Scholarlink

Background <p>Postmenopausal women are more likely to experience vasomotor symptoms (VMS), such as heat sensation and sweating. Recent trials have investigated fezolinetant in the treatment of VMS in postmenopausal women. Our study aims to conduct a meta-analysis of these trials in order to estimate fezolinetant’s effectiveness and safety in the management of VMS in postmenopausal women.</p> Method <p>We searched Cochrane, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for all published randomized controlled trials. Review Manager Software was used for the meta-analysis. The quality of evidence was graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework.</p> Results <p>Our study contained five trials with 3295 individuals with a mean age of 54.4&#xa0;years. The frequency of VMS was significantly lower in the fezolinetant group compared to the placebo group [MD = − 2.42, 95% CI (− 2.81, − 2.04), <i>P</i> &lt; 0.00001]. Additionally, when compared to the placebo group, the severity of VMS was significantly lower in the fezolinetant group [SMD = − 0.36, 95% CI (− 0.46, − 0.26), <i>P</i> &lt; 0.00001]. Furthermore, there was no significant&#xa0;difference in the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) between the fezolinetant group and the placebo group [RR = 1.02, 95% CI (0.97, 1.07), <i>P</i> = 0.51].</p> Conclusion <p>Fezolinetant is efficient and well-tolerated in the treatment of postmenopausal women with VMS.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Fezolinetant’s efficacy and safety in treatment of vasomotor symptoms in postmenopausal women: a meta-analysis and GRADE evaluation of randomized controlled trials

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年1月23日

查看全文
  • Abdallah R. Allam,
  • Mohamed Salah Alhateem,
  • Abdelrahman Mohamed Mahmoud

摘要

Background

Postmenopausal women are more likely to experience vasomotor symptoms (VMS), such as heat sensation and sweating. Recent trials have investigated fezolinetant in the treatment of VMS in postmenopausal women. Our study aims to conduct a meta-analysis of these trials in order to estimate fezolinetant’s effectiveness and safety in the management of VMS in postmenopausal women.

Method

We searched Cochrane, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for all published randomized controlled trials. Review Manager Software was used for the meta-analysis. The quality of evidence was graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework.

Results

Our study contained five trials with 3295 individuals with a mean age of 54.4 years. The frequency of VMS was significantly lower in the fezolinetant group compared to the placebo group [MD = − 2.42, 95% CI (− 2.81, − 2.04), P < 0.00001]. Additionally, when compared to the placebo group, the severity of VMS was significantly lower in the fezolinetant group [SMD = − 0.36, 95% CI (− 0.46, − 0.26), P < 0.00001]. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) between the fezolinetant group and the placebo group [RR = 1.02, 95% CI (0.97, 1.07), P = 0.51].

Conclusion

Fezolinetant is efficient and well-tolerated in the treatment of postmenopausal women with VMS.