特邀论文:个体化治疗

Tim Hillard, Paola Albertazzi, Jo Marsden
{"title":"特邀论文:个体化治疗","authors":"Tim Hillard, Paola Albertazzi, Jo Marsden","doi":"10.1258/136218006779160508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is now nearly four years since the publication of the original Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) trials and the huge amount of data continue to be analysed and published. The most recent publications indicate that there was actually a significant reduction in the number of breast cancers observed in estrogen-only users compared with placebo. At worst this implies that estrogen-only hormone therapy (HT) does not increase breast cancer risk and at best it suggests it may actually be protective. This is potentially excellent news for menopausal women, particularly those who have been hysterectomized. Yet, where are the media reports to get this message across to the public? Where are the reassuring statements from the regulatory authorities? At the time of going to press these latest reports have largely gone unnoticed and unreported. One of the key driving forces for the WHI trial was to identify whether or not there was a case for estrogen being ‘cardioprotective’. The initial results and accompanying headlines indicated that it was not and indeed suggested that estrogens may even be disadvantageous. Unfortunately, the media, many medical societies and the regulatory authorities all over the world subsequently took the message from the study that estrogens were not good for cardiovascular disease risk and extrapolated it to all age groups, even though the increase in adverse events was largely confined to the over70s. Reanalyses of the data now indicate an actual reduction in cardiovascular events in the younger age groups (50–59 years), the ages when most women are likely to consider HT. This is further supported by the latest Nurses’ Health Study publication showing a significant reduction in coronary heart disease in women who started HT around the time of menopause. Thus, it appears that estrogens started around the time of menopause may have a protective effect after all! Away from the WHI, the adverse publicity about HT has focused attention on non-hormonal treatments and their potential role in treating menopausal symptoms. Some alternative treatments have been the subject of appropriate scientific assessment, with varying results, but the debate about the role of alternative medicines in the management of the menopause continues.","PeriodicalId":85745,"journal":{"name":"The journal of the British Menopause Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"194 - 195"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Invited papers: individualizing therapy\",\"authors\":\"Tim Hillard, Paola Albertazzi, Jo Marsden\",\"doi\":\"10.1258/136218006779160508\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is now nearly four years since the publication of the original Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) trials and the huge amount of data continue to be analysed and published. The most recent publications indicate that there was actually a significant reduction in the number of breast cancers observed in estrogen-only users compared with placebo. At worst this implies that estrogen-only hormone therapy (HT) does not increase breast cancer risk and at best it suggests it may actually be protective. This is potentially excellent news for menopausal women, particularly those who have been hysterectomized. Yet, where are the media reports to get this message across to the public? Where are the reassuring statements from the regulatory authorities? At the time of going to press these latest reports have largely gone unnoticed and unreported. One of the key driving forces for the WHI trial was to identify whether or not there was a case for estrogen being ‘cardioprotective’. The initial results and accompanying headlines indicated that it was not and indeed suggested that estrogens may even be disadvantageous. Unfortunately, the media, many medical societies and the regulatory authorities all over the world subsequently took the message from the study that estrogens were not good for cardiovascular disease risk and extrapolated it to all age groups, even though the increase in adverse events was largely confined to the over70s. Reanalyses of the data now indicate an actual reduction in cardiovascular events in the younger age groups (50–59 years), the ages when most women are likely to consider HT. This is further supported by the latest Nurses’ Health Study publication showing a significant reduction in coronary heart disease in women who started HT around the time of menopause. Thus, it appears that estrogens started around the time of menopause may have a protective effect after all! Away from the WHI, the adverse publicity about HT has focused attention on non-hormonal treatments and their potential role in treating menopausal symptoms. Some alternative treatments have been the subject of appropriate scientific assessment, with varying results, but the debate about the role of alternative medicines in the management of the menopause continues.\",\"PeriodicalId\":85745,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The journal of the British Menopause Society\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"194 - 195\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The journal of the British Menopause Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1258/136218006779160508\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of the British Menopause Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1258/136218006779160508","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自最初的妇女健康倡议(WHI)试验发表至今已近四年,大量数据继续被分析和发表。最近的出版物表明,与安慰剂相比,仅使用雌激素的人患乳腺癌的数量实际上显著减少。在最坏的情况下,这意味着仅雌激素激素疗法(HT)不会增加患乳腺癌的风险,在最好的情况下,它表明它实际上可能具有保护作用。这对绝经期妇女来说是个潜在的好消息,尤其是那些做过子宫切除术的妇女。然而,媒体在哪里报道,让这一信息传达给公众?监管部门的安抚声明在哪里?在本文付印时,这些最新的报道基本上没有被注意到,也没有被报道。WHI试验的关键驱动力之一是确定雌激素是否具有“心脏保护”作用。最初的结果和附带的标题表明,雌激素甚至可能是不利的。不幸的是,媒体、世界各地的许多医学协会和监管机构随后从这项研究中得出结论,即雌激素不利于心血管疾病的风险,并将其推断到所有年龄组,尽管不良事件的增加主要局限于70岁以上的人群。现在对数据的重新分析表明,在较年轻的年龄组(50-59岁)中,心血管事件的实际减少,大多数女性可能会考虑HT。最新的《护士健康研究》进一步支持了这一观点,该研究显示,在更年期前后开始HT治疗的女性冠心病发病率显著降低。因此,似乎在更年期前后开始的雌激素可能具有保护作用!在WHI之外,关于激素疗法的负面宣传将注意力集中在非激素疗法及其在治疗更年期症状中的潜在作用上。一些替代疗法已经成为适当的科学评估的主题,结果各不相同,但关于替代药物在更年期管理中的作用的争论仍在继续。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Invited papers: individualizing therapy
It is now nearly four years since the publication of the original Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) trials and the huge amount of data continue to be analysed and published. The most recent publications indicate that there was actually a significant reduction in the number of breast cancers observed in estrogen-only users compared with placebo. At worst this implies that estrogen-only hormone therapy (HT) does not increase breast cancer risk and at best it suggests it may actually be protective. This is potentially excellent news for menopausal women, particularly those who have been hysterectomized. Yet, where are the media reports to get this message across to the public? Where are the reassuring statements from the regulatory authorities? At the time of going to press these latest reports have largely gone unnoticed and unreported. One of the key driving forces for the WHI trial was to identify whether or not there was a case for estrogen being ‘cardioprotective’. The initial results and accompanying headlines indicated that it was not and indeed suggested that estrogens may even be disadvantageous. Unfortunately, the media, many medical societies and the regulatory authorities all over the world subsequently took the message from the study that estrogens were not good for cardiovascular disease risk and extrapolated it to all age groups, even though the increase in adverse events was largely confined to the over70s. Reanalyses of the data now indicate an actual reduction in cardiovascular events in the younger age groups (50–59 years), the ages when most women are likely to consider HT. This is further supported by the latest Nurses’ Health Study publication showing a significant reduction in coronary heart disease in women who started HT around the time of menopause. Thus, it appears that estrogens started around the time of menopause may have a protective effect after all! Away from the WHI, the adverse publicity about HT has focused attention on non-hormonal treatments and their potential role in treating menopausal symptoms. Some alternative treatments have been the subject of appropriate scientific assessment, with varying results, but the debate about the role of alternative medicines in the management of the menopause continues.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信