Crossover randomized clinical study of the efficacy and safety of abergin versus bromocriptine in patients with hyperprolactinemia

Hyperprolactinemia is a most common neuroendocrine disease. For the vast majority of patients, therapy with dopamine agonists Is the method of choice in treating hyperprolactinemia of varying etiology. Therefore, comparison of the efficacy of the most known and common drugs from a group of dopamine agonists is highly urgent. The aim of our investigation was to study the efficacy and safety ofabergin versus bromocriptine. The investigation covered 37 women with hyperprolactinemia. All the patients were treated by an open-labeled regimen. The random number test was used to divide the patients into 2 groups: I) 18patients first received abergin for 6 months, then bromocriptine alone for 6 months, as well; 2) 19 patients first took bromocriptine for 6 months, then the drug was substituted for abergin. Measurement of total prolactin and brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were carried out in all the patients. Analysis of the findings has shown that the efficacy of abergin and bromocriptine is comparable by statistical indices (there was a more than 50% reduction in prolactin levels in above 75% of patients). The patients with prolactin-secreting pituitary adenomas treated with both abergin and bromocriptine displayed positive changes as decreased adenoma sizes as evidenced by brain MRI (55%) of patients. The findings suggest that abergin, a dopamine agonist made in Russia, is as effective, tolerable, and safe as its analogue bromocriptine. By taking into account its economic availability, abergin may be preferred in a number of clinical cases.

1. Мельниченко Г.А., Романцова Т.И. // Врач. №1.-C, 10-14.

2. Вrие Т., Pellegrini I., Gипz G. et al. // J. Clin. Endocrinol. - 1992. - Vol. 74. - P. 577.

3. Dalkin A. C, Marshall J. C. // Endocrinol. Mettbol. Clin. N. Am. - 1989. - Vol. 13. - P. 259-276.

4. Ferrari C, Croignani P. G. // Hum. Reprod. - 1986. - Vol. 1. - P. 507-514.

5. Ho K. Y., Thorner M. O. // Drugs. - 1988. - Vol. 36. -P. 67-82.

6. Levy van der A. J. et al. // J. Clin. Endocrinol. - 1991. - Vol. 72. - P. 1336-1341.

7. Liuzzi A., Dallabonzana D., Oppizzi G. et al. // N. Engl. J. Med. - 1985. - Vol. 313. - P. 656-659.

8. Newman С. В. et al. // Clin. Endocrinol. - 1989. - Vol. 31. -P. 391-400.

9. Nordmann R., Fluckiger E. W., Petcher T. J. et al. // Drugs of the Future. - 1988. - Vol. 13. - P. 951-959.

10. Vance M. L., Cranug J. A, Reimnitz С et al. // J. Clin. Endocrinol. - 1989. - Vol. 68. - P. 336-339.

11. Varga L., Lutterbeck P. M., PryorJ. S. et al. // Br. Med. J. - 1972. - P. 743-744.

12. Webster J. // Drug Saf. - 1996. - Vol. 14. - P. 228-238.

13. Weil С // Curr. Med. Res. Opin. - 1986. - Vol. 10. -P. 172-195.

14. Werder von K. // The Pituitary Gland / Ed. H. Imura. - New York, 1985. - P. 363-404.