Cardiovascular and metabolic effects of medroxyprogesterone acetate versus conjugated equine estrogen after premenopausal hysterectomy with bilateral ovariectomy
Kalyan, S., Hitchcock, C. L., Sirrs, S., Pudek, M., & Prior, J. C. (2010). Cardiovascular and metabolic effects of medroxyprogesterone acetate versus conjugated equine estrogen after premenopausal hysterectomy with bilateral ovariectomy. Pharmacotherapy, 30(5), 442-452. https://doi.org/10.1592/phco.30.5.442
Kalyan S, Hitchcock CL, Sirrs S, Pudek M, Prior JC. Cardiovascular and metabolic effects of medroxyprogesterone acetate versus conjugated equine estrogen after premenopausal hysterectomy with bilateral ovariectomy. Pharmacotherapy. 2010;30(5):442-452. doi:10.1592/phco.30.5.442
Kalyan, S., et al. "Cardiovascular and metabolic effects of medroxyprogesterone acetate versus conjugated equine estrogen after premenopausal hysterectomy with bilateral ovariectomy." Pharmacotherapy, vol. 30, no. 5, 2010, pp. 442-452.
For EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley:
License
No open license is recorded for this paper. Reuse terms are set by the publisher.
Vancouver Hospital and Health Sciences Centre05p83my93
Linked to ROR, the Research Organization Registry
Abstract
Objective
To compare the cardiovascular and metabolic effects of medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) with those of conjugated equine estrogen (CEE) as single-hormone therapies in women who underwent hysterectomy with bilateral ovariectomy.
Design
Secondary analysis of a 12-month, double-blind, randomized, parallel-therapy trial.
Setting
Four teaching hospitals and one community hospital in Vancouver, Canada.
Participants
Thirty-three healthy women who underwent premenopausal hysterectomy with bilateral ovariectomy.
Intervention
Subjects received either MPA 10 mg/day (18 women) or CEE 0.6 mg/day (15 women) for 12 months, started immediately after hysterectomy with bilateral ovariectomy.
Measurements and Main Results
Lipid profiles (high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL], total cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, and triglyceride levels), homeostatic measures (hemoglobin A(1c) and fasting blood glucose level), hormone levels (free and bioavailable testosterone, cortisol, sex hormone-binding globulin [SHBG], and dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate), inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein [CRP] and serum albumin levels), and anthropometric measures (body mass index [BMI], truncal fat, and total body fat) were assessed over the 12-month period. After 12 months, the women assigned to MPA had lesser increases in BMI (p=0.04), triglyceride (p=0.003), HDL (p<0.0005), SHBG (p<0.0005), total testosterone (p=0.003), and CRP values (p=0.01) and higher serum albumin levels (p<0.0005) compared with the women receiving CEE.
Conclusion
Therapy with CEE, but not MPA, after surgical menopause appears to predispose healthy women to low-grade inflammation, as evidenced by its independent associations with elevated CRP and reduced albumin levels. In women treated with MPA, the favorable levels of inflammatory markers, BMI, and triglyceride levels need to be confirmed in larger controlled trials, as progesterone therapy may provide a safe and effective alternative to estrogen for vasomotor symptoms in women with surgical menopause.
Guthardt Y et al., 2026·Sci Rep·Free full text on PubMed Central
This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the relationship between menstrual cycle phases and the incidence of muscle injuries in female team sport athletes, following PRISMA 2020 and PERSiST guidelines. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus from inception to mid-January 2024. Studies were included if they examined female team sport athletes of reproductive age with regular menstrual cycles and compared the occurrence of muscle injuries across at least two menstrual phases. Studies involving hormonal contraceptive use, medications affecting the menstrual cycle or musculoskeletal system, or menstrual dysfunction were excluded. Three studies met the inclusion criteria, involving 318 participants. Meta-analysis yielded a pooled Risk Ratio of 1.18 (95% CI: 0.75 to 1.86, p = 0.46) for injury risk between the luteal and follicular phases, suggesting no statistically significant association. However, the certainty of the cumulative evidence was rated as very low due to methodological limitations, including inconsistent phase classifications and reliance on imprecise methods for identifying menstrual phases. Consequently, no practical or clinical recommendations can be made at this time. Future research employing standardised, physiologically accurate methods for classifying and detecting menstrual cycle phases is necessary to better understand the potential links between hormonal fluctuations and injury risk.
To assess pairwise differences between placebo, unopposed estrogen, and each of three estrogen/progestin regimens on selected heart disease risk factors in healthy postmenopausal women.
A 3-year, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. A total of 875 healthy postmenopausal women aged 45 to 64 years who had no known contraindication to hormone therapy. Participants were randomly assigned in equal numbers to the following groups: (1) placebo; (2) conjugated equine estrogen (CEE), 0.625 mg/d; (3) CEE, 0.625 mg/d plus cyclic medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), 10 mg/d for 12 d/mo; (4) CEE, 0.625 mg/d plus consecutive MPA, 2.5 mg/d; or (5) CEE, 0.625 mg/d plus cyclic micronized progesterone (MP), 200 mg/d for 12 d/mo. Primary Endpoints: Four endpoints were chosen to represent four biological systems related to the risk of cardiovascular disease: (1) high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), (2) systolic blood pressure, (3) serum insulin, and (4) fibrinogen. Analysis: Analyses presented are by intention to treat. P values for primary endpoints are adjusted for multiple comparisons; 95% confidence intervals around estimated effects were calculated without this adjustment. Mean changes in HDL-C segregated treatment regimens into three statistically distinct groups: (1) placebo (decrease of 0.03 mmol/L [1.2 mg/dL]); (2) MPA regimens (increases of 0.03 to 0.04 mmol/L [1.2 to 1.6 mg/dL]); and (3) CEE with cyclic MP (increase of 0.11 mmol/L [4.1 mg/dL]) and CEE alone (increase of 0.14 mmol/L [5.6 mg/dL]). Active treatments decreased mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (0.37 to 0.46 mmol/L [14.5 to 17.7 mg/dL]) and increased mean triglyceride (0.13 to 0.15 mmol/L [11.4 to 13.7 mg/dL]) compared with placebo. Placebo was associated with a significantly greater increase in mean fibrinogen than any active treatment (0.10 g/L compared with -0.02 to 0.06 g/L); differences among active treatments were not significant. Systolic blood pressure increased and postchallenge insulin levels decreased during the trial, but neither varied significantly by treatment assignment. Compared with other active treatments, unopposed estrogen was associated with a significantly increased risk of adenomatous or atypical hyperplasia (34% vs 1%) and of hysterectomy (6% vs 1%). No other adverse effect differed by treatment assignment or hysterectomy status. Estrogen alone or in combination with a progestin improves lipoproteins and lowers fibrinogen levels without detectable effects on postchallenge insulin or blood pressure. Unopposed estrogen is the optimal regimen for elevation of HDL-C, but the high rate of endometrial hyperplasia restricts use to women without a uterus. In women with a uterus, CEE with cyclic MP has the most favorable effect on HDL-C and no excess risk of endometrial hyperplasia.
We sought to compare the effects of estrogen/transvaginal progesterone gel with estrogen/medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) on exercise-induced myocardial ischemia in postmenopausal women with coronary artery disease or previous myocardial infarction, or both. Estrogen therapy beneficially affects exercise-induced myocardial ischemia in postmenopausal women; however, women with an intact uterus also take progestin to protect against uterine malignancies. The effects of combination estrogen/progestin therapy on myocardial ischemia are unknown. Eighteen postmenopausal women (mean +/- SD age 59+/-7 years) were given 17-beta-estradiol in single-blinded manner for four weeks (1 mg/day for three weeks then 2 mg/day for one week). Estradiol (2 mg/day) was then continued, and the patients were randomized (double-blind) for 12 days to either transvaginal progesterone gel (90 mg on alternate days) and oral MPA placebo (10 mg/day), or vice versa. After another two weeks on estradiol alone, the patients crossed over to progestin treatment and repeated the protocol on the opposite treatment. Patients underwent treadmill exercise testing after each estradiol phase and at day 10 of each progestin phase. Exercise time to myocardial ischemia increased after the first estrogen phase as compared with baseline (mean difference with 95% confidence interval [CI]: 72 s [34 to 110], p = 0.001), and was increased by combination estradiol/progesterone therapy as compared with estradiol/MPA therapy (92 s [35 to 149], p = 0.001)). Two patients (11%) were withdrawn while taking estradiol/MPA owing to unstable angina. Combination estrogen/transvaginal progesterone gel increases exercise time to myocardial ischemia, as compared with estrogen/MPA. These results imply that the choice of progestin in women at higher cardiovascular risk requires careful consideration.
