diff --git a/docs/sources/en-wikipedia-org__wiki-methoxypropylamino_cyclohexenylidene_ethoxyethylcyanoac__24f4d65639.html b/docs/sources/en-wikipedia-org__wiki-methoxypropylamino_cyclohexenylidene_ethoxyethylcyanoac__24f4d65639.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..47c9743 --- /dev/null +++ b/docs/sources/en-wikipedia-org__wiki-methoxypropylamino_cyclohexenylidene_ethoxyethylcyanoac__24f4d65639.html @@ -0,0 +1,89 @@ + + + + + +
+
+ 📄 Archived: 2025-08-31 12:16:05 UTC +
+
+ 🔗 Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methoxypropylamino_cyclohexenylidene_ethoxyethylcyanoacetate +
+
+ +
+

Methoxypropylamino cyclohexenylidene ethoxyethylcyanoacetate

+
+

+

+

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

+
+

Organic compound used in sunscreen

+

Chemical compound

+

Methoxypropylamino cyclohexenylidene ethoxyethylcyanoacetate (INCI) is an organic compound used in sunscreens to absorb UVA radiation. It is marketed as Mexoryl 400 by L'OrĂ©al. MCE has an absorption maximum of 385 nm, which is in the long-wave UVA range (UVA1, 360−400 nm).[1][2][3][4][5][6][7] Like Mexoryl SX (Ecamsule) and Mexoryl XL (Drometrizole trisiloxane), it is used exclusively in products manufactured by L'OrĂ©al.[8] MCE was developed by L'OrĂ©al and BASF.[9] +

+

MCE is a yellow solid in the form of powder or small chunks.[1] At 25 °C, it is soluble in phenoxyethanol, dimethyl capramide, ethoxydiglycol, dimethyl isosorbide, and alcohol (ethanol), which are ingredients used in cosmetics.[1][10][11][12][13][14] +

It is considered a cyclic merocyanine.[15] +

+

Safety and regulation

[edit]
+

In 2019, MCE was approved for use up to a maximum concentration of 3% as a UV filter in cosmetics in the EU.[1] It is not currently recognised or approved by the FDA for use in cosmetics in the US. +

+
    +
  1. ^ a b c d "Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety" (PDF). europa.eu. Retrieved 28 July 2024. +
    2. +
  2. ^ Marionnet, Claire; de Dormael, Romain; Marat, Xavier; Roudot, Angélina; Gizard, Julie; Planel, Emilie; Tornier, Carine; Golebiewski, Christelle; Bastien, Philippe; Candau, Didier; Bernerd, Françoise (January 2022). "Sunscreens with the New MCE Filter Cover the Whole UV Spectrum: Improved UVA1 Photoprotection In Vitro and in a Randomized Controlled Trial". JID Innovations. 2 (1). doi:10.1016/j.xjidi.2021.100070. ISSN 2667-0267. PMC 8762479. PMID 35072138. +
    3. +
  3. ^ Aguilera, JosĂ©; Gracia-Cazaña, Tamara; Gilaberte, Yolanda (2023-10-01). "New developments in sunscreens". Photochemical & Photobiological Sciences. 22 (10): 2473–2482. Bibcode:2023PhPhS..22.2473A. doi:10.1007/s43630-023-00453-x. ISSN 1474-9092. PMID 37543534. +
    4. +
  4. ^ Bernerd, Françoise; Passeron, Thierry; Castiel, Isabelle; Marionnet, Claire (January 2022). "The Damaging Effects of Long UVA (UVA1) Rays: A Major Challenge to Preserve Skin Health and Integrity". International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 23 (15): 8243. doi:10.3390/ijms23158243. ISSN 1422-0067. PMC 9368482. PMID 35897826. +
    5. +
  5. ^ PubChem. "2-ethoxyethyl (2Z)-2-cyano-2-[3-(3-methoxypropylamino)cyclohex-2-en-1-ylidene]acetate". pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Retrieved 2024-07-30. +
    6. +
  6. ^ de Dormael, Romain; Bernerd, Francoise; Bastien, Philippe; Candau, Didier; Roudot, Angelina; Tricaud, Caroline (September 2022). "Improvement of photoprotection with sunscreen formulas containing the cyclic merocyanine UVA1 absorber MCE: In vivo demonstration under simulated and real sun exposure conditions in three randomised controlled trials". JEADV Clinical Practice. 1 (3): 229–239. doi:10.1002/jvc2.38. ISSN 2768-6566. +
    7. +
  7. ^ Flament, F.; Mercurio, D. G.; Muller, B.; Li, J.; Tricaud, C.; Bernerd, F.; Roudot, A.; Candau, D.; Passeron, T. (January 2024). "The impact of methoxypropylamino cyclohexenylidene ethoxyethylcyanoacetate ( MCE ) UVA1 filter on pigmentary and ageing signs: An outdoor prospective 8-week randomized, intra-individual comparative study in two populations of different genetic background". Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology. 38 (1): 214–222. doi:10.1111/jdv.19486. ISSN 0926-9959. PMID 37655436. +
    8. +
  8. ^ "L'Oréal Breaks the Ultra-long UVA Code with UVMune 400". Cosmetics & Toiletries. 2022-05-24. Retrieved 2024-07-28. +
    9. +
  9. ^ "La Roche-Posay UVMune 400: Science and Review". Lab Muffin Beauty Science. 2024-06-10. Retrieved 2024-07-28. +
    10. +
  10. ^ PubChem. "Phenoxyethanol". pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Retrieved 2024-07-29. +
    11. +
  11. ^ PubChem. "N,N-Dimethyldecanamide". pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Retrieved 2024-07-29. +
    12. +
  12. ^ PubChem. "Diethylene Glycol Monoethyl Ether". pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Retrieved 2024-07-29. +
    13. +
  13. ^ PubChem. "Dimethyl isosorbide". pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Retrieved 2024-07-29. +
    14. +
  14. ^ Lachenmeier, Dirk W (2008-11-13). "Safety evaluation of topical applications of ethanol on the skin and inside the oral cavity". Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology. 3 (1): 26. doi:10.1186/1745-6673-3-26. ISSN 1745-6673. PMC 2596158. PMID 19014531. +
    15. +
  15. ^ Winkler, Barbara; Hoeffken, Hans Wolfgang; Eichin, Kai; Houy, Wolfgang (2014-03-05). "A cyclic merocyanine UV-A absorber: mechanism of formation and crystal structure". Tetrahedron Letters. 55 (10): 1749–1751. doi:10.1016/j.tetlet.2014.01.113. ISSN 0040-4039. +
    16. +
+


