Search

Background: In the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) randomized trial, dietary intervention significantly reduced breast cancer mortality, especially in women with more metabolic syndrome (MetS) components. Therefore, this study investigated the associations of MetS and obesity with postmenopausal breast cancer after long‐term follow‐up in the WHI clinical trials. Methods: A total of 68,132 postmenopausal women, without prior breast cancer and with normal mammogram, were entered into WHI randomized clinical trials; 63,330 women with an entry MetS score comprised the study population. At entry, body mass index (BMI) was determined; MetS score (0, 1–2, and 3–4) included the following: (1) high waist circumference (≥88 cm), (2) high blood pressure (systolic ≥130 mm Hg and/or diastolic ≥85 mm Hg, or hypertension history), (3) high‐cholesterol history, and (4) diabetes history. Study outcomes included breast cancer incidence, breast cancer mortality, deaths after breast cancer, and results by hormone receptor status. Results: After a >20‐year mortality follow‐up, a higher MetS score (3–4), adjusted for BMI, was significantly associated with more poor prognosis, estrogen receptor (ER)–positive, progesterone receptor (PR)–negative cancers (p =.03), 53% more deaths after breast cancer (p <.001), and 44% higher breast cancer mortality (p =.03). Obesity status, adjusted for MetS score, was significantly associated with more good prognosis, ER‐positive, PR‐positive cancers (p <.001), more total breast cancers (p <.001), and more deaths after breast cancer (p <.001), with higher breast cancer mortality only in women with severe obesity (BMI, ≥35 kg/m2; p <.001). Conclusions: MetS and obesity status have independent, but differential, adverse associations with breast cancer receptor subtypes and breast cancer mortality risk. Both represent separate targets for breast cancer prediction and prevention strategies. Metabolic syndrome and obesity status have independent, but differential, adverse associations with breast cancer receptor subtypes and breast cancer mortality risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To assess the association between an abnormal 1-h 50-g glucose challenge test (GCT) followed by a normal 3-h 100-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) on fetal macrosomia and other adverse outcomes. MEDLINE, Cochrane, clinicaltrials.gov, and Google Scholar were searched from inception to March 2019. Any studies reporting adverse perinatal and/or maternal outcomes in women with an abnormal 50-g 1-h glucose challenge test (GCT) followed by a normal 3-h, 100-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) were included. Studies were critically appraised by three independent reviewers. Outcomes included fetal macrosomia, cesarean delivery, preeclampsia, birth weight, neonatal hypoglycemia, shoulder dystocia, NICU admission, respiratory morbidity, and low Apgar score. A random-effects model was employed to calculate pooled odds ratios (OR) for each outcome with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) and 95% predictive intervals (PI). We identified 30 studies comprising 18,067 patients with a normal 3-h GTT after an abnormal 1-h GCT (study group) and 117,091 patients with a normal 1-h, 50-g GCT (comparison group). Patients in the study group had an increased risk of macrosomia (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.48–1.91, 27 studies, 132,027 patients), cesarean delivery (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.30–1.48, 24 studies, 128,495 women), preeclampsia (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.15–1.91, 17 studies, 110,930 patients), hypoglycemia (OR 1.43, CI 1.07–1.91) and shoulder dystocia (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.09–2.12, 9 studies, 41,229 patients). Neonatal birth weight was significantly higher in the study group. The incidence of NICU admission, low Apgar score, and respiratory morbidity was similar in the two groups. Controlling for body mass index and 1-h glucose screen cut off did not alter these results. Even in the absence of gestational diabetes, patients who fail the GCT test are at mildly increased risk of maternal and neonatal morbidity including macrosomia, cesarean delivery, preeclampsia, and shoulder dystocia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective  This study aimed to perform a systematic review with meta-analysis to investigate if women with a low 50-g, 1-hour glucose challenge test (GCT) value are at risk for having neonates with a birth weight less than the 10th percentile. Study Design  A computerized literature search was conducted to identify studies that compared outcomes of pregnant women with a low GCT value versus women with a normal GCT value