched controls prior to the date of diagnosis. Conditional logistic regression yielded odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of breast cancer by the hormonal contraceptive type last prescribed, controlled for age, GP practice, body mass index, number of recorded births, time since last birth, and alcohol intake. MEDLINE and Embase were searched for observational studies published between 01 January 1995 and 01 November 2022 that reported on the association between current or recent progestagen-only contraceptive use and breast cancer risk in premenopausal women. Fixed effects meta-analyses combined the CPRD results with previously published results from 12 observational studies for progestagen-only preparations. Overall, 44% (4,195/9,498) of women with breast cancer and 39% (7,092/18,171) of matched controls had a hormonal contraceptive prescription an average of 3.1 (SD 3.7) years before breast cancer diagnosis (or equivalent date for controls). About half the prescriptions were for progestagen-only preparations. Breast cancer ORs were similarly and significantly raised if the last hormonal contraceptive prescription was for oral combined, oral progestagen-only, injected progestagen, or progestagen-releasing intrauterine devices (IUDs): ORs = 1.23 (95% CI [1.14 to 1.32]; p < 0.001), 1.26 (95% CI [1.16 to 1.37]; p < 0.001), 1.25 (95% CI [1.07 to 1.45]; p = 0.004), and 1.32 (95% CI [1.17 to 1.49]; p < 0.001), respectively. Our meta-analyses yielded significantly raised relative risks (RRs) for current or recent use of progestagen-only contraceptives: oral = 1.29 (95% CI [1.21 to 1.37]; heterogeneity χ25 = 6.7; p = 0.2), injected = 1.18 (95% CI [1.07 to 1.30]; heterogeneity χ28 = 22.5; p = 0.004), implanted = 1.28 (95% CI [1.08 to 1.51]; heterogeneity χ23 = 7.3; p = 0.06), and IUDs = 1.21 (95% CI [1.14 to 1.28]; heterogeneity χ24 = 7.9; p = 0.1). When the CPRD results were combined with those from previous published findings (which included women from a wider age range), the resulting 15-year absolute excess risk associated with 5 years use of oral combined or progestagen-only contraceptives in high-income countries was estimated at: 8 per 100,000 users from age 16 to 20 years and 265 per 100,000 users from age 35 to 39 years. The main limitation of the study design was that, due to the nature of the CPRD data and most other prescription databases, information on contraceptive use was recorded during a defined period only, with information before entry into the database generally being unavailable. This means that although our findings provide evidence about the short-term associations between hormonal contraceptives and breast cancer risk, they do not provide information regarding longer-term associations, or the impact of total duration of contraceptive use on breast cancer risk. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides important new evidence that current or recent use of progestagen-only contraceptives is associated with a slight increase in breast cancer risk, which does not appear to vary by mode of delivery, and is similar in magnitude to that associated with combined hormonal contraceptives. Given that the underlying risk of breast cancer increases with advancing age, the absolute excess risk associated with use of either type of oral contraceptive is estimated to be smaller in women who use it at younger rather than at older ages. Such risks need be balanced against the benefits of using contraceptives during the childbearing years.

