Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Ronald T Burkman

Publications and source records attributed to Ronald T Burkman.

29 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed2002

Relation of regimens of combined hormone replacement therapy to lobular, ductal, and other histologic types of breast carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of invasive lobular carcinoma has been increasing among postmenopausal women in some parts of the United States. Part of this may be due to changes in classification over time. However, the use of combined (estrogen and progestin) hormone replacement therapy (CHRT) also has increased during the last decade and may account in part for the increase in invasive lobular breast carcinoma. METHODS: A large, multicenter case-control study of Caucasian and African-American women who were diagnosed at age < 65 years with their first invasive breast tumor from July 1, 1994 through April 30, 1998 was conducted. In-person interviews were conducted with 1749 postmenopausal patients, and their responses were compared with the responses of 1953 postmenopausal control women identified through random-digit dialing who met the study criteria of being postmenopausal at the time of diagnosis. Polytomous logistic regression was used to calculate the odds ratio (OR) as an estimate of the relative risk and to compute the 95% confidence interval (95%CI) associated with the use of various regimens of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) among women diagnosed with ductal breast carcinoma, lobular (or mixed lobular and ductal) breast carcinoma, and a grouping of other histologic types of breast carcinoma. RESULTS: Ever use of unopposed estrogen therapy (ERT) was not associated with an increase in the risk of any histologic type of breast carcinoma. The risk of invasive lobular breast carcinoma and the risk of breast carcinoma of the grouping of other histologies increased among women currently using CHRT (OR, 2.2; 95%CI, 1.4-3.3; and OR, 1.9; 95%CI, 1.0-3.4, respectively). The risk increase was greater for the mixed lobular-ductal type than for the pure lobular type of breast carcinoma, although the difference was not statistically significant. There was some indication that >or= 5 years of continuous CHRT (>or= 25 days per month of progestin) was associated with a higher risk of lobular breast carcinoma (OR, 2.5; 95%CI, 1.4-4.3) compared with sequential CHRT (< 25 days per month of progestin; OR, 1.5; 95%CI, 0.8-2.6). Current use of continuous CHRT was only moderately associated with risk of ductal breast carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: Postmenopausal women who take CHRT appear to be at an increased risk of lobular breast carcinoma. Data from this study suggest that neither ERT use nor CHRT substantially increase the risk of ductal breast carcinoma among women age < 65 years.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Oral contraceptives and the risk of breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether the use of an oral contraceptive increases the risk of breast cancer later in life, when the incidence of breast cancer is increased. We conducted a population-based, case-control study to determine the risk of breast cancer among former and current users of oral contraceptives. METHODS: We interviewed women who were 35 to 64 years old. A total of 4575 women with breast cancer and 4682 controls were interviewed. Conditional logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios as estimates of the relative risk (incidence-density ratios) of breast cancer. RESULTS: The relative risk was 1.0 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.8 to 1.3) for women who were currently using oral contraceptives and 0.9 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.8 to 1.0) for those who had previously used them. The relative risk did not increase consistently with longer periods of use or with higher doses of estrogen. The results were similar among white and black women. Use of oral contraceptives by women with a family history of breast cancer was not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer, nor was the initiation of oral-contraceptive use at a young age. CONCLUSIONS: Among women from 35 to 64 years of age, current or former oral-contraceptive use was not associated with a significantly increased risk of breast cancer.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Hormone replacement therapy regimens and breast cancer risk(1).

Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) has increased in the United States over the past 2 decades in response to reports of long-term health benefits. A relationship between HRT and breast cancer risk has been observed in a number of epidemiological studies. In 2002, the Women's Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Trial reported an association between continuous combined HRT and breast cancer risk. The objective of this study was to examine the association between breast cancer risk and HRT according to regimen and duration and recency of use.A multicenter, population-based, case-control study was conducted in five United States metropolitan areas from 1994 to 1998. Analyzed were data from 3823 postmenopausal white and black women (1870 cases and 1953 controls) aged 35-64 years. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated as estimates of breast cancer risk using standard, unconditional, multivariable logistic regression analysis. Potential confounders were included in the final model if they altered ORs by 10% or more. Two-sided P values for trend were computed from the likelihood ratio statistic. Continuous combined HRT was associated with increased breast cancer risk among current users of 5 or more years (1.54; 95% confidence interval 1.10, 2.17). Additionally, a statistically significant trend indicating increasing breast cancer risk with longer duration of continuous combined HRT was observed among current users (P =.01). There were no positive associations between breast cancer risk and other HRT regimens. Our data suggest a positive association between continuous combined HRT and breast cancer risk among current, longer term users. Progestin administered in an uninterrupted regimen may be a contributing factor. Risk dissipates once use is discontinued.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Reproductive hormones and cardiovascular disease mechanism of action and clinical implications.

