Long-Term Cognitive Effects of Menopausal Hormone Therapy: A Critical Analysis for Research and Drug Development

Abstract

This article synthesizes current evidence on the long-term cognitive effects of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT), addressing a critical area of concern and opportunity in women's brain health. Targeted at researchers and drug development professionals, it explores the foundational 'critical window' hypothesis, methodological approaches in clinical trial design, and optimization strategies for MHT formulations and timing. By analyzing data from recent long-term extension studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, this review clarifies that short-term MHT use in early menopause shows no long-term cognitive harm but also confers no definitive protective benefit against cognitive decline. The conclusion outlines future research imperatives, including personalized medicine approaches based on APOE genotype, surgical menopause status, and the development of novel neuroprotective hormone formulations.

The Neuroprotective Hypothesis and the Critical Window Theory

Estrogen, particularly 17β-estradiol (E2), is a steroid hormone with profound effects beyond reproductive function, playing a critical role in maintaining brain health and resilience [1]. The neuroprotective properties of estrogen have garnered significant scientific interest, with research demonstrating its ability to protect against cerebral ischemia, reduce oxidative stress, and modulate neuroinflammatory pathways [1]. These protective mechanisms operate through complex interactions involving genomic signaling, rapid non-genomic pathways, and potent antioxidant systems [2]. Understanding these multifaceted mechanisms provides crucial insights for developing therapeutic strategies for neurodegenerative diseases, stroke, and age-related cognitive decline, particularly in the context of menopausal hormone therapy and cognitive function research [3].

The following diagram illustrates the core neuroprotective pathways mediated by estrogen, integrating genomic, non-genomic, and antioxidant mechanisms:

Figure 1: Integrated overview of estrogen-mediated neuroprotective pathways, showing genomic, non-genomic, and antioxidant mechanisms converging on functional neuroprotective outcomes.

Estrogen Receptors and Signaling Pathways

Estrogen Receptor Distribution and Function

Estrogen exerts its biological actions primarily through interaction with two classical nuclear estrogen receptors (ERα and ERβ) and the membrane-bound G protein-coupled estrogen receptor (GPER1) [1]. These receptors exhibit distinct patterns of expression in the brain and activate different downstream signaling cascades:

• ERα is densely localized in the hypothalamus, hippocampus, and preoptic area, with moderate expression in the cerebral cortex [1]. Evidence suggests ERα has a critical mediator role for E2-induced neuroprotection, as demonstrated by the loss of E2 neuroprotection in ERα knockout mice following cerebral ischemia [1].

• ERβ is predominantly expressed in the cortex, throughout the hippocampus, olfactory bulb, septum, and amygdala [1]. While ERβ activation can exert neuroprotective effects, E2 remains fully neuroprotective in ERβ knockout mice, suggesting ERβ may have supplemental rather than primary neuroprotective functions [1].

• GPER1 is a seven-transmembrane domain G-protein-coupled receptor primarily localized in the plasma membrane and endoplasmic reticulum, expressed in the hippocampus, striatum, hypothalamus, and other brain regions [1]. GPER1 activation upregulates interleukin-1 receptor antagonist in the hippocampus, reducing ischemia-induced cell death and enhancing anti-inflammatory mechanisms [2].

The genomic signaling pathway involves classical nuclear ERα and ERβ binding to E2 and activating estrogen response elements on DNA to regulate target gene transcription [2]. In contrast, non-genomic pathways involve membrane-bound receptors rapidly activating intracellular signaling cascades, with E2 directly modulating neuronal excitability through interactions with ERα and chloride intracellular channel proteins on millisecond timescales [2].

Key Neuroprotective Signaling Pathways

Estrogen activates multiple interconnected signaling pathways that collectively promote neuronal survival and function:

PI3K/Akt Pathway

The PI3K/Akt pathway represents a crucial survival signaling cascade activated by estrogen through both genomic and non-genomic mechanisms [2]. Estrogen binding to membrane receptors triggers rapid PI3K activation, leading to phosphorylation of Akt, which subsequently inhibits pro-apoptotic factors like Bad, caspase-9, and Forkhead transcription factors [2]. This pathway enhances neuronal survival by maintaining mitochondrial membrane integrity and reducing cytochrome c release [2]. In microglia, the PI3K/Akt pathway promotes an anti-inflammatory M2-like phenotype, suppressing neuroinflammation through SIRT1 upregulation and HMGB1 reduction [2].

MAPK/CREB Pathway

Estrogen activation of the MAPK pathway leads to phosphorylation of CREB, a transcription factor that regulates genes essential for neuronal survival, plasticity, and memory formation [2] [4]. This pathway is particularly important for estrogen-mediated enhancement of synaptic plasticity in the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex, regions critical for cognitive function [4]. The MAPK/CREB pathway interacts with estrogen's genomic signaling to amplify expression of neuroprotective genes including BDNF, Bcl-2, and synaptic proteins [4].

WNT/β-Catenin Pathway

Estrogen modulates the WNT/β-catenin signaling pathway, contributing to enhanced neuronal survival and suppression of neuroinflammation [2]. This pathway plays a crucial role in maintaining synaptic integrity and adult neurogenesis in the hippocampus [4]. Estrogen-mediated WNT/β-catenin activation increases β-catenin levels, which translocates to the nucleus to activate transcription of genes involved in neuronal development and repair [2].

Genomic Mechanisms of Neuroprotection

Estrogen's genomic actions involve direct regulation of gene expression through classical nuclear ERα and ERβ binding to estrogen response elements on DNA [2]. These mechanisms mediate longer-term neuroprotective effects through modulation of specific gene networks:

Regulation of Apoptotic and Survival Genes

Estrogen genomic signaling shifts the balance toward neuronal survival by upregulating anti-apoptotic proteins (Bcl-2, Bcl-x) while downregulating pro-apoptotic factors (Fas, Bax, cytochrome C) [2]. This coordinated regulation enhances neuronal resilience to various insults including oxidative stress, excitotoxicity, and ischemic injury [1]. The genomic effects are particularly important for maintaining basal levels of survival factors that provide ongoing protection against age-related neuronal vulnerability [4].

Synaptic Plasticity and Neurogenesis Regulation

Through genomic mechanisms, estrogen enhances synaptic connectivity by promoting long-term potentiation (LTP), increasing dendritic spine density, and heightening expression of synaptic proteins essential for plasticity [4]. These effects are especially pronounced in the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex, regions integral to working memory, spatial navigation, and executive function [4]. Estradiol also stimulates adult neurogenesis in the dentate gyrus, a capacity that declines with age and estrogen deprivation [4]. Estrogen genomic signaling regulates expression of neurotrophic factors including BDNF, which supports neuronal survival, differentiation, and synaptic function [4].

Non-Genomic Signaling Mechanisms

Estrogen's non-genomic actions occur rapidly through membrane-associated receptors and involve activation of intracellular signaling cascades without direct gene regulation:

Rapid Signaling Through Membrane Receptors

Membrane-bound ERα, ERβ, and GPER1 activate multiple downstream pathways including PKA, ERK, and PI3K, promoting generation of intracellular cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) and regulating intracellular calcium homeostasis [2]. These rapid signaling events can occur within seconds to minutes of estrogen exposure and modulate neuronal excitability, synaptic transmission, and neuroprotection [2]. E2 can directly interact with ERα and chloride intracellular channel protein 1, enhancing currents mediated by these channels and thereby rapidly modulating the excitability of ERα-positive neurons in the brain at millisecond timescales [2].

Cross-Talk with Neurotrophic Factor Signaling

Estrogen non-genomic signaling exhibits significant cross-talk with neurotrophin signaling pathways, particularly those activated by BDNF and nerve growth factor [2]. This interaction amplifies neuroprotective responses and enhances synaptic plasticity mechanisms. Estrogen rapidly potentiates BDNF signaling through activation of MAPK and PI3K pathways, creating positive feedback loops that sustain neuronal survival signals [4]. This cross-talk is particularly important for estrogen-mediated protection against excitotoxic insult and for supporting cognitive function during aging [4].

Antioxidant and Anti-inflammatory Pathways

Estrogen exerts potent antioxidant effects through multiple mechanisms that collectively reduce oxidative stress in the brain:

NADPH Oxidase Inhibition and ROS Reduction

A key neuroprotective mechanism of estrogen involves attenuation of NADPH oxidase activation, superoxide generation, and reactive oxygen species (ROS) production in the ischemic brain [1]. Estrogen significantly reduces oxidative stress by inhibiting NADPH oxidase assembly and activity, particularly following cerebral ischemia [1]. This antioxidant effect is mediated through both genomic and non-genomic mechanisms and represents a crucial pathway for estrogen-mediated protection against stroke and neurodegenerative conditions [1].

Mitochondrial Protection and Oxidative Phosphorylation

Estrogen enhances mitochondrial function through multiple pathways including PI3K/Akt, AMPK/PGC-1α, and Nrf2/HO-1 signaling [2]. These effects stabilize mitochondrial membrane potential (ΔΨm), enhance oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS), and reduce ROS production by increasing expression of mitochondrial antioxidant enzymes (Mn-SOD, GPx) [2]. Estrogen also promotes mitochondrial biogenesis through upregulation of PGC-1α and increases expression of electron transport chain components (COXI–III) [2]. By maintaining mitochondrial bioenergetic homeostasis and inhibiting NLRP3 inflammasome activation, estrogen protects against mitochondrial dysfunction, a common feature in neurodegenerative diseases [2].

Table 1: Estrogen-Mediated Antioxidant Effects on Neural Cells

Target	Key Signaling Pathways	Major Molecular Targets	Functional Outcomes
Mitochondria	PI3K/Akt, AMPK/PGC-1α, Nrf2/HO-1	↑COXI–III, ↑Mn-SOD, GPx, Stabilization of ΔΨm	Enhances OXPHOS, reduces ROS, inhibits NLRP3 inflammasome, maintains bioenergetic homeostasis [2]
NADPH Oxidase	Not fully characterized	Inhibition of NADPH oxidase activation	Attenuates superoxide and ROS generation, reduces oxidative stress in ischemic brain [1]
DNA Repair System	PI3K/Akt → Nrf2, BDNF signaling cascade	↑APE1, ↑Nrf2, APE1 mitochondrial/nuclear translocation	Enhances oxidative DNA repair, maintains genome integrity, protects against neurodegeneration [2]

Anti-inflammatory Mechanisms in Glial Cells

Estrogen exerts powerful anti-inflammatory effects on microglia and astrocytes, the primary immune cells of the central nervous system:

Microglial Modulation

Microglia predominantly express estrogen receptors that modulate their activation state and inflammatory output [2]. Estrogen promotes an anti-inflammatory M2-like phenotype in microglia through PI3K/Akt and TLR4/NF-κB pathways, increasing SIRT1 expression while reducing pro-inflammatory cytokines including IL-1β [2]. Estrogen also suppresses microglial activation through SIRT1/miR-138-5p signaling and modulates ferroptosis-related pathways, further reducing neuroinflammation [2]. These effects are particularly relevant for limiting chronic neuroinflammation in age-related neurodegenerative diseases [2].

Astrocyte Regulation

Astrocytes express surface estrogen receptors that allow rapid response to hormonal signaling [2]. E2 upregulates both mRNA and protein levels of glutamate transporters GLAST and GLT-1 in astrocytes, enhancing their capacity to clear extracellular glutamate and preventing excitotoxic neuronal death [2]. In Alzheimer's disease models, E2 significantly alleviates astrogliosis, downregulating activation markers such as GFAP and restoring cell morphology to a more homeostatic state [2]. Estrogen also stimulates astrocytes to synthesize and release various neurotrophic factors, contributing to overall neuroprotection [2].

Experimental Data and Research Findings

Quantitative Analysis of Neuroprotective Effects

Table 2: Experimental Evidence for Estrogen Receptor-Mediated Neuroprotection

Experimental Model	Treatment	Key Findings	Proposed Mechanism
Focal Cerebral Ischemia in ERα KO mice	17β-estradiol administration	Loss of E2 neuroprotection in ERα KO mice	ERα is critical for mediating E2 neuroprotective effects [1]
Global Cerebral Ischemia in rats	ER-α agonist (PPT)	Neuroprotection in hippocampal CA1 region and rescue of ischemia-induced LTP deficit	Specific ERα activation sufficient for neuroprotection [1]
Global Cerebral Ischemia in mice	ER-β agonist (DPN)	55% reduction in global cerebral ischemia damage in hippocampal CA1 region	ERβ activation can provide significant neuroprotection [1]
Glutamate-induced neuronal injury	GPER1 agonist (G-1)	Attenuated glutamate-induced cell death	GPER1 activation promotes neuronal survival [1]
Global Cerebral Ischemia	GPER activation	Upregulation of interleukin-1 receptor antagonist in hippocampus	Enhanced anti-inflammatory mechanisms and cognitive preservation [2]

Methodological Approaches in Estrogen Neuroprotection Research

Research on estrogen's neuroprotective mechanisms employs diverse experimental approaches:

In Vivo Models

Animal models of cerebral ischemia (both focal and global) have been instrumental in establishing estrogen's neuroprotective properties [1]. These models demonstrate that E2 administration significantly reduces infarct size, with peak circulating E2 levels showing inverse correlation with stroke damage [1]. Transgenic approaches including ERα and ERβ knockout mice have helped delineate receptor-specific contributions to neuroprotection [1]. Aromatase knockout mice, which lack the enzyme for E2 synthesis, show significantly increased infarct volume following cerebral ischemia compared to wild-type mice, highlighting the importance of endogenous E2 production for neuroprotection [1].

In Vitro Systems

Cell culture models utilizing primary neurons, astrocytes, microglia, and endothelial cells have identified cell-type specific responses to estrogen [1] [2]. Co-culture systems demonstrate that E2 modulates neuron-glia interactions, enhancing the supportive functions of astrocytes while suppressing microglial pro-inflammatory activation [2]. Studies using immortalized mouse brain endothelial cells show that E2 and ER-α selective agonists directly enhance endothelial cell viability following ischemic insult, suggesting vascular protection contributes to estrogen's neuroprotective effects [1].

Research Reagents and Experimental Tools

Table 3: Key Research Reagents for Studying Estrogen Neuroprotection

Reagent / Tool	Type	Primary Research Application	Key Findings Enabled
ICI182,780	Estrogen receptor antagonist	Blockade of endogenous ER signaling	Increased infarct size in female rats following cerebral ischemia, demonstrating role of endogenous E2/ER [1]
PPT (Propyl pyrazole triol)	ER-α selective agonist	Specific activation of ERα pathways	Neuroprotection in hippocampal CA1 following global cerebral ischemia, demonstrating ERα sufficiency [1]
DPN	ER-β selective agonist	Specific activation of ERβ pathways	55% reduction in global cerebral ischemia damage, showing ERβ-mediated protection [1]
G-1	GPER1 selective agonist	Specific activation of GPER1 signaling	Attenuation of glutamate-induced cell death, establishing GPER1 neuroprotective role [1]
Aromatase Inhibitors	Enzyme inhibitors	Blockade of endogenous E2 synthesis	Increased understanding of brain-derived E2 role in neuroprotection [1]
Aromatase KO mice	Genetic model	Study of brain-derived E2 deficiency	Increased infarct volume following focal cerebral ischemia, highlighting importance of local E2 production [1]

Estrogen's neuroprotective mechanisms represent a complex interplay of genomic, non-genomic, and antioxidant pathways that collectively enhance neuronal survival and function. The integrated signaling network activated by estrogen provides multi-level protection against diverse neurological insults including cerebral ischemia, excitotoxicity, and chronic neurodegeneration. Understanding these mechanisms has important implications for developing estrogen-based therapeutic strategies, particularly considering the critical period hypothesis which proposes that estrogen replacement must be initiated during a specific window around menopause to exert beneficial neural effects [1]. Future research should focus on elucidating receptor-specific contributions, optimizing therapeutic timing and formulations, and translating these mechanistic insights into effective neuroprotective treatments for age-related cognitive decline and neurodegenerative diseases.

The relationship between menopausal hormone therapy (HT) and cognitive outcomes presents a persistent paradox that has challenged researchers and clinicians for decades. Observational studies frequently suggested that HT could reduce the risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD) by 29% to 44%, while major randomized controlled trials, notably the Women's Health Initiative Memory Study (WHIMS), reported that HT actually increased dementia risk in older postmenopausal women [5]. This stark contradiction led to the formulation of the critical window hypothesis—a theoretical framework proposing that the effects of HT depend fundamentally on the timing of initiation relative to age and menopausal status [5] [6]. This hypothesis posits that a limited period exists following menopause during which HT may confer cognitive benefits or protection, with initiation outside this window proving ineffective or potentially harmful.

The biological plausibility of this hypothesis stems from understanding the neuroprotective effects of estrogen, which include supporting neuronal function, enhancing synaptic plasticity, and modulating brain bioenergetics [7]. The menopausal transition is characterized by a dramatic decline in circulating estrogen levels, which disrupts these processes and potentially creates a state of increased vulnerability to Alzheimer's pathology. The critical window hypothesis suggests that the brain remains responsive to estrogen replacement during this early transitional period, but this responsiveness diminishes over time as age-related pathological changes accumulate [5] [7].

This review systematically examines the clinical and mechanistic evidence supporting the critical window hypothesis, with particular emphasis on explaining the disparate findings between younger and older cohorts. We synthesize data from major observational studies, randomized trials, and neuroimaging investigations to provide researchers and drug development professionals with a comprehensive analysis of how timing modifies HT effects on cognitive outcomes.

Clinical Evidence: Disparate Outcomes by Timing of Initiation

Evidence from Observational Studies

Observational research has provided foundational support for the critical window hypothesis by demonstrating that the association between HT and dementia risk varies significantly based on when treatment is initiated. A pivotal study tracking 5,504 postmenopausal women for decades found strikingly different outcomes depending on timing of HT use [8]. Compared to never-users, women using HT only in mid-life (mean age ~48.7 years) demonstrated a 26% reduced risk of dementia (adjusted HR=0.74), whereas those initiating HT only in late-life (mean age ~76 years) showed a 48% increased risk (adjusted HR=1.48) [8]. Women who used HT during both periods had a neutral risk (adjusted HR=1.02), suggesting that prolonged exposure does not augment protective effects and may even mitigate early benefits [8].

The Cache County Study provided additional compelling evidence for timing effects by demonstrating that former HT users showed reduced AD risk, while current users (typically initiating therapy later) did not benefit unless they had used HT for ten or more years [5]. This pattern implies that HT might be ineffective in reducing dementia risk during the latent preclinical stage of the disease but potentially protective when initiated earlier in the menopausal transition.

Table 1: Observational Studies Examining Timing of HT Initiation and Dementia Risk

Study	Cohort Size	Early Initiation Effect	Late Initiation Effect	Follow-up Period
Kaiser Permanente [8]	5,504 women	26% reduced risk (aHR=0.74)	48% increased risk (aHR=1.48)	~40 years
Cache County [5]	Not specified	Reduced risk in former users	No benefit in current users	Not specified
Three observational studies of AD timing [5]	Not specified	All three supported window hypothesis	N/A	Not specified

Evidence from Randomized Controlled Trials

Randomized trial data provide the most rigorous evidence supporting the critical window hypothesis, with stark contrasts emerging between studies enrolling younger versus older participants. The WHIMS, which enrolled women aged 65 and older, found that conjugated equine estrogen plus medroxyprogesterone acetate (CEE/MPA) doubled the risk of all-cause dementia after approximately four years of follow-up [5]. Conversely, trials enrolling recently postmenopausal women, including the Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS) and the Early versus Late Intervention Trial with Estradiol (ELITE), generally demonstrated neutral cognitive effects—showing neither significant harm nor benefit [9] [10].

The KEEPS trial specifically evaluated women within three years of menopause who were randomized to oral conjugated equine estrogens (oCEE), transdermal 17β-estradiol (tE2), or placebo for four years [10]. The KEEPS Continuation study, which followed participants approximately ten years after the original trial concluded, found no long-term cognitive benefits or harms associated with either HT formulation compared to placebo [10]. This suggests that early initiation poses no long-term cognitive risks but also does not provide the protective effects suggested by earlier observational studies.

Table 2: Randomized Controlled Trials of HT and Cognitive Outcomes

Trial	Participant Age & Menopausal Status	HT Formulations	Cognitive Outcomes
WHIMS [5]	≥65 years (mean ~67-70)	CEE alone or CEE/MPA	Increased dementia risk with CEE/MPA; neutral with CEE alone
KEEPS [10]	42-58 years, within 3 years of menopause	oCEE, tE2 (both with progesterone)	No significant cognitive benefit or harm after 4 years
KEEPS Continuation [10]	58-73 years (10-year follow-up)	oCEE, tE2 (both with progesterone)	No long-term cognitive benefits or harms
ELITE [9]	<6 years or >10 years post-menopause	Oral estradiol	Not specified in sources, but noted as testing critical window

The Formulation Factor: Differential Effects by HT Type

Beyond timing, the specific HT formulation appears to significantly modify cognitive outcomes. The IGNITE study found that transdermal estradiol was associated with higher episodic memory scores, while oral estradiol was linked to better prospective memory, suggesting that different administration routes may preferentially benefit distinct cognitive domains [11]. This highlights the complexity of HT effects and underscores that the critical window hypothesis cannot be considered in isolation from formulation characteristics.

Analysis of WHIMS data indicated that CEE/MPA consistently increased dementia risk regardless of timing, whereas the evidence for estrogen-only therapy appears more timing-dependent [5]. This suggests that the progestin component may potentially exacerbate adverse effects, particularly in older women with established vascular risk factors.

Biological Mechanisms: Explaining the Window

Neuroprotective Effects of Estrogen

The critical window hypothesis is grounded in the substantial evidence demonstrating estrogen's multifaceted neuroprotective roles. Estrogen supports brain function through genomic and non-genomic mechanisms, modulating gene transcription through classical nuclear receptors (ERα and ERβ) and activating rapid intracellular signaling cascades through membrane-associated G protein-coupled estrogen receptors [7]. These mechanisms collectively enhance neuronal plasticity, support synaptic integrity, and promote adult neurogenesis [7] [12].

Estrogen particularly influences three systems crucial for cognitive aging: the basal forebrain cholinergic system (critical for memory and attention), the dopaminergic system (involved in executive function and reward processing), and mitochondrial bioenergetics (essential for neuronal energy production) [7]. The menopausal decline in estrogen disrupts these systems, potentially creating a period of heightened vulnerability during which intervention might be most effective.

