Abstract
Objective Determine whether hormone-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk varies by exposure route and formulation in 50-64 year-old US women.
Design Nested case-control study.
Setting Large US commercially-insured population with patient-level claims data.
Participants Women aged 50-64 years with at least one year of enrollment. Controls were matched to incident cases (10:1) on VTE date and case’s age (+/− 2yrs). Exclusions included prior VTE, intravascular vena cava (IVC) filter within twelve months, and anticoagulant exposure within 14 days.
Exposures All estrogen and progestogen prescriptions (with route and formulation) filled within 12 months prior to index date were coded as current (0-60 days), past (61-365 days), or none. Contraceptives were categorized separately.
Outcome Acute VTE cases were identified with ICD codes plus anticoagulant, IVC filter, or death within 30 days.
Results Conditional logic regression analyses controlled for differences between cases (n=20,359) and controls (n=203,590) in Elixhauser comorbidities and VTE risk factors. Odds ratios (OR) were as follows: for current oral, unopposed estradiol 1.24 (95% CI: 1.09 to 1.40) or conjugated equine estrogen (CEE) 1.46 (95% CI: 1.28 to 1.68); for progestogens with estradiol 1.14 (95% CI: 0.95 to 1.37), with CEE 1.52 (95% CI: 1.25 to 1.84), or with ethinyl estradiol 2.35 (95% CI: 1.71 to 3.25). Current transdermal estradiol had the lowest ORs, whether unopposed, 0.70 (95% CI: 0.59 to 0.83) or combined with progestogens, 0.73 (95% CI: 0.56 to 0.96), but varied by progestogen. The OR for estrogen-progestogen contraceptives was 5.22 (95% CI: 4.67 to 5.84) compared to no exposure and 4.24 (95% CI: 3.64 to 4.98) compared to combined MHT.
Conclusions In 50-64-year-old women, transdermal menopausal hormone therapy (estradiol with or without progestogens) did not elevate VTE risk. In contrast, contraceptives markedly increased VTE risk.
What is already known on this topic?
Randomized controlled trials indicate that relative risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) is approximately twice as high with menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) containing conjugated equine estrogen (CEE) with or without medroxyprogesterone acetate compared to no hormone exposure.
Recent large, observational studies in the UK and Europe suggest that estradiol is lower risk than CEE and transdermal estradiol does not raise VTE risk compared to no hormone exposure, but results may not generalize to the United States because of differences in formulary, prescribing patterns, and background VTE incidence.
What this study adds
Using a large medical record database for US commercially-insured women 50-64 years of age, results confirmed that VTE risk was higher for oral compared to transdermal MHT and transdermal MHT (unopposed estrogen or combined with a progestogen) did not increase risk for VTE compared to no hormone exposure. However, unique US prescribing patterns included MHT with transdermal estradiol plus oral progestogens and MHT with ethinyl estradiol.
MHT estrogen formulation affected VTE risk: ethinyl estradiol had higher risk than CEE, and CEE had higher risk than estradiol.
Combined hormonal contraceptives (oral, vaginal, transdermal) had a markedly higher increase in VTE compared to MHT.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Funding The data were obtained with a grant to SCW from the Texas Academy of Family Physicians Foundation.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Project has University of Texas Medical Branch Institutional Review Board Approval (#20-0313)
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Competing interests None declared.
Funding The data were obtained with a grant to SCW from the Texas Academy of Family Physicians Foundation.
Data Availability
Data availability statement Data were obtained from a third party and are not publicly available. All data relevant to the study are summarised in the article. No further data are available. Data are proprietary of Optum Health Systems. However, requests for re-analyses will be considered.
