Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • Classified ads
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • Classified ads
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
News

Fallout from JAMA's HRT study continuing to land in MDs' offices

Barbara Sibbald
CMAJ August 20, 2002 167 (4) 387-387-a;
Barbara Sibbald
CMAJ
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Physicians' offices were deluged with calls in July after results from a study involving the use of estrogen plus progestin hormone replacement therapy (HRT) were released early (JAMA 2002;288(3):321-33). Weeks later, doctors were still trying to figure out what findings from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) trial actually mean.

Figure1

Figure. Healthy aging post-HRT? Photo by: Health Canada

Dr. Morrie Gelfand, president of the North American Menopause Society (NAMS), says media coverage alarmed many women. “There was lots of sensationalism,” says Gelfand, who practises at Montreal's Jewish General Hospital. “Numbers can be used to make anything sound good or bad. We're talking 10 000 women-years here. What about the decrease in fractures and colorectal cancer rates? What does it really mean?”

NAMS (www.menopause.org/) has selected 10 experts to assess the study; findings will be released in October.

The trial, which involved 16 608 women aged 50 to 79, was stopped because preliminary results showed statistically significant increases in coronary disease, invasive breast cancer, stroke and pulmonary embolism in women being treated with estrogen plus progestin. The WHI trial, which was supposed to end in 2005, was designed to examine HRT's effect on the prevention of heart disease and hip fractures, and any associated change in risk for breast and colon cancer. The researchers concluded that “overall health risks exceeded benefits.”

The 8506 women treated with estrogen plus progestin had about 40 more coronary events, 40 more strokes, 80 more episodes of venous thromboembolism and 40 more instances of invasive breast cancer than the 8102 women assigned to the trial's placebo arm. However, Dr. Jennifer Blake, spokesperson for the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC), says data provided in the JAMA study are “small numbers among 16 000 women. The relative risk [of breast cancer because of this treatment] is the same as when a woman has her first baby after 35.”

The SOGC initially cautioned women not to overreact and said that the study assessed only one product (Prempro, which isn't available in Canada) and didn't necessarily apply to other products. Blake says the society is now “seriously” assessing the study's implications and may modify its guidelines.

Blake agrees that the study is “going to affect how we use HRT. It's thrown a spotlight on the use of progestin.”

Dr. Wulf Utian, executive director at NAMS, used more dramatic language: “This is the biggest bombshell to hit in my 30-some years in the menopause area.” — Barbara Sibbald, CMAJ

CMAJ
  • Yusuf S, Anand S. Hormone replacement therapy: a time for pause. p. 357.

  • Day A. Lessons from the Women's Health Initiative: primary prevention and gender health. p. 361.

  • Sackett DL. The arrogance of preventive medicine. p. 363.

  • Farquhar D. Postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy for chronic disease prevention: results from the Women's Health Initiative trial. p. 377.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

CMAJ
Vol. 167, Issue 4
20 Aug 2002
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Fallout from JAMA's HRT study continuing to land in MDs' offices
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Fallout from JAMA's HRT study continuing to land in MDs' offices
Barbara Sibbald
CMAJ Aug 2002, 167 (4) 387-387-a;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Fallout from JAMA's HRT study continuing to land in MDs' offices
Barbara Sibbald
CMAJ Aug 2002, 167 (4) 387-387-a;
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Highlights of this issue
  • Hormone replacement therapy: a time for pause
  • Lessons from the Women's Health Initiative: primary prevention and gender health
  • The arrogance of preventive medicine
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Canada will have three-digit suicide prevention hotline by 2023
  • Feds update immunization advice with Moderna vaccine approval
  • Trudeau promises to boost federal health transfers when the pandemic is over
Show more News

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Topics
    • Women's health (including abortion)

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions

Copyright 2021, Joule Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

Powered by HighWire