The Healthy Cell Bias of Estrogen Action

A fundamental concept for understanding the critical window is the "healthy cell bias" of estrogen action—the principle that estrogen's effects are modulated by the cellular environment and that compromised neurons may respond differently to estrogen exposure [5]. In younger, healthier brains with recently diminished estrogen levels, HT may support existing neuroprotective pathways. In contrast, in older brains with accumulated Alzheimer's pathology, vascular changes, or increased oxidative stress, estrogen might exacerbate underlying pathologies or accelerate the progression of existing disease processes.

This mechanistic framework explains why the same therapeutic intervention produces dramatically different outcomes based on the physiological context at the time of initiation. The declining responsiveness to estrogen with advancing age or disease progression effectively creates a biological deadline after which HT transitions from potentially protective to ineffective or harmful.

Emerging Evidence from Neuroimaging and Biomarker Studies

Advanced neuroimaging techniques have provided compelling in vivo evidence supporting the critical window hypothesis. A recent study investigating tau accumulation—a key Alzheimer's pathology—found that women over 70 using HT showed faster tau accumulation in temporal lobe regions, whereas women under 70 showed no association between HT use and tau pathology [11]. This suggests that late initiation may accelerate existing neurodegenerative processes, while earlier initiation does not produce this adverse effect.

The KEEPS Continuation neuroimaging substudy found that four years of HT initiated early in menopause had no long-term effects on white matter integrity, white matter hyperintensity volume, or cerebral infarcts when assessed approximately ten years later [9]. This provides reassurance about the long-term brain safety of appropriately timed HT and further supports the concept that early initiation does not produce the adverse cerebrovascular effects observed in older women.

Diagram 1: The Critical Window - Differential Effects of HT Timing on Brain Physiology. This diagram illustrates how the same hormonal therapy produces divergent effects based on the brain's physiological state at initiation.

Experimental Approaches and Methodologies

Key Clinical Trial Designs

Research testing the critical window hypothesis has employed sophisticated clinical trial designs that specifically control for timing variables:

The Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS) employed a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design to evaluate two HT formulations (oral conjugated equine estrogens and transdermal 17β-estradiol) initiated within 36 months of menopause in women aged 42-58 [9] [10]. Participants all had intact uteri and received micronized progesterone (200 mg/d for 12 days monthly) with active HT or matching placebo. The primary cognitive outcomes were measured through a comprehensive neuropsychological battery assessing multiple domains, with follow-up assessments conducted during the trial and approximately ten years post-completion in the KEEPS Continuation study [10].

The Early versus Late Intervention Trial with Estradiol (ELITE) specifically tested the critical window hypothesis by randomizing women to oral estradiol or placebo based on their time since menopause (<6 years versus >10 years) [9]. This direct comparison of early versus late initiation within the same trial framework provides particularly compelling evidence for timing effects.

Neuroimaging and Biomarker Assessment Methods

Advanced neuroimaging protocols have been essential for elucidating the structural and functional correlates of the critical window:

Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging (dMRI) techniques, including diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI), quantify microstructural changes in white matter integrity through metrics such as fractional anisotropy (FA), mean diffusivity (MD), neurite density index (NDI), and orientation dispersion index (ODI) [9]. In KEEPS Continuation, these measures were used to detect subtle white matter changes that might precede cognitive decline.

Positron Emission Tomography (PET) with ligands for amyloid-β (e.g., 11C-Pittsburgh compound B) and tau proteins has enabled researchers to track the accumulation of Alzheimer's pathology in relation to HT use [11]. These biomarker studies have revealed that HT initiation in older women (≥70 years) is associated with faster tau accumulation, providing a potential biological mechanism for the increased dementia risk observed in late-initiation cohorts.

Table 3: Assessment Methods in Critical Window Research

Method Category	Specific Techniques	Key Metrics	Utility in Critical Window Research
Cognitive Assessment	Neuropsychological batteries	Domain-specific composite scores (episodic memory, executive function, etc.)	Primary outcome measures for efficacy
Structural MRI	T1-weighted volumetrics	Regional brain volumes (prefrontal cortex, hippocampus)	Detects atrophy patterns related to timing
White Matter Integrity	DTI, NODDI	FA, MD, NDI, ODI	Assesses microstructural white matter health
Molecular PET	Amyloid-PET, Tau-PET	Standardized uptake value ratios (SUVR)	Quantifies Alzheimer's pathology burden
Fluid Biomarkers	CSF analysis	Aβ42, p-tau, total tau	Provides complementary pathological data

Preclinical Models

Animal studies have been instrumental in establishing causal relationships and exploring biological mechanisms underlying the critical window. The study by Yin et al. utilized a rat model to systematically test how chronological age, timing, and duration of estradiol treatment affect gene expression in hypothalamic nuclei regulating social behaviors [13]. This design included reproductively mature (~3 months) versus aging adult (~11 months) female Sprague-Dawley rats that were ovariectomized and administered estradiol or vehicle with different post-ovariectomy delays and treatment durations [13]. Molecular analyses focused on genes involved in social and affiliative behaviors (Avp, Avpr1a, Oxt, Oxtr, Esr2) in the paraventricular and supraoptic nuclei, revealing complex interactions between age, timing, and hormone exposure [13].

Table 4: Key Reagents and Methodologies for Critical Window Research

Resource Category	Specific Examples	Research Application
HT Formulations	Oral conjugated equine estrogens (oCEE), Transdermal 17β-estradiol (tE2), Medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), Micronized progesterone	Gold standard interventions for clinical trials; allow comparison of different administration routes and progestin effects
Cognitive Assessment Tools	Comprehensive neuropsychological batteries, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Domain-specific composite scores	Standardized quantification of cognitive outcomes across multiple domains
Neuroimaging Biomarkers	Structural MRI, Diffusion MRI (DTI, NODDI), Amyloid-PET, Tau-PET	Objective measures of brain structure, pathology, and neural integrity
Genetic Analysis	APOE ε4 genotyping, Estrogen receptor polymorphisms	Identification of genetic modifiers of HT response and differential risk
Animal Models	Ovariectomized rodent models, Timing-controlled estrogen replacement, Gene expression analysis	Mechanistic studies of timing effects and molecular pathways

The critical window hypothesis provides a compelling framework for reconciling apparently contradictory findings about HT effects on cognitive outcomes. Substantial evidence from observational studies, randomized trials, and neuroimaging research consistently indicates that HT initiation within the early postmenopausal period (typically within 5 years of menopause) poses no long-term cognitive harm, while initiation in late postmenopause (≥10 years after menopause or after age 65) increases dementia risk [5] [10] [8]. This timing-dependent effect is biologically plausible based on estrogen's neuroprotective mechanisms and the "healthy cell bias" of estrogen action [5].

For drug development professionals and researchers, these findings highlight several critical considerations. First, timing must be recognized as a fundamental effect modifier in clinical trial design and interpretation. Second, HT formulation characteristics, including administration route and progestin component, interact with timing to determine cognitive outcomes. Third, the field requires validated biomarkers that can identify optimal timing windows for individual women based on their brain health status.

Future research should prioritize the development of personalized timing algorithms that incorporate genetic, hormonal, and neuroimaging biomarkers to identify optimal windows for intervention. Additionally, investigation of selective estrogen receptor modulators and other estrogenic compounds that might offer neuroprotection without the risks associated with traditional HT represents a promising direction for therapeutic development. While HT should not be recommended for cognitive protection or dementia prevention in postmenopausal women, the critical window hypothesis remains highly relevant for understanding neuroendocrine aging and developing future interventions that might safely preserve cognitive health in women.

The increasing prevalence of age-related neurocognitive disorders presents a significant challenge to global health systems, with women facing a disproportionate burden of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related dementias [11]. Nearly two-thirds of individuals with AD dementia are women, prompting intensive investigation into female-specific risk and protective factors [11]. Among the most significant modifiers of cognitive trajectory are the complex interactions between genetic vulnerability, reproductive history, and hormonal exposures across the lifespan. The apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 allele stands as the strongest known genetic risk factor for sporadic AD, while surgically induced menopause represents a potentially modifiable risk factor through its effect on lifetime estrogen exposure [14] [15]. Understanding how these factors independently and interactively influence cognitive aging is crucial for developing targeted prevention strategies and therapeutic interventions for women's brain health. This review synthesizes current evidence from major observational studies and clinical trials to elucidate the roles of APOE ε4 carrier status, surgical menopause, and lifetime estrogen exposure as key modifiers of cognitive risk in women.

APOE Genotype: Structural and Functional Neural Correlates

APOE ε4 as a Genetic Risk Factor

The APOE ε4 allele is an established genetic risk factor for Alzheimer's disease, with evidence suggesting this risk is greater in women than in men [14]. This vulnerability appears dependent on interactions between estrogens and APOE genotype [14]. Neuroimaging studies reveal that APOE ε4 carriers exhibit significant differences in brain structure and function compared to those with protective genotypes. Specifically, APOE ε4 carriers show reduced functional connectivity in medial temporal areas and smaller hippocampal volumes—brain regions critically involved in memory formation and consolidation [16] [17].

Neuroprotective Effects of APOE ε2

In contrast to the risk associated with APOE ε4, the APOE ε2 allele is considered a neuroprotective factor and longevity gene that reduces the risk of AD [17]. Direct comparisons between these functionally opposite genotypes reveal that APOE ε2 carriers have better cognitive performance in general cognition, memory, attention, and executive function than APOE ε4 carriers [17]. Neuroimaging studies show that these cognitive advantages are supported by structural and functional brain differences, with APOE ε2 carriers exhibiting larger thalamus and right postcentral gyrus volumes, and increased resting-state functional connectivity across seven brain networks compared to ε4 carriers [17].

Table 1: APOE Genotype Effects on Brain Structure and Function

Brain Metric	APOE ε2 Carriers	APOE ε4 Carriers	Cognitive Correlation
Hippocampal Volume	Relatively preserved	Significant reduction	Associated with memory performance
Resting-State Functional Connectivity	Increased in multiple networks	Decreased in medial temporal areas	Correlates with executive function
Gray Matter Volume	Larger thalamus and postcentral gyrus	Reduced in AD-vulnerable regions	Linked to overall cognitive performance

Surgical Menopause and Estrogen Exposure

Surgical Menopause as a Risk Factor

Surgically induced menopause, specifically bilateral oophorectomy, has been repeatedly associated with poorer cognitive function, especially when it occurs early relative to the typical age of menopause onset [14]. The suspected mechanism for this increased risk is the sudden dramatic reduction of estrogen, particularly prior to the natural onset of menopause [14]. This explanation is supported by studies showing that the degree of cognitive risk or decreased function is associated with age at surgical intervention and subsequent use of estrogen therapy [14]. The timing hypothesis suggests there may be a critical window for intervention, with estrogen therapy initiated near the time of oophorectomy potentially mitigating negative cognitive consequences [14].

Lifetime Estrogen Exposure and Cognitive Protection

Greater lifetime exposure to estrogen, a recognized neuroprotectant, is associated with a reduced risk of age-related cognitive decline and dementia [14]. The neuroprotective mechanisms of estrogen, particularly 17β-estradiol, include involvement in neural plasticity, adult neurogenesis, and signaling with other neuroprotective factors such as brain-derived neurotrophic factor and insulin-like growth factor-1 [14]. Indicators of greater lifetime estrogen exposure—including longer reproductive span, older age at menopause, and use of hormone-based medications—have shown positive associations with cognitive performance later in life [18].

Table 2: Estrogen-Related Factors and Cognitive Outcomes

Estrogen Factor	Association with Cognition	Key Supporting Evidence
Longer Reproductive Span	Positive association	UK Biobank (N=221,124): Associated with better performance across multiple cognitive domains [18]
Hormonal Contraceptive Use	Positive association	IGNITE study: Birth control use associated with better MoCA scores, working memory, and executive function [14]
Early Surgical Menopause	Negative association	Multiple studies: Associated with increased risk of cognitive decline, especially before natural menopause age [14]
Hormone Therapy After Oophorectomy	Positive association	IGNITE: HT started within 2 years of oophorectomy associated with better episodic memory, working memory, and visuospatial processing [14]

Hormone Therapy: Formulation, Timing, and Administration

Critical Window Hypothesis

The timing of hormone therapy initiation appears crucial for cognitive outcomes, supporting the "critical window" hypothesis that optimal timing of estrogen therapy exposure is around the time of menopause when estrogen levels are changing, but before other age-related brain changes occur [14]. A recent systematic review and meta-analysis concluded that estrogen therapy improved global cognition after surgical menopause compared to placebo, and estrogen initiated near menopause onset was associated with improved verbal memory, while later initiation had no effects [14]. This timing hypothesis is further supported by research showing that HRT use in older age (commonly over 70) may accelerate tau accumulation in key brain regions, a process linked to the progression of Alzheimer's pathology and cognitive decline [11].

Formulation and Administration Route

Emerging evidence suggests that the type of estradiol-based hormone therapy and its route of administration may differentially impact cognitive domains. A large study from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging including 7,251 postmenopausal women found that transdermal estradiol was associated with higher episodic memory scores, whereas oral estradiol was associated with higher prospective memory scores compared to individuals who had never taken MHT [19] [20]. Neither administration route significantly affected executive functions, indicating domain-specific effects [20]. This suggests that the efficacy of estradiol-based MHT depends on the route of administration and cognitive domain, underscoring the importance of considering MHT type in therapeutic decisions [20].

Table 3: Hormone Therapy Formulations and Cognitive Domain Effects

Therapy Type	Administration Route	Primary Cognitive Benefits	Study Details
Transdermal Estradiol	Patches, gels, vaginal rings/creams	Episodic memory	Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (N=7,251) [20]
Oral Estradiol	Pills	Prospective memory	Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (N=7,251) [20]
HT After Oophorectomy	Various, started within 2 years of surgery	Episodic memory, working memory, visuospatial processing	IGNITE study [14]

Research Gaps and Methodological Considerations

APOE Interaction Evidence

Despite theoretical reasons to expect interactions between APOE genotype and hormone exposure, recent well-powered studies have found limited evidence for such interactions. The IGNITE study, which specifically hypothesized that APOE4 carrier status would interact with oophorectomy and hormone therapy to influence cognitive performance, did not observe significant interactions between APOE4 status and oophorectomy or hormone therapy in their associations with cognitive performance [14]. Similarly, a UK Biobank study of 221,124 women found that while APOE ε4 genotype was associated with reduced processing speed and executive functioning in a dose-dependent manner, it did not influence the observed associations between female-specific factors and cognition [18].

Methodological Limitations

Current research faces several methodological challenges. Most studies are observational rather than randomized clinical trials, preventing causal inferences [11]. Confounding is a major concern, as women who choose or are prescribed HRT may differ in important ways from non-users [11]. Additionally, HRT formulations, doses, duration, and timing vary widely across studies, and many studies do not capture all these parameters in detail, limiting generalizability [11]. There is also limited representation across racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups in many studies, potentially restricting the broader applicability of findings [11].

Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

IGNITE Study Protocol

The Investigating Gains in Neurocognition in an Intervention Trial of Exercise (IGNITE) study provides a representative methodological approach for investigating estrogen exposure and cognitive performance [14] [21]. This multi-center randomized clinical trial examined whether a 12-month aerobic exercise intervention would improve cognitive performance and neuroimaging markers of brain health in sedentary, cognitively unimpaired older adults in a dose-dependent manner [14]. The baseline data from 461 post-menopausal females (mean age = 69.6 years) included comprehensive assessment of oophorectomy and hormone therapy use, which were examined in relation to the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and factor-analytically derived composite scores for episodic memory, processing speed, working memory, executive function/attentional control, and visuospatial processing [14]. Reproductive history questionnaires captured self-reported information about natural menopause, hysterectomy, oophorectomy, and use of birth control or hormone therapy, with medications classified according to the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical system [14].

Neuroimaging and Genetic Protocols

Studies investigating APOE genotype effects typically employ standardized protocols combining neuropsychological assessment with structural and functional MRI. For example, one study used resting-state functional MRI and voxel-based morphometry to analyze differences in brain networks and gray matter between APOE ε2 and APOE ε4 carriers in non-dementia elderly [17]. Global functional connectivity density mapping, a data-driven, voxel-wise method, was used to measure whole-brain function based on rs-fMRI data [16]. APOE genotyping is typically performed using DNA extracted from peripheral blood cells, with ε2 homozygotes and heterozygotes often pooled into a single ε2+ carrier category due to the relative rarity of the ε2 allele, and similar approaches used for ε4 carriers [16].

Signaling Pathways and Biological Mechanisms

The relationship between estrogen exposure and brain health involves multiple complex biological pathways. Estrogen, particularly 17β-estradiol, exerts neuroprotective effects through various mechanisms, including interaction with APOE genotype, modulation of neural plasticity, and influence on Alzheimer's pathology biomarkers.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Materials

Table 4: Key Research Reagents and Methodological Components

Tool/Assessment	Primary Function	Example Implementation
APOE Genotyping	Determine ε2, ε3, ε4 allele status	DNA from peripheral blood cells; PCR-based methods [16]
Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)	Screening for mild cognitive impairment	IGNITE study baseline cognitive assessment [14]
Factor-Analytically Derived Cognitive Composites	Domain-specific cognitive measurement	IGNITE study derived scores for episodic memory, processing speed, working memory, executive function, visuospatial processing [14]
Resting-State fMRI	Measure functional brain connectivity	Global functional connectivity density mapping to assess network integrity [16] [17]
Structural MRI/Voxel-Based Morphometry	Quantify regional brain volumes	Hippocampal volume measurement; gray matter differences between APOE genotypes [16] [17]
Reproductive History Questionnaires	Document estrogen exposure variables	Self-reported menopausal status, oophorectomy, hormone therapy use, timing [14]
PET Tau Imaging	Measure Alzheimer's pathology	Harvard Aging Brain Study: investigated HRT associations with tau accumulation [11]

The complex interplay between APOE genotype, surgical menopause, and lifetime estrogen exposure significantly modifies cognitive aging trajectories in women. Current evidence indicates that while APOE ε4 confers genetic risk and APOE ε2 provides protection, estrogen exposure across the lifespan—particularly hormone therapy initiation timing and type after surgical menopause—can modulate cognitive outcomes. Future research should prioritize randomized controlled trials that account for the critical window hypothesis, incorporate detailed hormone therapy formulations and administration routes, and examine diverse populations to advance our understanding of these complex relationships. Such efforts will be essential for developing personalized approaches to maintain cognitive health in women at risk for age-related neurocognitive disorders.

The understanding of menopausal hormone therapy's (mHT) effects on cognitive function has undergone a fundamental transformation over the past two decades, moving from generalized safety concerns to a more nuanced appreciation of timing, formulation, and individual risk factors. This evolution in scientific understanding has been largely driven by two landmark studies: the Women's Health Initiative Memory Study (WHIMS) and the Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS). These investigations presented seemingly contradictory findings that ultimately refined our approach to mHT and cognitive outcomes. WHIMS, with its focus on older postmenopausal women, initially raised alarms by demonstrating increased dementia risk with conjugated equine estrogens (CEE), while KEEPS, studying recently postmenopausal women, found no such cognitive harm [22] [23]. This comparative analysis examines the methodological frameworks, participant characteristics, and findings of these pivotal studies to elucidate how their distinct paradigms have shaped current clinical understanding and practice.

The critical distinction between these studies lies not merely in their outcomes but in their fundamental designs and the hypotheses they tested. WHIMS emerged from an era when hormone therapy was predominantly considered for disease prevention in older adults, while KEEPS reflected the growing recognition of a "critical window" or "timing hypothesis" for intervention [22] [11]. This paradigm shift acknowledges that the effects of mHT may be substantially different when initiated during the perimenopausal transition or early postmenopause compared to initiation later in life. By comparing these studies side-by-side, researchers and clinicians can better understand the complex interplay between ovarian aging, exogenous hormone administration, and brain aging, ultimately leading to more personalized treatment approaches for menopausal women seeking both symptomatic relief and long-term cognitive health.

Study Designs and Methodological Approaches

WHIMS: The Older Postmenopausal Cohort

The Women's Health Initiative Memory Study (WHIMS) was designed as an ancillary study to the WHI hormone therapy trials, focusing specifically on cognitive outcomes in older postmenopausal women. WHIMS consisted of two parallel, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials examining the effects of CEE with or without medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) on dementia incidence and cognitive decline [23]. The study enrolled 7,147 healthy women aged 65-79 years (mean age 69-71 years) who were more than a decade past menopause onset. Participants were randomized to receive either daily CEE (0.625 mg) with MPA (2.5 mg) for women with an intact uterus, CEE-alone for women with prior hysterectomy, or matching placebos. The primary outcomes were incident all-cause dementia and global cognitive decline measured by the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS), with annual follow-up assessments conducted over an average of 5.2 years for the CEE+MPA trial and 6.1 years for the CEE-alone trial [23].

WHIMS implemented rigorous diagnostic protocols for dementia cases, requiring a comprehensive neuropsychological battery and clinical examination by experienced physicians, with final adjudication by a central committee of dementia experts. The study also included an ancillary magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sub-study (WHIMS-MRI) to examine structural brain correlates of cognitive outcomes, measuring brain volumes, white matter lesion volume, and infarcts [23]. This multimodal approach strengthened the study's ability to link clinical outcomes with potential neurobiological mechanisms.

KEEPS: The Early Postmenopausal Cohort

In contrast to WHIMS, the Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS) was specifically designed to test the "critical window hypothesis" by examining mHT effects when initiated close to menopause onset. KEEPS was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that enrolled 727 recently postmenopausal women aged 42-58 years within 6-36 months of their final menstrual period [22] [9]. Participants were randomized to one of three treatment arms: oral conjugated equine estrogens (oCEE, 0.45 mg/day), transdermal 17β-estradiol (tE2, 50 μg/day), or placebo pills and patches for 4 years. Women in the active treatment arms also received cyclical micronized progesterone (200 mg/day for 12 days/month) for endometrial protection, while the placebo group received placebo progesterone [22].

The KEEPS Cognitive and Affective Study (KEEPS-Cog) ancillary study evaluated cognitive outcomes using a comprehensive neuropsychological test battery at baseline and throughout the 4-year intervention period. The primary cognitive outcomes included four cognitive factor scores (verbal learning and memory, visual learning and memory, working memory, and verbal fluency) and a global cognitive score [22]. A distinctive feature of KEEPS was the long-term follow-up through the KEEPS Continuation study, which reevaluated participants approximately 10 years after the completion of the randomized trial, providing valuable insights into the long-term cognitive effects of short-term mHT exposure [22].

