Friday, September 23, 2016

New International Menopause Society (IMS) guidelines affirms the safety of menopausal HT.

The International Menopause Society (IMS) recently released 2016 Global Consensus Statement on Menopausal Hormone Therapy (MHT).[1]  The IMS brought together 7 international societies, including European Menopause and Andropause Society and the North American Menopause Society to formulate comprehensive, evidence based guidelines with practice essentials to help and guide physicians across the globe in managing women through menopause transition and beyond.

The guidelines are aimed at helping women across the globe to prevent chronic diseases due to aging along with treatment of troublesome menopausal symptoms. 

The term Menopausal Hormone Therapy (MHT) includes estrogen, progesterone and combined therapies.

The recommendations simply provide an overview of basic principles of hormone therapy which can be modified and adapted according to the geographical region, country specific belief and practices, basic infrastructure of healthcare and the variation and availability of the hormones. It also simply provides consensus and is not a replacement for the detailed guidelines issued by each individual societies.

Professor Rod Baber, IMS President, commented “I believe the new Global Consensus is a major step forward in the management of menopausal women as it provides women and their doctors with internationally endorsed guidance”.[2]

General principles that governs the use of MHT


The option of starting MHT should be decided according to the need of each patient depending upon age, time elapsed since menopause, the symptoms, risk of VTE, breast and gynecological malignancies and CVD.

It should be a part of overall life style change and management including diet, exercise and smoking cessation for prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

MHT include a range of hormonal products that can be administered by various routes. It includes Tibolone or CE/BZA too when available. Each product has its own side effects, and risk/benefit rations.

MHT should always begin with the lowest possible dose that alleviates the symptoms with minimum side effects. The route of administration should be tailored to individual need, preference and side effects. 

The benefit/risk ratio should be assessed annually for each patient. The duration of the treatment should be planned accordingly with the lowest possible dose schedule. Some women may require longer duration of treatment for relief of Vaso Motor symptoms (VMS).

Use of estrogen as single systemic agent is only advocated in case of patients who have undergone hysterectomy, concomitant use of progesterone is always advocated with intact uterus unless CE is combined with BZA for uterine protection. 

Testosterone only therapy or in combination with MHT is only indicated in selective postmenopausal women with sexual interest/arousal disorder.

Use of custom compound hormone therapy is not recommended because of batch to batch variability, lack of regulation standards for safety, efficacy and purity.  

Safety data on use of MHT for breast cancer survivor is limited currently. It’s use in such patients can only be undertaken after discussing it with patient’s oncologist when complementary options have exhausted.   

Benefit/risk profile for MHT


Quality of life, sexual satisfaction, mood changes, joint pain and sleep disturbances may improve with MHT.

MHT with Tibolone and combination of Conjugated Equine estrogen and bazedoxifene (CE/BZA) is effective in treatment of osteoporosis. It has consistently seen to be effective in reducing the risk of vertebral, hip and other osteoporosis-related fractures in post-menopausal women.

MHT is the only therapy that is effective in preventing fractures in postmenopausal women with mean T-score in normal or osteopenic range. It should be initiated before the age of 60 or 10 years within menopause for at risk women for osteoporosis. 

If started after the age of 60 years, it is considered the second line of therapy and risk/ benefit ratio should be compared with other first line drugs.

The most effective treatment of VMS at any age is Tibolone and combination of Conjugated Equine estrogen and bazedoxifene (CE/BZA). Symptomatic women derive maximum benefits if treatment is started within 10 years of menopause or before the age of 60 years.

Vulvovaginal atrophy(VVA) is now considered a component of genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM). MHT including Tibolone relieves the symptoms of VVA. Topical estrogen preparations are first line of treatment in patients with only local vaginal dryness, dyspareunia or recurrent UTI. Ospemifene, a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) is also licensed in some countries for treatment of dyspareunia due to VVA.

Many observational studies, RCTs and meta-analysis provides data that shows consistent benefits in standard dose estrogen alone group as compared to estrogen plus progestogen MHT in decreasing myocardial infarction and all-cause mortality when initiated before age of 60 or within 10 years of menopause.

The risk of VTE and ischemic stroke increases with oral MHT as compared with transdermal therapy (0.05 mg twice weekly or lower) when started before the age of 60 years.

The risk of breast cancer with MHT in women over the age of 50 years is a complex issue. Estrogen only MHT in women with hysterectomy shows a lower risk as compared to combine therapy the medroxyprogesterone acetate in the women’s health initiative study (WHI). However, the risk of < 1.0 per 1000 women per year is less than that associated with sedentary life style, alcohol consumption and obesity.

