Tibolone increases bone mineral density but also relapse in breast cancer survivors: LIBERATE trial bone substudy

Relationship between menopausal hormone therapy and incidence of fractures in postmenopausal women

OBJECTIVE

Long-term protective effects of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) at fractures with different doses and components are controversial. We analyzed the effect of MHT on the incidence of spine and femur fractures according to MHT type, age at commencement, duration and dose of hormones in Korean women.

METHOD

This retrospective study evaluated propensity score-matched patients with MHT from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. Among women aged ≥50 years with menopause between 2004 and 2007, spine and femur fracture incidence until 2017 was analyzed in 36,446 women who had received MHT for >1 year. Estrogen-progesterone therapy (EPT), estrogen-only therapy (ET) or tibolone therapy was conducted.

RESULTS

EPT significantly lowered the incidence of spine and femur fractures with a conventional dose, but not with a low dose. Tibolone significantly decreased the incidence of spine fractures in women aged 50-59 years when used for >5 years, and the incidence of femur fractures in women older than 60 years when used for >3 years. ET significantly lowered the risk of femur fractures when estradiol was used for >5 years.

CONCLUSION

In menopausal women, all MHT including conventional-dose EPT, ET and tibolone tended to lower the incidence of fractures. The effects, however, varied with the type of fracture and type of MHT.

Oral Therapeutics Post Menopausal Osteoporosis

Osteoporosis affects a significant number of postmenopausal women in the United States. Screening is performed using clinical assessments and bone mineral density scans via dual x-ray absorptiometry. Oral therapy is indicated to prevent pathologic fractures in those deemed at increased risk following screening. Bisphosphonates including alendronate, ibandronate, and risedronate are currently first-line oral therapeutics in fracture prevention following the diagnosis of osteoporosis. Hormonal therapies include estrogen-containing therapies, selective estrogen receptor modulators, and other compounds that mimic the effects of estrogen such as tibolone. Lifestyle modifications such as supplementation and physical activity may also contribute to the prevention of osteoporosis and are used as adjuncts to therapy following diagnosis. These therapeutics are limited primarily by their adverse effects. Treatment regimens should be tailored based on significant risk factors demonstrated by patients, adverse effects, and clinical response to treatment. The most severe risk factors relevant to pharmacological selection involve hormone replacement therapies, where concern for venous thrombosis, coronary artery disease, breast, and uterine cancer exist. Bisphosphonates are most commonly associated with gastrointestinal discomfort which may be mitigated with proper administration. Although adverse effects exist, these medications have proven to be efficacious in the prevention of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures in post-menopausal women. Fracture risk should be weighed against the risk of adverse events associated with each of the regimens, with clinical judgment dictating the treatment approach centered around patient goals and experiences.

Therapeutic Choices for Genitourinary Syndrome of Menopause (GSM) in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Update

(1) Background: Genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) is a medical condition that can affect breast cancer survivors (BCS). This is a complication that often can occur as a result of breast cancer treatment, causing symptoms such as vaginal dryness, itching, burning, dyspareunia, dysuria, pain, discomfort, and impairment of sexual function. BCS who experience these symptoms negatively impact multiple aspects of their quality of life to the point that some of them fail to complete adjuvant hormonal treatment; (2) Methods: In this systematic review of the literature, we have analyzed possible pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for GSM in BCS. We reviewed systemic hormone therapy, local hormone treatment with estrogens and androgens, the use of vaginal moisturizers and lubricants, ospemifene, and physical therapies such as radiofrequency, electroporation, and vaginal laser; (3) Results: The data available to date demonstrate that the aforementioned treatments are effective for the therapy of GSM and, in particular, vulvovaginal atrophy in BCS. Where possible, combination therapy often appears more useful than using a single line of treatment; (4) Conclusions: We analyzed the efficacy and safety data of each of these options for the treatment of GSM in BCS, emphasizing how often larger clinical trials with longer follow-ups are needed.

Association of hormone therapy and changes of objective sleep quality in women of late menopausal transition with sleep disorder: a preliminary study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate changes in objective sleep quality with hormone therapy (HT) in women with late menopausal transition.

METHODS

Healthy midlife women with sleep difficulty who received HT were included. Those undergoing late menopausal transition were screened. Sleep patterns and self-reported questionnaires were collected before and 10 weeks after starting HT.

