OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 24-week cyclic administration of estetrol (E4) (15 mg)/drospirenone (DRSP) (3 mg) in Japanese patients with endometriosis.
METHODS: A 24-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study.
METHODS: Twenty-five study centers in Japan.
METHODS: A total of 162 Japanese women diagnosed with endometriosis.
METHODS: Participants were randomly allocated to the E4/DRSP group or the placebo group. In the E4/DRSP group, participants were orally administered one tablet containing E4 (15 mg) and DRSP (3 mg) daily for 24 days, followed by one placebo tablet for 4 days for a hormone-free interval, constituting a 1-cycle regimen. One placebo tablet was administered once daily for 28 days to participants in the placebo group. The treatments were continued for six cycles (24 weeks) throughout the confirmatory period.
METHODS: Changes in visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for the most severe pelvic pain (lower abdominal and back pain) from baseline to six treatment cycles at the end of the confirmatory study period.
RESULTS: Estetrol/drospirenone showed changes in the mean VAS scores for the most severe pelvic pain (-33.2 mm) from baseline to the end of the 6-cycle treatment. The between-group difference was significant (-8.5 mm; 2-sided 95% confidence interval, -16.1 to -0.9 mm), showing superiority to placebo. The responder rates, ≥30% and ≥50% reductions in the VAS scores from baseline, were higher in the E4/DRSP group than in the placebo group: 53.2% vs. 29.6% and 36.4% vs. 12.3%. Objective gynecological findings (induration of the cul-de-sac, pelvic tenderness, and limited uterine mobility) were significantly improved by E4/DRSP treatment, and the proportions of stable and worsened participants were significantly lower than in the placebo group. Estetrol/drospirenone decreased the size of endometriomas and improved quality of life, on the basis of quality of life-related questionnaires and global impression scores. No safety concerns were observed with E4/DRSP treatment. Few differences were observed in the proportion of participants with hemostasis parameters outside the reference range between the E4/DRSP and placebo groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Estetrol/drospirenone effectively treats endometriosis-associated pain and improves gynecological findings. Estetrol/drospirenone may be a safe, new option for endometriosis treatment with a potentially decreased risk of thromboembolic events.
BACKGROUND: jRCT2011210027.

UNASSIGNED: To describe the effects of estetrol (E4) 15 mg/drospirenone (DRSP) 3 mg on physical and emotional premenstrual and menstrual symptoms.
UNASSIGNED: We used Menstrual Distress Questionnaire (MDQ) data from a phase-3 trial (NCT02817828) in Europe and Russia with participants (18 - 50 years) using E4/DRSP for up to 13 cycles. We assessed mean changes in MDQ-t-scores from baseline to end of treatment in premenstrual (4 days before most recent flow) and menstrual (most recent flow) scores for 4 MDQ domains in starters and switchers (use of hormonal contraception in prior 3 months) and performed a shift analysis on individual symptoms within each domain.
UNASSIGNED: Of 1,553 treated participants, 1,398(90.0%), including 531(38%) starters, completed both MDQs. Starters reported improvements for premenstrual Pain (-1.4), Water Retention (-3.3) and Negative Affect (-2.5); and for menstrual Pain (-3.5), Water Retention (-3.4), and Negative Affect (-2.7) (all p < 0.01). For switchers, no changes were significant except an increase in premenstrual (+1.0, p = 0.02) and menstrual (+1.5, p = 0.003) Water Retention. We observed a change in symptom intensity in >40% of participants for Cramps, Backache and Fatigue (domain Pain), Painful or Tender Breast and Swelling (domain Water Retention) and Mood Swings and Irritability (domain Negative Affect).
UNASSIGNED: E4/DRSP starters experienced significant improvements in the domains Pain, Water Retention and Negative Affect particularly benefiting those with more severe baseline symptoms. Switchers showed minimal changes.
A phase 3 study in Europe and Russia showed that Estetrol/Drospirenone, a new combined oral contraceptive, significantly improved the MDQ scores for domains Pain, Water Retention and Negative Affect in women starting COC use, while switchers showed minimal changes.

