Ospemifene effectively treats vulvovaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women: results from a pivotal phase 3 study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to study the efficacy and safety of ospemifene, a new selective estrogen receptor modulator, in the treatment of vulvovaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind phase 3 study in which 826 postmenopausal women were randomized 1:1:1 to receive treatment with ospemifene 30 or 60 mg/day or placebo orally for 12 weeks was conducted. The primary inclusion criteria were having 5% or less superficial cells on the vaginal smear (maturation index), vaginal pH greater than 5.0, and at least one moderate or severe symptom of vulvovaginal atrophy. The four coprimary endpoints were the change from baseline to 12 weeks in the percentage of superficial and parabasal cells on the vaginal smear, change in vaginal pH, and change in severity of most bothersome symptom (vaginal dryness or dyspareunia) compared with placebo. All participants were given a nonhormonal vaginal lubricant for use as needed. RESULTS: Ospemifene was statistically significantly superior to placebo in each of the coprimary endpoints at the 60-mg dose. Statistically significant results were achieved for all coprimary endpoints with the 30-mg dose except for dyspareunia. Ospemifene was well tolerated at both doses and demonstrated a favorable safety profile. CONCLUSIONS: Ospemifene was shown to be effective and well tolerated for the treatment of the symptoms of vaginal dryness and dyspareunia associated with vulvovaginal atrophy over and above the use of provided lubricants.

Prevalence and impact of vaginal symptoms among postmenopausal women.

INTRODUCTION: Vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA) is reported by one-quarter to one-half of postmenopausal women. AIM: We evaluated the prevalence, inconvenience of, and issues surrounding hormone use for VVA symptoms in women who were current, past, and never users of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT), along with the relationship of sexual activity to VVA symptoms. METHODS: An online survey was sent to 3,471 women >or=45 years old participating in a panel of approximately 43,000 U.S. adults maintained by Knowledge Networks. Respondents were stratified by MHT use (current, past, and never) and sexual activity (sexually active and not sexually active). Final respondent data underwent a poststratification process and Chi-square analysis of hormone use and VVA by sexual activity. Main Outcome Measures. Percent, calculated as the ratio of response over total responding for each survey question for all and stratified respondents. RESULTS: Forty-five percent (1,038/2,290) of respondents (age range 45-89 years; mean 60.7 years) were postmenopausal and currently or previously experienced VVA. Approximately 60% of past or never users of MHT reported vaginal symptoms; >90% found them bothersome. In comparison, 82% of current users reported VVA symptoms prior to use. 85% of all respondents were aware of safety issues associated with MHT. The prevalence and perceived severity of VVA symptoms were substantial but less frequent in nonsexually active women. Analysis of MHT use by past or current hormone use indicated a trend away from oral dosing and towards patch or vaginal hormones. CONCLUSIONS: Postmenopausal women have a high rate of VVA symptoms. Those who use MHT do so for multiple reasons-hot flashes, VVA, bone protection, dyspareunia-and most have concerns about long-term safety, despite the fact that the majority of MHT use was for >5 years. Safety concerns and lack of physician recommendation were major reasons for not using or discontinuing MHT.

Effects of ospemifene and raloxifene on biochemical markers of bone turnover in postmenopausal women.

Ospemifene is a novel selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) that is initially being developed for the treatment of vaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women. However, it also shows promise in the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. As a part of a phase II trial, we compared the effects of ospemifene and raloxifene on bone turnover in postmenopausal women. The study was conducted as a randomized, double-blind study in which 118 healthy postmenopausal women received 30 (n = 29), 60 (n = 30), or 90 mg (n = 30) ospemifene or 60 mg (n = 29) raloxifene for 3 months. Bone resorption was assessed by measuring the urinary outputs of N- and C-terminal cross-linking telopeptides of type I collagen (NTX and CTX, respectively). Bone formation was assessed by measuring bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (bone ALP), osteocalcin (OC), procollagen type I N propeptide (PINP), and procollagen type I C propeptide (PICP) in serum. All markers were studied before and at 3 months and 2-4 weeks after cessation of the medication. Urine NTX outputs decreased in all study groups, and the only statistically significant difference in NTX was observed between raloxifene and 30 mg ospemifene, which was reduced more in the raloxifene group. The output of CTX decreased most clearly in 60- and 90-mg ospemifene groups, but no significant differences between study groups emerged. A significant difference was found between the 90-mg ospemifene group and raloxifene in PINP in favor of ospemifene. No other differences in bone formation markers emerged between ospemifene and raloxifene. The study confirms the bone-restoring activity of ospemifene, which is comparable to that of raloxifene.

Effects of ospemifene and raloxifene on hormonal status, lipids, genital tract, and tolerability in postmenopausal women.

OBJECTIVE: To compare ospemifene and raloxifene regarding their effects on hormones, lipids, genital tract, and tolerability in postmenopausal women. DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind study in which 118 healthy postmenopausal women received 30 (n = 29), 60 (n = 30), or 90 mg (n = 30) of ospemifene or 60 mg (n = 29) of raloxifene for 3 months. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between study groups. In comparison with raloxifene, follicle-stimulating hormone levels decreased significantly more in the 90-mg ospemifene group and sex hormone-binding globulin levels increased more in all ospemifene groups. Total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels decreased more in raloxifene than in ospemifene groups, although the difference in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol between 90-mg ospemifene and raloxifene was not significant. Endometrial thickness did not change in any study group and endometrial biopsies showed atrophy in the majority of subjects at 3 months. All ospemifene groups demonstrated a clear estrogenic effect on the vaginal epithelium, as seen in Pap smears. This was in sharp contrast to the raloxifene group, which had no effect on the vaginal epithelium. Kupperman index decreased in all study groups during treatment. The adverse events were mild, mainly single cases, and no clustering of events was observed. There were no clinically significant abnormal findings in laboratory safety parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Ospemifene, at the dose of 90 mg/day, was more estrogenic than raloxifene, as shown by changes in serum follicle-stimulating hormone and sex hormone-binding globulin levels. Neither agent stimulated endometrium, but in contrast to raloxifene, ospemifene had a clear estrogenic effect in the vagina. Further studies with ospemifene are needed in subjects with vaginal atrophy.

Effects of ospemifene, a novel SERM, on hormones, genital tract, climacteric symptoms, and quality of life in postmenopausal women: a double-blind, randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: Ospemifene, a novel selective estrogen receptor modulator, shows a potential for prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. We studied the effects of ospemifene on hormone levels, genital tract organs, climacteric symptoms, and quality of life. DESIGN: A double-blinded study in which 160 postmenopausal women were randomly allocated to receive either ospemifene at three different daily doses (30, 60, or 90 mg) or placebo for 3 months. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed among the study groups in clinical characteristics or parameters reflecting estrogen action at baseline. Ospemifene reduced follicle-stimulating hormone and insulin-like growth factor I levels, whereas estradiol failed to change at all, and luteinizing hormone was reduced only in the 90-mg group of ospemifene. In the vast majority of participants, the endometrium remained atrophic after 3 months of treatment with ospemifene. Although the rate of proliferative endometrium slightly increased in all groups, including placebo, no hyperplasia or bleeding occurred in any participant. Ospemifene had no effect on the appearance of proliferation marker Ki-67 in the endometrium as compared with placebo, and endometrial thickness increased by mean 0.4 to 0.6 mm (P < 0.01, P < 0.05 and P < 0.05 for 30, 60 and 90 mg ospemifene, respectively). Uterine volume slightly increased (8.4%-14.7%) in the ospemifene groups (P > 0.05), perhaps as a result of increased uterine blood flow. The most conspicuous finding was the significant estrogenic effect on vaginal epithelium, as evidenced by an increase in intermediate and superficial cells in repeat Pap smears. Ospemifene was not observed to aggravate climacteric symptoms or cause adverse events, nor did it suppress climacteric symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Ospemifene at daily doses of 30 to 90 mg did not stimulate endometrium or aggravate hot flashes but clearly had a rather strong estrogenic effect on the vaginal epithelium during a 3-month treatment period. Such effects would be advantageous if ospemifene were found to be effective in the long-term prevention of osteoporosis.

Effects of ospemifene, a novel SERM, on vascular markers and function in healthy, postmenopausal women.

OBJECTIVE: Ospemifene, a novel selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM), shows promise for bone preservation in postmenopausal women. This study examined the effects of ospemifene on different vascular surrogate markers. DESIGN: A double-blinded study was conducted in 160 healthy, postmenopausal women who used, in a randomized order, ospemifene (at daily doses of 30, 60, or 90 mg) or placebo for 3 months. RESULTS: Although ospemifene caused falls from basal levels in total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, oxidized low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and a rise in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, the only statistically significant difference between ospemifene and placebo was an increase of triglyceride levels (11.3%) in the 90-mg group. Ospemifene caused no significant effect on endothelial markers or homocysteine. Of the markers reflecting coagulation and fibrinolysis, plasma fibrinogen was significantly reduced in the 60- and 90-mg groups of ospemifene (8.7% and 8.5%, respectively) when compared with the placebo group. No changes were seen in generation of thrombin or degradation of crosslinked fibrin D-dimer. The uterine or carotid arteries and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure were not affected by ospemifene. Ospemifene caused no changes in basal insulin or in a 2-h glucose tolerance test, suggesting unaltered insulin sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: Neutral effects of short-term use of ospemifene on vascular surrogate markers imply no effect for ospemifene on the risk for cardiovascular disorders in healthy, postmenopausal women.