Menopausal hormone therapy and risk of endometrial carcinoma among postmenopausal women in the European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition

Management of unscheduled bleeding on HRT: A joint guideline on behalf of the British Menopause Society, Royal College Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, British Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy, Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Health, Royal College of General Practitioners and Getting it Right First Time

Unscheduled bleeding on hormone replacement therapy (HRT) can affect up to 40% of users. In parallel with the increase in HRT prescribing in the UK, there has been an associated increase in referrals to the urgent suspicion of cancer pathway for unscheduled bleeding. On behalf of the British Menopause Society (BMS) an expert review panel was established, including primary and secondary care clinicians with expertise in the management of menopause, with representatives from key related organisations, including the Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists, the British Gynaecological Cancer Society, British Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy, Royal College of General Practitioners and Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Health, and service development partners from NHS England and GIRFT (Getting it Right First Time). For each topic, a focused literature review was completed to develop evidence led recommendations, where available, which were ratified by consensus review within the panel and by guideline groups.

Endometrial Cancer. Guideline of the DGGG, DKG and DKH (S3-Level, AWMF Registry Number 032/034-OL, September 2022). Part 1 with Recommendations on the Epidemiology, Screening, Diagnosis and Hereditary Factors of Endometrial Cancer, Geriatric Assessment and Supply Structures

Summary The S3-guideline on endometrial cancer, first published in April 2018, was reviewed in its entirety between April 2020 and January 2022 and updated. The review was carried out at the request of German Cancer Aid as part of the Oncology Guidelines Program and the lead coordinators were the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG), the Gynecology Oncology Working Group (AGO) of the German Cancer Society (DKG) and the German Cancer Aid (DKH). The guideline update was based on a systematic search and assessment of the literature published between 2016 and 2020. All statements, recommendations and background texts were reviewed and either confirmed or amended. New statements and recommendations were included where necessary. Aim The use of evidence-based risk-adapted therapies to treat women with endometrial cancer of low risk prevents unnecessarily radical surgery and avoids non-beneficial adjuvant radiation therapy and/or chemotherapy. For women with endometrial cancer and a high risk of recurrence, the guideline defines the optimum level of radical surgery and indicates whether chemotherapy and/or adjuvant radiation therapy is necessary. This should improve the survival rates and quality of life of these patients. The S3-guideline on endometrial cancer and the quality indicators based on the guideline aim to provide the basis for the work of certified gynecological cancer centers. Methods The guideline was first compiled in 2018 in accordance with the requirements for S3-level guidelines and was updated in 2022. The update included an adaptation of the source guidelines identified using the German Instrument for Methodological Guideline Appraisal (DELBI). The update also used evidence reviews which were created based on selected literature obtained from systematic searches in selected literature databases using the PICO process. The Clinical Guidelines Service Group was tasked with carrying out a systematic search and assessment of the literature. Their results were used by interdisciplinary working groups as a basis for developing suggestions for recommendations and statements which were then modified during structured online consensus conferences and/or additionally amended online using the DELPHI process to achieve a consensus. Recommendations Part 1 of this short version of the guideline provides recommendations on epidemiology, screening, diagnosis, and hereditary factors. The epidemiology of endometrial cancer and the risk factors for developing endometrial cancer are presented. The options for screening and the methods used to diagnose endometrial cancer are outlined. Recommendations are given for the prevention, diagnosis, and therapy of hereditary forms of endometrial cancer. The use of geriatric assessment is considered and existing structures of care are presented.

Reappraising 21 years of the WHI study: Putting the findings in context for clinical practice

Menopausal hormone treatment (MHT) is recommended for the management of menopause symptoms. The Women's Health Initiative (WHI) placebo-controlled randomised study examined the effects of continuous combined or estrogen-only MHT on the risk of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in post-menopausal women. The study was terminated prematurely after an interim analysis showed an increased risk of breast cancer diagnosis, which led to a rapid decrease in MHT use worldwide. Subsequently, limitations of the study design and its interpretation in the context of other clinical studies has contributed to a more nuanced appreciation of the risk-benefit profile of differing MHT regimens regarding risk associated with the class of progestogen prescribed, its pattern of prescription, duration of use and timing of initiation related to menopause onset. This review provides a contextual interpretation of the WHI placebo-controlled study and evaluates the impact of bioidentical MHT, with a focus on combined therapies containing micronised progesterone, on the risk of chronic NCDs in post-menopausal women.

The Women's Health Initiative randomized trials of menopausal hormone therapy and breast cancer: findings in context

IMPORTANCE AND OBJECTIVE

The menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) association with breast cancer has been controversial for more than 40 years. Most recently, findings from cohort studies have been discordant compared with those from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) randomized trials. In cohort studies, both estrogen therapy and estrogen plus progestin were associated with higher breast cancer incidence. In contrast, in the WHI randomized trials, findings for estrogen plus progestin are concordant with cohort study reports, whereas estrogen therapy significantly reduced breast cancer incidence. In addition, concerns have been raised regarding the WHI findings from both trials. In this report, we briefly summarize findings for MHT on breast cancer from cohort studies and the WHI randomized trials. The report focus is addressing, point-by-point, concerns raised regarding the WHI findings.

METHODS

For cohort studies, we relied on the latest findings from (1) the meta-analysis of the Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer and (2) the Million Women's Study. To identify commentaries and editorials, "Menopause" and "Climacteric" were searched from 2002 to present; PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for commentaries, editorials, and breast cancer, MHT, estrogen, conjugated equine estrogen, estradiol, "hormone replacement therapy," and "HRT."

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Thirty commentaries challenging WHI findings were identified. All were reviewed, and issues needing response were identified. Findings from the meta-analysis from the Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer and the Million Women Study were summarized and compared with finding in the two WHI randomized trials evaluating estrogen therapy and estrogen plus progestin. Based on the randomized clinical trials, estrogen therapy, for women with prior hysterectomy, decreases breast cancer incidence and mortality. In contrast, estrogen plus progestin increases breast cancer incidence, which persists through two decades. Women considering estrogen plus progestin use for vasomotor symptoms should understand the breast cancer risk.

Endometrial cancer risk with menopausal hormone therapy: Health Insurance Database in South Korea-based cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the risk of endometrial cancer according to the types of menopausal hormones used.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study recruited postmenopausal women older than 40 years from 2003 to 2011, utilizing data from the Korean national health insurance system from 2002 to 2019. The menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) group consisted of women who had been prescribed MHT for greater than 6 months between 2003 and 2011. The non-MHT group consisted of women who had never used menopausal hormones between 2003 and 2011.

RESULTS

A non-MHT group of 1 000 550 women and a MHT group of 353 025 women were chosen. In comparison to never-users, the risk of endometrial cancer was not higher in women who reported last using tibolone (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.96-1.2), combined estrogen plus progestin by the manufacturer (aHR 0.83, 0.72-0.96), combined estrogen plus progestin by the physician (aHR 0.88, 0.7-1.12), and transdermal estrogen (aHR 1.13, 0.36-3.52).

CONCLUSIONS

Tibolone, combined estrogen plus progestin by the physician, and transdermal estrogen do not affect the risk of endometrial cancer. The combination of estrogen plus progestin by the manufacturer decreases the risk of endometrial cancer.

Management of Menopause Symptoms and Quality of Life during the Menopause Transition

Some women experience bothersome symptoms around the time of menopause that may have a negative impact on their quality of life and prompt them to seek treatments. Menopausal hormone therapy was historically the treatment of choice. However, medical contraindications and personal preference for nonhormonal therapy have prompted the evaluation of a range of nonhormonal pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic therapies. This review provides an update focusing on the latest evidence-based approach for the management of bothersome symptoms of menopause.

Review of menopausal hormone therapy with estradiol and progesterone versus other estrogens and progestins

Objective: The objective of the present document was to review/summarize reported outcomes compared between menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) containing estradiol (E2) versus other estrogens and MHT with progesterone (P4) versus progestins (defined as synthetic progestogens).Methods: PubMed and EMBASE were systematically searched through February 2021 for studies comparing oral E2 versus oral conjugated equine estrogens (CEE) or P4 versus progestins for endometrial outcomes, venous thromboembolism (VTE), cardiovascular outcomes, breast outcomes, cognition, and bone outcomes in postmenopausal women.Results: A total of 74 comparative publications were identified/summarized. Randomized studies suggested that P4 and progestins are likely equally effective in preventing endometrial hyperplasia/cancer when used at adequate doses. E2- versus CEE-based MHT had a similar or possibly better risk profile for VTE and cardiovascular outcomes, and P4- versus progestin-based MHT had a similar or possibly better profile for breast cancer and cardiovascular outcomes. E2 may potentially protect better against age-related cognitive decline and bone fractures versus CEE; P4 was similar or possibly better versus progestins for these outcomes. Limitations are that many studies were observational and some were not adequately powered for the reported outcomes.Conclusions: Evidence suggests a differential effect of MHT containing E2 or P4 and those containing CEE or progestins, with some evidence trending to a potentially better safety profile with E2 and/or P4.

Management of postmenopausal women: Collège National des Gynécologues et Obstétriciens Français (CNGOF) and Groupe d'Etude sur la Ménopause et le Vieillissement (GEMVi) Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The aim of these recommendations is to set forth an individualized approach to the management of early postmenopausal women (i.e., within the first 10 years after natural menopause) covering all aspects of lifestyle and therapeutic management, with or without menopause hormone therapy (MHT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature review and consensus of French expert opinion. Recommendations were graded according to the HAS methodology and levels of evidence derived from the international literature, except when there was no good-quality evidence.

SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS

The beginning of menopause is an ideal time for each woman to evaluate her health status by assessing her bone, cardiovascular, and cancer-related risk factors that may be amplified by postmenopausal estrogen deficiency and by reviewing her lifestyle habits. Improving lifestyle, including nutrition and physical activity, and avoiding risk factors (notably smoking), should be recommended to all women. MHT remains the most effective treatment for vasomotor symptoms but it could be also recommended as first-line treatment for the prevention of osteoporosis in early postmenopausal women at low to moderate risk for fracture. The risks of MHT differ depending on its type, dose, duration of use, route of administration, timing of initiation, and whether a progestogen is used. There is reasonable evidence that using transdermal estradiol in association with micronized progesterone or dydrogesterone may limit both the venous thromboembolic risk associated with oral estrogens and the risk of breast cancer associated with synthetic progestins. Treatment should be individualized to each woman, by using the best available evidence to maximize benefits and minimize risks, with periodic reevaluation of its benefit-risk balance. For bothersome genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) symptoms, vaginal treatment with lubricants and moisturizers is recommended as first-line treatment together with low-dose vaginal estrogen therapy, depending on the clinical course. No recommendation of an optimal duration of MHT can be made, but it must take into consideration the initial indication for MHT as well as each woman's benefit-risk balance. Management of gynecological side-effects of MHT is also examined. These recommendations are endorsed by the Groupe d'Etude sur la Ménopause et le Vieillissement hormonal (GEMVI) and the Collège National des Gynécologues-Obstétriciens Français (CNGOF).

Association Between Hormone Replacement Therapy and Development of Endometrial Cancer: Results From a Prospective US Cohort Study

Although hormone replacement therapy (HRT) use is associated with elevated endometrial cancer(EC) risk, little evidence assesses potential effect-modifiers on HRT-related EC in a long-term follow-up. In this large-scale longitudinal cohort study, we tried to evaluate the association between different HRT types/methods use and risk of EC, and reveal this risk within different body mass index (BMI) groups. In whole cohort, 677 EC occurred during mean 11.6 years follow-up. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate multivariable-adjusted hazards ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with HRT status (never, former, or current) for risk of EC incidence. Current HRT use was not significantly associated with EC risk (HR for current vs. never HRT use: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.92, 1.38) in the whole cohort, but presented a dose-response effect on increased EC risk (HR for >10-year use vs. never HRT use: 1.73; 95% CI: 1.35, 2.21). Moreover, EC risk differed in distinct regimens or subsets (all P_interaction < 0.05). Estrogen-only use was associated with elevated EC risk (HR for current vs. never HRT use: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.12, 2.04), but women with high BMI (> 30 kg/m²) who currently use estrogen-only harbored decreased EC risk (HR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.38, 0.82) compared to counterparts without HRT use. Estrogen-only use is associated with increased EC risk, and precise monitoring of EC development for postmenopausal women with long-term HRT use are urgently needed. BMI could serve as an important surrogate to assess this risk.

The Role of Progestogens in Menopausal Hormone Therapy

Progestogens are steroid compounds that have the ability to induce secretory transformation in the endometrium and are utilized in menopausal hormone therapy to prevent endometrial hyperplasia and endometrial cancer. Progestogens can be derived from 21-carbon or 19-carbon steroid cytoskeletons and thus have different properties and metabolic effects beyond the progestational effects on the endometrium. This limited review will focus on the available progestogens utilized in combination hormone therapy including progesterone, medroxyprogesterone acetate, norethindrone, norethindrone acetate, levonorgestrel, and drospirenone. The impact of progestogens on a variety of target tissues including the endometrium, breast, cardiovascular system, brain, and bone, will be reviewed. Last, the current clinical regimens that can be utilized by clinicians will be discussed.

Hormone Therapy in Menopause: Concepts, Controversies, and Approach to Treatment

Hormone therapy (HT) is an effective treatment for menopausal symptoms, including vasomotor symptoms and genitourinary syndrome of menopause. Randomized trials also demonstrate positive effects on bone health, and age-stratified analyses indicate more favorable effects on coronary heart disease and all-cause mortality in younger women (close proximity to menopause) than in women more than a decade past menopause. In the absence of contraindications or other major comorbidities, recently menopausal women with moderate or severe symptoms are appropriate candidates for HT. The Women's Health Initiative (WHI) hormone therapy trials-estrogen and progestin trial and the estrogen-alone trial-clarified the benefits and risks of HT, including how the results differed by age. A key lesson from the WHI trials, which was unfortunately lost in the posttrial cacophony, was that the risk:benefit ratio and safety profile of HT differed markedly by clinical characteristics of the participants, especially age, time since menopause, and comorbidity status. In the present review of the WHI and other recent HT trials, we aim to provide readers with an improved understanding of the importance of the timing of HT initiation, type and route of administration, and of patient-specific considerations that should be weighed when prescribing HT.

[Menopause hormone treatment in practice. Postmenopausal women management: CNGOF and GEMVi clinical practice guidelines]

Menopause Hormonal Treatment (MHT) was initially developed to correct the climacteric symptoms induced by postmenopausal estrogen deficiency. In non-hysterectomized women, MHT combines estrogens and a progestogen, the latter opposing the negative impact of estrogen on endometrial proliferation. In France, and contrary to the USA and Northern European countries, MHT mainly combines 17β-estradiol, which is the physiological estrogen produced by the ovary, and progesterone or its derivative, dihydrogesterone. France has been a pioneer in the development of cutaneous administration routes (gel or transdermal patch) for estradiol, allowing better metabolic tolerance and a reduction of the risk of venous thromboembolism compared to the oral route. The choice of the doses as well as the treatment regimen is underpinned by tolerance as well as acceptance and compliance. The risk of breast cancer, which is one of the main risks of MHT, is higher with estro-progestogen combinations than with estrogens alone ; the preferential use of progesterone or dihydrogesterone being likely to limit the excess risk of breast cancer associated with MHT at least for duration of treatment of less than 5 to 7 years. The question of the optimal duration of MHT remains an issue and must take into account the initial indication of treatment as well as the benefit-risk balance, which is specific to each woman. Continuation of MHT is conditioned by the benefit-risk balance, which must be evaluated regularly, but also by the evolution of symptoms when MHT is stopped as well as menopause-related health risks or induced by MHT. After stopping MHT, it is necessary to maintain a medical follow-up to be adapted to the clinical situation of each woman and in particular, her cardiovascular and gynecological risk factors.

Risks, Benefits, and Treatment Modalities of Menopausal Hormone Therapy: Current Concepts

Menopausal hormone therapy (HT) prescribing practices have evolved over the last few decades guided by the changing understanding of the treatment's risks and benefits. Since the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) trial results in 2002, including post-intervention analysis and cumulative 18-year follow up, it has become clear that the risks of HT are low for healthy women less than age 60 or within ten years from menopause. For those who are experiencing bothersome vasomotor symptoms, the benefits are likely to outweigh the risks in view of HT's efficacy for symptom management. HT also has a role in preventing osteoporosis in appropriate candidates for treatment. A comprehensive overview of the types, routes, and formulations of currently available HT, as well as HT's benefits and risks by outcomes of interest are provided to facilitate clinical decision making.

[Benefit-risk balance of hormone replacement therapy: Cancers and mortality. Postmenopausal women management - CNGOF and GEMVi clinical practice guidelines]

The use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) for menopausal women has been the subject of much controversy in recent years, particularly concerning the carcinologic risks. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the impact of the use of HRT on the risk of gynecological but also extra-gynecological cancers. The effect of the type and the duration of use of HRT in menopausal women will also be discussed. The beneficial impact of HRT on overall mortality is also an element that will be discussed and must be taken into account when evaluating the benefit-risk balance of HRT for menopausal women.

