Cancer Risk and the HRT Decision: Bringing It Down to Basics



Cancer Risk and the HRT Decision: Bringing It Down to Basics

F. J. Montz, MD, K.M.

Professor and Director

The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service

Departments of Gynecology and Obstetrics, and Oncology

The Johns Hopkins Hospital and Medical Institutions

Baltimore, Maryland

To take HRT or not to take HRT—that, it seems, is the endlessly repeated question.

Do the benefits really outweigh the risks, or is the opposite true? For millions of peri-

and postmenopausal women and their clinicians, this is far more than a theoretical

question; it is a potentially life-altering one, and one that is steeped in controversy.

To fully appreciate the potential impact of any decision that a woman and her

healthcare provider may make regarding HRT, it is essential to understand the

magnitude of this relatively new issue. At the beginning of the 20th century, the

average life expectancy of an American woman was only 40 years. It is now

approaching nine decades. This exponential increase in the length of life leads to the

following realities: the average American woman will spend one third of her life in a

state of relative hypoestrogenism; 60 million American women either will be

menopausal or will enter menopause in the next few years; and living American

women can anticipate a combined total of 1.8 billion years of menopause.

Hypoestrogenism leads to both "life-threatening" and "lifestyle-threatening"

processes—and hot flashes, once the sine qua non of menopause, are turning out to

be the least of the problems. Increased risk of cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis,

Alzheimer's disease, anxiety, depression, emotional changes, fatigue, poor memory

and concentration, sleep disorders, cutaneous changes, urinary incontinence and

pelvic floor prolapse, and dyspareunia are just some of the hypoestrogenic sequelae

with which postmenopausal women potentially must deal.

Every decision made by thinking humans includes an assessment of risk as balanced

against benefit. In most situations, this risk-benefit assessment is performed

subliminally. By contrast, the risk-benefit assessment that precedes the decision to

take HRT is a more cognitive and, one would hope, a more rational one. A growing

body of data supports the beneficial effects of HRT in preventing or controlling the

life-threatening and lifestyle-threatening processes just noted. Yet a large proportion

of women who could be helped by such therapy refuse to even start HRT.

Furthermore, among those who do start HRT, it has been estimated that 20% will stop

taking it within 9 months, 10% will take it only intermittently, and as many as 30% will

never even have their prescriptions filled.1

If the benefits of HRT are so substantial, why don't more women take it?

Unquestionably, a significant cause of noncompliance is the related side effects, with

withdrawal bleeding being the most unappealing for the majority of women.2 Another

common, if not the most common, reason cited by women declining hormone

replacement is the fear of developing an HRT-related malignancy.1 Is this fear

founded on reliable data, or does it border on paranoia? And is the risk of

HRT-related cancer a real one, or has it been overblown? The answer is that in most

settings, and when taken appropriately, HRT has a protective effect at best, and a

neutral effect at worst, against four forms of cancer: endometrial, breast, ovarian, and

colon.

Endometrial cancer

The association between endometrial cancer and estrogen replacement is by now

unequivocal: If estrogen replacement is administered to a woman who has a uterus

with absent or insufficient concomitant progesterone therapy, her relative risk (RR) of

developing endometrial cancer is increased as much as 12 to 18 fold.3 However, and

most importantly, addition of an adequate dosage of progestins throughout the cycle

reduces the relative risk to below that of women who take no hormone replacement at

all.3 Secondary to the salutary effects of HRT, women who develop endometrial

cancer while receiving HRT have a longer life expectancy than do women who neither

develop endometrial cancer nor take HRT.

Breast cancer

The 1-in-8-lifetime breast cancer risk figure has been well publicized4; most women

can recite it readily. What women tend to be less aware of is that it is heart disease,

not breast cancer, that kills the greatest number of American women each year. More

American women die of heart disease than of any other cause, including breast

cancer.5 Thus, while breast cancer tends to be what women fear most, the fact is that

they have far more to fear from heart disease.

This fact notwithstanding, fear of breast cancer continues to prevent a substantial

number of women from taking HRT. Is the fear founded in fact? As matters currently

stand, the vast majority of large, well-designed studies evaluating HRT and the risk of

breast cancer have failed to identify an increase in RR in the average-risk population.6

However, it must be acknowledged that there are some data to suggest that selected

subgroups of women who take HRT (those who take relatively high doses of estrogen

for long time periods, those with a history of prior proliferative, nonmalignant breast

disease, thin women receiving certain progestins, and those with family histories of

breast cancer) are at a statistically significant increased risk of developing breast

cancer.7,8 Interestingly, however, those patients who develop breast cancer while

receiving HRT have been repeatedly demonstrated to have higher rates of

disease-free survival than similar patients who develop breast cancer while not taking

HRT. This difference persists when controlled for stage of disease, and may be

secondary to a higher percentage of less aggressive breast cancer subtypes being

diagnosed in women taking HRT.9

This issue is not without controversy, but we can be certain of a few things. First,

hormone replacement has been used for more than five decades in the United States,

and more than 1,500 peer-reviewed journal articles have examined the association

between HRT and breast cancer development. The mere fact that this enormous body

of literature has not produced a clear answer is reassuring in and of itself: if the

association between HRT and breast cancer was strong and real, we should have

more than enough objective data to substantiate it, just as we do for the association

between endometrial cancer and unopposed estrogen administration. Secondly, from

a public health perspective, it is clear that more women-years are saved as a result of

the beneficial effects of HRT than are lost from the negative effects of a potential

increase in RR of developing breast cancer.10

Ovarian cancer

There have been no randomized clinical trials examining the potential association

between HRT and ovarian cancer, and there is a paucity of reliable historical data.