Menopausal hormone therapy and central nervous system tumors: Danish nested case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Use of estrogen-containing menopausal hormone therapy has been shown to influence the risk of central nervous system (CNS) tumors. However, it is unknown how the progestin-component affects the risk and whether continuous versus cyclic treatment regimens influence the risk differently. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Nested case-control studies within a nationwide cohort of Danish women followed for 19 years from 2000 to 2018. The cohort comprised 789,901 women aged 50 to 60 years during follow-up, without prior CNS tumor diagnosis, cancer, or contraindication for treatment with menopausal hormone therapy. Information on cumulative exposure to female hormonal drugs was based on filled prescriptions. Statistical analysis included educational level, use of antihistamines, and use of anti-asthma drugs as covariates. During follow-up, 1,595 women were diagnosed with meningioma and 1,167 with glioma. The median (first-third quartile) follow-up time of individuals in the full cohort was 10.8 years (5.0 years to 17.5 years). Compared to never-use, exposure to estrogen-progestin or progestin-only were both associated with increased risk of meningioma, hazard ratio (HR) 1.21; (95% confidence interval (CI) [1.06, 1.37] p = 0.005) and HR 1.28; (95% CI [1.05, 1.54] p = 0.012), respectively. Corresponding HRs for glioma were HR 1.00; (95% CI [0.86, 1.16] p = 0.982) and HR 1.20; (95% CI [0.95, 1.51] p = 0.117). Continuous estrogen-progestin exhibited higher HR of meningioma 1.34; (95% CI [1.08, 1.66] p = 0.008) than cyclic treatment 1.13; (95% CI [0.94, 1.34] p = 0.185). Previous use of estrogen-progestin 5 to 10 years prior to diagnosis yielded the strongest association with meningioma, HR 1.26; (95% CI [1.01, 1.57] p = 0.044), whereas current/recent use of progestin-only yielded the highest HRs for both meningioma 1.64; (95% CI [0.90, 2.98] p = 0.104) and glioma 1.83; (95% CI [0.98, 3.41] p = 0.057). Being an observational study, residual confounding could occur. CONCLUSIONS: Use of continuous, but not cyclic estrogen-progestin was associated with increased meningioma risk. There was no evidence of increased glioma risk with estrogen-progestin use. Use of progestin-only was associated with increased risk of meningioma and potentially glioma. Further studies are warranted to evaluate our findings and investigate the influence of long-term progestin-only regimens on CNS tumor risk.

The effect of progestin therapy in advanced and recurrent endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Fifteen percent of patients with endometrial cancer (EC) have advanced stage disease or develop a recurrence. Progestins have been applied as systemic treatment for decades, but there is limited evidence on response prediction with biomarkers and toxicity. OBJECTIVES: To review the response and toxicity of progestin therapy and stratify response to progesterone receptor (PR) expression and tumour grade. SEARCH STRATEGY: We used the search terms 'Endometrial cancer', 'Progestins', 'Disease progression', 'Recurrence' and related terms in Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies on patients with advanced stage or recurrent EC treated with progestin monotherapy were included. Studies on adjuvant therapy, with fewer than ten cases and with sarcoma histology were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Evaluation for bias was performed with the Revised Cochrane RoB2 tool for randomised studies and the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomised studies. A random effects meta-analysis was performed with the overall response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate and toxicity as primary outcome measures. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-six studies (1639 patients) were included. The ORR of progestin therapy was 30% (95% CI 25-36), the clinical benefit rate was 52% (95% CI 42-61). In PR-positive EC, the ORR was 55%, compared with 12% in PR-negative disease (risk difference 43%, 95% CI 15-71). Severe toxicity occurred in 6.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Progestin therapy is a viable treatment option in patients with advanced stage and recurrent EC with low toxicity and high ORR in PR-positive disease. The role of PR expression in relation to progression-free survival and overall survival is unclear.

Lack of evidence that progesterone in ovulatory cycles causes breast cancer.

A recent Perspective article asserted that progesterone secretion during ovulatory cycles is the cause of breast cancer. However, we challenge most of the evidence developed in this publication. First, there is a lack of evidence that progesterone is mutagenic for breast cells. Cause of a cancer should mean initiation by mutation, as opposed to promotion. Second, subclinical ovulatory disturbances occur rather frequently in normal-length menstrual cycles. Third, the authors attribute a potential carcinogenic effect to progesterone secreted during menstrual cycles but not to progesterone during pregnancy. They did not discuss breast cancer evidence from progesterone/progestin therapeutics. They argue that in genetic primary amenorrhea, a hypothetic lower risk of breast cancer could be due to the lack of progesterone, despite the progesterone/progestin in hormone replacements these women receive. Fourth, they advocate a regulatory effect of progesterone on several genes potentially involved in cancer genesis. In particular, they attribute a lower risk of breast cancer in women with Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome to a defect in the progesterone-stimulated Wnt4 gene. However, this defect is only present in a small subset. Thus, the postulated progesterone breast cancer risk is unconvincing, which we discuss point by point in this commentary.