RESULTS

Ten women who met the criteria (age, 50.1 ± 2.8 years) showed higher sleep efficiency and shorter wakefulness after sleep onset (WASO) 10 weeks after starting HT. However, no significant change was found in objective sleep quality after adjustment for multiple comparisons: sleep efficiency, 84.2 ± 7.7 versus 88.2% ± 4.7%, P = 0.037, adjusted P = 0.259; WASO, 59.0 ± 27.2 minutes versus 41.4 ± 17.4 minutes, P = 0.020, adjusted P = 0.140; average duration per awakening, 2.9 ± 1.0 minutes versus 2.2 ± 0.5 minutes, P = 0.033, adjusted P = 0.231. A better score of subjective sleep quality in the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index was observed 10 weeks after starting HT (2.0 ± 0.0 vs 1.2 ± 0.4, P = 0.006, adjusted P = 0.042), but sensitivity analysis did not show consistent results after adjustment for multiple comparisons (2.0 ± 0.0 vs 1.1 ± 0.4, P = 0.020, adjusted P = 0.140). Total scores of the Insomnia Severity Index and Menopause Rating Scale were better 10 weeks after starting HT (Insomnia Severity Index, 14.7 ± 3.0 vs 9.1 ± 3.8, P = 0.010; Menopause Rating Scale, 29.0 ± 5.2 vs 21.6 ± 3.0, P = 0.009) with consistent results in sensitivity analyses. There was no difference in the Epworth Sleepiness Scale before and after HT (7.2 ± 1.7 vs 8.6 ± 4.5, P = 0.309). The change in each objective sleep quality variable before and after HT showed strong positive or negative correlations with the change in only a few items in subjective sleep quality.

CONCLUSION

Women in the late menopausal transition period showed higher sleep efficiency and shorter WASO after HT; however, multiple comparisons showed no statistically significant difference in objective sleep quality between before and after HT.

Systemic or Vaginal Hormone Therapy After Early Breast Cancer: A Danish Observational Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Women treated for breast cancer (BC) often suffer genitourinary syndrome of menopause. These symptoms may be alleviated by vaginal estrogen therapy (VET) or menopausal hormone therapy (MHT). However, there are concerns of risks of recurrence of BC and death following treatment.

METHODS

Our study included longitudinal data from a national cohort of postmenopausal women, diagnosed 1997-2004 with early-stage invasive estrogen receptor-positive nonmetastatic BC, who received no treatment or 5 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy. We ascertained prescription data on hormone therapy, VET or MHT, from a national prescription registry. We evaluated mortality and risk of recurrence associated with use of VET and MHT vs non-use using multivariable models adjusted for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Among 8461 women who had not received VET or MHT before BC diagnosis, 1957 and 133 used VET and MHT, respectively, after diagnosis. Median follow-up was 9.8 years for recurrence and 15.2 years for mortality. The adjusted relative risk of recurrence was 1.08 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.89 to 1.32) for VET (1.39 [95% CI = 1.04 to 1.85 in the subgroup receiving adjuvant aromatase inhibitors]) and 1.05 (95% CI = 0.62 to 1.78) for MHT. The adjusted hazard ratios for overall mortality were 0.78 (95% CI = 0.71 to 0.87) and 0.94 (95% CI = 0.70 to 1.26) for VET and MHT, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In postmenopausal women treated for early-stage estrogen receptor-positive BC, neither VET nor MHT was associated with increased risk of recurrence or mortality. A subgroup analysis revealed an increased risk of recurrence, but not mortality, in patients receiving VET with adjuvant aromatase inhibitors.

Directive clinique no 422f : Ménopause et cancer du sein

OBJECTIF

Proposer des stratégies pour améliorer les soins aux femmes en périménopause ou ménopausées d'après les plus récentes données probantes publiées.

POPULATION CIBLE

Femmes en périménopause ou ménopausées. BéNéFICES, RISQUES ET COûTS: La population cible bénéficiera des plus récentes données scientifiques publiées que leur communiqueront les fournisseurs de soins de santé. Aucun coût ni préjudice ne sont associés à cette information, car les femmes seront libres de choisir parmi les différentes options thérapeutiques, y compris le statu quo, pour la prise en charge des symptômes et morbidités associés à la ménopause. DONNéES PROBANTES: Les auteurs ont interrogé les bases de données PubMed, Medline et Cochrane Library pour extraire des articles publiés entre 2002 et 2020 en utilisant des termes MeSH spécifiques à chacun des sujets abordés dans les 7 chapitres. MéTHODES DE VALIDATION: Les auteurs ont évalué la qualité des données probantes et la force des recommandations en utilisant le cadre méthodologique d'évaluation, de développement et d'évaluation (GRADE). Voir l'annexe A en ligne (tableau A1 pour les définitions et tableau A2 pour l'interprétation des recommandations fortes et faibles). PROFESSIONNELS CONCERNéS: médecins, y compris gynécologues, obstétriciens, médecins de famille, internistes, urgentologues; infirmières, y compris infirmières autorisées et infirmières praticiennes; pharmaciens; stagiaires, y compris étudiants en médecine, résidents, moniteurs cliniques; et autres fournisseurs de soins auprès de la population cible. RéSUMé POUR TWITTER: Prise en charge de la ménopause chez les survivantes et « présurvivantes » du cancer du sein et les femmes ayant un risque élevé de cancer du sein : mise à jour sur les données récentes. DÉCLARATIONS SOMMAIRES: RECOMMANDATIONS.

