Menopausal hormone therapy use and long‐term all‐cause and cause‐specific mortality in the Long Island Breast Cancer Study Project

The 100 top-cited articles in menopausal syndrome: a bibliometric analysis

BACKGROUND

Significant scientific research has been conducted concerning menopausal syndrome(MPS), yet few bibliometric analyses have been performed. Our aim was to recognise the 100 most highly cited published articles on MPS and to analytically evaluate their key features.

METHODS

To identify the 100 most frequently cited articles, a search was conducted on Web of Science using the term 'menopausal syndrome'. Articles that matched the predetermined criteria were scrutinised to obtain the following data: citation ranking, year of publication, publishing journal, journal impact factor, country of origin, academic institution, authors, study type, and keywords.

RESULTS

The publication period is from January 1, 2000, to August 31, 2022. The maximum number of citations was 406 and in 2012. The median citations per year was 39.70. Most of the articles focused on treatment and complications. These articles were published in 36 different journals, with the Journal of MENOPAUSE having published the greatest number (14%). Forty-eight articles (48%) were from the United States, with the University of Pittsburgh being the leading institute (9%). Joann E. Manson was the most frequent first author (n = 6). Observational studies were the most frequently conducted research type (n = 53), followed by experimental studies (n = 33). Keyword analysis identified classic research topics, including genitourinary syndrome of menopause, bone mineral density (BMD), and anti-mullerian hormone (AMH) loci.

CONCLUSION

Using bibliometrics, we conducted an analysis to identify the inadequacies, traditional focal points, and potential prospects in the study of MPS across current scientific areas. Treatment and complications are at the core of MPS research, whereas prediction and biomarkers have less literature of high quality. There is a necessity for innovative analytical metrics to measure the real effect of these papers with a high level of citation on clinical application.

Menopausal hormone therapy: why we should no longer be afraid of the breast cancer risk

The threat that women may develop breast cancer is the major reason why both physicians and women are afraid to use menopausal hormone therapy (MHT). The fear pertains to estrogen-progestin replacement therapy (EPRT) as estrogen-alone replacement therapy has no, or even a reduced, breast cancer risk. We reviewed the way breast cancer risk with EPRT was reported in some major publications since 2002 and tried to put the use-risk association in context. We hope this will make it easier for the physician and the menopausal woman to understand the risk involved and allow more confident and more informed decision-making regarding MHT use. We conclude that there are five interrelated reasons why physicians and women should no longer be afraid of the breast cancer risk with EPRT. We submit that breast cancer related to EPRT use is rare because the risk is very low; the reported increase in breast cancer risk with EPRT is not relevant to current practice; modifiable lifestyle factors, not EPRT, are the real risks for breast cancer; breast cancer-specific mortality is reduced in women who develop breast cancer while on EPRT; and avoiding MHT use when indicated puts a woman in harm's way.

Menopausal hormone therapy and women's health: An umbrella review

BACKGROUND

There remains uncertainty about the impact of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) on women's health. A systematic, comprehensive assessment of the effects on multiple outcomes is lacking. We conducted an umbrella review to comprehensively summarize evidence on the benefits and harms of MHT across diverse health outcomes.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and 10 other databases from inception to November 26, 2017, updated on December 17, 2020, to identify systematic reviews or meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies investigating effects of MHT, including estrogen-alone therapy (ET) and estrogen plus progestin therapy (EPT), in perimenopausal or postmenopausal women in all countries and settings. All health outcomes in previous systematic reviews were included, including menopausal symptoms, surrogate endpoints, biomarkers, various morbidity outcomes, and mortality. Two investigators independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality of systematic reviews using the updated 16-item AMSTAR 2 instrument. Random-effects robust variance estimation was used to combine effect estimates, and 95% prediction intervals (PIs) were calculated whenever possible. We used the term MHT to encompass ET and EPT, and results are presented for MHT for each outcome, unless otherwise indicated. Sixty systematic reviews were included, involving 102 meta-analyses of RCTs and 38 of observational studies, with 102 unique outcomes. The overall quality of included systematic reviews was moderate to poor. In meta-analyses of RCTs, MHT was beneficial for vasomotor symptoms (frequency: 9 trials, 1,104 women, risk ratio [RR] 0.43, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.57, p < 0.001; severity: 7 trials, 503 women, RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.50, p = 0.002) and all fracture (30 trials, 43,188 women, RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.84, p = 0.002, 95% PI 0.58 to 0.87), as well as vaginal atrophy (intravaginal ET), sexual function, vertebral and nonvertebral fracture, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular mortality (ET), and colorectal cancer (EPT), but harmful for stroke (17 trials, 37,272 women, RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.29, p = 0.027) and venous thromboembolism (23 trials, 42,292 women, RR 1.60, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.58, p = 0.052, 95% PI 1.03 to 2.99), as well as cardiovascular disease incidence and recurrence, cerebrovascular disease, nonfatal stroke, deep vein thrombosis, gallbladder disease requiring surgery, and lung cancer mortality (EPT). In meta-analyses of observational studies, MHT was associated with decreased risks of cataract, glioma, and esophageal, gastric, and colorectal cancer, but increased risks of pulmonary embolism, cholelithiasis, asthma, meningioma, and thyroid, breast, and ovarian cancer. ET and EPT had opposite effects for endometrial cancer, endometrial hyperplasia, and Alzheimer disease. The major limitations include the inability to address the varying effects of MHT by type, dose, formulation, duration of use, route of administration, and age of initiation and to take into account the quality of individual studies included in the systematic reviews. The study protocol is publicly available on PROSPERO (CRD42017083412).

CONCLUSIONS

MHT has a complex balance of benefits and harms on multiple health outcomes. Some effects differ qualitatively between ET and EPT. The quality of available evidence is only moderate to poor.

Perils of prolonged ovarian suppression and hypoestrogenism in the treatment of breast cancer: Is the risk of treatment worse than the risk of recurrence?

Premenopausal breast cancer is usually estrogen receptor positive, and hence, prolonged ovarian suppression by medical or surgical means to prevent recurrence has become standard of management to improve disease-free survival. Ten-year adjuvant tamoxifen therapy is associated with 3.5% fewer recurrences compared to five years. The SOFT trial demonstrated small but statistically significant incremental improvements in long-term disease-free survival by the addition of gonadotropin-releasing hormone analog treatment (triptorelin) to an aromatase inhibitor (exemestane). Profound hypoestrogenism in the premenopausal age group may not be well tolerated due to a host of bothersome side effects (primarily vasomotor symptoms, musculoskeletal complaints, genitourinary syndrome of menopause, and mood disorders). Prolonged hypoestrogenism in younger women is associated with premature development of cardiovascular disease, bone loss, cognitive decline, and all-cause mortality. This paper explores multi-system consequences of prolonged hypoestrogenism in premenopausal women derived from studies of women with and without breast cancer. Pretreatment counseling in estrogen receptor positive breast cancer should emphasize the benefit of prolonged estrogen suppression on breast cancer recurrence and established risks of lifelong hypoestrogenism on quality of life and all-cause mortality. Future genomic research may help identify the best candidates for extended ovarian suppression to avoid treating many women when only a minority benefit.