Menopause hormone treatment after cancer.

Regular improvement in survival of women after treatment for cancer has been reached in these last years. Menopause hormone therapy (MHT) remains the most efficient treatment to alleviate climacteric symptoms and improve quality of life in symptomatic women. The long-term effects of estrogen deficiency can be, at least partially, prevented by MHT. However, using MHT in an oncologic context can be associated with contraindications. Patients who have experienced breast cancer frequently face severe climacteric symptoms, but results from randomized trials are not in favor of using MHT in these women. Three randomized trials are available in women treated by MHT after ovarian cancer, and report better survival rates in the active group of treatment, suggesting that, at least in serous high-grade ovarian carcinoma, MHT could be allowed. No robust data are available for MHT after endometrial carcinoma. According to various guidelines, MHT could be possible in low grades with good prognosis. Progestogen, however, is not contraindicated and can help to alleviate climacteric symptoms. Squamous cell cervical carcinoma is not hormone-dependent and therefore patients can be treated with MHT without restrictions, whereas cervical adenocarcinoma is likely to be estrogen-dependent, despite lack of robust data, and thus only progesterone or progestin might be potentially used. It is possible that, in future, better molecular characterization of genomic profiles of various cancers may allow MHT to be used with some patients.

Former long-term use of combined hormonal contraception and glucose metabolism disorders in perimenopausal women: A prospective, population-based cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Current use of combined hormonal contraceptives worsens glucose tolerance and increases the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus at late fertile age, but the impact of their former use on the risk of glucose metabolism disorders is still controversial. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a prospective, longitudinal birth cohort study with long-term follow-up consisting of 5889 women. The cohort population has been followed at birth, and at ages of 1, 14, 31 and 46. In total, 3280 (55.7%) women were clinically examined and 2780 also underwent a 2-h oral glucose tolerance test at age 46. Glucose metabolism indices were analyzed in former combined hormonal contraceptive users (n = 1371) and former progestin-only contraceptive users (n = 52) and in women with no history of hormonal contraceptive use (n = 253). RESULTS: Compared with women with no history of hormonal contraceptive use, those who formerly used combined hormonal contraceptives for over 10 years had an increased risk of prediabetes (odds ratio [OR] 3.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6-9.2) but not of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Former progestin-only contraceptive use was not associated with any glucose metabolism disorders. The results persisted after adjusting for socioeconomic status, smoking, alcohol consumption, parity, body mass index and use of cholesterol-lowering medication. CONCLUSIONS: Former long-term use of combined hormonal contraceptives was associated with a significantly increased risk of prediabetes in perimenopausal women, which potentially indicates a need of screening for glucose metabolism disorders in these women.

Menopausal hormone therapy and the risk of cataracts in postmenopausal women in South Korea.

PURPOSE: Postmenopausal women have a higher prevalence of cataracts than men of a similar age. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) on lens opacities in postmenopausal women. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analysed population-based health insurance data in South Korea collected from 2002 to 2019. To determine the risk factors associated with cataract, postmenopausal women (N = 2,506,271) were grouped according to post-MHT use. The treatment group was further divided into the following subgroups: tibolone, combined oestrogen plus progestin by manufacturer, oral oestrogen, combined oestrogen plus progestin by physician and topical oestrogen groups. The main outcome measure was the prevalence of cataracts. RESULTS: The control group comprised 463,151 postmenopausal women who had never used MHT after menopause, while the treatment group included 228,033 postmenopausal women who had used MHT continuously for at least 6 months. The treatment group had a higher incidence of cataracts than the control group based on Cox proportional hazards ratio analysis. Low socioeconomic status and high parity were identified as risk factors for cataracts, and reduced risk of cataracts was associated with living in rural areas and drinking alcohol. CONCLUSIONS: Women undergoing post-MHT, including tibolone, had a higher incidence of cataracts. Cataract development should be a concern when examining postmenopausal patients using MHT.