Guideline No. 422f: Menopause and Breast Cancer

OBJECTIVE

Provide strategies for improving the care of perimenopausal and postmenopausal women based on the most recent published evidence.

TARGET POPULATION

Perimenopausal and postmenopausal women.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

Target population will benefit from the most recent published scientific evidence provided via the information from their health care provider. No harms or costs are involved with this information since women will have the opportunity to choose among the different therapeutic options for the management of the symptoms and morbidities associated with menopause, including the option to choose no treatment.

EVIDENCE

Databases consulted were PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library for the years 2002-2020, and MeSH search terms were specific for each topic developed through the 7 chapters.

VALIDATION METHODS

The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations of strong and weak recommendations). INTENDED AUDIENCE: physicians, including gynaecologists, obstetricians, family physicians, internists, emergency medicine specialists; nurses, including registered nurses and nurse practitioners; pharmacists; medical trainees, including medical students, residents, fellows; and other providers of health care for the target population.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS.

Hormone therapy in the postmenopausal years: considering benefits and risks in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Menopausal symptoms can be very distressing and considerably affect a woman's personal and social life. It is becoming more and more evident that leaving bothersome symptoms untreated in midlife may lead to altered quality of life, reduced work productivity and, possibly, overall impaired health. Hormone therapy (HT) for the relief of menopausal symptoms has been the object of much controversy over the past two decades. At the beginning of the century, a shadow was cast on the use of HT owing to the concern for cardiovascular and cerebrovascular risks, and breast cancer, arising following publication of a large randomized placebo-controlled trial. Findings of a subanalysis of the trial data and extended follow-up studies, along with other more modern clinical trials and observational studies, have provided new evidence on the effects of HT.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

The goal of the following paper is to appraise the most significant clinical literature on the effects of hormones in postmenopausal women, and to report the benefits and risks of HT for the relief of menopausal symptoms.

SEARCH METHODS

A Pubmed search of clinical trials was performed using the following terms: estrogens, progestogens, bazedoxifene, tibolone, selective estrogen receptor modulators, tissue-selective estrogen complex, androgens, and menopause.

OUTCOMES

HT is an effective treatment for bothersome menopausal vasomotor symptoms, genitourinary syndrome, and prevention of osteoporotic fractures. Women should be made aware that there is a small increased risk of stroke that tends to persist over the years as well as breast cancer risk with long-term estrogen-progestin use. However, healthy women who begin HT soon after menopause will probably earn more benefit than harm from the treatment. HT can improve bothersome symptoms, all the while conferring offset benefits such as cardiovascular risk reduction, an increase in bone mineral density and a reduction in bone fracture risk. Moreover, a decrease in colorectal cancer risk is obtainable in women treated with estrogen-progestin therapy, and an overall but nonsignificant reduction in mortality has been observed in women treated with conjugated equine estrogens alone or combined with estrogen-progestin therapy. Where possible, transdermal routes of HT administration should be preferred as they have the least impact on coagulation. With combined treatment, natural progesterone should be favored as it is devoid of the antiapoptotic properties of other progestogens on breast cells. When beginning HT, low doses should be used and increased gradually until effective control of symptoms is achieved. Unless contraindications develop, patients may choose to continue HT as long as the benefits outweigh the risks. Regular reassessment of the woman's health status is mandatory. Women with premature menopause who begin HT before 50 years of age seem to have the most significant advantage in terms of longevity.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

In women with bothersome menopausal symptoms, HT should be considered one of the mainstays of treatment. Clinical practitioners should tailor HT based on patient history, physical characteristics, and current health status so that benefits outweigh the risks.