Writing Group for the Women's Health Initiative Investigators, 2002·JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
Despite decades of accumulated observational evidence, the balance of risks and benefits for hormone use in healthy postmenopausal women remains uncertain. To assess the major health benefits and risks of the most commonly used combined hormone preparation in the United States. Estrogen plus progestin component of the Women's Health Initiative, a randomized controlled primary prevention trial (planned duration, 8.5 years) in which 16608 postmenopausal women aged 50-79 years with an intact uterus at baseline were recruited by 40 US clinical centers in 1993-1998. Participants received conjugated equine estrogens, 0.625 mg/d, plus medroxyprogesterone acetate, 2.5 mg/d, in 1 tablet (n = 8506) or placebo (n = 8102).Main outcomes measuresThe primary outcome was coronary heart disease (CHD) (nonfatal myocardial infarction and CHD death), with invasive breast cancer as the primary adverse outcome. A global index summarizing the balance of risks and benefits included the 2 primary outcomes plus stroke, pulmonary embolism (PE), endometrial cancer, colorectal cancer, hip fracture, and death due to other causes. On May 31, 2002, after a mean of 5.2 years of follow-up, the data and safety monitoring board recommended stopping the trial of estrogen plus progestin vs placebo because the test statistic for invasive breast cancer exceeded the stopping boundary for this adverse effect and the global index statistic supported risks exceeding benefits. This report includes data on the major clinical outcomes through April 30, 2002. Estimated hazard ratios (HRs) (nominal 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) were as follows: CHD, 1.29 (1.02-1.63) with 286 cases; breast cancer, 1.26 (1.00-1.59) with 290 cases; stroke, 1.41 (1.07-1.85) with 212 cases; PE, 2.13 (1.39-3.25) with 101 cases; colorectal cancer, 0.63 (0.43-0.92) with 112 cases; endometrial cancer, 0.83 (0.47-1.47) with 47 cases; hip fracture, 0.66 (0.45-0.98) with 106 cases; and death due to other causes, 0.92 (0.74-1.14) with 331 cases. Corresponding HRs (nominal 95% CIs) for composite outcomes were 1.22 (1.09-1.36) for total cardiovascular disease (arterial and venous disease), 1.03 (0.90-1.17) for total cancer, 0.76 (0.69-0.85) for combined fractures, 0.98 (0.82-1.18) for total mortality, and 1.15 (1.03-1.28) for the global index. Absolute excess risks per 10 000 person-years attributable to estrogen plus progestin were 7 more CHD events, 8 more strokes, 8 more PEs, and 8 more invasive breast cancers, while absolute risk reductions per 10 000 person-years were 6 fewer colorectal cancers and 5 fewer hip fractures. The absolute excess risk of events included in the global index was 19 per 10 000 person-years. Overall health risks exceeded benefits from use of combined estrogen plus progestin for an average 5.2-year follow-up among healthy postmenopausal US women. All-cause mortality was not affected during the trial. The risk-benefit profile found in this trial is not consistent with the requirements for a viable intervention for primary prevention of chronic diseases, and the results indicate that this regimen should not be initiated or continued for primary prevention of CHD.
Prior JC et al., 2014·PLoS One·Free full text on PubMed Central
Progesterone is effective treatment for hot flushes/night sweats. The cardiovascular effects of progesterone therapy are unknown but evidence suggests that premenopausal normal estradiol with also normal progesterone levels may provide later cardiovascular protection. We compared the effects of progesterone to placebo on endothelial function, weight, blood pressure, metabolism, lipids, inflammation and coagulation. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, 3-month placebo-controlled trial of progesterone (300 mg daily) among 133 healthy postmenopausal women in Vancouver, Canada from 2003-2009. Endothelial function by venous occlusion plethysmography was a planned primary outcome. Enrolled women were 1-11 y since last menstruation, not using hormones (for >6 months), non-smoking, without diabetes, hypertension, heart disease or their medications. Randomized (1∶1) women (55 ± 4 years, body mass index 25 ± 3) initially had normal blood pressure, fasting lipid, glucose and electrocardiogram results. Endothelial function (% forearm blood flow above saline) was not changed with progesterone (487 ± 189%, n = 18) compared with placebo (408 ± 278%, n = 16) (95% CI diff [-74 to 232], P = 0.30). Progesterone (n = 65) and placebo (n = 47) groups had similar changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, resting heart rate, weight, body mass index, waist circumference, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglyceride levels. High-density lipoprotein was lower (-0.14 mmol/L, P = 0.001) on progesterone compared with placebo. Fasting glucose, hs-C-reactive protein, albumin and D-dimer changes were all comparable to placebo. Framingham General Cardiovascular Risk Profile scores were initially low and remained low with progesterone therapy and not statistically different from placebo. Results indicate that progesterone has short-term cardiovascular safety. Endothelial function, weight, blood pressure, waist circumference, inflammation and coagulation were unchanged as were lipids except for HDL-C. The statistically significant decrease in HDL-C levels was not clinically important (based on lack of Cardiovascular Risk Profile change). ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00152438.
Therapeutics › Hormonal Agents › Progesterone and Progestins · Perimenopause and Menopause › Hormone Therapy › Benefits and Risks · Reproductive Endocrinology › Ovarian Hormones › Progesterone
Shirin Kalyan, Sandra Sirrs, Jerilynn C Prior, Christine L Hitchcock
S Kalyan, S Sirrs, J Prior, Chris Hitchcock, C Hitchcock
PMID 20411996 20411996 DOI 10.1592/phco.30.5.442 10.1592/phco.30.5.442 Kalyan et al. 2010, Kalyan 2010
Cite this article
Kalyan, S., Hitchcock, C. L., Sirrs, S., Pudek, M., & Prior, J. C. (2010). Cardiovascular and metabolic effects of medroxyprogesterone acetate versus conjugated equine estrogen after premenopausal hysterectomy with bilateral ovariectomy. Pharmacotherapy, 30(5), 442-452. https://doi.org/10.1592/phco.30.5.442
Kalyan S, Hitchcock CL, Sirrs S, Pudek M, Prior JC. Cardiovascular and metabolic effects of medroxyprogesterone acetate versus conjugated equine estrogen after premenopausal hysterectomy with bilateral ovariectomy. Pharmacotherapy. 2010;30(5):442-452. doi:10.1592/phco.30.5.442
Kalyan, S., et al. "Cardiovascular and metabolic effects of medroxyprogesterone acetate versus conjugated equine estrogen after premenopausal hysterectomy with bilateral ovariectomy." Pharmacotherapy, vol. 30, no. 5, 2010, pp. 442-452.
