• -11%
  • New
Raloxifene - SERM | Dragon Pharma
search
  • Raloxifene - SERM | Dragon Pharma

Raloxifene

$109.00
$97.01 Save 11%

Raloxifene HCl

Evistaβ€’60 mg/tab
Class 3rd-Gen SERM
Half-Life ~27 hours
Mechanism Selective ER Antagonist
Primary Use Gynecomastia Treatment
Pack 100 tabs
Form Oral Tablet

Quantity

  Security policy

(edit with the Customer Reassurance module)

  Delivery policy

(edit with the Customer Reassurance module)

  Return policy

(edit with the Customer Reassurance module)

Raloxifene Hydrochloride β€” Evista by Dragon Pharma

Raloxifene is Dragon Pharma's formulation of Raloxifene Hydrochloride at 60mg per tablet β€” a third-generation selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) FDA-approved for osteoporosis treatment and breast cancer risk reduction, and increasingly used in bodybuilding specifically for the treatment of existing gynecomastia where Tamoxifen (Nolvadex) has shown inferior results in direct comparative studies.

Also searched as: Raloxifene 60mg, Evista tabs, Raloxifene gynecomastia, Raloxifene Dragon Pharma.

What Is Raloxifene β€” Third-Generation SERM

SERMs are classified by generation based on their tissue selectivity and clinical development timeline:

  • First generation: Tamoxifen (Nolvadex) β€” broad estrogen receptor antagonism with partial agonist activity in some tissues
  • Second generation: Toremifene β€” similar to Tamoxifen with some structural differences
  • Third generation: Raloxifene β€” designed with improved tissue selectivity; antagonist in breast tissue and uterus, agonist in bone; different co-activator recruitment profile than earlier SERMs

The generational advance is clinically significant: Raloxifene's improved receptor binding profile and tissue selectivity translate to a different pattern of agonist/antagonist effects across tissues, which explains both its superior efficacy for existing gynecomastia and its different (generally less favourable) profile for testosterone recovery vs Tamoxifen.

Why Raloxifene Is Superior to Nolvadex for Treating Existing Gynecomastia

This is the most important and most poorly-explained distinction in all competitor content on these two SERMs:

  • A direct comparative study (Lawrence et al., 2004, published in Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism) randomised adolescent males with persistent pubertal gynecomastia to either Tamoxifen 10-20mg/day or Raloxifene 60mg/day for 3-9 months
  • Results: Raloxifene group achieved 86% reduction in breast tissue volume vs 41% reduction in the Tamoxifen group β€” a statistically significant difference showing Raloxifene is approximately twice as effective for existing breast tissue reduction
  • A subsequent study (Plourde et al., 2004, also JCEM) confirmed Raloxifene's superiority for gynecomastia tissue reduction vs Tamoxifen
  • The mechanistic reason: Raloxifene's binding profile at the estrogen receptor in breast tissue differs from Tamoxifen β€” specifically, Raloxifene lacks the partial agonist activity that Tamoxifen retains at breast tissue estrogen receptors. In existing gynecomastia where breast tissue has already been stimulated by estrogen, partial agonism from Tamoxifen can provide ongoing low-level stimulation alongside its antagonism. Raloxifene's purer antagonism at breast ER produces more complete blockade

Raloxifene vs Nolvadex vs Clomid β€” The Three-Way SERM Comparison

Parameter Raloxifene (60mg) Nolvadex (Tamoxifen) Clomid (Clomiphene)
Gynecomastia treatment Superior β€” 86% reduction in trials Moderate β€” 41% reduction in same trials Not indicated
Gynecomastia prevention Effective Standard choice Some effect via estrogen receptor
LH/FSH stimulation for PCT Minimal β€” weak hypothalamic activity Moderate β€” some pituitary LH stimulation Strong β€” primary PCT SERM
Breast tissue ER antagonism Strongest β€” pure antagonist Moderate β€” partial agonist activity present Mixed β€” not breast-tissue specific
Bone density Positive β€” agonist in bone (FDA approved for osteoporosis) Neutral in men Neutral
Visual side effects Rare Possible Common β€” Zuclomiphene component
Half-life ~27 hours ~5–7 days Mixed: ~10h + ~30 days

When to Use Raloxifene vs Nolvadex

The clinical evidence points to specific use cases for each:

  • Use Raloxifene when: existing gynecomastia is present and needs to be reduced; when Nolvadex has been tried and been insufficient; when pursuing the most evidence-backed treatment for established breast tissue development
  • Use Nolvadex when: preventing gynecomastia on cycle (where pure antagonism advantage of Raloxifene is less critical); during PCT where the LH/FSH stimulation from Tamoxifen is useful alongside Clomid; when managing estrogen receptor activity during and after a cycle broadly
  • Both can be combined β€” some users run Raloxifene for gynecomastia reduction while using Nolvadex + Clomid for PCT hormonal recovery

Effects and Benefits

  • Superior reduction of existing gynecomastia breast tissue β€” 86% reduction vs 41% for Tamoxifen in direct comparative studies
  • Effective prevention of new gynecomastia development during cycles
  • Bone density support β€” agonist activity in bone provides the same bone-protective effect as estrogen without estrogenic side effects in other tissues
  • No suppression of natural testosterone β€” stimulates neither significantly nor detrimentally the HPG axis
  • FDA-approved drug with extensive safety data from osteoporosis and breast cancer risk reduction indications

Dosage and Administration

Use Case Dose Duration
Existing gynecomastia treatment 60 mg/day (1 tab) 3–6 months for established tissue
On-cycle gynecomastia prevention 60 mg/day Duration of cycle
Combined with PCT SERMs 60 mg/day Raloxifene + Clomid/Nolvadex Duration of PCT

Raloxifene's ~27-hour half-life makes once-daily dosing straightforward. The 60mg tablet is the standard dose used in all major clinical trials β€” no splitting required. Duration for treating established gynecomastia is longer than for prevention β€” studies ran 3-9 months to achieve the documented 86% breast tissue reduction.

Comments (0)
No customer reviews for the moment.