Medroxyprogesterone and conjugated oestrogen are equivalent for hot flushes: a 1-year randomized double-blind trial following premenopausal ovariectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oestrogen therapy is the gold standard treatment for hot flushes/night sweats, but it and oestrogen/progestin are not suitable for all women. MPA (medroxyprogesterone acetate) reduces hot flushes, but its effectiveness compared with oestrogen is unknown. In the present study, oral oestrogen [CEE (conjugated equine oestrogen)] and MPA were compared for their effects on hot flushes in a planned analysis of a secondary outcome for a 1-year randomized double-blind parallel group controlled trial in an urban academic medical centre. Participants were healthy menstruating women prior to hysterectomy/ovariectomy for benign disease. A total of 41 women {age, 45 (5) years [value is mean (S.D.)]} were enrolled; 38 women were included in this analysis of daily identical capsules containing CEE (0.6 mg/day) or MPA (10 mg/day). Demographic variables did not differ at baseline. Daily data provided the number of night and day flushes compared by group. The vasomotor symptom day-to-day intensity change was assessed by therapy assignment. Hot flushes/night sweats were well controlled in both groups, one occurred on average every third day and every fourth night. Mean/day daytime occurrences were 0.363 and 0.187 with CEE and MPA respectively, but were not significantly different (P=0.156). Night sweats also did not differ significantly (P=0.766). Therapies were statistically equivalent (within one event/24 h) in the control of vasomotor symptoms. Day-to-day hot flush intensity decreased with MPA and tended to remain stable with CEE (P<0.001). In conclusion, this analysis demonstrates that MPA and CEE are equivalent and effective in the control of the number of hot flushes/night sweats immediately following premenopausal ovariectomy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".