Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32781573›Full record

ReviewCancers2020

Menopausal Hormone Therapy and Risk of Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Clemens B Tempfer, Ziad Hilal, Peter Kern, Ingolf Juhasz-Boess, Günther A Rezniczek

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Menopause in gynecologic cancer survivors: evidence for decision-making.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Risk assessment for endometrial cancer in women with abnormal vaginal bleeding: Results from the prospective IETA-1 cohort study.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2022
    Observational
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Clemens B TempferDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany and Comprehensive Cancer Center of the Ruhr-Universität Bochum (RUCCC), 44708 Bochum, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6904-3258
Ziad HilalDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany and Comprehensive Cancer Center of the Ruhr-Universität Bochum (RUCCC), 44708 Bochum, Germany.
Peter KernDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, St. Elisabeth-Krankenhaus Bochum, 44787 Bochum, Germany.
Ingolf Juhasz-BoessDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Freiburg, 79110 Freiburg, Germany.
Günther A RezniczekDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Germany and Comprehensive Cancer Center of the Ruhr-Universität Bochum (RUCCC), 44708 Bochum, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0852-6002
Ruhr University Bochum · DESt. Elisabeth-Hospital Bochum · DEUniversity of Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMenopausal hormone therapy (MHT) is an appropriate treatment for women with the climacteric syndrome. The estrogen component of MHT effectively alleviates climacteric symptoms but also stimulates the endometrium and thus may increase the risk of endometrial cancer (EC). MATERIALS AND

methodsWe performed a systematic literature search of the databases PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify controlled and uncontrolled clinical trials reporting on the prevalence and/or incidence of EC among women using MHT.

results31 publications reporting on 21,306 women with EC diagnosed during or after MHT were identified. A significantly reduced risk of EC among continuous-combined (cc)MHT users with synthetic progestins (SPs) was demonstrated in 10/19 studies with odds ratios (ORs)/hazard ratios (HRs) between 0.24 and 0.71. Only one study documented an increased risk of EC among long-term users (≥10 years), not confirmed in three other sub-group analyses of women with ≥6, ≥5, and >10 years of ccMHT use. A significantly increased risk of EC among users of sequential-combined (sc)MHT with SPs was demonstrated in 6/12 studies with ORs/HRs between 1.38 and 4.35. Number of days of progestin per month was a significant modulator of EC risk. A decreased risk of EC was seen in obese women. Two studies documented an increased risk of EC among users of cc/scMHT with micronized progesterone. A significantly increased risk of EC among estrogen-only MHT users was demonstrated in 9/12 studies with ORs/HRs between 1.45 and 4.46. The adverse effect of estrogen-only MHT was greatest among obese women.

conclusionccMHT with SPs reduces the risk of EC, whereas estrogen-only MHT increases the risk. scMHT with SPs and cc/scMHT with micronized progesterone increase the risk of EC depending on type of progestin, progestin dosage, and duration of MHT use.

Indexed as

endometrial cancerestradiolhormone-dependent cancerhormone replacementhormone therapyprogesteroneprogestins

Identifiers

PMID32781573
PMCPMC7465414
OpenAlexW3046970533

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.