during routine screening for gestational diabetes. Results  Sixteen cohort studies were included for analysis. Women with a low GCT value were noted to have a 43% increased odds of having neonates with birth weight less than the 10th percentile (odds ratio [OR]: 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.28–1.60) and 30% increased odds of having neonates with a birth weight less than 2,500 g (OR: 1.3; 95% CI: 1.0–1.7) when compared with women with a normal GCT value. The rates of preterm delivery, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH)/preeclampsia, respiratory distress, NICU, and Apgar scores less than 7 were similar in the two groups. Conclusion  A low GCT value defined as less than 90 mg/dL identifies pregnancies at elevated risk for having neonates with a birth weight less than the 10th percentile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When powder is applied to the genital area, it has the potential to reach internal reproductive organs and promote carcinogenesis by irritating and inflaming exposed tissues. Although many studies have considered the association between genital powder use and ovarian cancer risk, the relationship between genital powder use and uterine cancer is less well‐studied. We pooled data from four large, prospective cohorts (the Nurses' Health Study, the Nurses' Health Study II, the Sister Study and the Women's Health Initiative ‐ Observational Study). We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusting for prespecified confounders. In total, 209 185 women were included, with 37% reporting ever genital powder use. Over a mean 14.5 years of follow‐up, 3272 invasive uterine cancers were diagnosed. There was no overall association between ever genital powder use and uterine cancer (HR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.94‐1.09), with little difference observed for frequent (≥1 times/week) vs never use (HR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.95‐1.16; P‐for‐trend =.46). Long‐term use (>20 years; HR = 1.12, 95% CI: 0.96‐1.31; P‐for‐trend = 0.14) was associated with a small, but not statistically significant, increase in risk, compared to never use. There were not clear differences by uterine cancer histologic subtypes or across strata of relevant covariates, including race/ethnicity, follow‐up time, menopausal status and body mass index. The results of this large, pooled analysis do not support a relationship between the use of genital powder and uterine cancer, although the positive associations observed for long‐term use may merit further consideration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: The relationship between use of powder in the genital area and ovarian cancer is not established. Positive associations reported in case-control studies have not been confirmed in cohort studies.Objective: To estimate the association between use of powder in the genital area and ovarian cancer using prospective observational data.Design, Setting, and Participants: Data were pooled from 4 large, US-based cohorts: Nurses' Health Study (enrollment 1976; follow-up 1982-2016; n = 81 869), Nurses' Health Study II (enrollment 1989; follow-up 2013-2017; n = 61 261), Sister Study (enrollment 2003-2009; follow-up 2003-2017; n = 40 647), and Women's Health Initiative Observational Study (enrollment 1993-1998; follow-up 1993-2017; n = 73 267).Exposures: Ever, long-term (≥20 years), and frequent (≥1/week) use of powder in the genital area.Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary analysis examined the association between ever use of powder in the genital area and self-reported incident ovarian cancer. Covariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models.Results: The pooled sample included 252 745 women (median age at baseline, 57 years) with 38% self-reporting use of powder in the genital area. Ten percent reported long-term use, and 22% reported frequent use. During a median of 11.2 years of follow-up (3.8 million person-years at risk), 2168 women developed ovarian cancer (58 cases/100 000 person-years). Ovarian cancer incidence was 61 cases/100 000 person-years among ever users and 55 cases/100 000 person-years among never users (estimated risk difference at age 70 years, 0.09% [95% CI, -0.02% to 0.19%]; estimated HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.99 to 1.17]). The estimated HR for frequent vs never use was 1.09 (95% CI, 0.97 to 1.23) and for long-term vs never use, the HR was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.25). Subgroup analyses were conducted for 10 variables; the tests for heterogeneity were not statistically significant for any of these comparisons. While the estimated HR for the association between ever use of powder in the genital area and ovarian cancer risk among women with a patent reproductive tract was 1.13 (95% CI, 1.01 to 1.26), the P value for interaction comparing women with vs without patent reproductive tracts was .15.Conclusions and Relevance: In this analysis of pooled data from women in 4 US cohorts, there was not a statistically significant association between use of powder in the genital area and incident ovarian cancer. However, the study may have been underpowered to identify a small increase in risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the association between an abnormal 1-h 50-g glucose challenge test (GCT) followed by a normal 3-h 100-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) on fetal macrosomia and other adverse outcomes.Data Sources: MEDLINE, Cochrane, clinicaltrials.gov, and Google Scholar were searched from inception to March 2019.Methods Of Study Selection: Any studies reporting adverse perinatal and/or maternal outcomes in women with an abnormal 50-g 1-h glucose challenge test (GCT) followed by a normal 3-h, 100-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) were included. Studies were critically appraised by three independent reviewers. Outcomes included fetal macrosomia, cesarean delivery, preeclampsia, birth weight, neonatal hypoglycemia, shoulder dystocia, NICU admission, respiratory morbidity, and low Apgar score. A random-effects model was employed to calculate pooled odds ratios (OR) for each outcome with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) and 95% predictive intervals (PI).Tabulation, Integration, and Results: We identified 30 studies comprising 18,067 patients with a normal 3-h GTT after an abnormal 1-h GCT (study group) and 117,091 patients with a normal 1-h, 50-g GCT (comparison group). Patients in the study group had an increased risk of macrosomia (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.48-1.91, 27 studies, 132,027 patients), cesarean delivery (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.30-1.48, 24 studies, 128,495 women), preeclampsia (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.15-1.91, 17 studies, 110,930 patients), hypoglycemia (OR 1.43, CI 1.07-1.91) and shoulder dystocia (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.09-2.12, 9 studies, 41,229 patients). Neonatal birth weight was significantly higher in the study group. The incidence of NICU admission, low Apgar score, and respiratory morbidity was similar in the two groups. Controlling for body mass index and 1-h glucose screen cut off did not alter these results.Conclusion: Even in the absence of gestational diabetes, patients who fail the GCT test are at mildly increased risk of maternal and neonatal morbidity including macrosomia, cesarean delivery, preeclampsia, and shoulder dystocia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In most countries, testosterone therapy is prescribed off-label such that women are using either testosterone formulations approved for men with dose modification, or compounded therapies. Current research into testosterone physiology and clinical effects should mainly focus on measuring total testosterone as the main biomarker rather than "free" testosterone, as evidence that "free" testosterone is the biologically active testosterone fraction is lacking[9] (Expert Opinion). Studies of non-oral testosterone therapies (percutaneous and injectable), I in doses that approximate physiological testosterone concentrations for premenopausal women i , have shown no significant adverse effects on lipid profiles over the short term (Level I, Grade A). Should a trial of testosterone therapy be given for HSDD, a baseline total testosterone concentration should be measured before commencement, with a repeat level 3-6 weeks after treatment initiation (Level IIA, Grade C). [Extracted from the article]

Background: Whether health outcomes of menopausal estrogen therapy differ between women with and without bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) is unknown.Objective: To examine estrogen therapy outcomes by BSO status, with additional stratification by 10-year age groups.Design: Subgroup analyses of the randomized Women's Health Initiative Estrogen-Alone Trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00000611).Setting: 40 U.S. clinical centers.Participants: 9939 women aged 50 to 79 years with prior hysterectomy and known oophorectomy status.Intervention: Conjugated equine estrogens (CEE) (0.625 mg/d) or placebo for a median of 7.2 years.Measurements: Incidence of coronary heart disease and invasive breast cancer (the trial's 2 primary end points), all-cause mortality, and a "global index" (these end points plus stroke, pulmonary embolism, colorectal cancer, and hip fracture) during the intervention phase and 18-year cumulative follow-up.Results: The effects of CEE alone did not differ significantly according to BSO status. However, age modified the effect of CEE in women with prior BSO. During the intervention phase, CEE was significantly associated with a net adverse effect (hazard ratio for global index, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.09 to 1.86]) in older women (aged ≥70 years), but the global index was not elevated in younger women (P trend by age = 0.016). During cumulative follow-up, women aged 50 to 59 years with BSO had a treatment-associated reduction in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.68 [CI, 0.48 to 0.96]), whereas older women with BSO had no reduction (P trend by age = 0.034). There was no significant association between CEE and outcomes among women with conserved ovaries, regardless of age.Limitations: The timing of CEE in relation to BSO varied; several comparisons were made without adjustment for multiple testing.Conclusion: The effects of CEE did not differ by BSO status in the overall cohort, but some findings varied by age. Among women with prior BSO, in those aged 70 years or older, CEE led to adverse effects during the treatment period, whereas women randomly assigned to CEE before age 60 seemed to derive mortality benefit over the long term.Primary Funding Source: The WHI program is funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; National Institutes of Health; and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Wyeth Ayerst donated the study drugs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lifestyle-related factors influence risk of endometrial and ovarian cancers, but few studies have examined their joint associations with risk of these cancers. Using multivariable Cox regression models, we assessed the association of a healthy lifestyle index (HLI—a composite score (range, 0–20) involving diet, alcohol consumption, physical activity, body mass index, and smoking; higher scores represent healthier behavior) with risk of endometrial and ovarian cancers among 108,136 postmenopausal women who were recruited in the US Women's Health Initiative study between 1993 and 1998. After a median follow-up of 17.9 years, 1,435 endometrial cancer cases and 904 ovarian cancer cases had been ascertained. Women in the highest quintile of the HLI score had a lower risk of overall, type I, well-differentiated, moderately differentiated, poorly differentiated, and localized endometrial cancer than those in the lowest quintile (for quintile 5 vs. quintile 1, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.61 (95% CI: 0.51, 0.72), HR = 0.60 (95% CI: 0.49, 0.72), HR = 0.66 (95% CI: 0.46, 0.96), HR = 0.69 (95% CI: 0.52, 0.90), HR = 0.49 (95% CI: 0.34, 0.72), and HR = 0.61 (95% CI: 0.50, 0.74), respectively). The HLI score had a weak positive association with risk of serous ovarian cancer. Our findings underscore the potential importance of a healthy lifestyle in lowering endometrial cancer risk among postmenopausal women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reproductive health is a key component of cancer care and survivorship, encompassing gynecologic issues ranging from contraception and fertility to treatment of sexual dysfunction and menopause. Yet, oncology providers are often unfamiliar with the management of gynecologic issues. In order to address the unmet needs of female cancer patients, reproductive health should be addressed at the time of cancer diagnosis and continue through survivorship. Universal screening for pregnancy intention can guide counseling on contraception and fertility preservation. Safe and efficacious contraceptive options for both patients undergoing active treatment and cancer survivors are available and can often offer non-contraceptive benefits such as regulation of menses. Prompt referral to reproductive endocrinology specialists allows patients to explore options for fertility preservation prior to the receipt of cancer-directed therapies. Due to a rapid drop in hormone levels, treatment-induced menopause often results in severe symptoms. In patients with induced menopause, balancing the risks of hormone therapy compared to the decreased quality of life and health concerns associated with early menopause may help patients with difficult decisions regarding symptom control. Cancer treatment impacts sexual function with both physical changes to the vulvovaginal tissues and altered relationship dynamics. Open discussions on the impact to sexual health are paramount to quality of life after cancer. While more data is needed in many areas, proactive management of reproductive health issues is crucial to quality of life in cancer survivorship. In this article, we review contemporary management of the reproductive health of the female cancer patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]