BMJ  2004;328:357-358 (14 February), doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7436.357

Editorial

Where are we now with hormone replacement therapy?

It works for symptoms but is not good for future health

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Menopausal symptoms can be grim, and the desire to replace the hormonal "deficit" with exogenous hormones remains strong. Since the 1950s, hormone replacement therapy has been used increasingly,¹ while evidence on the risks of unwanted side effects has accumulated. Twenty five years ago, the increased risk of endometrial cancer emerged, resulting in the addition of progestogen. Cohort studies had examined oestrogen alone and indicated important benefits, but, since the 1980s, combined preparations have dominated. Interpretations of the evidence were therefore confused, since whatever effects oestrogen or progestogen have on disease will differ. Eventually, evidence of increased risk of combined therapy on breast cancer, coronary heart disease, stroke, and venous thromboembolism from a randomised trial was reported.² This trial was stopped early, after an average of five years' follow up among 17 000 women, during which around 40% stopped their trial drugs. The results from the oestrogen alone arm of the . . . [Full text of this article]

Nuffield Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Research Institute, Churchill Hospital, Oxford OX3 7BN (klim.mcpherson@obstetrics-gynaecology.oxford.ac.uk)

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Abusing patients by denying them choice

Richard Smith
BMJ 2004 328: 0. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Benefits and harms associated with hormone replacement therapy: clinical decision analysis

Cosetta Minelli, Keith R Abrams, Alex J Sutton, and Nicola J Cooper
BMJ 2004 328: 371. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Green, J., Denham, A., Ingram, J., Hawkey, S., Greenwood, R. (2007). Treatment of menopausal symptoms by qualified herbal practitioners: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. Fam Pract 24: 468-474 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Chalmers, I. (2007). Why fair tests are needed: a brief history. Evid. Based Nurs. 10: 4-5 [Full text]  
• Chalmers, I. (2006). Why fair tests are needed: a brief history. Evid. Based Med. 11: 67-68 [Full text]  
• (2004). Hit Parade. BMJ 328: 962-962 [Full text]  

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Rocks and hard places....

Cobie Brinkman
bmj.com, 12 Feb 2004 [Full text]

HRT is the worst treatment for symptoms

Ellen C G Grant
bmj.com, 13 Feb 2004 [Full text]

IS NATURE FOOLISH?

BM Hegde
bmj.com, 15 Feb 2004 [Full text]

HRT is not neuroprotective

Matthew L Grove
bmj.com, 17 Feb 2004 [Full text]

Is the menopause natural?

Jonathan S Charlton
bmj.com, 17 Feb 2004 [Full text]

Women's Health Initiative and Breast cancer

Geoffrey D Madden
bmj.com, 17 Feb 2004 [Full text]

endocrinologists debate this too!

Jon Madura
bmj.com, 18 Feb 2004 [Full text]

WHI study was ill-conceived

Geoff Taylor
bmj.com, 19 Feb 2004 [Full text]

Re: Is the menopause natural?

Paula S. Derry
bmj.com, 25 Feb 2004 [Full text]

HRT/osteoporosis clinical trials- ethical concerns

Dr. Neil de Jesus Rangel. DM(Endocrinology)
bmj.com, 5 Mar 2004 [Full text]