Women who experience a natural or iatrogenic menopause before the age of 45, particularly before the age of 40 face a consistent high risk for cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, mood disorders and dementia. Results of observational studies have shown that these women benefit from MHT, but they have to be confirmed by RCTs. MHT can be prescribed till the age of natural menopause. 

In women with major depressive disorders, antidepressant therapy remains the first line of treatment, although MHT can be used to improve mood in women with anxiety/depressive symptoms.  MHT initiated in early menopause and after the age of 65 years also does not have significant effect on cognition and increase the risk of dementia.  Although some observational studies have shown that early initiation may prevent Alzheimer’s disease in later life.




[1] http://www.imsociety.org/manage/images/pdf/fd28270c02bdca95a58a471e1719e9b4.pdf
[2] http://www.imsociety.org/manage/images/pdf/d9cfd8c2b902d63b0c1bb0ada805240d.pdf

Wednesday, September 21, 2016

Building strong bones with biologics- Romosozumab significantly decreases fracture risk in osteoporotic postmenopausal women.

Clinical Pearls:


  • Currently, no osteoanabolic treatment exists for osteoporosis, other than parathyroid hormone.
  • Romosozumab is the first humanized, osteoanabolic, anti-sclerostin monoclonal antibody which binds and inhibits sclerostin leading to increases in bone formation and decrease in bone reabsorption.
  • This regimen is a new approach in treating osteoporosis whereby patients received sequential anabolic therapy with two biologic agents-Romosozumab and Denosumab. 
  • One year of treatment with Romosozumab resulted in clinically significant lower risk of vertebral and clinical fractures in postmenopausal women and resulted in substantial gains in Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at the spine and hip. 

According to the statistics by International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) [1]It is estimated that osteoporosis affects 200 million women worldwide, affecting one tenth of women over the age of 60, one fifth over the age of 70, two-fifth over the age of 80 and nearly two-third over the age of 90.[2] 

Nearly 1 in 3 women over the age of 50 will suffer osteoporotic fractures during her life time. Fewer than 25% of patients suffering osteoporotic fractures receive treatment after the incidence and even among those who start the treatment, majority of the patients terminate it prematurely.

Currently, other than the parathyroid hormone analogs all treatments aimed at osteoporosis are antiresorptive. Researchers have spent resources on development of anabolic therapies, which led them to novel therapeutic approach in the treatment of osteoporosis - sclerostin inhibition. Sclerostin is secreted by osteocytes and acts by inhibiting Wnt signaling, thereby preventing osteoblast development and function.

Romosozumab is the first humanized, osteoanabolic, anti-sclerostin monoclonal antibody which binds and inhibits sclerostin leading to increases in bone formation and decrease in bone reabsorption.[3] 

The Fracture Study in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis (FRAME) is an international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group phase 3 trial. The landmark study aims to evaluate the effect of 1 year of Romosozumab (at a dose of 210 mg, administered subcutaneously monthly) on development of fractures in post-menopausal women with osteoporosis. The FRAME trial recruited 7180 postmenopausal women between 55 -90 years of age and they were randomized to receive either 210 mg of Romosozumab placebo once a month for 12 months.

The study findings were presented at the at the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) 2016 Annual Meeting.[4] The results were also published simultaneously in The New England Journal of Medicine.[5]

After I year of therapy with the monoclonal antibody treatment, patient received 2 doses of denosumab 60 mg subcutaneously at an interval of 6months. This regimen is a new approach in treating osteoporosis whereby patients received sequential anabolic therapy with two biologic agents.

The results were statistically significant since the relative risk of new vertebral fractures was reduced by 75% and the relative risk of a clinical fracture by 36% through 12 months compared to those receiving placebo.

The study met the coprimary end points of reducing the cumulative incidence of new vertebral fractures at the end of 1 year and 24 months. By reducing the incidence of clinical fractures (vertebral and non-vertebral) at the end of 12 months’ secondary end point werealso met, however when only incidence of non-vertebral fractures was analyzed, the study was short of meeting the goal.

In the study Romosozumab did reduce non-vertebral fractures but the data was not statistically significant. This was explained due to the geographical location of the study population. Majority of the study subjects were from Latin America were the incidence of non-vertebral fracture is extremely low. When the analysis was conducted after excluding the Latin American cohort, Romosozumab led to a significant 42% reduction in the risk of nonvertebral fractures over 1 year compared with placebo patients.

The clinical benefits seen in trials were also supported by lab results of increase in bone-formation marker P1NP and decrease in bone-resorption marker β-CTX during the 12 months’ period of therapy.

Adverse events were reported in control as well as placebo groups equally. Hypersensitivity reactions were more common in the Romosozumab group along with single incidence of jaw bone necrosis and atypical femoral fracture.

