Quantifying the economic burden of unintended pregnancies due to drug-drug interactions with hormonal contraceptives from the United States payer perspective.

Background: In the United States of America (USA), nearly 10 million women use oral contraceptives (OCs). Concomitant administration of certain medications can result in contraceptive failure, and consequently unintended pregnancies due to drug-drug interactions (DDIs). The objective of this analysis was to estimate the economic impact of unintended pregnancies due to DDIs among women of reproductive age using an OC alone or in combination with an enzyme inducer co-medication in the USA from a payer perspective. Methods: A Markov model using a cohort of 1,000 reproductive-age women was developed to estimate costs due to contraceptive failure for OC alone versus OC with concomitant enzyme inducer drugs. All women were assumed to begin an initial state, continuing until experiencing an unintended pregnancy. Unintended pregnancies could result in birth, induced abortion, spontaneous abortion, or ectopic pregnancy. The cohort was analyzed over a time horizon of 1 year with a cycle length of 1 month. Estimates of costs and probabilities of unintended pregnancy outcomes were obtained from the literature. Probabilities from the Markov cohort trace was used to estimate number of pregnancy outcomes. Results: On average, enzyme inducers resulted in 20 additional unintended pregnancies with additional unadjusted and adjusted costs median (range) of USD136,304 (USD57,436-USD320,093) and USD65,146 (USD28,491-USD162,635), respectively. The major component of the direct cost is attributed to the cost of births. Considering the full range of events, DDIs with enzyme inducers could result in 16-25 additional unintended pregnancies and total unadjusted and adjusted costs ranging between USD46,041 to USD399,121 and USD22,839 to USD202,788 respectively. Conclusion: The direct costs associated with unintended pregnancies due to DDIs may be substantial and are potentially avoidable. Greater awareness of DDI risk with oral contraceptives among payers, physicians, pharmacists and patients may reduce unintended pregnancies in at-risk populations.

Incorporating Pharmacometrics into Pharmacoeconomic Models: Applications from Drug Development.

Pharmacometrics is the science of quantifying the relationship between the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of drugs in combination with disease models and trial information to aid in drug development and dosing optimization for clinical practice. Considering the variability in the dose-concentration-effect relationship of drugs, an opportunity exists in linking pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic model-based estimates with pharmacoeconomic models. This link may provide early estimates of the cost effectiveness of drug therapies, thus informing late-stage drug development, pricing, and reimbursement decisions. Published case studies have demonstrated how integrated pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic-pharmacoeconomic models can complement traditional pharmacoeconomic analyses by identifying the impact of specific patient sub-groups, dose, dosing schedules, and adherence on the cost effectiveness of drugs, thus providing a mechanistic basis to predict the economic value of new drugs. Greater collaboration between the pharmacoeconomics and pharmacometrics community can enable methodological improvements in pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic-pharmacoeconomic models to support drug development.

Does switching contraceptive from oral to a patch or vaginal ring change the likelihood of timely prescription refill?

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated contraceptive refill patterns of women insured commercially in the US who switched from oral contraceptives (OCs) to the patch or vaginal ring and assessed if switching contraceptive methods changes refill patterns. STUDY DESIGN: Women aged 15-44 with ≥2 patch or ring prescriptions and ≥2 OC prescriptions before the first patch/ring prescription were identified from the MarketScan® Commercial database (1/1/2002-6/30/2011). Refill patterns 1-year pre- and postindex date (first patch/ring prescription) were evaluated, and women were categorized as timely or delayed refillers on OCs and patch/ring. Regression modeling was used to investigate the association between refill patterns and contraceptive methods and switching effects on refill patterns. RESULTS: Of 17,814 women identified, 7901 switched to the patch, and 9913 switched to the ring. Among timely OC refillers, the percentage of timely refills decreased (patch: 95.6% to 79.4%, p<.001; ring: 96.5% to 74.3%, p<.001). However, among delayed OC refillers, the percentage of timely refills improved (patch: 47.9% to 72.2%, p<.001; ring: 50.4% to 64.0%, p<.001) during patch/ring use. Nonetheless, compared to timely OC refillers, women who were delayed OC refillers had 1.68-fold [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.52-1.84, p<.001] and 1.85-fold greater odds (CI: 1.69-2.02, p<.001) of being a delayed refiller while on the patch and ring, respectively. CONCLUSION: Switching to the patch or ring may improve refill behavior for women who have problems refilling OCs timely; however, the magnitude of the improvement may fail to improve ultimate contraceptive efficacy by simply switching to the patch or ring. IMPLICATIONS: The impact on timely refills of switching from OCs to either the patch or ring is complex and varies depending on the pattern of timely refills on OCs.

