WORLD PEPTIDEFOUNDATION

Where is Leuprolide being studied?

Find registered human studies, phases, products, recruitment status and reported research locations around the world. Registry search matches are separate from this profile’s reviewed evidence.

Find studies for Leuprolide →Worldwide registry directory

Scientific intelligence record

Experience 2.0

GnRH agonist

Leuprolide

Leuprolide is a synthetic nonapeptide agonist of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor. Initial continuous exposure can transiently increase luteinizing hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone, and gonadal steroid concentrations; sustained depot exposure then desensitizes pituitary GnRH signaling and suppresses gonadal steroid production. This biphasic action supports product-specific uses in prostate cancer, central precocious puberty, endometriosis, and uterine fibroids, while stimulation-test and assisted-reproduction contexts use different timing and objectives.

Record status

Traceability partial

Last meaningful update: 9/20/2026

Evidence searched through:
Not recorded
Assessment updated:
9/20/2026
Documented human review:
No documented human review recorded
Automated scientific assessment:
None recorded
AI source check:
9/26/2026

Published source links and profile text pass separate gates. Only a documented human review is labelled as human review; an automated scientific assessment applies deterministic checks, and an AI source check confirms only that a source exists and matches its identifiers. A source count alone does not establish a review.

Evidence coverage has three distinct layers. The corpus count is a transparent screening inventory, the featured set contains study-level tiering and interpretation, and the published-source count contains records promoted through the institutional publication workflow. Source validation, editorial publication, and scientific appraisal are separate decisions; these numbers must not be merged.

Ranked research corpus

500

Categorized publications with provisional ranking; scientific review remains separate.

Featured tiered studies

0

Cornerstone publications with study-level interpretation, limitations, and tier disclosure.

Research domains

6

Clinical and scientific questions synthesized independently across the evidence atlas.

Published source records

25

Database records promoted through the governed publication workflow—not the corpus total.

Corpus generated 2026-09-18. Counts remain separately labeled so screening is not represented as completed review.

Human experience · separate evidence stream

No community pattern is displayed yet

Eligible observations remain below the privacy and reliability threshold. WPF will not convert a handful of reports into a percentage, trend, or clinical claim.

Observation is valuable human context. It is not evidence of causation, efficacy, or safety.

Public display gate

n ≥ 20 eligible observations

Exact progress remains private before the threshold.

Contribute an observationArchive details

Intelligence snapshot

The state of the record

A compact view of what is represented, what remains unresolved, and how completely the record can be traced.

Ranked research corpus

500

Categorized screening records; proposed rankings remain pending human appraisal.

Featured tiered studies

0

Cornerstone studies with published study-level interpretation and tier disclosure.

Research domains

6

Independent evidence dossiers covering the major research questions.

Published source records

25

Source records published through the governed workflow; this count does not certify scientific conclusions.

Contradictions

0

Conflicting evidence relationships that remain visible.

Research gaps

1

Questions the current record identifies as unresolved.

Connected media

0

Media records explicitly linked to this scientific record.

What we know

Evidence, claims, and boundaries

The project separates represented evidence from qualification, contradiction, uncertainty, and what the evidence does not establish.

Reconciled domain conclusions

6 published domain syntheses connected to 0 featured studies

Leuprolide no longer relies on the legacy “no public claim” state. Each research domain publishes a bounded synthesis, confidence level, evidence context, limitations, geographic applicability, regulatory interpretation, and research gaps. Publication of these syntheses is separate from the scientific review status shown above.

Inspect the reconciled evidence atlas
Inspect the published evidence record25 governed records · titles, provenance, and original-source linksOpen records ↓
2008Phase 3 human evidence
Evidence strength A · 91/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
70/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

The efficacy and safety of degarelix: a 12-month, comparative, randomized, open-label, parallel-group phase III study in patients with prostate cancer.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of degarelix, a new gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist (blocker), vs leuprolide for achieving and maintaining testosterone suppression in a 1-year phase III trial involving patients with prostate cancer.

Authors
Laurence Klotz, Laurent Boccon-Gibod, Neal D Shore, Cal Andreou, Bo-Eric Persson, Per Cantor, Jens-Kristian Jensen, Tine Kold Olesen, Fritz H Schröder
Source
BJU international
DOI
10.1111/j.1464-410x.2008.08183.x
PubMed
19035858
Open original source
2023Phase 3 human evidence

Improved Outcomes with Enzalutamide in Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer.