The midlife transition and the risk of cardiovascular disease and cancer Part II: strategies to maximize quality of life and limit dysfunction and disease

Chronic dysfunction, disabilities, and complex diseases such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus type 2, osteoporosis and certain cancers, among other burdens, emerge and accelerate in midlife women. Previously in part l, we described the clinical and laboratory research findings that more readily explain and clarify the underlying pathogenetic mechanisms driving these clinical burdens, including new findings on how in particular visceral obesity and the emergence and acceleration of various components of metabolic syndrome-glucotoxicity and lipotoxicity-and a chronic systemic inflammatory state abetted by the loss of ovarian production of estradiol and the inevitable inroads of aging generate this spectrum of clinical problems. These research insights translate into opportunities for effective care strategies leading to prevention, amelioration, possible correction, and enhanced quality of life. To achieve these goals, updated detailed diagnostic, management, and therapeutic guidelines implemented by a reprogrammed and repurposed "menopause" office visit are described. A triage mechanism-when to refer to other specialists for further care-is emphasized. The previously polarized views of menopausal hormone therapy have narrowed significantly, leading to the construction of a more confident, unified, and wider clinical application. Accordingly, a menopausal hormone therapy program providing maximum benefit and minimum risk, accompanied by an algorithm for enhanced shared decision making, is included.

Peri- and postmenopause-diagnosis and interventions interdisciplinary S3 guideline of the association of the scientific medical societies in Germany (AWMF 015/062): short version

This short version of the interdisciplinary S3 guideline "Peri- and Postmenopause-Diagnosis and Interventions" is intended as a decision-making instrument for physicians who counsel peri- and postmenopausal women. It is designed to assist daily practice. The present short version summarizes the full version of the guideline which contains detailed information on guideline methodology, particularly regarding the critical appraisal of the evidence and the assignment of evidence levels. The statements and recommendations of the full version of the guideline are quoted completely in the present short version including levels of evidence (LoE) and grades of recommendation. The classification system developed by the Centre for Evidence-based Medicine in Oxford was used in this guideline.

Oestrogen receptor pathway activity is associated with outcome in endometrial cancer

BACKGROUND

Oestrogen receptor (ER) expression is a prognostic biomarker in endometrial cancer (EC). However, expression does not provide information about the functional activity of the ER pathway. We evaluated a model to quantify ER pathway activity in EC, and determined the prognostic relevance of ER pathway activity.

METHODS

ER pathway activity was measured in two publicly available datasets with endometrial and EC tissue, and one clinical cohort with 107 samples from proliferative and hyperplastic endometrium and endometrioid-type EC (EEC) and uterine serous cancer (USC). ER pathway activity scores were inferred from ER target gene mRNA levels from Affymetrix microarray data (public datasets), or measured by qPCR on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded samples (clinical cohort) and related to ER expression and outcome.

RESULTS

ER pathway activity scores differed significantly throughout the menstrual cycle supporting the validity of the pathway test. The highest ER pathway scores were found in proliferative and hyperplastic endometrium and stage I EEC, whereas stage II-IV EEC and USCs had significantly lower levels. Low ER pathway activity was associated with recurrent disease, and added prognostic value in patients with low ER expression.

CONCLUSION

The ER pathway test reflects activity of the ER pathway, and may improve prediction of outcome in EC patients.

Menopausal Hormone Therapy and Risk of Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review

Background: Menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) is an appropriate treatment for women with the climacteric syndrome. The estrogen component of MHT effectively alleviates climacteric symptoms but also stimulates the endometrium and thus may increase the risk of endometrial cancer (EC). Materials and Methods: We performed a systematic literature search of the databases PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify controlled and uncontrolled clinical trials reporting on the prevalence and/or incidence of EC among women using MHT. Results: 31 publications reporting on 21,306 women with EC diagnosed during or after MHT were identified. A significantly reduced risk of EC among continuous-combined (cc)MHT users with synthetic progestins (SPs) was demonstrated in 10/19 studies with odds ratios (ORs)/hazard ratios (HRs) between 0.24 and 0.71. Only one study documented an increased risk of EC among long-term users (≥10 years), not confirmed in three other sub-group analyses of women with ≥6, ≥5, and >10 years of ccMHT use. A significantly increased risk of EC among users of sequential-combined (sc)MHT with SPs was demonstrated in 6/12 studies with ORs/HRs between 1.38 and 4.35. Number of days of progestin per month was a significant modulator of EC risk. A decreased risk of EC was seen in obese women. Two studies documented an increased risk of EC among users of cc/scMHT with micronized progesterone. A significantly increased risk of EC among estrogen-only MHT users was demonstrated in 9/12 studies with ORs/HRs between 1.45 and 4.46. The adverse effect of estrogen-only MHT was greatest among obese women. Conclusion: ccMHT with SPs reduces the risk of EC, whereas estrogen-only MHT increases the risk. scMHT with SPs and cc/scMHT with micronized progesterone increase the risk of EC depending on type of progestin, progestin dosage, and duration of MHT use.

Exogenous hormone use and cutaneous melanoma risk in women: The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition

Evidence suggests an influence of sex hormones on cutaneous melanoma risk, but epidemiologic findings are conflicting. We examined the associations between use of oral contraceptives (OCs) and menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) and melanoma risk in women participating in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). EPIC is a prospective cohort study initiated in 1992 in 10 European countries. Information on exogenous hormone use at baseline was derived from country-specific self-administered questionnaires. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Over 1992-2015, 1,696 melanoma cases were identified among 334,483 women, whereof 770 cases among 134,758 postmenopausal women. There was a positive, borderline-significant association between OC use and melanoma risk (HR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.00-1.26), with no detected heterogeneity across countries (phomogeneity = 0.42). This risk increased linearly with duration of use (ptrend = 0.01). Among postmenopausal women, ever use of MHT was associated with a nonsignificant increase in melanoma risk overall (HR = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.97-1.43), which was heterogeneous across countries (phomogeneity = 0.05). Our findings do not support a strong and direct association between exogenous hormone use and melanoma risk. In order to better understand these relations, further research should be performed using prospectively collected data including detailed information on types of hormone, and on sun exposure, which may act as an important confounder or effect modifier on these relations.

