Ilaria Piacenti, Veronica Tius, Maria Federica Viscardi, Anna Biasioli, Martina Arcieri, Stefano Restaino, Ludovico Muzii, Giuseppe Vizzielli, Maria Grazia Porpora
{"title":"Dienogest vs. combined oral contraceptive: A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and side effects to inform evidence-based guidelines.","authors":"Ilaria Piacenti, Veronica Tius, Maria Federica Viscardi, Anna Biasioli, Martina Arcieri, Stefano Restaino, Ludovico Muzii, Giuseppe Vizzielli, Maria Grazia Porpora","doi":"10.1111/aogs.15145","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Dienogest is a synthetic fourth-generation progestin that has been approved for the medical treatment of endometriosis, and its efficacy on pain symptoms and quality of life is well established even in the long term. Nowadays, only a few controlled trials evaluating the safety of dienogest compared with other hormonal therapies have been published. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare efficacy and tolerability data between dienogest and combined oral contraceptives (COC) in patients taking hormonal therapy for endometriosis treatment in order to inform evidence-based guidelines.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>PubMed (Medline), Web of Science, and Google Scholar were systematically searched from the inception of each database until October 2024. Selection criteria included any articles comparing efficacy outcomes and at least one tolerability data between dienogest and COC in patients diagnosed with endometriosis. Studies comparing COC containing Dienogest or another type of hormonal treatment were excluded. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted if adequate data were available from at least three studies, reporting pooled mean differences and odds ratios between groups using Review Manager V.7.9.0. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024598455.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of four randomized control trials and one observational study were included, showing moderate risk at bias assessment. Meta-analysis did not show any statistical difference in improving pelvic pain after treatment [CI 95% (-1.45-1.17); I<sup>2</sup> = 86%; p = 0.84]. In contrast, dyspareunia after treatment was significantly lower in the COC group [CI 95% (0.64-1.33); I<sup>2</sup> = 0%; p < 0.00001]. No statistical difference was found in terms of vaginal bleeding [OR = 0.88; CI 95% (0.39-1.96); I<sup>2</sup> = 41%; p = 0.75], nausea and vomiting [OR = 0.51; CI 95% (0.16-1.63); I<sup>2</sup> = 67%; p = 0.26], headache [OR = 0.91; CI 95% (0.38-2.21); I<sup>2</sup> = 59%; p = 0.84], hot flushes [OR = 1.16; CI 95% (0.54-2.48); I<sup>2</sup> = 0%; p = 0.71], and hair loss [OR = 1.69; CI 95% (0.52-5.53); I<sup>2</sup> = 46%; p = 0.39]. Treatment discontinuation rate was similar between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Dienogest is comparable to COC in terms of efficacy and tolerability. The therapeutic choice should be based on the patient's preference, clinical history, and experience.</p>","PeriodicalId":6990,"journal":{"name":"Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.15145","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Dienogest is a synthetic fourth-generation progestin that has been approved for the medical treatment of endometriosis, and its efficacy on pain symptoms and quality of life is well established even in the long term. Nowadays, only a few controlled trials evaluating the safety of dienogest compared with other hormonal therapies have been published. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare efficacy and tolerability data between dienogest and combined oral contraceptives (COC) in patients taking hormonal therapy for endometriosis treatment in order to inform evidence-based guidelines.
Material and methods: PubMed (Medline), Web of Science, and Google Scholar were systematically searched from the inception of each database until October 2024. Selection criteria included any articles comparing efficacy outcomes and at least one tolerability data between dienogest and COC in patients diagnosed with endometriosis. Studies comparing COC containing Dienogest or another type of hormonal treatment were excluded. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted if adequate data were available from at least three studies, reporting pooled mean differences and odds ratios between groups using Review Manager V.7.9.0. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024598455.
Results: A total of four randomized control trials and one observational study were included, showing moderate risk at bias assessment. Meta-analysis did not show any statistical difference in improving pelvic pain after treatment [CI 95% (-1.45-1.17); I2 = 86%; p = 0.84]. In contrast, dyspareunia after treatment was significantly lower in the COC group [CI 95% (0.64-1.33); I2 = 0%; p < 0.00001]. No statistical difference was found in terms of vaginal bleeding [OR = 0.88; CI 95% (0.39-1.96); I2 = 41%; p = 0.75], nausea and vomiting [OR = 0.51; CI 95% (0.16-1.63); I2 = 67%; p = 0.26], headache [OR = 0.91; CI 95% (0.38-2.21); I2 = 59%; p = 0.84], hot flushes [OR = 1.16; CI 95% (0.54-2.48); I2 = 0%; p = 0.71], and hair loss [OR = 1.69; CI 95% (0.52-5.53); I2 = 46%; p = 0.39]. Treatment discontinuation rate was similar between groups.
Conclusions: Dienogest is comparable to COC in terms of efficacy and tolerability. The therapeutic choice should be based on the patient's preference, clinical history, and experience.
期刊介绍:
Published monthly, Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica is an international journal dedicated to providing the very latest information on the results of both clinical, basic and translational research work related to all aspects of women’s health from around the globe. The journal regularly publishes commentaries, reviews, and original articles on a wide variety of topics including: gynecology, pregnancy, birth, female urology, gynecologic oncology, fertility and reproductive biology.