OBJECTIVE: To characterise and compare the toxicity of estetrol (E4) and 17α-ethinylestradiol (EE2), and their respective mixture with the progestin drospirenone (DRSP) in zebrafish (Danio rerio) embryos.
METHODS: Zebrafish embryos were exposed to E4, EE2, DRSP, E4+DRSP, and EE2+DRSP in a fish embryo acute toxicity (FET) test. A second test examined behavioural responses and, using label-free proteomics, identified changes in protein expression in response to hormonal treatments, across a range of concentrations, including those that are considered to be environmentally relevant.
RESULTS: In the FET test, no effects were found from E4 at concentrations ≤100 mg/L, while EE2 induced mortality and morphological abnormalities at concentrations of 1-2 mg/L. In the behavioural test, exposure to 30 ng/L EE2 (∼200 × predicted environmental concentration - PEC) resulted in hypoactivity in fish larvae and exposure to 0.3 ng/L EE2 (∼2 × PEC) led to quantitative changes in protein abundance, revealing potential impacts on RNA processing and protein synthesis machinery. Exposure to E4 did not alter behaviour, but several groups of proteins were modulated, mainly at 710 ng/L (∼200 × PEC), including proteins involved in oxidative phosphorylation. When combined with DRSP, EE2 induced reduced effects on behaviour and proteomic responses, suggesting an antagonistic effect of DRSP. E4+DRSP induced no significant effects on behaviour or proteomic profiles at tested concentrations.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that E4-based combined oral contraceptives present a more favourable environmental profile than EE2-based contraceptives, particularly during the early developmental stages of fish.

Epidemiological data suggest that the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection rate is higher in women than in men, but the death rate is lower, while women (>50 years) on menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) have a higher survival rate than those not on MHT. Classical oral estrogen enhances the synthesis of coagulation markers and may increase the risk of thromboembolic events that are common in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The favorable hemostatic profile of estetrol (E4) might be suitable for use in women who are receiving estrogen treatment and contract COVID-19. A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study (NCT04801836) investigated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of E4 versus placebo in hospitalized patients with moderate COVID-19. Eligible postmenopausal women and men (aged ≥ 18 years old) were randomized to E4 15 mg or placebo, once daily for 21 days, in addition to the standard of care (SoC). The primary efficacy endpoint of improvement in COVID-19 (percentage of patients recovered at day 28) between the placebo and E4 arms was not met. E4 was well tolerated, with no safety signals or thromboembolic events, suggesting that postmenopausal women can safely continue E4-based therapy in cases of moderate COVID-19 managed with SoC.

A phase 2 study showed that 15 mg estetrol (E4) alleviates vasomotor symptoms (VMS). Here, we present the effects of E4 15 mg on vaginal cytology, genitourinary syndrome of menopause, and health-related quality of life.
In a double-blind, placebo-controlled study, postmenopausal participants (n = 257, 40-65 y) were randomized to receive E4 2.5, 5, 10, or 15 mg or placebo once daily for 12 weeks. Outcomes were the vaginal maturation index and maturation value, genitourinary syndrome of menopause score, and the Menopause Rating Scale to assess health-related quality of life. We focused on E4 15 mg, the dose studied in ongoing phase 3 trials, and tested its effect versus placebo at 12 weeks using analysis of covariance.
Least square (LS) mean percentages of parabasal and intermediate cells decreased, whereas superficial cells increased across E4 doses; for E4 15 mg, the respective changes were -10.81% ( P = 0.0017), -20.96% ( P = 0.0037), and +34.17% ( P < 0.0001). E4 15 mg decreased LS mean intensity score for vaginal dryness and dyspareunia (-0.40, P = 0.03, and -0.47, P = 0.0006, respectively); symptom reporting decreased by 41% and 50%, respectively, and shifted to milder intensity categories. The overall Menopause Rating Scale score decreased with E4 15 mg (LS mean, -3.1; P = 0.069) and across doses was associated with a decreasing frequency and severity of VMS ( r = 0.34 and r = 0.31, P < 0.001).
E4 demonstrated estrogenic effects in the vagina and decreased signs of atrophy. E4 15 mg is a promising treatment option also for important menopausal symptoms other than VMS.

UNASSIGNED: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer (PCa) is accompanied by side effects affecting health-related quality of life (HRQL).
UNASSIGNED: To assess the effects of the fetal estrogen estetrol (E4) on symptoms related to estrogen and androgen deficiency, and on HRQL measured using the validated Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) questionnaire.
UNASSIGNED: This was a phase 2, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study in patients with advanced PCa.
UNASSIGNED: Patients receiving ADT were randomly assigned at a 2:1 ratio to daily treatment with a high dose of E4 (HDE4; n = 41) or placebo (n = 21) for 24 wk.
UNASSIGNED: The primary outcome was the effect of HDE4 cotreatment on hot flushes (HFs). Secondary outcomes were the Q-Man questionnaire for evaluation of the effect on estrogen and androgen deficiency symptoms, and the FACT-P questionnaire for evaluating HRQL.
UNASSIGNED: At 24 wk, the number of patients experiencing HFs was significantly lower in the HDE4 group than in the placebo group (14.3% vs 60.0%; p < 0.001). HDE4 treatment was associated with lower incidence of night sweats, arthralgia, and fatigue, but more nipple tenderness and gynecomastia. At 24 wk, the mean HRQL score favored HDE4 over placebo for the FACT-P total score (122.2 ± 12.3 vs 118.7 ± 19.7) and for several other FACT subscales.
UNASSIGNED: Daily HDE4 coadministration almost completely prevented HFs in patients with advanced PCa treated with ADT. HDE4 also had positive effects on HRQL and counteracted other estrogen deficiency symptoms caused by ADT. These data support the dual efficacy concept of ADT and HDE4 to improve HRQL and increase the antitumor effect of ADT.
UNASSIGNED: For patients on androgen deprivation therapy for advanced prostate cancer, cotreatment with a high dose of estetrol almost completely prevents the occurrence of hot flushes and improves quality of life and well-being, but nipple sensitivity and an increase in breast size may occur.

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists can be improved.
OBJECTIVE: To assess safety, the frequency and severity of hot flushes (HFs), bone health, and antitumor effects of high-dose estetrol (HDE4) when combined with ADT.
METHODS: A phase II, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was conducted in advanced prostate cancer patients requiring ADT (the PCombi study).
METHODS: Patients receiving LHRH agonist treatment were randomized 2:1 to 40 mg HDE4 (n = 41) or placebo (n = 21) cotreatment for 24 wk.
METHODS: Coprimary endpoints were frequency/severity of HFs and levels of total and free testosterone (T). Secondary endpoints included assessments of bone metabolism (osteocalcin and type I collagen telopeptide [CTX1]), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH). Efficacy analysis was based on the selected per-protocol (PP) population.
CONCLUSIONS: Of 62 patients included in the study, 57 were suitable for a PP analysis (37 HDE4; 20 placebo). No E4-related serious cardiovascular adverse events occurred at 24 wk. Weekly HFs were reported by 13.5% of patients with HDE4 and 60.0% with placebo (p < 0.001). Daily HFs occurred in 5.9% versus 55%. Bone turnover parameters decreased significantly with HDE4 (p < 0.0001). Total and free T decreased earlier (p < 0.05), and free T was suppressed further (p < 0.05). PSA suppression was more profound and earlier (p < 0.005). FSH levels were suppressed by 98% versus 57% (p < 0.0001). Estrogenic side effects were nipple sensitivity (34%) and gynecomastia (17%).
CONCLUSIONS: HDE4 cotreatment of ADT patients with advanced prostate cancer was well tolerated, and no treatment-related cardiovascular adverse events were observed at 24 wk. HFs and bone turnover were substantially reduced. Suppression of free T, PSA, and FSH was more rapid and profound, suggesting enhanced disease control by HDE4 cotreatment. Larger and longer-lasting studies are needed to confirm the results of the study reported here.
RESULTS: Cotreatment of androgen deprivation therapy with high-dose estetrol in advanced prostate cancer patients results in fewer occurrences of hot flushes, bone protection, and other antitumor benefits. Nipple sensitivity and gynecomastia may occur as side effects.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the contraceptive efficacy, bleeding pattern and safety of a combined oral contraceptive containing estetrol (E4) 15 mg and drospirenone (DRSP) 3 mg.
METHODS: Multicenter, open-label, phase 3 trial.
METHODS: Sixty-nine sites in Europe and Russia.
METHODS: Sexually active women aged 18-50 years with regular menstrual cycles and body mass index ≤35 kg/m2 .
METHODS: E4/DRSP was administered in a 24 active/4 placebo regimen for up to 13 cycles. Visits were scheduled during Cycles 2, 4, 7 and 10 and after completing treatment during which adverse events (AEs) were collected. Participants recorded medication intake, vaginal bleeding/spotting, use of other contraceptive methods and sexual intercourse on a daily diary.
METHODS: Pearl Index (PI) for women 18-35 years (overall and method-failure), bleeding pattern and AEs.
RESULTS: A total of 1553 women aged 18-50 years, including 1353 from 18 to 35 years old, received the study medication. PI was 0.47 pregnancies/100 woman-years (95% CI 0.15-1.11); method failure PI was 0.29 pregnancies/100 woman-years (95% CI 0.06-0.83). Scheduled bleeding/spotting occurred in 91.9-94.4% of women over Cycles 1 to 12 and lasted a median of 4-5 days per cycle. The percentage of women with unscheduled bleeding/spotting episodes decreased from 23.5% in Cycle 1 to <16% from Cycle 6 onwards. The most common AEs were headache (7.7%), metrorrhagia (5.5%), vaginal haemorrhage (4.8%) and acne (4.2%). One treatment-related serious AE was reported, a lower extremity venous thromboembolism. One-hundred and forty-one (9.1%) women discontinued study participation because of treatment-related adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS: E4/DRSP provides effective contraception, a predictable bleeding pattern and a favourable safety profile.
UNASSIGNED: A phase 3 trial with E4/DRSP shows high contraceptive efficacy, a predictable bleeding pattern and favourable safety profile.

The aim of this study was to select the minimum effective dose of estetrol (E4) for the treatment of vasomotor symptoms in postmenopausal women.
This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Postmenopausal women (n = 257, of whom 32 were hysterectomized) aged 40 to 65 years, with ≥7 moderate to severe hot flushes (HFs) per day, or 50 or more moderate to severe HFs weekly, received 2.5, 5, 10, or 15 mg E4, or placebo once-daily for a period of 12 weeks. Efficacy was assessed by recording the frequency and severity of HFs. Overall safety was assessed by recording adverse events, measuring endometrial thickness, and monitoring bleeding patterns. Treatment groups were compared using analysis of covariance.
The frequency of moderate to severe HFs decreased with all E4 doses. The difference in the percentage change of weekly HF frequency was significant for 15 mg E4 versus placebo at both W4 (-66% vs -49%, P = 0.032) and W12 (-82% vs -65%, P = 0.022). The decrease in severity of HFs was significantly more pronounced for 15 mg E4 than for placebo at both W4 (-0.59 vs -0.33, P = 0.049) and W12 (-1.04 vs -0.66, P = 0.049); the other doses failed to achieve statistical significance. In nonhysterectomized women, endometrial thickness increased during treatment and normalized following progestin treatment at study completion. No endometrial hyperplasia was observed.
Estetrol 15 mg is considered to be the minimum effective daily oral dose for treatment of vasomotor symptoms. Its current seemingly favorable safety profile is further to be confirmed in phase 3 clinical development. : Video Summary:http://links.lww.com/MENO/A591.
Video Summary:http://links.lww.com/MENO/A591.

Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists have replaced estrogens for endocrine treatment of advanced prostate cancer (PC) because of cardiovascular side effects. The fetal estrogen estetrol (E4) may be safer for PC treatment and is expected to decrease testosterone (T) and prevent estrogen deficiency.
To investigate the safety and T-suppressive effect of E4 in healthy men.
Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-escalating study.
The study was conducted at a phase I clinical unit (QPS, Netherlands).
Healthy male volunteers aged 40 to 70 years.
Three treatment cohorts of 15 volunteers with placebo (n = 5) and E4 (n = 10). Estetrol doses tested were 20, 40, and 60 mg/d. Subjects were treated for 4 weeks.
Subjective side effects, pharmacodynamic effects on hemostatic variables, lipids, glucose, bone parameters, and endocrine parameters related to T metabolism.
Total and free T decreased dose-dependently and significantly. Nipple tenderness occurred in 40% and decrease of libido occurred in 30% of E4-treated men. The unwanted estrogenic effects on hemostasis were small, dose dependent, and in some cases significant. Lipid and bone parameters showed a favorable trend.
The effect of E4 on testosterone levels is insufficient for standalone PC treatment. Taking all clinical and pharmacodynamic variables into consideration, a daily dose of 40 mg E4 seems safe for further evaluation of endocrine PC treatment in combination with LHRH analogs.