ArticleReproduction (Cambridge, England)2026
Evaluating the contraceptive potential of active immunization against gonadotropin-releasing hormone.
Article in Reproduction (Cambridge, England), 2026. 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
Abstract
Humans and rhesus macaques are known to express two molecular forms of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH-I and GnRH-II), which appear to differentially contribute to the regulation of the menstrual cycle. Specifically, there is evidence to suggest that GnRH-I is the primary mediator of negative estrogen feedback to the hypothalamus and pituitary gland, while GnRH-II is the primary mediator of the positive feedback that stimulates the preovulatory surge of luteinizing hormone. Therefore, it is plausible that selective silencing of GnRH-II would block ovulation and lay the platform for development of a novel contraceptive. To test this possibility female rhesus macaques were actively immunized against GnRH-II (and/or GnRH-I), and serum estradiol and progesterone concentrations were monitored for an additional ∼2.5 years. Despite multiple booster immunizations every ∼6 weeks, and elevated GnRH antibody titers, none of the animals ceased ovulating (i.e., revealed by monthly peaks of serum progesterone concentrations followed by menstruation). Taken together, these findings question the efficacy of GnRH vaccines as a stratagem for selectively blocking ovulation in humans. However, they do not negate the potential value of pharmacological interventions aimed at selectively silencing GnRH-II function and its involvement in stimulating the preovulatory luteinizing hormone surge.
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.