Non-contraceptive oestrogen-containing preparations for controlling symptoms of premenstrual syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Premenstrual syndrome (PMS) is a psychological and somatic disorder of unknown aetiology, with symptoms typically including irritability, depression, mood swings, bloating, breast tenderness and sleep disturbances. About 3% to 10% of women who experience these symptoms may also meet criteria for premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD). PMS symptoms recur during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle and reduce by the end of menstruation. PMS results from ovulation and may be due to ovarian steroid interactions relating to neurotransmitter dysfunction. Premenstrual disorders have a devastating effect on women, their families and their work.Several treatment options have been suggested for PMS, including pharmacological and surgical interventions. The treatments thought to be most effective tend to fall into one of two categories: suppressing ovulation or correcting a speculated neuroendocrine anomaly.Transdermal oestradiol by patch, gel or implant effectively stops ovulation and the cyclical hormonal changes which produce the cyclical symptoms. These preparations are normally used for hormone therapy and contain lower doses of oestrogen than found in oral contraceptive pills. A shortened seven-day course of a progestogen is required each month for endometrial protection but can reproduce premenstrual syndrome-type symptoms in these women. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of non-contraceptive oestrogen-containing preparations in the management of PMS. SEARCH METHODS: On 14 March 2016, we searched the following databases: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGF) Specialised Register; Cochrane Central Register of Studies (CRSO); MEDLINE; Embase; PsycINFO; CINAHL; ClinicalTrials.gov; metaRegister of Controlled trials (mRCT); and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal. In addition, we checked the reference lists of articles retrieved. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included published and unpublished randomized placebo or active controlled trials on the efficacy of the use of non-contraceptive oestrogen-containing preparations in the management of premenstrual syndrome in women of reproductive age with PMS diagnosed by at least two prospective cycles without current psychiatric disorder. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data on premenstrual symptoms and adverse effects and entered data into Review Manager 5 software. Where possible, intention-to-treat or modified intention-to-treat analysis was used. Studies were pooled using a fixed-effect model, analysing cross-over trials as parallel trials. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for premenstrual symptom scores. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. The overall quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE working group methods. MAIN RESULTS: The search resulted in 524 potentially relevant articles. Five eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified (305 women). Trials using oral tablets, transdermal patches and implants were identified. No trial used gels.One small cross-over trial (11 women, effective sample size 22 women considering cross-over trials) compared oral luteal-phase oestrogen versus placebo. Data were very low quality and unsuitable for analysis, but study authors reported that the intervention was ineffective and might aggravate the symptoms of PMS. They also reported that there were no adverse events.Three studies compared continuous oestrogen with progestogen versus placebo (with or without progestogen). These trials were of reasonable quality, although with a high risk of attrition bias and an unclear risk of bias due to potential carry-over effects in two cross-over trials. Continuous oestrogen had a small to moderate positive effect on global symptom scores (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.10, P = 0.005, 3 RCTs, 158 women, effective sample size 267 women, I² = 63%, very low quality evidence). The evidence was too imprecise to determine if the groups differed in withdrawal rates due to adverse effects (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.58, P = 0.33, 3 RCTs, 196 women, effective sample size 284 women, I² = 0%, very low quality evidence). Similarly, the evidence was very imprecise in measures of specific adverse events, with large uncertainties around the true value of the relative risk. None of the studies reported on long-term risks such as endometrial cancer or breast cancer.One study compared patch dosage (100 vs 200 µg oestrogen, with progestogen in both arms) and had a high risk of performance bias, detection bias and attrition bias. The study did not find evidence that dosage affects global symptoms but there was much uncertainty around the effect estimate (SMD -1.55, 95% CI -8.88 to 5.78, P = 0.68, 1 RCT, 98 women, very low quality evidence). The evidence on rates of withdrawal for adverse events was too imprecise to draw any conclusions (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.46, P = 0.34, 1 RCT, 107 women, low-quality evidence). However, it appeared that the 100 µg dose might be associated with a lower overall risk of adverse events attributed to oestrogen (RR 0.51, 95% Cl 0.26 to 0.99, P = 0.05, 1 RCT, 107 women, very low quality evidence) with a large uncertainty around the effect estimate.The overall quality of the evidence for all comparisons was very low, mainly due to risk of bias (specifically attrition), imprecision, and statistical and clinical heterogeneity. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found very low quality evidence to support the effectiveness of continuous oestrogen (transdermal patches or subcutaneous implants) plus progestogen, with a small to moderate effect size. We found very low quality evidence from a study based on 11 women to suggest that luteal-phase oral unopposed oestrogen is probably ineffective and possibly detrimental for controlling the symptoms of PMS. A comparison between 200 µg and 100 µg doses of continuous oestrogen was inconclusive with regard to effectiveness, but suggested that the lower dose was less likely to cause side effects. Uncertainty remains regarding safety, as the identified studies were too small to provide definite answers. Moreover, no included trial addressed adverse effects that might occur beyond the typical trial duration of 2-8 months. This suggests the choice of oestrogen dose and mode of administration could be based on an individual woman's preference and modified according to the effectiveness and tolerability of the chosen regimen.

Fourth consensus of the International Society for Premenstrual Disorders (ISPMD): auditable standards for diagnosis and management of premenstrual disorder.

Whilst professional bodies such as the Royal College and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have well-established standards for audit of management for most gynaecology disorders, such standards for premenstrual disorders (PMDs) have yet to be developed. The International Society of Premenstrual Disorders (ISPMD) has already published three consensus papers on PMDs covering areas that include definition, classification/quantification, clinical trial design and management (American College Obstetricians and Gynecologists 2011; Brown et al. in Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD001396, 2009; Dickerson et al. in Am Fam Physician 67(8):1743-1752, 2003). In this fourth consensus of ISPMD, we aim to create a set of auditable standards for the clinical management of PMDs. All members of the original ISPMD consensus group were invited to submit one or more auditable standards to be eligible in the inclusion of the consensus. Ninety-five percent of members (18/19) responded with at least one auditable standard. A total of 66 auditable standards were received, which were returned to all group members who then ranked the standards in order of priority, before the results were collated. Proposed standards related to the diagnosis of PMDs identified the importance of obtaining an accurate history, that a symptom diary should be kept for 2 months prior to diagnosis and that symptom reporting demonstrates symptoms in the premenstrual phase of the menstrual cycle and relieved by menstruation. Regarding treatment, the most important standards were the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) as a first line treatment, an evidence-based approach to treatment and that SSRI side effects are properly explained to patients. A set of comprehensive standards to be used in the diagnosis and treatment of PMD has been established, for which PMD management can be audited against for standardised and improved care.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for premenstrual syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Premenstrual syndrome (PMS) is a common cause of physical, psychological and social problems in women of reproductive age. The key characteristic of PMS is the timing of symptoms, which occur only during the two weeks leading up to menstruation (the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle). Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are increasingly used as first line therapy for PMS. SSRIs can be taken either in the luteal phase or else continuously (every day). SSRIs are generally considered to be effective for reducing premenstrual symptoms but they can cause adverse effects. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of SSRIs for treating premenstrual syndrome. SEARCH METHODS: Electronic searches for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were undertaken in the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL (February 2013). Where insufficient data were presented in a report, attempts were made to contact the original authors for further details. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were considered in which women with a prospective diagnosis of PMS, PMDD or late luteal phase dysphoric disorder (LPDD) were randomised to receive SSRIs or placebo for the treatment of premenstrual syndrome. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected the studies, assessed eligible studies for risk of bias, and extracted data on premenstrual symptoms and adverse effects. Studies were pooled using random-effects models. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for premenstrual symptom scores, using separate analyses for different types of continuous data (that is end scores and change scores). Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. Analyses were stratified by type of drug administration (luteal or continuous) and by drug dose (low, medium, or high). We calculated the number of women who would need to be taking a moderate dose of SSRI in order to cause one additional adverse event (number needed to harm: NNH). The overall quality of the evidence for the main findings was assessed using the GRADE working group methods. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-one RCTs were included in the review. They compared fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline, escitalopram and citalopram versus placebo. SSRIs reduced overall self-rated symptoms significantly more effectively than placebo. The effect size was moderate when studies reporting end scores were pooled (for moderate dose SSRIs: SMD -0.65, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.84, nine studies, 1276 women; moderate heterogeneity (I(2) = 58%), low quality evidence). The effect size was small when studies reporting change scores were pooled (for moderate dose SSRIs: SMD -0.36, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.51, four studies, 657 women; low heterogeneity (I(2)=29%), moderate quality evidence).SSRIs were effective for symptom relief whether taken only in the luteal phase or continuously, with no clear evidence of a difference in effectiveness between these modes of administration. However, few studies directly compared luteal and continuous regimens and more evidence is needed on this question.Withdrawals due to adverse effects were significantly more likely to occur in the SSRI group (moderate dose: OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.84 to 3.53, 15 studies, 2447 women; no heterogeneity (I(2) = 0%), moderate quality evidence). The most common side effects associated with a moderate dose of SSRIs were nausea (NNH = 7), asthenia or decreased energy (NNH = 9), somnolence (NNH = 13), fatigue (NNH = 14), decreased libido (NNH = 14) and sweating (NNH = 14). In secondary analyses, SSRIs were effective for treating specific types of symptoms (that is psychological, physical and functional symptoms, and irritability). Adverse effects were dose-related.The overall quality of the evidence was low to moderate, the main weakness in the included studies being poor reporting of methods. Heterogeneity was low or absent for most outcomes, though (as noted above) there was moderate heterogeneity for one of the primary analyses. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: SSRIs are effective in reducing the symptoms of PMS, whether taken in the luteal phase only or continuously. Adverse effects are relatively frequent, the most common being nausea and asthenia. Adverse effects are dose-dependent.