In an accompanying editorial, Dr Rosen and Dr Ingelfinger quote "The long-term treatment of osteoporosis remains challenging, and Romosozumab may be one answer. More trials are needed before we can embrace a new approach."

The study received funding from Amgen and UCB Pharma as well as Dr Cosman received personal fees from Amgen and other pharma company. The editorial authors are employee of NEJM.  





[1] https://www.iofbonehealth.org/facts-statistics
[2] Kanis JA (2007) WHO Technical Report, University of Sheffield, UK: 66.
[3] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24842796
[4] http://www.asbmr.org/meetings/annualmeeting.aspx
[5] http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1607948#t=article

Monday, September 19, 2016

Premature or early onset menopause is associated with increased risk of CVD and all-cause mortality.

Clinical pearls:

  • Women who had premature menopause are at high risk for CHD, CVD and all-cause mortality.
  • With every 1 in 3 women dying due to CVD, identifying those who are high risks for it is important from public health perspective.
  • Women with premature menopause can be benefited by pharmacological and life style interventions to prevent the increased all-cause mortality and CVD risk they are put at due to accelerated reproductive aging.

Majority of women around the world undergo menopause between 45 to 55 years of age with the average age being 51 years.[1] According to recent estimates about 5% of women attain natural menopause between the age of 41-45 years and additional 1% of have the last period before the age of 40.  Another 5% have premature menopause due to surgical removal of the ovaries, radiation and chemotherapy for malignancies or smoking.  The age at final menstrual period is of great public health significance and is considered as an important marker for predicting future cardiovascular, bone and overall health of the women. [2]

Women who attain menopause before 45 years of age have shorter total duration of estrogen exposure as compared to women who have menopause in 50s.

Multiple observational and cross sectional studies in the past have tried to assess the effect of loss of ovarian function and increased risk of cardiovascular diseases (CVD) and all-cause mortality in women undergoing premature menopause.

A recent meta-analysis published in JAMA cardiology by Muka et al [3] tried to systemically review and meta-analyze the relationship between age and duration of menopause and increased risk of cardiovascular diseases.

The analysis included 32 studies consisting of 310,329 non-overlapping women in their analysis.

The investigators compared the outcomes between women who entered menopause before 45 years of age to those women who were 45 or older at the onset. It was seen that women in the early menopause group had 1.5 times the risk of overall coronary heart disease, 1.11 times the risk of fatal coronary heart disease,1.23 times the risk for overall stroke, 0.99 for stroke mortality, 1.19 times the risk for CVD mortality, and 1.12 for all-cause mortality as compared to women who had menopause after the age of 45 years.

Women who had menopause between age of 50-54 have decreased risk (.87 times) of suffering from fatal CHD as compared to women who had menopause before 50 years of age. The risk for stroke was comparable in both the groups.

With every 1 in 3 women dying due to CVD, identifying those who are high risks for it might be important from public health perspective. Menopause might be a crucial period in women’s life to evaluate her future risk for CVD and introduce interventions to reduce the risk.

In an invited commentary about the article by Dr JoAnn E Manson (Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA) and D. Teresa K Woodruff (Northwestern University), the authors stress upon the complicated relationship between menopause and CVD. They discuss the findings of the Framingham Heart Study which states that increase in systolic, diastolic blood pressure, cholesterol and other vascular risk factors around pre and peri menopausal years led to an accelerated menopause at a younger age. The data from the study provides an important clue about cardiovascular health being responsible for menopausal timing, but it does not exclude a bidirectional relationship. [4]

An earlier Meta-analysis of observational study showed that bilateral surgical oophorectomy was associated with more than double the risk of CVD (risk ratio=2.62). Women who are put on HRT after the surgery nullify their increased risk for CVD as compared to women with intact ovaries.

A detailed analysis of Women’s Health Initiative study also stressed the beneficial effects of HRT in relation to cardiovascular health when initiated between the ages of 50 to 59 years as compared to older women. [5]

The ELITE: Early Versus Late Intervention Trial With Estradiol also affirms the timing hypothesis in relation to timing of estradiol administration, when a beneficial cardiovascular effect is only seen in women with early, but not later menopause. [6]

To conclude, the findings of the review indicates that women who had premature menopause are at high risk for CHD, CVD and all-cause mortality.

Complex relationship exists between cardiovascular health and accelerated reproductive aging and further research is needed to clarify the issue, but currently women with premature menopause can be benefited by pharmacological and life style interventions to prevent the increased all-cause mortality and CVD risk they are put at due to accelerated reproductive aging.





[1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3285482/
[2] http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/infertility/
[3] http://cardiology.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2551981
[4] http://amaprod.silverchaircdn.com/data/Journals/CARDIOLOGY/0/hic160023.pdf.gif
[5] https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/whi/
[6] https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00114517