Rowan T Chlebowski1, Thomas E Rohan2, JoAnn E Manson3, Aaron K Aragaki4, Andrew Kaunitz5, Marcia L Stefanick6, Michael S Simon7, Karen C Johnson8, Jean Wactawski-Wende9, Mary J O'Sullivan10, Lucile L Adams-Campbell11, Rami Nassir12, Lawrence S Lessin13, Ross L Prentice4. 1. Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, California. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York. 3. Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Public Health Sciences, Seattle, Washington. 5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Florida College of Medicine-Jacksonville, Jacksonville. 6. Stanford Prevention Research Center, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. 7. Karmanos Cancer Institute, Department of Oncology, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan. 8. Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis. 9. Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, State University of New York at Buffalo. 10. Obstetrics/Gynecology, University of Miami Health System Miami, Florida. 11. Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC. 12. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Medicine, University of California, Davis. 13. Hematology and Medical Oncology, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: The use of menopausal hormone therapy (HT) continues in clinical practice, but reports are conflicting concerning the longer-term breast cancer effects of relatively short-term use. OBJECTIVE: To report the longer-term influence of menopausal HT on breast cancer incidence in the 2 Women's Health Initiative (WHI) randomized clinical trials. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 27,347 postmenopausal women aged 50 to 79 years were enrolled at 40 US centers from 1993 to 1998 and followed up for a median of 13 years through September 2010. INTERVENTIONS: A total of 16,608 women with a uterus were randomized to conjugated equine estrogens (0.625 mg/d [estrogen]) plus medroxyprogesterone acetate (2.5 mg/d [progestin]) (E + P) or placebo with a median intervention duration of 5.6 years, and 10,739 women with prior hysterectomy were randomized to conjugated equine estrogens alone (0.625 mg/d) or placebo with a median intervention duration of 7.2 years. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Time-specific invasive breast cancer incidence rates and exploratory analyses of breast cancer characteristics by intervention and postintervention phases in the 2 HT trials. RESULTS: In the E + P trial, hazard ratios (HRs) for the influence of combined HT on breast cancer were lower than 1 for 2 years (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.47-1.08) and steadily increased throughout intervention, becoming significantly increased for the entire intervention phase (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.01-1.53). In the early postintervention phase (within 2.75 years from intervention), there was a sharp decrease in breast cancer incidence in the combined HT group, though the HR remained higher than 1 (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.90-1.70). During the late postintervention phase (requiring patient re-consent), the HR for breast cancer risk remained higher than 1 through 5.5 years (median) of additional follow-up (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.06-1.77). In the estrogen alone trial, the HR for invasive breast cancer risk was lower than 1 throughout the intervention phase (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.61-1.02) and remained lower than 1 in the early postintervention phase (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.34-0.89), but risk reduction was not observed during the late postintervention follow-up (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.73-1.87). Characteristics of breast cancers diagnosed during early and late postintervention phases differed in both trials. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In the E + P trial, the higher breast cancer risk seen during intervention was followed by a substantial drop in risk in the early postintervention phase, but a higher breast cancer risk remained during the late postintervention follow-up. In the estrogen alone trial, the lower breast cancer risk seen during intervention was sustained in the early postintervention phase but was not evident during the late postintervention follow-up.