Progesterone and endometrial cancer

It is well established that unopposed estrogen, either endogenous or therapeutic, can induce endometrial hyperplasia and potentially endometrial cancer (EC). Anovulatory cycles, obesity, and insulin resistance are major risk factors for EC. Progestogen (progesterone and progestin), including levonorgestrel intrauterine device, are able to prevent or to treat hyperplasia, atypical hyperplasia, and even well-differentiated EC, as presented in this review. During menopausal hormone therapy, progestogens protect the endometrium against the proliferative effects of estrogens in women with a uterus. Whereas, recent epidemiologic data suggest that micronized progesterone (MP) is apparently safer for the breast, it could be less efficient than synthetic progestin on the endometrium. However, several studies from biopsies during treatment with MP do not show any increased risk of hyperplasia. Lack of compliance could explain the results on EC.

Anti-estrogen Treatment in Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review

Introduction: Hormonal therapy in endometrial cancer (EC) is used for patients who wish to preserve fertility and for patients with advanced or recurrent disease in a palliative setting. First line hormonal therapy consists of treatment with progestins, which has a response rate of 25% in an unselected population. Treatment with anti-estrogens is an alternative hormonal therapy option, but there is limited data on the effect and side-effects of anti-estrogens in EC. Therefore, we performed a systematic review to investigate the response rate and toxicity of anti-estrogenic therapy in patients with endometrial cancer.

Methods: A systematic search in electronic databases was performed to identify studies on selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERM) and down-regulators (SERD) and aromatase inhibitors that reported on response rates (RR) among EC patients. Outcome in estrogen receptor (ER) positive and negative disease was assessed independently.

Results: Sixteen studies on advanced stage and recurrent EC were included. Ten studies investigated anti-estrogen monotherapy and seven investigated a combination of anti-estrogenic drugs with either progestin or targeted treatment. Due to heterogeneity in patient population, no meta-analysis was performed. The median age of the patients in the included studies ranged from 61 to 71 years and the proportion of low grade tumors ranged from 38 to 80%. The RR for tamoxifen ranged from 10 to 53%, for other SERMs and SERDs 9–31%, for aromatase inhibitors from 8 to 9%, for combined tamoxifen/progestin treatment 19–58%, for combined chemo- and hormonal therapy 43% and for combination of anti-estrogenic treatment with mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors 14–31%. Toxicity consisted mainly of nausea and thrombotic events and was higher in combination therapy of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy and hormonal therapy and mTOR inhibitors compared to other therapies.

Conclusion: Tamoxifen or a combination of tamoxifen and progestin should be the preferred choice when selecting second line hormonal treatment because the RRs are similar to first line progestin treatment and the toxicity is low. The response can be optimized by selecting patients with endometrioid tumors and positive estrogen receptor status, which should be based on a pretreatment biopsy.

Menopausal Hormone Therapy in Gynecologic Cancer Survivors: A Review of the Evidence and Practice Recommendations

Gynecologic cancers are common in the United States and represent a significant health burden. Treatment of these cancers often causes premature cessation of ovarian function, with resultant symptoms that are often more severe than those associated with natural menopause. Hormone therapy is the most effective treatment for menopausal symptoms, but the decision-making process about its use can be complex for survivors of gynecologic cancer. In this review, we provide evidence-based recommendations about the use of hormone therapy after gynecologic cancer.

Increased Incidence of Endometrial Cancer Following the Women's Health Initiative: An Assessment of Risk Factors

BACKGROUND

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result (SEER) database shows a variable increase in endometrial cancer incidence over time. The objective of this review was to examine published endometrial cancer rates and potential etiologies.

METHODS

Endometrial cancer incidence was obtained from the SEER Program database from 1975 through 2014, and a test for trend in incidence was calculated. Changes in risk factors thought to be associated with endometrial cancer, including age, obesity, diabetes, diet and exercise, reproductive factors, and medications (hormone therapy [HT] including Food and Drug Administration [FDA]-approved and non-FDA-approved [compounded] estrogens and progestogens, tamoxifen, and hormonal contraceptives) were found through PubMed searches. Temporal trends of risk factors were compared with endometrial cancer trends from SEER.

RESULTS

Although endometrial cancer rates were constant from 1992 to 2002 (women 50-74 years of age), they increased 2.5% annually with a 10% increase from 2006 to 2012 (trend test 0.82). Use of approved prescription estrogen-progestogen combination products decreased after the publication of the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) data, whereas other risk factors either remained constant or decreased during the same time; however, compounded bioidentical HT (CBHT) use increased coincident with the endometrial cancer increase.

CONCLUSION

Endometrial cancer rate increases after the first publication of WHI data in 2002 may be associated with the decreased use of approved estrogen-progestogen therapy, the increase in CBHT use, and the prevalence of obesity and diabetes; potential relationships require further evaluation.

Estradiol and progesterone bioavailability for moderate to severe vasomotor symptom treatment and endometrial protection with the continuous-combined regimen of TX-001HR (oral estradiol and progesterone capsules)

Objective:

In the REPLENISH trial, women receiving TX-001HR—an oral, softgel capsule, combining 17β-estradiol (E2) and progesterone (E2 mg/P4 mg 1/100, 0.5/100), had significantly improved vasomotor symptoms, while having their endometrium protected from hyperplasia. The objective here was to describe P4 levels sufficient to counteract the potential endometrial effects of 1 or 0.5 mg oral E2 with TX-001HR.

Methods:

In REPLENISH (phase 3; NCT01942668), serum P4, E2, and estrone (E1) levels were characterized in postmenopausal women treated with TX-001HR (E2 mg/P4 mg: 1/100, 0.5/100, [0.5/50, 0.25/50 and placebo not reported here]) at baseline, week 12, and month 12 for P4, and at baseline, weeks 4 and 12, and months 6, 9, and 12 for E2 and E1. In a phase 1 study, pharmacokinetic parameters were assessed after 7 daily doses of oral E2 mg/P4 mg (1/100 and 0.5/100).