Patients with prostate cancer who have high-risk biochemical recurrence have an increased risk of progression.

Authors
Stephen J Freedland, Murilo de Almeida Luz, Ugo De Giorgi, Martin Gleave, Geoffrey T Gotto, Christopher M Pieczonka, Gabriel P Haas, Choung-Soo Kim, Miguel Ramirez-Backhaus, Antti Rannikko, Jamal Tarazi, Swetha Sridharan
Source
The New England journal of medicine
DOI
10.1056/nejmoa2303974
PubMed
37851874
Open original source
2016Phase 3 human evidence
Evidence strength A · 91/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Monitoring treatment of central precocious puberty using basal luteinizing hormone levels and practical considerations for dosing with a 3-month leuprolide acetate formulation.

Peak gonadotropin-releasing hormone or agonist (GnRHa) stimulated luteinizing hormone (LH) testing with leuprolide acetate (LA) is commonly used to document suppression during therapy for central precocious puberty (CPP).

Authors
Peter A Lee, Margaret Luce, Peter Bacher
Source
Journal of pediatric endocrinology & metabolism : JPEM
DOI
10.1515/jpem-2016-0026
PubMed
27740929
Open original source
2020Phase 3 human evidence
Evidence strength A · 91/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
70/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Oral Relugolix for Androgen-Deprivation Therapy in Advanced Prostate Cancer.

Injectable luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists (e.g., leuprolide) are the standard agents for achieving androgen deprivation for prostate cancer despite the initial testosterone surge and delay in therapeutic effect.

Authors
Neal D Shore, Fred Saad, Michael S Cookson, Daniel J George, Daniel R Saltzstein, Ronald Tutrone, Hideyuki Akaza, Alberto Bossi, David F van Veenhuyzen, Bryan Selby, Xiaolin Fan, Vicky Kang
Source
The New England journal of medicine
DOI
10.1056/nejmoa2004325
PubMed
32469183
Open original source
2012Phase 3 human evidence
Evidence strength A · 91/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Ulipristal acetate versus leuprolide acetate for uterine fibroids.

The efficacy and side-effect profile of ulipristal acetate as compared with those of leuprolide acetate for the treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids before surgery are unclear.

Authors
Jacques Donnez, Janusz Tomaszewski, Francisco Vázquez, Philippe Bouchard, Boguslav Lemieszczuk, Francesco Baró, Kazem Nouri, Luigi Selvaggi, Krzysztof Sodowski, Elke Bestel, Paul Terrill, Ian Osterloh
Source
The New England journal of medicine
DOI
10.1056/nejmoa1103180
PubMed
22296076
Open original source
2019Phase 3 human evidence
Evidence strength A · 91/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

A New Sustained-release, 3-Month Leuprolide Acetate Formulation Achieves and Maintains Castrate Concentrations of Testosterone in Patients With Prostate Cancer.

This clinical trial investigated the effectiveness, pharmacokinetic properties, and safety profile of leuprolide acetate 22.5-mg depot, a new 3-month leuprolide depot formulation, as androgen deprivation therapy for patients with prostate cancer.

Authors
Neal D Shore, Sílvia Guerrero, Rosa Ma Sanahuja, Gemma Gambús, Antonio Parente
Source
Clinical therapeutics
DOI
10.1016/j.clinthera.2019.01.004
PubMed
30929678
Open original source
2018Phase 3 human evidence
Evidence strength A · 91/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
70/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

FSH suppression and tumour control in patients with prostate cancer during androgen deprivation with a GnRH agonist or antagonist.

Gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists suppress follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) to lower levels than GnRH agonists.

Authors
E David Crawford, B Tombal, T Keane, F Boccardo, K Miller, N Shore, J W Moul, J-E Damber, L Collette, B-E Persson
Source
Scandinavian journal of urology
DOI
10.1080/21681805.2018.1522372
PubMed
30624128
Open original source
2024Phase 3 human evidence
Evidence strength A · 91/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Testosterone Recovery for Relugolix Versus Leuprolide in Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer: Results from the Phase 3 HERO Study.

In the HERO study, relugolix demonstrated sustained testosterone suppression superior to that of leuprolide acetate (97% vs 89%; difference 7.9% [95% confidence interval, 4.1-12%; p < 0.001]).

