ArticleScientific reports2025
The efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for girls with central precocious puberty or early normal puberty: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Bibliometric and LDA analysis of the correlation between childhood obesity and precocious puberty (2005-2025).Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Pooled it
- The Role of Pelvic Ultrasound in Monitoring and Predicting Therapeutic Efficacy of GnRHa for Central Precocious Puberty.Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU · 2026Article
- Gamma-aminobutyric acid supplementation combined with gonadotropin-releasing hormone analog therapy versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone analog therapy alone for linear growth in children with growth retardation: a retrospective cohort study.Translational pediatrics · 2026Article
- Effectiveness and Safety of Hormonal Treatments in Children with Growth Disorders: A Systematic Review of Clinical Evidence.Clinics and practice · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Chinese Expert Consensus on central precocious puberty (CPP) defines girls' rapid sexual development before age 8 as CPP; while after age 8 as early normal puberty (ENP). And the use of recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) for CPP and ENP is off-label and lacks reliable evidence for clinical practice. This study only included girls due to the low prevalence among boys. We aimed to compare the long-term efficacy and safety of gonadotrophin releasing hormone analogue (GnRHa) in combination with or without rhGH for the treatment of CPP and ENP, and to explore the differences in the efficacy of different age of intervention. The medical information of girls with CPP or ENP at a women's and children's hospital from January 2013 to December 2018 was retrospectively collected. The primary outcome of efficacy was final adult height (FAH), and the secondary outcome included height gain, genetic height gain, standard deviation score of final adult height (FAHSDS), and standard deviation score of height (HSDS) gain. The safety outcomes were the rate of at least one adverse event of any type and the rate of each adverse event. We included factors with P < 0.05 in baseline analysis, and factors from systematic review and clinical experience as covariates in multivariable linear regression to adjust the clinical treatment choice, and subgroup analysis was taken to explore the efficacy of interventions at different ages. A total of 182 girls with CPP or ENP were finally included in this study. The adjusted results of multivariable linear regression showed that the mean(SD) of FAH in the combination therapy group (CG) (162.58 [0.46] cm) was higher than the monotherapy group (MG) (160.25 [0.35] cm) and the no treatment group (NG) (158.39 [0.47] cm) (P < 0.001), and the height gain(CG: 4.00 [0.46] cm, MG: 1.68 [0.36] cm, NG: - 0.18 [0.47] cm, P < 0.001), genetic height gain(CG: 6.18 [0.46] cm, MG: 3.85 [0.35] cm, NG: 1.99 [0.47] cm, P < 0.001), FAHSDS (CG: 0.66 [0.08], MG: 0.24 [0.06], NG: - 0.13 [0.08], P < 0.001), and HSDS gain(CG: 0.26 [0.08], MG: - 0.17 [0.06], NG: - 0.54 [0.08]) in CG were all higher than MG and NG. Besides, the incidence of at least one adverse event of any type in the CG was higher than MG and NG (CG: 83.30%, MG: 15.00%, NG: 16.70%, P < 0.001), among which the incidence of fasting insulin elevation (CG: 55.60%, MG: 1.25%, NG: 2.08%, P < 0.001) and hypothyroidism(CG: 44.4%, MG: 0.00%, NG: 0.00%, P < 0.001) was higher than the other two groups. Subgroup analysis indicated that, compared with the NG, the MG showed no differences in FAH in girls who entered puberty after the age of 8 years (1.46 [- 0.01, 2.93], P = 0.051) and those treated with GnRHa for less than 1 year (0.30 [- 1.34, 1.94], P = 0.718). Compared with the NG, there were no differences in FAH between the CG and MG (1.41 [- 0.76, 3.58], P = 0.204, 1.70 [- 0.77, 4.16], P = 0.178) in girls who initiated pharmacotherapy at the age of 10-12 years. Compared with the MG, the CG showed no differences in FAH in girls treated with rhGH in combination for less than 1 year (1.48 [- 0.09, 3.05], P = 0.064). The combination of GnRHa and rhGH can improve the FAH of girls with CPP and ENP to a certain extent, especially for those who began pharmacotherapy before 10 years of age and continued treatment for more than 1 year, but meanwhile increased the incidence of adverse events. The benefits, risks, and affordability of medication should still be comprehensively considered before decisions on pharmacotherapy.
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.