Results:

In REPLENISH (n = 1,835), mean P4 levels were 0.39 to 0.55 ng/mL with 100-mg P4 doses; E2 levels were 42.3 to 45.6 pg/mL and 23.0 to 27.4 pg/mL for the 1-mg and 0.5-mg E2 doses, respectively; E1 levels were 214 to 242 pg/mL and 114 to 129 pg/mL for the 1-mg and 0.5-mg E2 doses. In the phase 1 study (n = 40; day 7), mean C_avg for P4 was 0.66 ng/mL with 100-mg P4 doses; E2 was 38.1 pg/mL and 29.2 pg/mL for 1 mg and 0.5 mg E2, respectively; and E1 was 211 and 106 pg/mL for 1 mg and 0.5 mg E2. All three analytes reached steady state within 7 days; accumulation ratios were 1.36 to 1.94.

Conclusions:

P4 levels observed with TX-001HR were similar in the phase 1 and 3 studies, and were associated with no endometrial hyperplasia with either E2 daily dose over 1 year in the REPLENISH phase 3 study, which showed significant improvements in menopausal vasomotor symptoms.

Interdisciplinary Diagnosis, Therapy and Follow-up of Patients with Endometrial Cancer. Guideline (S3-Level, AWMF Registry Nummer 032/034-OL, April 2018) - Part 1 with Recommendations on the Epidemiology, Screening, Diagnosis and Hereditary Factors of Endometrial Cancer

Summary The first German interdisciplinary S3-guideline on the diagnosis, therapy and follow-up of patients with endometrial cancer was published in April 2018. Funded by German Cancer Aid as part of an Oncology Guidelines Program, the lead coordinators of the guideline were the German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) and the Gynecological Oncology Working Group (AGO) of the German Cancer Society (DKG).

Purpose The use of evidence-based, risk-adapted therapy to treat low-risk women with endometrial cancer avoids unnecessarily radical surgery and non-useful adjuvant radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy. This can significantly reduce therapy-induced morbidity and improve the patientʼs quality of life as well as avoiding unnecessary costs. For women with endometrial cancer and a high risk of recurrence, the guideline defines the optimal surgical radicality together with the appropriate chemotherapy and/or adjuvant radiotherapy where required. The evidence-based optimal use of different therapeutic modalities should improve survival rates and the quality of life of these patients. The S3-guideline on endometrial cancer is intended as a basis for certified gynecological cancer centers. The aim is that the quality indicators established in this guideline will be incorporated in the certification processes of these centers.

Methods The guideline was compiled in accordance with the requirements for S3-level guidelines. This includes, in the first instance, the adaptation of source guidelines selected using the DELBI instrument for appraising guidelines. Other consulted sources include reviews of evidence which were compiled from literature selected during systematic searches of literature databases using the PICO scheme. In addition, an external biostatistics institute was commissioned to carry out a systematic search and assessment of the literature for one area of the guideline. The identified materials were used by the interdisciplinary working groups to develop suggestions for Recommendations and Statements, which were then modified during structured consensus conferences and/or additionally amended online using the DELPHI method with consent being reached online. The guideline report is freely available online.

Recommendations Part 1 of this short version of the guideline presents recommendations on epidemiology, screening, diagnosis and hereditary factors, The epidemiology of endometrial cancer and the risk factors for developing endomentrial cancer are presented. The options for screening and the methods used to diagnose endometrial cancer including the pathology of the cancer are outlined. Recommendations are given for the prevention, diagnosis, and therapy of hereditary forms of endometrial cancer.

Evidence on the use of progesterone in menopausal hormone therapy

A need exists for a regulatory agency-approved hormone therapy (HT) with naturally occurring hormones combining progesterone (P4) and estradiol (E2), since no single product contains both endogenous hormones. Many women choose HT with P4 and millions of women around the world are using unapproved, poorly regulated compounded HT. The use of natural P4 in HT results, for the most part, in favorable outcomes without deleterious effects, as shown in clinical studies of postmenopausal women. Importantly, P4 used in HT prevents endometrial hyperplasia from estrogens while helping relieve vasomotor symptoms and improving quality-of-life measures. Additionally, risk of venous thromboembolism and breast cancer does not appear to increase with use of P4 plus estrogens as shown with synthetic progestins plus estrogens in large observations studies, and no detrimental effects of P4 in HT have been found on outcomes related to cardiovascular disease or cognition. A regulatory agency-approved HT with naturally occurring E2/P4 could be an option for the millions of women who desire a bioidentical product and/or are exposed to potential risks of inadequately studied and under-regulated compounded HT.

Menopausal hormone therapy: a better and safer future

Major advances in menopause hormone therapy (MHT) hold promise in the future of better and safer care for women at and after the menopause. The principal advances are: (1) the critical window or 'window of opportunity' in the 10 years or so after the menopause, during which the benefits of MHT in healthy women exceed any risks; (2) use of transdermal instead of oral administration of estrogen to reduce the risk of venous thromboembolism; (c) investigation of the use of oral micronized progesterone (MP) and vaginal MP to prevent endometrial hyperplasia and carcinoma without any increased risk of breast cancer and venous thromboembolism in postmenopausal women receiving estrogens; vaginal MP prevents endometrial proliferation in the short term but the long-term effects in MHT remain to be established; (4) investigation into the use of intrauterine levonorgestrel-releasing devices (LNG-IUDs), which are an attractive form of MHT in perimenopausal women, providing contraception and reducing uterine bleeding, although the risk of breast cancer with LNG-IUDs requires clarification. Women in the future can look forward to a symptom-free menopause and to safer and more beneficial MHT.