However, most of the existing research suggests no increase in risk. A rare exception

is a recent meta-analysis that showed an overall RR of 1.15 in ever-users of HRT.11

It is not theoretically implausible that HRT might stimulate the ovarian epithelium and

thereby increase a woman's risk of developing ovarian cancer. At the same time,

however, one must ask whether this increase in risk is clinically significant. It is true

that survival rates are not high for this form of cancer. On the other hand, relative to the

risk of developing cardiovascular disease in women, the risk of developing ovarian

cancer is very low—just 1.5% in the course of a lifetime.12 Thus, for ovarian cancer, as

in the case of breast cancer, the proven overall benefits of HRT outweigh the potential

risks, when the aggregate of clinical data is measured objectively.

Colon cancer

The data regarding HRT and colon cancer are relatively conclusive: The risk of this

form of cancer is reduced by 50% in recent HRT users. Moreover, the longer the

duration of use, the greater the protection; even a remote history of HRT use (up to 10

years before) can impart a protective effect.13,14 In answer to the question we

considered for ovarian cancer—Is this decrease in risk clinically significant?—one

would have to conclude that it is, since women in the United States are almost three to

four times more likely to develop colon cancer than they are ovarian cancer.12

Conclusion

For the majority of American women, the cancer-phobic concerns that lead to

avoidance of postmenopausal HRT are neither rational nor based on scientific

evidence. However, there is a relatively small subset of women for whom HRT does

pose a potential health threat: those with a documented significantly increased risk of

breast cancer but without an increased risk of cardiovascular or other diseases that

can be prevented or delayed by the administration of postmenopausal estrogens.10

These women are more appropriately managed with nonestrogenic compounds. It is

the healthcare provider's obligation to perform an individualized HRT-related

risk-benefit assessment for every woman entering menopause. Subsequently,

through a provider–patient relationship, a regimen of lifestyle changes and nutritional

and pharmacologic interventions can be developed to maximize both quality and

length of life.

References

1.

Ravnikar VA. Compliance with hormone therapy. Am J Obstet Gynecol

1987;156:1332-4.

2.

Strickland DM, Hammond TL. Postmenopausal estrogen replacement in a large

gynecologic practice. Am J Gynecol Health 1988;2:26-31.

3.

Weiderpass E, Adami H-O, Baron JA, et al. Risk of endometrial cancer following

estrogen replacement with and without progestins. J Natl Cancer Inst

1991;91:1131-7.

4.

Feuer EJ, Wun LM, Boring CC, et al. The lifetime risk of developing breast

cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85:892-7.

5.

U.S. Dept of Health and Human Services. Mortality, part B. In: Vital Statistics of

the United States: Various Years Through 1991. Hyattsville, Md: National Center

for Health Statistics; 1995:2.

6.

Bush TL, Whiteman MK. Hormone replacement therapy and risk of breast cancer

(editorial). JAMA 1999;281:2140-1.

7.

Colditz GA, Hankinson SE, Hunter DJ, et al. The use of estrogens and progestins

and the risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med

1995;332:1589-93.

8.

Schairer C, Lubin J, Troisi R, Sturgeon S, Brinton L, Hoover R. Menopausal

estrogen and estrogen-progestin replacement therapy and breast cancer risk.

JAMA 2000;283:485-91.

9.

Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Breast cancer and

hormone replacement therapy: collaborative reanalysis of data from 51

epidemiological studies of 52,705 women with breast cancer and 108,411

women without breast cancer. Lancet 1997;350:1047-59.

10.

Col NF, Eckman MH, Karas RH, et al. Patient-specific decisions about hormone

replacement therapy in postmenopausal women. JAMA 1997;277:1140-7.

11.

Garg PP, Kerlikowske K, Subak L, Grady D. Hormone replacement therapy and

the risk of epithelial ovarian carcinoma: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol

1998;92:472-9.

12.

Greenlee RT, Murray T, Bolden S, Wingo PA. Cancer Statistics, 2000. CA

Cancer J Clin 2000;50:7-33.

13.

Newcomb PA, Storer BE. Postmenopausal hormone use and risk of large bowel

cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:1067-71.

14.

Potter JD. Hormones and colon cancer (editorial). J Natl Cancer Inst

1995;87:1039-40.

[Literature | Menopause Educational Materials | Conferences & Congresses | Opinion Papers]

[News | Membership / Registration | Editorial Board | Web Links]

[About Women & Menopause | Home]

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download