Sundström-Poromaa, I., Comasco, E., Sumner, R., & Luders, E. (2020). Progesterone - Friend or foe? Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology, 59, 100856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yfrne.2020.100856
Sundström-Poromaa I, Comasco E, Sumner R, Luders E. Progesterone - Friend or foe? Front Neuroendocrinol. 2020;59:100856. doi:10.1016/j.yfrne.2020.100856
Sundström-Poromaa, I., et al. "Progesterone - Friend or foe?" Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology, vol. 59, 2020, pp. 100856.
For EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley:
Open access
No open license is recorded for this paper. Reuse terms are set by the publisher.
Estradiol is the "prototypic" sex hormone of women. Yet, women have another sex hormone, which is often disregarded: Progesterone. The goal of this article is to provide a comprehensive review on progesterone, and its metabolite allopregnanolone, emphasizing three key areas: biological properties, main functions, and effects on mood in women. Recent years of intensive research on progesterone and allopregnanolone have paved the way for new treatment of postpartum depression. However, treatment for premenstrual syndrome and premenstrual dysphoric disorder as well as contraception that women can use without risking mental health problems are still needed. As far as progesterone is concerned, we might be dealing with a two-edged sword: while its metabolite allopregnanolone has been proven useful for treatment of PPD, it may trigger negative symptoms in women with PMS and PMDD. Overall, our current knowledge on the beneficial and harmful effects of progesterone is limited and further research is imperative.
Niemeyer Hultstrand J et al., 2022·Lancet Reg Health Eur·Free full text on PubMed Central
Evidence on a possible association between newer hormonal contraceptives (HC) and risk of breast cancer remains inconclusive, especially as concerns progestogen-only methods. In this nationwide prospective cohort study, all Swedish women aged 15-34 at study start on January 1(st) 2005, or who turned 15 years during the study period, were followed until December 31(st) 2017. Using information from seven National Registers, we assessed the risk ratio of developing breast cancer and breast cancer in situ in relation to different HC using Poisson regression. We adjusted the analyses for several known confounders of breast cancer. Findings: This cohort included 1.5 million women providing more than 14 million person-years. During the study period, 3842 women were diagnosed with breast cancer. Compared with never users of any HC, we found no increased risk of developing breast cancer among current users of any combined HC, IRR 1.03 (0.91-1.16), whereas current users of progestogen-only methods had an increased risk of developing breast cancer, IRR 1.32 (1.20-1.45). Across all types of HC, the risk of developing breast cancer appeared to be highest the first five years of use (combined HC IRR 1.39 (1.14-1.69); progestogen-only methods IRR 1.74 (1.44-2.10). The risk disappeared ten years after the women stopped using HC. The absolute risk of breast cancer per 100,000 women-years was 22.4 for never users, 10.9 for current users of combined HC, and 29.8 for current users of progestogen-only methods. Interpretation: Current use of progestogen-only methods is associated with a small increased risk of developing breast cancer, whereas we could only detect an increased risk among users of combined HC during the first five years of use. This may partly be explained by a selective prescription of progestogen-only methods to women with risk factors for breast cancer, like smoking or obesity. As the absolute risk of breast cancer was small, the many health benefits associated with HC must also be taken into account in contraceptive counselling. This study was funded by the Swedish Cancer Society and by the Uppsala County Council, the Faculty of Medicine at Uppsala University.
Tata B et al., 2018·Nat Med·Free full text on PubMed Central
Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is the main cause of female infertility worldwide and corresponds with a high degree of comorbidities and economic burden. How PCOS is passed on from one generation to the next is not clear, but it may be a developmental condition. Most women with PCOS exhibit higher levels of circulating luteinizing hormone, suggestive of heightened gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) release, and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) as compared to healthy women. Excess AMH in utero may affect the development of the female fetus. However, as AMH levels drop during pregnancy in women with normal fertility, it was unclear whether their levels were also elevated in pregnant women with PCOS. Here we measured AMH in a cohort of pregnant women with PCOS and control pregnant women and found that AMH is significantly more elevated in the former group versus the latter. To determine whether the elevation of AMH during pregnancy in women with PCOS is a bystander effect or a driver of the condition in the offspring, we modeled our clinical findings by treating pregnant mice with AMH and followed the neuroendocrine phenotype of their female progeny postnatally. This treatment resulted in maternal neuroendocrine-driven testosterone excess and diminished placental metabolism of testosterone to estradiol, resulting in a masculinization of the exposed female fetus and a PCOS-like reproductive and neuroendocrine phenotype in adulthood. We found that the affected females had persistently hyperactivated GnRH neurons and that GnRH antagonist treatment in the adult female offspring restored their neuroendocrine phenotype to a normal state. These findings highlight a critical role for excess prenatal AMH exposure and subsequent aberrant GnRH receptor signaling in the neuroendocrine dysfunctions of PCOS, while offering a new potential therapeutic avenue to treat the condition during adulthood.
