{"title":"Update on Menopause Hormone Therapy; Current Indications and Unanswered Questions.","authors":"Annice Mukherjee, Susan R Davis","doi":"10.1111/cen.15211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To provide clinicians involved in managing menopause with a summary of current evidence surrounding menopause hormone therapy (MHT).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>The authors evaluate and synthesize existing pooled evidence relating to MHT's clinical indications, efficacy, and safety and explore the limitations of existing data.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>The review focuses on MHT-related outcomes in women with natural-timed menopause captured within observational studies, RCTs, and pooled data from pivotal meta-analyses and reviews.</p><p><strong>Measurements: </strong>Available published data are scrutinized. Available evidence and notably lacking data from women not adequately represented in published MHT trials, such as those with socioeconomic adversity, significant comorbidities, and minority ethnic backgrounds, are highlighted and deliberated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The impact of MHT differs significantly between demographics. Current consensus recommendations for MHT emphasize the importance of tailoring type, route, dose, and duration of therapy to individual needs and risk/benefit ratio through shared decision-making. MHT impact can change over time. Current MHT data support its benefits for treating menopause symptoms and a potential window of opportunity in midlife to benefit skeletal health. Limitations of current evidence highlight menopause health inequalities and underscores the need for further research.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This review recommends tailored use of MHT for well-defined indications, recognizing its value for menopause symptom relief and skeletal benefits for many midlife women. MHT may be used as long as benefits outweigh risks, through shared decision-making. There is insufficient clinical evidence to support the long-term use of MHT in some contemporary cohorts of women accessing MHT in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":10346,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Endocrinology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Endocrinology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cen.15211","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To provide clinicians involved in managing menopause with a summary of current evidence surrounding menopause hormone therapy (MHT).
Design: The authors evaluate and synthesize existing pooled evidence relating to MHT's clinical indications, efficacy, and safety and explore the limitations of existing data.
Patients: The review focuses on MHT-related outcomes in women with natural-timed menopause captured within observational studies, RCTs, and pooled data from pivotal meta-analyses and reviews.
Measurements: Available published data are scrutinized. Available evidence and notably lacking data from women not adequately represented in published MHT trials, such as those with socioeconomic adversity, significant comorbidities, and minority ethnic backgrounds, are highlighted and deliberated.
Results: The impact of MHT differs significantly between demographics. Current consensus recommendations for MHT emphasize the importance of tailoring type, route, dose, and duration of therapy to individual needs and risk/benefit ratio through shared decision-making. MHT impact can change over time. Current MHT data support its benefits for treating menopause symptoms and a potential window of opportunity in midlife to benefit skeletal health. Limitations of current evidence highlight menopause health inequalities and underscores the need for further research.
Conclusions: This review recommends tailored use of MHT for well-defined indications, recognizing its value for menopause symptom relief and skeletal benefits for many midlife women. MHT may be used as long as benefits outweigh risks, through shared decision-making. There is insufficient clinical evidence to support the long-term use of MHT in some contemporary cohorts of women accessing MHT in clinical practice.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Endocrinology publishes papers and reviews which focus on the clinical aspects of endocrinology, including the clinical application of molecular endocrinology. It does not publish papers relating directly to diabetes care and clinical management. It features reviews, original papers, commentaries, correspondence and Clinical Questions. Clinical Endocrinology is essential reading not only for those engaged in endocrinological research but also for those involved primarily in clinical practice.