ArticleBMC women's health2026
Comparison of two menopausal hormone therapy regimens in managing menopausal symptoms: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC women's health, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFemoston (estradiol/dydrogesterone) and Climen (estradiol valerate/cyproterone acetate) are two widely prescribed sequential menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) regimens that differ in estrogen formulation, progestogen component, and sequential pattern. Head-to-head comparative data on their clinical efficacy and safety remain scarce.
methodsThis single-center retrospective study enrolled 80 perimenopausal and early postmenopausal women who received Femoston (n = 42) or Climen (n = 38) for six consecutive treatment cycles between January 2022 and January 2025. The primary outcome was post-treatment Kupperman Menopausal Index (KMI) score assessed by multivariable linear regression. Secondary outcomes included individual symptom response rates, serum sex hormone levels, lipid profile, hepatic enzymes, fasting plasma glucose, endometrial thickness, and adverse events.
resultsBoth regimens produced substantial reductions in KMI scores from baseline (Femoston: 26.90 ± 5.72 to 10.48 ± 3.72; Climen: 27.53 ± 6.08 to 11.74 ± 4.12; both P < 0.001). After multivariable adjustment, treatment group was not independently associated with post-treatment KMI score (β = 0.58, 95% CI: -0.82 to 1.98, P = 0.412). Response rates for hot flashes/sweating, insomnia, and mood symptoms were comparably high between groups (all P > 0.05). Both regimens significantly suppressed FSH and LH and elevated E₂. Regarding lipid profiles, Femoston significantly increased HDL-C (P = 0.001) whereas Climen did not (P = 0.402); Climen significantly increased TG (P = 0.048) whereas Femoston did not (P = 0.583). After Benjamini-Hochberg correction, the between-group difference in HDL-C remained significant (adjusted P = 0.024). No clinically significant changes in hepatic enzymes, fasting glucose, or endometrial thickness were observed in either group, and no serious adverse events occurred.
conclusionsFemoston and Climen provide comparable short-term menopausal symptom relief. The more favorable lipid profile with Femoston, particularly its HDL-C benefit, may inform individualized regimen selection, especially in women without indications for antiandrogenic therapy. Prospective studies with longer follow-up are warranted to evaluate hard cardiovascular endpoints.
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.