ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
GnRH Analogues for the Treatment of Endometriosis-Related Pain: A Narrative Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endometriosis is a chronic estrogen-dependent condition affecting women of reproductive age and commonly presents with dysmenorrhea, chronic pelvic pain, dyspareunia, and infertility. In a substantial proportion of patients, pain persists despite first-line hormonal treatment, making alternative pharmacologic strategies necessary. GnRH agonists and antagonists act primarily by suppressing ovarian estrogen production and thereby reduce an important hormonal driver of disease activity. Although both classes are effective for pain relief, they differ in onset of action, reversibility, tolerability, and suitability for prolonged use. This narrative review summarizes the current evidence on GnRH-based therapies for endometriosis-associated pain, with particular attention to biological rationale, clinical efficacy, safety, and the role of add-back therapy. Overall, both agonists and antagonists appear to provide clinically significant symptom improvement, especially in women who do not respond adequately to oral contraceptives or progestins. Their clinical use, however, is limited by hypoestrogenic adverse effects such as vasomotor symptoms and bone mineral density loss, which often require monitoring and adjunctive add-back therapy. Oral GnRH antagonists may offer practical advantages in selected patients through rapid action, the absence of a flare effect, and dose-adjustable hormonal suppression, although treatment choice must also consider long-term safety, cost, access, and individual patient characteristics. In summary, GnRH analogues remain useful second-line options, but treatment should be individualized according to symptom severity, previous treatment response, reproductive goals, tolerability, bone health, cost, and availability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.