A new progestin-only pill (POP): the impact of drospirenone-only pill 4 mg 24 + 4 on coagulation markers and bleeding patterns.

PURPOSE: Progestin-only pills (POPs), compared to combined, are not associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism, but are associated with a poor cycle control. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a new POP [4 mg drospirenone (DRSP) for 24 days with a 4-day hormone-free interval] on some coagulation markers (both procoagulant and fibrinolytic) and to describe its impact on bleeding patterns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective trial, based on serum evaluation of following coagulation markers and tests: Factor (F) X, F VIII, F V, INR, aPTT, Protein S and antithrombin III. A 'bleeding diary' was used to categorise women as having (1) unscheduled bleeding, (2) scheduled bleeding and (3) amenorrhoea. Thirty patients were followed for six 28-day intake cycles, with a follow-up at the end of the 3rd and 6th cycles. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease of F X (p = 0.03) (-5.7% at cycle 6). No significant changes have been observed for F VII, F V and INR. A significant increase in aPTT (p = 0.01 at 3 cycles), Protein S (p = 0.0006 at 3 cycles) and antithrombin III (p < 0.0001 at 3 cycles) was recorded. This non-deteriorating coagulation impact was associated with a significant and progressive reduction of days of scheduled and unscheduled bleeding in users between cycles 4 and 6 (from 1.3 ± 0.2 days at cycle 4 to 0.8 ± 0.1 days at cycle 6 and from 2.6 ± 0.4 days at cycle 4 to 0.6 ± 0.2 days at cycle 6, respectively, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: DRSP 24 + 4 use was associated with a non-deteriorating effect on coagulation markers and a significant progressive reduction of days of scheduled and unscheduled bleeding.

Contraception with DRSP 24 + 4 was associated with a non-deteriorating effect on coagulation markers and a significant progressive reduction of days of scheduled and unscheduled bleeding.

[Meningioma under progestin treatment : what attitude to adopt ?] / Méningiome sous traitement progestatif : quelle attitude adopter ?

The risks of meningioma associated with the use of cyproterone acetate at high doses (25 to 100 mg/day) have been known since 2007. Recently, two additional molecules have been incriminated: nomegestrol acetate and chlormadinone acetate. The higher the cumulative dose and the longer the treatment duration, the bigger the risk of meningioma (12-fold after 5 years of treatment for nomegestrol acetate, and 7-fold after 3.5 years of treatment for chlormadinone acetate). Nevertheless, these medications have many indications that demonstrate their importance in the daily practice of the general practitioner, of the gynecologist and of the reproductive endocrinologist. Therefore, caution is required when introducing a powerful progestin that is incriminated in the long term at high doses. If the benefit/risk balance favours the initiation of progestin therapy, it is recommended to use the minimal effective dose and to limit the duration of use. Clinical and brain imaging monitoring should also be performed. Finally, if a meningioma develops on progestin, it is recommended that any medication containing a progesterone agonist be suspended.

Les risques de méningiome liés à la consommation de l'acétate de cyprotérone à de fortes doses (25 à 100 mg/jour) sont connus depuis 2007. Récemment, deux molécules supplémentaires ont été incriminées : l'acétate de nomégestrol et l'acétate de chlormadinone. Le risque de développer un méningiome est d'autant plus important que la dose cumulée est grande et que la prescription se prolonge dans le temps (risque multiplié par 12 à partir de 5 ans de traitement pour l'acétate de nomégestrol, et multiplié par 7 à partir de 3,5 ans de traitement par acétate de chlormadinone). Néanmoins, ces médications possèdent de nombreuses indications témoignant de leur importance dans la pratique quotidienne du médecin généraliste, du gynécologue et de l'endocrinologue de la reproduction. Dès lors, la vigilance est de mise lors de l'introduction d'un progestatif puissant incriminé à long terme et à haute dose. Si la balance bénéfices/risques plaide en faveur de l'instauration d'un traitement par progestatif, il est recommandé d'utiliser la dose minimale efficace et d'en limiter la durée d'utilisation. Une surveillance clinique et par imagerie cérébrale systématique est vivement recommandée. Enfin, en cas de détection d'un méningiome, il est recommandé de suspendre toute médication contenant un agoniste de la progestérone.