Pharmacotherapeutic options for the treatment of menopausal symptoms

Introduction: Menopausal symptoms can be very overwhelming for women. Over the years, many pharmacotherapeutic options have been tested, and others are still being developed. Hormone therapy (HT) is the most efficient therapy for managing vasomotor symptoms and related disturbances. The term HT comprises estrogens and progestogens, androgens, tibolone, the tissue-selective estrogen complex (TSEC), a combination of bazedoxifene and conjugated estrogens, and the selective estrogen receptor modulators, such as ospemifene. Estrogens and progestogens and androgens may differ significantly for chemical structure and can be delivered through different routes, thereby displaying various pharmacological and clinical properties. Tibolone, TSEC and SERM also exhibit unique pharmacodynamics that can be exploited to obtain distinctive therapeutic effects. Non-hormonal options fall mainly into the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) and selective noradrenergic reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), GABA-analogue drug classes.Areas covered: Herein, the authors describe the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of hormonal (androgens, estrogens, progestogens, tibolone, TSEC, SERMs) and non-hormonal (SSRIs, SNRIs, Gabapentin, Pregabalin, Oxybutynin, Neurokinin antagonists) treatments for menopausal symptoms and report essential clinical trial data in humans.Expert opinion: Patient tailoring of treatment is key to managing symptoms of menopause. Physicians must have in-depth knowledge of the pharmacology of compounds to tailor therapy to the individual patient's characteristics and needs.

Tibolone as Hormonal Therapy and Neuroprotective Agent

Tibolone (TIB), a selective tissue estrogenic activity regulator (STEAR) in clinical use by postmenopausal women, activates hormonal receptors in a tissue-specific manner. Estrogenic activity is present mostly in the brain, vagina, and bone, while the inactive forms predominate in the endometrium and breast. Conflicting literature on TIB's actions has been observed. While it has benefits for vasomotor symptoms, bone demineralization, and sexual health, a higher relative risk of hormone-sensitive cancer has been reported. In the brain, TIB can improve mood and cognition, neuroinflammation, and reactive gliosis. This review aims to discuss the systemic effects of TIB on peri- and post-menopausal women and its role in the brain. We suggest that TIB is a hormonal therapy with promising neuroprotective properties.

Evidencing the impact of cancer trials: insights from the 2014 UK Research Excellence Framework

INTRODUCTION

An impactful clinical trial will have real-life benefits for patients and society beyond the academic environment. This study analyses case studies of cancer trials to understand how impact is evidenced for cancer trials and how impact evaluation can be more routinely adopted and improved.

METHODS

The United Kingdom (UK) Government allocates research funding to higher-education institutions based on an assessment of the institutions' previous research efforts, in an exercise known as the Research Excellence Framework (REF). In addition to each institution's journal publications and research environment, for the first time in 2014, allocation of funding was also dependent on an evaluation of the wider, societal impact of research conducted. In the REF2014, impact assessment was performed by evaluation of impact case studies. In this study, case studies (n = 6637) submitted by institutions for the REF2014 were accessed and those focussing on cancer trials were identified. Manual content analysis was then used to assess the characteristics of the cancer trials discussed in the case studies, the impact described and the methods used by institutions to demonstrate impact.

RESULTS

Forty-six case studies describing 106 individual cancer trials were identified. The majority were phase III randomised controlled trials and those recruiting patients with breast cancer. A list of indicators of cancer trial impact was generated using the previous literature and developed inductively using these case studies. The most common impact from a cancer trial identified in the case studies was on policy, in particular citation of trial findings in clinical guidelines. Impact on health outcomes and the economy were less frequent and health outcomes were often predicted rather than evidenced. There were few descriptions identified of trialists making efforts to maximise trial impact.

DISCUSSION

Cancer trial impact narratives for the next REF assessment exercise in 2021 can be improved by evidencing actual rather than predicted Impact, with a clearer identification of the beneficiaries of cancer trials and the processes through which trial results are used. Clarification of the individuals responsible for performing impact evaluations of cancer trials and the provision of resources to do so needs to be addressed if impact evaluation is to be sustainable.

Tibolone Effects on Human Glioblastoma Cell Lines

BACKGROUND

Ovarian steroid hormones are involved in modulating the growth of glioblastomas (the most common, aggressive, and lethal brain tumor) through the interaction with their intracellular receptors. Activation of sex hormone receptors is involved in glioblastomas progression. Tibolone (TIB) is a selective tissue estrogenic activity regulator widely prescribed to treat menopausal symptoms and to prevent bone lost. The effects of TIB on the growth of glioblastoma are unknown.

AIM OF THE STUDY

To evaluate the effects of TIB on cell number, migration, and invasion of two derived human glioblastoma cell lines (U251 MG and U87), as well as the role of this steroid in estrogen and progesterone receptors activity and content.

METHODS

U251-MG and U87 human glioblastoma cell lines were grown with different doses of TIB. The number of cells was determined and migration and invasion tests were carried out. Protein expression was performed by Western blot.

RESULTS

We observed that TIB (10 nM) increased the number of cells by inducing proliferation with no effects on cell migration or invasion. The increase in cell proliferation induced by TIB was blocked by estrogen (ERs) or progesterone receptor (PRs) antagonists, ICI 182, 780 and RU 486, suggesting that these receptors mediate proliferating actions of TIB; TIB also modified the content of ERs and PRs by increasing ER-α, ER-β, and PR-B, while decreased PR-A.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that TIB increases cell number and proliferation of human glioblastoma cells through the regulation of ERs and PRs actions and content.

Hormone Replacement Therapy in Cancer Survivors - Review of the Literature

Rapid advance in oncology leads to increasing survival of oncologic patients. More and more of them live long enough to reach either the natural age of menopause or, as a side effect of their oncotherapy, experience the cessation of gonadal function, leading to premature ovarian insufficiency, with disturbing vasomotor symtoms and long-term negative cardiovascular and skeletal effects. Thus, an ever increasing number of cancer survivors search endocrinologic help in the form of hormone replacement therapy (HRT). The misinterpretation of the WHI (Women's Health Initiative) Study has lead to an irrational fear of female hormone replacement, both by the general population and medical professionals. It has seemed the logical and safe conclusion to many physicians to avoid HRT, supposing that this attitude definitely causes no harm, whereas the decision of prescribing estrogen alone or with progestins might bear oncologic and thromboembolic risks and may even lead to litigation in case of a potentially related complication. However, it was known even before the WHI results that premature menopause and hypogonadism decreases the life expectancy of women by years through its skeletal and cardiovascular effects, and this negative effect correlates with the length of the hypoestrogenaemic period. Therefore, the denial of HRT also needs to be supported by evidence and should be weighed againts the risks of HRT. Yet, the oncologic risk of HRT is extremely difficult to assess. In this work we review the latest evidence from in vitro experiments to clinical studies, regarding HRT in survivors of gynecologic and non-gynecologic cancers. Based on our literature research, we group tumours regarding the oncologic risk of properly chosen female hormone replacement therapy in cancer survivors as follows: ’HRT is advanageous’ (e.g. endometrial cancer type I, cervical adenocarcinoma, haematologic malignancies, local cutaneous malignant melanoma, colorectal cancer, hepatocellular cancer); ’HRT is neutral’ (e.g. BRCA 1/2 mutation carriers without cancer, endometrial cancer type II, uterinal carcinosarcoma and adenosarcoma, certain types of ovarian cancer, cervical, vaginal and vulvar squamous cell carcinoma, prolactinoma, kidney cancer, pancreatic cancer, thyroid cancer); ’HRT is relatively contraindicated’ for various reasons (e.g. leiomyosarcoma, certain types of ovarian tumours, brain tumours, advanced metastatic malignant melanoma, lung cancer, gastric cancer, bladder cancer); ’HRT is diasadvantageous and thus contraindicated’ (e.g. breast cancer, endometrial stroma sarcoma, meningioma, glioma, hormone receptor positive gastric and bladder cancer).

Hormone therapy in menopausal women with fibroids: is it safe?

Menopause is an important transition in the life of women. It has been estimated that by the year 2030, worldwide 1.2 billion women will be menopausal. The most bothersome symptoms of menopause are believed to be due to declines in estrogen levels in postmenopausal women. Thus, hormone therapy is an effective treatment option for menopausal women, although prolonged use of hormone therapy is associated with a slightly increased risk of breast cancer, thromboembolism, and stroke. A literature search for studies evaluating the effects of hormone therapy in menopausal women with asymptomatic fibroids demonstrated variable effects of hormone therapy on the volume and size of the fibroids. Some studies have demonstrated an increase in size of pre-existing asymptomatic fibroids and formation of new fibroids with higher doses of progestogen in combination therapy. The finding of low resistance index in uterine arteries of women with asymptomatic fibroids is associated with an increased risk of fibroid growth, and thus making the measurement of pulsatility index of uterine arteries a possible screening tool before initiating hormone therapy in menopausal women with fibroids. Although the effect of hormone treatment is variable and statistically insignificant in many cases, the newer selective estrogen receptor modulators having tissue-specific estrogen agonistic and antagonistic actions such as raloxifene have a favorable clinical profile and may be better alternatives in women with asymptomatic fibroids.

