Article

The Bioidentical Hormone Debate: Are Bioidentical Hormones (Estradiol, Estriol, and Progesterone) Safer or More Efficacious than Commonly Used Synthetic Versions in Hormone Replacement Therapy?

Holtorf Medical Group, Inc., Torrance, CA 90505, USA.
Postgraduate Medicine (Impact Factor: 1.54). 02/2009; 121(1):73-85. DOI: 10.3810/pgm.2009.01.1949
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The use of bioidentical hormones, including progesterone, estradiol, and estriol, in hormone replacement therapy (HRT) has sparked intense debate. Of special concern is their relative safety compared with traditional synthetic and animal-derived versions, such as conjugated equine estrogens (CEE), medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), and other synthetic progestins. Proponents for bioidentical hormones claim that they are safer than comparable synthetic and nonhuman versions of HRT. Yet according to the US Food and Drug Administration and The Endocrine Society, there is little or no evidence to support claims that bioidentical hormones are safer or more effective.
This paper aimed to evaluate the evidence comparing bioidentical hormones, including progesterone, estradiol, and estriol, with the commonly used nonbioidentical versions of HRT for clinical efficacy, physiologic actions on breast tissue, and risks for breast cancer and cardiovascular disease.
Published papers were identified from PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases, which included keywords associated with bioidentical hormones, synthetic hormones, and HRT. Papers that compared the effects of bioidentical and synthetic hormones, including clinical outcomes and in vitro results, were selected.
Patients report greater satisfaction with HRTs that contain progesterone compared with those that contain a synthetic progestin. Bioidentical hormones have some distinctly different, potentially opposite, physiological effects compared with their synthetic counterparts, which have different chemical structures. Both physiological and clinical data have indicated that progesterone is associated with a diminished risk for breast cancer, compared with the increased risk associated with synthetic progestins. Estriol has some unique physiological effects, which differentiate it from estradiol, estrone, and CEE. Estriol would be expected to carry less risk for breast cancer, although no randomized controlled trials have been documented. Synthetic progestins have a variety of negative cardiovascular effects, which may be avoided with progesterone.
Physiological data and clinical outcomes demonstrate that bioidentical hormones are associated with lower risks, including the risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular disease, and are more efficacious than their synthetic and animal-derived counterparts. Until evidence is found to the contrary, bioidentical hormones remain the preferred method of HRT. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to delineate these differences more clearly.

3 Followers
 · 
150 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The skin is the body's largest organ and it is able to self-repair throughout an individual's life. With advanced age, skin is prone to degenerate in response to damage. Although cosmetic surgery has been widely adopted to rejuvinate skin, we are far from a clear understanding of the mechanisms responsible for skin aging. Recently, adult skin-resident stem/progenitor cells, growth arrest, senescence or apoptotic death and dysfunction caused by alterations in key signaling genes, such as Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK, PI3K/Akt-kinases, Wnt, p21 and p53, have been shown to play a vital role in skin regeneration. Simultaneously, enhanced telomere attrition, hormone exhaustion, oxidative stress, genetic events and ultraviolet radiation exposure that result in severe DNA damage, genomic instability and epigenetic mutations also contribute to skin aging. Therefore, cell replacement and targeting of the molecular systems found in skin hold great promise for controlling or even curing skin aging.
    Ageing Research Reviews 11/2014; 19. DOI:10.1016/j.arr.2014.10.006 · 7.63 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hormone replacement therapies have become important for treating diseases such as premature ovarian failure or menopausal complications. The clinical use of bioidentical hormones might significantly reduce some of the potential risks reportedly associated with the use of synthetic hormones. In the present study, we demonstrate the utility and advantage of a microfluidic chip culture system to enhance the development of personalized, on-demand, treatment modules using embryoid bodies (EBs). Functional EBs cultured on microfluidic chips represent a platform for personalized, patient-specific treatment cassettes that can be cryopreserved until required for treatment. We assessed the viability, differentiation, and functionality of EBs cultured and cryopreserved in this system. During extended microfluidic culture, estradiol, progesterone, testosterone, and anti-müllerian hormone levels were measured, and the expression of differentiated steroidogenic cells was confirmed by immunocytochemistry assay for the ovarian tissue markers anti-müllerian hormone receptor type II, follicle-stimulating hormone receptor, and inhibin β-A and the estrogen biosynthesis enzyme aromatase. Our studies showed that under microfluidic conditions, differentiated steroidogenic EBs continued to secrete estradiol and progesterone at physiologically relevant concentrations (30-120 pg/ml and 150-450 pg/ml, respectively) for up to 21 days. Collectively, we have demonstrated for the first time the feasibility of using a microfluidic chip system with continuous flow for the differentiation and extended culture of functional steroidogenic stem cell-derived EBs, the differentiation of EBs into cells expressing ovarian antigens in a microfluidic system, and the ability to cryopreserve this system with restoration of growth and functionality on thawing. These results present a platform for the development of a new therapeutic system for personalized medicine. ©AlphaMed Press.
    STEM CELLS TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 02/2015; 4(3). DOI:10.5966/sctm.2014-0119 · 3.60 Impact Factor
  • Source

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
333 Downloads
Available from
May 16, 2014