Search

Objectives Use of postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy (HRT) has been associated with an elevated risk of gynecological cancers. There is evidence that the effect differs with the type of hormone used. Dydrogesterone is pharmacologically very similar to progesterone. Methods We used the UK-based General Practice Research Database (GPRD) to conduct a follow-up study with a nested case–control analysis. We assessed and compared the risk of developing breast, ovarian, endometrial/uterine or cervical cancer in estradiol/dydrogesterone (E/D) users, users of other HRT, or non-users of HRT. Results The breast cancer incidence rates were 2.41 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.81–3.15), 3.28 (95% CI 3.01–3.55) and 3.16 (95% CI 2.92–3.42) per 1000 person-years for E/D users, users of other HRT or non-users, respectively. In a direct comparison, the breast cancer risk for E/D users was lower than for users of other HRT (odds ratio 0.76, 95% CI 0.56–1.05). The incidence rates of other gynecological cancers were similar or also slightly lower for E/D users than for users of other HRT. Conclusion This study provides evidence that the risk of developing gynecological cancers with E/D use of several months to a few years is similar to the risks of developing gynecological cancer without HRT or use of other HRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Use of postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy (HRT) used to be promoted to reduce the risk of ischemic cardiovascular diseases, a concept which has been challenged by results of the large Women's Health Initiative trial in users of estrogen and progestin. It is postulated that the type of progestin used in HRT affects the cardiovascular risk. Methods We used the UK-based General Practice Research Database to conduct a follow-up study with a nested case-control analysis. We assessed and compared the risk of developing myocardial infarction, thrombotic stroke or venous thromboembolism in estradiol/dydrogesterone users, users of other HRT, or non-users of HRT. Results The incidence rates of myocardial infarction, thrombotic stroke and venous thromboembolism in estradiol/dydrogesterone users were 0.40 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.76), 0.27 (95% CI 0.10-0.58) and 0.31 (95% CI 0.13-0.64) per 1000 person-years, respectively. As compared to non-users of HRT, the adjusted relative risk estimates (odds ratios) in the nested case-control analysis for estradiol/dydrogesterone users or users of other HRT were 1.06 (95% CI 0.48-2.36) and 1.12 (95% CI 0.84-1.51) for myocardial infarction, 0.50 (95% CI 0.21-1.22) and 1.18 (95% CI 0.94-1.48) for thrombotic stroke, and 0.84 (95% CI 0.37-1.92) and 1.42 (95% CI 1.10-1.82) for venous thromboembolism, respectively. Conclusion The study provides evidence that estradiol/dydrogesterone use of several months to a few years is not associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events than use of other HRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]