ReCent Medical News

Rethinking risk in menopause

July 2026

Image: RFBSIP - stock.adobe.com

This article examines the evolving evidence on women’s health in and around menopause, and what it means for life and health insurance risk, including how midlife changes may influence health trajectories and outcomes in later life. Drawing on large cohort studies, clinical guidelines and Hannover Re’s internal analysis, it explores what is known, where evidence remains limited or overstated, and how underwriters can distinguish between a natural life stage and genuine medical risk.

From media headlines about “brain fog” and “hormone chaos” to conflicting views on hormone replacement therapy (HRT), menopause has become highly visible – but not always accurately represented. For insurers, the challenge is to cut through the noise: to understand when menopausal symptoms are simply part of a normal transition and when they signal a materially higher risk of mortality, morbidity or disability.

While many public debates focus on short‑term symptoms, the greatest relevance for insurance lies in the long‑term patterns that cluster around the menopausal transition: cardiovascular disease, bone health, mental health and cognitive aging. These pathways are driven by a mix of age, hormones, lifestyle and social factors, rather than menopause alone.

What is menopause?

Menopause is defined retrospectively as 12 consecutive months without menstrual periods, not explained by other causes. The average age of natural menopause in high‑income countries is around 51 years, with perimenopause – the transitional phase of fluctuating hormones and cycle changes – typically beginning in the mid‑40s and lasting several years.[1][2]

Image: doucefleur - stock.adobe.com

Common symptoms include:

Vasomotor: hot flushes and night sweats
Sleep: difficulty falling or staying asleep, early waking
Psychological: mood swings, anxiety, irritability, low mood
Cognitive: subjective “brain fog”, word‑finding difficulties
Musculoskeletal: joint pains and stiffness
Urogenital: vaginal dryness, discomfort, urinary frequency

Clinical guidelines consistently emphasise that menopause is a natural biological process, not a disease.[1][3] For most women, symptoms are self‑limiting and improve over time, and many remain otherwise healthy and active through midlife and beyond.

In underwriting practice, menopause itself is not typically assessed as a distinct risk factor. However, symptoms that arise during the menopausal transition – such as vasomotor complaints, mood changes, or irregular bleeding – are often evaluated in isolation. Where the underlying hormonal context is not recognised, this can result in normal physiological changes being interpreted as indicators of disease and, in some cases, lead to ratings that may not reflect underlying risk. This is particularly relevant where the aetiology of symptoms is unclear or not explicitly linked to menopause in the available documentation.

At the same time, the menopausal transition coincides with a shift in underlying risk profiles. Cardiovascular risk factors become more common, bone density begins to decline more rapidly, and a vulnerable subgroup experience significant mood disturbances or cognitive concerns.

How does menopause influence health risk?

Cardiovascular disease

Before menopause, women tend to have lower rates of coronary heart disease (CHD) than men of the same age, a difference partly attributed to oestrogen’s favourable effects on lipids and vascular function. After menopause, this advantage diminishes as LDL cholesterol, blood pressure and central adiposity typically increase.[3]

Two major analyses are particularly relevant for underwriting:

A large meta‑analysis of 32 studies found that earlier natural menopause (younger than 45 years) – compared with menopause at 50–54 – was associated with higher risks of CHD and all‑cause mortality, even after adjusting for traditional risk factors.[4]

A large prospective analysis drawing on the UK Biobank (United Kingdom), including over 140,000 women, reported that both premature (<40 years) and early (40–44 years) menopause were linked with increased incidence of cardiovascular events.[5]

These findings support the view that age at menopause is a modest but real cardiovascular risk marker, highlighting important heterogeneity within the menopausal population, especially when combined with smoking, diabetes or obesity. However, for women with menopause at a typical age and a favourable risk profile, menopause alone does not justify additional life or CI loadings.

Bone health and fractures

Oestrogen deficiency accelerates bone resorption. Postmenopausal women can lose up to 10% of their bone mass in the first 5–10 years after the final menstrual period, increasing lifetime fracture risk.[6][7]

Osteoporotic fractures, particularly hip and vertebral fractures, are associated with increased mortality and long‑term disability in older women.[7] However, in the midlife age band (40–60 years), many women are still in the early phase of bone loss and have not yet experienced fractures. For underwriting, this means:

Documented osteoporosis with prior low‑trauma fracture is a clear risk marker, especially for disability or long‑term care products.

In a 50‑year‑old woman without fracture history and with a low T‑score, risk lies more in future morbidity than near‑term mortality; the product type and term are therefore crucial.

International guidelines stress the value of combining bone mineral density (BMD) with clinical risk factors (age, prior fracture, glucocorticoid use, smoking, BMI) when estimating fracture risk.[6][7]

Mental health

Multiple longitudinal studies, including the U.S.-based Study of Women’s Health Across the Nation (SWAN), show that the perimenopausal period is associated with an increased risk of depressive symptoms, particularly in women with prior depression, severe vasomotor symptoms, or significant psychosocial stressors.[8][9]

Key findings include:

The risk of a major depressive episode is higher during the late transition and early postmenopause compared with premenopause.[8] For many women, mood symptoms are intermittent and time‑limited, rather than the start of a chronic psychiatric disorder.[9] This has direct underwriting implications.

Two applicants presenting with similar depressive symptoms may represent very different underwriting risks depending on whether those symptoms are linked to the menopausal transition or reflect an underlying psychiatric disorder. The key issue is therefore not the presence of symptoms alone, but their interpretation in clinical context.

Cognitive function and dementia

Subjective cognitive complaints – memory lapses, difficulty concentrating, “brain fog” – are frequently reported during perimenopause. Importantly, these do not always correlate with objective cognitive impairment on testing.[10]

However, premature menopause (<40 years), particularly when surgically induced, is associated with increased longer‑term risk:

A landmark study found that women who underwent bilateral oophorectomy before natural menopause had a higher risk of cognitive impairment or dementia later in life, particularly if they did not receive adequate oestrogen replacement.[11]

For shorter‑duration covers, these risks often lie beyond the policy horizon. They become more relevant for long‑duration or lifetime products, and for applicants already showing functional cognitive impairment at underwriting.

Cancer

Cancer risk in midlife women is shaped by age, genetics, lifestyle and reproductive history. Breast, colorectal and lung cancers dominate in this age group. The role of menopause and hormone therapy is nuanced:

Combined oestrogen‑progestin HRT is associated with a small increase in breast cancer risk with longer duration of use, as shown in the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), a large U.S.-based randomised controlled trial.[12]
Oestrogen‑only therapy in women with prior hysterectomy showed no increase – and possibly a decrease – in breast cancer incidence in extended follow‑up.[13]
Absolute risk differences are small in healthy women in their 50s, especially with limited‑duration therapy started near menopause.[12][13]

Clinical consensus is that for most healthy women under 60 years and within 10 years of menopause onset, the benefits of hormone therapy for troublesome symptoms outweigh the risks.[1]

For underwriters, the message is clear: HRT use is not, in itself, an indicator of elevated cancer risk. Current evidence shows that risks are small, vary by regimen, and were historically overstated. HRT should therefore be interpreted in clinical context, including type, route, duration, and indication, rather than as a standalone risk factor. Importantly, HRT use also reflects patient and physician perceptions of risk, and does not directly indicate underlying health status.

Data gaps, bias and implications for underwriting

Medical research and insurance data have historically been male‑biased. Women were under‑represented in clinical trials and large datasets often did not stratify by menopausal status. This leaves gaps in understanding midlife female health and its implications for insurance.

Population‑level analyses show that while women have lower mortality than men through much of adulthood, they experience a greater burden of disability, particularly from depression and musculoskeletal conditions.[14][15]

For underwriting, the key distinction is between short‑ and long‑term products. Menopause itself does not appear to introduce a step‑change in mortality risk, but marks a period in which cardiometabolic, musculoskeletal and mental health risks evolve under the influence of both biological and modifiable factors.

A key exception is early or medically induced menopause, which may occur following oophorectomy, chemotherapy, pelvic radiation, or in association with autoimmune or chronic conditions. In these cases, menopause is not the primary risk driver but a marker of underlying pathology and altered long‑term risk trajectories, including increased risks of cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis and other comorbidities. Such scenarios warrant closer underwriting scrutiny, as they may reflect materially different morbidity and mortality profiles from natural menopause.

What does the evidence mean for underwriting and claims?

Taken together, the evidence points to a consistent conclusion: menopause itself is rarely the primary driver of insurance risk in midlife. Instead, risk is shaped by age at menopause, overall cardiometabolic health, comorbidities, functional impact and time horizon.

In practice, menopause is not rated as a distinct risk factor. However, underwriting decisions are often based on individual symptoms, such as vasomotor complaints, mood disorders or bleeding patterns, which may be assessed in isolation. Where the menopausal context is not recognised or documented, this can lead to ratings that do not reflect the underlying risk profile. This supports a principle‑based approach to risk assessment, grounded in the individual’s broader health profile and clinical context, rather than symptom‑based interpretation alone.

The table below highlights commonly over‑interpreted menopause‑related features alongside more meaningful indicators of insurance risk:

Low predictive value	Higher predictive value
Menopausal status alone	Age at menopause (early / premature)
Vasomotor symptoms	Cardiometabolic profile
HRT use	Smoking, inactivity
Depressive or anxiety symptoms	Severity, functional impact and aetiology

Underwriting

In practical terms, an evidence‑based approach to underwriting women in midlife includes:

Treating natural menopause at a typical age as neutral from a rating perspective.
Placing greater emphasis on the global cardiometabolic profile (BMI, blood pressure, lipids, diabetes, smoking and family history) rather than menopausal status alone.[3-5]
Considering age at menopause as a modest risk modifier, particularly when early or premature menopause occurs alongside other risk factors.[4][5]
Interpreting HRT and antidepressant use in clinical context, distinguishing short‑term symptom management from markers of chronic or severe disease.[1][12][13]
Remaining alert to potential underlying conditions that should not be attributed to menopause without appropriate assessment, such as postmenopausal bleeding, unexplained weight loss, or chest pain.
Using menopause as a prompt to explore bone health, fracture history and falls risk, especially for long‑term disability products.[6][7] The importance of functional outcomes is reflected in Hannover Re’s Ascent underwriting guidelines, where osteoporosis and fracture risk may lead to exclusions or modified terms.

