Thirty-two menopausal women entered the study (16 in each treatment group), of whom 24 completed the trial. The objectives were to investigate the long term efficacy and the local and systemic tolerance of Menorest 50® and Premarin® in the control of menopausal symptoms. After a 4-week treatment-free run-in period, patients were treated with continuous estrogen therapy (a twice-weekly application with Menorest 50® or a daily oral administration of Premarin® 0.625mg) for 1 year, plus a sequential progestin. The main efficacy criterion was the reduction in the mean number of hot flushes per day at 12 months. This study was considered to be a pilot study to collect data on changes in the bone mineral density of lumbar spine (L1-L4) assessments from baseline to weeks 30 and 56. Menorest 50® and Premarin® produced similar results in the relief of menopausal symptoms over the 1-year period of treatment. The mean number of hot flushes per day decreased from 6.9 at baseline to 0.5 at 12 weeks and 0.1 at 12 months in the Menorest 50® group, and from 7.0 to 0.3 and 0.0, respectively, in the Premarin group. The lumbar spine and hip densitometry results revealed that Menorest 50® prevented bone loss to the same extent as Premarin®. Tolerance was similar, with approximately the same number of patients with adverse events, severe adverse events and related-to-study-drug adverse events in both groups. Menorest 50® and Premarin® 0.625mg demonstrated similar results over the 1-year treatment period in reducing the mean number of hot flushes and the severity score of menopausal symptoms, including vasomotor, psychological and urogenital symptoms.
Bone Mineral Density Adis International Limited Drug Invest Menopausal Symptom Estrogen Replacement Therapy
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Sitruk-Ware R. Oestrogen therapy during menopause: practical treatment recommendations. Drugs 1990; 39(2): 203–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bush TL, Barrett-Connor E, Cowan LD, et al. Cardiovascular mortality and noncontraceptive use of oestrogen in women: results from the Lipid Research Clinics Program Follow-Up Study. Circulation 1987; 75: 1102–9. Med Gynaecol Sociol 1969; 4: 268–79PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stampfer MJ, Colditz GA. Estrogen replacement therapy and coronary heart disease: a quantitative assessment of the epidemiologic evidence. Prev Med 1991; 20: 47–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balfour JA, Heel RC. Transdermal oestradiol: A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic efficacy in the treatment of menopausal complaints. Drugs 1990; 40(4): 561–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balfour JA, McTavish D. Transdermal estradiol. A review of its pharmacological profile and therapeutic potential in the prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Drugs Aging 1992; 2(6): 487–507PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judd HL. Transdermal estradiol: a potentially improved method of hormone replacement. J Reprod Med 1994; 39: 343–52PubMedGoogle Scholar
Field CS, Ory SJ, Wahner HW, et al. Preventive effects of transdermal 17β-estradiol on osteoporotic changes after surgical menopause: a two-year placebo-controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993; 168: 114–21PubMedGoogle Scholar
Laufer LR, De Fazio JL, Lu JKH, et al. Estrogen replacement therapy by transdermal estradiol administration. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1983; 146: 533PubMedGoogle Scholar
Padwick ML, Endacott J, Whitehead MI. Efficacy, acceptability and metabolic effects of transdermal estradiol in the management of post-menopausal women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 152: 1085–91PubMedGoogle Scholar
Place VA, Powers M, Darley PE, et al. A double-blind comparative study of Estraderm and Premarin in the amelioration of post-menopausal symptoms. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 152: 1092PubMedGoogle Scholar
Steingold KA, Laufer L, Chetkowski RJ, et al. Treatment of hot flushes with transdermal estradiol administration. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1985; 61: 627–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borg ML, Gimona A, Renoux A, et al. Pharmacokinetics of estradiol and estrone following repeated administration of Menorest, a new estrogen transdermal delivery system, in menopausal women. Clin Drug Invest 1995; 10(2): 96–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Roux Y, Borg ML, Sibille M, et al. Biovailability study of Menorest, a new estrogen transdermal delivery system, compared with a transdermal reservoir system. Clin Drug Invest 1995; 10(3): 172–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Studd JWW, McCarthy K, Zamblera D, et al. Efficacy and tolerance of Menorest compared to Premarin in the treatment of postmenopausal women. A randomised, multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy study. Maturitas 1995; 22: 105–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pornel B, Genazzani AR, Costes D, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of Menorest 50 compared to Estraderm TTS 50 in the treatment of post-menopausal symptoms. A randomized, multicenter, parallel group study. Maturitas: 1995. In pressGoogle Scholar
Adami S, Suppi R, Bertoldi F, et al. Transdermal estradiol in the treatment of postmenopausal bone loss. Bone Miner 1989; 7(6): 79–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar