Efficacy and safety of low-dose regimens of conjugated estrogens cream administered vaginally
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of low-dose conjugated estrogens (CE) cream for treatment of atrophic vaginitis. METHODS: Postmenopausal women (N = 423) with moderate-to-severe vaginal atrophy were randomized to CE cream 0.3 mg or placebo once daily (21 days on/7 days off) or twice weekly for 12 weeks, followed by open-label treatment with CE cream for 40 weeks consistent with their prior regimen. Primary endpoints were changes in vaginal maturation index (VMI; percentage of superficial cells), vaginal pH, and severity of participant-reported most bothersome symptom (vaginal dryness, itching, burning, or dyspareunia) at week 12. Endometrial safety was assessed by transvaginal ultrasound and endometrial biopsy for 52 weeks. RESULTS: At week 12, improvements in VMI with daily and twice-weekly use of low-dose CE cream (27.9% and 25.8%, respectively) were significantly greater compared with placebo (3.0% and 1.0%, respectively; P < 0.001). Improvements in vaginal pH with daily and twice-weekly CE cream (-1.6 for both) were also significantly greater relative to placebo (-0.4 and -0.3, respectively; P < 0.001). VMI and vaginal pH responses were sustained through 52 weeks. Both CE cream regimens significantly reduced most bothersome symptom scores compared with placebo (P < or = 0.001), including those for dyspareunia (P < or = 0.01). There was no report of endometrial hyperplasia or carcinoma. Adverse events occurred with similar frequency among the active and placebo groups during the double-blind phase. CONCLUSIONS: Daily and twice-weekly use of low-dose CE cream was equally effective in relieving symptoms of vulvovaginal atrophy. Both regimens showed endometrial safety and sustained efficacy during 1 year of therapy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".