Authors
Ronald Tutrone, Fred Saad, Daniel J George, Bertrand Tombal, James L Bailen, Michael S Cookson, Daniel R Saltzstein, Sarah Hanson, Bruce Brown, Sophia Lu, Mark Fallick, Neal D Shore
Source
European urology oncology
DOI
10.1016/j.euo.2023.11.024
PubMed
38143206
Open original source
2001Phase 1–2 human evidence
Evidence strength B · 80/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Randomized double-blind study evaluating the efficacy on uterine fibroids shrinkage and on intra-operative blood loss of different length of leuprolide acetate depot treatment before myomectomy.

To determine whether length of pre-operative treatment with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) may have different effects on uterine shrinkage and intra-operative blood loss, 36 patients with symptomatic uterine fibroids awaiting myomectomy were randomly divided into two groups.

Authors
V M Jasonni, R D'Anna, A Mancuso, C Caruso, F Corrado, I Leonardi
Source
Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica
DOI
10.1034/j.1600-0412.2001.801014.x
PubMed
11580742
Open original source
2011Phase 1–2 human evidence
Evidence strength B · 80/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

A 6-month depot formulation of leuprolide acetate is safe and effective in daily clinical practice: a non-interventional prospective study in 1273 patients.

Testosterone stimulates growth in many prostate tumours.

Authors
Ulf W Tunn
Source
BMC urology
DOI
10.1186/1471-2490-11-15
PubMed
21801354
Open original source
2003Phase 1–2 human evidence
Evidence strength B · 80/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Comparative efficacy of triptorelin pamoate and leuprolide acetate in men with advanced prostate cancer.

To compare the efficacy of monthly administrations of the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists triptorelin pamoate and leuprolide acetate to induce and maintain castrate levels of serum testosterone in men with advanced prostate cancer.

Authors
C F Heyns, M-P Simonin, P Grosgurin, R Schall, H C Porchet, South African Triptorelin Study Group
Source
BJU international
DOI
10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04308.x
PubMed
12887472
Open original source
1989Phase 1–2 human evidence
Evidence strength B · 80/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

A controlled trial of leuprolide with and without flutamide in prostatic carcinoma.

To test the hypothesis that maximal androgen blockade improves the effectiveness of the treatment of prostatic cancer, we conducted a randomized, double-blind trial in patients with disseminated, previously untreated prostate cancer (stage D2).

Authors
E D Crawford, M A Eisenberger, D G McLeod, J T Spaulding, R Benson, F A Dorr, B A Blumenstein, M A Davis, P J Goodman
Source
The New England journal of medicine
DOI
10.1056/nejm198908173210702
PubMed
2503724
Open original source
2002Phase 1–2 human evidence
Evidence strength B · 80/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Comparison of leuprolide acetate and triptorelin in assisted reproductive technology cycles: a prospective, randomized study.

To compare the use of two depot GnRH-a, leuprolide and triptorelin, in long-suppression GnRH-a protocols.

Authors
Raoul Orvieto, Ram Kerner, Haim Krissi, Jacob Ashkenazi, Zion Ben Rafael, Itai Bar-Hava
Source
Fertility and sterility
DOI
10.1016/s0015-0282(02)04262-0
PubMed
12477523
Open original source
1986Phase 1–2 human evidence
Evidence strength B · 80/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Single-dose pharmacokinetics of leuprolide in humans following intravenous and subcutaneous administration.

A group of six normal adult male volunteers was divided into two groups (I and II) who received bolus intravenous and subcutaneous 1-mg doses of leuprolide.

Authors
L T Sennello, R A Finley, S Y Chu, C Jagst, D Max, D E Rollins, K G Tolman
Source
Journal of pharmaceutical sciences
DOI
10.1002/jps.2600750211
PubMed
3083092
Open original source
2021Phase 1–2 human evidence
Evidence strength B · 80/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Cardiovascular Safety of Degarelix Versus Leuprolide in Patients With Prostate Cancer: The Primary Results of the PRONOUNCE Randomized Trial.

The relative cardiovascular safety of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists compared with GnRH agonists in men with prostate cancer and known atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease remains controversial.

Authors
Renato D Lopes, Celestia S Higano, Susan F Slovin, Adam J Nelson, Robert Bigelow, Per S Sørensen, Chiara Melloni, Shaun G Goodman, Christopher P Evans, Jan Nilsson, Deepak L Bhatt, Noel W Clarke
Source
Circulation
DOI
10.1161/circulationaha.121.056810
PubMed
34459214
Open original source
1993Phase 1–2 human evidence
Evidence strength B · 80/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Role of leuprolide acetate depot in hysteroscopic surgery: a controlled study.

To evaluate leuprolide acetate (LA) depot (Enantone Depot, Takeda, Italy) when administered preoperatively in hysteroscopic surgery.

Authors
A Perino, N Chianchiano, M Petronio, E Cittadini
Source
Fertility and sterility
DOI
10.1016/s0015-0282(16)55790-2
PubMed
8458448
Open original source
2009Phase 1–2 human evidence
Evidence strength B · 80/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Utility of single luteinizing hormone determination 3 h after depot leuprolide in monitoring therapy of gonadotropin-dependent precocious puberty.

To determine utility of luteinizing hormone (LH) estimation, post intramuscular (IM) depot leuprolide in comparison with subcutaneous leuprolide stimulation test.

Authors
Shrikrishna V Acharya, Raju A Gopal, Joe George, Tushar R Bandgar, Padma S Menon, Nalini S Shah
Source
Pituitary
DOI
10.1007/s11102-009-0184-0
PubMed
19396631
Open original source
1998Phase 1–2 human evidence
Evidence strength B · 80/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Leuprolide acetate depot and hormonal add-back in endometriosis: a 12-month study. Lupron Add-Back Study Group.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a GnRH agonist, leuprolide acetate depot, alone and in combination with three hormonal add-back regimens in the management of endometriosis-associated pelvic pain.

Authors
M D Hornstein, E S Surrey, G W Weisberg, L A Casino
Source
Obstetrics and gynecology
DOI
10.1016/s0029-7844(97)00620-0
PubMed
9464714
Open original source
1994Phase 1–2 human evidence
Evidence strength B · 80/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Absence of a dose-response effect of leuprolide acetate on leiomyomata uteri size.

To evaluate the effects of two different doses (3.75 mg versus 7.5 mg) of leuprolide acetate (LA, Lupron; Tap Pharmaceuticals, Deerfield, IL) on myoma size, blood loss during myomectomy, on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) signal quality, and histopathologic changes in women requiring myomectomy.

Authors
R J Kiltz, J Rutgers, J Phillips, M L Murugesapillai, O A Kletzky
Source
Fertility and sterility
PubMed
8194611
Open original source
1994Phase 1–2 human evidence
Evidence strength B · 80/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
70/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist use before hysterectomy.

Our purpose was to compare the effects of leuprolide acetate in patients with symptomatic uterine leiomyoma before hysterectomy.

Authors
T G Stovall, R L Summit, S A Washburn, F W Ling
Source
American journal of obstetrics and gynecology
PubMed
8203435
Open original source
2011Phase 1–2 human evidence
Evidence strength B · 80/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Randomized trial of leuprolide versus continuous oral contraceptives in the treatment of endometriosis-associated pelvic pain.

To compare the efficacy of leuprolide and continuous oral contraceptives in the treatment of endometriosis-associated pain.

Authors
David S Guzick, Li-Shan Huang, Betsy A Broadman, Maureen Nealon, Mark D Hornstein
Source
Fertility and sterility
DOI
10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.01.027
PubMed
21300339
Open original source
2024Observational human evidence
Evidence strength B · 75/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Effectiveness of leuprolide acetate administered monthly compared to three-monthly in the treatment of central precocious puberty: evaluation at the end of treatment.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogs are the standard treatment for central precocious puberty (CPP).

Authors
Thanaporn Thaneetrakool, Suphab Aroonparkmongkol, Nattakarn Numsriskulrat, Vichit Supornsilchai, Suttipong Wacharasindhu, Khomsak Srilanchakon
Source
Frontiers in endocrinology
DOI
10.3389/fendo.2024.1390674
PubMed
38737553
Open original source
2015Observational human evidence
Evidence strength B · 75/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Gonadotropin and Estradiol Levels after Leuprolide Stimulation Tests in Brazilian Girls with Precocious Puberty.

To determine the best cutoff value on the leuprolide stimulation test for the diagnosis of central precocious puberty (CPP) in a Brazilian population.

Authors
Flavia R R Junqueira, Lucia A S Lara, Wellington P Martins, Rui A Ferriani, Ana Carolina J S Rosa-E-Silva, Marcos Felipe S de Sá, Rosana M Reis
Source
Journal of pediatric and adolescent gynecology
DOI
10.1016/j.jpag.2014.09.006
PubMed
26094907
Open original source
2025Observational human evidence
Evidence strength A · 88/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
85/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

The Effect of Leuprolide Acetate 11.25 mg 3-Month Formulation in Children with Central Precocious Puberty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Compared to the well-established leuprolide acetate (LA) 1-month formulations, the LA 11.25 mg 3-month formulation could reduce the frequency of injections and potentially improve treatment adherence in children with central precocious puberty (CPP).

