Zhu · Steroids 2021 · Systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials · n=1223 participants across 21 trial arms

The effect of dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) supplementation on estradiol levels in women: A dose-response and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Cited 14 times in the scientific literature.

Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PubMed 34246664 · doi:10.1016/j.steroids.2021.108889 · record verified 2026-08-29

What was done

Researchers conducted a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials across PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus through May 10, 2021, without time or language restrictions. They evaluated the effect of oral DHEA supplementation versus control on circulating estradiol concentrations in women using a random-effects model with the generic inverse of variance method. The meta-analysis included 21 trial arms comprising 1,223 participants (610 intervention, 613 control).

What was found

DHEA supplementation significantly increased circulating estradiol levels overall compared to controls (weighted mean difference [WMD]: 7.02 pg/mL, 95% CI: 5.43 to 8.62, P = 0.000). Stratified analyses showed: - Age ≥60 years: WMD 8.56 pg/mL (95% CI: 6.97 to 10.16, I² = 94%) - Duration ≥26 weeks: WMD 7.30 pg/mL (95% CI: 6.28 to 8.32, I² = 61%) - Dosage of 50 mg/day: WMD 7.75 pg/mL (95% CI reported in abstract as 9.12 to 9.39, I² = 94%) - Postmenopausal women: WMD 7.61 pg/mL (95% CI: 5.97 to 9.24, I² = 93%)

Why it matters

This review demonstrates that exogenous DHEA elevates circulating estradiol in women, confirming functional peripheral aromatization, especially in postmenopausal women with low baseline estrogens.

Limits

Statistical heterogeneity was extremely high across most subgroup analyses (I² up to 94%). The abstract contains an apparent typo in the reported 95% CI for the 50 mg/day subgroup. Clinical outcomes, safety, adverse effects, and quality assessment/risk of bias of included studies were not detailed in the abstract.

Cited by