Estrogenicity of essential oils is not required to relieve symptoms of urogenital atrophy in breast cancer survivors

Background

Urogenital atrophy (UA) is a common treatment-limiting side effect of endocrine therapies. Topical estrogen is effective but systemic absorption may counter aromatase inhibitor efficacy. Numerous complementary approaches are marketed for use in UA without rigorous testing of their estrogenicity. We tested multiple essential oils in cancer cell growth and estrogen reporter assays in vitro and assessed clinical outcomes with the essential oil pessaries (EOPs) in breast cancer survivors with UA.

Methods

Effects on cell growth were tested in hormone-dependent (MCF-7) and -independent (MDA-MB-231) cell lines using the sulforhodamine-B assay. An estrogen response element (ERE) luciferase reporter assay was used to assess estrogenicity directly. Antifungal activity against two common pathogenic yeasts was assessed using standard microdilution methods. EOPs were offered to breast cancer survivors with symptomatic UA and the service evaluated using serial questionnaires.

Results

Two essential oils, Cymbopogon martinii and Pelargonium graveolens, demonstrated marked estrogenicity, stimulating ER+ cell growth and ERE-luciferase reporter activity to levels seen with premenopausal estradiol concentrations. Additional oils were screened for estrogenicity and Lavandula angustifolia and Chamaemelum nobile identified as non/minimally estrogenic. The antifungal activity of this combination of oils was confirmed. A second cohort of breast cancer survivors with UA received the second generation EOP with comparable improvement in symptom scores suggesting that estrogenicity may not be required for optimal therapy of UA.

Conclusion

Certain essential oils demonstrate profound estrogenicity and caution should be exercised before their use in breast cancer survivors. Our minimally estrogenic pessary will be formally tested in clinical trials.

Short-term and long-term effects of tibolone in postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

Tibolone is a synthetic steroid used for the treatment of menopausal symptoms, on the basis of short-term data suggesting its efficacy. We considered the balance between the benefits and risks of tibolone.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of tibolone for treatment of postmenopausal and perimenopausal women.

SEARCH METHODS

In October 2015, we searched the Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGF) Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO (from inception), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and clinicaltrials.gov. We checked the reference lists in articles retrieved.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tibolone versus placebo, oestrogens and/or combined hormone therapy (HT) in postmenopausal and perimenopausal women.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures of The Cochrane Collaboration. Primary outcomes were vasomotor symptoms, unscheduled vaginal bleeding and long-term adverse events. We evaluated safety outcomes and bleeding in studies including women either with or without menopausal symptoms.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 46 RCTs (19,976 women). Most RCTs evaluated tibolone for treating menopausal vasomotor symptoms. Some had other objectives, such as assessment of bleeding patterns, endometrial safety, bone health, sexuality and safety in women with a history of breast cancer. Two included women with uterine leiomyoma or lupus erythematosus. Tibolone versus placebo Vasomotor symptomsTibolone was more effective than placebo (standard mean difference (SMD) -0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.10 to -0.89; seven RCTs; 1657 women; moderate-quality evidence), but removing trials at high risk of attrition bias attenuated this effect (SMD -0.61, 95% CI -0.73 to -0.49; odds ratio (OR) 0.33, 85% CI 0.27 to 0.41). This suggests that if 67% of women taking placebo experience vasomotor symptoms, between 35% and 45% of women taking tibolone will do so. Unscheduled bleedingTibolone was associated with greater likelihood of bleeding (OR 2.79, 95% CI 2.10 to 3.70; nine RCTs; 7814 women; I2 = 43%; moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that if 18% of women taking placebo experience unscheduled bleeding, between 31% and 44% of women taking tibolone will do so. Long-term adverse eventsMost of the studies reporting these outcomes provided follow-up of two to three years (range three months to three years). Breast cancerWe found no evidence of differences between groups among women with no history of breast cancer (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.25; four RCTs; 5500 women; I2= 17%; very low-quality evidence). Among women with a history of breast cancer, tibolone was associated with increased risk (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.85; two RCTs; 3165 women; moderate-quality evidence). Cerebrovascular eventsWe found no conclusive evidence of differences between groups in cerebrovascular events (OR 1.74, 95% CI 0.99 to 3.04; four RCTs; 7930 women; I2 = 0%; very low-quality evidence). We obtained most data from a single RCT (n = 4506) of osteoporotic women aged 60 to 85 years, which was stopped prematurely for increased risk of stroke. Other outcomesEvidence on other outcomes was of low or very low quality, with no clear evidence of any differences between the groups. Effect estimates were as follows:• Endometrial cancer: OR 2.04, 95% CI 0.79 to 5.24; nine RCTs; 8504 women; I2 = 0%.• Cardiovascular events: OR 1.38, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.27; four RCTs; 8401 women; I2 = 0%.• Venous thromboembolic events: OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.97; 9176 women; I2 = 0%.• Mortality from any cause: OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.41; four RCTs; 8242 women; I2 = 0%. Tibolone versus combined HT Vasomotor symptomsCombined HT was more effective than tibolone (SMD 0.17, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.28; OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.66; nine studies; 1336 women; moderate-quality evidence). This result was robust to a sensitivity analysis that excluded trials with high risk of attrition bias, suggesting a slightly greater disadvantage of tibolone (SMD 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.41; OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.10). This suggests that if 7% of women taking combined HT experience vasomotor symptoms, between 8% and 14% of women taking tibolone will do so. Unscheduled bleedingTibolone was associated with a lower rate of bleeding (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.41; 16 RCTs; 6438 women; I2 = 72%; moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that if 47% of women taking combined HT experience unscheduled bleeding, between 18% and 27% of women taking tibolone will do so. Long-term adverse eventsMost studies reporting these outcomes provided follow-up of two to three years (range three months to three years). Evidence was of very low quality, with no clear evidence of any differences between the groups. Effect estimates were as follows:• Endometrial cancer: OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.23 to 9.33; five RCTs; 3689 women; I2 = 0%.• Breast cancer: OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.78 to 3.67; five RCTs; 4835 women; I2 = 0%.• Venous thromboembolic events: OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.14; four RCTs; 4529 women; I2 = 0%.• Cardiovascular events: OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.66; two RCTs; 3794 women; I2 = 0%.• Cerebrovascular events: OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.16 to 3.66; four RCTs; 4562 women; I2 = 0%.• Mortality from any cause: only one event reported (two RCTs; 970 women).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality evidence suggests that tibolone is more effective than placebo but less effective than HT in reducing menopausal vasomotor symptoms, and that tibolone is associated with a higher rate of unscheduled bleeding than placebo but with a lower rate than HT.Compared with placebo, tibolone increases recurrent breast cancer rates in women with a history of breast cancer, and may increase stroke rates in women over 60 years of age. No evidence indicates that tibolone increases the risk of other long-term adverse events, or that it differs from HT with respect to long-term safety.Much of the evidence was of low or very low quality. Limitations included high risk of bias and imprecision. Most studies were financed by drug manufacturers or failed to disclose their funding source.

A systematic review of non-hormonal treatments of vasomotor symptoms in climacteric and cancer patients

The cardinal climacteric symptoms of hot flushes and night sweats affect 24-93% of all women during the physiological transition from reproductive to post-reproductive life. Though efficacious, hormonal therapy and partial oestrogenic compounds are linked to a significant increase in breast cancer. Non-hormonal treatments are thus greatly appreciated.

This systematic review of published hormonal and non-hormonal treatments for climacteric, and breast and prostate cancer-associated hot flushes, examines clinical efficacy and therapy-related cancer risk modulation.

A PubMed search included literature up to June 19, 2014 without limits for initial dates or language, with the search terms, (hot flush* OR hot flash*) AND (clinical trial* OR clinical stud*) AND (randomi* OR observational) NOT review). Retrieved references identified further papers. The focus was on hot flushes; other symptoms (night sweats, irritability, etc.) were not specifically screened. Included were some 610 clinical studies where a measured effect of the intervention, intensity and severity were documented, and where patients received treatment of pharmaceutical quality. Only 147 of these references described studies with alternative non-hormonal treatments in post-menopausal women and in breast and prostate cancer survivors; these results are presented in Additional file 1.

The most effective hot flush treatment is oestrogenic hormones, or a combination of oestrogen and progestins, though benefits are partially outweighed by a significantly increased risk for breast cancer development.

This review illustrates that certain non-hormonal treatments, including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, gabapentin/pregabalin, and Cimicifuga racemosa extracts, show a positive risk-benefit ratio.

Key points

Several non-hormonal alternatives to hormonal therapy have been established and registered for the treatment of vasomotor climacteric symptoms in peri- and post-menopausal women.

There are indications that non-hormonal treatments are useful alternatives in patients with a history of breast and prostate cancer. However, confirmation by larger clinical trials is required.