+

+
+
+
\ No newline at end of file diff --git a/docs/sources/papers-lgbt__papers-prog__eec4c32946.html b/docs/sources/papers-lgbt__papers-prog__eec4c32946.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..fbad792 --- /dev/null +++ b/docs/sources/papers-lgbt__papers-prog__eec4c32946.html @@ -0,0 +1,108 @@ + + + + + +
+
+ 📄 Archived: 2025-08-31 12:24:29 UTC +
+
+ 🔗 Source: https://papers.lgbt/papers/prog +
+
+ +
+

/prog

progesterone in transsexual female hrt: a review of timing, biology, and what we (don’t yet) know

by emily/endocrinemoder/adenine

abstract

this review tackles a hard question in transsexual female care: when to add progesterone. + + mechanistically, mammary development runs in two phases. first, estradiol (with gh/igf‑1) pushes ductal elongation and branching from terminal end buds; later, progesterone (with prolactin) leans the system toward lobulo‑alveolar differentiation and secretory readiness. that division of labor matters for sequencing. adding progesterone too early, before estradiol has built a decent ductal scaffold—could, in theory, nudge tissue into differentiation at the expense of further branching, ultimately limiting ductal complexity and perhaps final breast size. animal models and cis puberty biology make that hypothesis biologically plausible; direct proof for or against in trans cohorts is not yet here. human data to date: (i) cis/animal literature strongly separates estrogen‑led branching from progesterone‑led alveologenesis; (ii) transsexual female groups show early, front‑loaded growth under estradiol with modest absolute volumes after a year; (iii) a small, short prospective study of 100 mg oral micronized progesterone (omp) showed no breast staging benefit at 3 months; (iv) patient‑reported surveys suggest perceived benefits; and (v) a randomized trial testing estradiol ± omp with 3‑d volume endpoints is underway. pending stronger trials, a cautious, time‑sequenced approach, defer progesterone until ~6–12 months after starting estradiol, once tanner b2–b3 budding is evident, best harmonizes with puberty physiology while minimizing the chance of getting ahead of the biology.

progesteroneroadmapbreast developmentestradiolCHTHRT

progesterone in transsexual female hrt: a review of timing, biology, and what we (don’t yet) know