Authors
Linqi Han, Chunjuan Zhai, La Da, Yan Sun
Source
Advances in therapy
DOI
10.1007/s12325-025-03222-7
PubMed
40498278
Open original source
2018Observational human evidence
Evidence strength A · 86/100 · ProvisionalHow this is rated

This score estimates how strongly this source can support scientific claims. It is not a prestige score, and the grade does not transfer automatically to every claim that cites the source.

Grade guide: A+/A is the strongest represented support; B+/B is substantial but qualified; C is limited, indirect, observational, or preclinical; D/E is weak, mechanistic-only, anecdotal, or insufficient.

Directness
70/100
Replication
70/100

Provisional ratings are automated baselines from structured metadata. They are not completed full-text risk-of-bias reviews and may change after editorial assessment.

Methodology: WPF-ESR-1.0

Are all gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists equivalent for the treatment of prostate cancer? A systematic review.

To review direct comparative studies of the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists goserelin, triptorelin, and leuprorelin for the treatment of prostate cancer, and identify whether there are meaningful clinical differences between these agents.

Authors
Eva M Bolton, Thomas Lynch
Source
BJU international
DOI
10.1111/bju.14168
PubMed
29438592
Open original source

Scientific context

Chemistry and represented biological context

Existing reviewed chemistry is preserved as scientific context. Chemistry and mechanism information do not establish clinical efficacy or safety.

Open chemistry and biological context ↓
Chemical identity

Molecular and structural record

Structured record
Molecular formula
C59H84N16O12
Molecular weight (Da)
1209.4
Amino acid sequence
pGlu-His-Trp-Ser-Tyr-D-Leu-Leu-Arg-Pro-NHEt
SMILES
CCNC(=O)[C@@H]1CCCN1C(=O)[C@H](CCCN=C(N)N)NC(=O)[C@H](CC(C)C)NC(=O)[C@@H](CC(C)C)NC(=O)[C@H](CC2=CC=C(C=C2)O)NC(=O)[C@H](CO)NC(=O)[C@H](CC3=CNC4=CC=CC=C43)NC(=O)[C@H](CC5=CN=CN5)NC(=O)[C@@H]6CCC(=O)N6
InChI
InChI=1S/C59H84N16O12/c1-6-63-57(86)48-14-10-22-75(48)58(87)41(13-9-21-64-59(60)61)68-51(80)42(23-32(2)3)69-52(81)43(24-33(4)5)70-53(82)44(25-34-15-17-37(77)18-16-34)71-56(85)47(30-76)74-54(83)45(26-35-28-65-39-12-8-7-11-38(35)39)72-55(84)46(27-36-29-62-31-66-36)73-50(79)40-19-20-49(78)67-40/h7-8,11-12,15-18,28-29,31-33,40-48,65,76-77H,6,9-10,13-14,19-27,30H2,1-5H3,(H,62,66)(H,63,86)(H,67,78)(H,68,80)(H,69,81)(H,70,82)(H,71,85)(H,72,84)(H,73,79)(H,74,83)(H4,60,61,64)/t40-,41-,42-,43+,44-,45-,46-,47-,48-/m0/s1
InChIKey
GFIJNRVAKGFPGQ-LIJARHBVSA-N

Chemical identity describes the recorded molecular information. It does not establish biological activity, clinical efficacy, safety, or therapeutic suitability.

Explore further

Continue through the research system

Move from this peptide record into the project's broader evidence, research, comparison, and methodology systems.

Research discovery

Compare peptides

Examine represented peptide records side by side.

Evidence system

Explore how scientific evidence is represented and reviewed.

Research hub

Enter the broader research and intelligence environment.

Methodology

Review project methods, boundaries, and interpretation rules.

Research

How the scientific record is developing

Chronology, unresolved research questions, opportunities, and researcher activity remain descriptive rather than evaluative.

Research chronology

  1. 1986 · study · Temporal status not established

    Single-dose pharmacokinetics of leuprolide in humans following intravenous and subcutaneous administration.

    Journal of pharmaceutical sciences

  2. 1989 · study · Temporal status not established

    A controlled trial of leuprolide with and without flutamide in prostatic carcinoma.

    The New England journal of medicine

  3. 1993 · study · Temporal status not established

    Role of leuprolide acetate depot in hysteroscopic surgery: a controlled study.

    Fertility and sterility

  4. 1994 · study · Temporal status not established

    Absence of a dose-response effect of leuprolide acetate on leiomyomata uteri size.

    Fertility and sterility

  5. 1994 · study · Temporal status not established

    Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist use before hysterectomy.

    American journal of obstetrics and gynecology

  6. 1998 · study · Temporal status not established

    Leuprolide acetate depot and hormonal add-back in endometriosis: a 12-month study. Lupron Add-Back Study Group.

    Obstetrics and gynecology

  7. 2001 · study · Temporal status not established

    Randomized double-blind study evaluating the efficacy on uterine fibroids shrinkage and on intra-operative blood loss of different length of leuprolide acetate depot treatment before myomectomy.

    Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica

  8. 2002 · study · Temporal status not established

    Comparison of leuprolide acetate and triptorelin in assisted reproductive technology cycles: a prospective, randomized study.

    Fertility and sterility

  9. 2003 · study · Temporal status not established

    Comparative efficacy of triptorelin pamoate and leuprolide acetate in men with advanced prostate cancer.

    BJU international

  10. 2008 · study · Temporal status not established

    The efficacy and safety of degarelix: a 12-month, comparative, randomized, open-label, parallel-group phase III study in patients with prostate cancer.

    BJU international

  11. 2009 · study · Temporal status not established

    Utility of single luteinizing hormone determination 3 h after depot leuprolide in monitoring therapy of gonadotropin-dependent precocious puberty.

    Pituitary

  12. 2011 · study · Temporal status not established

    A 6-month depot formulation of leuprolide acetate is safe and effective in daily clinical practice: a non-interventional prospective study in 1273 patients.

    BMC urology

  13. 2011 · study · Temporal status not established

    Randomized trial of leuprolide versus continuous oral contraceptives in the treatment of endometriosis-associated pelvic pain.

    Fertility and sterility

  14. 2012 · study · Temporal status not established

    Ulipristal acetate versus leuprolide acetate for uterine fibroids.

    The New England journal of medicine

  15. 2015 · study · Temporal status not established

    Gonadotropin and Estradiol Levels after Leuprolide Stimulation Tests in Brazilian Girls with Precocious Puberty.

    Journal of pediatric and adolescent gynecology

  16. 2016 · study · Temporal status not established

    Monitoring treatment of central precocious puberty using basal luteinizing hormone levels and practical considerations for dosing with a 3-month leuprolide acetate formulation.

    Journal of pediatric endocrinology & metabolism : JPEM

  17. 2018 · study · Temporal status not established

    FSH suppression and tumour control in patients with prostate cancer during androgen deprivation with a GnRH agonist or antagonist.

    Scandinavian journal of urology

  18. 2018 · study · Temporal status not established

    Are all gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists equivalent for the treatment of prostate cancer? A systematic review.

    BJU international

  19. 2019 · study · Temporal status not established

    A New Sustained-release, 3-Month Leuprolide Acetate Formulation Achieves and Maintains Castrate Concentrations of Testosterone in Patients With Prostate Cancer.

    Clinical therapeutics

  20. 2020 · study · Temporal status not established

    Oral Relugolix for Androgen-Deprivation Therapy in Advanced Prostate Cancer.

    The New England journal of medicine

  21. 2021 · study · Temporal status not established

    Cardiovascular Safety of Degarelix Versus Leuprolide in Patients With Prostate Cancer: The Primary Results of the PRONOUNCE Randomized Trial.

    Circulation

  22. 2023 · study · Temporal status not established

    Improved Outcomes with Enzalutamide in Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer.

    The New England journal of medicine

  23. 2024 · study · Temporal status not established

    Testosterone Recovery for Relugolix Versus Leuprolide in Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer: Results from the Phase 3 HERO Study.

    European urology oncology

  24. 2024 · study · Temporal status not established

    Effectiveness of leuprolide acetate administered monthly compared to three-monthly in the treatment of central precocious puberty: evaluation at the end of treatment.

    Frontiers in endocrinology

  25. 2025 · study · Temporal status not established

    The Effect of Leuprolide Acetate 11.25 mg 3-Month Formulation in Children with Central Precocious Puberty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

    Advances in therapy

  26. 2026 · regulatory · Temporal status not established

    Regulatory review: approved

    United States (FDA — LUPRON DEPOT)

  27. 2026 · regulatory · Temporal status not established

    Regulatory review: approved

    United States (FDA — LUPRON DEPOT-PED)

The represented chronology reflects records currently included in the governed dataset and does not claim to represent the entire scientific literature.