Table 1: Fundamental Design Characteristics of WHIMS and KEEPS

Design Characteristic	WHIMS	KEEPS
Participant Age Range	65-79 years	42-58 years
Time Since Menopause	>10 years	6-36 months
Study Design	Ancillary to WHI HT trials	Primary prevention trial
Intervention Duration	5.2-6.1 years	4 years
Follow-up Period	Annual during trial	4 years + 10-year observational follow-up
mHT Formulations	CEE ± MPA	oCEE, tE2, or placebo
Progestogen Component	MPA (if uterus present)	Micronized progesterone
Primary Cognitive Outcomes	All-cause dementia, global cognitive decline	Cognitive factor scores, global cognitive score

Participant Profiles and Critical Window Hypothesis

The fundamentally different participant characteristics between WHIMS and KEEPS represent the core of the paradigm shift in understanding mHT effects on cognitive health. WHIMS enrolled women who were at least 65 years old and typically more than a decade past their final menstrual period, representing a population in which age-related neuropathological processes may have already been established [23]. In contrast, KEEPS specifically targeted women in the early postmenopausal period (within 3 years of menopause), coinciding with the hypothesized "critical window" for therapeutic intervention [22] [9]. This temporal distinction is crucial, as the neuroprotective effects of estrogen may depend on initiating treatment before significant age-related neuropathology accumulates.

Cardiovascular risk profiles also substantially differed between the study populations. WHIMS participants had higher baseline cardiovascular risk, with approximately one-third having hypertension and a significant proportion with other cardiovascular risk factors [23]. KEEPS, by design, enrolled healthy women with low cardiovascular risk, excluding those with clinically defined cardiovascular disease, uncontrolled hypertension, diabetes, smoking >10 cigarettes daily, or significant dyslipidemia [9]. This distinction is particularly relevant given the connection between vascular health and cognitive aging, suggesting that mHT effects may be modified by underlying cardiovascular status.

Table 2: Baseline Characteristics of WHIMS and KEEPS Participants

Characteristic	WHIMS	KEEPS
Mean Age at Enrollment	69-71 years	52.7 years
Time Since Menopause	>10 years	<3 years
Cardiovascular Risk	Moderate-High	Low
Cardiovascular Exclusion Criteria	Minimal	Extensive (history of CVD, uncontrolled hypertension, diabetes, etc.)
mHT Formulations Tested	CEE ± MPA	oCEE, tE2 (both with micronized progesterone)
Key Neuroimaging Components	WHIMS-MRI: Structural MRI, brain volumes, WMH	KEEPS Continuation: dMRI, DTI, NODDI, WMH

The "critical window hypothesis" posits that the timing of mHT initiation relative to menopause onset is a decisive factor in determining neurological outcomes [11]. This concept suggests that estrogen may have beneficial or neutral effects when administered during a specific window of opportunity early in the menopausal transition but potentially harmful effects when initiated after significant age-related pathological changes have accumulated. The contrasting designs of WHIMS and KEEPS directly test this hypothesis, with WHIMS representing later intervention and KEEPS representing early intervention. Supporting this concept, recent research has demonstrated that among women over age 70, HRT use was associated with faster accumulation of tau protein, a key Alzheimer's disease pathology, while no such association was found in women under age 70 [11].

Cognitive Outcomes: Divergent Findings and Interpretations

WHIMS: Elevated Dementia Risk and Global Cognitive Decline

WHIMS reported unexpectedly negative cognitive outcomes that significantly altered clinical practice and research directions. The study found that compared to placebo, CEE+MPA doubled the risk for probable dementia (hazard ratio 1.76, 95% CI 1.19-2.60; P = 0.005) and was associated with a mean decrement of 0.21 points on the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS) for global cognitive function (P = 0.006) [23]. The CEE-alone trial also demonstrated an increased risk for combined mild cognitive impairment or dementia (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.01-1.89; P = 0.04) and greater decline on the 3MS (P = 0.04) compared to placebo [23]. These findings were particularly striking given that the study had initially hypothesized that hormone therapy would reduce dementia risk.

The ancillary WHIMS-MRI study provided potential neurobiological correlates for these clinical findings, revealing that both CEE+MPA and CEE-alone were associated with significantly lower brain volumes in the hippocampus (P = 0.05), frontal lobe (P = 0.004), and total brain (P = 0.07) compared to placebo, though no differences were found in ischemic lesion volumes [23]. The domain-specific WHI Study of Cognitive Aging (WHISCA) further found that CEE+MPA had a negative impact on verbal memory over time (P = 0.01), while CEE-alone was associated with lower spatial rotational ability at initial assessment (P ≤ 0.01) [23]. These comprehensive findings across multiple cognitive domains and neuroimaging parameters provided a consistent picture of potential harm in this older population.

KEEPS: Neutral Cognitive Effects and Long-term Safety

In stark contrast to WHIMS, the KEEPS-Cog trial found no significant cognitive benefits or harms after 48 months of mHT initiation within 3 years of the final menstrual period [22]. Neither the oral CEE nor transdermal estradiol groups demonstrated statistically significant differences in cognitive factor scores (verbal learning and memory, visual learning and memory, working memory, and verbal fluency) or global cognitive scores compared to placebo. These neutral findings persisted despite the study being adequately powered to detect clinically meaningful differences and utilizing a comprehensive cognitive assessment battery.

The KEEPS Continuation study, which reevaluated participants approximately 10 years after the completion of the randomized trial, provided crucial long-term follow-up data [22]. This observational extension found that baseline cognition and changes during KEEPS were the strongest predictors of later cognitive performance, with no long-term cognitive effects of the earlier mHT exposure. Cross-sectional comparisons confirmed that participants previously assigned to mHT (either oCEE or tE2) performed similarly on cognitive measures to those randomized to placebo [22]. Neuroimaging data from KEEPS Continuation further supported these clinical findings, showing no evidence of long-term effects of 4 years of mHT on white matter integrity when compared to placebo, as measured by diffusion MRI, white matter hyperintensity volume, and cerebral infarcts [9].

Diagram 1: The Critical Window Hypothesis in mHT Research. This diagram illustrates how timing of initiation relative to menopause determines cognitive outcomes.

Neurobiological Mechanisms and Imaging Correlates

Advanced neuroimaging techniques employed in both WHIMS and KEEPS have provided valuable insights into the structural and microstructural brain changes associated with mHT in different populations. WHIMS-MRI utilized conventional structural MRI to measure brain volumes and white matter hyperintensities, finding significantly reduced hippocampal and frontal lobe volumes in the hormone therapy groups compared to placebo [23]. These volumetric reductions in regions critical for memory and executive function provided a potential anatomical substrate for the observed cognitive deficits and increased dementia risk in this older cohort.

KEEPS Continuation employed more advanced diffusion MRI (dMRI) techniques, including both diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI), to examine white matter microstructure [9]. These techniques provide biologically relevant parameters such as fractional anisotropy (FA), mean diffusivity (MD), neurite density index (NDI), and orientation dispersion index (ODI), which offer specific insights into axonal integrity and organization. The study found no significant differences in dMRI metrics between any of the treatment arms (oCEE or tE2) and placebo following adjustment for multiple comparisons [9]. Similarly, no differences were observed in white matter hyperintensity volume or infarct prevalence. These findings align with the neutral clinical cognitive outcomes observed in KEEPS and suggest that early initiation of mHT in healthy, recently postmenopausal women does not adversely affect white matter integrity over the long term.

The contrasting neuroimaging findings between WHIMS and KEEPS support the concept that the aging brain may respond differently to exogenous hormone exposure. In the WHIMS population, with established age-related vascular and neuronal changes, hormone therapy may accelerate atrophic processes or interact with existing neuropathology. In contrast, in the healthier, younger brains of KEEPS participants, hormone exposure may have neutral effects or potentially subtle benefits not detected by the measures employed. This interpretation is supported by an ancillary study of KEEPS that demonstrated better preservation of prefrontal cortex volume in the tE2 group compared to placebo 7 years post-randomization, suggesting possible region-specific effects that warrant further investigation [22].

Comparative Methodologies and Research Tools

Assessment Protocols and Outcome Measures

The cognitive assessment protocols in WHIMS and KEEPS reflected their distinct primary outcomes and participant characteristics. WHIMS utilized the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS) as its primary global cognitive measure and implemented a rigorous multi-step process for dementia diagnosis, including comprehensive neuropsychological testing and expert adjudication [23]. This approach was appropriate for detecting clinically significant cognitive impairment in an older population at higher risk for dementia. The ancillary WHISCA study extended this assessment to domain-specific cognitive functions, including verbal and figural memory, working memory, attention, spatial reasoning, and executive function, providing a more nuanced understanding of cognitive effects [23].

KEEPS-Cog employed a comprehensive neuropsychological test battery designed to detect more subtle cognitive changes in a relatively young, high-functioning population. The battery was structured around four cognitive factor scores (verbal learning and memory, visual learning and memory, working memory, and verbal fluency) plus a global cognitive score, providing sensitivity to domain-specific changes that might precede global cognitive decline [22]. This approach was particularly suited to detecting potential cognitive benefits or subtle adverse effects in a population where dramatic cognitive decline would be unexpected.

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions in Hormone Therapy Cognitive Research

Research Tool Category	Specific Examples	Research Application	Functional Purpose
Hormone Formulations	Conjugated equine estrogens (CEE); Transdermal 17β-estradiol (tE2); Medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA); Micronized progesterone	Intervention testing	Compare different estrogen types, routes of administration, and progestogen components
Cognitive Assessment Batteries	Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS); Domain-specific neuropsychological tests	Cognitive outcome measurement	Assess global cognition, specific cognitive domains (memory, executive function, attention)
Neuroimaging Techniques	Structural MRI; Diffusion MRI (DTI, NODDI); PET imaging (amyloid, tau)	Brain structure and pathology quantification	Measure brain volumes, white matter integrity, amyloid-β and tau accumulation
Biomarker Assays	APOE genotyping; Cardiovascular risk markers; Hormone levels	Participant characterization and effect modification analysis	Assess genetic risk factors, cardiovascular health, hormone exposure
Statistical Approaches	Latent growth models; Cox proportional hazards models; Linear mixed models	Data analysis	Model cognitive change over time, compare event rates, adjust for covariates

Statistical Approaches and Analytical Frameworks

Both studies employed sophisticated statistical approaches appropriate for their designs and research questions. WHIMS utilized Cox proportional hazards models to compare dementia incidence between treatment groups and linear mixed models to analyze cognitive change over time [23]. These methods were well-suited to the time-to-event nature of dementia diagnosis and the longitudinal cognitive data. The large sample size provided substantial statistical power to detect clinically meaningful differences in dementia rates.

KEEPS employed latent growth models (LGMs) to assess whether baseline cognition and cognitive changes during the trial predicted long-term cognitive performance, and whether mHT allocation modified these relationships [22]. This approach is particularly powerful for modeling individual trajectories of cognitive change and examining how interventions might alter these trajectories over time. The use of LGMs in the KEEPS Continuation study allowed researchers to leverage data from both the original trial and the long-term follow-up, providing insights into how early cognitive status and changes relate to later performance.

Diagram 2: Core Experimental Workflow in mHT Cognitive Trials. This diagram shows the shared basic structure of WHIMS and KEEPS, with key outcome differences highlighted.

Implications for Research and Clinical Practice

The evolution from WHIMS to KEEPS represents a fundamental shift in how we approach mHT and cognitive outcomes, with profound implications for both research and clinical practice. The contrasting findings underscore the critical importance of timing of initiation in determining cognitive outcomes, supporting the "critical window" hypothesis [22] [11]. For clinicians, this translates to a more nuanced understanding that mHT initiated in early menopause for symptomatic treatment appears to carry no long-term cognitive risk, while initiation in late postmenopause may increase dementia risk. This timeline-based framework allows for more personalized treatment decisions that account for a woman's age, time since menopause, and individual risk profile.

The formulation differences between studies also inform clinical choices. WHIMS exclusively tested oral CEE with synthetic MPA, while KEEPS compared oral CEE with transdermal estradiol, both with natural micronized progesterone [22] [23]. The neutral cognitive findings in KEEPS, coupled with the more favorable side effect profile of transdermal estradiol and micronized progesterone, suggest that formulation considerations extend beyond cognitive effects to overall risk-benefit assessment. Recent observational research has further suggested that different routes of administration may have differential effects on specific cognitive domains, with transdermal estradiol associated with higher episodic memory scores and oral estradiol associated with higher prospective memory scores compared to no HRT [11].

From a research perspective, the evolution from WHIMS to KEEPS highlights the importance of carefully defined participant characteristics and appropriate outcome measures for the population being studied. Future research should continue to explore the biological mechanisms underlying the timing hypothesis, including how estrogen interacts with the aging brain at different stages. Additionally, longer-term follow-up of early initiators, investigation of personalized approaches based on genetic and other risk factors, and exploration of newer formulations and delivery methods represent promising directions for advancing the field. The KEEPS Continuation study exemplifies the value of long-term observational follow-up of randomized trial participants to detect delayed benefits or harms that may not be apparent during the initial intervention period [22].

The journey from WHIMS to KEEPS represents a paradigm shift in our understanding of menopausal hormone therapy's effects on cognitive health. WHIMS, with its focus on older postmenopausal women, revealed the potential risks of late-initiated CEE-based therapy, while KEEPS, studying recently postmenopausal women, demonstrated the neutral cognitive effects of early-initiated therapy with different formulations. This evolution in understanding has transformed clinical practice from blanket avoidance of mHT toward a more nuanced, personalized approach that considers timing, formulation, and individual risk factors.

The comparative analysis of these studies highlights the fundamental importance of participant characteristics and research design in shaping outcomes and interpretations. The "critical window" hypothesis emerging from these contrasting findings provides a valuable framework for both clinical decision-making and future research directions. As the field continues to evolve, ongoing studies will further refine our understanding of how to optimize menopausal hormone therapy for both symptomatic management and long-term cognitive health, ultimately enabling more personalized approaches that maximize benefits and minimize risks for individual women.

Research Designs and Biomarkers for Assessing Cognitive Outcomes

Large-scale longitudinal studies have been instrumental in shaping our understanding of the complex relationship between menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) and cognitive function. The Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS) Continuation and the Women's Health Initiative Memory Study (WHIMS) represent two pivotal but methodologically distinct approaches to investigating this relationship. This comparison guide analyzes their experimental designs, participant characteristics, methodological frameworks, and findings to provide researchers and drug development professionals with critical insights for designing future studies on hormone therapy and cognitive outcomes. The contrasting results from these studies—with WHIMS indicating potential cognitive harm and KEEPS Continuation showing neutral effects—highlight how fundamental design decisions regarding participant age, timing of intervention, and choice of therapeutic formulations can dramatically influence study outcomes and interpretations.

The relationship between menopausal hormone therapy and cognitive function has evolved through several theoretical frameworks, most notably the critical window hypothesis. This concept posits that the timing of MHT initiation relative to menopause represents a crucial determinant of cognitive outcomes, with potential neuroprotective effects when initiated early but neutral or detrimental effects when started later in life [24] [25]. This hypothesis emerged largely in response to the seemingly contradictory findings between observational studies and randomized controlled trials, providing a conceptual framework that reconciles these differences by emphasizing chronological age and time since menopause as critical effect modifiers.

The neurobiological mechanisms underpinning this hypothesis involve complex estrogen-mediated pathways. Estrogen receptors densely populate brain regions critical for memory and executive function, including the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus [25]. Estradiol enhances dendritic spine density, promotes synaptogenesis, supports glycolytic metabolism in neurons, and exhibits neuroprotection against oxidative stress and amyloid-β toxicity [25]. Preclinical models suggest that the integrity of these systems and their responsiveness to exogenous estrogen diminishes with prolonged hormone deprivation, creating a therapeutic window that closes with advancing age and time since menopause [25] [26].

Study Design and Methodologies Comparison

Fundamental Design Characteristics

Table 1: Core Study Design Characteristics

Design Feature	KEEPS Continuation	WHIMS
Primary Study Design	Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with observational continuation	Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
Parent Study	KEEPS (Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study)	WHI (Women's Health Initiative)
Follow-up Duration	~10 years post-randomization (4-year treatment + ~6-year observational)	5.2 years (CEE+MPA) to 6.8 years (CEE-alone)
Primary Cognitive Outcomes	Global cognitive score, 4 cognitive factor scores	Incident dementia, mild cognitive impairment, global cognitive decline

Participant Recruitment and Selection Criteria

Table 2: Participant Characteristics and Eligibility Criteria

Characteristic	KEEPS Continuation	WHIMS
Age at Enrollment	42-58 years (mean ~52.7) [27]	65-79 years (mean ~69) [28]
Menopausal Status	Within 6 months to 3 years of final menstrual period [27]	≥10 years postmenopause [28] [25]
Cardiovascular Health	Free of clinical cardiovascular disease; CAC score <50 Agatston Units [27]	No dementia at baseline; cardiovascular status varied
Sample Size	727 initially randomized; 275 with cognitive data at continuation [10] [22]	4,532 (CEE+MPA trial); 2,947 (CEE-alone trial) [28]
Exclusion Criteria	BMI >35 kg/m², untreated hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, major chronic diseases [27]	Pre-existing dementia, contraindications to hormone therapy [28]

Intervention Protocols

KEEPS Intervention Protocol:

• Oral CEE group: 0.45 mg/day conjugated equine estrogens (Premarin) + micronized progesterone (Prometrium, 200 mg/d for 12 days/month) [27] [10]
• Transdermal E2 group: 50 μg/day 17β-estradiol (Climara) + micronized progesterone (Prometrium, 200 mg/d for 12 days/month) [27] [10]
• Placebo group: Matching placebo pill, patch, and progesterone capsule [27]
• Treatment duration: 48 months [10] [22]
• Progesterone regimen: Cyclical rather than continuous administration [27]

WHIMS Intervention Protocol:

• CEE+MPA group: 0.625 mg/day conjugated equine estrogens + 2.5 mg/day medroxyprogesterone acetate (for women with intact uterus) [28]
• CEE-alone group: 0.625 mg/day conjugated equine estrogens (for hysterectomized women) [28]
• Placebo group: Matching placebo [28]
• Treatment duration: Mean 5.2 years (CEE+MPA) and 6.8 years (CEE-alone) before early termination [28]

Assessment Methods and Cognitive Measures

KEEPS Cognitive Assessment: The KEEPS-Cog ancillary study utilized a comprehensive neuropsychological test battery analyzed using 4 cognitive factor scores and a global cognitive score [10] [22]. Assessments were conducted at baseline, during the 48-month trial, and again at the KEEPS Continuation visit approximately 10 years post-randomization [22]. Statistical analyses employed latent growth models to assess whether baseline cognition and cognitive changes during KEEPS predicted cognitive performance at follow-up, and whether MHT randomization modified these relationships [10].

WHIMS Cognitive Assessment: WHIMS utilized a multi-stage assessment approach:

• Initial screening: Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS) administered annually [28]
• Secondary evaluation: Participants scoring below education-adjusted cutpoints underwent comprehensive assessment with the CERAD battery [28]
• Clinical evaluation: Specialist neuropsychiatric examination classifying participants as Normal, Mild Cognitive Impairment, or Probable Dementia [28]
• Adjudication process: Final classification by expert panel including neurologists and geriatric psychiatrists [28]

Key Findings and Comparative Outcomes

Primary Cognitive Outcomes

Table 3: Comparative Cognitive Outcomes from KEEPS and WHIMS

Outcome Measure	KEEPS Continuation Findings	WHIMS Findings
Global Cognition	No significant differences between MHT groups and placebo at 4 years or ~10 years post-randomization [10] [22]	Significant decline on 3MS with CEE+MPA (mean difference -0.21 points, p=0.006) [28]
Dementia Incidence	Not assessed as primary outcome	Increased risk with CEE+MPA (HR 2.05, 95% CI 1.21-3.48) [28]
Mild Cognitive Impairment	Not assessed as primary outcome	No significant difference with CEE+MPA (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.74-1.55) [28]
Verbal Memory	No significant formulation effects	Negative impact on verbal memory over time with CEE+MPA (p=0.01) [28]
Spatial Ability	No significant formulation effects	Lower spatial rotational ability with CEE-alone (p<0.01) at initial assessment [28]
Long-term Effects	No long-term cognitive benefits or harms after ~10 years [22]	Not assessed beyond trial period

Neuroimaging and Biomarker Findings

KEEPS Neuroimaging Results:

• Brain volume preservation: Transdermal estradiol associated with better preservation of prefrontal cortex volume 7 years post-randomization [22]
• Amyloid deposition: Preserved prefrontal cortex volume with tE2 correlated with lower amyloid deposition [22]
• White matter hyperintensities: Platelet activation associated with development of white matter hyperintensities [27]

WHIMS-MRI Findings:

• Brain volume reduction: Both CEE+MPA and CEE-alone associated with smaller hippocampal (p=0.05), frontal lobe (p=0.004), and total brain volumes (p=0.07) [28]
• Ischemic lesions: No significant differences in ischemic brain lesion volume [28]
• Effect modification: HT-associated reductions in hippocampal volumes were greatest in women with baseline 3MS scores ≤90 [28]

Non-Cognitive Health Outcomes

KEEPS Additional Findings:

• Mood benefits: Positive effect on mood with o-CEE [27]
• Menopausal symptoms: Reduced hot flashes, improved sleep with both treatments [27]
• Sexual function: Improved sexual function with t-E2 [27]
• Bone health: Maintenance of bone mineral density with both treatments [27]
• Cardiovascular effects: Trend for reduced accumulation of coronary artery calcium with o-CEE; no severe adverse effects including venous thrombosis [27]

WHIMS Additional Health Outcomes:

• Cardiovascular risks: Increased risk of stroke (HR 1.41, CEE+MPA; HR 1.39, CEE-alone) and coronary heart disease (HR 1.29, CEE+MPA) [28]
• Thromboembolic events: Increased pulmonary embolism with CEE+MPA (HR 2.13) [28]
• Cancer outcomes: Increased breast cancer with CEE+MPA (HR 1.25); reduced colorectal cancer (HR 0.63) [28]
• Fracture risk: Reduced hip fracture risk with both CEE+MPA (HR 0.66) and CEE-alone (HR 0.61) [28]

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 4: Key Research Reagents and Assessment Tools

Reagent/Instrument	Application in Research	Specific Examples from Studies
Hormone Formulations	Testing therapeutic interventions	Oral conjugated equine estrogens (Premarin), transdermal 17β-estradiol (Climara) [27] [10]
Progestogens	Endometrial protection in women with uterus	Micronized progesterone (Prometrium), medroxyprogesterone acetate [27] [28]
Cognitive Assessment Batteries	Measuring cognitive outcomes	Modified Mini-Mental State Exam (3MS), CERAD battery, domain-specific cognitive factor scores [28] [10]
Neuroimaging Biomarkers	Assessing structural brain changes	MRI for brain volume, white matter hyperintensities, coronary artery calcium scores [27] [28] [22]
Genetic Analysis Tools	Pharmacogenomic investigations	Variants of genes associated with estrogen metabolism [27]
Biochemical Assays	Hormone level monitoring	Plasma estradiol level measurements [26]

Discussion: Implications for Future Research Design

Methodological Considerations for Future Studies

The comparative analysis of KEEPS Continuation and WHIMS reveals several critical methodological considerations for designing future studies on hormone therapy and cognitive outcomes:

Participant Selection Factors:

• Chronological age and time since menopause represent crucial effect modifiers that must be carefully considered in recruitment strategies [24] [25]
• Cardiovascular health status at baseline may influence both cognitive outcomes and MHT effects [27]
• Genetic background involving estrogen metabolism pathways may contribute to individual variability in treatment response [27]

Intervention Design Considerations:

• Formulation differences (oral vs. transdermal, CEE vs. 17β-estradiol) may have distinct biological effects [27] [26]
• Progestogen type and regimen (continuous vs. cyclical, MPA vs. micronized progesterone) may modify cognitive outcomes [27] [28]
• Treatment duration requirements may differ for detecting cognitive effects versus other health outcomes

Assessment Methodologies:

• Domain-specific cognitive measures may be more sensitive to MHT effects than global cognitive scores [10]
• Neuroimaging biomarkers may detect neural effects before behavioral changes manifest [22] [26]
• Long-term follow-up beyond active treatment periods is essential to identify delayed effects [10] [22]

The divergent findings from KEEPS Continuation and WHIMS underscore the profound influence of study design on outcomes in hormone therapy research. While WHIMS demonstrated significant cognitive risks associated with MHT initiation in older postmenopausal women, KEEPS Continuation found neither cognitive benefits nor harms when MHT was initiated early in menopause in healthy women. These contrasting results highlight the critical window hypothesis as a fundamental principle guiding future research and clinical practice. For drug development professionals and researchers, these studies illustrate the necessity of carefully considering timing of intervention, participant characteristics, choice of therapeutic formulations, and assessment methodologies when designing clinical trials investigating hormone therapy and cognitive function. Future research should continue to explore the biological mechanisms underlying these timing effects and identify biomarkers that can predict individual response to hormone interventions.

