Search

Background/Objectives: This study aims to assess the effects of combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs) on bone metabolism markers. It primarily measures osteocalcin and additionally examines other bone health markers, seeking to determine their responses to estrogen–progestogen treatments. Methods: This study involved a comprehensive evaluation of the pertinent literature and a meta-analysis explicitly conducted on data describing women of reproductive age. The analysis encompassed accessible papers ranging to December 2024 (i.e., those listed in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Scopus, the Cochrane Database, International Clinical Trials Registry, and ClinicalTrials.gov). We examined published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective studies. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane tool for RCTs and the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for prospective studies. The selected indicators for primary and secondary outcomes were ascertained by standardized mean change (SMC), displaying the difference between conditions before and after treatment. Trends were evaluated using meta-regressions. Results: Ultimately, 34 articles out of 1924 identified items met the inclusion criteria, covering 33 unique studies. In EE/E4 combinations, osteocalcin dropped significantly (SMC −0.54 (CI.95 −0.64/−0.43) and −0.43 (CI.95 −0.76/−0.10)). Similar effects were observed for other bone-formation and reabsorption markers, with less significant reductions observed in E2-containing CHC (e.g., alkaline phosphatase (bone) EE combinations, SMC −0.39 (CI.95 −0.67/−0.11); P1NP E2 combination, 0.12 (CI.95 −0.10/0.33); and EE combinations, −0.55 (CI.95 −0.83/−0.26)). The reduction patterns also exhibited differences according to the women’s age (e.g., osteocalcin in EE combinations ≤21, SMC −0.63 (CI.95 −0.77/−0.49) and >21, SMC −0.42 (CI.95 −0.61/−0.24); alkaline phosphatase (bone) EE combinations ≤21, SMC −0.55 (CI.95 −0.86/−0.24) and >21, SMC −0.06 (CI.95 −0.47/0.35)). This analysis found that CHC maintains or reduces bone turnover in childbearing women, with effects varying by age and hormone combination. Moreover, bone-formation and reabsorption markers correlated positively to pro-androgenic progestins (p < 0.05). Thus, estrogen–progestogen combinations reduce bone turnover less when weak estrogens and a pro-androgenic or neutral progestin are present. Conclusions: This study found that CHCs reduce bone turnover, with natural estrogens and androgenic progestins appearing to be more beneficial than EE and anti-androgenic types. These findings would potentially influence decisions relevant to CHC prescriptions during a woman’s reproductive phases, emphasizing the need for additional research to tailor CHC usage to bone health.

Our primary aim was to estimate the magnitude of stage I endometrial cancer (EC) survivors that could benefit from hormonal therapy (HT). Our secondary aims were to assess EC incidence in women below 50 and below 60 over the years, and analyze the overall survival and any influencing factors. We analyzed the endometrioid EC data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program according to women’s age, tumor stage, and grade. We analyzed the proportions of EC survivors below 50 and below 60 years of age and stratified those age groups by race. For age distribution and survival analysis SEER, 18 registries’ research data (2000–2018) were analyzed. We analyzed the SEER 12 registries’ research data (1992–2019) for incidence time trends. Our investigation found a 14% and 40% cumulative prevalence of stage I EC that occurs in women below 50 or 60 years, respectively. EC’s prevalence has progressively risen in recent decades, but cancer-specific mortality remains low. The increasing number of women affected by EC in premenopause or early postmenopause face an 18 years-survival rate of 96.86% and 95.73%, respectively. A significant proportion of low-grade EC survivors can potentially benefit from HT treatment, and this requires awareness of other aspects of their health or quality of life, in addition to cancer treatments.

Endometriosis is a common inflammatory disease affecting women of reproductive age, characterized by the growth of endometrial tissue beyond the uterus. In addition to gynecological manifestations, many endometriosis patients experience gastrointestinal symptoms, indicating a potential association between gut health and the disease. Recent studies have revealed alterations in the gut microbiota of individuals with endometriosis, including reduced diversity, microbial composition imbalances, and pathogenic bacteria. These changes can disrupt immune function, increase inflammation, and contribute to the chronic inflammatory state observed in endometriosis. Moreover, dysregulation of intestinal permeability may further exacerbate gastrointestinal symptoms in affected individuals. Understanding the role of the gut microbiota and intestinal permeability in endometriosis can provide valuable insights into disease pathogenesis, aid in non-invasive diagnostic approaches, and open new avenues for therapeutic interventions. Probiotics, in particular, have shown promise in improving endometriosis-associated pain symptoms and reducing endometriotic lesions in animal models. This review suggests that additional research and well-designed clinical trials are necessary to validate the potential diagnostic and therapeutic benefits of manipulating the gut microbiota in managing endometriosis and its gastrointestinal symptoms, thereby improving the quality of life for those affected.

Severe maternal and newborn morbidity and mortality associated with pre-eclampsia, which are caused partly by premature delivery, affect a factual proportion of pregnancies. Despite its prevalence, the underlying causes of pre-eclampsia remain elusive, with emerging evidence implicating the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) in its pathogenesis. This study sought to elucidate the involvement of the AhR and its associated pathway in pre-eclampsia by comparing placental components of the AhR pathway in pregnant individuals with and without pre-eclampsia. This case–control investigation was conducted at the University Hospital of Udine from May 2021 to February 2023. The AhR was assessed using immunohistochemistry and immunofluorescence, and its mRNA was evaluated using a Real-Time Quantitative Reverse Transcription PCR. Levels of mRNA expression were also estimated for other components of the AhR pathway (CYP1B1, IDO1, ARNT, TIPARP, S100A4, and AHRR). Our findings show decreased levels of expression of AhR, IDO1, ARNT, TiPARP, and S100A4 in the placental tissues of individuals with pre-eclampsia compared to controls (p < 0.05). The AhR exhibited a distinct localization within the syncytiotrophoblast (nuclei and cytoplasm) and CD45-positive cells (nuclei and cytoplasm). Furthermore, a significant positive correlation between the AhR and S100A4 (rho = 0.81) was observed in normal placentas, while CYP1B1 displayed a significant negative correlation with the AhR (rho = −0.72), within addition to its negative correlation with TiPARP (rho = −0.83). This study illuminates pre-eclampsia’s molecular aberrations, suggesting new diagnostic, therapeutic, and mechanistic approaches. This study emphasizes the need for more research to validate and broaden these findings to improve the management of this complex pregnancy condition.

The history of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) started in the 1960s, with very high popularity in the 1990s. The first clinical trials on HRT and chronic postmenopausal conditions were started in the USA in the late 1990s. After the announcement of the first results of the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) in 2002, which showed that HRT had more detrimental than beneficial effects, HRT use dropped. The negative results of the study received wide publicity, creating panic among some users and new guidance for doctors on prescribing HRT. The clear message from the media was that HRT had more risks than benefits for all women. In the following years, a reanalysis of the WHI trial was performed, and new studies showed that the use of HRT in younger women or in early postmenopausal women had a beneficial effect on the cardiovascular system, reducing coronary disease and all-cause mortality. Notwithstanding this, the public opinion on HRT has not changed yet, leading to important negative consequences for women’s health and quality of life.