The effects of combined raloxifene and oral estrogen on vasomotor symptoms and endometrial safety.

OBJECTIVE: To compare effects of 52 weeks' treatment with either raloxifene 60 mg/day alone (RLX) or in combination with 17beta-estradiol 1 mg/day (RLX + E) on vasomotor symptoms (n = 83) and endometrial safety (n = 123) in postmenopausal women who transitioned from estrogen-progestin therapy. DESIGN: In this randomized, double-blind clinical trial, the frequency of vasomotor symptoms, hot flashes, and night sweats was assessed for up to 52 weeks. Endometrial thickness was assessed by transvaginal ultrasonography at baseline and at 12 and 52 weeks. An exit endometrial biopsy was performed at study completion or early termination. RESULTS: The frequency of vasomotor symptoms, hot flashes, and night sweats was unchanged from baseline with RLX but was significantly reduced in women treated with RLX + E, from baseline (all P < 0.001) and the RLX group at 6, 12, 24, 36, and 52 weeks (all P < 0.01). Women in the RLX + E group had significantly increased endometrial thickness (0.74 +/- 0.28 mm, mean +/- SEM) at 52 weeks, from baseline and RLX (P < 0.05), with no statistically significant changes in women treated with RLX. Two women, both in the RLX + E group, had endometrial hyperplasia (one with atypia) on the exit biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: In women transitioning from estrogen-progestin therapy, occurrence of vasomotor symptoms was unchanged from baseline with RLX treatment, but these symptoms were significantly reduced with combined RLX + E therapy. Signs of endometrial stimulation were observed in the RLX + E group. Further studies using different estrogen doses and preparations are needed before concomitant use of raloxifene with systemic estrogens can be recommended.

Comparative effects of raloxifene and alendronate on fracture outcomes in postmenopausal women with low bone mass.

UNLABELLED: The double-blind, randomized raloxifene alendronate comparison trial was the first study designed to compare two osteoporosis therapies head-to-head for fracture risk reduction. The original protocol planned to treat 3000 postmenopausal women with alendronate 10 mg/day (ALN) or raloxifene 60 mg/day (RLX) for 5 years, and to recruit women (50-80 years old) with a femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) T-score between -2.5 and -4.0, inclusive, no prevalent vertebral fractures, and no prior bone-active agent use. The trial was stopped early, due to difficulty in finding treatment-naïve women to meet enrollment goals within the planned timeline, resulting in insufficient power to show non-inferiority between therapies in the primary endpoint (number of women with >or=1 new osteoporotic vertebral or nonvertebral fracture). Except for vertebral fractures, fracture analyses were based upon 1412 of the 1423 women randomized (mean age of 66 years). After 312+/-254 days (mean+/-SD), 22 women in the ALN group and 20 in the RLX group had new vertebral or nonvertebral fractures. Four women in the ALN group and none in the RLX group had moderate/severe vertebral fractures, a pre-specified endpoint (P=0.04). Lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip BMD were increased from baseline at 2 years in each group (P<0.001), with greater increases in the ALN group (each P<0.05). Similar numbers of women in each group had >or=1 adverse event and discontinued due to an adverse event. The only adverse events with an incidence that differed between groups were colonoscopy, diarrhea, and nausea; each was more common with ALN treatment (each P<0.05). One woman in each group had a venous thromboembolic event. One case of breast cancer occurred in each group. In summary, as this trial was terminated early, there was insufficient power to compare the fracture risks between alendronate and raloxifene. Safety profiles were as expected from clinical trial and post-marketing reports. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00035971.

