WhelWomen's Health Evidence Lab
WHEL-C-010 · Emerging evidence · 3.8/10

CABERGOLINE for endometriosis

Cabergoline is annotated as a Phase 2 clinical candidate for endometriosis acting as a dopamine D2 receptor agonist per Open Targets.

Origin · ApprovedPathway · 505(b)(2) · existing active ingredient, new indicationEvidence arm · Pathway insightsEvidence supports
How to read thisThe summary above and the proposed mechanism are generated by the model from the sources it ingested, and are written as the model’s reasoning rather than established fact. Any figure quoted from MATRIX is a model-derived association score, not a clinical measurement. How far the published record backs this pair is carried by the score’s own rigor dimension and traced to verbatim sources at the foot of the page.

Hypothesized mechanism

Cabergoline acts as a dopamine D2 receptor agonist, a pathway that may be relevant to endometriosis (potentially via antiangiogenic effects), though the mechanistic link to the phenotype is not detailed in the claims.

This is the model’s proposed mechanism from the sources on file, not a demonstrated causal pathway. How well the published record supports it is reflected in the rigor and plausibility dimensions of the score, and traced to the verbatim sources at the foot of the page.

How the score was reached, for this pair

The composite score is the sum of five dimensions, each scored 0 to 2 by the model from the evidence on file. Below is the sub-score this specific pair received on each, with what that dimension measures. It scored 3.8 of 10 overall, a emerging reading, from a pathway rated emerging in strength.

The model’s overall reasoning for this pair is the summary at the top of the page, and the mechanism it proposed is in the section above.

Pathway arm · anchors the headline3.8 / 10 · Emerging

Scored for women. Female representation not stated — applicability to women uncertain (flagged for full text). (band F4, ×0.75).

Corroboration

Only a single source (Open Targets) is cited, establishing one line: that cabergoline is a clinical candidate for endometriosis via D2 receptor agonism. No independent mechanistic lines (e.g., antiangiogenic data, lesion regression studies) converge in the provided claims.

0 / 2

Rigor

The claim references a PHASE_2 clinical candidate status per Open Targets, implying human-relevant clinical development, but no actual study data, models, or outcomes are presented. The evidence is a database annotation rather than reported experimental or trial results.

1 / 2

Specificity

The single claim specifies a precise molecular action: dopamine D2 receptor agonist acting on dopamine receptor D2. This is a well-defined, target-specific mechanism for cabergoline.

2 / 2

Plausibility

The claim ties cabergoline's D2 agonism to endometriosis as a clinical candidate, but provides no mechanistic rationale linking D2 receptor activity to the endometriosis phenotype (e.g., via antiangiogenic VEGF effects). Plausibility is supported only by candidate status, not an explained target-phenotype fit.

1 / 2

Consistency

With only one claim, there are no multiple signals to compare; the single annotation is internally consistent but cannot demonstrate convergence. No contradicting evidence is present, but neither is corroborating directionality.

1 / 2
How the scoring rubric works, in general

Independent reading, reported beside the score

One outside model cross-reference is reported alongside the composite score. It is recorded separately and is not combined into the score.

MATRIX cross-reference Top 1%

Every Cure’smachine-learned treatment-probability model, drawn from a biomedical knowledge graph across roughly 1,800 drugs and 22,000 diseases. It provides a model-based estimate of how plausible a drug-disease link is given the structure of biomedical knowledge, reported alongside the substrate’s own evidence.

For this pair. MATRIX places this pair at Top 1%, with a treat-score of 3.61 (higher is better; across the pairs we cover, scores span about 3.1 to 4.5).

Scored over MATRIX’s own entities, confirming the same drug and disease: CHEBI:3286 (drug) and MONDO:0005133 (disease). Validate against the source: Every Cure’s MATRIX dataset ↗.

More on the MATRIX cross-reference and its provenance

Layers not covered for this pair

Sex-specific pharmacokineticsNone on file

Not covered for this pair. This layer holds documented sex-specific pharmacokinetics for a limited set of drugs, and this compound is not among them yet. A blank here means the drug is not covered by the layer, not that no sex difference exists.

More on the sex-specific pharmacokinetics layer and its sources
Cycle-phase dependenceNone on file

Not covered for this pair. The cycle-phase layer is seeded for the strongest-evidence cases so far (PMDD), and this pair is not among them yet. A blank here means the pair is not covered by the layer, not that the effect was found to be phase-independent.

More on the cycle-phase layer and its sources

Source evidence · what the pipeline ingested

These are the sources the pipeline ingested to detect and score this signal, the published literature the model actually read, each tagged by study type. Where the model combined findings the claim is marked as a synthesis (S), and where the literature disagrees the contradiction is shown (!).

Every source below belongs to this signal’s evidence arm, Pathway insights. Whel reads each drug-condition pair through four such arms, each held to its own inclusion bar; a signal is surfaced through one of them.

  • 1Per Open Targets (retrieved 2026-06-16), CABERGOLINE (a Small molecule) is a clinical candidate for endometriosis (maximum clinical stage PHASE_2); its mechanism of action is Dopamine D2 receptor agonist on target dopamine receptor D2. Open Targets · mechanistic
  • 2In FDA AEMS (the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System, formerly FAERS; retrieved 2026-06-16), 59 report(s) of ABDOMINAL PAIN were recorded for CABERGOLINE among female patients (of 2498 female reports for CABERGOLINE in the analysed sample). This is a raw adverse-event report count, not a disproportionality statistic or evidence of causation, and is subject to reporting bias and confounding. Read two ways: as a safety consideration, and — because it suggests CABERGOLINE acts on a system relevant to endometriosis — as a mechanistic lead for further investigation, not evidence of benefit. AEMS · adverse-event report
  • 3In FDA AEMS (the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System, formerly FAERS; retrieved 2026-06-16), 38 report(s) of ABDOMINAL DISTENSION were recorded for CABERGOLINE among female patients (of 2498 female reports for CABERGOLINE in the analysed sample). This is a raw adverse-event report count, not a disproportionality statistic or evidence of causation, and is subject to reporting bias and confounding. Read two ways: as a safety consideration, and — because it suggests CABERGOLINE acts on a system relevant to endometriosis — as a mechanistic lead for further investigation, not evidence of benefit. AEMS · adverse-event report
  • 4Per SIDER (the Side Effect Resource, from pre-2015 drug labels), CABERGOLINE lists Abdominal pain as a labeled side effect, reported in 5.0% of participants. SIDER 4.1 is a 2015 snapshot, so newer drugs may be unrepresented; this is a label-derived association, not causation in any individual. Read two ways: as a safety consideration, and — because it suggests CABERGOLINE acts on a system relevant to endometriosis — as a mechanistic lead for further investigation, not evidence of benefit. SIDER · label side-effect

These are the verbatim sources the pipeline surfaced and read; they may not be the full published record for a pair, and the score reflects the strength and agreement of the evidence rather than its volume. The strength of these source types is what the rigor dimension of the score reads off. MATRIX, sex-specific pharmacokinetics, and cycle phase are separate layers the pipeline does not ingest, external cross-references reported beside the score, and they link to their own sources in their sections above.

The primary sources and pipelines this evidence is drawn from