We found high quality evidence that hormone therapy in both primary and secondary prevention conferred no protective effects for all-cause mortality , cardiovascular death , non-fatal myocardial infa rct ion , angina , or revascularisation .
There was no strong evidence of effect on risk of stroke in this group .
Our review findings provide strong evidence that treatment with hormone therapy in post-menopausal women overall , for either primary or secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease events has little if any benefit and causes an increase in the risk of stroke and venous thromboembolic events
BACKGROUND Evidence from systematic review s of observational studies suggests that hormone therapy may have beneficial effects in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular disease events in post-menopausal women , however the results of r and omised controlled trials ( RCTs ) have had mixed results .
This is an up date d version of a Cochrane review published in 2013 .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of hormone therapy for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in post-menopausal women , and whether there are differential effects between use in primary or secondary prevention .
Secondary aims were to undertake exploratory analyses to ( i ) assess the impact of time since menopause that treatment was commenced ( ≥ 10 years versus < 10 years ) , and where these data were not available , use age of trial participants at baseline as a proxy ( ≥ 60 years of age versus < 60 years of age ) ; and ( ii ) assess the effects of length of time on treatment .
Implementation of the Women's Health Initiative study design.
The Women ’s Health Initiative ( WHI ) Clinical Trial ( CT ) includes three overlapping components , each a r and omized controlled comparison among women who were postmenopausal and 50 to 79 years of age at r and omization . The dietary modification ( DM ) component r and omly assigned 48,836 ( target 48,000 ) eligible women to either a sustained low-fat eating pattern  ( 40 % ) or  self-selected dietary behavior  ( 60 % ) , with breast cancer and colorectal cancer as design ated primary outcomes and coronary heart disease as a secondary outcome . The nutrition goals for women assigned to the DM intervention group have been to reduce total dietary fat to 20 % , and saturated fat to less than 7 % of daily calories and , secondarily , to increase daily servings of vegetables and fruits to at least five and of grain products to at least six and to maintain these changes throughout trial follow-up . The r and omization of 40 % , rather than 50 % , of participating women to the DM intervention group was intended to reduce trial costs , while testing trial hypotheses with specified power . The postmenopausal hormone therapy ( PHT ) component comprises two r and omized , double-blind trials among 27,347 ( target 27,500 ) women , with coronary heart
We found high quality evidence that hormone therapy in both primary and secondary prevention conferred no protective effects for all-cause mortality , cardiovascular death , non-fatal myocardial infa rct ion , angina , or revascularisation .
There was no strong evidence of effect on risk of stroke in this group .
Our review findings provide strong evidence that treatment with hormone therapy in post-menopausal women overall , for either primary or secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease events has little if any benefit and causes an increase in the risk of stroke and venous thromboembolic events
BACKGROUND Evidence from systematic review s of observational studies suggests that hormone therapy may have beneficial effects in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular disease events in post-menopausal women , however the results of r and omised controlled trials ( RCTs ) have had mixed results .
This is an up date d version of a Cochrane review published in 2013 .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of hormone therapy for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in post-menopausal women , and whether there are differential effects between use in primary or secondary prevention .
Secondary aims were to undertake exploratory analyses to ( i ) assess the impact of time since menopause that treatment was commenced ( ≥ 10 years versus < 10 years ) , and where these data were not available , use age of trial participants at baseline as a proxy ( ≥ 60 years of age versus < 60 years of age ) ; and ( ii ) assess the effects of length of time on treatment .