Reply to: Continuous versus cyclic oral contraceptives for endometriosis: any conclusive evidence?

letter OA: closed CC0
Limited metadata. Only one source feed has indexed this record so far — no abstract, full text, or open-access copy is available through Endo Lab. The publisher's page (linked below) is the canonical location for the actual content. If you have institutional access, use "Find at my library".
AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06+body, 2026-06-07

This reply discusses a systematic review of continuous versus cyclic oral contraceptives for endometriosis and references multiple studies on their efficacy in treatment and recurrence.

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 paper is a brief reply by Zorbas and colleagues responding to a comment about the article “Continuous versus cyclic oral contraceptives for endometriosis: any conclusive evidence.” It addresses the exchange at the level of the evidence discussion and maintains that, based on the literature considered in the earlier review topic, definitive conclusions are limited. The main caveat is that it is not a new clinical study but a commentary reply tied to previously published systematic-review material. Relevance to endometriosis: the paper is directly about endometriosis treatments and discusses the evidence base comparing continuous versus cyclic oral contraceptive regimens.

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

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

endometriosis

MeSH descriptors

Contraceptives, Oral Endometriosis Contraceptives, Oral Endometriosis Female Humans

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 (6)

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: 2026-05-13T22:17:52.213533+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK