Efficacy, tolerability, and endometrial safety of ospemifene compared with current therapies for the treatment of vulvovaginal atrophy: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Ospemifene is a novel selective estrogen receptor modulator developed for the treatment of moderate to severe postmenopausal vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA). OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to perform a systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA) to assess the efficacy and safety of ospemifene compared with other therapies used in the treatment of VVA in North America and Europe. EVIDENCE REVIEW: Electronic database searches were conducted in November 2021 in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Randomized or nonrandomized controlled trials targeting postmenopausal women with moderate to severe dyspareunia and/or vaginal dryness and involving ospemifene or at least one VVA local treatment were considered. Efficacy data included changes from baseline in superficial and parabasal cells, vaginal pH, and the most bothersome symptom of vaginal dryness or dyspareunia, as required for regulatory approval. Endometrial outcomes were endometrial thickness and histologic classifications, including endometrial polyp, hyperplasia, and cancer. For efficacy and safety outcomes, a Bayesian NMA was performed. Endometrial outcomes were compared in descriptive analyses. FINDINGS: A total of 44 controlled trials met the eligibility criteria ( N = 12,637 participants). Network meta-analysis results showed that ospemifene was not statistically different from other active therapies in most efficacy and safety results. For all treatments, including ospemifene, the posttreatment endometrial thickness values (up to 52 wk of treatment) were under the recognized clinical threshold value of 4 mm for significant risk of endometrial pathology. Specifically, for women treated with ospemifene, endometrial thickness ranged between 2.1 and 2.3 mm at baseline and 2.5 and 3.2 mm after treatment. No cases of endometrial carcinoma or hyperplasia were observed in ospemifene trials, nor polyps with atypical hyperplasia or cancer after up to 52 weeks of treatment. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Ospemifene is an efficacious, well-tolerated, and safe therapeutic option for postmenopausal women with moderate to severe symptoms of VVA. Efficacy and safety outcomes with ospemifene are similar to other VVA therapies in North America and Europe.
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 | 0.018 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.041 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".