Ospemifene 60mg tablets

Abstract Importance Ospemifene is a novel selective estrogen receptor modulator developed for the treatment of moderate to severe postmenopausal vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA). Objective The aim of the study is to perform a systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA) to assess the efficacy and safety of ospemifene compared with other therapies used in the treatment of VVA in North America and Europe. Evidence Review Electronic database searches were conducted in November 2021 in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Randomized or nonrandomized controlled trials targeting postmenopausal women with moderate to severe dyspareunia and/or vaginal dryness and involving ospemifene or at least one VVA local treatment were considered. Efficacy data included changes from baseline in superficial and parabasal cells, vaginal pH, and the most bothersome symptom of vaginal dryness or dyspareunia, as required for regulatory approval. Endometrial outcomes were endometrial thickness and histologic classifications, including endometrial polyp, hyperplasia, and cancer. For efficacy and safety outcomes, a Bayesian NMA was performed. Endometrial outcomes were compared in descriptive analyses. Findings A total of 44 controlled trials met the eligibility criteria (N = 12,637 participants). Network meta-analysis results showed that ospemifene was not statistically different from other active therapies in most efficacy and safety results. For all treatments, including ospemifene, the posttreatment endometrial thickness values (up to 52 wk of treatment) were under the recognized clinical threshold value of 4 mm for significant risk of endometrial pathology. Specifically, for women treated with ospemifene, endometrial thickness ranged between 2.1 and 2.3 mm at baseline and 2.5 and 3.2 mm after treatment. No cases of endometrial carcinoma or hyperplasia were observed in ospemifene trials, nor polyps with atypical hyperplasia or cancer after up to 52 weeks of treatment. Conclusions and Relevance Ospemifene is an efficacious, well-tolerated, and safe therapeutic option for postmenopausal women with moderate to severe symptoms of VVA. Efficacy and safety outcomes with ospemifene are similar to other VVA therapies in North America and Europe.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Background: Vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA) significantly impacts the quality of life in breast cancer patients leading to symptoms like vaginal dryness, dyspareunia, and genital discomfort. Quality of life in this context is measured using validated scales like the Vaginal Health Index, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify effective treatment options for VVA, including topical estrogen, systemic hormone therapy, vaginal DHEA, ospemifene, and non-hormonal methods like intravaginal laser therapy, moisturizers, and lubricants. A systematic search of four databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, CENTRAL, Embase) identified studies on VVA treatment efficacy in breast cancer patients, yielding 13,039 records, with 32 eligible studies and 8 included in the meta-analysis. Results: Significant improvements were found with intravaginal laser therapy, showing notable differences in the Vaginal Health Index (MD = 8.24, p p = 0.05), and dryness (MD = -5.05, p = 0.01). However, no significant changes were observed in FSFI and vaginal pH. Notably only intravaginal laser therapy was included in the meta-analysis, as other treatment options lacked comparable data. Both hormonal and non-hormonal treatments improved quality of life, with laser therapy showing the most substantial effects. Conclusions: Intravaginal laser therapy is an effective treatment for VVA symptoms in breast cancer survivors, particularly in improving the Vaginal Health Index and reducing dyspareunia. Despite the strengths of the study, variability among studies, lack of RCT-s and data limitations, especially on long-term effects, present challenges.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Dyspareunia in peri- and postmenopausal women is common, clinically consequential, and often undertreated in gynecologic practice. Although genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) is a frequent contributor, intercourse-related pain may also reflect vestibular, pelvic floor, dermatologic, inflammatory, treatment-related, and psychosocial factors. This narrative review provides a practical phenotype-based framework for assessment and management when GSM, vestibular pain, and pelvic floor dysfunction coexist, and when deep-pain phenotypes require broader pelvic evaluation. PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and selected guideline sources were searched for English-language literature published from January 2014 to March 2026, prioritizing guidelines, systematic reviews, randomized or sham-controlled trials, and examination-based studies relevant to office gynecology. History should distinguish superficial from deep pain, provoked from spontaneous symptoms, and urinary, dermatologic, inflammatory, and psychosocial features. Examination should proceed from vulva and vestibule to vagina and pelvic floor, with bimanual assessment and selective imaging when deeper pathology is suspected. Management includes education, irritant avoidance, moisturizers and lubricants, and prescription therapy for clinically significant GSM, usually low-dose vaginal estrogen, with prasterone or ospemifene as selected alternatives. Pelvic floor physiotherapy should be considered when tenderness, guarding, or penetration-limiting hypertonicity is present. Because menopause-specific pelvic floor evidence remains limited, related recommendations are framed as cautious extrapolations from broader dyspareunia, vulvodynia, and chronic pelvic pain literature.