Evaluation of safety and effectiveness of gestrinone in the treatment of endometriosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Endometriosis is a common chronic gynecological disease defined as the presence of endometrial glands and stroma tissue outside the uterus. Gestrinone is an effective antiestrogen that induces endometrial atrophy and/or amenorrhea. The purpose of this systematic review is to provide an evaluation of safety and effectiveness of gestrinone for the treatment of endometriosis. METHODS: We performed a search in six electronic databases: PubMed, MEDLINE (ovid), Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL (clinical trials), Web of Science and Scopus. Our selected primary outcomes were the changes in dysmenorrhea, pain relief including pelvic pain and dyspareunia. The secondary outcomes embrace hormones parameters, pregnancy rate and adverse events. RESULTS: Of 3269 references screened, 16 studies were included involving 1286 women. All studies compared gestrinone with other drugs treatments (placebo, Danazol, Mifepristone tablets, Leuprolide acetate, Quyu Jiedu Recipe) during 6 months. When compared with other drugs treatments, gestrinone relieved dysmenorrhea, pelvic pain, and morphologic response in the ovary. There was an increase on the pregnancy rate. Regarding the side effects observed, gestrinone showed the same adverse events and increased the risk of acne and seborrhea when compared to other treatments. Even if there was any difference in efficacy between gestrinone, danazol, leuprolide acetate, or Quyu Jiedu Recipe Chinese Medicine, it remains unclear due to insufficient data. CONCLUSION: Based limited evidence available suggests that gestrinone appeared to be safe and may have some efficacy advantages over danazol, as well as other therapeutic interventions for treating endometriosis. However, this conclusion should be interpreted with caution, due the quality of the evidence provided is generally very low or unclear. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CRD42021284148.

Polymeric implants with drug-releasing capabilities: a mapping review of laboratory research.

PURPOSE: To provide a systematic map of the nature and extent of preclinical research concerning drug-releasing polymeric implants. SIGNIFICANCE: By summarizing available data, this mapping review can guide the development of new drug-delivery devices. METHODS: In-vitro studies assessing drug-delivery implants were reviewed. A study protocol was registered at Open Science Framework. The association of polymers with prominent drugs, manufacturing processes, geometries, treatments, and anatomical locations was assessed using the VOSviewer software. The release periods were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 423 articles, published between 1975 and 2020, were included and grouped into a framework with nine main categories. More than half of studies were published between 2010 and 2020. Among 201 individual polymers or combinations, the most investigated were PLGA, PCL, PLA, Silicone (SIL), EVA, and PU. Similarly, from 232 individual drugs or combinations, the most prominent were dexamethasone (DEX; anti-inflammatory), paclitaxel (PTX; anticancer), fluoruracil (anticancer), ciprofloxacin (CFX) hydrochloride (antibiotic), and gentamicin (GS; antibiotic). A total of 51 manufacturing processes were encountered, of which the most reported were solvent evaporation, compression molding (CM), extrusion (EX), electrospinning (ELS), and melt molding (MM). Among 38 implant geometries, cylinder (CIL) was the most prominent, followed by disk, square film, circular film (FCIR), and undefined film. Release times varied greatly, although the majority of articles ranged between 5 and 300 d. CONCLUSIONS: Drug-delivery implants were highly heterogeneous due to its applicability for multiple health conditions. Most implants were made of PLGA and most drugs assessed presented anti-inflammatory, antibiotic, or anticancer effects. Solvent evaporation and CIL were the most prominent manufacturing process and geometry, respectively.