Meningioma in patients exposed to progestin drugs: results from a real-life screening program.

PURPOSE: To report the results of systematic meningioma screening program implemented by French authorities in patients exposed to progestin therapies (cyproterone (CPA), nomegestrol (NA), and chlormadinone (CMA) acetate). METHODS: We conducted a prospective monocentric study on patients who, between September 2018 and April 2021, underwent standardized MRI (injection of gadolinium, then a T2 axial FLAIR and a 3D-T1 gradient-echo sequence) for meningioma screening. RESULTS: Of the 210 included patients, 15 (7.1%) had at least one meningioma; seven (7/15, 47%) had multiple meningiomas. Meningiomas were more frequent in older patients and after exposure to CPA (13/103, 13%) compared to NA (1/22, 4%) or CMA (1/85, 1%; P = 0.005). After CPA exposure, meningiomas were associated with longer treatment duration (median = 20 vs 7 years, P = 0.001) and higher cumulative dose (median = 91 g vs. 62 g, P = 0.014). Similarly, their multiplicity was associated with higher dose of CPA (median = 244 g vs 61 g, P = 0.027). Most meningiomas were ≤ 1 cm3 (44/58, 76%) and were convexity meningiomas (36/58, 62%). At diagnosis, patients were non-symptomatic, and all were managed conservatively. Among 14 patients with meningioma who stopped progestin exposure, meningioma burden decreased in 11 (79%) cases with no case of progression during MR follow-up. CONCLUSION: Systematic MR screening in progestin-exposed patients uncovers small and multiple meningiomas, which can be managed conservatively, decreasing in size after progestin discontinuation. The high rate of meningiomas after CPA exposure reinforces the need for systematic screening. For NA and CMA, further studies are needed to identify patients most likely to benefit from screening.

Risk of intracranial meningioma with three potent progestogens: A population-based case-control study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A dose-dependent association between the use of cyproterone acetate (CPA) and intracranial meningioma has been identified but data for other potent progestogens are scarce. The association was assessed between intracranial meningioma surgery and exposure to three potent progestogens: CPA (≥25 mg/day), nomegestrol acetate (NOMAC) (3.75-5 mg/day) and chlormadinone acetate (CMA) (2-10 mg/day). METHODS: In this nationwide population-based case-control study, cases underwent surgery for intracranial meningioma in France from 2009 to 2018. They were matched to five control subjects for sex, year of birth and area of residence. Progestogen exposure was defined as progestogen use within the year before surgery for cases or the same date for their controls. RESULTS: In total, 25,216 cases were included (75% women, median age 58 years). Progestogen exposure was noted for 9.9% of cases (2497/25,216) and 1.9% (2382/126,080) of controls, with an odds ratio (OR) of 6.7 (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.3-7.1). The OR was 1.2 (1.0-1.4) for short-term use (<1 year) and 9.5 (8.8-10.2) for prolonged use. A strong association was identified for prolonged use of CPA (OR = 22.7, 95% CI 19.5-26.4), NOMAC (OR = 6.5, 95% CI 5.8-7.2) and CMA (OR = 4.7, 95% CI 4.5-5.3). Progestogen exposure increased the risk of meningioma for all histological grades and anatomical sites, particularly for the anterior and middle skull base: OR = 35.7 (95% CI 26.5-48.2) and 23.9 (95% CI 17.8-32.2) for CPA. The estimated number of attributable cases was 2124 (95% CI 2028-2220) (212/year). CONCLUSION: A strong association between prolonged exposure to potent progestogens and surgery for meningioma was observed. The risk increased from CMA to NOMAC to CPA. Individuals should be informed of this risk.