Duloxetine in the treatment of women with stress urinary incontinence: results from DESIRE (Duloxetine Efficacy and Safety for Incontinence in Racial and Ethnic populations).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of duloxetine for the treatment of African-American and Hispanic women with stress urinary incontinence. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The 10-week (a 2-week lead in period followed by 8 weeks of active treatment), open-label, multicenter study of duloxetine 40 mg twice daily included women with stress urinary incontinence or stress predominant mixed incontinence. Efficacy was measured by the median percent change from baseline to endpoint of weekly incontinence episode frequency. The primary objective assessed the treatment response in a pre-specified group of women (n = 2960; 2321 Caucasian, 271 African-American, and 368 Hispanic) with similar baseline incontinence and comorbidity characteristics as the subjects enrolled in the placebo-controlled trials of duloxetine for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. The efficacy in African-American and Hispanic women was compared with Caucasians using a predefined non-inferiority subpopulation analysis. Safety measures included adverse events, laboratory test results, and vital signs. RESULTS: All three subgroups reported significant (all p < 0.001) median percent decreases in weekly incontinence episode frequency: -65.7% (African-American), -73.0% (Hispanic), and -75.0% (Caucasian). Non-inferior efficacy was demonstrated for African-American and Hispanic women compared to the Caucasian women. Common adverse events included nausea (21.8%, 28.0%, 25.3%), dry mouth (7.7%, 11.4%, 11.9%), and fatigue (9.2%, 5.7%, 11.6%) for the African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Duloxetine was efficacious and well tolerated for the treatment of African-American, Hispanic, and Caucasian women with stress urinary incontinence. The trial design was successful in enrolling a diverse population of patients. The most important limitations include the lack of placebo control, the short study duration, and the exclusion of patients with less than seven incontinence episodes per week.

The dopamine receptor D2 genotype is associated with hyperprolactinemia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patients with hyperprolactinemia for the presence of dopamine receptor D2 polymorphisms. DESIGN: Case-control study. SETTING: Academic research environment. PATIENT(S): Women and men with pathologic hyperprolactinemia and healthy controls. INTERVENTION(S): DNA extraction of peripheral blood, polymerase chain reaction, single-strand conformation polymorphism, DNA sequencing, and restriction digest. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Two polymorphisms in exon 7 of the dopamine receptor D2 (DRD2) gene. Polymorphism 1 involves nucleotide 3420 (C to T, 313 His), and polymorphism 2 involves nucleotide 3438 (C to T, 319 Pro). RESULT(S): The frequency of DRD2 polymorphism 1 alleles was increased in subjects with hyperprolactinemia. Analysis of the DRD2 genotypes demonstrates an odds ratio of 6.77 (2.39, 19.14; 95% confidence interval) for the polymorphism 1 homozygous state in hyperprolactinemia. CONCLUSION(S): A genetic predisposition to hyperprolactinemia is suggested by an excess homozygosity for polymorphism 1 in exon 7 of the DRD2 gene. Previous studies of lactotrophs from prolactinomas have found normal DRD2 receptors but differing isoform density. Homozygosity of polymorphism 1 may influence the distribution of the DRD2 isoforms on the lactotroph. Other potential mechanisms include an association with a molecular defect in a postreceptor signaling mechanism, such as a somatic inactivating mutation in a G1 protein, which could result in autonomous function of the lactotroph. Mutations could also result in different receptor-G protein interactions, such as a Gs instead of Gi, and result in autonomous lactotroph function.

Rationale for a non-inferiority clinical trial design focused on subpopulations.

Although double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials are utilized extensively to characterize the efficacy and safety of new treatment options, the characteristics of the trial participants often do not reflect those of the wider patient population. In most cases, one or more patient subgroups (whether defined by race, ethnicity, co-morbidity, concomitant medication, age, or gender) will be under-represented. Understanding treatment responses in these subpopulations is a vital component of the overall therapeutic profile of a medication. Several different approaches to subgroup analyses within a single trial have been described. In addition, meta-analytic and data pooling approaches utilize results from multiple clinical trials of similar design to increase the number of patients within a targeted subgroup. If the results from exploratory analyses are suggestive of a clinically relevant difference in treatment response for a particular subgroup, then implementation of a prospectively designed clinical trial may be warranted. In this commentary, we discuss the design and results of various studies that include subgroup analyses. In addition, we describe a novel study design with a non-inferiority subpopulation analysis (NISA) that may provide new insights with respect to subgroup analyses. The NISA study design relies on characterization of the dominant group of patients recruited to date in placebo-controlled trials. In the NISA study, the group of patients with those same characteristics is referred to as the Core group. The other key features of the NISA design include non-inferiority analyses comparing subgroups to the Core group and study conditions closely aligned with routine clinical practice (heterogeneous study population and open-label drug administration without placebo). Limitations of the NISA design include the requirement of previously conducted placebo-controlled trials, the inability to compare treatment response to placebo, and that NISA has yet to be validated in practice. We also describe the implementation of the NISA study design in two ongoing clinical trials. After completion of these two studies, the practical value of the NISA design can be more thoroughly evaluated.