+

introduction

+

crosssex hormone therapy (CHT) for transsexual female individuals aims to induce breast development, shift body composition, and align secondary sex characteristics with gender. with breasts, some individuals achieve satisfactory fullness with estradiol alone, but many plateau early with small absolute volumes despite appropriate estradiol exposure and testosterone suppression. observational program data and narrative reviews consistently note that most measurable growth happens early, and that even after years, many remain below an a‑cup equivalent. fueling interest in adjuncts such as progesterone. the question is not “progesterone: yes or no?” but “progesterone: when?”. (PubMed, Wiley Online Library, PMC)

+
+

the two‑phase frame: ducts first, then lobulo‑alveoli

+

phase 1 — branching morphogenesis. at puberty, estradiol acting within a gh/igf‑1 milieu drives terminal end buds (tebs) to invade the fat pad, elongate, and bifurcate, laying the primary and secondary ductal tree. this is the branching state: high proliferation at tebs, lateral sprouting, and progressive filling of the fat pad. estradiol’s priming also induces progesterone receptor and prolactin receptor expression in ductal epithelium, setting the stage for the next phase. (PMC, Oxford Academic)

+

phase 2 — side‑branching and alveologenesis. once a ductal scaffold exists, progesterone signaling (largely via pr‑b) promotes tertiary side‑branching and, with prolactin, the lobulo‑alveolar program that ultimately supports lactation. while full alveolar expansion is most dramatic in pregnancy, progesterone’s imprint on side‑branching and early alveolar buds is well described in nonpregnant models. mechanistically, progesterone acts through paracrine mediators (e.g., rankl, wnt programs) and mitogenic targets (e.g., cyclin d1). (PMC, BioMed Central, PNAS)

+

takeaway. the mammary gland toggles between a grow‑and‑branch state (estradiol‑dominant) and a differentiate‑and‑fill state (progesterone ± prolactin). trying to run both programs at once is biologically awkward. single‑cell/spatial work in mice even maps a tradeoff between proliferative/branching programs and lineage‑differentiation programs under endocrine cues. (ScienceDirect)

+
+

why timing matters: the “too‑early progesterone” hypothesis

+

the hypothesis. introduce progesterone before estradiol has meaningfully elongated and branched ducts (i.e., pre‑ or very‑early budding), and you risk shifting epithelial fate toward alveolar differentiation while curtailing further teb‑driven branching, potentially locking in a simpler ductal tree and limiting later capacity for volume/shape change. this is a theoretical concern, not a proven harm, but it is biologically coherent given (i) estrogen’s lead role in ductal outgrowth; (ii) progesterone’s drive toward side‑branching and alveologenesis; and (iii) evidence of a proliferation↔differentiation tradeoff. (PMC, BioMed Central, ScienceDirect)

+

what cis puberty teaches about sequencing. in cis girls, thelarche (breast budding) is typically the first clinical sign of puberty; consistent luteal progesterone exposure only becomes regular after ovulatory cycles settle, often years later. in other words, nature tends to build ducts first under estradiol and only layers regular progesterone later. mirroring that tempo in transsexual female CS is a reasonable default. (NCBI, pm.amegroups.org, Renaissance School of Medicine)

+
+

evidence base (and its gaps)

+

1) cis biology & animal models (strong on mechanism, not final outcomes)

+
    +
  • estrogen + gh/igf‑1 is sufficient to trigger pubertal ductal outgrowth with classic teb dynamics; progesterone is dispensable for initial elongation in several models but required/sufficient for side‑branching and alveolar budding/differentiation once ducts exist. multiple groups demonstrate progesterone‑induced tertiary branching and alveolar formation. (PMC, Oxford Academic)
    • +
  • progesterone’s paracrine network (rankl, wnt4, cyclin d1) and estradiol’s priming of pr/prlr support a staged handoff, estrogen sets competence; progesterone executes differentiation. (Oxford Academic, PMC)
    • +
  • single‑cell/spatial atlases highlight endocrine‑linked state switching between proliferative branching and lineage commitment, reinforcing the intuitive “don’t ask the gland to do both at once” message. (ScienceDirect)
    • +
+

mechanistic bottom line: the order‑of‑operations model (grow ducts under estradiol; differentiate under progesterone) is robust across mammals. that doesn’t prove timing harms/benefits in trans adults, but it makes the timing question worth caring about. (PMC)

+

2) transsexual female groups (what actually happens with estradiol alone, and what people report with progesterone)

+
    +
  • estradiol alone: prospective data show breast development is modest and front‑loaded, with the majority of measurable change in the first 6 months after starting CHT; many remain below an a‑cup after a year, and augmentation rates are high. (PubMed, Wiley Online Library, PMC)
    • +
  • patient‑reported experience: a 2025 cross‑sectional survey of transsexual individuals using progestogens found that most users perceived improved breast development; such surveys are valuable for hypothesis‑generation but are susceptible to selection and expectation biases. (ScienceDirect)
    • +
+