Exogenous Hormone Use and Endometrial Cancer in U.S. Black Women

Background: Although endometrial cancer risk differs among white and black women, few data on its associations with exogenous hormone use in the latter group are available. Studies have reported lower endometrial cancer risk among users of oral contraceptives (OCs), but higher risk among users of estrogen-only female menopausal hormones (FMHs). Evidence for the risk among estrogen plus progestin FMHs users is equivocal.Methods: We followed 47,555 Black Women's Health Study participants with an intact uterus from 1995 through 2013. Data on exogenous hormone use, covariates, and endometrial cancer were obtained biennially. Self-reported incident cases of endometrial cancer were confirmed by medical records or cancer registries whenever possible. We estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using Cox proportional hazards regression.Results: We observed 300 endometrial cancer cases during 689,546 person-years of follow-up. Compared with never use, ≥10 years' duration of OC use was associated with lower risk (multivariable IRR = 0.45, 95% CI, 0.27-0.74), but risk was higher among current users of estrogen-only (IRR = 3.78, 95% CI, 1.69-8.43) and estrogen plus progestin FMH (IRR = 1.55, 95% CI, 0.78-3.11). Risk was not increased among former users of estrogen-only (IRR = 0.87, 95% CI, 0.44-1.72) or estrogen plus progestin FMH (IRR = 0.63, 95% CI, 0.36-1.09).Conclusions: Current use of estrogen-only and estrogen plus progestin FMH was associated with increased risk of endometrial cancer. Risk appeared lower among former users of estrogen plus progestin FMH. Long-term OC use was associated with reduced risk.Impact: Our results are generally consistent with those among white women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 27(5); 558-65. ©2018 AACR.

The impact of micronized progesterone on breast cancer risk: a systematic review

Postmenopausal women with an intact uterus using estrogen therapy should receive a progestogen for endometrial protection. The debate on bioidentical hormones including micronized progesterone has increased in recent years. Based on a systematic literature review on the impact of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) containing micronized progesterone on the mammary gland, an international expert panel's recommendations are as follows: (1) estrogens combined with oral (approved) or vaginal (off-label use) micronized progesterone do not increase breast cancer risk for up to 5 years of treatment duration; (2) there is limited evidence that estrogens combined with oral micronized progesterone applied for more than 5 years are associated with an increased breast cancer risk; and (3) counseling on combined MHT should cover breast cancer risk - regardless of the progestogen chosen. Yet, women should also be counseled on other modifiable and non-modifiable breast cancer risk factors in order to balance the impact of combined MHT on the breast.

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS AND AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY POSITION STATEMENT ON MENOPAUSE-2017 UPDATE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE)/American College of Endocrinology (ACE) Position Statement is designed to update the previous menopause clinical practice guidelines published in 2011 but does not replace them. The current document reviews new clinical trials published since then as well as new information regarding possible risks and benefits of therapies available for the treatment of menopausal symptoms. AACE reinforces the recommendations made in its previous guidelines and provides additional recommendations on the basis of new data. A summary regarding this position statement is listed below: New information available from randomized clinical trials and epidemiologic studies reported after 2011 was critically reviewed. No previous recommendations from the 2011 menopause clinical practice guidelines have been reversed or changed. Newer information enhances AACE's guidance for the use of hormone therapy in different subsets of women. Newer information helps to support the use of various types of estrogens, selective estrogen-receptor modulators (SERMs), and progesterone, as well as the route of delivery. Newer information supports the previous recommendation against the use of bioidentical hormones. The use of nonhormonal therapies for the symptomatic relief of menopausal symptoms is supported. Newer information enhances AACE's guidance for the use of hormone therapy in different subsets of women. Newer information helps to support the use of various types of estrogens, SERMs, and progesterone, as well as the route of delivery. Newer information supports the previous recommendation against the use of bioidentical hormones. The use of nonhormonal therapies for the symptomatic relief of menopausal symptoms is supported. New recommendations in this position statement include: 1.

RECOMMENDATION

the use of menopausal hormone therapy in symptomatic postmenopausal women should be based on consideration of all risk factors for cardiovascular disease, age, and time from menopause. 2.

RECOMMENDATION

the use of transdermal as compared with oral estrogen preparations may be considered less likely to produce thrombotic risk and perhaps the risk of stroke and coronary artery disease. 3.

RECOMMENDATION

when the use of progesterone is necessary, micronized progesterone is considered the safer alternative. 4.

RECOMMENDATION

in symptomatic menopausal women who are at significant risk from the use of hormone replacement therapy, the use of selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors and possibly other nonhormonal agents may offer significant symptom relief. 5.

RECOMMENDATION

AACE does not recommend use of bioidentical hormone therapy. 6.

RECOMMENDATION

AACE fully supports the recommendations of the Comité de l'Évolution des Pratiques en Oncologie regarding the management of menopause in women with breast cancer. 7.

RECOMMENDATION

HRT is not recommended for the prevention of diabetes. 8.

RECOMMENDATION

In women with previously diagnosed diabetes, the use of HRT should be individualized, taking in to account age, metabolic, and cardiovascular risk factors.

ABBREVIATIONS

AACE = American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists; ACE = American College of Endocrinology; BMI = body mass index; CAC = coronary artery calcification; CEE = conjugated equine estrogen; CEPO = Comité de l'Évolution des Pratiques en Oncologie; CAD = coronary artery disease; CIMT = carotid intima media thickness; CVD = cardiovascular disease; FDA = Food and Drug Administration; HDL = high-density lipoprotein; HRT = hormone replacement therapy; HT = hypertension; KEEPS = Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study; LDL = low-density lipoprotein; MBS = metabolic syndrome; MPA = medroxyprogesterone acetate; RR = relative risk; SERM = selective estrogen-receptor modulator; SSRI = selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitor; VTE = venous thrombo-embolism; WHI = Women's Health Initiative.

