Agarwal S K
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA.
J Reprod Med. 1998 Mar;43(3 Suppl):293-8.
To understand why differences in gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist therapeutic protocols may affect their efficacy and safety profiles, to understand the important study design facets regarding the literature on GnRH agonist treatment of endometriosis and to compare the efficacy and side effect profiles of FDA-approved GnRH agonist therapies used for the management of endometriosis and consider the implications.
Review of the English-language literature regarding the use of GnRH agonists for the management of endometriosis.
A limited number of studies are available that directly compare the effects of different GnRH agonists. However, contrary to medical opinion, it appears that there are significant differences between GnRH agonist therapies.
The data suggest that it may be possible to reduce doses or alter regimens of GnRH agonists so as to reduce side effects while maintaining efficacy.
了解促性腺激素释放激素（GnRH）激动剂治疗方案的差异为何会影响其疗效和安全性，了解GnRH激动剂治疗子宫内膜异位症文献中重要的研究设计方面，并比较美国食品药品监督管理局（FDA）批准的用于治疗子宫内膜异位症的GnRH激动剂疗法的疗效和副作用情况，并考虑其意义。
回顾关于使用GnRH激动剂治疗子宫内膜异位症的英文文献。
仅有数量有限的研究直接比较了不同GnRH激动剂的效果。然而，与医学观点相反，GnRH激动剂疗法之间似乎存在显著差异。
数据表明，有可能减少GnRH激动剂的剂量或改变给药方案，以便在维持疗效的同时减少副作用。
