1 Zübeyde Hn. Womens Hospital, Ankara, 2 Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Gazi University, Ankara and 3 Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Ankara Research and Training Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
4 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: Hosdere cad. Örgü sok. As apt. 2/15, Ayranci, Ankara, Turkey. e-mail: Narter{at}turk.net
![]() |
Abstract |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Key words: menopause/pulsed estrogen therapy/surgically induced menopause
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
There is a substantial need for a new well-tolerated route of estrogen replacement that bypasses the liver, but that is efficient enough to relieve the vasomotor symptoms of menopause. In particular, the severe vasomotor symptoms secondary to surgical menopause in relatively early years of life constitute a serious health problem. Pulsed estrogen therapy represents a new approach for the treatment of menopausal symptoms. In this therapy an aqueous solution of the natural 17-estradiol (E2) is used and it is delivered by a pump intranasally. After nasal administration, plasma E2 levels rise rapidly and fall to 10% of their peak level within 2 h (Devissaguet et al., 1999
), unlike both oral and transdermal administration, which produce prolonged or plateau estrogen levels (Scott et al., 1991
). The efficacy of pulsed estrogen therapy in reducing postmenopausal symptoms has been demonstrated in a prospective randomized placebo-controlled study (Studd et al., 1999
) and 300 µg/day was identified as an appropriate initial dose. However, the efficacy of pulsed estrogen therapy has not been evaluated in the treatment of the severe vasomotor symptoms of relatively young patients who have undergone total hysterectomy and bilateral oophorectomy.
We carried out a prospective open-labelled multicentre study to evaluate the efficacy of pulsed estrogen therapy in patients <45 years old with surgically induced menopause.
![]() |
Materials and methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Study design
The Kupperman Index (KI) was 30.3 ± 2.2 in the patients at the beginning of the study (Table I). The patients had no contraindications for estrogen replacement therapy. Smokers were not included in this study. The mean body mass index (BMI) of the patients was 25.5 ± 4.3 (mean ± SD). All the patients were of low socio-economic status. The expense of both therapies was covered by the national health insurance, since this study was not financially supported by any commercial body. Pulsed estrogen therapy (Aerodiol®, nasal spray; Les Laboratories Servier, France) became available in April 2002 in Turkey and the study was started the following month. Since it was shown to be safe, well accepted and effective in doses ranging from 100 to 600 µg/day, and while 900 µg/day produced excessive estrogenization (Pelissier et al., 2001), an initial dose of 300 µg/day was administered in accordance with the results presented by Studd et al. (1999
). The dose was raised to a maximum of 600 µg/day, if menopausal symptoms persisted at each follow-up, if necessary. In all patients, the dose was increased to 450 and 600 µg after 4 and 8 weeks, respectively. The doses of 450 and 600 µg were prescribed as two puffs in the morning/one puff in the evening and as two puffs in the morning/two puffs in the evening, respectively. After using pulsed estrogen therapy for 12 weeks, patients were invited back for the third time and the KI was re-calculated, and they were asked the following questions: Do you find the medication you have just used effective in terms of relieving your hot flushes? Do you want to continue using this method of hormone replacement or would you prefer to try another method? The responses of the patients to the first question were recorded as 13 (completely = 1, moderately = 2, ineffective = 3). The patients who preferred another method at the end of the first 12 weeks were prescribed oral conjugated estrogen (Premarin® tablet, 0.625 mg, 1 tablet/day; Wyeth, Istanbul, Turkey) (Figure 1). The patients were re-evaluated clinically at the out-patient departments every 4 weeks. At the end of the second 12 weeks, they were invited back for the last time. They were asked the same questions again as those asked after they had been using pulsed estrogen therapy for 12 weeks.
|
|
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
The number of hot flushes was 11.96 ± 1.01 at the beginning of the study (week 0, n = 138) and 6.83 ± 0.67 and 2.99 ± 0.67 after 12 and 24 weeks, respectively (n = 138; P < 0.0001, week 0 versus 12, 0 versus 24 and 12 versus 24). In the completely satisfied patients, the number of hot flushes was 12.04 ± 1.09, 3.96 ± 0.66 and 3.00 ± 0.69 at weeks 0, 12 and 24, respectively (P < 0.0001, week 0 versus 12, 0 versus 24 and 12 versus 24). In the patients who were moderately satisfied at the end of week 12 (n = 47) the number of hot flushes was 11.94 ± 0.99, 7.40 ± 0.47 and 3.00 ± 0.69 at weeks 0, 12 and 24, respectively (P < 0.0001, week 0 versus 12, 0 versus 24 and 12 versus 24) and 12.00 ± 1.06, 7.57 ± 0.45 and 3.03 ± 0.68 in the unsatisfied patients (n = 65) at weeks 0, 12 and 24, respectively (P < 0.0001, week 0 versus 12, 0 versus 24 and 12 versus 24) (Table I and Figure 2).
|
|
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
The initial dose of pulsed estrogen therapy was 300 µg/day in our study as it was identified as an appropriate initial dose by Studd et al. (1999). The maximum dose was 600 µg/day, since Pelissier et al. (2001
) concluded that pulsed estrogen was safe, well accepted and effective in doses ranging from 100 to 600 µg/day in their dose-finding study. In the same study (Pelissier et al., 2001
), estrogenization was excessive for a daily dose of 900 µg/day. In addition to excessive estrogenization, another problem related to the use of 900 µg/day of pulsed estrogen is the expense of such a high dose; it is 56 times the cost of oral HRT in Turkey.
The patients were evaluated by the investigators taking into account the severity of vasomotor symptoms. The subjective measurements of hot flushes might be considered a limitation of this study, but it is widely known by clinicians that the evaluation of various symptoms is more useful than E2 plasma levels when adjusting the dose of estrogen replacement therapy in daily practice. The dose of pulsed estrogen was increased according to the clinical findings in our study. The final decision about the efficacy of estrogen replacement therapy was made at the end of 12 weeks, which was considered a sufficient evaluation period (Pelissier et al., 2001). The difference between our findings in hysterectomized women and those reported by Pelissier et al. in women also receiving a progestin for 1014 days of the month may stem from addition of a progestin. Moreover, the homogeneous and highly symptomatic patient population included in our study might play a role in this difference. Our data are in accordance with those reported by Steingold et al. (1985
) concerning highly symptomatic women. They carried out a doseresponse study of the effects of transdermal E2 on the frequency of hot flushes in highly symptomatic menopausal women and reported that the standard dose of transdermal E2 (0.050 mg/day) reduced the frequency of hot flushes by 50%, but the complete elimination of hot flushes required a dose of E2 which was 4 times higher (0.200 mg/day).
In our study, 112 of 138 patients (81.2%) using 600 µg/day of pulsed estrogen therapy were dissatisfied and they wanted to change the medication at the end of the first 12 weeks. The patients who preferred another method at the end of the first 12 weeks were prescribed oral conjugated estrogen since it is the most widely prescribed estrogen replacement therapy medication in Turkey. It is easily available and much cheaper than transdermal estrogen replacement patches. Moreover, the major problem related to the use of transdermal patches in Turkey is adhesion, particularly during hot summer months (unpublished data). The administration of E2 as a cutaneous gel represents an option comparable to the patch in estrogen replacement therapy (Hirvonen et al., 1997). However, transdermal estrogen gel was not an option since it only became available in Turkey after the beginning of this trial.
In another group of Turkish women, Ozsoy et al. (2002) showed pulsed estrogen therapy to be safe, easy to use and highly efficient in alleviating postmenopausal symptoms at a dose of 300 µg/day. However, their data was from a patient population which was not as homogeneous or highly symptomatic as the population included in our study (e.g. numbers of moderate to severe hot flushes per day at the beginning of the study in the two groups were 7.0 ± 4.9 and 7.1 ± 4.0).
Mastalgia was reported less frequently in the pulsed estrogen therapy group (n = 138) than in the oral estrogen replacement therapy group (n = 112) (3.6 versus 6.3%, P > 0.05). In the pulsed estrogen therapy group, mastalgia was reported only by the patients using 600 µg of pulsed E2 daily. The incidence of moderate or severe mastalgia was reported as 7.2% by Lopes et al. (2001) in patients using pulsed estrogen therapy. In the same study, one woman out of 176 patients discontinued treatment prematurely as a result of mastalgia (Lopes et al., 2001
). In our study, no women dropped out because of mastalgia.
In conclusion, pulsed estrogen therapy administered for 12 weeks significantly reduced the frequency of hot flushes in patients <45 years old with surgically induced menopause and suffering from severe vasomotor symptoms. However, 81.2% of patients were not completely satisfied at the end of this period. Further studies are needed to compare the efficacy of pulsed estrogen therapy and other estrogen replacement therapies in highly symptomatic women with surgically induced menopause.
![]() |
Acknowledgements |
---|
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
De Lignieres B, Basdevant A, Thomas G, Thalabard JC, Mercier-Bodard C, Conard J, Guyene TT, Mairon N, Corvol P, Guy-Grand B, et al. (1986) Biological effects of estradiol-17 in postmenopausal women: oral versus percutaneous administration. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 62,536541.[Abstract]
Devissaguet JP, Brion N, Lhote O and Deloffre P (1999) Pulsed estrogen therapy: pharmacokinetics of intranasal 17estradiol (S 21400) in postmenopausal women and comparison with oral and transdermal formulations. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmokinet 24,265271.
Frenkel Y, Kopernik G, Lazer S, Tugendreich D, Zmira N, Oettinger M, Tendler R and Serr DM (1994) Acceptability and skin reactions to transdermal estrogen replacement therapy in relation to climate. Maturitas 20,3136.[ISI][Medline]
Greendale GA, Lee NP and Arriola ER (1999) The menopause. Lancet 353,571580.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Hirvonen E, Cacciatore B, Wahlstrom T, Rita H and Wilen-Rosenqvist G (1997) Effects of transdermal estrogen therapy in postmenopausal women: a comparative study of an oestradiol gel and an oestradiol delivering patch. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 104 (Suppl.),2631.[ISI][Medline]
Lopes P, Merkus HMWM, Nauman J, Bruschi F, Foidart JM and Calaf J (2000) Randomized comparison of intranasal and transdermal estradiol. Obstet Gynecol 96,906912.
Lopes P, Rosenberg S, de Graaf J, Fernandez-Villoria E and Marianowski L (2001) Aerodiol® versus the transdermal route: perspectives for patient preference. Maturitas 38 (Suppl.),S31S49.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
OConnell MB (1995) Pharmacokinetic and pharmacologic variation between different estrogen products. J Clin Pharmacol 35 (Suppl.),S18S24.
Ozsoy M, Oral B and Ozsoy D (2002) Clinical equivalence of intranasal estradiol and oral estrogens for postmenopausal symptoms. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 79,143146.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Pelissier C, de Kervasdoue A, Chuong VT, Maugis EL, de Mouillac FV, Breil MH, Moniot G, Zeitoun-Lepvrier G, Robin M, Rime B, et al. (2001) Clinical evaluation, dose-finding and acceptability of Aerodiol®, the pulsed estrogen therapy for treatment of climacteric symptoms. Maturitas 37, 181189.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Scott RT, Ross B, Anderson C and Archer DF (1991) Pharmacokinetics of percutaneous estradiol: a crossover study using a gel and a transdermal system in comparison with oral micronized estradiol. Obstet Gynecol 77,758764.[Abstract]
Stanczyk FZ, Shoupe D, Nunez V, Macias-Gonzales P, Vijod MA and Lobo RA (1988) A randomized comparison of nonoral estradiol delivery in postmenopausal women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 159,15401546.[ISI][Medline]
Steingold KA, Laufer L, Chetkowski RJ, DeFazio JD, Matt DW, Meldrum DR and Judd HL (1985) Treatment of hot flashes with transdermal estradiol administration. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 61,627632.[Abstract]
Studd J, Pornel B, Marton I, Bringer J, Varin C, Tsouderos Y and Christiansen C (1999) Doseresponse study of the efficacy and acceptability of intranasal 17-oestradiol for menopausal symptoms. Lancet 353,15741578.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
The Transdermal HRT Investigators Group (1993) A randomized study to compare the effectiveness, tolerability and acceptability of two different transdermal estradiol replacement therapies. Int J Fertil Menopausal Stud 38,511.[Medline]
Submitted on March 13, 2003; resubmitted on July 1, 2003; accepted on September 23, 2003.