The long-term effects of hormone therapy on cognitive function represent a critical area of biomedical research, necessitating precise and sensitive biomarkers to track microstructural changes in the brain. Within this research context, advanced neuroimaging techniques provide powerful tools for quantifying brain integrity beyond macroscopic changes. This guide focuses on two complementary approaches: white matter integrity, assessed through diffusion MRI (dMRI) including advanced models like Neurite Orientation Dispersion and Density Imaging (NODDI), and gray matter volume measurements derived from structural MRI. These biomarkers offer distinct yet interconnected perspectives on brain microstructure, enabling researchers to characterize subtle neurobiological changes associated with cognitive outcomes in hormone therapy research and beyond. The following sections provide a detailed comparison of these technologies, their experimental protocols, and their applications in clinical neuroscience research.

Biomarker Comparison: Technical Specifications and Diagnostic Performance

White Matter Integrity Biomarkers

Table 1: Comparison of Diffusion MRI Models for Assessing White Matter Integrity

Model	Key Parameters	Biological Interpretation	Strengths	Acquisition Requirements
DTI	Fractional Anisotropy (FA)	Directional coherence of water diffusion; higher values indicate greater white matter integrity [29]	Sensitive to group differences; widely available; established analysis tools [30]	Single-shell (typically b=1000 s/mm²)
	Mean Diffusivity (MD)	Overall magnitude of water diffusion; increased values suggest tissue degeneration [31]
	Radial Diffusivity (RD)	Diffusion perpendicular to axons; potentially related to myelination [30]
NODDI	Neurite Density Index (NDI)	Volume fraction of neurites (axons/dendrites); reflects neurite density [30] [32]	Improved specificity to microstructural features; explains complementary aspects of tissue organization [30]	Multi-shell (typically b=700/2000 s/mm² or similar)
	Orientation Dispersion Index (ODI)	Variation in neurite orientation (0-1); higher values indicate more dispersed organization [30] [33]	Validated against histology [34]
	Isotropic Volume Fraction (ISOVF)	CSF compartment fraction [31]

Gray Matter Volume Biomarkers

Table 2: Gray Matter Volume Assessment Techniques

Technique	Measured Parameters	Biological Interpretation	Clinical Applications	Performance Characteristics
Voxel-Based Morphometry	Regional GM volume	Local tissue quantity; atrophy indicates neurodegeneration	Alzheimer's disease [35] [36], Parkinson's disease [37] [38]	Correlates with cognitive performance [35]
Surface-Based Analysis	Cortical thickness	Distance between GM-WM boundary and pial surface	Alzheimer's disease [35], TBI recovery [29]	Detects early atrophy patterns
Gray-White Matter Boundary Analysis	gwBZ (boundary Z-score)	Integrity of GM-WM interface; blurring suggests microstructural disruption [36]	Alzheimer's disease differentiation [36]	High accuracy when combined with MMSE (AUC=0.972) [36]

Comparative Diagnostic Performance

Table 3: Diagnostic Performance Across Neurological Conditions

Condition	Biomarker	Performance Metrics	Key Regional Findings
Alzheimer's Disease [31]	DTI (FA)	Satisfactory ROC performance	Multiple WM tracts
	NODDI (ICVF)	Satisfactory ROC performance	Multiple WM tracts
	MAP-MRI (RTOP, RTAP)	Strongest correlation with MMSE/MoCA	Multiple WM tracts
Mild Cognitive Impairment [35]	DTI (FA)	Significant group detection (p<0.05); better classification than GM volume	Splenium, left isthmus cingulum, fornix
	GM Volume	Significant group detection (p<0.05)	Bilateral hippocampi, left entorhinal cortex
Combined DTI + GM Volume [35]	FA + GM Volume	Improved classification accuracy	Complementary regions
Parkinson's Disease [37]	T1w GM Metrics	Pooled sensitivity: 0.71; specificity: 0.89	Substantia nigra, striatum, thalamus

Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

Diffusion MRI Acquisition and Processing

Data Acquisition Protocol: A standardized diffusion MRI protocol for multi-model analysis should include multi-shell acquisition. For example, in Alzheimer's disease research, protocols typically employ three shells (b=500, 1000, 2000 s/mm²) with 112 total directions acquired on 3T Siemens scanners with parameters: TR=3300ms, TE=71ms, resolution=2×2×2mm [32]. For NODDI-optimized protocols, higher b-values (b=2000-3000 s/mm²) improve specificity to neurite architecture, particularly in gray matter [34].

Preprocessing Pipeline:

• Distortion Correction: Estimate susceptibility-induced distortions using reversed phase-encode directions (e.g., FSL's topup) [30]
• Motion and Eddy Current Correction: Correct for head movement and eddy current-induced distortions (e.g., FSL's eddy) with concurrent b-vector rotation [30] [32]
• Artifact Reduction: Apply Gibbs ringing artifact correction and denoising algorithms [32] [31]
• Model Fitting:
  • DTI: Linear fitting of tensor model (e.g., FSL's dtifit) to derive FA, MD, RD [30]
  • NODDI: Non-linear fitting using accelerated algorithms (e.g., AMICO, MDT) to estimate NDI, ODI [34] [32]
• Spatial Normalization: Tensor-based registration (e.g., DTI-TK) for improved alignment [30]
• Tract-Based Analysis: Projection onto mean FA skeleton using TBSS for group comparisons [30]

Structural MRI Processing for Gray Matter Volume

Volumetric Processing Protocol:

• Preprocessing: Bias-field correction, brain extraction (e.g., optiBET), and tissue segmentation into GM, WM, and CSF [29] [38]
• Spatial Normalization: Non-linear registration to standard space (e.g., MNI) using high-dimensional registration algorithms (e.g., DARTEL) [38]
• Quality Control: Visual inspection of segmented images and image quality rating (IQR >75% satisfactory threshold) [38]
• Volume Extraction: ROI-based analysis using standardized atlases (e.g., AAL3, Harvard-Oxford) [29] [38]
• Harmonization: For multi-site studies, apply batch effect correction (e.g., NeuroHarmonize) using empirical Bayes approaches to preserve biological variability [38]

Advanced Integrated Analysis

For comprehensive assessment, combined approaches include:

• Gray-White Matter Boundary Analysis: Calculation of gwBZ and gwBTV from 3D T1-weighted images to assess the integrity of the cortical interface [36]
• Multivariate Gray Matter Volumetric Distance: Patient-specific summary scores of GMV heterogeneity using Mahalanobis distance to predict symptom progression [38]

Table 4: Essential Research Tools for Advanced Neuroimaging Studies

Tool Category	Specific Software/Resource	Primary Function	Application Examples
Diffusion Processing	FSL (FDT, TOPUP, EDDY)	Diffusion preprocessing, tensor fitting, TBSS	Motion/distortion correction [30], DTI metric calculation [30] [34]
	MRtrix3	Advanced diffusion analysis, spherical deconvolution	Gibbs ringing removal, response function estimation [32]
	AMICO/NODDI Matlab Toolbox	NODDI model fitting	Accelerated NDI/ODI calculation [34] [32]
Structural Processing	Freesurfer	Automated cortical reconstruction, volume segmentation	Hippocampal volume extraction [32], cortical thickness measurement [35]
	CAT12/SPM	Voxel-based morphometry, volume-based analysis	GM volume calculation [38], spatial normalization
Multi-modal Integration	MRtrix3/Tournier et al.	Multi-shell diffusion analysis	NODDI parameter estimation [32]
	NeuroHarmonize	Multi-site data harmonization	Scanner effect removal [38]
Standardized Atlases	JHU DTI-based White Matter Atlas	White matter ROI definition	Cingulum, fornix, uncinate fasciculus segmentation [32]
	AAL3 (Automated Anatomical Labeling)	Gray matter ROI definition	Motor-related region parcellation [38]
Quality Control	MRIQC	Automated quality assessment	Image quality metrics [38]

Advanced neuroimaging biomarkers provide complementary insights into brain microstructure relevant to studying hormone therapy effects on cognitive function. White matter integrity metrics from dMRI (particularly NODDI) offer specific information about neurite density and organization, while gray matter volume measures capture neurodegenerative processes. The experimental protocols outlined enable robust implementation of these biomarkers in longitudinal studies. Integration of multiple imaging modalities enhances sensitivity to detect subtle changes and strengthens correlations with cognitive outcomes, providing a powerful approach for monitoring intervention effects in clinical research.

Evaluating cognitive function is a critical component in clinical research investigating the long-term effects of interventions such as menopausal hormone therapy (mHT). Cognitive test batteries provide structured assessments to detect subtle changes across multiple cognitive domains, offering insights into how treatments may influence brain health over time. Within mHT research, these assessments help resolve conflicting findings by determining whether therapy initiated during early menopause confers cognitive protection, risk, or has neutral long-term effects. The evolution from relying solely on global cognitive scores to incorporating domain-specific analysis represents a significant advancement in detecting nuanced neuropsychological changes.

Research in this field utilizes diverse methodological approaches, from traditional pencil-and-paper tests to computerized batteries and emerging digital technologies. The Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS) and its follow-up, the KEEPS Continuation Study, exemplify how comprehensive cognitive assessments applied over extended periods can clarify long-term outcomes. These studies revealed no significant cognitive benefits or harms from short-term mHT initiated early in menopause, providing reassurance for women considering treatment for symptom management [22] [10]. This article compares current cognitive assessment methodologies, examines their applications in hormone therapy research, and details the experimental protocols that yield reliable data for scientific and clinical decision-making.

Comparison of Cognitive Assessment Methodologies

Cognitive assessment strategies have evolved substantially, with different approaches offering distinct advantages and limitations for capturing cognitive changes in clinical research.

Table 1: Comparison of Cognitive Assessment Methodologies

Methodology	Key Features	Primary Applications	Advantages	Limitations
Traditional Neuropsychological Batteries	Pencil-and-paper format, trained administrator, multi-domain assessment	Large-scale clinical trials (e.g., KEEPS), diagnostic evaluation	Well-validated, extensive normative data, comprehensive domain coverage	Time-consuming, practice effects, requires specialized training, limited ecological validity
Interview-Based Assessments	Structured interviews with patients and/or caregivers	Complement to performance-based tests, functional capacity assessment	Captures real-world impact, less susceptible to practice effects	Subject to reporting biases, influenced by insight and psychopathology
Computerized Test Batteries	Automated administration, digital interface, precise timing	Cognitive training studies, large-scale screening, repeated testing	Standardized administration, reduced administrator bias, efficient data collection	Limited ecological validity for simple adaptations, requires technical reliability
Technology-Enhanced Assessments	Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA), Virtual Reality (VR), digital phenotyping	Real-world cognitive functioning, naturalistic settings	High ecological validity, real-time data, context-rich information	Ethical/privacy concerns, technological barriers, validation ongoing

Traditional neuropsychological batteries have been extensively employed in major mHT trials such as the KEEPS Continuation Study, which utilized a battery of eleven tests to assess verbal learning and memory, auditory attention, working memory, visual attention, executive function, speeded language, and mental flexibility [22] [10]. These assessments provided the foundation for determining that four years of mHT initiated within three years of menopause showed no long-term cognitive benefits or harms a decade after treatment cessation.

Global cognitive scores, such as the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), offer efficient screening but lack sensitivity to domain-specific changes. The Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) provides both global and domain-specific indices for immediate and delayed memory, attention, language, and visuospatial/constructional abilities [39]. Research indicates that domain-specific analysis is essential for detecting subtle cognitive changes, as global measures may mask significant domain-specific variations [40].

Emerging technologies promise enhanced ecological validity by assessing cognition in real-world contexts. Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) uses digital devices to capture cognitive performance multiple times throughout the day in natural environments, while Virtual Reality (VR) creates immersive environments that simulate real-world cognitive demands [41]. Although not yet widely implemented in large-scale mHT trials, these approaches address the ecological limitations of traditional assessments.

Cognitive Assessment in Hormone Therapy Research: Key Findings

Cognitive test batteries have played a pivotal role in clarifying the relationship between menopausal hormone therapy and brain health. The Women's Health Initiative Memory Study (WHIMS), which enrolled women over age 65, found that conjugated equine estrogens (CEE), with or without medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), increased the risk of dementia and global cognitive decline [39]. In contrast, the Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS), which initiated therapy in younger women (mean age 52.6) within three years of menopause, found no significant cognitive benefits or harms after four years of treatment [42].

The KEEPS Continuation Study provided crucial long-term data, reevaluating participants approximately ten years after the original trial concluded. Using the same cognitive test battery administered during the initial trial, researchers found that women previously randomized to either oral conjugated equine estrogens (oCEE) or transdermal 17β-estradiol (tE2) performed similarly to those who received placebo on all cognitive measures [22] [10]. This suggests that short-term mHT use early in menopause has no long-term impact on cognitive function in women with good cardiovascular health.

Recent research has investigated effect modifiers, including APOE genotype and timing of initiation. The European Prevention of Alzheimer's Dementia (EPAD) cohort study reported that APOE4 carriers using HRT had better delayed memory scores and larger entorhinal and amygdala volumes compared to non-users, with earlier initiation associated with larger hippocampal volumes [39]. This highlights the importance of considering genetic factors when evaluating cognitive outcomes of mHT.

Table 2: Cognitive Outcomes in Major Hormone Therapy Studies

Study	Population	Intervention	Cognitive Outcomes	Domain-Specific Findings
KEEPS Continuation	Recently postmenopausal women, 4-year intervention, 10-year follow-up	oCEE, tE2, or placebo	No long-term cognitive benefits or harms	No significant differences in verbal learning/memory, auditory attention, working memory, visual attention, executive function
WHIMS	Women aged ≥65 years	CEE + MPA or CEE-alone	Increased risk of dementia and cognitive decline	Global cognitive decline, particularly in memory and executive function
EPAD Cohort	Women aged ≥50 years, no dementia	Various HRT formulations	Improved delayed memory in APOE4 carriers	APOE4 carriers showed specific improvements in delayed memory, with larger entorhinal and amygdala volumes
IGNITE Study	Postmenopausal women (mean age 69.6)	Assessment of lifetime estrogen exposure	Hormone therapy after oophorectomy associated with better episodic memory, working memory, and visuospatial processing	Domain-specific benefits observed in multiple cognitive domains

The IGNITE study further supports the importance of timing and indication, finding that hormone therapy use following oophorectomy was associated with better performance in episodic memory, working memory, and visuospatial processing [12]. This comprehensive cognitive battery utilized factor-analytically derived composite scores to detect domain-specific associations that might be missed by global measures alone.

Experimental Protocols for Cognitive Assessment

Well-designed experimental protocols are essential for reliable cognitive assessment in clinical research. The KEEPS Continuation Study exemplifies a rigorous approach, implementing a longitudinal design with blinded assessment and comprehensive test selection.

KEEPS Continuation Study Protocol

Study Design: The original KEEPS trial was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled 4-year mHT trial. Participants were recently postmenopausal women (within 6-36 months of last menses) aged 42-58 with low cardiovascular risk. They were randomized to oral conjugated equine estrogens (oCEE; 0.45 mg/d), transdermal 17β-estradiol (tE2; 50 µg/d), or placebo pills or patch. All participants receiving active treatment or placebo also received micronized progesterone (200 mg/d for 12 days monthly) [9].

Cognitive Assessment Timeline: Cognitive testing occurred at baseline, during the 4-year intervention period, and again at the KEEPS Continuation visit approximately 10 years after trial completion (14 years after randomization) [22] [10].

Test Battery: The cognitive battery included eleven tests measuring multiple domains:

• Verbal learning and memory: Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test
• Auditory attention and working memory: Digit Span subtest from Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale
• Visual attention: Symbol Digit Modalities Test
• Executive function: Trail Making Test Parts A and B
• Speeded language: Verbal Fluency tests (phonemic and semantic)
• Mental flexibility: Stroop Color-Word Test

Analysis Approach: Latent growth models assessed whether baseline cognition and cognitive changes during KEEPS predicted performance at follow-up, and whether mHT randomization modified these relationships. Cross-sectional comparisons evaluated group differences at the Continuation visit, adjusting for covariates including age, education, and APOE ε4 status [22].

Domain-Specific Dispersion Analysis Protocol

Objective: Cognitive dispersion (intraindividual variability across neuropsychological tests) has been proposed as an early marker of cognitive decline. This protocol evaluates whether global or domain-specific dispersion better predicts conversion to mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia [40].

Participants: 1,595 participants from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center dataset followed for ≥4 visits.

Assessment Tools: Global dispersion calculated as intraindividual standard deviation across 10 neuropsychological test scores. Domain-specific dispersion calculated within three domains: Memory, Language, and Executive Functioning/Attention/Processing Speed (EFAS).

Statistical Analysis: Multinomial logistic regression models compared fit statistics across four dispersion models (global, EFAS, language, memory) in predicting progression to MCI and dementia. Models controlled for demographics, APOE4 status, and MMSE scores [40].

Open-Source Cognitive Test Battery Protocol

Platform: Browser-based assessment using JavaScript library p5.js, enabling online or laboratory administration [43].

Test Battery Components: Seven tasks assessing attention and memory:

• Multiple-objects tracking: Measures dynamic attention through simultaneous tracking of moving objects
• Enumeration: Assesses counting ability for briefly displayed items
• Load-induced blindness: Evaluates divided attention through dual-task paradigm
• Go/no-go: Measures response inhibition to relevant vs. irrelevant stimuli
• Task-switching: Assesses cognitive flexibility through shifting attention between tasks
• Working memory: Spatial span task adapted from Corsi Block Tapping Test
• Memorability: Evaluates long-term memory retention

Administration: All tasks completed within 90 minutes, suitable for pre-post intervention assessment [43].

Diagram 1: Cognitive Assessment Experimental Workflow. This flowchart illustrates the standard protocol for longitudinal cognitive assessment in clinical trials.

Research Reagent Solutions: Essential Materials for Cognitive Assessment

Table 3: Essential Research Materials for Cognitive Assessment in Clinical Trials

Material/Instrument	Function	Example Applications	Key Features
Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT)	Assesses verbal learning and memory	KEEPS, EPAD cohort	Evaluates immediate memory, learning rate, retroactive interference, recognition
Repeatable Battery for Neuropsychological Status (RBANS)	Brief assessment of multiple cognitive domains	EPAD cohort	Provides index scores for immediate/delayed memory, attention, language, visuospatial
Trail Making Test (TMT) Parts A & B	Evaluates visual attention, processing speed, executive function	KEEPS, IGNITE study	Measures cognitive flexibility and task-switching (Part B)
Wechsler Digit Span Task	Assesses auditory attention, working memory	KEEPS Continuation	Forward span measures attention, backward span measures working memory
Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB)	Computerized cognitive assessment	Cognitive mechanism studies	Precise timing, reduced administrator bias, automated scoring
Open-Source Cognitive Battery	Flexible assessment of attention and memory	Cognitive training research	Customizable parameters, browser-based administration, open-source code
Virtual Reality Platforms	Ecologically valid assessment in simulated environments	Emerging research	Real-world task simulation, immersive assessment contexts

Diagram 2: Cognitive Domain Relationships. This diagram illustrates the relationship between global cognitive scores and specific cognitive domains assessed in comprehensive test batteries.

Comprehensive cognitive test batteries, encompassing both global scores and domain-specific analyses, provide essential methodologies for evaluating the long-term cognitive effects of menopausal hormone therapy. The evolution from traditional pencil-and-paper assessments to computerized batteries and emerging digital technologies continues to enhance the sensitivity, ecological validity, and practicality of cognitive assessment in clinical research.

Major studies including KEEPS, WHIMS, and the EPAD cohort have demonstrated that factors such as timing of initiation, formulation, and individual characteristics including APOE genotype significantly influence cognitive outcomes. The consistent finding that short-term mHT initiated early in menopause poses no long-term cognitive harm offers valuable reassurance for women and clinicians, while also clarifying that such therapy should not be prescribed solely for cognitive protection.

Future research directions include further development of technology-enhanced assessments with improved ecological validity, continued investigation of genetic and biological moderators of treatment response, and the standardization of domain-specific scoring approaches to enable more precise detection of cognitive changes. As assessment methodologies continue to advance, so too will our understanding of the complex relationship between hormone therapy and cognitive aging.

