Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37251622›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2023

Ulipristal acetate versus levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system for heavy menstrual bleeding (UCON): a randomised controlled phase III trial.

Lucy H R Whitaker, Lee J Middleton, Jane P Daniels, Alistair R W Williams, Lee Priest, Smita Odedra, Versha Cheed, Clive E Stubbs, T Justin Clark, Mary-Ann Lumsden and 11 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Preoperative medical therapy before surgery for uterine fibroids.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Lucy H R WhitakerMRC Centre for Reproductive Health, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Lee J MiddletonBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Jane P DanielsNottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Alistair R W WilliamsDivision of Pathology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Lee PriestBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Smita OdedraBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Versha CheedBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Clive E StubbsBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
T Justin ClarkBirmingham Women's and Children's Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
Mary-Ann LumsdenReproductive & Maternal Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Dharani K HapangamaDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Siladitya BhattacharyaUniversity of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Paul P SmithBirmingham Women's and Children's Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
Elaine P NichollsAdcal H.R. Consultancy, UK (PPI representative).
Neil RobertsMRC Centre for Reproductive Health, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Scott I SempleBHF Centre for Cardiovascular Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Lucky SaraswatUniversity of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Jane WalkerDepartment of Clinical Radiology, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Rohan R ChodankarMRC Centre for Reproductive Health, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Hilary O D CritchleyMRC Centre for Reproductive Health, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
UCON Collaborative
Cancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit · GBMRC Centre for Reproductive Health · GBUniversity of Aberdeen · GBUniversity of Edinburgh · GBEdinburgh Royal Infirmary · GBUniversity of Glasgow · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office PCL/19/01Medical Research Council G1002033Medical Research Council MC_PC_14144Medical Research Council MR/N022556/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Heavy menstrual bleeding affects one in four women and negatively impacts quality of life. Ulipristal acetate is prescribed to treat symptoms associated with uterine fibroids. We compared the effectiveness of ulipristal acetate and the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system at reducing the burden of heavy menstrual bleeding, irrespective of the presence of fibroids. Methods: This randomised, open-label, parallel group phase III trial enrolled women over 18 years with heavy menstrual bleeding from 10 UK hospitals. Participants were centrally randomised, in a 1:1 ratio, to either three, 12-week treatment cycles of 5 mg ulipristal acetate daily, separated by 4-week treatment-free intervals, or a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. The primary outcome, analysed by intention-to-treat, was quality of life measured by the Menorrhagia Multi-Attribute Scale at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included menstrual bleeding and liver function. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 20426843. Findings: Between June 5th, 2015 and February 26th, 2020, 236 women were randomised, either side of a recruitment suspension due to concerns of ulipristal acetate hepatoxicity. Subsequent withdrawal of ulipristal acetate led to early cessation of recruitment but the trial continued in follow-up. The primary outcome substantially improved in both groups, and was 89, (interquartile range [IQR] 65 to 100, n = 53) and 94, (IQR 70 to 100, n = 50; adjusted odds ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26-1.17; p = 0.12) in the ulipristal and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system groups. Rates of amenorrhoea at 12 months were higher in those allocated ulipristal acetate compared to levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (64% versus 25%, adjusted odds ratio 7.12, 95% CI 2.29-22.2). Other outcomes were similar between the two groups and there were no cases of endometrial malignancy or hepatotoxicity due to ulipristal acetate use. Interpretation: Our findings suggested that both treatments improved quality of life. Ulipristal was more effective at inducing amenorrhoea. Ulipristal has been demonstrated to be an effective medical therapeutic option but currently its use has restrictions and requires liver function monitoring. Funding: UK Medical Research Council and National Institute of Health Research EME Programme (12/206/52).

Indexed as

Adenomyosis endometriumAmenorrhoeaDrug induced liver injuryFibroidHeavy menstrual bleedingLeiomyomaLevonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systemProgesterone receptor modulator associated endometrial changesQuality of lifeRandomised controlled trialSelective progesterone receptor modulatorUlipristal acetateUltrasoundUrgent safety measuresUterus

Identifiers

PMID37251622
PMCPMC10209678
OpenAlexW4377016745

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.