Fracture Risk After Bilateral Oophorectomy in Elderly Women

Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic - Rochester, Рочестер, Minnesota, United States
Journal of bone and mineral research: the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (Impact Factor: 6.59). 04/2003; 18(5):900 - 905. DOI: 10.1359/jbmr.2003.18.5.900

ABSTRACT Elderly women with the lowest serum estrogen levels are at the greatest risk of bone loss and fractures, but it is controversial whether the ovaries contribute to estrogen production after menopause, and therefore, whether bilateral oophorectomy in postmenopausal women might have adverse skeletal effects. To address this potential problem, we estimated long-term fracture risk among 340 postmenopausal Olmsted County, MN, women who underwent bilateral oophorectomy for a benign ovarian condition in 1950-1987. In over 5632 person-years of follow-up (median, 16 years per subject), 194 women experienced 516 fractures (72% from moderate trauma). Compared with expected rates, there was a significant increase in the risk of any osteoporotic fracture (moderate trauma fractures of the hip, spine, or distal forearm; standardized incidence ratio [SIR], 1.54; 95% CI, 1.29-1.82) but almost as large an increase in fractures at other sites (SIR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.13-1.59). In multivariate analyses, the independent predictors of overall fracture risk were age, anticonvulsant or anticoagulant use for ≥6 months, and a history of alcoholism or prior osteoporotic fracture; obesity was protective. Estrogen replacement therapy was associated with a 10% reduction in overall fracture risk (hazard ratio [HR], 0.90; 95% CI, 0.64-1.28) and a 20% reduction in osteoporotic fractures (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.52-1.23), but neither was statistically significant. The increase in fracture risk among women who underwent bilateral oophorectomy after natural menopause is consistent with the hypothesis that androgens produced by the postmenopausal ovary are important for endogenous estrogen production that protects against fractures.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Removal of the ovaries is common during surgery for endometrial cancer. However, because loss of the ovaries can cause several health problems in patients, strategies for the prevention of such problems need to be established. Hence, we decided to conduct a multicenter randomized clinical trial to assess the effect of raloxifene on bone mineral density (BMD), bone metabolism, and the lipid profile of patients who had undergone surgery for patients with endometrial cancer. Patients with endometrial cancer were enrolled after treatment. The participants were randomized into 2 groups: group 1 included 39 women who received alfacalcidol (1 μg/d) alone and group 2 included 37 women who received alfacalcidol and the test drug, raloxifene hydrochloride, at a dose of 60 mg/d. The BMD of lumbar spine and femoral neck, serum bone markers, as well as lipid profile parameters were evaluated at enrollment as well as 6, 12, and 24 months after the enrollment. The primary efficacy end point was the percentage change from baseline to 24 months in lumbar spine (L2-L4) and femoral neck BMD. Sixty-four women completed the 24-month study. At 24 months, the lumbar and femoral neck BMDs were significantly increased in group 2 compared with group 1 (3.5% vs -0.8% and 2.3% vs -2.8%, respectively). In group 2, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol levels were significantly reduced by 13.6% and serum N-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen as well as bone-specific alkaline phosphatase values were significantly reduced by 16.7% and 25.7%, respectively. The patients who received adjuvant therapy for endometrial cancer showed a significantly higher response to raloxifene (5.8% vs 1.9%). Recurrence was detected in 2 (2.6%) patients in group 1. No severe adverse events were noted in any patient during the study period. Raloxifene exerts positive effects on BMD, bone metabolism, and lipid profile parameters and could provide an improved therapeutic option for patients with endometrial cancer.
    International Journal of Gynecological Cancer 01/2015; DOI:10.1097/IGC.0000000000000333 · 1.95 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Identifying and managing osteoporosis among cancer survivors is an important issue, yet little is known about the bone health of cancer survivors in Korea. This study was designed to measure the prevalence of osteoporosis and to assess related factors among Korean cancer survivors. Materials and Methods: This study was designed as a cross-sectional analysis. Data were obtained from dual energy X-ray absorptiometry measurement of the lumbar vertebrae and femoral neck, and from standardized questionnaires among 556 cancer survivors and 17,623 non-cancer controls who participated in the Fourth and Fifth Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (2008-2011). We calculated adjusted proportions of osteoporosis in non-cancer controls vs. cancer survivors, and we performed multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results: The prevalence of osteoporosis among cancer survivors was significant higher than that of the non-cancer controls after adjusting for related factors. Furthermore, osteoporosis among cancer survivors was higher in elderly subjects (60-69 years : adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.04, 95% CI : 1.16-8.00, ≥70 years : aOR 6.60, 95% CI 2.20-19.79), in female cancer survivors (aOR: 7.03, 95% CI: 1.88-26.28), and in a group with lower monthly income (aOR: 3.38, 95% CI: 1.31-8.71). In male cancer survivors, underweight and lower calcium intake were risk factors. Conclusions: These data suggest that the osteoporosis among cancer survivors varies according to non-oncologic and oncologic factors. Effective screening should be applied, and a sufficient and comprehensive management should be matched to individual cancer survivors early after cancer treatment.
    Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention: APJCP 08/2013; 14(8):4743-4750. DOI:10.7314/APJCP.2013.14.8.4743 · 1.50 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is a widespread tendency to perform oophorectomy at the same time as hysterectomy, based on the view that prophylactic oophorectomy is the best strategy to reduce the rate of ovarian cancer, as well as to confer protection against breast cancer and decrease the subsequent risk of ovarian surgery. However, ovarian cancer is an uncommon malignant disease. In contrast, the beneficial effects of conserving the ovaries are well known and include a reduction of the risks of cardiovascular disease, osteoporotic fracture, dementia, Parkinson's disease, and sexual dysfunction, as well as a decrease in the incidence of menopausal symptoms and mortality. Consequently, ovarian conservation until the age of 65 years is associated with higher survival rates.The present article analyzes the pros and cons of both approaches and concludes that the only indications for performing simultaneous oophorectomy at hysterectomy in benign processes would be the presence of BRCA1 and 2 mutations or severe endometriosis and, finally, patient choice.
    Clínica e Investigación en Ginecología y Obstetricia 05/2009; 36(3). DOI:10.1016/j.gine.2009.01.001