Explore the vast range of titles available.

Emergency contraception can prevent unintended pregnancies, but current methods are only effective if used as soon as possible after sexual intercourse and before ovulation. We compared the efficacy and safety of ulipristal acetate with levonorgestrel for emergency contraception. Women with regular menstrual cycles who presented to a participating family planning clinic requesting emergency contraception within 5 days of unprotected sexual intercourse were eligible for enrolment in this randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial. 2221 women were randomly assigned to receive a single, supervised dose of 30 mg ulipristal acetate (n=1104) or 1·5 mg levonorgestrel (n=1117) orally. Allocation was by block randomisation stratified by centre and time from unprotected sexual intercourse to treatment, with allocation concealment by identical opaque boxes labelled with a unique treatment number. Participants were masked to treatment assignment whereas investigators were not. Follow-up was done 5–7 days after expected onset of next menses. The primary endpoint was pregnancy rate in women who received emergency contraception within 72 h of unprotected sexual intercourse, with a non-inferiority margin of 1% point difference between groups (limit of 1·6 for odds ratio). Analysis was done on the efficacy-evaluable population, which excluded women lost to follow-up, those aged over 35 years, women with unknown follow-up pregnancy status, and those who had re-enrolled in the study. Additionally, we undertook a meta-analysis of our trial and an earlier study to assess the efficacy of ulipristal acetate compared with levonorgestrel. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00551616. In the efficacy-evaluable population, 1696 women received emergency contraception within 72 h of sexual intercourse (ulipristal acetate, n=844; levonorgestrel, n=852). There were 15 pregnancies in the ulipristal acetate group (1·8%, 95% CI 1·0–3·0) and 22 in the levonorgestrel group (2·6%, 1·7–3·9; odds ratio [OR] 0·68, 95% CI 0·35–1·31). In 203 women who received emergency contraception between 72 h and 120 h after sexual intercourse, there were three pregnancies, all of which were in the levonorgestrel group. The most frequent adverse event was headache (ulipristal acetate, 213 events [19·3%] in 1104 women; levonorgestrel, 211 events [18·9%] in 1117 women). Two serious adverse events were judged possibly related to use of emergency contraception; a case of dizziness in the ulipristal acetate group and a molar pregnancy in the levonorgestrel group. In the meta-analysis (0–72 h), there were 22 (1·4%) pregnancies in 1617 women in the ulipristal acetate group and 35 (2·2%) in 1625 women in the levonorgestrel group (OR 0·58, 0·33–0·99; p=0·046). Ulipristal acetate provides women and health-care providers with an effective alternative for emergency contraception that can be used up to 5 days after unprotected sexual intercourse. HRA Pharma.

Estradiol valerate/dienogest (E2V/DNG) is a combined oral contraceptive (COC) with 2 new hormonal entities and a unique 4-phasic dosing regimen indicated for women to prevent pregnancy. The purpose of this article is to review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, tolerability, and cost of E2V/DNG. MEDLINE (1966–June 2011) and EMBASE (1966–June 2011) were searched for original research and review articles published in the English language using the terms Natazia or Qlaira or estradiol valerate and dienogest. The reference lists of identified articles were reviewed for additional pertinent publications. Abstracts from the 2005 to 2011 American Society of Reproductive Medicine and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists meetings were searched using the same terms. The search provided 56 articles that addressed the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, clinical efficacy, and tolerability of E2V/DNG in women of reproductive age. Articles reporting efficacy or tolerability in the setting of menopause were excluded. The initial efficacy of E2V/DNG on ovulation inhibition was investigated in 2 prospective, randomized, open-label, Phase II dose-finding studies. The dose that was approved by the Food and Drug Administration resulted in 3.13% of women ovulating in the second cycle of treatment (90% CI, 0.2%–6.05%). Rate of pregnancy prevention with this agent was reported with a Pearl Index ranging from 0.73 to 1.27 (unadjusted) to 0.34 to 0.72 (adjusted for method failure only). The mean duration of withdrawal bleeding was 4.3 days (range, 4.0–4.6 days) among 2266 women receiving 13 treatment cycles. Adverse events reported in >1% of patients included abdominal pain, acne, breast pain, dysmenorrhea, emotional lability, headache, nausea, and weight increase. Estradiol valerate/dienogest is a new contraceptive formulation. It offers efficacy, tolerability, and an acceptable safety profile with a potentially better bleeding pattern than levonorgestrel-containing COCs. This COC may be especially useful for older women of reproductive age who are adherent to therapy and looking for shorter and/or lighter menstrual cycles. Studies will need to be performed to determine whether clinically significant differences in outcomes exist among E2V/DNG and other available COCs.

