Efficacy of ormeloxifene versus norethisterone in the management of abnormal uterine bleeding

In: International Journal of Reproduction, Contraception, Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2025 · vol. 14(7) , pp. 2279–2283 · doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20251979 · W4411679862
article OA: diamond CC0
AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-08

Ormeloxifene demonstrated superior efficacy and tolerability compared to norethisterone in managing abnormal uterine bleeding, evidenced by greater reduction in bleeding, improved hemoglobin, and fewer side effects.

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, 2026-06-10 · read from full text

This prospective comparative study randomized 100 women aged 35 years and above with abnormal uterine bleeding to receive either ormeloxifene or norethisterone, assessing efficacy and safety over 4 months. The primary outcome was change in PBAC score, with secondary outcomes including hemoglobin levels and endometrial thickness measured at baseline, 2 months, and 4 months. Ormeloxifene produced a larger reduction in PBAC score (76.15% vs 45.97%), greater hemoglobin improvement (2.91 g/dl vs 1.31 g/dl), and a slightly greater decrease in endometrial thickness (4.09 mm vs 3.50 mm), while acne and gastrointestinal side effects were more common with norethisterone. This paper does not explicitly discuss endometriosis or adenomyosis; it was included in the corpus via a keyword match in the upstream search index.

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

Abstract

Background: Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is a common gynecological issue that significantly affects the quality of life of women, particularly those in the reproductive and perimenopausal age groups. Ormeloxifene, a selective estrogen receptor modulator, and norethisterone, a synthetic progestogen, are commonly used in its medical management. Objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of ormeloxifene and norethisterone in the management of AUB. Methods: A prospective comparative study was conducted on 100 women aged 35 years and above diagnosed with AUB at D. Y. Patil Hospital, Navi Mumbai between July 2023 to December 2024. Participants were randomly assigned to two treatment groups. Group A received ormeloxifene (60 mg twice a week for 12 weeks, then once weekly for four weeks), while Group B received norethisterone (5 mg twice daily from day 5 to 25 of the menstrual cycle for 4 cycles). The primary outcome was the change in PBAC score. Secondary outcomes included hemoglobin levels, endometrial thickness, and incidence of side effects, evaluated at baseline, 2 months, and 4 months. Results: Group A showed a 76.15% reduction in PBAC score, a 2.91 g/dl increase in hemoglobin, and a 4.09 mm decrease in endometrial thickness. In contrast, Group B demonstrated a 45.97% reduction in PBAC score, a 1.31 g/dl increase in hemoglobin, and a 3.50 mm decrease in endometrial thickness. Acne and gastrointestinal side effects were more common in the norethisterone group. Conclusions: Ormeloxifene was more effective and better tolerated than norethisterone for the treatment of AUB. Its weekly dosing schedule, superior hematological improvement, and lower side-effect profile make it a preferable first-line therapy.
Full text 6,822 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 5 sections · click to expand

Background

Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is a common gynecological issue that significantly affects the quality of life of women, particularly those in the reproductive and perimenopausal age groups. Ormeloxifene, a selective estrogen receptor modulator, and norethisterone, a synthetic progestogen, are commonly used in its medical management. Objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of ormeloxifene and norethisterone in the management of AUB.

Methods

A prospective comparative study was conducted on 100 women aged 35 years and above diagnosed with AUB at D. Y. Patil Hospital, Navi Mumbai between July 2023 to December 2024. Participants were randomly assigned to two treatment groups. Group A received ormeloxifene (60 mg twice a week for 12 weeks, then once weekly for four weeks), while Group B received norethisterone (5 mg twice daily from day 5 to 25 of the menstrual cycle for 4 cycles). The primary outcome was the change in PBAC score. Secondary outcomes included hemoglobin levels, endometrial thickness, and incidence of side effects, evaluated at baseline, 2 months, and 4 months.

Results

Group A showed a 76.15% reduction in PBAC score, a 2.91 g/dl increase in hemoglobin, and a 4.09 mm decrease in endometrial thickness. In contrast, Group B demonstrated a 45.97% reduction in PBAC score, a 1.31 g/dl increase in hemoglobin, and a 3.50 mm decrease in endometrial thickness. Acne and gastrointestinal side effects were more common in the norethisterone group.