ISPMD consensus on the management of premenstrual disorders.

The second consensus meeting of the International Society for Premenstrual Disorders (ISPMD) took place in London during March 2011. The primary goal was to evaluate the published evidence and consider the expert opinions of the ISPMD members to reach a consensus on advice for the management of premenstrual disorders. Gynaecologists, psychiatrists, psychologists and pharmacologists each formally presented the evidence within their area of expertise; this was followed by an in-depth discussion leading to consensus recommendations. This article provides a comprehensive review of the outcomes from the meeting. The group discussed and agreed that careful diagnosis based on the recommendations and classification derived from the first ISPMD consensus conference is essential and should underlie the appropriate management strategy. Options for the management of premenstrual disorders fall under two broad categories, (a) those influencing central nervous activity, particularly the modulation of the neurotransmitter serotonin and (b) those that suppress ovulation. Psychotropic medication, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, probably acts by dampening the influence of sex steroids on the brain. Oral contraceptives, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists, danazol and estradiol all most likely function by ovulation suppression. The role of oophorectomy was also considered in this respect. Alternative therapies are also addressed, with, e.g. cognitive behavioural therapy, calcium supplements and Vitex agnus castus warranting further exploration.

Towards a consensus on diagnostic criteria, measurement and trial design of the premenstrual disorders: the ISPMD Montreal consensus.

Premenstrual disorders (PMD) are characterised by a cluster of somatic and psychological symptoms of varying severity that occur during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle and resolve during menses (Freeman and Sondheimer, Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry 5:30-39, 2003; Halbreich, Gynecol Endocrinol 19:320-334, 2004). Although PMD have been widely recognised for many decades, their precise cause is still unknown and there are no definitive, universally accepted diagnostic criteria. To consider this issue, an international multidisciplinary group of experts met at a face-to-face consensus meeting to review current definitions and diagnostic criteria for PMD. This was followed by extensive correspondence. The consensus group formally became established as the International Society for Premenstrual Disorders (ISPMD). The inaugural meeting of the ISPMD was held in Montreal in September 2008. The primary aim was to provide a unified approach for the diagnostic criteria of PMD, their quantification and guidelines on clinical trial design. This report summarises their recommendations. It is hoped that the criteria proposed here will inform discussions of the next edition of the World Health Organisation's International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11), and the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-V) criteria that are currently under consideration. It is also hoped that the proposed definitions and guidelines could be used by all clinicians and investigators to provide a consistent approach to the diagnosis and treatment of PMD and to aid scientific and clinical research in this field.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for premenstrual syndrome.

BACKGROUND: This is a substantive update of a previous review. Severe premenstrual syndrome (PMS) affects between 3% to 5% of women of reproductive age. Severe PMS is classified under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD). Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are increasingly used as front-line therapy for PMS. A systematic review was undertaken on the efficacy of SSRIs in the management of severe PMS, or PMDD, to assess the evidence for this treatment option. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness of SSRIs in reducing premenstrual syndrome symptoms in women diagnosed with severe premenstrual syndrome. SEARCH STRATEGY: Electronic searches for relevant randomised controlled trials were undertaken in the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, and CINAHL (March 2008). Where insufficient data were presented in a report the original authors were contacted for further details. SELECTION CRITERIA: All trials were considered in which women with a prospective diagnosis of PMS, PMDD or late luteal phase dysphoric disorder (LPDD) were randomised to receive SSRIs or placebo for the treatment of premenstrual syndrome in a blinded trial. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Forty randomised controlled trials were identified which reported the use of SSRIs in the management of PMS. Fifty-six trials were excluded. The review authors extracted the data independently and estimated standardised mean differences for continuous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Due to heterogeneity, analyses were subgrouped into change and absolute scores. The primary analysis of reduction in overall symptomatology included data on 2294 women with premenstrual syndrome. SSRIs were found to be highly effective in treating the premenstrual symptoms (SMD -0.53, 95% CI 0.68 to -0.39; P < 0.00001). Secondary analysis showed that they were effective in treating physical (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.45 to -0.22; P < 0.00001), functional (SMD -0.30, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.17; P < 0.00001), and behavioural symptoms (SMD -0.41, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.29; P < 0.00001). Luteal phase only and continuous administration were both effective and there was no influence of a placebo run-in period on reduction in symptoms. All SSRIs (fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline, fluvoxamine, citalopram, and clomipramine) were effective in reducing premenstrual symptoms. Withdrawals due to side effects were twice as likely to occur in the treatment group (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.62 to 2.92; P < 0.00001). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence supports the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in the management of severe premenstrual syndrome.