Claims

For claims assessors, an understanding of menopause can help to:

Distinguish disability driven by persistent pathology (e.g. severe osteoporosis or major depression) from shorter‑term functional impacts associated with the menopausal transition.
Support early and proportionate intervention, particularly where fatigue, sleep disturbance or mental health symptoms intersect with work capacity.[8][9]
Frame conversations around expectations, rehabilitation and return to work in a way that recognises the reality of symptoms without pathologising a normal life stage.

Globally, insurers are beginning to respond to these challenges through emerging menopause‑related support programmes and services, including rehabilitation-focused initiatives, specialist clinical support, and workplace-based interventions.

These developments reflect an increasing focus on functional impact and recovery over time, rather than assuming a fixed or permanent level of impairment.

Conclusion

With global populations ageing and more wealth shifting into older age groups, midlife women represent a growing and strategically important insurance segment.[3][13][14]

The current body of evidence suggests that menopause itself is a natural life stage, not a disease, and that risk in midlife women is driven far more by cardiometabolic, skeletal and mental health profiles than by menopausal status alone. Early or surgical menopause, significant comorbidities, or recurrent severe depression justify closer scrutiny; typical‑age menopause with well‑managed symptoms does not.[1-5][8-15]

By continuously monitoring emerging research, analysing internal experience, and refining underwriting guidelines, insurers can move from a simplistic menopause narrative to a nuanced, evidence‑based risk lens, supporting fairer access to cover for women in midlife while maintaining robust risk management.

Please get in touch to discuss this topic further or explore market‑specific examples.

Author

Siobhan Jelavić

Senior L&H Underwriter

Hannover Re (Ireland) DAC

References

The 2022 hormone therapy position statement of The North American Menopause Society. Menopause. 2022;29(7):767‑794.
Shifren JL, Gass ML, NAMS Recommendations Panel. The North American Menopause Society recommendations for clinical care of midlife women. Menopause. 2014;21(10):1038‑1062.
Baggio G, Corsini A, Floreani A, Giannini S, Zagonel V. Gender medicine: a task for the third millennium. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2013;51(4):713‑727.
Muka T, Oliver‑Williams C, Kunutsor S, et al. Association of age at onset of menopause and time since onset of menopause with cardiovascular outcomes, intermediate vascular traits, and all‑cause mortality: a systematic review and meta‑analysis. JAMA Cardiol. 2016;1(7):767‑776.
Honigberg MC, Zekavat SM, Aragam K, Finneran P, Klarin D, Bhatt DL, Januzzi JL Jr, Scott NS, Natarajan P. Association of Premature Natural and Surgical Menopause With Incident Cardiovascular Disease. JAMA. 2019 Dec 24;322(24):2411-2421.
Kanis JA, McCloskey EV, Johansson H, et al. European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int. 2013;24(1):23‑57.
Gregson CL, Armstrong DJ, Bowden J, Cooper C, Edwards J, Gittoes NJL, Harvey N, Kanis J, Leyland S, Low R, McCloskey E, Moss K, Parker J, Paskins Z, Poole K, Reid DM, Stone M, Thomson J, Vine N, Compston J. UK clinical guideline for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Arch Osteoporos. 2022 Apr 5;17(1):58.
Freeman EW, Sammel MD, Liu L, Gracia CR, Nelson DB, Hollander L. Hormones and menopausal status as predictors of depression in women in transition to menopause. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2004 Jan;61(1):62-70.
Bromberger JT, Kravitz HM. Mood and menopause: findings from the Study of Women’s Health Across the Nation (SWAN) over 10 years. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2011;38(3):609‑625.
Weber MT, Mapstone M, Staskiewicz J, Maki PM. Reconciling subjective memory complaints with objective memory performance in the menopausal transition. Menopause. 2012;19(7):735‑741.
Rocca WA, Bower JH, Maraganore DM, et al. Increased risk of cognitive impairment or dementia in women who underwent oophorectomy before menopause. Neurology. 2007;69(11):1074‑1083.
Rossouw JE, Anderson GL, Prentice RL, et al. Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results from the Women’s Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2002;288(3):321‑333.
Manson JE, Chlebowski RT, Stefanick ML, et al. Menopausal hormone therapy and health outcomes during the intervention and extended post‑stopping phases of the Women’s Health Initiative randomized trials. JAMA. 2013;310(13):1353‑1368.
Regitz‑Zagrosek V. Sex and gender differences in health: science & society series on sex and science. EMBO Rep. 2012;13(7):596‑603.
GBD 2019 Diseases and Injuries Collaborators. Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396(10258):1204‑1222.