ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2026
Exploring New Treatment Strategies for Endometriosis-Narrative Review.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The pharmacological treatment of endometriosis using SPRMs requires improvement. The pure PR-agonist dienogest (DNG), a clinically established progestin, can serve as a reference compound for comparison. Its efficacy and safety have been well characterised in preclinical in vitro and in vivo studies, as well as in qualified pivotal clinical studies for the treatment of endometriosis. The pharmacodynamic profile of Dienogest (DNG) is compared with the experience of using the pure PR antagonist Vilaprisan and the mixed PR agonist/antagonist Asoprisnil to treat endometriosis. Unfortunately, the clinical development of Vilaprisan was suspended due to long-term toxicology findings in animals that require further clarification. The clinical development of Asoprisnil, however, was discontinued due to concerns regarding SPRM-associated endometrial changes, although the interpretation of PAEC has been debated. Additionally, another SPRM, Ulipristal acetate, has been associated with rare but serious cases of liver injury. However, Vilaprisan is primarily supported by fibroid-related clinical development, whereas Asoprisnil has limited Phase II endometriosis evidence. Nevertheless, this new mesoprogestin, Asoprisnil, has shown signs of tissue-selective activity in limited clinical and preclinical studies. Continuing the strategy of using mixed PR agonists/antagonists could inspire further drug development. The preclinical profile of the new mesoprogestin EC313 has been presented, showing a higher PR agonistic/antagonistic quotient than Asoprisnil, with comparatively elevated anti-endometriotic activity. Furthermore, EC313 increases the progesterone receptor isoform B/A ratio, but its clinical efficacy remains unproven as it is still in the early stages of development. Based on the preclinical data currently available, the next generation of mesoprogestins warrants further investigation for the treatment of endometriosis and related gynaecological disorders. This prompts consideration of whether there is potential to enhance the effectiveness of drug discovery strategies within this particular pharmacological class.
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.