Are Women with Treatment-Induced Menopause Truly Being Heard?

19 hours ago

3 min read

Updated: 5 minutes ago

A small but insightful new study recently caught my eye, and it sheds light on a vital topic that I encounter often in my practice. Published in Clinical Nutrition Open Science, the research provides a snap-shot of supplement use amongst women experiencing treatment-induced menopause.

The study looked at a group of 75 women, the vast majority of whom (85%) were breast cancer survivors. Because it is a small, cross-sectional survey, we cannot generalise the findings to everyone. However, the findings gave me food for thought:

High prevalence: around three in four women were taking at least one supplement to help manage symptoms.
Internet: for botanical products specifically, the internet and social media were the most common sources of information.
A disclosure issue: only about half (53%) of the women had told their oncology team about what they were taking.

Why Are Menopause Concerns Being "Glossed Over"?

What stayed with me the most from this paper weren't the numbers, but the reasons women gave for not mentioning their supplement use to their oncologists.

Participants highlighted:

Short appointment times
More pressing medical issues taking clinical priority
Fragmented care across different clinics
Feeling the topic would not be taken seriously

One quote from a participant reflected this frustration: “Mention menopause and it is glossed over.” In other words, menopause concerns were often minimised. This unfortunately matches what I hear from clients in my own practice.

This Is Where I See Issues (beyond what this study is showing)

When the conversation about menopausal symptoms struggles to find a place within the standard of care, any other (complementary) type of support that patients may be relying on to feel better tends to be dismissed. In this way, truly integrative care keeps being just a dream.

Moreover, when the undisclosed complementary support comes with safety checks and a personalised approach, issues of safety are less of a concern. But when the source of information is generalised, then safety may suffer. And, going back to the study for a moment, the authors actually flag that some of the botanicals named by participants have known or potential interactions with endocrine therapies (such as tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors).

Which Brings Me To...

The reality is that supplement use in cancer survivorship is well-documented and this is not a problem, but choices must be correctly supported.

I am not going to discuss how many people from all backgrounds are now talking about supplements online, I think the problem is there for everyone to see.

Instead, where I see value online is in online communities and patient advocacy groups, which are a lifeline, they are incredible places to find validation, shared experiences, and to start asking questions.

At the same time, because every oncology treatment plan is highly specific, complementary care that involves supplements works best and safest when brought to a qualified practitioner who works integratively with standard of care, checks the available evidence, any drug-nutrient interactions and tailors them to the individual situation.

What I’d Love To See

I would love to see medical settings with adequate time and space for communication with the patient, as well as integrative health practitioners, about these issues.

Most of all, I’d like to see menopausal symptoms that women seek relief from after cancer treatment as a fully included, respected part of the cancer care conversation.

I see a growing number of patients, health professionals and patient advocates joining forces and moving towards a more integrated approach to not just for iatrogenic menopause, but cancer care in general. Let’s keep the conversations going.

Johnston KE, O’Connell K, Cushen SJ. Clin Nutr Open Sci 2026;70:100726.