Wyatt K et al., 2001·BMJ·Free full text on PubMed Central
To evaluate the efficacy of progesterone and progestogens in the management of premenstrual syndrome. Systematic review of published randomised, placebo controlled trials. 10 trials of progesterone therapy (531 women) and four trials of progestogen therapy (378 women). Proportion of women whose symptoms showed improvement with progesterone preparations (suppositories and oral micronised). Proportion of women whose symptoms showed improvement with progestogens. Secondary analysis of efficacy of progesterone and progestogens in managing physical and behavioural symptoms. Overall standardised mean difference for all trials that assessed efficacy of progesterone (by both routes of administration) was -0.028 (95% confidence interval -0.017 to -0.040). The odds ratio was 1.05 (1.03 to 1.08) in favour of progesterone, indicating no clinically important difference between progesterone and placebo. For progestogens the overall standardised mean was -0.036 (-0.014 to -0.060), which corresponds to an odds ratio of 1.07 (1.03 to 1.11) showing a statistically, but not clinically, significant improvement for women taking progestogens. The evidence from these meta-analyses does not support the use of progesterone or progestogens in the management of premenstrual syndrome.
To evaluate the anxiolytic 3alpha-5alpha-reduced progesterone metabolite allopregnanolone in the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle in women with premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and controls. Thirty-five women with prospectively documented PMS and 36 controls were evaluated. Serum progesterone and allopregnanolone levels were measured on days 19 and 26 of the cycle as determined by urinary LH detection kits. Analysis of variance and Student t tests were used to analyze the data. Allopregnanolone levels were significantly lower on day 26 in the PMS group than in controls (3.6 +/- 0.8 versus 7.5 +/- 1.3 ng/mL; P < .04). Significant differences in the ratio of the metabolite to progesterone also were noted, with a smaller ratio in the PMS subjects (0.9 +/- 0.3 versus 3.2 +/- 1.3 ng/mL; P < .05). There were no significant differences between the PMS and control groups with respect to serum progesterone levels. Subjects with PMS manifested lower levels of the anxiolytic metabolite allopregnanolone in the luteal phase when compared with controls. Diminished concentrations of allopregnanolone in women with PMS may lead to an inability to enhance gamma aminobutyric acid-mediated inhibition during states of altered central nervous system excitability, such as ovulation or physiologic or psychological stress. The lowered metabolite levels could contribute to the genesis of various mood symptoms of the disorder, such as anxiety, tension, and depression.
Dennerstein L et al., 1985·Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)·Free full text on PubMed Central
A double blind, randomised, crossover trial of oral micronised progesterone (two months) and placebo (two months) was conducted to determine whether progesterone alleviated premenstrual complaints. Twenty three women were interviewed premenstrually before treatment and in each month of treatment. They completed Moos's menstrual distress questionnaire, Beck et al's depression inventory, Spielberger et al's state anxiety inventory, the mood adjective checklist, and a daily symptom record. Analyses of data found an overall beneficial effect of being treated for all variables except restlessness, positive moods, and interest in sex. Maximum improvement occurred in the first month of treatment with progesterone. Nevertheless, an appreciably beneficial effect of progesterone over placebo for mood and some physical symptoms was identifiable after both one and two months of treatment. Further studies are needed to determine the optimum duration of treatment.
Boero G et al., 2020·Neurobiology of stress·Free full text on PubMed Central
For several years, research from around the world has suggested that the neuroactive steroid (3α,5α)-3-hydroxypregnan-20-one (allopregnanolone) may have therapeutic potential for treatment of various stress-related diseases including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, alcohol use disorders (AUDs), as well as neurological and psychiatric conditions that are worsened in the presence of stress, such as multiple sclerosis, schizophrenia, and seizure disorders. In this review, we make the argument that the pleiotropic actions of allopregnanolone account for its ability to promote recovery in such a wide variety of illnesses. Likewise, the allopregnanolone precursors, pregnenolone and progesterone, share many actions of allopregnanolone. Of course, pregnenolone and progesterone lack direct effects on GABAA receptors, but these compounds are converted to allopregnanolone in vivo. This review presents a theoretical framework for understanding how endogenous neurosteroids that regulate 1) γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA)A receptors, 2) corticotropin releasing factor (CRF) and 3) pro-inflammatory signaling in the innate immune system and brain could play a key role in both the prevention and treatment of stress-related disease. We further discuss cautions and limitations of allopregnanolone or precursor therapy as well as the need for more clinical studies.
PMID 32730861 32730861 DOI 10.1016/j.yfrne.2020.100856 10.1016/j.yfrne.2020.100856 Sundström-Poromaa et al. 2020, Sundström-Poromaa 2020
Cite this article
Sundström-Poromaa, I., Comasco, E., Sumner, R., & Luders, E. (2020). Progesterone - Friend or foe? Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology, 59, 100856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yfrne.2020.100856
Sundström-Poromaa I, Comasco E, Sumner R, Luders E. Progesterone - Friend or foe? Front Neuroendocrinol. 2020;59:100856. doi:10.1016/j.yfrne.2020.100856
Sundström-Poromaa, I., et al. "Progesterone - Friend or foe?" Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology, vol. 59, 2020, pp. 100856.
