Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Provide evidence-based recent data on oral micronized progesterone (OMP) and progestins in menopausal hormonal therapy (MHT). RECENT FINDINGS: Medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) increases breast cancer acting through the glucocorticoid receptor; progestins in MHT increase thrombosis more than oral estrogens; MPA, but not OMP or other progestins, increase monocyte cell endothelium adhesion; MPA and estradiol (E2)/MPA have negative brain effects, whereas E2/progesterone (P4) has neuroregenerative brain effects. The 'window of opportunity' cardiovascular disease hypothesis is not supported by a randomized controlled trial showing that transdermal estradiol with sequential OMP in early menopause does not prevent increased carotid intimal media thickness; P4 in the cardiac electrical system opposes E2 effects and prevents sudden death/long QT syndrome; transdermal estradiol/OMP does not increase venous thromboembolism in observational data. P4 decreases breast cell proliferation and improves prognosis through P4 receptor alteration of estrogen receptor α genetic effects; OMP with conjugated equine estrogen (CEE)/estrogen (E)/E2 does not increase breast cancer in two prospective cohorts, one population-based. Endometrial cancer is increased in MHT of CEE/E/E2+cyclic OMP at 200 mg/day. SUMMARY: New data show CEE/E/E2+MPA/P mechanisms for negative breast cancer, venous thromboembolism, cardiovascular system, and brain effects. OMP/P4 counterbalances CEE/E/E2-related negative effects on breast cancer and long QT syndrome. OMP effectively treats vasomotor symptoms and sleep disturbances, and could safely be used alone for symptomatic menopause.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".