CHAMGAP
APPROVEDReviewed and approved by the Chamgap Editorial Team (2026-07-24). The draft was written by AI, the existence of all 2 cited sources was verified at the original page, and the verdict passed blind grading and adversarial audit. Methodology v0.6.
Verdict No. 1626 · Search date 2026-07-24 · Methodology v0.6

Linzagolix,
does it really help with Reduction of uterine-fibroid-associated heavy menstrual bleeding to the clinical response threshold?

30-Second Summary
B
Evidence Grade B · 75 · Safety unknown
Bleeding reduction is well supported, but bone health and add-back therapy matter
What the
research shows
Linzagolix met the week-24 bleeding-response primary endpoint in both similarly designed double-blind phase 3 PRIMROSE trials, with analysis populations of 511 and 501. Heavy-bleeding reduction is a patient treatment target and replicated phase 3 benefit yields high-end B with 75 points.
What the
ads claim
Marketing may imply a nonsurgical cure, but the established benefit is control of heavy bleeding while treated, not permanent fibroid removal or durable benefit after withdrawal.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • Linzagolix is a once-daily oral GnRH-receptor antagonist that suppresses gonadal hormones in a dose-dependent manner.
  • Doses of 100 mg or 200 mg are used, and 200 mg is generally paired with estradiol and norethisterone acetate add-back therapy.
  • The pivotal response required menstrual blood loss no greater than 80 mL and at least a 50% reduction from baseline.
  • Hot flushes and bone-mineral-density loss were more prominent with unopposed high-dose therapy, so dose, add-back therapy, and duration require prescriber oversight.
Gap Measurement · Verdict 1626 · B 75
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

PRIMROSE 1 and 2 were similarly designed double-blind phase 3 trials with analysis populations of 511 and 501. Both met the week-24 primary response of menstrual blood loss no greater than 80 mL and at least 50% below baseline, replicating a patient treatment-target endpoint.

02

Why this is classified as B (75)

Success on a patient treatment-target bleeding response in two similarly designed double-blind phase 3 trials of 511 and 501 patients yields high-end B with 75 points.

Counterpoint. Anemia and quality-of-life gains are supportive, while post-withdrawal recurrence and long-term bone health remain important.

Rejudgment record. Cross-check applied — Consistent success on a prespecified patient-centered bleeding response in two regional phase 3 trials, tempered by one sponsor program and a 24-week pivotal period

Sub-claim grades by effect

This ingredient is marketed for several effects. A single overall grade blends strong and weak claims together, so each effect is graded separately here. The overall grade reflects the strongest disconfirming or core claim.

Effect (sub-claim)GradeBasis
Reduced uterine-fibroid-associated menstrual blood lossBPrespecified response succeeded in two phase 3 trials.
Improved anemiaCHemoglobin improvement was supportive.
Improved health-related quality of lifeCA positive supportive endpoint within the sponsor program.

Cross-check — Codex and Claude

This verdict was drafted by Codex through literature review and source-existence checks, cross-checked through blind grading and adversarial audit, and settled by reapplying the methodology boundary rules. Cases with split grades were resolved through rejudgment.
03

Evidence Table

StudyDesignSampleFundingEndpointResultWeight
Donnez J et al. 2022 (PRIMROSE 1·2)Two randomized double-blind placebo-controlled phase 3 trials1,012ObsEvaWeek-24 menstrual-blood-loss responseEvery regimen was superior to placebo in both trials (p≤0.003).Pivotal confirmatory evidence
Donnez J et al. 2025PRIMROSE extension and withdrawal analysis1,012ObsEva/Theramex-associatedWeek-52 maintenance and post-withdrawal bleedingResponses persisted through week 52; bleeding commonly returned after withdrawal.Supportive longer-term evidence
§

Receipt — 2 References

All 2 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-07-24).

Donnez J, Taylor HS, Stewart EA, et al. Linzagolix with and without hormonal add-back therapy for the treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids: two randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials. Lancet. 2022;400(10356):896-907. PMID: 36116480. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01475-1.
checked
Donnez J, Petraglia F, Taylor H, et al. Linzagolix with and without hormonal add-back therapy for symptomatic uterine fibroids: PRIMROSE 1 & 2 long-term extension and withdrawal study. Fertil Steril. 2025. PMID: 40543832. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.06.016.
checked
Draft and rewrite: Codex (AI) · Verification: Codex blind grading and adversarial audit · Final adjudication: Claude
Reviewed and approved: Chamgap Editorial Team · Approval date: 2026-07-24 · Corrections: none

Cite this verdict

Linzagolix x reduced heavy menstrual bleeding associated with uterine fibroids Evidence Grade B card
[Chamgap] Linzagolix x reduced heavy menstrual bleeding associated with uterine fibroids — Evidence Grade B·75. 2 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/womens/linzagolix-uterine-fibroid-heavy-menstrual-bleeding/ · CC BY 4.0

CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.

!

What this document does and does not do

Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.