Conclusions

Ormeloxifene was more effective and better tolerated than norethisterone for the treatment of AUB. Its weekly dosing schedule, superior hematological improvement, and lower side-effect profile make it a preferable first-line therapy. Metrics

References

Munro MG, Critchley HO, Broder MS, et al. FIGO classification system (PALM-COEIN) for causes of abnormal uterine bleeding in nongravid women of reproductive age. FIGO Working Group on Menstrual Disorders. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2011;113:3-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2010.11.011 Godha Z, Mohsin Z, Hakim S, Wasim S. Comparative study of Ormeloxifene and Medroxyprogesterone acetate in abnormal uterine bleeding. J Obstetrics Gynecol India. 2016;66:395-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-015-0761-2 Kriplani A, Srivastava A, Kulshrestha V, Kachhawa G, Agarwal N, Bhatla N, Hari S. Efficacy of ormeloxifene versus oral contraceptive in the management of abnormal uterine bleeding due to uterine leiomyoma. J Obstetrics Gynaecol Res. 2016;42(12):1744-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jog.13105 Mishra D, Sultan S. FIGO’S PALM–COEIN Classification of abnormal uterine bleeding: A Clinico-Histopathological correlation in Indian setting. The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India. 2017;67:119-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-016-0925-8 Awwad JT, Joth TL, Schiff I. Abnormal uterine bleeding in perimenopause. Int J Fertil Menopausal Stud. 1993;38(5):261-9. Livingstone M, Fraser IS. Mechanism of abnormal uterine bleeding. Hum Reprod Updates. 2002;8(1):60-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/8.1.60 Kriplani A, Kulshrestha V, Agarwal N. Efficacy and safety of ormeloxifene in management of menorrhagia: a pilot study. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2009;35:746-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1447-0756.2008.00987.x Ravibabu K, Palla J, Chintada GS. A study of efficacy of ormeloxifene in the pharmacological management of dysfunctional uterine bleeding. Journal of clinical and diagnostic research: JCDR. 2013;7(11):2534. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2013/6396.3602 Dhananjay BS, Nanda SK. The role of sevista in the management of dysfunctional uterine bleeding. JCDR. 2012;7(1):132. Chitrangada, Singh SK, Nag S. A double blinded randomized controlled trial to compare Ormeloxifene and Norethisterone in the treatment of dysfunctional uterine bleeding. IOSR-JDMS. 2014;13(1):52-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9790/0853-13175256 Malik S, Musharaf S, Malik F, Abass M. Efficacy and safety of ormeloxifene in the management of dysfunctional uterine bleeding. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20191933 Chandra BS, Kumar SS, Shankar BT, Chandra GRS, Chandra RA, Prasad KS. Ormeloxifene a selective estrogen receptor modulator, for treatment of dysfunctional menorrhagia. J Obstet Gynecol lnd. 2004;54(1):56-9. Lal J. Clinical pharmacokinetics and interaction of centchroman—a mini review. Contraception. 2010;81(4):275-80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2009.11.007 Porteous A, Prentice A. The medical management of dysfunctional uterine bleeding. Reviews in Gynaecological Practice. 2003;3(2):81-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1471-7697(03)00018-2 Nelson AL, Teal SB. Medical therapies for chronic menorrhagia. Obstet Gynecol Survey. 2007;62(4):272-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ogx.0000259228.70277.6f Shelly W, Draper MW, Krishnan V, Wong M, Jaffe RB. The selective estrogen receptor modulators: an update on the recent clinical findings. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2008;63(3):163-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/OGX.0b013e31816400d7 Irvine GA, Cameron IT. The medical management of dysfunctional uterine bleeding. Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 1999;13(2):189-202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1053/beog.1999.0017 Magnay JL, O’Brien S, Gerlinger C, Seitz C. Pictorial methods to assess heavy menstrual bleeding in research and clinical practice: a systematic literature review. BMC women's health. 2020;20:1-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-020-0887-y Surabhi HD, Chandra Mouli A. Comparison of effectiveness of ormeloxifene with norethisterone in perimenopausal DUB treatment. Indian J Obstet Gynecol Res. 2019;6(2):137-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18231/j.ijogr.2019.032 Amruta C, Pawaskar NT. Norethisterone versus ormeloxifene in the treatment of perimenopausal dub. J. Evid. Based Med. Healthc. 2018;5(30):2245-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18410/jebmh/2018/465 Srinivasan S. Efficacy of ormeloxifene in comparison to norethisterone in the management of abnormal uterine bleeding. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2022;11(11):2983-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20222633 Das P, Nafees E, Roy S, Mahaseth P. To compare the success in treatment of dub with ormeloxifene vs norethisterone. Int J Acad Med Pharm. 2023;5(3):1955-60. Agarwal N, Singh S, Singh S, Agarwal M, Manocha P. Comparative evaluation of the efficacy and safety of ormeloxifene and norethisterone in dysfunctional uterine bleeding. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2013;2(2):194-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5455/2320-1770.ijrcog20130617

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

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 (21)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK