Rosiglitazone and ethinyl estradiol/cyproterone acetate as single and combined treatment of overweight women with polycystic ovary syndrome and insulin resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies have evaluated insulin sensitizers in comparison/association with oral contraceptives (OC) in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) with insulin resistance (IR). This study assessed the effects of a thiazolidinedione versus an anti-androgenic estrogen-progestin followed by their sequential combinations in overweight PCOS women. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-eight candidates in whom elevated insulin was not normalized after 4 months of diet were randomly assigned to 6 months of rosiglitazone 4 mg/day or to ethinyl estradiol 35 mg/cyproterone acetate 2 mg (EE/CPA: 21/28 days cycle). Each group then received both medications for another 6 months. Rosiglitazone reduced insulin, IR indices [homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) and quantitative sensitivity check index (QUICKI)] and the insulin area under the curve in response to an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), but had limited effect on lipids, androgens and hirsutism. EE/CPA did not modify insulin and OGTT response but increased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides and decreased androgens and hirsutism. Similar changes occurred during combined treatments. End results were highly significant in combined groups without noticeable side-effects or changes in safety parameters. CONCLUSIONS: In obese PCOS women with high insulin not corrected by diet, the combination of rosiglitazone and EE/CPA may be used to achieve complementary beneficial effects on endocrine-metabolic anomalies and clinical symptoms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".