Considerations for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) vs. Observational Follow-ups

The investigation into the long-term effects of menopausal hormone therapy (mHT) on cognitive function exemplifies the critical interplay between different clinical study designs. Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and observational follow-ups each provide distinct yet complementary evidence, forming the foundation for a robust scientific understanding. This guide objectively compares the performance of these methodological approaches, detailing their respective protocols, applications, and how their integration can advance research in women's cognitive health.

Core Definitions and Methodological Comparison

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are experimental studies where investigators intentionally assign participants randomly to different treatment groups to examine the effect of an intervention under controlled conditions [44]. Observational Follow-ups are studies where investigators observe the effects of exposures on outcomes without manipulating the exposure assignment, often using existing data or long-term cohort tracking [44] [45].

Table 1: Core Characteristics and Comparative Performance of RCTs and Observational Studies

Feature	Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs)	Observational Follow-ups
Primary Aim	Establish efficacy (effect under ideal conditions) [46]	Establish effectiveness (effect in real-world practice) [46]
Key Strength	High internal validity; controls for known and unknown confounders via randomization [45]	High external validity; assesses outcomes in broader, real-world populations [45]
Key Limitation	Limited generalizability due to strict inclusion/exclusion criteria [46] [44]	Susceptibility to bias and confounding (e.g., "healthy user" bias) [44] [5]
Ideal Application	Testing intended effects of a new intervention [44]	Studying natural exposures, unintended effects, or when RCTs are unethical/infeasible [46] [44]
Cost & Duration	Typically high-cost and time-intensive [44]	Often more cost-efficient, especially with existing data [44]
Data Source	Prospectively collected research data [46]	Electronic health records, health administrative data, population registries [45]

Experimental Protocols in Hormone Therapy and Cognition Research

The following section details the methodologies of key studies that have shaped the understanding of mHT and cognitive function.

Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial: The KEEPS-Cog Study

The Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS) and its ancillary Cognitive study (KEEPS-Cog) is a pivotal RCT examining the effects of mHT initiated early in menopause [22].

• Objective: To determine whether 48 months of mHT initiated within three years of the final menstrual period affects cognitive function in recently postmenopausal women [22].
• Population: Healthy, recently postmenopausal women (within 36 months of last menses) aged 42-58 years [22].
• Randomization & Blinding: Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups using a computer-generated list. The study was double-blinded, with participants and investigators unaware of treatment assignments [47] [22].
• Intervention Groups:
  • Oral conjugated equine estrogens (oCEE): 0.45 mg/day plus cyclic micronized progesterone (200 mg/day for 12 days/month).
  • Transdermal estradiol (tE2): 50 μg/day plus cyclic micronized progesterone (200 mg/day for 12 days/month).
  • Placebo: Matching placebo pills and patches [22].
• Primary Outcome Measures: Cognitive function was assessed using a standardized neuropsychological test battery, which was analyzed to create four cognitive factor scores and a global cognitive score [22].
• Key Findings: After 48 months of treatment, the KEEPS-Cog trial found no significant cognitive benefit or harm from either form of mHT compared to placebo [22].

Protocol for an Observational Follow-up: The KEEPS Continuation Study

The KEEPS Continuation Study is an observational, longitudinal cohort study designed as a follow-up to the original KEEPS RCT [22] [10].

• Objective: To clarify the long-term cognitive effects of short-term mHT exposure initiated in early postmenopause, approximately 10 years after the completion of the randomized KEEPS trial [22].
• Population: Participants from the original KEEPS clinical trial were re-contacted and invited to return for an in-person research visit [10].
• Study Design: This was an observational follow-up; participants were no longer on the randomized treatments from the KEEPS trial. The study observed the long-term outcomes based on their original randomization group [22].
• Data Collection: Participants repeated the original KEEPS-Cog cognitive test battery. Cognitive data from both the original KEEPS and the KEEPS Continuation were analyzed together [22] [10].
• Statistical Analysis: Latent growth models (LGMs) were used to assess whether baseline cognition and cognitive changes during the KEEPS trial predicted cognitive performance at follow-up, and whether the original mHT randomization modified these relationships, while adjusting for covariates [22].
• Key Findings: The KEEPS Continuation found no long-term cognitive benefits or harms from the prior short-term mHT exposure. Baseline cognition and its change during the original trial were the strongest predictors of later performance [22] [10].

Decision Framework and Analytical Innovations

The choice between an RCT and an observational study is driven by the research question, ethical considerations, and feasibility. The following diagram illustrates a decision framework for selecting the appropriate methodology.

Advancements in statistical methods are enhancing the robustness of both RCTs and observational studies. For RCTs, innovations include adaptive trials, sequential trials, and platform trials, which increase flexibility and efficiency [45]. For observational studies, causal inference methods—such as the use of Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs) to explicitly define confounders and the E-value to quantify the robustness of results to unmeasured confounding—allow for a more rigorous analysis that can approximate the causal reasoning of RCTs [45].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 2: Key Reagents and Materials for Hormone Therapy and Cognition Research

Item	Function/Application in Research
Conjugated Equine Estrogens (CEE)	A complex mixture of estrogens sourced from horses; a standard preparation used in major trials like WHI and KEEPS to study the effects of oral estrogen [22] [5].
17β-Estradiol (Transdermal)	A bio-identical human estrogen delivered via skin patch; used to study the effect of estrogen without first-pass liver metabolism, as in the KEEPS trial [22].
Medroxyprogesterone Acetate (MPA)	A synthetic progestin; used in combination with CEE in the WHI trial to protect the uterus in women with a uterus [5].
Micronized Progesterone	A bio-identical progesterone; used in the KEEPS trial as the progestin component, believed to have a more neutral metabolic and potentially neurological profile [22].
Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)	A brief 30-question test (10-12 mins) assessing multiple cognitive domains; used as a sensitive tool to detect mild cognitive impairment in clinical studies [47].
Standardized Neuropsychological Battery	A comprehensive set of tests measuring specific cognitive domains (e.g., memory, executive function); used in trials like KEEPS-Cog to generate composite factor scores for precise analysis [22].
Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS-m)	A validated cognitive assessment tool administered by telephone; used for large-scale longitudinal follow-up studies, such as post-WHI assessments [48].
Latent Growth Modeling (LGM)	A sophisticated statistical technique using structural equation modeling; applied in the KEEPS Continuation to model individual cognitive trajectories over time [22].

Integrated Evidence: The Case of Hormone Therapy and Cognition

The research on mHT and cognitive function provides a powerful case study of how RCTs and observational studies, despite sometimes showing conflicting results, together build a nuanced evidence base.

• Early Observational Studies: Consistently suggested a reduced risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD) among women who used mHT, with meta-analyses showing a 29-44% risk reduction [5]. However, these findings were potentially influenced by the "healthy user bias" [5].
• The WHI Memory Study (WHIMS) RCT: Found that initiating CEE, with or without MPA, in women aged 65 and older significantly increased the risk of dementia and provided no cognitive benefit [48] [5]. This contradicted the observational data.
• Reconciling the Evidence: The discrepancy led to the "critical window hypothesis," which posits that the effects of mHT depend on the timing of initiation relative to menopause [49] [5]. This hypothesis suggests that mHT may be beneficial or neutral when started early in menopause but harmful when initiated later in life [5].
• Synthesis via KEEPS: The KEEPS RCT tested this by assigning recently postmenopausal women to mHT or placebo and found no cognitive effect after 4 years [22]. Its observational follow-up, the KEEPS Continuation, further showed no long-term cognitive benefits or harms a decade later [22] [10]. This integrated evidence indicates that while mHT poses no long-term cognitive harm for healthy, recently menopausal women, it also does not improve or preserve cognitive function [10].

This progression from observational evidence to RCTs and then to long-term observational follow-ups underscores that neither study design alone is sufficient. The body of evidence, incorporating both methodologies, provides the most reliable guidance for clinical practice and future research.

Resolving Inconsistencies and Optimizing Therapeutic Parameters

The investigation of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) extends beyond symptom management to potential long-term impacts on cognitive health. Critical formulation variables—including estrogen type, administration route, and progestogen pairing—significantly influence neurobiological pathways and clinical outcomes. This guide provides a systematic comparison of oral conjugated equine estrogens (CEE), transdermal estradiol, and progestogen combinations, with specific focus on experimental data relevant to cognitive function research. Understanding these variables is essential for designing rigorous studies and interpreting the growing body of evidence on hormone therapy's central nervous system effects.

Table 1: Core Formulation Characteristics and Metabolic Profiles

Formulation Variable	Composition	Metabolic Pathway	Key Metabolic Consequences	Relevance to Brain Research
Oral CEE (e.g., Premarin)	Complex mixture of conjugated estrogens derived from pregnant mares' urine, primarily estrone sulfate [50]	First-pass hepatic metabolism [51]	Increased synthesis of clotting factors, CRP; higher VTE risk; creates estrone-predominant environment [52] [53]	Lower affinity for estrogen receptors; different activation profile than endogenous estradiol [51]
Transdermal Estradiol (e.g., patches, gels)	17β-estradiol identical to human estrogen [53]	Direct absorption into systemic circulation; avoids first-pass metabolism [51]	More stable hormone levels; minimal impact on clotting factors, inflammatory markers; preserves natural E2:E1 ratio [52] [51]	Mimics premenopausal hormonal milieu; potentially more favorable for brain receptor binding [51]
Progestogen Components	Varied: MPA, progesterone, dydrogesterone [53]	Hepatic metabolism (oral); variable bioavailability	MPA associated with increased breast cancer risk; progesterone/dydrogesterone potentially safer profiles [53]	Different neurosteroid properties; progesterone converts to allopregnanolone with GABAergic effects

Experimental Data and Clinical Outcomes Comparison

Quantitative Clinical Outcomes Across Formulations

Rigorous comparison of MHT formulations requires examination of multiple clinical domains, including cardiovascular risk, cancer incidence, and cognitive outcomes. The following tables synthesize quantitative findings from major studies and systematic reviews.

Table 2: Safety and Efficacy Outcomes by Formulation

Outcome Measure	Oral CEE	Transdermal Estradiol	Progestogen Influence	Key Supporting Evidence
Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) Risk	Significantly increased [52] [53]	No significant increase [52] [53]	Minimal modifying effect on VTE [52]	Systematic review of 51 studies [52]
Global Index Event Risk (WHI-OS)	CEE <0.625 mg/d + P: aHR 0.74 (0.56-0.97) vs. CEE 0.625 mg/d + P [54]	Similar to oral CEE <0.625 mg/d [54]	Not separately quantified in WHI-OS	WHI Observational Study (n=45,112) [54]
Breast Cancer Risk	Increased risk with CEE+MPA [53]	Potentially lower risk [53]	MPA increases risk; progesterone/dydrogesterone may reduce risk [53]	WHI trial and observational studies [53]
Cardiovascular Risk	Increased early CHD risk in WHI [54]	Potentially lower risk [53]	Not fully delineated	WHI trial [54]

Table 3: Cognitive Domain Performance by Formulation

Cognitive Domain	Oral CEE	Oral Estradiol	Transdermal Estradiol	Study Details
Global Cognitive Function	No long-term benefit or harm vs. placebo [50] [10]	Not separately reported (KEEPS)	No long-term benefit or harm vs. placebo [50] [10]	KEEPS Continuation (7 sites, n=275) [50] [10]
Episodic Memory	Not significantly different from no MHT [51]	Not significantly different from no MHT [51]	Significantly higher (β=0.413, p=0.007, d=0.303) [51]	CLSA (n=7,251) [51]
Prospective Memory	Not significantly different from no MHT [51]	Significantly higher (β=0.208, p=0.015, d=0.283) [51]	Not significantly different from no MHT [51]	CLSA (n=7,251) [51]
Executive Function	No significant effect [51]	No significant effect [51]	No significant effect [51]	CLSA (n=7,251) [51]

Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

KEEPS-Cog and KEEPS Continuation Study Protocol

Objective: To evaluate short-term and long-term cognitive effects of different MHT formulations initiated early in postmenopause [50] [10].

Design:

• Phase 1 (KEEPS-Cog): 48-month randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
• Phase 2 (KEEPS Continuation): Observational follow-up approximately 10 years post-trial

Participants:

• 727 healthy women early in postmenopause (within 3 years of final menstrual period)
• Age 42-58 years at randomization
• Low cardiovascular risk profile

Interventions:

• Oral CEE (0.45 mg/d) + cyclic micronized progesterone (200 mg/d for 12 days/month)
• Transdermal estradiol (50 μg/d) + cyclic micronized progesterone (200 mg/d for 12 days/month)
• Placebo pills and patches

Cognitive Assessment:

• Comprehensive neuropsychological test battery
• Primary outcomes: cognitive factor scores and global cognitive score
• Assessment times: Baseline, 18, 36, 48 months (KEEPS-Cog); ~10 years post-trial (Continuation)

Statistical Analysis:

• Latent growth models to assess cognitive trajectories
• Adjustment for covariates including age, education, and baseline cognitive performance

Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) Protocol

Objective: To examine associations between MHT formulation and specific cognitive domains in a population-based cohort [51].

Design: Cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from a national observational study

Participants:

• 7,251 cognitively healthy postmenopausal women
• Average age: 60.5 years (±10.2)
• Average menopause age: 50.5 years (±4.2)

Group Classification:

• Current oral estradiol-based MHT users (with/without progestogen)
• Current transdermal estradiol-based MHT users (patches, gels, vaginal formulations)
• Never-users of any MHT

Cognitive Assessment:

• Episodic memory: Verbal learning and recall tests
• Prospective memory: Remembering to perform future tasks
• Executive function: Planning, problem-solving, cognitive flexibility tasks

Statistical Analysis:

• Linear regression models adjusting for age, education, vascular risk factors
• Interaction testing for APOE ε4 status and parity
• Cohen's d for effect size quantification

Neurobiological Pathways and Experimental Workflows

Formulation-Dependent Neurobiological Pathways

The following diagram illustrates the key neurobiological pathways through which different MHT formulations potentially influence cognitive processes, based on current experimental evidence.

Experimental Workflow for MHT Cognitive Studies

The diagram below outlines a standardized experimental workflow for investigating cognitive effects of different MHT formulations, synthesized from methodologies used in the cited studies.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 4: Key Research Reagents and Assessment Tools for MHT Cognitive Studies

Reagent/Instrument	Specific Examples	Research Function	Application Notes
Estrogen Formulations	Premarin (oral CEE), Estraderm (transdermal estradiol)	Experimental interventions	Dose-equivalency critical: 0.45mg CEE ≈ 50μg transdermal E2 [50]
Progestogen Components	Medroxyprogesterone acetate, micronized progesterone, dydrogesterone	Endometrial protection; study of differential effects	Progesterone and dydrogesterone preferred for brain research due to neurosteroid properties [53]
Cognitive Assessment Batteries	KEEPS-Cog battery, CLSA cognitive modules	Domain-specific cognitive measurement	Must include episodic memory, prospective memory, executive function tests [50] [51]
Genetic Analysis Tools	APOE ε4 genotyping kits	Effect modification analysis	Essential for subgroup analysis given ε4-carrier differential responses [51]
Neuroimaging Biomarkers	PET for tau and amyloid, MRI for volumetric analysis	Pathophysiological mechanism investigation	Detects tau accumulation differences in older HRT users [11]

Research Gaps and Future Directions

Current evidence reveals significant formulation-dependent effects on cognitive outcomes, yet critical questions remain. The differential domain-specific cognitive benefits observed between transdermal and oral estradiol formulations demand further mechanistic investigation [51]. The interaction between progestogen type and cognitive outcomes represents another understudied area, with preliminary evidence suggesting distinct neurosteroid properties of progesterone compared to synthetic progestins may influence cognitive outcomes [53]. Future research should prioritize long-term randomized trials comparing modern formulations, incorporate neuroimaging biomarkers, and explore personalized approaches based on genetic risk factors, menopause timing, and specific cognitive domain concerns.

The relationship between menopausal hormone therapy (mHT) and cognitive function represents one of the most debated topics in women's health neuroscience. Central to this debate is the critical window hypothesis, which posits that the timing of mHT initiation relative to menopause significantly modifies its effects on the brain [5] [55]. This hypothesis suggests that a finite period exists shortly after menopause during which the brain remains responsive to estrogen's neuroprotective effects, while initiation beyond this window may be ineffective or potentially harmful [5]. The divergence between initial observational studies suggesting cognitive benefits and subsequent randomized trials showing null or adverse effects has been partially explained by this timing-dependent effect [5] [55]. This guide provides a comprehensive comparison of experimental data investigating how initiation of mHT within 3-10 years of menopause and varying treatment durations impacts long-term cognitive outcomes and brain health, synthesizing evidence for a research audience.

Comparative Analysis of Key Clinical Studies

Table 1: Key Study Designs and Participant Characteristics

Study Name	Design	Participant Age & Menopausal Status	mHT Formulations	Treatment Duration	Cognitive/Neural Outcomes
KEEPS & KEEPS Continuation [10] [9]	Randomized controlled trial with observational follow-up	Age 52.6 at enrollment; within 3 years of final menstrual period	oCEE (0.45 mg/d) + progesterone; tE2 (50 μg/d) + progesterone; placebo	4 years (treatment); ~10 year follow-up	Cognitive scores; MRI brain measures (white matter integrity, gray matter volume)
WHIMS [5] [55]	Randomized controlled trial	Age ≥65 at enrollment; ≥10 years postmenopause	CEE (0.625 mg/d) ± MPA	5-7 years (mean)	Dementia incidence; global cognitive function
WHIMS-Y [9]	Randomized controlled trial	Age 50-55 at enrollment; within 5 years of menopause	CEE (0.625 mg/d) ± MPA	5-7 years (mean)	Global cognitive function; verbal memory
ELITE [9]	Randomized controlled trial	Stratified by <6 or >10 years since menopause	Oral 17β-estradiol (1 mg/d) + progesterone	5-7 years (mean)	Cognitive function; cardiovascular outcomes
CFAS Wales [56] [57]	Population-based longitudinal cohort	Age ≥65 at baseline; various years postmenopause	Various (observational)	Varied (self-reported)	Cognitive performance over time

Table 2: Cognitive and Brain Imaging Outcomes by Timing and Formulation

Study	Time Since Menopause at Initiation	Global Cognition	Verbal Memory	Executive Function	Brain Structure	Dementia Risk
KEEPS [10]	<3 years	No effect (vs placebo)	No effect (vs placebo)	No effect (vs placebo)	tE2: preserved prefrontal cortex volume [58]	Not assessed
KEEPS Continuation [10] [9]	<3 years	No long-term effect (10+ years post-treatment)	No long-term effect (10+ years post-treatment)	No long-term effect (10+ years post-treatment)	No long-term effect on white matter integrity [9]	Not assessed
WHIMS [5] [55]	≥10 years	Adverse effect	Not specifically reported	Not specifically reported	Not assessed	Increased risk
WHIMS-Y [9]	<5 years	No effect	No effect	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
CFAS Wales [56]	Varied (observational)	Associated with better performance at single time point only	Not specifically reported	Not specifically reported	Not assessed	Not assessed

Detailed Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

The KEEPS Clinical Trial Protocol

The Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS) established a rigorous methodological framework for testing the critical window hypothesis [10] [9].

Participant Selection:

• Inclusion Criteria: Women aged 42-58, within 6-36 months of spontaneous menopause, with intact uterus
• Exclusion Criteria: History of cardiovascular disease, uncontrolled hypertension, smoking >10 cigarettes/day, BMI >35 kg/m², diabetes, dyslipidemia, or high coronary artery calcium score
• Sample Size: 727 women randomized across 9 clinical sites

Intervention Protocol:

• Randomization: Double-blind, placebo-controlled design with three arms:
  • Oral conjugated equine estrogens (oCEE; Premarin, 0.45 mg/day)
  • Transdermal 17β-estradiol (tE2; Climara patch, 50 μg/day)
  • Placebo pills and patch
• Progestin Component: All active treatment arms received micronized progesterone (Prometrium, 200 mg/day for 12 days/month) for endometrial protection
• Treatment Duration: 48 months of active intervention

Assessment Methods:

• Cognitive Battery: Comprehensive neuropsychological assessment including verbal learning and memory, auditory attention, working memory, visual attention, executive function, speeded language, and mental flexibility
• Neuroimaging: Structural MRI, diffusion MRI for white matter integrity, and assessment of white matter hyperintensities
• Additional Measures: Cardiovascular health markers, menopausal symptoms, quality of life

The KEEPS Continuation study (2017-2022) re-evaluated original participants approximately 10 years after trial completion, with 299 of 622 eligible women enrolled across 7 sites [10]. Statistical analyses employed latent growth models to assess whether baseline cognition and cognitive changes during KEEPS predicted performance at follow-up, and whether mHT randomization modified these relationships, adjusting for covariates.

Neuroimaging Methodologies in mHT Research

Advanced neuroimaging techniques have provided crucial insights into mHT's effects on brain structure and function.

Diffusion MRI Protocol:

• Technique: Multi-shell diffusion MRI acquisition
• Metrics:
  • Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI): Fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD)
  • Neurite Orientation Dispersion and Density Imaging (NODDI): Neurite density index (NDI), orientation dispersion index (ODI), isotropic volume fraction (ISOVF)
• Analysis: Linear regression models fitted for each brain region with false discovery rate adjustment for multiple comparisons [9]

Functional MRI Protocol:

• Task Paradigm: Task-switching protocol assessing cognitive control
• Analysis: Comparison of BOLD signal during task switching under HT versus placebo conditions
• Regions of Interest: Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex [26]

Experimental Workflow: KEEPS Trial Design

Signaling Pathways and Neurobiological Mechanisms

The neurobiological basis for the critical window hypothesis involves multiple interconnected signaling pathways through which estrogen modulates brain function and structure.

Estrogen Signaling in Brain Health

Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Materials and Assessment Tools

Category	Specific Reagent/Instrument	Research Function	Example Use
Hormone Formulations	Oral conjugated equine estrogens (Premarin)	Synthetic estrogen preparation	KEEPS: 0.45 mg/day [10]
	Transdermal 17β-estradiol (Climara patch)	Bioidentical estrogen delivery	KEEPS: 50 μg/day [10]
	Micronized progesterone (Prometrium)	Endometrial protection with neuroprotective potential	KEEPS: 200 mg/day for 12 days/month [10]
Cognitive Assessments	Comprehensive neuropsychological battery	Multi-domain cognitive assessment	KEEPS: 11 tests across multiple domains [10]
	Task-switching paradigms	Cognitive control and executive function assessment	fMRI study of prefrontal function [26]
Neuroimaging Tools	Diffusion MRI (DTI, NODDI)	White matter microstructure quantification	KEEPS Continuation: white matter integrity [9]
	Functional MRI (BOLD contrast)	Neural activity during cognitive tasks	Prefrontal activity during task switching [26]
	Structural MRI (volumetric)	Brain region volume measurement	Prefrontal cortex preservation [58]
Biomarker Assays	Plasma estradiol level measurement	Verification of hormone exposure	Confirmation of therapeutic levels [26]
	APOE genotyping	Genetic risk stratification	Effect modification analysis [56]

Integrated Analysis and Research Implications

The collective evidence from these studies indicates a complex relationship between mHT timing, duration, and cognitive outcomes that varies across neurobiological systems.