Hormone therapy for sexual function in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

The perimenopausal and postmenopausal periods are associated with many symptoms, including sexual complaints.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of hormone therapy (HT) on sexual function in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for articles in the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ISI Web of Knowledge and OpenGrey. The last search was performed in December 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing HT to either placebo or no intervention (control). We considered as HT estrogens alone; estrogens in combination with progestogens; synthetic steroids (for example tibolone); or selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) (for example raloxifene, bazedoxifene). Studies of other drugs possibly used in the relief of menopausal symptoms were excluded. We included studies that evaluated sexual function using any validated assessment tool. The primary outcome was a composite score for sexual function and the scores for individual domains (arousal and sexual interest, orgasm, and pain) were secondary outcomes. Studies were selected by two authors independently.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were independently extracted by two authors and checked by a third. Risk of bias assessment was performed independently by two authors. We contacted study investigators as required. Data were analysed using standardized mean difference (SMD) and relative risk (RR). We stratified the analysis by participant characteristics with regard to menopausal symptoms. The overall quality of the evidence for the primary outcome was evaluated using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

The search retrieved 2351 records from which 27 studies (16,393 women) were included. The 'symptomatic or early post-menopausal' subgroup included nine studies: perimenopausal women (one study), up to 36 months postmenopause (one study), up to five years postmenopause (one study), experiencing vasomotor or other menopausal symptoms (five studies), or experiencing hot flushes and sexual dysfunction (one study). The 'unselected postmenopausal women' subgroup included 18 studies, which included women regardless of menopausal symptoms and permitted the inclusion of women with more than five years since the final menstrual period. No studies were restricted to women with sexual dysfunction. Only five studies evaluated sexual function as a primary outcome. Eighteen studies were deemed at high risk of bias, and the other nine studies were at unclear risk of bias. Twenty studies received commercial funding.Findings for sexual function (measured by composite score):For estrogens alone versus control, in symptomatic or early postmenopausal women the SMD and 95% CI were compatible with a small to moderate benefit in sexual function for the HT group (SMD 0.38, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.54, P < 0.00001, 3 studies, 699 women, I² = 55%, high-quality evidence). In unselected postmenopausal women, the 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a small benefit (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.34, P = 0.08, 2 studies, 478 women, I² = 44%, low-quality evidence). The subgroups were not pooled because of considerable heterogeneity.For estrogens combined with progestogens versus control, in symptomatic or early postmenopausal women the 95% CI was compatible with a small to moderate benefit for sexual function in the HT group (SMD 0.42, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.64, P = 0.0003, 1 study, 335 women, moderate-quality evidence). In unselected postmenopausal women, the 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a small benefit (SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.20, P = 0.10, 3 studies, 1314 women, I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence). The subgroups were not pooled because of considerable heterogeneity.For tibolone versus control, in symptomatic or early postmenopausal women the 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a small benefit for sexual function in the HT group (SMD 0.13, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.26, P = 0.05, 1 study, 883 women, low-quality evidence). In unselected postmenopausal women, the 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a moderate benefit (SMD 0.38, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.71, P = 0.03, 2 studies, 142 women, I² = 0%, low-quality evidence). In the combined analysis, the 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a small benefit (SMD 0.17, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.29, P = 0.008, 3 studies, 1025 women, I² = 20%).For SERMs versus control, in symptomatic or early postmenopausal women the 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a moderate benefit for sexual function in the HT group (SMD 0.23, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.50, P = 0.09, 1 study, 215 women, low-quality evidence). In unselected postmenopausal women, the 95% CI was compatible with small harm to a small benefit (SMD 0.04, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.29, P = 0.72, 1 study, 283 women, low-quality evidence). In the combined analysis, the 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a small benefit (SMD 0.13, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.31, P = 0.16, 2 studies, 498 women, I² = 2%).A comparison of SERMs combined with estrogens versus control was only evaluated in symptomatic or early postmenopausal women. The 95% CI was compatible with no effect to a small benefit for sexual function in the HT group (SMD 0.21, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.43, P = 0.05, 1 study, 542 women, moderate-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

HT treatment with estrogens alone or in combination with progestogens was associated with a small to moderate improvement in sexual function, particularly in pain, when used in women with menopausal symptoms or in early postmenopause (within five years of amenorrhoea), but not in unselected postmenopausal women. Evidence regarding other HTs (synthetic steroids and SERMs) is of low quality and we are uncertain of their effect on sexual function. The current evidence does not suggest an important effect of tibolone or of SERMs alone or combined with estrogens on sexual function. More studies evaluating the effect of synthetic steroids, SERMS and the association of SERM + estrogens would improve the quality of the evidence for the effect of these treatments on sexual function in peri and postmenopausal women. Future studies should also evaluate the effect of HT solely among women with sexual complaints.