OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to determine whether metabolic syndrome (MetS) or its components modified the effect of hormone therapy (HT) on the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) events in the Women's Health Initiative clinical trials. METHODS: We performed a nested case-control study of incident CHD events during the first 4 years of follow-up in the Women's Health Initiative HT trials (estrogen plus progestin therapy [EPT] and estrogen therapy [ET]). There were 359 incident cases of CHD during follow-up. After the exclusion of women with cardiovascular disease (n = 90), diabetes, or hypertension at baseline (n = 103), 166 CHD cases were matched to 524 controls on age, randomization date, and hysterectomy status. MetS classification required at least three of five Adult Treatment Panel III criteria. Analyses by χ and t tests for heterogeneity and logistic regression were performed. Postmenopausal women (n = 27,347) aged 50 to 79 years from 40 US clinical centers participated. Daily conjugated equine estrogens (0.625 mg) and medroxyprogesterone acetate (2.5 mg; EPT) or conjugated equine estrogens (0.625 mg; ET) were compared with placebo. The main outcome measure was the odds for CHD with HT use versus placebo by MetS status. RESULTS: MetS modified the risk of CHD events with HT. In the pooled analysis, risk was increased with HT versus placebo in women with MetS (odds ratio, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.26-4.07), whereas women without MetS were not found to have an increased risk for a CHD event with HT (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.58-1.61; P for interaction = 0.03). Results of the EPT and ET trials, when examined separately, were similar. The constellation of MetS variables was more predictive of risk from HT than MetS components assessed individually. When women with diabetes or hypertension were included in the analysis, statistically significant effect modification was not detected. CONCLUSIONS: MetS at baseline in women without prior cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or hypertension at baseline identifies women who are more likely to have had adverse coronary outcomes on HT. CHD risk stratification is recommended before initiating HT. The basis for the greater risk of CHD events with HT among women with MetS requires further study.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to determine whether metabolic syndrome (MetS) or its components modified the effect of hormone therapy (HT) on the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) events in the Women's Health Initiative clinical trials. METHODS: We performed a nested case-control study of incident CHD events during the first 4 years of follow-up in the Women's Health Initiative HT trials (estrogen plus progestin therapy [EPT] and estrogen therapy [ET]). There were 359 incident cases of CHD during follow-up. After the exclusion of women with cardiovascular disease (n = 90), diabetes, or hypertension at baseline (n = 103), 166 CHD cases were matched to 524 controls on age, randomization date, and hysterectomy status. MetS classification required at least three of five Adult Treatment Panel III criteria. Analyses by χ and t tests for heterogeneity and logistic regression were performed. Postmenopausal women (n = 27,347) aged 50 to 79 years from 40 US clinical centers participated. Daily conjugated equine estrogens (0.625 mg) and medroxyprogesterone acetate (2.5 mg; EPT) or conjugated equine estrogens (0.625 mg; ET) were compared with placebo. The main outcome measure was the odds for CHD with HT use versus placebo by MetS status. RESULTS: MetS modified the risk of CHD events with HT. In the pooled analysis, risk was increased with HT versus placebo in women with MetS (odds ratio, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.26-4.07), whereas women without MetS were not found to have an increased risk for a CHD event with HT (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.58-1.61; P for interaction = 0.03). Results of the EPT and ET trials, when examined separately, were similar. The constellation of MetS variables was more predictive of risk from HT than MetS components assessed individually. When women with diabetes or hypertension were included in the analysis, statistically significant effect modification was not detected. CONCLUSIONS: MetS at baseline in women without prior cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or hypertension at baseline identifies women who are more likely to have had adverse coronary outcomes on HT. CHD risk stratification is recommended before initiating HT. The basis for the greater risk of CHD events with HT among women with MetS requires further study.
Authors: Scott M Grundy; James I Cleeman; Stephen R Daniels; Karen A Donato; Robert H Eckel; Barry A Franklin; David J Gordon; Ronald M Krauss; Peter J Savage; Sidney C Smith; John A Spertus; Fernando Costa Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-09-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jacques E Rossouw; Ross L Prentice; JoAnn E Manson; Lieling Wu; David Barad; Vanessa M Barnabei; Marcia Ko; Andrea Z LaCroix; Karen L Margolis; Marcia L Stefanick Journal: JAMA Date: 2007-04-04 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Barbara Sternfeld; Hua Wang; Charles P Quesenberry; Barbara Abrams; Susan A Everson-Rose; Gail A Greendale; Karen A Matthews; Javier I Torrens; MaryFran Sowers Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2004-11-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Andreas Festa; Ken Williams; Anthony J G Hanley; James D Otvos; David C Goff; Lynne E Wagenknecht; Steven M Haffner Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-06-28 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Garnet L Anderson; Marian Limacher; Annlouise R Assaf; Tamsen Bassford; Shirley A A Beresford; Henry Black; Denise Bonds; Robert Brunner; Robert Brzyski; Bette Caan; Rowan Chlebowski; David Curb; Margery Gass; Jennifer Hays; Gerardo Heiss; Susan Hendrix; Barbara V Howard; Judith Hsia; Allan Hubbell; Rebecca Jackson; Karen C Johnson; Howard Judd; Jane Morley Kotchen; Lewis Kuller; Andrea Z LaCroix; Dorothy Lane; Robert D Langer; Norman Lasser; Cora E Lewis; JoAnn Manson; Karen Margolis; Judith Ockene; Mary Jo O'Sullivan; Lawrence Phillips; Ross L Prentice; Cheryl Ritenbaugh; John Robbins; Jacques E Rossouw; Gloria Sarto; Marcia L Stefanick; Linda Van Horn; Jean Wactawski-Wende; Robert Wallace; Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-04-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: K L Margolis; D E Bonds; R J Rodabough; L Tinker; L S Phillips; C Allen; T Bassford; G Burke; J Torrens; B V Howard Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2004-07-14 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Jacques E Rossouw; Garnet L Anderson; Ross L Prentice; Andrea Z LaCroix; Charles Kooperberg; Marcia L Stefanick; Rebecca D Jackson; Shirley A A Beresford; Barbara V Howard; Karen C Johnson; Jane Morley Kotchen; Judith Ockene Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-07-17 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Vesna D Garovic; Natasa M Milic; Tracey L Weissgerber; Michelle M Mielke; Kent R Bailey; Brian Lahr; Muthuvel Jayachandran; Wendy M White; Howard N Hodis; Virginia M Miller Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2017-08-25 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Karen C Johnson; Aaron K Aragaki; Rebecca Jackson; Alex Reiner; Per Morten Sandset; Jan Rosing; Anders E A Dahm; Frits Rosendaal; JoAnn E Manson; Lisa W Martin; Simin Liu; Lewis H Kuller; Mary Cushman; Jacques E Rossouw Journal: Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol Date: 2015-12-17 Impact factor: 8.311