RCT Entities:
IMPORTANCE: The use of menopausal hormone therapy (HT) continues in clinical practice, but reports are conflicting concerning the longer-term breast cancer effects of relatively short-term use. OBJECTIVE: To report the longer-term influence of menopausal HT on breast cancer incidence in the 2 Women's Health Initiative (WHI) randomized clinical trials. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 27,347 postmenopausal women aged 50 to 79 years were enrolled at 40 US centers from 1993 to 1998 and followed up for a median of 13 years through September 2010. INTERVENTIONS: A total of 16,608 women with a uterus were randomized to conjugated equineestrogens (0.625 mg/d [estrogen]) plus medroxyprogesterone acetate (2.5 mg/d [progestin]) (E + P) or placebo with a median intervention duration of 5.6 years, and 10,739 women with prior hysterectomy were randomized to conjugated equineestrogens alone (0.625 mg/d) or placebo with a median intervention duration of 7.2 years. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Time-specific invasive breast cancer incidence rates and exploratory analyses of breast cancer characteristics by intervention and postintervention phases in the 2 HT trials. RESULTS: In the E + P trial, hazard ratios (HRs) for the influence of combined HT on breast cancer were lower than 1 for 2 years (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.47-1.08) and steadily increased throughout intervention, becoming significantly increased for the entire intervention phase (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.01-1.53). In the early postintervention phase (within 2.75 years from intervention), there was a sharp decrease in breast cancer incidence in the combined HT group, though the HR remained higher than 1 (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.90-1.70). During the late postintervention phase (requiring patientre-consent), the HR for breast cancer risk remained higher than 1 through 5.5 years (median) of additional follow-up (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.06-1.77). In the estrogen alone trial, the HR for invasive breast cancer risk was lower than 1 throughout the intervention phase (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.61-1.02) and remained lower than 1 in the early postintervention phase (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.34-0.89), but risk reduction was not observed during the late postintervention follow-up (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.73-1.87). Characteristics of breast cancers diagnosed during early and late postintervention phases differed in both trials. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In the E + P trial, the higher breast cancer risk seen during intervention was followed by a substantial drop in risk in the early postintervention phase, but a higher breast cancer risk remained during the late postintervention follow-up. In the estrogen alone trial, the lower breast cancer risk seen during intervention was sustained in the early postintervention phase but was not evident during the late postintervention follow-up.
Authors: Rowan T Chlebowski; Garnet Anderson; JoAnn E Manson; Mary Pettinger; Shagufta Yasmeen; Dorothy Lane; Robert D Langer; F Allan Hubbell; Anne McTiernan; Susan Hendrix; Robert Schenken; Marcia L Stefanick Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-05-03 Impact factor: 44.544
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: Peter M Ravdin; Kathleen A Cronin; Nadia Howlader; Christine D Berg; Rowan T Chlebowski; Eric J Feuer; Brenda K Edwards; Donald A Berry Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-04-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: JoAnn E Manson; Rowan T Chlebowski; Marcia L Stefanick; Aaron K Aragaki; Jacques E Rossouw; Ross L Prentice; Garnet Anderson; Barbara V Howard; Cynthia A Thomson; Andrea Z LaCroix; Jean Wactawski-Wende; Rebecca D Jackson; Marian Limacher; Karen L Margolis; Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller; Shirley A Beresford; Jane A Cauley; Charles B Eaton; Margery Gass; Judith Hsia; Karen C Johnson; Charles Kooperberg; Lewis H Kuller; Cora E Lewis; Simin Liu; Lisa W Martin; Judith K Ockene; Mary Jo O'Sullivan; Lynda H Powell; Michael S Simon; Linda Van Horn; Mara Z Vitolins; Robert B Wallace Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-10-02 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Mitch Dowsett; Jack Cuzick; Jim Ingle; Alan Coates; John Forbes; Judith Bliss; Marc Buyse; Michael Baum; Aman Buzdar; Marco Colleoni; Charles Coombes; Claire Snowdon; Michael Gnant; Raimund Jakesz; Manfred Kaufmann; Francesco Boccardo; Jon Godwin; Christina Davies; Richard Peto Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-11-30 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Rowan T Chlebowski; Wendy Barrington; Aaron K Aragaki; JoAnn E Manson; Gloria Sarto; Mary J OʼSullivan; Daniel Wu; Jane A Cauley; Lihong Qi; Robert L Wallace; Ross L Prentice Journal: Menopause Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Lynn Rosenberg; Traci N Bethea; Emma Viscidi; Chi-Chen Hong; Melissa A Troester; Elisa V Bandera; Christopher A Haiman; Laurence N Kolonel; Andrew F Olshan; Christine B Ambrosone; Julie R Palmer Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2015-11-26 Impact factor: 13.506