{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024804177545691905, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009138381201044387, 'mean_word_length': 5.3347107438016526, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Hormone replacement therapy: optimising the dose and route of administration.

Several new products and regimens for estrogen replacement in the postmenopausal woman have recently been introduced, giving physicians and patients greater choice not only in dose but also in route of administration. Estrogen treatment in the postmenopausal woman has several proven benefits for those who have vasomotor symptoms or problems related to urogenital atrophy. However, the most controversial area is in the long-term preventive benefits of estrogen against the development of osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease, particularly in women older than 60 years. It is in these areas that decisions on the dose and optimal route of administration of estrogen replacement therapy (ERT) must be made. Although adding a progestogen to an ERT regimen is mandatory, particularly in a woman with an intact uterus, discussion now focuses on which progestogen least attenuates the beneficial effects of estrogen. Emerging trends suggest that lower doses of estrogen (i.e. ethinylestradiol 5 microg/day, estradiol 0.25 mg/day or conjugated estrogens [CEE] 0.3 mg/day) continuously combined with lower doses of medroxyprogesterone (MPA) are equally effective at relieving vasomotor symptoms as the most commonly prescribed regimen in the US (CEE 0.625mg/MPA 2.5mg daily), with fewer adverse events, leading to greater patient acceptance and likelihood for continuation of therapy. This is especially important when therapy is initiated at an older age.