Prevention of bone loss and hypoestrogenic symptoms by estrogen and interrupted progestogen add-back in long-term GnRH-agonist down-regulated patients with endometriosis and premenstrual syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the utility of a low-dose estrogen and pulsed progestogen hormone replacement therapy (HRT) regimen for add-back during long-term gonadotropin-releasing hormone-agonist (GnRH-agonist) therapy. DESIGN: A pilot clinical trial conducted at a tertiary referral, academic, reproductive sciences center. The study included 15 patients with endometriosis and 5 patients with severe premenstrual syndrome (PMS). Patients with endometriosis received leuprolide acetate depot 3.75 mg IM monthly until their symptoms had resolved (2-3 months), at which time HRT was initiated along with the GnRH-agonist. Patients with severe PMS received the same treatment with the addition of HRT after 1 month. The HRT regimen consisted of 1 mg oral micronized estradiol daily and 0.35 mg norethindrone daily for 2 days alternating with 2 days without norethindrone. The main outcome measure included bone density assessment in the lumbar spine and femoral neck by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry at 6- to 12-month intervals. The mean follow-up duration +/- SD while on GnRH-agonist treatment was 31.2 +/- 17 months (for endometriosis patients) and 37.7 +/- 8.4 months (for patients with severe PMS). RESULTS: Bone mineral density was stable after initiation of HRT for the entire follow-up period. No patient had return of pelvic pain or resumption of mood swings after HRT add-back. After the first 3 months of HRT, all women remained amenorrheic. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term GnRH-agonist down-regulation is safe and effective when combined with HRT add-back. Furthermore, on the basis of this small study, the low-dose pulsed progestogen, continuous estrogen HRT regimen seems to be safe for use as add-back therapy in terms of bone health.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".