The bulk of the experimental data suggest beneficial effects of estrogen (both premenopausal use of OCs and postmenopausal use of ERT-HRT). An intriguing finding from the monkey studies is that social subordination, which induces estrogen deficiency in female monkeys, accelerates atherosclerosis premenopausally and predicts extent of postmenopausal atherosclerosis. This effect can be inhibited by exogenous estrogen, premenopausally. The results suggest that more effort on detecting and regulating premenopausal ovarian dysfunction may be justified. A complication in understanding estrogen action may be the result of varying extents of arterial damage. For example, primary prevention studies in both postmenopausal animals and women have provided strong evidence of atheroprotection with a variety of estrogens. In contrast, the results of secondary prevention studies [10,12] have in general suggested little cardioprotection with either ERT or HRT. Studies in rabbits suggest the antiatherogenic effect of estrogen may not be present when the endothelium is damaged [64]. The state of the endothelium may be critical for some estrogen actions. For those effects of estrogen that require the ER, be it ERalpha or ERbeta, the presence of the receptor may vary with age, disease state, or type of hormone therapy. If continuous combined HRT therapy decreases ER in the artery as it does in the uterus, this may eliminate those estrogen actions requiring the ER, but not others. Older women who have not been exposed to estrogens for many years may be more sensitive to some estrogen effects, and may need lower doses of ERT-HRT. Recent reports suggest that lower doses of estrogens maintain beneficial effects on lipoproteins and coagulation factors [95], while also requiring lower doses of progestogens to protect the uterus [96]. These beneficial findings are very promising in light of the improvements in CHD risk and decreased stroke risk reported with low-dose estrogens [5]. It ill be interesting to see if CRP is increased with lower doses of estrogens and whether these changes are associated with increased early risk of CHD. Perhaps older women with CHD are also more obese, may have diabetes, and may be more susceptible to inflammatory and thrombotic effects of higher doses of estrogens. There are many questions left unanswered. It is hoped that some of the answers may come from the WHI, which is a large prospective trial assessing ERT and HRT. The age range is also relatively large and may be able to determine if older women respond differently than younger women. Some initial data from the WHI have been made available suggesting a small increased risk in the first 2 years and a trend for decreasing risk in the last months of the first 2 years [34]. Just recently, the CEE + MPA arm of the study was stopped early by the data and-safety monitoring board as the overall health risks exceeded benefits with increases in both breast cancer and CVD [97]. The remainder of the study groups including an estrogen-only arm, are expected to continue until 2005.

Cardiovascular Diseases↗
PubMed2002

Reproductive hormones and cancer: ovarian and colon cancer.

Evidence continues to accumulate that oral contraceptive use provides substantial protection against ovarian cancer. Less clear is whether the benefit affects women with genetic predisposition or women in the perimenopausal age range. The role of hormone replacement therapy in the occurrence of ovarian cancer is unclear. Available evidence suggests that if there is any potential risk, it involves women who use estrogen alone. Few women if any entering the menopause are at risk. There is some evidence that oral contraceptives have a favorable impact on the risk of colorectal cancer. Available data are limited. Finally, there is growing evidence that hormone replacement therapy reduces risk of colorectal cancer, a benefit that accrues to perimenopausal women.

Colonic Neoplasms↗
PubMed2002

The NICHD Women's Contraceptive and Reproductive Experiences Study: methods and operational results.

PURPOSE: This paper presents methods and operational results of a population-based case-control study examining the effects of oral contraceptive use on breast cancer risk among white and black women aged 35-64 years in five U.S. locations. METHODS: Cases were women newly diagnosed with breast cancer during July 1994 through April 1998. Controls were identified through random digit dialing (RDD) using unclustered sampling with automated elimination of nonworking numbers. Sampling was density-based, with oversampling of black women. In-person interviews were conducted from August 1994 through December 1998. Blood samples were obtained from subsets of cases and controls, and tissue samples were obtained from subsets of cases. A computerized system tracked subjects through study activities. Special attention was devoted to minimizing exposure misclassification, because any exposure-disease associations were expected to be small. RESULTS: An estimated 82% of households were screened successfully through RDD. Interviews were completed for 4575 cases (2953 whites; 1622 blacks) and 4682 controls (3021 whites; 1661 blacks). Interview response rates for cases and controls were 76.5% and 78.6%, respectively, with lower rates for black women and older women. CONCLUSIONS: The methodologic details of this large collaboration may assist researchers conducting similar investigations.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Venous thromboembolism and oral contraceptives: current status and clinical implications.

Recent studies of currently available oral contraceptives indicate that the risk of major sequelae is low in young women (aged between 20 and 24 years). Venous thromboembolism remains one event that can occur in users independent of the presence of risk factors. However, the attributable risk is small, with a range of approximately 7 to 18 events per 100 000 women annually. This risk is directly proportional to estrogen dosage starting at levels of 30-35 microg. The type of progestogen (progestin) may also influence risk, though recent studies are controversial. In particular, there is debate surrounding whether desogestrel and gestodene carry a greater risk of thromboembolism than levonorgestrel. Modifiable risk factors for venous thromboembolism include hemostatic disorders, especially factor V Leiden, and possibly obesity. Cigarette smoking is not a significant risk factor in oral contraceptive users. With the exception of avoiding oral contraceptive use among women with a either a personal history of venous thromboembolism or a strong family history (until evaluated for hemostatic abnormalities), and perhaps limiting the use of desogestrel- or gestodene-containing oral contraceptives, there is little clinicians can do to reduce the risk of this disorder.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Do thyroid disorders increase the risk of breast cancer?

The objective of this study was to determine whether thyroid disorders or treatment of such disorders affects the risk of breast cancer. Subjects aged 35-64 years were participants in the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Women's Contraceptive and Reproductive Experiences Study, a population-based, case-control study of invasive breast cancer that was carried out at five sites in the United States. In-person interviews were completed for 4575 women (cases) with breast cancer (2953 white and 1622 black) and 4682 control women (3021 white and 1661 black). Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using multiple logistic regression methods. Models included adjustment for age (5-year age groups), race (white or black), and site. A history of any thyroid disorder (OR = 1.1, 95% CI = 0.9-1.2) was not associated with breast cancer risk. Only women with a history of thyroid cancer had an increased risk, but this was restricted to parous women (parous OR = 3.4, 95% CI = 1.5-8.1; nulliparous OR = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.04-5.1). Breast cancer risk was not associated with treatment for thyroid disorders. There was no statistical interaction between thyroid disorders, thyroid treatments, and race, menopausal status, or parity. We found no association between thyroid disorders or their associated treatments and the risk of breast cancer.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The transdermal contraceptive patch: a new approach to hormonal contraception.

The transdermal contraceptive patch delivers ethinyl estradiol and norelgestromin (17-deacetylnorgestimate) at a rate over seven days that results in efficacy paralleling that achieved with oral contraceptives. Due to the pharmacokinetics of the system, adequate steroid levels are maintained for two days beyond the recommended duration of use of an individual patch, with resulting maintenance of efficacy. With perfect use, the failure rate is 0.70 pregnancies per 100 woman-years and for typical use, the rate is 0.88 pregnancies per 100 woman-years. Body weight above 90 kilograms (198 pounds) is associated with lower efficacy. Cycle control is similar to that achieved by oral contraceptives. With the exception of a transient increase in breast tenderness, the side effect profile is similar to that noted by oral contraceptive users. A major advantage of this method compared to oral contraceptives is a nearly 90% perfect adherence to the dosing schedule across all age groups. Partial or total detachment of the patch occurs at an overall rate of 3.8%. This rate is not affected by warm humid climates, vigorous exercise, or exposure to saunas or water baths.

Adhesiveness↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Clinical pearls: factors affecting reported contraceptive efficacy rates in clinical studies.

Current combination oral contraceptives (OCs) are among the most popular, safe, and effective methods of reversible contraception. There are, however, many factors that can affect contraceptive failure rates as reported in clinical trials, including subject characteristics, factors related to study methodology and data analysis, and publication biases. The variability of these factors among clinical trials makes meaningful comparisons of contraceptive efficacy data across studies difficult, if not misleading or erroneous. It is even more difficult to reconcile the differences between clinical trial efficacy rates and everyday use rates; for instance, the National Survey of Family Growth reported that the rate of OC failure is close to 8% in the United States, which is higher than rates reported in clinical trials. Thus, it is important for the clinician to consider the many factors that can influence reporting of contraceptive failure rates in clinical trials and be aware of the limitations in differentiating OCs on the basis of contraceptive efficacy derived from clinical trial data. Furthermore, clinical trial data may not accurately predict contraceptive efficacy in everyday use.

Adult↗