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Abstract Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of ospemifene for the treatment of moderate to severe vaginal dryness in postmenopausal women with vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA). Methods: This 12-week, multicenter, double-blind phase 3 study randomized postmenopausal women (aged 40-80 years) with VVA and moderate to severe vaginal dryness as their most bothersome symptom to daily oral ospemifene 60 mg or placebo. Coprimary efficacy endpoints included changes from baseline to week 12 in percentages of vaginal parabasal and superficial cells, vaginal pH, and vaginal dryness severity with ospemifene versus placebo; other secondary endpoints were evaluated (weeks 4, 8, and 12). Safety was assessed by treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and endometrial biopsies. Results: Women (n = 631; ospemifene [n = 316], placebo [n = 315]) had a mean age of 59.8 years, a mean body mass index of 27.2 kg/m2, and most were white. Ospemifene significantly improved (P < 0.0001) the percentages of parabasal and superficial cells, vaginal pH, and severity of vaginal dryness severity compared with placebo at week 12; significant between-group differences were noted by week 4. Secondary endpoints of dyspareunia (P < 0.001), maturation value (P < 0.0001), and the Female Sexual Function Index (P < 0.05) also significantly improved with ospemifene versus placebo at week 12. Significantly more women responded (31.5% vs 6.0%; P < 0.0001) or were satisfied (49.2% vs 33.8%; P = 0.0007) with ospemifene versus placebo at week 12. No unexpected TEAEs, treatment-related serious TEAEs, thrombotic events, or endometrial hyperplasia or carcinoma were observed. Conclusions: Ospemifene was effective and well tolerated for the treatment of moderate-to-severe vaginal dryness in postmenopausal women with VVA.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Many breast cancer survivors (BCS) suffer the consequences of antineoplastic treatments that induce a hypoestrogenic state, leading to chronic climacteric symptoms such as genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM), arousing significant alteration in their quality of life. Non-hormonal therapies (NHT) are first-line treatments, safe but with mild efficacy. When facing moderate-severe GSM, the options for BCS are limited: local estrogen therapy, considered the 'gold standard' but with concerns about safety; vaginal androgens and prasterone, which seem to trigger an activation of estrogen and androgen receptors of the vaginal epithelium layers, without activating estrogen receptors on other tissues, being potentially safe but still without strong evidence in favor of BCS; vaginal lasers, which appear to improve vascularization of vaginal mucosa by stimulating the remodeling of the underlying connective tissue, but with contradictory results of efficacy in recent randomized clinical trials; and ospemifene, an oral selective estrogen receptor modulator presenting mild vaginal estrogenic potency and anti-estrogenic effect at the endometrial and breast level, but still not recommended for use in BCS in recent North American Menopause Society guidelines. There is a need for further studies evaluating objectively the efficacy and safety of these promising therapeutic options. On the other hand, sexuality must be seen as a multifactorial issue, where GSM is only part of the problem; evidence shows that sexual counseling improves the quality of life of BCS. Finally, there is a need to limit the underdiagnosis and undertreatment of GSM in BCS; the primary goal of physicians treating BCS regarding this issue has to be the provision of information of what to expect regarding genital and sexual symptoms to BCS and to counsel on early first-line treatments that may help prevent more severe GSM.

Abstract licence: Public domain

ABSTRACT Introduction The demand for effective and safe treatments of genitourinary syndrome (GSM) in post-menopausal women (PMW) is growing. Published data on the efficacy and safety of ospemifene (OSP) prompt an updated literature review to enlighten possible improvements in the GSM treatment. Area covered We searched articles published in English from 2010 to 2023 through Medline (PubMed) and Embase databases with Boolean terms: OSP, PMW, GSM, endometrium, breast cancer, cardiometabolic syndrome, bone metabolism, adherence to treatment, and patient satisfaction. We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational and cross-sectional studies and completed the search manually. Expert opinion Of the 157 retrieved records, 25 primary studies met the inclusion criteria (15 regarding efficacy and safety, two for additional effects, and four for adherence and satisfaction with the OSP treatment). Seven RCTs involved nearly 5,000 patients, 10 out of 18 prospective observational studies 563, and six retrospective analyses 356,439. Evidence of OSP treatment in PMW with GSM relies on RCTs and remarkable real-world data. The 25 primary studies showcased the high clinical response to symptoms, the favorable safety profile of OSP with very few adverse events, a neutral impact on the endometrium, breast, bone, and thrombosis, and the possible improvement of cardiovascular risk factors.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0