ArticleJournal of gynecologic oncology2019
Combined estrogen-progestin pill is a safe and effective option for endometrial hyperplasia without atypia: a three-year single center experience.
Article in Journal of gynecologic oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endometrial Hyperplasia: Current Insights into Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Clinical Management.Cancers · 2025Review
- Endometrial Atypical Hyperplasia and Risk of Endometrial Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of oral contraceptive pill (OCP) as therapy for endometrial hyperplasia (EH) without atypia in reproductive-aged women compared with oral progestin.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was carried out in our reproductive center. Consecutive patients diagnosed with infertility and non-atypical EH identified through electronic database who met inclusion criteria (n=309). Patients were assigned to two treatment groups: OCP (n=216) and oral progestin (n=93); clinical and reproductive outcomes were recorded.
resultsReversal of EH to normal endometrium, clinical pregnancy, live birth and miscarriage rate. Women in OCP group were younger, had higher prevalence of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome and other uterine pathology and longer duration of infertility than women in progestin group. Reversal of EH was observed in 93.52% women on OCP and in 86.02% women on progestin (p=0.032; adjusted odds ratio [aOR]= 2.35; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.06-5.21) after the initial course of treatment for 2 to 6 months. Cyclic OCP (n=184) resulted in better response to treatment compared to continuous OCP (n=32) (95.11% vs. 84.38%; p=0.039; aOR =3.60; 95% CI =1.12-11.55). Clinical pregnancy rate in OCP group was marginally higher than progestin group (87/208, 41.83% vs. 27/90, 30.00%; p=0.054). Miscarriage (25.29% vs. 29.63%; p=0.654) and live birth rate (31.25% vs. 21.11%; p=0.074) were comparable between the groups.
conclusionFor the first time we demonstrate that OCP is an effective therapy for non-atypical EH and is associated with higher remission rate compared with oral progestin. Reproductive outcomes are reassuring and comparable between the two groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.