Safety and adverse effects associated with raloxifene: multiple outcomes of raloxifene evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of raloxifene on major adverse events that occur with postmenopausal estrogen therapy or tamoxifen. METHODS: The Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation, a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, enrolled 7,705 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Women were randomly assigned to raloxifene 60 mg/d or 120 mg/d or placebo. Outcomes included venous thromboembolism, cataracts, gallbladder disease, and endometrial hyperplasia or cancer. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 3.3 years, raloxifene was associated with an increased risk for venous thromboembolism (relative risk [RR] 2.1; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-3.8). The excess event rate was 1.8 per 1,000 woman-years (95% CI -0.5-4.1), and the number needed to treat to cause 1 event was 170 (95% CI 100-582) over 3.3 years. Risk in the raloxifene group was higher than in the placebo group for the first 2 years, but decreased to about the same rate as in the placebo group thereafter. Raloxifene did not increase risk for cataracts (RR 0.9; 95% CI 0.8-1.1), gallbladder disease (RR 1.0; 95% CI 0.7-1.3), endometrial hyperplasia (RR 1.3; 95% CI 0.4-5.1), or endometrial cancer (RR 0.9; 95% CI 0.3-2.7). CONCLUSION: Raloxifene was associated with an increased risk for venous thromboembolism, but there was no increased risk for cataracts, gallbladder disease, endometrial hyperplasia, or endometrial cancer. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I

Comparison of fracture, cardiovascular event, and breast cancer rates at 3 years in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare event rates for osteoporotic fractures, cardiovascular events, and breast cancer in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. DESIGN: A prospective, observational study of the placebo group in the double-blind, randomized Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation trial. SETTING: One hundred eighty clinical research centers in 25 countries. PARTICIPANTS: Postmenopausal women (n=2,565, mean age=67) with osteoporosis were given calcium (500 mg/d) and vitamin D (400-600 IU/d) supplements. MEASUREMENTS: The occurrence of at least one new fracture, cardiovascular event, or breast cancer diagnosis at 3 years was identified and adjudicated. RESULTS: The occurrence of any fracture was the most common event in these women. In women without prevalent vertebral fractures (n=1,627), the event rates per 1,000 patient-years were 45.4 for any fracture, 15.2 for vertebral fracture, 4.7 for clinical vertebral fracture, 0.9 for hip fracture, 8.3 for any cardiovascular event, and 5.2 for all breast cancer. In women with prevalent vertebral fractures (n=938), the event rates per 1,000 patient-years were 117.4 for any new fracture, 77.1 for new vertebral fracture, 25.7 for clinical vertebral fracture, 5.8 for hip fracture, 15.1 for any cardiovascular event, and 2.6 for all breast cancer. The effect of prevalent fracture status on event rates was not dependent on whether women were older or younger than 65, but women aged 65 and older had a 3.6 times greater occurrence of cardiovascular events than younger women, irrespective of prevalent fracture status. CONCLUSION: These data on the relative incidence of clinically significant skeletal and extra-skeletal outcomes may be useful in choosing an agent for health maintenance for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

Antiresorptive treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: review of randomized clinical studies and rationale for the Evista alendronate comparison (EVA) trial.

Standard pharmacological antiresorptive therapy for the prevention and/or treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis now consists of four categories of drugs: estrogens, a selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM), bisphosponates, and calcitonin. All of these drugs have been studied in randomized controlled trials, but meaningful comparisons of the efficacy of drugs have been difficult due to differences in baseline risks for fracture and differences in study design, including calcium and vitamin D supplementation, definition of fracture, and discontinuation rates. The current paper reviews results from pivotal studies of antiresorptive therapies with fracture as a primary endpoint, as well as head-to-head trials comparing these therapies using surrogate markers of fracture risk, and introduces the first head-to-head trial with fracture as a primary endpoint. The Evista Alendronate Comparison (EVA) trial, a multi-center, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized trial with two active treatment arms is currently underway to compare directly the osteoporotic fracture risk reduction efficacy of raloxifene and alendronate in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis as defined by bone mineral density. The results from this trial will permit more informed judgment by practitioners and provider groups concerning the relative clinical utility of these two drugs.

Transition from estrogen-progestin to raloxifene in postmenopausal women: effect on vasomotor symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: To compare vasomotor symptoms after transition from estrogen-progestin therapy to raloxifene 60 mg/d with and without a placebo washout. METHODS: Postmenopausal women currently taking continuous combined estrogen-progestin therapy (conjugated equine estrogen, 0.625 mg/medroxyprogesterone acetate, 2.5 or 5 mg) daily for 5 or more months were enrolled. Women were randomized to 1 of 4 blinded regimens: 1) 12 weeks estrogen-progestin; 2) 12 weeks placebo; 3) 4 weeks placebo, then 8 weeks raloxifene; or 4) 12 weeks raloxifene. For the final 36 weeks, all subjects received raloxifene. Vasomotor symptoms were assessed by patient diaries. RESULTS: A total of 266 women (mean age 57.5) were enrolled. Mean hot flush frequency at baseline was approximately 1 per week in the entire population, with 16% of women reporting hot flushes. Mean frequency and severity of hot flushes during the first 12 weeks of the study were statistically greater in the 3 groups transitioned off estrogen-progestin (range of hot flushes per week: 4 weeks, 11-12; 8 weeks, 18-24; 12 weeks, 13-16), as compared with those continuing estrogen-progestin, with no difference between these 3 groups (P> or =.1). Approximately 50-70% of these women reported hot flushes, generally rated as mild to moderate by participants, after estrogen-progestin discontinuation. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of women discontinuing estrogen-progestin experience hot flushes. Raloxifene does not appear to increase the frequency or severity of vasomotor symptoms in women discontinuing estrogen-progestin more than that observed with placebo treatment after estrogen-progestin discontinuation. Transition from estrogen-progestin to raloxifene with no washout period therefore may be acceptable. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I

Prevention of osteoporosis and uterine effects in postmenopausal women taking raloxifene for 5 years.

OBJECTIVE: Raloxifene hydrochloride (60 mg/day) is a selective estrogen receptor modulator indicated for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Raloxifene treatment for 3 years increases bone mineral density (BMD) and, unlike tamoxifen (a triphenylethylene selective estrogen receptor modulator), does not stimulate the endometrium in healthy postmenopausal women. The effect of longer duration of treatment with raloxifene is not known. Therefore, the main objectives of these analyses are (1) to compare the effect of 5 years of treatment with raloxifene (60 mg/day) with placebo in terms of the likelihood of developing osteoporosis and (2) to evaluate the effect of 5 years of raloxifene treatment on the endometrium and incidence of vaginal bleeding. DESIGN: The current analyses include integrated data from two identically designed, prospective, double-blinded trials including postmenopausal women (mean age, 55 years) randomly assigned to either placebo (n = 143) or raloxifene (60 mg/day; n = 185). Osteoporosis and osteopenia were diagnosed according to World Health Organization criteria, using the manufacturer's database for the lumbar spine and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey's 1998 reference base for the hip. Endometrial thickness was determined using transvaginal ultrasonography. Clinical diagnoses of endometrial hyperplasia or endometrial cancer were confirmed by blinded review of histopathology reports. RESULTS: Compared with the case of placebo, raloxifene treatment for 5 years reduced bone turnover markers (osteocalcin: -10.9%, P < 0.001; bone-specific alkaline phosphatase: -7.2%, P = 0.042; urinary C-telopeptide: -11.1%, P = 0.034) and was associated with increased BMD in the lumbar spine (2.8%; P < 0.001) and total hip BMD (2.6%; P < 0.001). Women taking raloxifene were less likely to develop osteoporosis (relative risk [RR] for raloxifene v placebo: 0.13; 95% CI: 0.00, 0.37; P = 0.001) or osteopenia (RR: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.00, 0.81; P = 0.038) at the lumbar spine and were more likely to convert to normal BMD status at the lumbar spine (RR: 4.01; 95% CI: 1.34, 11.23; P = 0.043) and total hip (RR: 3.92; 95% CI: 1.12,14.27; P = 0.011) at 5 years, compared with the case of placebo. Raloxifene also significantly reduced total cholesterol (-5.5%; P < 0.001) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-8.7%; P < 0.001), compared with the case of placebo. No significant changes in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P = 0.257) or triglycerides (P = 0.620) were detected. Incidence of hot flashes was higher among women taking raloxifene compared with those taking placebo [raloxifene, 47 (28.8%); placebo, 21 (16.8%); P = 0.017]. Women taking placebo or raloxifene reported a similar incidence of vaginal bleeding (P = 0.999) or of mean endometrial thickness of more than 5 mm at baseline and at each visit, up to the 5-year endpoint (P >/= 0.349). No diagnoses of endometrial hyperplasia or endometrial cancer were made in either treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Five years of raloxifene treatment in healthy postmenopausal women preserves BMD, significantly reduces the likelihood of development of osteoporosis, and was not associated with an increased rate of vaginal bleeding, endometrial hyperplasia, or endometrial carcinoma, compared with the case of placebo.

Effect of raloxifene on the response to conjugated estrogen vaginal cream or nonhormonal moisturizers in postmenopausal vaginal atrophy.

OBJECTIVE: To study the effect of raloxifene on the response to conjugated estrogen cream or nonhormonal moisturizer in postmenopausal women with preexisting signs of vaginal atrophy. METHODS: Postmenopausal women with preexisting and untreated vaginal atrophy were enrolled in this parallel, placebo-controlled, randomized study. A total of 187 women were randomized to four treatment groups: daily oral raloxifene (60 mg per day) or a placebo in a double-blind manner plus one application of conjugated estrogen cream (0.5 g) or one applicator full of nonhormonal moisturizer, open label. The conjugated estrogen cream or nonhormonal moisturizer was applied daily for the first 2 weeks, and then twice weekly thereafter for 3 months. Efficacy of treatment regimens on signs and symptoms of vaginal atrophy was evaluated by monitoring objective and subjective parameters. RESULTS: Signs and symptoms of vaginal atrophy improved in all four treatment groups. Raloxifene did not diminish the magnitude of improvement when administered with either vaginal preparation. Conjugated estrogen cream produced a statistically greater improvement in signs (P <.05) but not in individual symptoms or overall satisfaction relative to nonhormonal moisturizer. CONCLUSION: Postmenopausal women with evidence of preexisting vaginal atrophy may use either low-dose conjugated estrogen cream or nonhormonal moisturizer to treat the atrophy concurrently with raloxifene (60 mg per day).

Effects of oral raloxifene on serum estradiol levels and other markers of estrogenicity.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of raloxifene hydrochloride, 60 mg/d, on serum levels of E(2), estrone, sex steroid-binding globulin, thyroxine-binding globulin, and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) in postmenopausal women. DESIGN: Randomized placebo-controlled study at 16 centers in the United States. PATIENT(S): Ninety three women 42 to 80 years of age who were at least 2 years postmenopausal. INTERVENTION(S): Raloxifene (n = 47) or placebo (n = 46) for 3 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Levels of E(2), estrone, sex steroid-binding globulin, thyroxine-binding globulin, and FSH were measured at baseline and after 3 months of therapy. RESULT(S): Raloxifene increased serum levels of sex steroid-binding globulin and thyroxine-binding globulin and decreased FSH levels compared with placebo. Levels of E(2) and estrone were unaffected. CONCLUSION(S): In postmenopausal women, raloxifene (60 mg/d) did not increase serum estrogen levels; however, it increased levels of sex steroid-binding globulin and thyroxine-binding globulin and decreased FSH levels.