Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Circulation
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Circulation. 2002;105:902-903

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Barrett-Connor, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Barrett-Connor, E.

(Circulation. 2002;105:902.)
© 2002 American Heart Association, Inc.


Editorial

Looking for the Pony in the HERS Data

Elizabeth Barrett-Connor, MD

From the Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, Calif.

Correspondence to Elizabeth Barrett-Connor, MD, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Dr, La Jolla, CA 92093-0607. E-mail ebarrettconnor@ucsd.edu


Key Words: Editorials • trials • hormones • heart disease

One of the great public health advances of the last century was the development of the randomized, controlled clinical trial, which is designed to control for known and unknown differences in persons who take or do not take medication (by the use of randomization), and for the effects of patient and provider expectation (by the use of double-blind placebo control).

See p 917

The late Reuel A. Stallones was fond of teaching that clinical trials are done during a narrow window of opportunity when there is enough evidence for benefit to justify the time and expense of the trial, but not so much evidence that it would be unethical to deprive participants of the "active" treatment by assigning them to placebo. This window is particularly difficult to achieve when the medication has been in use for many years, its benefit has been demonstrated repeatedly in epidemiological studies and in clinical practice, and when the thought leaders and major medical organizations have already recommended its widespread use.

Such was the case with hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and the prevention of heart disease. At the beginning of the Heart and Estrogen/progestin Replacement Study (HERS), a secondary prevention trial of estrogen in postmenopausal women with heart disease, several experts opined that this trial was unnecessary at best and unethical at worst, given the consistency of the observational data, which certainly looks very impressive in a meta-analysis, and the plethora of potential cardioprotective mechanisms for estrogen that have been demonstrated in vivo and in . . . [Full Text of this Article]




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Am Coll CardiolHome page
L. B. Daniels and E. Barrett-Connor
Can natriuretic peptides help identify heart failure patients for whom statins are beneficial?
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., November 10, 2009; 54(20): 1860 - 1861.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CirculationHome page
D. M. Herrington
Hormone Replacement Therapy and Heart Disease: Replacing Dogma With Data
Circulation, January 7, 2003; 107(1): 2 - 4.
[Full Text] [PDF]