scholarly journals Use of hormone replacement therapy and risk of venous thromboembolism: nested case-control studies using the QResearch and CPRD databases

BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. k4810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yana Vinogradova ◽  
Carol Coupland ◽  
Julia Hippisley-Cox

AbstractObjectiveTo assess the association between risk of venous thromboembolism and use of different types of hormone replacement therapy.DesignTwo nested case-control studies.SettingUK general practices contributing to the QResearch or Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) databases, and linked to hospital, mortality, and social deprivation data.Participants80 396 women aged 40-79 with a primary diagnosis of venous thromboembolism between 1998 and 2017, matched by age, general practice, and index date to 391 494 female controls.Main outcome measuresVenous thromboembolism recorded on general practice, mortality, or hospital records. Odds ratios were adjusted for demographics, smoking status, alcohol consumption, comorbidities, recent medical events, and other prescribed drugs.ResultsOverall, 5795 (7.2%) women who had venous thromboembolism and 21 670 (5.5%) controls had been exposed to hormone replacement therapy within 90 days before the index date. Of these two groups, 4915 (85%)and 16 938 (78%) women used oral therapy, respectively, which was associated with a significantly increased risk of venous thromboembolism compared with no exposure (adjusted odds ratio 1.58, 95% confidence interval 1.52 to 1.64), for both oestrogen only preparations (1.40, 1.32 to 1.48) and combined preparations (1.73, 1.65 to 1.81). Estradiolhad a lower risk than conjugated equine oestrogen for oestrogen only preparations (0.85, 0.76 to 0.95) and combined preparations (0.83, 0.76 to 0.91). Compared with no exposure, conjugated equine oestrogen with medroxyprogesterone acetate had the highest risk (2.10, 1.92 to 2.31), and estradiol with dydrogesterone had the lowest risk (1.18, 0.98 to 1.42). Transdermal preparations were not associated with risk of venous thromboembolism, which was consistent for different regimens (overall adjusted odds ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.01).ConclusionsIn the present study, transdermal treatment was the safest type of hormone replacement therapy when risk of venous thromboembolism was assessed. Transdermal treatment appears to be underused, with the overwhelming preference still for oral preparations.

BMJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. m3873 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yana Vinogradova ◽  
Carol Coupland ◽  
Julia Hippisley-Cox

Abstract Objective To assess the risks of breast cancer associated with different types and durations of hormone replacement therapy (HRT). Design Two nested case-control studies. Setting UK general practices contributing to QResearch or Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), linked to hospital, mortality, social deprivation, and cancer registry (QResearch only) data. Participants 98 611 women aged 50-79 with a primary diagnosis of breast cancer between 1998 and 2018, matched by age, general practice, and index date to 457 498 female controls. Main outcome measures Breast cancer diagnosis from general practice, mortality, hospital, or cancer registry records. Odds ratios for HRT types, adjusted for personal characteristics, smoking status, alcohol consumption, comorbidities, family history, and other prescribed drugs. Separate results from QResearch or CPRD were combined. Results Overall, 33 703 (34%) women with a diagnosis of breast cancer and 134 391 (31%) controls had used HRT prior to one year before the index date. Compared with never use, in recent users (<5 years) with long term use (≥5 years), oestrogen only therapy and combined oestrogen and progestogen therapy were both associated with increased risks of breast cancer (adjusted odds ratio 1.15 (95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.21) and 1.79 (1.73 to 1.85), respectively). For combined progestogens, the increased risk was highest for norethisterone (1.88, 1.79 to 1.99) and lowest for dydrogesterone (1.24, 1.03 to 1.48). Past long term use of oestrogen only therapy and past short term (<5 years) use of oestrogen-progestogen were not associated with increased risk. The risk associated with past long term oestrogen-progestogen use, however, remained increased (1.16, 1.11 to 1.21). In recent oestrogen only users, between three (in younger women) and eight (in older women) extra cases per 10 000 women years would be expected, and in oestrogen-progestogen users between nine and 36 extra cases per 10 000 women years. For past oestrogen-progestogen users, the results would suggest between two and eight extra cases per 10 000 women years. Conclusion This study has produced new generalisable estimates of the increased risks of breast cancer associated with use of different hormone replacement preparations in the UK. The levels of risks varied between types of HRT, with higher risks for combined treatments and for longer duration of use.


Maturitas ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 132 ◽  
pp. 17-23
Author(s):  
Theresa Burkard ◽  
Marlene Rauch ◽  
Julia Spoendlin ◽  
Daniel Prieto-Alhambra ◽  
Susan S. Jick ◽  
...  

The Lancet ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 348 (9033) ◽  
pp. 1027 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edel Daly ◽  
Martin P Vessey ◽  
Rosemary Painter ◽  
Michael M Hawkins

2003 ◽  
Vol 105 (3) ◽  
pp. 408-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esteve Fernandez ◽  
Silvano Gallus ◽  
Cristina Bosetti ◽  
Silvia Franceschi ◽  
Eva Negri ◽  
...  

BMJ ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 340 (jun03 4) ◽  
pp. c2519-c2519 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Renoux ◽  
S. Dell'Aniello ◽  
E. Garbe ◽  
S. Suissa

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document