What still needs investigation

Claim traceability

No institutional claim record is currently represented for this peptide.

Evidence is missing or not represented as studied; this is not a conclusion that the intervention does not work.

Researchers represented in the evidence record12 bibliographic identities · open to inspect

These are bibliographic author identities derived from represented records. Name strings are not proof of unique real-world researcher identity, and publishing organizations are not treated as institutional affiliations.

Neal D Shore

4 represented evidence records

Years represented: 2008, 2019, 2020, 2024

Publishing organizations appearing in records: BJU international, Clinical therapeutics, European urology oncology, The New England journal of medicine

Daniel J George

2 represented evidence records

Years represented: 2020, 2024

Publishing organizations appearing in records: European urology oncology, The New England journal of medicine

Daniel R Saltzstein

2 represented evidence records

Years represented: 2020, 2024

Publishing organizations appearing in records: European urology oncology, The New England journal of medicine

Fred Saad

2 represented evidence records

Years represented: 2020, 2024

Publishing organizations appearing in records: European urology oncology, The New England journal of medicine

Michael S Cookson

2 represented evidence records

Years represented: 2020, 2024

Publishing organizations appearing in records: European urology oncology, The New England journal of medicine

Ronald Tutrone

2 represented evidence records

Years represented: 2020, 2024

Publishing organizations appearing in records: European urology oncology, The New England journal of medicine

A Mancuso

1 represented evidence record

Years represented: 2001

Publishing organizations appearing in records: Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica

A Perino

1 represented evidence record

Years represented: 1993

Publishing organizations appearing in records: Fertility and sterility

Adam J Nelson

1 represented evidence record

Years represented: 2021

Publishing organizations appearing in records: Circulation

Alberto Bossi

1 represented evidence record

Years represented: 2020

Publishing organizations appearing in records: The New England journal of medicine

Ana Carolina J S Rosa-E-Silva

1 represented evidence record

Years represented: 2015

Publishing organizations appearing in records: Journal of pediatric and adolescent gynecology

Antonio Parente

1 represented evidence record

Years represented: 2019

Publishing organizations appearing in records: Clinical therapeutics

Connections

Follow the scientific relationships

Connections appear only when they are represented by the project’s underlying records.

Open 12 represented connections ↓

institution

The New England journal of medicine

represented evidence source

institution

Fertility and sterility

represented evidence source

institution

BJU international

represented evidence source

institution

Journal of pediatric endocrinology & metabolism : JPEM

represented evidence source

institution

Clinical therapeutics

represented evidence source

institution

Scandinavian journal of urology

represented evidence source

institution

European urology oncology

represented evidence source

institution

Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica

represented evidence source

institution

BMC urology

represented evidence source

institution

Journal of pharmaceutical sciences

represented evidence source

institution

Circulation

represented evidence source

institution

Pituitary

represented evidence source

Traceability

Follow the record back to its source

The experience makes incomplete links visible instead of presenting a false impression of perfect provenance.

Source publication state

A governed source may be verified and approved for publication while its claim-to-evidence link is still incomplete.

Reviewer provenance state

“Human scientist reviewed: no” means that specific source-path attribution is not recorded. It does not silently negate the separate publication-review state.

Domain conclusion → Evidence

Connected

Evidence → Source

Connected

Source → Original record

Connected

Traceability documents how the project connects statements to records. It does not establish that a source is scientifically valid or that a claim is clinically true.

Reconciled for 6 domain conclusions and 0 featured studies.

Detailed study-to-domain mappings and original-source paths appear in the Leuprolide evidence-governance section.

Inspect the ranked source records

Observational archive

What contributors reported

Observational archive data is intentionally separated from published scientific evidence.

Observational boundary

Insufficient eligible observations are available for display under the current filters.

Insufficient eligible observations are currently represented to display aggregated findings for this peptide.

Regulatory context

Published jurisdictional records

Regulatory status is jurisdiction-specific and time-dependent. It is presented as context, not as a recommendation for use or a substitute for scientific evidence evaluation.

Research + media

Media connected to this scientific record

Only media explicitly linked through the project’s relationship system appears here.

No scientifically connected media is currently represented for this peptide.

