Back

Efficacy and Safety of Oral L-Ergothioneine Supplementation in Primary Dysmenorrhea: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

Guo, C.; Liu, W.; Ding, W.; Cao, J.; Tong, T.; Liu, F.; Xiao, G.

2026-03-27 obstetrics and gynecology
10.64898/2026.03.26.26349375 medRxiv
Show abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral L-ergothioneine (EGT) in alleviating pain and associated symptoms in women with primary dysmenorrhea (PD). Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 40 women with PD (aged 18-30 years) were randomized (1:1) to receive EGT capsules (120 mg/day) or a matching placebo for 3 consecutive menstrual cycles. Outcomes evaluated at baseline and post-cycle included peak pain (Visual Analog Scale, VAS), Dysmenorrhea Symptom Score, and the COX Menstrual Symptom Scale (CMSS). Results: EGT significantly improved PD symptoms over 3 cycles. Mean VAS for peak pain decreased from 4.80 {+/-} 1.12 to 2.32 {+/-} 1.59 in the EGT group (p < 0.001), compared to a non-significant reduction (4.10 {+/-} 1.30 to 3.45 {+/-} 1.69) in the placebo group. The between-group difference at cycle 3 was significant (p < 0.01). A linear mixed-model confirmed a significant Time x Group interaction (p < 0.001), showing an accelerated decline in symptom severity for EGT. Furthermore, 84% of EGT-treated patients achieved [&ge;]50% VAS reduction versus 35% in the placebo group (p = 0.003). Serum inflammatory biomarkers showed no significant between-group differences or correlation with VAS improvements, suggesting EGT's analgesic effects likely operate via cytoprotective pathways independent of classical inflammatory cascades. No adverse events were reported. Conclusion: Oral EGT supplementation (120 mg/day) effectively and progressively mitigates menstrual pain and systemic symptoms in PD, offering a well-tolerated, non-pharmacological intervention. Trial Registration: ChiCTR2500112557; Retrospectively registered on 2025-11-17.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.