SynthesisInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2026
Elinzanetant: Efficacy and safety in the management of vasomotor symptoms in postmenopausal women, a systematic review and meta-analysis with grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation assessment.
Synthesis in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Elinzanetant: Efficacy and safety in the management of vasomotor symptoms in postmenopausal women, a systematic review and meta-analysis with grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation assessment.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMenopause is frequently associated with different symptoms and signs, such as vasomotor symptoms (VMSs), which can affect women's quality of life. While hormonal therapy is considered the traditional and most used medication for controlling these VMSs associated with menopause, neurokinin (NK) receptor antagonists resemble a novel, promising generation of medications that provide fewer adverse events compared to hormonal therapy. Elinzanetant is the first drug that can act on both NK-1 and 3 receptors by selectively antagonizing them. It has also been developed for the management of moderate-to-severe VMSs.
objectivesWe aim to investigate the effectiveness and safety of elinzanetant compared to placebo in the management of moderate and severe VMSs that are associated with postmenopausal women.
methodWe conducted a search of four databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus) using the following search strategy: ([Elinzanetant) OR [NT-814] OR [BAY 3427080] OR (NK Receptor Antagonist]) AND ([Menopausal Symptoms] OR [Flashes Vasomotor Symptoms] OR (VMS)) with no search restrictions or filters applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) comparing elinzanetant to placebo in post-menopausal women suffering from frequent moderate-to-severe VMSs that reported both efficacy and safety outcomes. We used a uniform Google Sheet designed to collect data from our included RCTs. After data collection, we used Review Manager Software (RevMan) V.5.4.1. to perform all the analyses and plots using a risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) with a 95% CI for continuous outcomes. We conducted risk of bias assessment using Risk of Bias Assessment tool-2 (ROB2).
resultsWe included five RCTs in our review with 1699 participants. Our results reported that elinzanetant demonstrated a statistically significant difference in reducing both frequency and severity of VMSs at week 4 compared to placebo (MD = -2.75, 95% CI: [-3.83, -1.67], P < 0.00001; MD = -0.29, 95% CI: [-0.35, -0.22], P < 0.00001, respectively). These results were maintained at week 12 for both frequency (MD = -2.30, 95% CI: [-3.00, -1.59], P < 0.00001) and severity (MD = -0.35, 95% CI: [-0.43, -0.28], P < 0.00001). Compared to placebo, elinzanetant was associated with a higher incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (RR = 1.12, 95% CI: [1.03, 1.22], P < 0.01), TEAEs causing permanent discontinuation of the study drug (RR = 2.18, 95% CI: [1.45, 3.28], P = 0.0002), drug-related TEAEs (RR = 1.92, 95% CI: [1.53, 2.41], P < 0.00001), headache (RR = 2.19, 95% CI: [1.38, 3.49], P = 0.0009), somnolence (RR = 2.96, 95% CI: [1.42, 6.17], P = 0.004), and fatigue (RR = 3.39, 95% CI: [1.77, 6.49], P = 0.0002). However, no statistically significant difference was observed in the incidence of serious TEAEs (RR = 1.70, 95% CI: [0.82, 3.54], P = 0.15).
conclusionElinzanetant showed significant efficacy in reducing both the frequency and severity of VMSs associated with post-menopausal women at different time points, while concurrently improving outcomes associated with women's quality of life. While elinzanetant was associated with a higher incidence of non-serious adverse events such as headache, somnolence, and fatigue, which led to more treatment discontinuations, it did not increase the risk of serious adverse events compared to placebo, indicating an acceptable safety profile. Conclusively, our results indicate that elinzanetant represents a promising alternative for VMS management; however, it should not replace the clinical assessment of eligibility for hormone therapy. Further studies are required to confirm its long-term safety and sustained effectiveness. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: Our study was registered on PROSPERO on September 20, 2024, with ID CRD42024593052.
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.