Hormone replacement therapy use and plasma levels of sex hormones in the Norwegian Women and Cancer Postgenome Cohort – a cross-sectional analysis
2008

Hormone Replacement Therapy and Hormone Levels in Norwegian Women

Sample size: 425 publication 10 minutes Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Waaseth Marit, Bakken Kjersti, Dumeaux Vanessa, Olsen Karina S, Rylander Charlotta, Figenschau Yngve, Lund Eiliv

Primary Institution: Institute of Community Medicine, University of Tromsø, Norway

Hypothesis

What are the plasma hormone levels in women using hormone replacement therapy (HRT) compared to those not using it, and how do these levels relate to body mass index (BMI) and menopausal status?

Conclusion

Users of systemic E2-containing HRT have hormone levels similar to premenopausal women, while BMI affects hormone levels among non-users.

Supporting Evidence

  • 20% of postmenopausal women were HRT users.
  • Plasma levels of estradiol increased with higher E2 doses.
  • Systemic E2-containing HRT suppressed FSH levels.
  • BMI did not differ between HRT users and non-users.
  • Increased BMI was linked to higher E2 and lower FSH and SHBG levels among non-users.
  • The questionnaires used showed high sensitivity and specificity for menopausal status.

Takeaway

This study looked at how hormone replacement therapy affects hormone levels in women. It found that women using certain types of therapy have hormone levels like younger women.

Methodology

A cross-sectional study measuring plasma hormone levels in 425 women aged 48-62 who completed questionnaires and provided blood samples.

Potential Biases

Potential bias due to self-reported data on HRT use and menopausal status.

Limitations

The study's cross-sectional design limits causal inferences, and small sample sizes may affect the robustness of some findings.

Participant Demographics

Women aged 48-62, with a mix of postmenopausal and pre/perimenopausal participants.

Statistical Information

P-Value

p<0.01

Confidence Interval

95% CI 89–96% for sensitivity; 95% CI 64–82% for specificity

Statistical Significance

p<0.01

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1186/1472-6874-8-1

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication