Treatment of endometriosis in different ethnic populations: a meta-analysis of two clinical trials

Christoph Gerlinger, Thomas Faustmann, Jeffrey J Hassall, Christian Seitz
BMC women's health · 2012 · vol. 12(1) , pp. 9 · doi:10.1186/1472-6874-12-9 · PMID:22515510 · PMC3470994 · W1988050977
review OA: gold CC0 ⤵ 26 in-corpus citations
📄 Open PDF View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-07 ⓘ

This meta-analysis found dienogest and GnRH analogues equally effective for endometriosis pain in European and Japanese populations, though ethnic differences in bone mineral density response are possible.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

⚙ AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-07 ⓘ

This meta-analysis reviewed and pooled results from two multicenter, randomized 24-week clinical trials that directly compared the progestin dienogest (DNG) versus GnRH analogues (leuprolide in Europe; buserelin in Japan) in women with laparoscopically or laparoscopically confirmed endometriosis. Using changes in self-reported endometriosis-related pain measured on a 0–100 mm visual analogue scale as the primary efficacy outcome, the authors found no heterogeneity between trials (I² = 0%), indicating similar efficacy of DNG and GnRH analogues for pain reduction across European and Japanese populations, and the meta-analysis also reported DNG superiority for bone mineral density change with a caveat of potential heterogeneity in physiology. A major limitation explicitly reflected in the study design is that only two trials qualified for inclusion after excluding other reports, and the European and Japanese trials differed in DNG dosing and blinding approach. This paper is centrally about endometriosis—meta-analyzing DNG versus GnRH analogue treatment effects in European and Japanese populations and comparing pain and bone mineral density outcomes.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Approaches to the treatment of endometriosis vary worldwide, but studies comparing endometriosis medications in different ethnic groups are rare. A systematic literature search identified two studies directly comparing dienogest (DNG) versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues in European and Japanese populations. Meta-analysis of visual analogue scale scores revealed no heterogeneity in response between the trials, indicating equivalent efficacy of DNG and GnRH analogues for endometriosis-related pain across populations. DNG was significantly superior to GnRH analogues for bone mineral density change in both trials, but significant heterogeneity between the studies may indicate ethnic differences in physiology.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

endometriosis

MeSH descriptors

Buserelin Endometriosis Hormone Antagonists Leuprolide Nandrolone Asian People Buserelin Endometriosis Endometriosis Europe Female Hormone Antagonists Humans Japan Leuprolide Nandrolone Nandrolone Treatment Outcome White People

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (49)

Cited by (26)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-06-11T06:19:48.454388+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-05-13T22:16:17.081435+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK