Do Progestogens and Progesterone Reduce Bone Loss?

In: Menopause · 1996 · vol. 3(1) , pp. 13–19 · doi:10.1097/00042192-199603010-00004 · W2312911576
Review OA: green CC0
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-08-01 ⓘ

Depot progestogens, while effective contraceptives and protective against endometrial cancer, have inconclusive evidence regarding their impact on bone loss, necessitating further long-term studies.

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

⚙ AI-generated deep summary by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-09-02 · read from full text ⓘ

This review examines the conflicting evidence regarding whether long-term progestogen use causes bone loss through hypoestrogenic amenorrhea or offers protective bone trophic properties. The authors analyze data on depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, levonorgestrel implants, and progestogen-only pills, concluding that current evidence is inconclusive regarding the magnitude of any risk. They recommend continuing progestogen use for contraception and endometrial cancer protection while monitoring amenorrheic women with low thresholds for estradiol testing and bone density scans. Relevance to endometriosis: listed as one indication for GnRH antagonists, though the paper's main focus is uterine fibroids.

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

Abstract

Long-term unopposed depot progestogens are currently used widely, mainly for contraception. Anxiety has recently arisen as to their implied role in the pathogenesis of osteoporosis. The reason for this has been the hypoestrogenic amenorrhoea that they can cause by hypothalamic suppression. On the other hand, progestogens have been shown from in vitro work, animal studies, and clinical trials to have bone trophic properties also. Review of the data available for the specific commonly used progestogens, such as depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, levonorgestrel implants, and the progestogen-only pill, provides inconclusive evidence as to the magnitude of the problem. Large long-term randomized controlled studies that examine bone turnover and densities are required to settle the issue. In the interim period, we should continue to use long-term progestogens as they provide an excellent method of contraception and are protective against endometrial cancer. However, we must be vigilant in women who become amenorrhoeic and have a low threshold for performing estradiol levels and bone density scans, giving add-back estrogen or withdrawing the drug where necessary.
Full text 1,265 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Do Progestogens and Progesterone Reduce Bone Loss? - Nicholas Panay - John Studd Abstract: Long-term unopposed depot progestogens are currently used widely, mainly for contraception. Anxiety has recently arisen as to their implied role in the pathogenesis of osteoporosis. The reason for this has been the hypoestrogenic amenorrhoea that they can cause by hypothalamic suppression. On the other hand, progestogens have been shown from in vitro work, animal studies, and clinical trials to have bone trophic properties also. Review of the data available for the specific commonly used progestogens, such as depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, levonorgestrel implants, and the progestogen-only pill, provides inconclusive evidence as to the magnitude of the problem. Large long-term randomized controlled studies that examine bone turnover and densities are required to settle the issue. In the interim period, we should continue to use long-term progestogens as they provide an excellent method of contraception and are protective against endometrial cancer. However, we must be vigilant in women who become amenorrhoeic and have a low threshold for performing estradiol levels and bone density scans, giving add-back estrogen or withdrawing the drug where necessary.

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 (sparse)

Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.

Cites (1)

References (8)

Source provenance

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