Timing Effects Across Cognitive Domains

The critical window hypothesis receives partial support from the experimental data, with important qualifications. While initiation of mHT within 3 years of menopause shows no adverse effects on long-term cognitive outcomes, it also demonstrates no significant benefits for global cognition, verbal memory, or executive function compared to placebo [10] [50]. However, neuroimaging studies reveal that timing effects may be domain-specific, with earlier initiation associated with preserved prefrontal cortex volume and enhanced prefrontal activity during cognitive control tasks, despite the absence of behavioral differences [58] [26]. This dissociation between neural and behavioral outcomes suggests that mHT may produce neurobiological changes that are not captured by standard cognitive assessment tools.

The contrast between KEEPS findings (initiation <3 years postmenopause) and WHIMS findings (initiation ≥10 years postmenopause) supports the existence of a timing-dependent effect, though primarily for risk mitigation rather than cognitive enhancement [10] [55]. The harmful effects observed in WHIMS when mHT was initiated in older postmenopausal women have not been observed in studies initiating treatment closer to menopause onset [10] [42].

Formulation and Duration Considerations

The comparative data suggest that formulation differences may interact with timing effects. In KEEPS, both oral and transdermal formulations showed similar null effects on cognitive outcomes despite different metabolic profiles [10]. However, neuroimaging data hint at potential formulation-specific effects, with transdermal estradiol associated with better preservation of prefrontal cortex volume compared to placebo [58]. The addition of progesterone appears to modify estrogen's effects, with natural progesterone (as used in KEEPS) potentially having a more favorable risk profile than synthetic progestins [10] [55].

Regarding treatment duration, the 4-year intervention in KEEPS followed by 10+ years of observation demonstrates that short-term use does not produce long-term cognitive harm or benefit [10] [9]. This pattern persists across multiple cognitive domains and is consistent with neuroimaging measures of white matter integrity [9]. The stability of these findings over time provides reassurance about the long-term neurocognitive safety of short-term mHT use initiated during early menopause.

Implications for Research and Drug Development

For researchers and drug development professionals, these findings highlight several critical considerations:

• Endpoint Selection: Neural outcomes (e.g., neuroimaging measures) may detect subtler effects than standard cognitive tests
• Formulation Optimization: Natural progesterone and transdermal delivery systems may offer preferable risk-benefit profiles
• Personalization Factors: APOE status, cardiovascular health, and surgical versus natural menopause may modify treatment effects
• Trial Design: Adequate follow-up periods are essential to detect long-term consequences of short-term interventions

Future research should prioritize elucidating the neurobiological mechanisms underlying timing effects, developing more sensitive cognitive and neural endpoints, and identifying biomarkers that predict individual response to mHT interventions.

Surgical menopause, induced by bilateral oophorectomy, provides a powerful natural experiment for investigating the timing and necessity of menopausal hormone therapy (mHT). Unlike natural menopause, which involves a gradual decline in ovarian function, surgical menopause causes an abrupt cessation of estrogen production, creating a clear starting point for studying the effects of estrogen deprivation and replacement [12]. This model has become instrumental in testing the "critical window hypothesis," which proposes that initiating mHT close to the time of menopause maximizes benefits while minimizing risks [12] [42]. Research demonstrates that the timing of mHT initiation is a crucial determinant of cognitive outcomes, with administration proximate to estrogen loss showing the most favorable results [12].

The neuroprotective role of estrogen, particularly 17β-estradiol, involves multiple mechanisms including neural plasticity, adult neurogenesis, and signaling with other neuroprotective factors such as brain-derived neurotrophic factor and insulin-like growth factor-1 [12]. When this protection is abruptly withdrawn through surgical menopause, the consequences for cognitive health may be more pronounced than in natural menopause, making this population particularly important for studying mHT interventions.

Comparative Analysis: Surgical vs. Natural Menopause Models

Key Studies and Cognitive Outcomes

Table 1: Comparative Cognitive Outcomes Following Surgical vs. Natural Menopause

Study/Model	Participant Characteristics	Intervention	Cognitive Outcomes	Key Findings
Surgical Menopause (WHAM Study) [59]	Premenopausal BRCA1/2 carriers (n=83) planning RRSO; comparison group (n=98)	65% initiated HT after RRSO; prospective 24-month observation	Verbal learning and memory, psychomotor speed, fluency	Small adverse effect on verbal learning at 24 months; effect partly offset by HT use (p=0.04 for HT users vs. non-users)
IGNITE Study [12]	Postmenopausal women (n=461; mean age=69.6); history of oophorectomy	HT started on average within 2 years of oophorectomy	Episodic memory, working memory, visuospatial processing	HT association with better episodic memory (β=0.106, p=0.02), working memory (β=0.120, p=0.005), and visuospatial processing (β=0.095, p=0.03)
KEEPS Continuation [22] [10]	Recently postmenopausal women (n=275); low cardiovascular risk	4 years of oCEE (0.45mg/d) or tE2 (50μg/d) with progesterone; assessment 10 years post-trial	Verbal learning/memory, auditory attention, working memory, executive function	No long-term cognitive benefits or harms from mHT; baseline cognition strongest predictor of later performance
ELSA Employment Study [60] [61]	Women from English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (n=1,386)	HT use in early postmenopause	Labor market participation	Surgical menopause associated with increased labor market exit (RRR=1.45); HT mediated risk reduction (RRRNIE=0.73)

Quantitative Data Synthesis

Table 2: Standardized Effect Sizes of mHT on Cognitive Domains Across Menopause Models

Cognitive Domain	Surgical Menopause	Natural Menopause (KEEPS)	Early Natural Menopause
Verbal Learning	β = 0.106-0.120 [12]	Not significant [22] [10]	Not available
Working Memory	β = 0.120, p=0.005 [12]	Not significant [22] [10]	Not available
Executive Function	Not significant [59]	Not significant [22] [10]	Not available
Global Cognition	Not available	Not significant [22] [10] [62]	Not significant [60]
Labor Market Participation	RRRNIE = 0.73 [60]	Not applicable	RRRNIE = 0.79 [60]

Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

WHAM Study Protocol: Surgical Menopause and Cognition

The What Happens After Menopause (WHAM) study employed a prospective, multisite, 24-month observational design to examine cognitive outcomes following premenopausal risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) [59]. The methodology can be summarized as follows:

• Participants: Premenopausal BRCA1/2 carriers (n=83) planning RRSO were recruited from gynecology-oncology and familial cancer centers, with a comparison group (n=98) not planning oophorectomy.
• Baseline Assessment: Comprehensive cognitive testing was conducted within 8 weeks of eligibility screening, with RRSO scheduled between baseline and 3 months.
• Cognitive Measures: The test battery focused on verbal learning and memory, psychomotor speed, and fluency, assessed at baseline, 3, 12, and 24 months.
• HT Initiation: 65% of participants initiated hormone therapy after RRSO, allowing for comparison between HT users and non-users.
• Statistical Analysis: Multivariable models assessed group differences in cognitive performance over time, adjusting for HT use and other relevant factors.

This protocol's strength lies in its prospective design and specific focus on surgical menopause, providing high-quality evidence about short-term cognitive effects and HT modulation.

KEEPS Continuation Protocol: Long-Term Follow-Up

The Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS) Continuation implemented an observational, longitudinal cohort design to evaluate the long-term cognitive effects of short-term mHT initiated early after natural menopause [22] [10]:

• Original KEEPS Design: A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled 4-year mHT trial with three arms: oral conjugated equine estrogens (oCEE, 0.45 mg/d), transdermal 17β-estradiol (tE2, 50 µg/d), and placebo pills or patch. All participants received cyclic progesterone.
• Participant Population: 727 recently postmenopausal women (within 6-36 months of last menses) aged 42-58 with low cardiovascular risk.
• KEEPS Continuation: 10-14 years after original randomization, 299 participants from 7 original sites underwent reassessment.
• Cognitive Assessment: Participants completed the original KEEPS-Cog test battery, analyzed using 4 cognitive factor scores and a global cognitive score.
• Statistical Approach: Latent growth models assessed whether baseline cognition and cognitive changes during KEEPS predicted follow-up performance, and whether mHT randomization modified these relationships.

This protocol provides unique insights into long-term cognitive effects by extending follow-up of a rigorously controlled trial.

Neurobiological Mechanisms and Research Framework

Estrogen Signaling and Neuroprotection

The neuroprotective effects of estrogen, particularly 17β-estradiol, involve multiple signaling pathways that become disrupted following surgical menopause [12]. Understanding these mechanisms is essential for contextualizing cognitive outcomes in surgical menopause models:

• Neural Plasticity and Neurogenesis: Estrogen promotes synaptic formation and complexity, enhances neurogenesis in the hippocampus, and supports neuronal survival through multiple signaling cascades.
• Neurotrophic Factor Regulation: Estrogen modulates brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), both critical for neuronal health and cognitive function.
• Metabolic Regulation: Estrogen influences cerebral glucose metabolism and mitochondrial function, with disruptions potentially contributing to cognitive vulnerability after surgical menopause.
• Cerebrovascular Effects: Estrogen maintains healthy cerebral blood flow and endothelial function, with abrupt withdrawal potentially impacting white matter integrity [9].

The timing of mHT initiation appears crucial for engaging these neuroprotective mechanisms effectively. The critical window hypothesis suggests that intervention must occur while neural systems remain responsive to estrogen, before age-related changes compromise this responsiveness [12] [42].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Essential Research Materials for Surgical Menopause and mHT Studies

Reagent/Material	Specification	Research Application	Example Studies
Transdermal 17β-estradiol	Climara patch, 50 μg/d	Provides consistent estrogen levels bypassing first-pass metabolism; compared to oral formulations	KEEPS [22] [10]
Oral conjugated equine estrogens	Premarin, 0.45 mg/d	Represents traditional oral HT; undergoes hepatic first-pass metabolism	KEEPS [22] [10], WHI [42]
Micronized progesterone	Prometrium, 200 mg/d for 12 days monthly	Endometrial protection with favorable neuroactive profile	KEEPS [22] [10]
Cognitive Test Batteries	Domain-specific composite scores (verbal memory, executive function, etc.)	Standardized assessment of multiple cognitive domains	KEEPS-Cog [22] [10], WHAM [59]
Diffusion MRI (dMRI)	DTI and NODDI parameters (FA, MD, NDI, ODI)	White matter integrity assessment through water diffusion metrics	KEEPS Ancillary [9]
APOE Genotyping	ε2, ε3, ε4 allele determination	Stratification based on Alzheimer's disease genetic risk	IGNITE [12]
FLAIR MRI	White matter hyperintensity volume quantification	Detection of cerebrovascular disease and structural changes	KEEPS Ancillary [9]

Surgical menopause provides an exceptional model for investigating the timing and necessity of hormone therapy, offering methodological advantages for elucidating the critical window hypothesis. Current evidence indicates that mHT initiation proximate to surgical menopause can mitigate certain cognitive effects, particularly in verbal learning and memory [59] [12], and may support functional outcomes such as workforce participation [63] [60] [61]. However, these benefits appear domain-specific and must be balanced against potential risks.

Future research should prioritize several key areas: first, elucidating the molecular mechanisms through which timing influences mHT efficacy; second, examining how different mHT formulations (transdermal versus oral) interact with timing variables; and third, exploring how genetic factors such as APOE ε4 status modify these relationships [12]. The surgical menopause model will continue to be invaluable for addressing these questions, ultimately informing more personalized approaches to hormone therapy that maximize benefits while minimizing risks for women experiencing both surgical and natural menopause transitions.

In cardiovascular research, the relationships between physiological health, lifestyle factors, and symptom burden present complex methodological challenges. Accurate measurement and interpretation of these interconnected domains are crucial for developing effective interventions, particularly when framed within broader investigations such as the long-term effects of hormone therapy on cognitive function. This guide objectively compares predominant assessment methodologies and synthesizes experimental data to inform rigorous study design. We focus specifically on tools for quantifying symptom burden and lifestyle factors—key confounding variables that must be properly addressed to isolate true treatment effects in longitudinal studies.

Comparative Analysis of Symptom Burden Assessment Tools

Symptom burden, the subjective experience of symptom prevalence, frequency, and severity, significantly impacts functional status and quality of life in patients with cardiovascular conditions [64]. Proper measurement is essential for controlling this confounding factor. The following table compares two validated patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures commonly used in cardiovascular research.

Table 1: Comparison of Symptom Burden Assessment Tools in Cardiovascular Research

Feature	Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS)	Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ)
Original Development Context	Palliative care (oncology) [64]	Heart failure-specific [65]
Primary Domains Measured	Nine common symptoms: pain, tiredness, nausea, depression, anxiety, drowsiness, appetite, well-being, shortness of breath [64]	Physical function, symptoms (frequency, severity), social function, self-efficacy, quality of life [65]
Scoring System	0-10 numeric rating scale for each symptom (total score 0-90) [66]	Multiple scales transformed to a 0-100 overall summary score [65]
Key Strengths	Rapid administration; captures multiple symptoms simultaneously; validated prognostic value [66]	Comprehensive, disease-specific health status assessment; high reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.94) [65]
Documented Predictive Value	Prognostic for 6-month HF readmission/mortality (adjusted HR: 1.10 per 5-point increase) [66]	Predicts risk of death and recurrent hospital admissions [64]

Experimental Protocols for Assessing Symptom Burden and Lifestyle Factors

Protocol 1: Prospective Cohort Study Using ESAS

Objective: To investigate the prognostic significance of symptom burden assessed by ESAS in older patients with heart failure [66].

Population: Consecutive patients ≥60 years hospitalized with HF (Framingham criteria) [66].

Methodology:

• Symptom Assessment: At hospital discharge, patients self-complete the ESAS questionnaire, rating nine symptoms on an 11-point numeric scale (0=absence, 10=worst possible) with "now" as the timeframe [66].
• Covariate Assessment: Collect baseline data on physical examination, biomarkers (BNP, eGFR), echocardiography, medications, and geriatric assessments (nutritional risk index, handgrip strength, cognitive function) prior to discharge [66].
• Outcome Measurement: Primary outcome is combined HF readmission and all-cause mortality within 6 months, determined via medical record review and follow-up surveys [66].
• Statistical Analysis: Multivariable Cox regression models adjusted for established risk scores (e.g., MAGGIC) and biomarkers. Calculate Net Reclassification Improvement (NRI) and Integrated Discrimination Improvement (IDI) to assess prognostic value added by ESAS [66].

Protocol 2: Cross-Sectional Study of Health Status Using mHealth Tools

Objective: To identify predictors of health status in a racially/ethnically diverse HF patient sample using a mobile health application [65].

Population: Patients with HF recruited from cardiac inpatient units and ambulatory clinics [65].

Methodology:

• mHealth Platform: Participants report symptoms via the mi.Symptoms web application on a tablet device, which integrates validated instruments including PROMIS short forms and the KCCQ [65].
• Core Measures:
  • Physical/Psychological Symptoms: PROMIS scales for pain interference, fatigue, sleep disturbance, depression, anxiety, and anger [65].
  • Physical/Social Function: PROMIS scales for physical function, cognitive abilities, and ability to participate in social roles [65].
  • Health Status: KCCQ as the primary outcome [65].
• Statistical Analysis: Multiple linear regression analysis to identify predictors of KCCQ score, adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical variables [65].

Mechanistic Pathways Linking Lifestyle, Cardiovascular Health, and Symptom Burden

The relationship between modifiable lifestyle factors, cardiovascular health, and perceived symptom burden operates through interconnected biological pathways. The following diagram synthesizes these key mechanistic relationships.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

Table 2: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Cardiovascular Lifestyle Studies

Item	Primary Function	Example Application
Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS)	Quantifies patient-reported severity of nine common symptoms (e.g., pain, tiredness, anxiety) [64]	Primary endpoint in prognostic studies linking symptom burden to clinical outcomes [66]
Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ)	Assesses disease-specific health status across physical limitation, symptoms, social function, and quality of life [65]	Validated outcome measure in interventions targeting functional capacity and social participation [65]
PROMIS Short Forms	Measures universal physical and psychological symptom domains (pain, fatigue, depression, anxiety) with population-normed T-scores [65]	Captures non-cardiac symptoms that contribute to overall burden in comorbid populations [65]
Mediterranean Diet-Related Healthy Lifestyle (MHL) Score	Combines multiple lifestyle factors (BMI, diet, activity, smoking, alcohol) into a composite score [67]	Evaluates overall lifestyle adherence as an exposure variable for CVD risk prediction [67]
Mobile Health (mHealth) Applications	Enables real-time symptom reporting and data integration at the point of need [65]	Facilitates longitudinal data collection in the patient's natural environment for ecological momentary assessment [65]

Discussion: Implications for Research on Hormone Therapy and Cognitive Function

Within long-term studies of hormone therapy's effects on cognitive function, cardiovascular health and symptom burden function as critical confounding variables that must be accurately measured and statistically controlled. The assessment tools and protocols detailed above provide methodological frameworks for addressing these complexities.

Cardiac biomarkers increasingly demonstrate predictive value for cognitive decline, potentially through shared pathways of vascular damage, neuroinflammation, and neurohormonal imbalance [68]. Furthermore, symptom burden—particularly fatigue, anxiety, and impaired well-being—may reflect systemic physiological disturbances that influence both cardiovascular and cognitive outcomes [64] [66]. Lifestyle factors modify risk across both domains, with composite lifestyle scores demonstrating substantial risk reduction (hazard ratios of 0.43-0.44 for CVD in highly adherent groups) [67].

Future research should integrate precise cardiovascular phenotyping with validated PRO measures to disentangle these complex relationships. The strategic use of the tools and methodologies compared in this guide will enhance the rigor of studies investigating how hormone therapies influence cognitive trajectories, ensuring that observed effects are accurately attributed beyond confounding cardiovascular pathways.

Synthesizing Evidence from Meta-Analyses and Long-Term Studies

The relationship between menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) and cognitive function represents one of the most contentious areas in women's health neuroscience. Despite extensive preclinical evidence suggesting estrogen's neuroprotective effects, the clinical application of MHT to support cognitive function remains controversial [69]. The discovery that Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology may begin decades before symptom onset indicates a substantial window for intervention, potentially coinciding with the menopause transition in women [69]. This prodromal phase may start as early as midlife, thus aligning with the menopause transition in women [69]. The onset of menopause establishes a hypoestrogenic state that has been proposed as a female-specific risk factor for AD, given that postmenopausal women account for over 60% of AD patients—a gender disparity not solely explained by longevity factors [69].

The "critical window hypothesis" posits that MHT is most effective when initiated during a period when the brain may be more responsive to estrogen, typically near menopause onset [56]. This framework is essential for understanding the divergent findings between earlier observational studies that suggested cognitive benefits and subsequent clinical trials that showed neutral or negative effects. This meta-analysis systematically examines data from 34 randomized controlled trials including 14,914 treated and 12,679 placebo participants to clarify the effects of MHT formulation, timing of initiation, and treatment duration on cognitive outcomes [69].

Methodological Framework: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols

Search Strategy and Inclusion Criteria

The systematic review was conducted in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [69]. Investigators carried out a comprehensive literature search in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases from 1975 through September 2023. The search strategy incorporated structured keyword combinations including ['hormone replacement therapy', 'estrogen therapy', 'estrogen replacement therapy', 'postmenopausal hormone therapy'] and ['cognition', 'cognitive performance', 'memory', 'dementia', 'Alzheimer's disease'] and ['randomized controlled trial', 'clinical trial'] [69].

The inclusion criteria were strictly defined to ensure methodological rigor:

• Publications in English in peer-reviewed journals
• Well-defined participant cohorts
• Medically healthy women or patients with hysterectomy/oophorectomy
• Outcomes including measures of cognitive function
• Randomized placebo-controlled trials with at least 2 weeks duration
• Systemic estrogen with or without progestogen as treatment
• Reported estimates of association with measures of statistical uncertainty [69]

Table 1: Data Extraction Protocol

Data Category	Specific Elements Extracted
Study Characteristics	Year of publication, country, study design
Participant Information	Number of participants, age, menopausal status, type of menopause
Intervention Details	Formulation, dosage, route, timing of initiation, duration
Outcome Measures	Cognitive endpoints, assessment tools, summary statistics
Statistical Data	Mean/median scores, standard error, standard deviation, confidence intervals

Statistical Analysis Framework

The meta-analysis employed robust variance estimation (RVE) to compute pooled effect sizes, accounting for intra-study dependent effect sizes while mitigating the impact of outliers, unequal variances, and other sources of heterogeneity [69]. This advanced statistical approach allowed for inclusion of multiple effect estimates from single studies. Researchers evaluated heterogeneity using Cochran's Q, I² and tau² statistics and interpreted data using random-effect models that incorporate study sample size with within- and between-study variance to account for study heterogeneity [69].

Study-specific estimates were used to calculate pooled estimated effect sizes (standardized mean difference [SMD]) with 95% confidence intervals (C.I.). Results were considered significant at P < 0.05. When interpreting SMDs, the magnitude was assessed as a measure of effect size: approximately 0.2 representing a small effect, 0.5 a medium effect, and 0.8 a large effect [69]. The analysis strategy included both cognitive domain scores and individual cognitive tests available across at least four studies reporting comparable outcomes.

Quantitative Synthesis: Meta-Analysis Findings on MHT and Cognition

The meta-analysis of 34 randomized controlled trials revealed that MHT had no overall effects on cognitive domain scores when all studies were pooled [69]. However, when results were stratified by formulation and treatment timing, significant patterns emerged. The divergent effects based on formulation and timing explain much of the controversy in the literature and highlight the importance of these moderating variables.

Table 2: MHT Effects on Cognitive Domains by Formulation and Timing

Cognitive Domain	Therapy Type	Timing of Initiation	Standardized Mean Difference (95% CI)	P-value
Global Cognition	Estrogen-only	Surgical menopause	1.575 (0.228, 2.921)	0.043
Verbal Memory	Estrogen-only	Midlife/close to menopause	0.394 (0.014, 0.774)	0.046
MMSE Scores	Estrogen-progestogen	Spontaneous menopause (mostly late-life)	-1.853 (-2.974, -0.733)	0.030
Visual Memory	Any MHT	Duration >1 year	Worsening (specific SMD not reported)	Significant

For surgical menopause, which predominantly involved estrogen-only therapy, researchers observed significant improvements in global cognition compared to placebo (SMD=1.575, 95% CI 0.228, 2.921; P=0.043) [69]. When initiated specifically in midlife or close to menopause onset, estrogen therapy was associated with improved verbal memory (SMD=0.394, 95% CI 0.014, 0.774; P=0.046), while late-life initiation demonstrated no such benefits [69]. Conversely, estrogen-progestogen therapy for spontaneous menopause was associated with a significant decline in Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) scores compared to placebo (SMD=-1.853, 95% CI -2.974, -0.733; P=0.030), with most of these studies administering treatment in a late-life population [69].

Long-Term Cognitive Outcomes: KEEPS Continuation Study

The Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS) Continuation provides crucial insights into the long-term cognitive effects of short-term MHT use. This observational follow-up study reevaluated participants from the original KEEPS trial approximately 10 years after completion of the 4-year clinical trial [50]. The original KEEPS-Cog trial had found no cognitive benefit or harm after 48 months of MHT initiated within 3 years of final menstrual period [10].

In the KEEPS Continuation, 299 participants repeated the original cognitive test battery, which was analyzed using 4 cognitive factor scores and a global cognitive score [50]. Latent growth models assessed whether baseline cognition and cognitive changes during KEEPS predicted cognitive performance at follow-up, and whether MHT randomization modified these relationships [50]. The results demonstrated that cognitive performance was not influenced by earlier exposure to either MHT formulation (oral conjugated equine estrogens or transdermal 17β-estradiol) [10]. The authors concluded that "short-term MHT exposure in recently postmenopausal women with low cardiovascular risk has no long-term impact on cognition" [10].

Neurobiological Mechanisms: Pathways of Hormonal Influence on Cognitive Function

The diagram above illustrates the complex neurobiological pathways through which menopausal hormone therapy may influence cognitive function. The framework highlights the critical role of timing in determining whether MHT exerts beneficial, neutral, or detrimental effects on cognition.

The neuroprotective potential of estrogen stems from its action on multiple molecular and cellular pathways. Estrogen, particularly 17β-estradiol, is known to have neurotrophic and neuroprotective effects, with modulatory influences on metabolic and biochemical pathways implicated in AD [69]. Ovarian hormones support neurocognitive processes by enhancing synaptic plasticity, providing neuroprotection, and regulating cerebral blood flow [56]. These mechanisms explain why the hypoestrogenic state established after menopause has been proposed as a female-specific risk factor for AD [69].

The critical window hypothesis represented in the diagram explains why timing of initiation is crucial—MHT initiated during the perimenopausal or early postmenopausal period when the brain is still responsive to estrogen may produce beneficial effects, while the same intervention initiated later may have neutral or negative consequences [56]. This aligns with the "healthy cell bias" of estrogen action, which suggests that estrogen benefits healthy neurons but may adversely affect compromised neural tissue [69].

Experimental Protocols and Assessment Methodologies

Cognitive Assessment Battery

The meta-analysis synthesized results from diverse cognitive assessment tools across multiple domains. The comprehensive neuropsychological evaluation typically included:

• Global Cognition: Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)
• Verbal Memory: California Verbal Learning Test, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test
• Visual Memory: Benton Visual Retention Test, Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure
• Executive Function: Trail Making Test Part B, Stroop Test, Digit Span
• Visuospatial Ability: Block Design, Mental Rotation Tests
• Attention and Processing Speed: Trail Making Test Part A, Digit Symbol Coding [69] [70]

In the KEEPS Continuation study, participants repeated the original KEEPS-Cog test battery which was analyzed using 4 cognitive factor scores and a global cognitive score [50]. Cognitive data from both KEEPS and KEEPS Continuation were available for 275 participants, and latent growth models (LGMs) assessed whether baseline cognition and cognitive changes during KEEPS predicted cognitive performance at follow-up [50].

Neuroimaging Protocols

Advanced neuroimaging techniques provided objective measures of brain structure and function. The KEEPS Continuation study employed multimodal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to investigate white matter architecture 10 years after KEEPS completion [9]. The protocol included:

• Diffusion MRI (dMRI): Utilizing both diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI) to quantify water diffusion in brain tissue
• Structural MRI: Fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) sequences to detect white matter hyperintensities and cerebral infarcts
• Quantitative Metrics: Fractional anisotropy (FA), mean diffusivity (MD), neurite density index (NDI), orientation dispersion index (ODI), and isotropic volume fraction (ISOVF) [9]

The imaging protocol allowed researchers to detect early microstructural changes in the brain that may predict future cognitive alterations before overt cognitive impairment manifests [9].

Research Reagent Solutions: Essential Materials for Hormone-Cognition Studies

Table 3: Key Research Reagents and Materials for MHT-Cognition Investigations

Reagent/Material	Specification	Research Function	Example Use
Oral Conjugated Equine Estrogens (oCEE)	Premarin, 0.45 mg/d	Synthetic estrogen formulation	KEEPS Trial: compared against transdermal and placebo [50]
Transdermal 17β-Estradiol (tE2)	Climara patch, 50 μg/d	Bioidentical estrogen delivery	KEEPS Trial: transdermal arm to assess route of administration effects [10]
Micronized Progesterone	Prometrium, 200 mg/d for 12 d/mo	Progestogen component for uterus protection	KEEPS: combined with both estrogen arms for endometrial protection [50]
Placebo Controls	Matching pills and patches	Methodological control for blinding	Essential for RCT design across all included studies [69]
Cognitive Assessment Batteries	Standardized neuropsychological tests	Quantifying cognitive outcomes across domains	MMSE for global cognition; specific tests for verbal/visual memory [69]
APOE Genotyping Kits	Allele-specific detection	Stratification by genetic dementia risk	CFAS Wales: assessing APOE4 interaction with HRT effects [56]

The meta-analytic evidence from 34 RCTs and nearly 15,000 treated participants demonstrates that the effects of MHT on cognition are not uniform but depend critically on multiple factors including formulation, timing of initiation, type of menopause, and treatment duration. The differential outcomes based on these variables explain much of the apparent contradiction in the literature and highlight the importance of personalized approaches to MHT.

For clinical practice, these findings offer nuanced guidance: MHT initiated in early menopause for symptom management appears to have neither long-term cognitive benefits nor harms, providing reassurance for women and clinicians considering short-term use for menopausal symptoms [10] [42]. However, MHT should not be recommended as an intervention specifically to preserve cognitive function or prevent cognitive decline in postmenopausal women [10].

Future research should address several critical knowledge gaps, including the long-term effects of newer MHT formulations, the impact of MHT on women at higher cardiovascular risk, and the potential interactions between MHT and genetic risk factors for Alzheimer's disease. Additionally, more homogeneous study designs with larger samples are needed to clarify the effects on specific cognitive domains and to identify potential subgroups of women who might derive cognitive benefit from appropriately timed MHT interventions [69].

The long-term impact of therapeutic interventions on distinct cognitive domains is a critical area of investigation in neurological and psychiatric research. Understanding domain-specific outcomes—particularly in verbal memory, global cognition, and executive function—enables more targeted and effective interventions for cognitive decline and neurodegenerative conditions. This guide synthesizes current evidence from clinical trials and observational studies, providing a direct comparison of cognitive outcomes across multiple interventions, including menopausal hormone therapy (MHT), multidomain lifestyle programs, and assessments of post-viral cognitive effects. The data presented herein are framed within the broader thesis that cognitive outcomes are highly domain-specific and influenced by intervention type, timing, and individual risk factors.

Comparative Outcomes Across Cognitive Domains

The tables below summarize quantitative findings from key studies investigating intervention effects on verbal memory, global cognition, and executive function.

Table 1: Cognitive Domain Outcomes from Major Clinical Trials

Study / Intervention	Global Cognition Effect	Verbal Memory Effect	Executive Function Effect	Participant Profile
U.S. POINTER (Lifestyle) [71] [72]	Structured: +0.243 SD/yearSelf-guided: +0.213 SD/yearGroup difference: +0.029 SD/year (P=0.008)	No significant group differences found [72]	Structured intervention showed greater improvement: +0.037 SD/year (P<0.05) [72]	Older adults (60-79 yrs) at risk for cognitive decline [71]
KEEPS Continuation (MHT) [10]	No long-term benefit or harm from either MHT formulation vs. placebo [10]	No long-term benefit or harm from either MHT formulation vs. placebo [10]	No long-term benefit or harm from either MHT formulation vs. placebo [10]	Recently postmenopausal women with low cardiovascular risk [10]
Post-COVID-19 Study [73]	Not directly assessed	Story Retelling (IUs/min):COVID-19 group: 0.53 (SD 0.21)Non-COVID-19 group: 0.63 (SD 0.24)P = 0.049	Verbal working memory (Alphabet Span) showed no significant group difference (P=0.20) [73]	Young adults (mean age ~21 yrs) with and without history of COVID-19 [73]

Table 2: Executive Function Domain Performance in Dual-Task Walking [74] [75]

Executive Function Domain	Cognitive Task	Correct Response Speed (CRS)	Dual-Task Cost on Gait Speed	Interference Profile
Working Memory	Backward Digit Span	Highest CRS in single and dual-task conditions	Moderate interference	Balanced cognitive and motor interference
Inhibition	Stroop Test	Intermediate CRS	Lower interference	Lower overall interference
Cognitive Flexibility	Category Naming	Slowest CRS in both conditions	Highest interference	Highest overall interference

Detailed Experimental Protocols

U.S. POINTER Lifestyle Intervention Trial

The U.S. POINTER study was a two-year, single-blind, randomized clinical trial conducted across five sites in the United States [71] [72].

• Objective: To compare the effects of two different two-year lifestyle interventions on cognitive trajectory in older adults at risk for cognitive decline and dementia [71].
• Participants: 2,111 individuals aged 60-79 years with a sedentary lifestyle and suboptimal diet, plus at least two additional risk factors (e.g., family history of memory impairment, cardiometabolic risk) [71] [72].
• Intervention Groups:
  • Structured Intervention (n=1,056): Participants attended 38 facilitated peer team meetings over two years. They followed a prescribed activity program with specific, measurable goals for aerobic/resistance exercise, adherence to the MIND diet, cognitive training via BrainHQ, and social activities. Regular health metric reviews and goal-setting with a study clinician were included [72].
  • Self-Guided Intervention (n=1,055): Participants attended six peer team meetings to encourage self-selected lifestyle changes fitting their personal needs and schedules. Staff provided general encouragement without directed coaching [72].
• Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the annual rate of change in a global cognitive function composite score (comprising executive function, episodic memory, and processing speed). Secondary outcomes included effects on specific cognitive domains [71].

KEEPS Continuation MHT Cognitive Study

The Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS) Continuation was an observational follow-up of a prior randomized controlled trial [10].

• Objective: To assess the long-term cognitive effects of short-term (4 years) menopausal hormone therapy (mHT) initiated within 3 years of menopause [10].
• Participants: 275 women from the original KEEPS trial who were recently postmenopausal (within 36 months) and at low cardiovascular risk at the time of randomization [10].
• Original Trial Design: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial with three arms:
  • Oral conjugated equine estrogens (oCEE; 0.45 mg/day)
  • Transdermal 17β-estradiol (tE2; 50 µg/day)
  • Placebo pills or patch Participants in the active treatment arms also received cyclic micronized progesterone. [10]
• Follow-up: The KEEPS Continuation re-evaluated participants approximately 10 years after the completion of the original 4-year trial [10].
• Outcome Measures: Cognitive performance was assessed using a battery of tests analyzed through four cognitive factor scores and a global cognitive score. Latent growth models were used to analyze cognitive change over time [10].

Post-COVID-19 Verbal Working Memory and Story Retelling

This study investigated the impact of COVID-19 on memory-based story retelling and verbal working memory in young adults [73].

• Objective: To examine group differences in story retelling and working memory between individuals with and without a history of COVID-19, and to determine if verbal working memory predicts story retelling performance [73].
• Participants: 79 young adults (mean age ~21 years); 40 with a history of COVID-19 and 39 without [73].
• Assessment Methods:
  • Story Retelling Procedure (SRP): Participants listened to a story and were immediately asked to retell it. Performance was quantified using information units per minute (IUs/min), a measure of discourse informativeness [73].
  • Verbal Working Memory Task: Assessed using the Alphabet Span Test, which requires manipulation and recall of alphabetically organized verbal information [73].
• Analysis: Group comparisons were conducted on IUs/min and Alphabet Span scores. Regression analysis tested whether working memory predicted story retelling performance [73].

Conceptual Frameworks and Workflows

The following diagrams illustrate the key conceptual relationships and experimental workflows derived from the analyzed studies.

Hormone Therapy Critical Window Hypothesis

Dual-Task Interference on Executive Functions

Lifestyle Intervention Workflow (U.S. POINTER)

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Materials and Assessments for Cognitive Domain Research

Research Tool	Primary Function	Applicable Cognitive Domain	Key Studies Using Tool
Alphabet Span Test	Assesses verbal working memory capacity through manipulation and recall of alphabetically organized information	Verbal Working Memory	Post-COVID-19 cognitive study [73]
Story Retelling Procedure (SRP)	Quantifies discourse informativeness and narrative organization via information units per minute (IUs/min)	Verbal Memory, Discourse Production	Post-COVID-19 cognitive study [73]
Global Cognitive Composite Z-score	Composite measure integrating executive function, episodic memory, and processing speed	Global Cognition	U.S. POINTER [71] [72]
Backward Digit Span Task	Measures working memory capacity through reverse repetition of number sequences	Working Memory	Dual-task walking study [74] [75]
Stroop Test	Assesses inhibitory control and attention by measuring interference in color-word naming	Inhibition, Executive Function	Dual-task walking study [74] [75]
Category Naming Task	Evaluates cognitive flexibility through rapid category switching and verbal fluency	Cognitive Flexibility	Dual-task walking study [74] [75]
BrainHQ Platform	Computerized cognitive training system for targeted brain exercises	Multiple Cognitive Domains	U.S. POINTER [72]

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) recent decision to remove most "black box" warnings from menopausal hormone therapy (HT) products represents a pivotal moment in women's health research and regulatory science [76] [77]. This regulatory transformation stems from a comprehensive reassessment of the risk-benefit profile of hormone therapies, particularly regarding cardiovascular disease, breast cancer, and dementia risks that were highlighted in the early 2000s based primarily on the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) study [78]. The FDA is now working with manufacturers to update product labeling to remove these warnings, though the boxed warning for endometrial cancer remains for systemic estrogen-alone products [77].

For researchers and drug development professionals, this regulatory evolution underscores a critical concept: the timing, formulation, and patient selection factors in therapeutic interventions are paramount. The revised regulatory position acknowledges that the initial warnings were based on studies of older women (average age 63) using hormone formulations that differ from contemporary treatments [76] [78]. This reversal creates an imperative for the research community to develop more nuanced methodological approaches that account for the "critical window" hypothesis and formulation-specific effects when investigating HT's impact on cognitive function and other long-term health outcomes.

Comparative Analysis of Hormone Therapy Effects on Cognitive Outcomes

Quantitative Synthesis of Cognitive and Brain Health Outcomes

Table 1: Cognitive and Brain Health Outcomes Across Major Hormone Therapy Studies

Study Name	Design	Participant Age & Menopausal Status	HT Formulations	Cognitive/Brain Outcomes	Key Findings
KEEPS Continuation [9]	Randomized controlled trial with observational follow-up	Mean age 67 (58-73); initiated HT within 3 years of menopause	oCEE, tE2 vs. placebo	White matter integrity via dMRI	No long-term effects of 4-year HT on white matter integrity compared to placebo
WHIMS [79]	Randomized controlled trial	Ages 65+	CEE with/without MPA	Dementia incidence	Increased risk with HT (EPT RR=1.64; ET RR=1.19)
Danish Twin Study [80]	Observational cohort	Ages 50+	Systemic HT	Cognitive function	Changed association after 2002; suggests selection effect influences results
Harvard Aging Brain Study [11]	Observational	Ages 51-89	Various HT formulations	Tau accumulation	Faster tau accumulation in women >70 using HT; no association in women <70
Meta-Analysis (Brinton et al.) [79]	Systematic review & meta-analysis	Midlife vs. late-life	ET vs. EPT	AD and dementia risk	32% reduced dementia risk with midlife ET; increased risk with late-life use

Table 2: Formulation-Specific Effects on Cognitive Domains

Cognitive Domain	HT Formulation	Research Findings	Study Reference
Episodic Memory	Transdermal estradiol	Associated with higher scores compared to no HT	[11]
Prospective Memory	Oral estradiol	Associated with higher scores compared to no HT	[11]
Executive Function	All formulations	Earlier menopause associated with lower scores; no significant HT effect	[11]
Global Cognitive Function	oCEE, tE2	No significant harm or benefit when initiated early after menopause	[9] [79]
Dementia Risk	Estrogen-only therapy	32% reduced risk with midlife initiation	[79]
Dementia Risk	Estrogen-plus-progestogen	Increased risk with late-life initiation (RR=1.64)	[79]

Critical Window Hypothesis: Timing of Initiation as Determinant of Outcomes

The "critical window" or "timing" hypothesis represents a central framework for understanding the divergent outcomes observed in HT research. This hypothesis posits that the neuroprotective benefits of estrogen are maximized when initiated during perimenopause or early postmenopause (typically within 10 years of menopause onset or before age 60), while initiation later in life may be neutral or potentially harmful [77] [79].

Advanced neuroimaging studies provide biological plausibility for this hypothesis. Research using diffusion MRI (dMRI) techniques including diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and Neurite Orientation Dispersion and Density Imaging (NODDI) has revealed that the aging brain's response to HT differs substantially based on proximity to menopause [9]. The NODDI protocol provides biologically relevant parameters offering specific insight into neuronal integrity and organization: neurite density index (NDI, reflecting axon and dendrite density), orientation dispersion index (ODI, indicating directional spread of neurites), and isotropic volume fraction (ISOVF, representing freely diffusing water molecules) [9].

The biological mechanisms underlying the critical window likely involve multiple pathways. Earlier initiation may preserve cerebrovascular function, maintain synaptic density in vulnerable regions like the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus, and reduce the accumulation of Alzheimer's disease pathology including tau protein [11]. Later initiation, when neurodegenerative processes may already be established, could potentially accelerate existing pathology through inflammatory or vascular mechanisms.

Diagram 1: Critical Window Hypothesis in Hormone Therapy

Experimental Protocols and Methodological Considerations

Neuroimaging Protocols for Assessing White Matter Integrity

The KEEPS Continuation study provides a robust methodological framework for investigating HT effects on brain structure [9]. This protocol employs multiple magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques to comprehensively evaluate white matter architecture:

Diffusion MRI (dMRI) Acquisition Parameters:

• Multi-shell diffusion-weighted imaging protocol
• Multiple b-values (typically b=1000, 2000 s/mm²) for enhanced tissue characterization
• Isotropic voxel resolution (typically 2mm³)
• Multiple diffusion-encoding directions (64+ directions recommended)
• Parallel imaging acceleration to reduce scan time

Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) Processing Pipeline:

• Raw dMRI data preprocessing: denoising, eddy-current correction, motion artifact correction
• Tensor fitting at each voxel to derive fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD)
• Tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS) for whole-brain white matter skeleton analysis
• Region-of-interest (ROI) analysis in specific white matter tracts

Neurite Orientation Dispersion and Density Imaging (NODDI) Processing:

• Multi-compartment modeling of water diffusion in intra-neurite, extra-neurite, and cerebrospinal fluid spaces
• Calculation of three primary metrics: neurite density index (NDI), orientation dispersion index (ODI), and isotropic volume fraction (ISOVF)
• Statistical comparison of NODDI metrics between treatment groups

White Matter Hyperintensity (WMH) Quantification:

• Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) sequence acquisition
• Automated WMH segmentation using machine learning algorithms
• Manual verification and correction of segmentation errors
• Total WMH volume calculation and spatial distribution analysis

This multi-modal approach allows researchers to detect both microstructural changes (through dMRI) and macrostructural alterations (through WMH analysis) that may predict subsequent cognitive impairment.

Longitudinal Cognitive Assessment Methodology

The Danish twin study exemplifies rigorous methodological approaches for investigating HT-cognition relationships in observational designs [80]. Key elements include:

Cognitive Assessment Battery:

• Standardized cognitive tests covering multiple domains: episodic memory, prospective memory, executive function
• Consistent test administration across study waves
• Quality control procedures for data collection

Statistical Modeling for Observational Data:

• Cross-sectional analysis adjusting for age, education, social class
• Intrapair twin analyses to control for unobserved familial confounding
• Longitudinal models to assess cognitive change over time
• Pre-specified subgroup analyses by age cohort (50-69 vs. 70+)
• Time-interaction terms to evaluate changes in associations after the 2002 WHI publication

This methodology is particularly valuable for addressing confounding by indication, a critical challenge in HT research, by leveraging the natural experiment created by the shifting HT prescribing patterns after the WHI results.

Research Reagent Solutions Toolkit

Table 3: Essential Research Materials and Methodologies for Hormone Therapy Neuroscience Research

Research Tool Category	Specific Examples	Research Application	Key Considerations
Hormone Formulations	Oral conjugated equine estrogens (oCEE/Premarin), Transdermal 17β-estradiol (tE2), Micronized progesterone	Controlled administration in clinical trials; formulation-specific effects investigation	Route of administration significantly impacts risk profile; transdermal avoids first-pass metabolism
Neuroimaging Biomarkers	Diffusion MRI (DTI, NODDI), White matter hyperintensity volume, FLAIR sequences for cerebral infarcts	Quantification of microstructural and macrostructural white matter integrity	Multi-shell dMRI provides superior characterization; NODDI offers biologically specific parameters
Molecular Imaging Agents	Tau-PET tracers (e.g., flortaucipir), Amyloid-β-PET tracers (e.g., Pittsburgh compound B)	In vivo assessment of Alzheimer's disease pathology	Critical for understanding HT effects on proteinopathy accumulation across age groups
Cognitive Assessment Tools	Episodic memory tests, Prospective memory tasks, Executive function batteries	Domain-specific cognitive outcome measurement	Must be sensitive to early cognitive changes; computer-based tests enable precise timing metrics
Genetic Profiling	APOE ε4 genotyping, Polygenic risk scores for Alzheimer's disease	Stratification by genetic risk factors	APOE ε4 status modifies cognitive outcomes; essential for personalized medicine approaches
Biobanking Resources	Plasma/serum banks, DNA repositories, CSF collections	Multi-omics integration and biomarker discovery	Enables systems biology approaches to understanding HT mechanisms

Regulatory Evolution and Future Research Directions

The FDA's removal of black box warnings for HT represents more than just labeling changes—it signifies a fundamental shift toward precision medicine in women's brain health [76] [77]. This regulatory transformation was predicated on accumulated evidence that the risks identified in the WHI study were not generalizable to younger, recently menopausal women using contemporary formulations [78]. For researchers, this underscores the importance of contextualizing findings within specific patient subgroups, treatment formulations, and timing variables.

Future research priorities should include:

• Elucidation of Biological Mechanisms: Further investigation into how different HT formulations influence tau pathology, synaptic integrity, and cerebrovascular function across the menopausal transition [11].
• Personalized Medicine Approaches: Development of biomarkers to identify women most likely to benefit from HT for cognitive protection, including genetic, imaging, and clinical predictors.
• Formulation Optimization: Head-to-head comparisons of different estrogenic compounds, progestogens, and administration routes for specific cognitive outcomes.
• Long-term Follow-up: Extended observational studies of women who participated in early-initiation clinical trials to determine whether midlife HT use ultimately reduces dementia incidence.

The evolving regulatory landscape presents both opportunities and responsibilities for the research community to generate the high-quality evidence needed to optimize HT decision-making for brain health preservation in women.

The management of menopausal symptoms, particularly vasomotor symptoms (VMS), has evolved significantly with increased understanding of both hormonal and non-hormonal pathways. This comparison guide examines the efficacy, mechanisms, and cognitive implications of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) versus emerging non-hormonal alternatives, primarily neurokinin-3 (NK3) receptor antagonists. The analysis is framed within the critical context of long-term cognitive effects, a primary concern in therapeutic decision-making for researchers and drug development professionals.

The debate around MHT and brain health has undergone substantial shifts over the past decades. Initial observational studies suggested cognitive benefits, but the Women's Health Initiative Memory Study (WHIMS) in 2003-2004 indicated increased risks of dementia and mild cognitive impairment when MHT was initiated in women aged 65-79 [81]. This led to the "timing hypothesis," proposing that effects may differ based on when therapy is initiated relative to menopause [81]. Recent studies continue to investigate this complex relationship, with some evidence suggesting that the type, route, and timing of therapy may influence cognitive outcomes differently.

Mechanistic Pathways and Molecular Targets

Understanding the distinct biological pathways targeted by MHT and NK3 receptor antagonists is fundamental to comparing their therapeutic profiles and potential cognitive implications.

Menopausal Hormone Therapy (MHT) Mechanisms

MHT functions primarily through estrogen receptor modulation throughout the body and brain. The central nervous system contains abundant estrogen receptors, and estrogen has been implicated as a neuroprotective hormone in women [9]. The proposed mechanisms include:

• Direct receptor modulation: Estrogens cross the blood-brain barrier and bind to nuclear and membrane estrogen receptors, influencing gene expression and cellular signaling.
• Neuroprotective effects: Estrogen may enhance synaptic plasticity, promote cholinergic function, and reduce oxidative stress.
• Vascular benefits: Estrogen exerts favorable effects on cerebral blood flow and vascular function.

The effects appear to be formulation-dependent, with transdermal 17β-estradiol showing preservation of prefrontal cortex volume and reduced β-amyloid deposition in some studies, while oral conjugated equine estrogens showed no such effects [81]. The route of administration also significantly influences metabolic parameters, with transdermal delivery avoiding first-pass hepatic metabolism.

Neurokinin-3 Receptor Antagonist Mechanisms

Neurokinin-3 receptor antagonists represent a novel non-hormonal approach that targets the thermoregulatory pathway rather than directly replacing hormones [82]. The mechanism involves:

• Hypothalamic thermoregulation: Depletion of estrogen during menopause increases sensitivity in the KNDy (kisspeptin/neurokinin/dynorphin) neurons in the hypothalamus, leading to increased neurokinin B signaling and NK3 receptor activation.
• Thermoregulatory dysfunction: Excessive NK3 signaling disrupts the hypothalamic set-point for temperature control, resulting in inappropriate vasodilation and sweating manifesting as hot flashes.
• Dual receptor targeting: Some newer agents like elinzanetant act as dual neurokinin-1 and neurokinin-3 receptor antagonists, potentially addressing both VMS and associated mood symptoms [82].

The following diagram illustrates these distinct mechanistic pathways:

Figure 1: Comparative mechanistic pathways of MHT and NK3 receptor antagonists in managing menopausal symptoms. MHT acts through estrogen receptor (ER) modulation, while NK3 antagonists target the thermoregulatory pathway in hypothalamic KNDy neurons.

Comparative Efficacy Data

Vasomotor Symptom Reduction

Vasomotor symptoms (VMS), including hot flashes and night sweats, affect approximately 80% of women during menopausal transition and represent the primary indication for treatment [82]. The comparative efficacy of MHT and NK3 receptor antagonists is summarized in the table below.

Table 1: Comparative Efficacy for Vasomotor Symptom Reduction

Therapy	Specific Agents	Efficacy Outcomes	Timeframe	Study Details
MHT (Standard Dose)	Oral conjugated equine estrogens (0.45 mg/d), Transdermal 17β-estradiol (50 μg/d)	~75% symptom reduction [83]	4 years	KEEPS Trial: Multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled
MHT (Low Dose)	Various formulations	~65% symptom reduction [83]	4 years	KEEPS Trial: Multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled
NK3 Receptor Antagonists	Fezolinetant	Significant reduction in VMS frequency vs. placebo (Cohen's d = -0.56 at 4 weeks; -0.34 at 12 weeks) [84]	12 weeks	Meta-analysis of 6 RCTs (n=3,657)
Dual NK1/NK3 Antagonists	Elinzanetant	Significant reduction in VMS frequency and severity [82]	12 weeks	OASIS Phase 3 trials (preliminary)

Cognitive Outcomes

The long-term cognitive effects of menopausal therapies represent a critical consideration for researchers and clinicians. The evidence base varies significantly between MHT and non-hormonal alternatives.

Table 2: Comparative Cognitive Outcomes

Therapy	Cognitive Domain	Long-term Outcomes	Study Details
MHT (Overall)	Global cognition	No long-term benefit or harm 10 years post-treatment [10] [85]	KEEPS Continuation: Observational follow-up of RCT, n=275
Transdermal Estradiol	Prefrontal cortex volume	Better preservation vs. placebo [81]	KEEPS Ancillary Study: Neuroimaging biomarkers
Transdermal Estradiol	Episodic memory	Higher scores vs. no hormone therapy [86]	Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA), n=7,251
Oral Estradiol	Prospective memory	Higher scores vs. no hormone therapy [86]	Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA)
Oral CEE	β-amyloid deposition	No reduction vs. placebo [81]	KEEPS Ancillary Study
NK3 Antagonists	Cognitive effects	Not primarily studied for cognitive outcomes [84] [82]	Focus on VMS reduction with safety monitoring

The KEEPS Continuation study, which followed participants for approximately 10 years after the completion of the 4-year randomized trial, found no evidence that MHT initiated within 3 years of menopause provided long-term cognitive benefits or harms [10] [85]. This provides important reassurance about the long-term neurocognitive safety of MHT for symptom management in healthy, recently postmenopausal women, while also indicating that MHT should not be recommended as an intervention to preserve cognitive function [85].

Safety and Tolerability Profiles

Table 3: Comparative Safety Profiles

Parameter	MHT	NK3 Receptor Antagonists
Contraindications	Unexplained vaginal bleeding, estrogen-dependent malignancies, active thromboembolic disease, liver dysfunction [83]	No absolute contraindications identified yet; monitoring required for hepatic effects
Common Adverse Events	Breakthrough bleeding, breast tenderness, headache [83]	Mild to moderate side effects similar to placebo in trials [84]
Serious Risks	Increased VTE risk (oral formulations), stroke, breast cancer (with prolonged use) [81]	Potential hepatic effects (transaminase elevations); not considered class effect [82]
Monitoring Requirements	Regular breast and pelvic exams, mammography, cardiovascular risk assessment [83]	Liver function at baseline and regularly thereafter (monthly for first 3 months, then at 6 and 9 months) [84]
Special Considerations	Timing hypothesis: initiation within 10 years of menopause or before age 60 preferred [83]	Structurally distinct agents may have different safety profiles; long-term safety data still emerging [82]

Key Experimental Methodologies

KEEPS Trial and Continuation Study Protocol

The Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS) represents one of the most comprehensive investigations into the effects of MHT initiated early after menopause. The methodological approach provides a robust template for studying menopausal interventions.

Study Design:

• Original KEEPS: Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled 4-year trial [9]
• KEEPS Continuation: Observational follow-up approximately 10 years after trial completion [10]

Participant Criteria:

• Recently postmenopausal women (within 6-36 months of last menses)
• Age 42-58 years at enrollment
• Low cardiovascular risk profile
• Exclusion criteria: History of cardiovascular disease, uncontrolled hypertension, smoking >10 cigarettes daily, BMI >35 kg/m², diabetes, dyslipidemia, or high coronary artery calcium score [9]

Interventions:

• Oral conjugated equine estrogens (oCEE; 0.45 mg/day)
• Transdermal 17β-estradiol (tE2; 50 μg/day)
• Placebo pills or patches
• Participants in active treatment arms received micronized progesterone (200 mg/day for 12 days/month) [9]

Assessment Methods:

• Cognitive testing: Comprehensive battery including verbal learning/memory, auditory attention/working memory, visual attention/executive function, and speeded language/mental flexibility [10]
• Neuroimaging: Structural MRI, diffusion MRI (dMRI) including DTI and NODDI protocols, white matter hyperintensity volume assessment [9]
• Biomarkers: APOE ε4 genotyping, cardiovascular risk factors, hormonal assays [9]

The cognitive assessment workflow in the KEEPS Continuation study exemplifies rigorous longitudinal design:

Figure 2: KEEPS trial and continuation study experimental workflow for assessing long-term cognitive effects of MHT. The design includes randomization, baseline and follow-up assessments, and multiple outcome measures over approximately 14 years total.

Neurokinin-3 Receptor Antagonist Trial Methodology

The evaluation of NK3 receptor antagonists employs distinct methodological approaches focused primarily on VMS reduction and safety monitoring.

Study Design Characteristics:

• Duration: Typically 12-52 weeks for efficacy; longer extensions for safety
• Population: Peri- and postmenopausal women with moderate to severe VMS (generally ≥7 daily hot flashes or ≥50 per week)
• Primary endpoints: Change from baseline in VMS frequency and severity
• Key secondary endpoints: Patient-reported outcomes, quality of life measures, sleep parameters

Assessment Tools:

• VMS diaries: Electronic or paper documentation of hot flash frequency and severity
• Quality of life measures: Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQOL), Greene Climacteric Scale
• Safety monitoring: Liver function tests (ALT, AST), comprehensive metabolic panel, adverse event monitoring

Recent Advancements: Phase 3 trials for newer agents like elinzanetant employ dual receptor targeting (NK1 and NK3) and investigate additional endpoints including sleep disturbances (NIRVANA trial) [82].

Research Reagent Solutions Toolkit

Table 4: Essential Research Materials and Methods for Menopause Intervention Studies

Research Tool	Specific Application	Function in Experimental Design
Diffusion MRI (dMRI)	White matter integrity assessment [9]	Quantifies microstructural changes in brain white matter tracts
DTI Metrics	Fractional Anisotropy (FA), Mean Diffusivity (MD) [9]	Indicators of myelin integrity and structural barriers to water diffusion
NODDI Parameters	Neurite Density Index (NDI), Orientation Dispersion Index (ODI) [9]	Provides biologically relevant parameters for neuronal integrity and organization
FLAIR MRI	White matter hyperintensity volume [9]	Detects macrostructural white matter lesions associated with small vessel disease
APOE ε4 Genotyping	Genetic risk stratification [9]	Identifies individuals with genetic susceptibility to Alzheimer's pathology
Standardized Cognitive Batteries	KEEPS-Cog assessment [10]	Evaluates multiple cognitive domains using validated, reproducible measures
Electronic VMS Diaries	Fezolinetant trials [84]	Captures real-time symptom frequency and severity in clinical trials
PET Imaging	Tau and amyloid-β accumulation [11]	Quantifies Alzheimer's disease pathology in longitudinal studies

The comparative analysis of MHT and neurokinin-3 receptor antagonists reveals distinct profiles that may guide targeted therapeutic development and clinical application. MHT demonstrates robust efficacy for VMS reduction with additional benefits for bone health and genitourinary symptoms, while showing neither long-term cognitive benefit nor harm when initiated early in menopause. The formulation, route, and timing of MHT appear critical to its effects, with transdermal estradiol showing potential advantages for certain cognitive domains and metabolic parameters.

Neurokinin-3 receptor antagonists offer a novel mechanism specifically targeting the thermoregulatory pathway, with compelling efficacy data for VMS reduction and a favorable initial safety profile. Their non-hormonal nature addresses an important unmet need for women with contraindications to or concerns about MHT. However, long-term cognitive outcomes remain largely unstudied for this newer class of medications.

For researchers and drug development professionals, these findings highlight several critical considerations. First, the continued investigation of timing, formulation, and route of administration remains essential for optimizing MHT. Second, the mechanistic insights from NK3 receptor antagonism open new pathways for therapeutic development beyond traditional hormonal approaches. Finally, standardized assessment of cognitive outcomes in longer-term studies will be crucial for fully understanding the neurocognitive implications of both existing and emerging menopausal therapies.

Conclusion

The collective evidence indicates that short-term MHT initiated in early menopause poses no long-term cognitive harm, offering crucial reassurance for its use in symptomatic women. However, it should not be prescribed for cognitive protection alone, as consistent benefits are not observed. The future of MHT research lies in precision medicine—refining patient selection based on timing, formulation, genetic predispositions like APOE status, and type of menopause. For drug development, this underscores the need for novel compounds that replicate estrogen's neuroprotective effects while minimizing peripheral risks, and for clinical trials designed with longer observational follow-ups to truly capture long-term cognitive trajectories.

References

• 1. ESTROGEN SIGNALING AND NEUROPROTECTION IN ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3324183/]
• 2. The estrogen–brain interface in neuroinflammation [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12434045/]
• 3. Current Insights and Future Directions [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39815764/]
• 4. Estrogen, menopause, and Alzheimer's disease [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/molecular-biosciences/articles/10.3389/fmolb.2025.1634302/full]
• 5. The Critical Window Hypothesis of Hormone Therapy and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3780981/]
• 6. Critical window hypothesis of hormone therapy and cognition [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23715379/]
• 7. Menopause and cognitive impairment: A narrative review of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8394691/]
• 8. Timing of Hormone Therapy and Dementia - PubMed Central [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3058824/]
• 9. Long-term effects of 4 years of menopausal hormone therapy ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12382724/]
• 10. Long-term cognitive effects of menopausal hormone therapy [https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004435]
• 11. Latest research on hormone replacement therapy and ... [https://www.parsemus.org/2025/11/latest-research-on-hormone-replacement-therapy-and-brain-health/]
• 12. Lifetime estrogen exposure and domain-specific cognitive ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/aging-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnagi.2025.1524474/full]
• 13. Testing the critical window of estradiol replacement on ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0303720715301052]
• 14. Lifetime estrogen exposure and domain-specific cognitive ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12003372/]
• 15. Linking menopause-related factors, history of depression ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018506X24001211]
• 16. The Specific Impact of Apolipoprotein E Epsilon 2 on ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7081769/]
• 17. Differences in resting-state brain networks and gray matter ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1197987/full]
• 18. Associations between reproductive history, hormone use ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/aging-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnagi.2022.1014605/full]
• 19. Hormone therapy type matters for memory performance ... [https://www.aan.com/PressRoom/home/PressRelease/5280]
• 20. Association Between Menopause Age and Estradiol-Based ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40865026/]
• 21. Lifetime Estrogen Exposure and Domain-Specific ... [https://www.rand.org/pubs/external_publications/EP70913.html]
• 22. Long-term cognitive effects of menopausal hormone therapy [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11581397/]
• 23. The Women's Health Initiative Memory Study (WHIMS) [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960076009002787]
• 24. Estrogen and Cognitive Functioning in Women [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4838456/]
• 25. COGNITIVE CHANGES WITH REPRODUCTIVE AGING ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6853028/]
• 26. Hormone therapy at early post-menopause increases ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/srep44917]
• 27. The Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS) [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6738629/]
• 28. Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy and Cognitive Outcomes [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4547365/]
• 29. Grey matter volume and fractional anisotropy as ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12549239/]
• 30. A Comparative Study Using DTI and NODDI [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5176300/]
• 31. Analysis of advanced diffusion models assessing white ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-09412-1]
• 32. NODDI-derived measures of microstructural integrity in ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10614746/]
• 33. Neurite imaging reveals microstructural variations in ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811918301058]
• 34. Diffusion Tensor Model links to Neurite Orientation ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-48671-7]
• 35. MRI markers for mild cognitive impairment - PubMed - NIH [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23762488/]
• 36. Gray-white matter boundary Z-score and volume as ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/aging-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnagi.2023.1291376/full]
• 37. Diagnostic performance of T1-Weighted MRI gray matter ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1353802025007503]
• 38. MRI-based multivariate gray matter volumetric distance for ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-44322-0]
• 39. Hormone replacement therapy is associated with improved ... [https://alzres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13195-022-01121-5]
• 40. The utility of global versus domain-specific ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41229183/]
• 41. Current limitations in technology-based cognitive ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12009854/]
• 42. Does menopausal hormone therapy affect long-term ... [https://www.alzdiscovery.org/cognitive-vitality/blog/does-menopausal-hormone-therapy-affect-long-term-cognitive-function]
• 43. An Open-Source Cognitive Test Battery to Assess Human ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.880375/full]
• 44. Evidence‐based medicine—When observational studies ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7540602/]
• 45. Rethinking the pros and cons of randomized controlled trials ... [https://bmcproc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12919-023-00285-8]
• 46. Randomized controlled trials vs. observational studies [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5073487/]
• 47. The effect of hormone replacement therapy on cognitive ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6600282/]
• 48. Does hormone replacement therapy prevent cognitive ... [https://mdedge.com/jfponline/article/262927/womens-health/does-hormone-replacement-therapy-prevent-cognitive-decline]
• 49. Hormone therapy and cognitive function: Is there a critical ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S030645220600042X]
• 50. Long-term cognitive effects of menopausal hormone therapy [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39570992/]
• 51. Association Between Menopause Age and Estradiol-Based ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12380479/]
• 52. Effects of transdermal versus oral hormone replacement ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10147786/]
• 53. Optimizing menopausal hormone therapy: for treatment ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2414644722000252]
• 54. Comparison of Clinical Outcomes among Users of Oral and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5607093/]
• 55. Postmenopausal hormone therapy and cognition - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4573348/]
• 56. Hormone replacement therapy, menopausal age and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11782126/]
• 57. Hormone replacement therapy, menopausal age and ... [https://www.gbhi.org/news-publications/hormone-replacement-therapy-menopausal-age-and-lifestyle-variables-are-associated]
• 58. Taking a Closer Look at Menopausal Hormone Therapy ... [https://newsnetwork.mayoclinic.org/discussion/taking-a-closer-look-at-menopausal-hormone-therapy-and-cognitive-health/]
• 59. A prospective controlled study of cognition 24 months after ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0090825825000162]
• 60. The associations of early and surgical menopause with 10 ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41056546/]
• 61. Hormone therapy may help women stay in work after ... [https://www.elsa-project.ac.uk/post/hormone-therapy-may-help-women-stay-in-work-after-menopause-study-suggests]
• 62. Hormone therapy unlikely to affect cognitive function [https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/short-term-menopausal-therapy-cognitive-function]
• 63. Women With Surgical Menopause May Exit Workforce ... [https://menopause.org/press-releases/women-with-surgical-menopause-may-exit-workforce-earlier-but-hormone-therapy-could-help]
• 64. Symptom Burden and Quality of Life Among Patients With ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10981229/]
• 65. Measuring Health Status and Symptom Burden using a ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6433527/]
• 66. Prognostic value of symptom burden as a simple patient- ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-06615-4]
• 67. Comparison of four healthy lifestyle scores for predicting ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-01213-6]
• 68. Cardiac biomarkers as predictors of cognitive decline in ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40681222/]
• 69. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/endocrinology/articles/10.3389/fendo.2024.1350318/full]
• 70. A review of the objective cognitive function measurements ... [https://icurology.org/DOIx.php?id=10.4111/icu.20230103]
• 71. Structured vs Self-Guided Multidomain Lifestyle Interventions ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40720610/]
• 72. U.S. POINTER Lifestyle Intervention Improved Cognition [https://aaic.alz.org/releases-2025/us-pointer-study-results-announced.asp]
• 73. Story Retelling and Verbal Working Memory in Young ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12326206/]
• 74. The role of executive function domains on cognitive and ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40555012/]
• 75. The role of executive function domains on cognitive and ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0966636225002401]
• 76. HHS Advances Women's Health, Removes Misleading ... [https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/hhs-advances-womens-health-removes-misleading-fda-warnings-hormone-replacement-therapy]
• 77. FACT SHEET: FDA Initiates Removal of “Black Box ... [https://www.hhs.gov/press-room/fact-sheet-fda-initiates-removal-of-black-box-warnings-from-menopausal-hormone-replacement-therapy-products.html]
• 78. What to know about menopause hormone therapy after ... [https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/what-to-know-about-menopause-hormone-therapy-after-fda-removed-black-box-warnings]
• 79. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10625913/]
• 80. Postmenopausal hormone therapy and cognition in twins [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301211524002276]
• 81. Risks and benefits of hormone therapy after menopause for ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11095817/]
• 82. Neurokinin-3 Receptor Antagonists: A Novel Approach to ... [https://womensmentalhealth.org/posts/neurokinin-3-receptor-antagonists-for-menopausal-vasomotor-symptoms/]
• 83. The 2025 Menopausal Hormone Therapy Guidelines [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12438153/]
• 84. Efficacy and safety of fezolinetant for vasomotor symptoms ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40557213/]
• 85. Short-Term Hormone Therapy for Menopause Has No ... [https://www.thecardiologyadvisor.com/news/short-term-hormone-therapy-for-menopause-cognitive-impact/]
• 86. Hormone therapy type may influence postmenopausal ... [https://www.news-medical.net/news/20250828/Hormone-therapy-type-may-influence-postmenopausal-cognitive-health.aspx]