Epidemiology of Endometrial Carcinoma: Etiologic Importance of Hormonal and Metabolic Influences

Endometrial carcinoma is the most common gynecologic cancer in developed nations, and the annual incidence is projected to increase, secondary to the high prevalence of obesity, a strong endometrial carcinoma risk factor. Although endometrial carcinomas are etiologically, biologically, and clinically diverse, hormonal and metabolic mechanisms are particularly strongly implicated in the pathogenesis of endometrioid carcinoma, the numerically predominant subtype. The centrality of hormonal and metabolic disturbances in the pathogenesis of endometrial carcinoma, combined with its slow development from well-characterized precursors in most cases, offers a substantial opportunity to reduce endometrial carcinoma mortality through early detection, lifestyle modification, and chemoprevention. In this chapter, we review the epidemiology of endometrial carcinoma, emphasizing theories that link risk factors for these tumors to hormonal and metabolic mechanisms. Future translational research opportunities related to prevention are discussed.

Progestogen safety and tolerance in hormonal replacement therapy

INTRODUCTION

Today, it is a mandatory practice to prescribe a combination of estrogens and progestogens for menopausal women requiring hormone therapy and with a uterus. The WHI study and its reanalysis demonstrate a big difference in results between the conjugated equin estrogen (CEE) only vs.CEE plus medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) arms in relation with breast cancer and cardiovascular risk. The conclusion is that risk is clearly higher in the arm with MPA than in the CEE only arm. Although the only progestogen used in the WHI study was medroxyprogesterone acetate, side effects and intolerance have been extrapolated as a class effect to all progestogens. Areas covered: Progestogen tolerance and side effects in hormone therapy were reviewed. For that purpose, a limited literature search was conducted on key resources including Pubmed, the Cochrane Library, ECRI, and major international health technology agencies. Expert opinion: Many of the tolerance effects are based on limited data. There are no double-blind randomized trials comparing long-term safety for breast cancer and cardiovascular risk among different progestogens. Short-term clinical studies, observational, and in animal and in vitro studies indicate that both micronized progesterone and dydrogesterone are the safer progestogens with an acceptable metabolic profile.

Menopausal hormone therapy in cancer survivors: A narrative review of the literature

Decision making regarding the use of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) for the treatment of bothersome menopausal symptoms in a cancer survivor can be complex, and includes assessment of its impact on disease-free or overall survival. Estrogen receptors are present in several cancer types, but this does not always result in estrogen-mediated tumor proliferation and adverse cancer-related outcomes. Estrogen may even be protective against certain cancers. Menopausal hormone therapy is associated with an increased risk of recurrence and mortality after diagnosis of some cancer types, but not others. We provide a narrative review of the medical literature regarding the risk of cancer recurrence and associated mortality with initiation of MHT after the diagnosis of breast, gynecologic, lung, colorectal, hematologic cancers, and melanoma. Menopausal hormone therapy may be considered for management of bothersome menopausal symptoms in women with some cancer types (e.g., colorectal and hematologic cancer, localized melanoma, and most cervical, vulvar and vaginal cancers), while nonhormonal treatment options may be preferred for others (e.g., breast cancer). In women with other cancer types, recommendations are less straightforward, and the use of MHT must be individualized.

Elevated glucose levels impair the WNT/β-catenin pathway via the activation of the hexosamine biosynthesis pathway in endometrial cancer

Endometrial cancer (EC) is one of the most common gynecological malignancies in the world. Associations between fasting glucose levels (greater than 5.6mmol/L) and the risk of cancer fatality have been reported. However, the underlying link between glucose metabolic disease and EC remains unclear. In the present study, we explored the influence of elevated glucose levels on the WNT/β-catenin pathway in EC. Previous studies have suggested that elevated concentrations of glucose can drive the hexosamine biosynthesis pathway (HBP) flux, thereby enhancing the O-GlcNAc modification of proteins. Here, we cultured EC cell lines, AN3CA and HEC-1-B, with various concentrations of glucose. Results showed that when treated with high levels of glucose, both lines showed increased expression of β-catenin and O-GlcNAcylation levels; however, these effects could be abolished by the HBP inhibitors, Azaserine and 6-Diazo-5-oxo-l-norleucine, and be restored by glucosamine. Moreover the AN3CA and HEC-1-B cells that were cultured with or without PUGNAc, an inhibitor of the O-GlcNAcase, showed that PUGNAc increased β-catenin levels. The results suggest that elevated glucose levels increase β-catenin expression via the activation of the HBP in EC cells. Subcellular fractionation experiments showed that AN3CA cells had a higher expression of intranuclear β-catenin in high glucose medium. Furthermore, TOP/FOP-Flash and RT-PCR results showed that glucose-induced increased expression of β-catenin triggered the transcription of target genes. In conclusion, elevated glucose levels, via HBP, increase the O-GlcNAcylation level, thereby inducing the over expression of β-catenin and subsequent transcription of the target genes in EC cells.

An epidemiological model for prediction of endometrial cancer risk in Europe

Endometrial cancer (EC) is the fourth most frequent cancer in women in Europe, and as its incidence is increasing, prevention strategies gain further pertinence. Risk prediction models can be a useful tool for identifying women likely to benefit from targeted prevention measures. On the basis of data from 201,811 women (mostly aged 30-65 years) including 855 incident EC cases from eight countries in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort, a model to predict EC was developed. A step-wise model selection process was used to select confirmed predictive epidemiologic risk factors. Piece-wise constant hazard rates in 5-year age-intervals were estimated in a cause-specific competing risks model, five-fold-cross-validation was applied for internal validation. Risk factors included in the risk prediction model were body-mass index (BMI), menopausal status, age at menarche and at menopause, oral contraceptive use, overall and by different BMI categories and overall duration of use, parity, age at first full-term pregnancy, duration of menopausal hormone therapy and smoking status (specific for pre, peri- and post-menopausal women). These variables improved the discriminating capacity to predict risk over 5 years from 71% for a model based on age alone to 77% (overall C statistic), and the model was well-calibrated (ratio of expected to observed cases = 0.99). Our model could be used for the identification of women at increased risk of EC in Western Europe. To achieve an EC-risk model with general validity, a large-scale cohort-consortium approach would be needed to assess and adjust for population variation.