3) randomized trials (the missing piece)

+
    +
  • a multicenter randomized study is underway testing estradiol ± oral micronized progesterone with 3‑d breast volume as the primary endpoint; the published protocol frames safety and dosing (e.g., 200–400 mg) and sets up the first high‑quality efficacy readout. as of today, results are pending. (PMC, BioMed Central)
    • +
+

evidence summary: the mechanistic case for timing is coherent; real‑world outcomes in trans populations remain uncertain. there is no definitive proof that progesterone increases volume, or that starting it early harms it. nonetheless, sequencing it after estradiol‑initiated budding is a low‑regret choice aligned with puberty biology and current observational signals. (PMC, PubMed)

+
+

practical timing: why “after 6–12 months” is a reasonable default

+
    +
  • by ~6–12 months on estradiol, most patients are at tanner b2–b3 (budding to early mound), and the early estradiol‑led branching burst is underway; adding progesterone after this point emulates cis puberty sequencing and is less likely to push the gland out of branching mode prematurely. (NCBI, PubMed)
    • +
  • the front‑loaded time course of estradiol‑only growth (largest gains in months 0–6) further supports waiting until the initial branching wave has crested before deliberately inviting alveolar programming. (PubMed)
    • +
+

translation: if your goal is to maximize the ductal scaffold before layering alveolar fullness, wait for budding, then consider progesterone, understanding that its volumetric benefit is unproven and may be subtle or person‑specific. (PubMed)

+
+

frequently asked timing scenarios (biologically informed takes)

+
    +
  1. starting progesterone at month 0 with estradiol. not preferred on biological grounds: risks nudging toward alveolar programs before ducts expand, with no evidence of net volumetric gain. if done, counsel that effects (positive or negative) are unproven. (PMC, ScienceDirect)
    2. +
  2. adding progesterone at 6–12 months, once budding is clear. reasonable default to mirror cis puberty sequencing; aligns with estradiol‑front‑loaded growth and likely minimizes any theoretical “early differentiation” penalty. (PubMed, pm.amegroups.org)
    3. +
  3. adding progesterone after 12–24 months because growth plateaued. also reasonable, with the caveat that plateau is common and absolute volumes may stay modest; consider documenting changes with standardized photography or 3‑d tools when possible. (Lippincott Journals, PLOS)
    4. +
+
+

conclusions

+
    +
  • mammary biology really does split: estradiol builds the ducts; progesterone matures the alveoli. starting progesterone too early is a plausible way to push tissue into the wrong program at the wrong time. this is theoretical, not proven harm. (PMC, BioMed Central)
    • +
  • adding progesterone after 6–12 months of estradiol, once budding is evident, tracks natural puberty and is less likely to hinder ductal expansion. it may or may not add meaningful volume; (pm.amegroups.org, PubMed, BioMed Central)
    • +
  • until we have definitive data, transparent counseling + careful sequencing + measurement beats all‑or‑nothing takes. (PLOS)
    • +
+
+

selected references (linked inline above)

+
    +
  • macias & hinck. mammary gland development. 2012 (review). estradiol → ductal growth; progesterone → alveolar programs. (PMC)
    • +
  • arendt et al. form and function: how estrogen and progesterone regulate mammary gland development. 2015. (PMC)
    • +
  • oakes et al. key stages in mammary gland development: the alveolar morphogenesis. 2006. (BioMed Central)
    • +
  • bocchinfuso et al. endocrinology 2000. estrogen priming induces pr/prlr in ductal epithelium. (Oxford Academic)
    • +
  • de blok et al. jcem 2018. most breast growth occurs in the first 6 months of gaht. (PubMed)
    • +
  • d’hoore et al. journal of internal medicine 2022 (review). modest volumes after 1 year; many < aaa. (Wiley Online Library)
    • +
  • nolan et al. endocrine connections 2022. 100 mg omp for 3 months: no change in sleep/distress/tanner vs controls. (Bioscientifica)
    • +
  • chang et al. transgender health 2025 (in press/online first). survey: many users perceive benefit from progestogens. (ScienceDirect)
    • +
  • dijkman et al. bmc pharmacology & toxicology 2023. rct protocol: estradiol ± omp; primary outcome 3‑d breast volume. (BioMed Central)
    • +
  • transdermal estradiol and vte risk: case‑control/meta‑analytic evidence in cis cohorts; program data in trans cohorts. (PMC)
    • +
+
+
+
+ \ No newline at end of file