1. < Osteoporosis & Bone Health
Profile picture for debbie1956

FDA HRT News

Posted by debbie1956 @debbie1956, 19 hours ago

I thought some members might appreciate reading this Medscape article I just received regarding FDA proposal to remove black box warning on Menopause HRT: https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/fda-panel-urges-review-boxed-warning-menopause-therapy-2025a1000swh?ecd=WNL_trdalrt_pos1_ous_251027_etid7828112&uac=360685MZ&impID=7

Interested in more discussions like this? Go to the Osteoporosis & Bone Health Support Group.

Profile picture for Maryann
Maryann | @mkoch | 12 hours ago

This is a great article. For years I wore a .025 estrogen transdermal patch. Then, after being diagnosed with Stage 1 breast cancer the oncologist said "no estrogen." Not even just vaginal estrogen. Life was pretty miserable as my husband and I were still sexually active. After 6 months I went to see a new gynecologist (as my former one had retired) and explained the problem/situation. The gynecologist said, "They just don't understand." As the article states, she explained to me that absorption from vaginal estrogen is negligible. She accessed the computer in the exam room and immediately sent a letter to my oncologist explaining why she was prescribing vaginal estrogen for me. Three months later the gyn. ordered blood work and the results showed no detectable trace of estrogen in my blood stream. But being allowed to take advantage of that tube of estrogen made a world of difference.

REPLY
2 replies
Profile picture for mayblin
mayblin | @mayblin | 11 hours ago

Thank you, debbie1956, for sharing this article. From my reading, the main point is that the FDA panel is proposing removing the boxed warning for vaginal (local) estrogen, while the warning for systemic HRT is expected to remain, although risks like breast cancer and cardiovascular disease are more nuanced than older warnings suggested.

REPLY
Profile picture for gravity3
gravity3 | @gravity3 | 10 hours ago

Thank you for posting this. All I can say is.....it is about time!!!!!

REPLY
1 reply
Profile picture for nycmusic
nycmusic | @nycmusic | 9 hours ago
In reply to @mkoch "This is a great article. For years I wore a .025 estrogen transdermal patch. Then, after..." + (show)
Profile picture for Maryann @mkoch

This is a great article. For years I wore a .025 estrogen transdermal patch. Then, after being diagnosed with Stage 1 breast cancer the oncologist said "no estrogen." Not even just vaginal estrogen. Life was pretty miserable as my husband and I were still sexually active. After 6 months I went to see a new gynecologist (as my former one had retired) and explained the problem/situation. The gynecologist said, "They just don't understand." As the article states, she explained to me that absorption from vaginal estrogen is negligible. She accessed the computer in the exam room and immediately sent a letter to my oncologist explaining why she was prescribing vaginal estrogen for me. Three months later the gyn. ordered blood work and the results showed no detectable trace of estrogen in my blood stream. But being allowed to take advantage of that tube of estrogen made a world of difference.

Jump to this post

@mkoch thanks, me too ! It helped a lot !

REPLY
Profile picture for debbie1956
debbie1956 | @debbie1956 | 5 hours ago
In reply to @mkoch "This is a great article. For years I wore a .025 estrogen transdermal patch. Then, after..." + (show)
Profile picture for Maryann @mkoch

This is a great article. For years I wore a .025 estrogen transdermal patch. Then, after being diagnosed with Stage 1 breast cancer the oncologist said "no estrogen." Not even just vaginal estrogen. Life was pretty miserable as my husband and I were still sexually active. After 6 months I went to see a new gynecologist (as my former one had retired) and explained the problem/situation. The gynecologist said, "They just don't understand." As the article states, she explained to me that absorption from vaginal estrogen is negligible. She accessed the computer in the exam room and immediately sent a letter to my oncologist explaining why she was prescribing vaginal estrogen for me. Three months later the gyn. ordered blood work and the results showed no detectable trace of estrogen in my blood stream. But being allowed to take advantage of that tube of estrogen made a world of difference.

Jump to this post

@mkoch Thank you for sharing your experience with your gynecologist. It is so helpful to be aware of different medical opinions. This is one of the greatest benefits of the Mayo Clinic Connect group.

REPLY
Profile picture for debbie1956
debbie1956 | @debbie1956 | 5 hours ago
In reply to @gravity3 "Thank you for posting this. All I can say is.....it is about time!!!!!" + (show)
Profile picture for gravity3 @gravity3

Thank you for posting this. All I can say is.....it is about time!!!!!

Jump to this post

@gravity3 Yes how I wish these decisions had been made 15 years ago to reduce my severe menopause symptoms and provide bone loss protection.

REPLY
Profile picture for janieben
janieben | @janieben | 2 hours ago

Does anyone have a list of recent studies that actually prove women over 65 or 70 should not START bioidentical hormones due to increased risk of heart disease, stroke, dementia, etc.? I keep reading that some doctors are ok with prescribing for a 74 year old like me, and some doctors are totally against it. I would really like to see the evidence!

REPLY
Please sign in or register to post a reply.