Sources + provenance

Read the scientific record with its boundaries intact

The public record organizes reviewed evidence; it does not establish scientific truth by itself.
Association, mechanism, observation and regulatory status must not be represented as proof of clinical efficacy or safety.
Observational reports describe contributor experiences and cannot establish causation, effectiveness, safety or clinical benefit.
Contradictory and qualifying evidence must remain visible rather than being silently discarded.
Absence of represented evidence is not evidence that research does not exist.
Research gaps identify unresolved questions; they are not negative conclusions.
Regulatory status is distinct from scientific evidence quality.
Media relationships provide context and explanation; they do not increase the strength of scientific evidence.
A section with no represented records is an incomplete project record, not a scientific conclusion.
Researcher and institutional relationships are shown only when supported by represented records and must not be interpreted as rankings or endorsements.

Generated: 11/8/2026, 5:24:45 PM

global evidence atlas

Leuprolide research, ranked and separated by purpose

This is a deduplicated literature screening registry—not a claim that every mention directly proves efficacy or safety. Machine proposals remain visibly separate from governed human appraisal.

698Discoverable source universe
500Ranked screening records
6Research domains
0Accountably approved conclusions

500 matching records · ranked 2026-09-18

Page 1 of 20

Count reconciliation: 698 discoverable source records match the peptide identity query; 500 are retained in this bounded, ranked screening view; 0 belong to the separate governed layer labeled “Accountably approved conclusions.” Domain totals overlap because one publication may inform several questions.

governance and regulatory context

Leuprolide: what this atlas does and does not establish

Last checked
2026-09-18
Accountable publication approval
Not yet approved by a named accountable reviewer. Machine screening only.

No new outcome conclusion is inferred from discovery metadata. Named accountable approval is required for governed scientific conclusions.

Regulatory status by jurisdiction

Absence of a record in this pass is not proof that no authorization exists. Status must remain jurisdiction-, product-, formulation-, and date-specific.

  • United States (FDA — LUPRON DEPOT)approvedchecked 2026-09-09

    LUPRON DEPOT leuprolide acetate is FDA-approved in product-specific depot formulations for palliative treatment of advanced prostate cancer and for other indications only as stated in the applicable current labeling.

    FDA Drugs@FDA — LUPRON DEPOT NDA 019943
  • United States (FDA — LUPRON DEPOT-PED)approvedchecked 2026-09-09

    LUPRON DEPOT-PED is FDA-approved for treatment of pediatric patients with central precocious puberty under its age-, formulation-, dose-, and monitoring-specific labeling.

    FDA Drugs@FDA — LUPRON DEPOT-PED NDA 020263

5 FDA structured product label record(s) were identified for this compound name in openFDA. Label presence reflects an approved product exists under that name; it is not a claim about the specific formulation, dose, or use being discussed anywhere else on this page.

No machine-proposed evidence-strength grades exist yet for this compound; all screening records are unassigned pending further review.

Leuprolide evidence · ranking key

How evidence is ranked

A tier describes the evidentiary role and design strength of a source. It is not a popularity score, proof that every conclusion is correct, or a substitute for claim-level review.

A

Practice-defining evidence

Large, well-conducted randomized trials; prespecified major outcomes; rigorous systematic reviews or meta-analyses; and major regulatory assessments.

B

Strong supporting evidence

Smaller randomized trials, strong prospective cohorts, prespecified secondary analyses, and high-quality comparative-effectiveness studies.

C

Contextual evidence

Retrospective cohorts, claims-database studies, pharmacovigilance analyses, mechanistic human research, and well-documented case series.

D

Signal-generating evidence

Case reports, conference abstracts, preclinical research, hypothesis-generating analyses, and expert commentary.

Tier and confidence answer different questions

Tier classifies source design and evidentiary role. Confidence reflects risk of bias, sample size, comparator quality, outcome relevance, follow-up, missing data, directness, replication, reporting quality, and whether conclusions stay within the measured results.

Funding and conflicts are disclosed and considered, but sponsorship never automatically changes a tier. Corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern override the original rating.

Suggested citation

  • APA

    World Peptide Foundation. (n.d.). Leuprolide — Peptide Scientific Intelligence. World Peptide Foundation. (Updated September 20, 2026.) https://www.worldpeptidefoundation.org/directory/leuprolide

  • AMA / Vancouver

    World Peptide Foundation. Leuprolide — Peptide Scientific Intelligence. World Peptide Foundation website. Updated September 20, 2026. https://www.worldpeptidefoundation.org/directory/leuprolide