Progestogen Use in Gender-Affirming Hormone Therapy: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Transgender women take gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) to affirm their gender identity and improve quality of life and well-being. Usually, GAHT in transgender women consists of estrogen plus a testosterone-lowering medication. The use of progestogens in GAHT for transgender women has been a controversial topic due to lack of evidence for benefit and potential for increased harm. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines using 4 databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid, and Cochrane). Manuscripts were reviewed from January 2000 to March 2022 to identify effects of progestogens in transgender women over the age of 16 years on breast development, cardiovascular disease, bone density, quality of life, and stroke incidence. RESULTS: Ten articles were deemed eligible based on specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Studies analyzing users of cyproterone acetate were also included if there was a comparator group. No relevant studies were found assessing stroke incidence in the transgender population using a progestogen compound. CONCLUSION: Overall, findings were significant for a decreased high-density lipoprotein level and increased thromboembolism risk in transgender women using progestogens. No conclusive evidence was found regarding improved quality of life or breast development. Further research needs to be conducted assessing the effects of progestogens in transgender women.

Systemic hormonal contraception and risk of venous thromboembolism.

INTRODUCTION: The increased risk of venous thromboembolism associated with the use of hormonal contraception is well recognized, but evidence regarding hormonal contraception containing natural estradiol is limited. This study aimed to assess the associations between the patterns of use of different systemic hormonal contraceptives and the risk of venous thromboembolism during 2017-2019. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All fertile-aged women (15-49 years) living in Finland in 2017 and using hormonal contraception in 2017 and their 1:1 age- and residence-matched controls not using hormonal contraception in 2017 (altogether 587 559 women) were selected from the Prescription Centre. All incident venous thromboembolism cases during 2018-2019 and their 4:1 age-matched controls were further analyzed in a prospective nested case-control design to assess the associations between the use (starting, stopping, continuous vs no use) of different hormonal contraception types and venous thromboembolism. RESULTS: Altogether, 1334 venous thromboembolism cases occurred during the follow-up period (incidence rate 1.14 per 1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.20), with an incidence rate ratio of hormonal contraception vs no hormonal contraception use of 1.42 (95% CI 1.27-1.58). Compared with non-use, starting the use of gestodene and ethinylestradiol (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.85; 95% CI 1.62-5.03), drospirenone and ethinylestradiol (aOR 1.55; 95% CI 0.98-2.44), desogestrel and ethinylestradiol (aOR 1.97; 95% CI 0.99-3.92), and transdermal patch releasing norelgestromin and ethinylestradiol (aOR 5.10; 95% CI 1.12-23.16), as well as continuing the use of gestodene and ethinylestradiol (aOR 2.60; 95% CI 1.61-4.21), drospirenone and ethinylestradiol (aOR 1.55; 95% CI 1.02-2.37), cyproterone-acetate and estrogen/ethinylestradiol (aOR 1.66; 95% CI 1.06-2.61), and vaginal ring releasing etonogestrel and ethinylestradiol (aOR 3.27; 95% CI 1.95-5.48) were associated with venous thromboembolism risk. Regarding the type of estrogen, the highest risk was associated with current use (vs non use in the previous 180 days) of ethinylestradiol-containing preparations (aOR 2.20; 95% CI 1.82-2.65), followed by estradiol-containing preparations (aOR 1.39; 95% CI 1.04-1.87) with no risk for progestin-only hormonal contraception. Current use of estradiol-containing preparations was not associated with venous thromboembolism risk after exclusion of cyproterone-acetate and estrogen/ethinylestradiol (aOR 1.05; 95% CI 0.66-1.66). CONCLUSIONS: An increased risk of venous thromboembolism is associated with ethinylestradiol-containing combined preparations. The use of estradiol-containing combined preparations confers only a slightly increased risk, possibly driven by cyproterone-containing combined oral contraceptives, whereas the use of progestin-only contraception is not associated with venous thromboembolism.