ArticleThe Canadian journal of urology2025
Treatment patterns for genitourinary syndrome of menopause: a TriNetX analysis.
Article in The Canadian journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGenitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) is a highly prevalent, underdiagnosed condition that can significantly impair quality of life (QoL). This study evaluates real-world treatment trends for GSM to better understand current management practices and highlight ongoing gaps in care. The background is in a different font than the rest of the abstract.
methodsWe queried the TriNetX database for patients with a diagnosis of postmenopausal atrophic vaginitis (ICD N95.2) and treatment information from 2004-2024. A combination of RxNorm and International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD) codes was used to classify disease and treatment type, including topical estrogen (RxNorm 4083, 4099), Ospemifene (RxNorm 1370971), Prasterone (RxNorm 3143), and hormone replacement therapy (HRT, ICD Z79.890). Demographic information about the patients' age and sex was collected.
resultsOverall, there were 2,867,232 cases of GSM identified. 71.22% (n = 2,042,024) of the cohort did not receive any treatment. Of patients undergoing treatment, the majority underwent a single intervention (n = 740,922, 89.79%). Of single medical therapy cases, topical estrogen (n = 656,825; 88.64%) was most common, followed by HRT (n = 78,855; 10.64%), Prasterone (n = 3691; 0.50%), and lastly Ospemifene (n = 1551; 0.21%). Very few patients underwent multiple interventions (n = 31,339; 9.1%), the majority of which were prescribed topical estrogen with HRT (n = 70,392; 83.52%).
conclusionsMost women diagnosed with GSM did not receive treatment. Among those treated, topical estrogen was the predominant therapy. Newer therapies were underutilized, though it is unclear whether this is due to provider familiarity, patient preference, or access. Further research is warranted to elucidate the underlying reasons for undertreatment in this population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41496540What 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.