Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 699

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Comparison of Cabergoline and Bromocriptine in the Treatment of Hyperprolactinemic Amenorrhea

Open access
Webster, Jonathan, Piscitelli, Gabriella, Polli, Anna, Ferrari, Carlo I., Ismail, Ikram, Scanlon, Maurice F.·1994·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cabergoline is a long-acting dopamine-agonist drug that suppresses prolactin secretion and restores gonadal function in women with hyperprolactinemic amenorrhea. We designed a study to compare its safety and efficacy with those of bromocriptine, which has been the standard therapy. METHODS: A total of 459 women with hyperprolactinemic amenorrhea were treated with either cabergoline (0.5 to 1.0 mg twice weekly) or bromocriptine (2.5 to 5.0 mg twice daily), administered in a double-blind fashion for 8 weeks and subsequently in an open fashion for 16 weeks, during which adjustments in the dose were made according to the response. Of the 459 women, 279 had microprolactinomas, 3 had macroprolactinomas, 1 had a craniopharyngioma, 167 had idiopathic hyperprolactinemia, and the remainder had an empty sella. Clinical and biochemical status was assessed at 2-week intervals for 8 weeks and monthly thereafter for a total of 6 months, with an additional assessment at 14 weeks. RESULTS: Stable normoprolactinemia was achieved in 186 of the 223 women treated with cabergoline (83 percent) and 138 of the 236 women treated with bromocriptine (59 percent, P < 0.001). Seventy-two percent of the women treated with cabergoline and 52 percent of those treated with bromocriptine had ovulatory cycles or became pregnant during treatment (P < 0.001). Amenorrhea persisted in 7 percent of the cabergoline-treated women and 16 percent of the bromocriptine-treated women. Adverse effects were recorded in 68 percent of the women taking cabergoline and 78 percent of those taking bromocriptine (P = 0.03); 3 percent discontinued taking cabergoline, and 12 percent stopped taking bromocriptine (P < 0.001) because of drug intolerance. Gastrointestinal symptoms were significantly less frequent, less severe, and shorter-lived in the women treated with cabergoline. CONCLUSIONS: Cabergoline is more effective and better tolerated than bromocriptine in women with hyperprolactinemic amenorrhea.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm199410063311403

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 13 references

Cited by

See all 699

Metadata

Authors
Webster, J., Piscitelli, G., Polli, A., Ferrari, C. I., Ismail, I., & Scanlon, M. F.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1994-10-06
Volume
331
Issue
14
Pages
904-909
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2040892630
Cited by
699
References
13
FWCI
10.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Comparison of Cabergoline and Bromocriptine in the Treatment of Hyperprolactinemic Amenorrhea. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199410063311403
The paper
Webster, J., Piscitelli, G., Polli, A., Ferrari, C. I., Ismail, I., & Scanlon, M. F. (1994). A Comparison of Cabergoline and Bromocriptine in the Treatment of Hyperprolactinemic Amenorrhea. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199410063311403

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.