TABLE 4.
The effect of estrogen + progestin treatment on risk of coronary heart disease events, by baseline hot flush status
| No significant hot flushes (n = 2,325) |
Clinically significant hot flushesa (n = 434) |
Total participants (N = 2,763)b |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study year | HR (95% CI)b |
P | HR (95% CI)c |
P | HR (95% CI)b |
P |
| Year 1 | 1.32 (0.86-2.03) |
0.21 | 9.01 (1.15-70.4) |
0.04 | 1.52 (1.01-2.29) |
0.05 |
| Year 2 | 0.94 (0.60-1.47) |
0.79 | 1.11 (0.46-2.68) |
0.82 | 0.98 (0.66-1.46) |
0.91 |
| Year 3 | 0.98 (0.60-1.60) |
0.93 | 0.40 (0.12-1.29) |
0.12 | 0.85 (0.54-1.33) |
0.47 |
| Year 4+ | 0.81 (0.52-1.25) |
0.34 | 0.44 (0.13-1.45) |
0.18 | 0.75 (0.49-1.12) |
0.16 |
| Total | 1.00 (0.80-1.25) |
0.99 | 0.96 (0.57-1.62) |
0.88 | 0.99 (0.81-1.22) |
0.94 |
HR, hazard ratio.
a
Defined as hot flushes that were bothersome all, most, a good bit, or some of the time.
b
Data on baseline hot flush severity were missing for four participants.
c
HRs compare the effects of estrogen + progestin versus placebo on coronary heart disease event risk.