Updating the clinical experience in XXXX --the European perspective.

@entity1 @entity1872 @entity28696 @entity46 @entity490 @entity10 @entity546 @entity3427
In a large, double-blind, multicentre study, 269 @entity1 with confirmed @entity46 were randomly allocated to receive either @entity1872 (200 mg twice daily; n = 137) or @entity28696 (2.5 mg twice weekly; n = 132) for 6 months. The two groups were comparable in terms of the staging of @entity46 by the American Fertility Society (1979) score. After the sixth month of treatment, repeat laparoscopy was performed. Clinical assessment, haematological and biochemical investigations were carried out during the 6 months of treatment and for a further 12 months' follow-up and are compared between the two groups. A total of 15 @entity1 from the @entity28696 group, including four @entity1 with @entity3427 , and 17 @entity1 from the @entity1872 group, including six @entity1 with @entity10 , withdrew because of adverse symptoms. An additional 22 @entity1 , including 10 from the @entity28696 group and 12 from the @entity1872 group withdrew because of lack of efficacy, pregnancy, elevated hepatic function tests or for reasons unrelated to the trial. Total American Fertility Society scoring showed an improvement of 73.3% in 101 @entity1 receiving @entity28696 and 72.7% in 99 @entity1 receiving @entity1872 . The results showed a significant reduction in the severity of dysmenorrhoea by the third month in the @entity1872 group and at 6 months in both groups. There was a significant (P < 0.001) increase in weight observed in both groups during treatment. Overall, the tolerability of @entity1872 and @entity28696 was good; however, significantly more @entity1 with @entity28696 complained of @entity3427 while significantly more with @entity1872 complained of leg cramps. During the 12 months of follow-up, mild, moderate or severe degrees of lower @entity490 , dysmenorrhoea and deep @entity546 all fluctuated, with no statistically significant increase in frequency in either group.