AbstractObjectivesTo investigate the association between contemporary combined hormonal contraceptives (including progestogen types in combined preparations and all progestogen-only products) and overall and specific types of ovarian cancer.DesignProspective, nationwide cohort study.SettingDenmark, 1995-2014.ParticipantsAll women aged 15-49 years during 1995-2014 were eligible. Women were excluded if they immigrated after 1995, had cancer (except non-melanoma skin cancer), had venous thrombosis, or were treated for infertility before entry (final study population included 1 879 227 women). Women were categorised as never users (no record of being dispensed hormonal contraception), current or recent users (≤1 year after stopping use), or former users (>1 year after stopping use) of different hormonal contraceptives.Main outcome measuresPoisson regression was used to calculate relative risk of ovarian cancer among users of any contemporary combined hormonal contraceptives and by progestogen type in combined preparations and all progestogen-only products, including non-oral preparations. Separate analyses examined women followed up to their first contraception type switch and those with full contraceptive histories. Duration, time since last use, and tumour histology were examined and the population prevented fraction were calculated.ResultsDuring 21.4 million person years, 1249 incident ovarian cancers occurred. Among ever users of hormonal contraception, 478 ovarian cancers were recorded over 13 344 531 person years. Never users had 771 ovarian cancers during 8 150 250 person years. Compared with never users, reduced risks of ovarian cancer occurred with current or recent use and former use of any hormonal contraception (relative risk 0.58 (95% confidence interval 0.49 to 0.68) and 0.77 (0.66 to 0.91), respectively). Relative risks among current or recent users decreased with increasing duration (from 0.82 (0.59 to 1.12) with ≤1 year use to 0.26 (0.16 to 0.43) with >10 years’ use; P<0.001 for trend). Similar results were achieved among women followed up to their first switch in contraceptive type. Little evidence of major differences in risk estimates by tumour type or progestogen content of combined oral contraceptives was seen. Use of progestogen-only products were not associated with ovarian cancer risk. Among ever users of hormonal contraception, the reduction in the age standardised absolute rate of ovarian cancer was 3.2 per 100 000 person years. Based on the relative risk for the never use versus ever use categories of hormonal contraception (0.66), the population prevented fraction was estimated to be 21%—that is, use of hormonal contraception prevented 21% of ovarian cancers in the study population.ConclusionsUse of contemporary combined hormonal contraceptives is associated with a reduction in ovarian cancer risk in women of reproductive age—an effect related to duration of use, which diminishes after stopping use. These data suggest no protective effect from progestogen-only products.

PurposeMidostaurin, approved for treating FLT-3-mutated acute myeloid leukemia and advanced systemic mastocytosis, is metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 to two major metabolites, and may inhibit and/or induce CYP3A, CYP2B6, and CYP2C8. Two studies investigated the impact of midostaurin on CYP substrate drugs and oral contraceptives in healthy participants.MethodsUsing sentinel dosing for participants’ safety, the effects of midostaurin at steady state following 25-day (Study 1) or 24-day (Study 2) dosing with 50 mg twice daily were evaluated on CYP substrates, midazolam (CYP3A4), bupropion (CYP2B6), and pioglitazone (CYP2C8) in Study 1; and monophasic oral contraceptives (containing ethinylestradiol [EES] and levonorgestrel [LVG]) in Study 2.ResultsIn Study 1, midostaurin resulted in a 10% increase in midazolam peak plasma concentrations (Cmax), and 3–4% decrease in total exposures (AUC). Bupropion showed a 55% decrease in Cmax and 48–49% decrease in AUCs. Pioglitazone showed a 10% decrease in Cmax and 6% decrease in AUC. In Study 2, midostaurin resulted in a 26% increase in Cmax and 7–10% increase in AUC of EES; and a 19% increase in Cmax and 29–42% increase in AUC of LVG. Midostaurin 50 mg twice daily for 28 days ensured that steady-state concentrations of midostaurin and the active metabolites were achieved by the time of CYP substrate drugs or oral contraceptive dosing. No safety concerns were reported.ConclusionMidostaurin neither inhibits nor induces CYP3A4 and CYP2C8, and weakly induces CYP2B6. Midostaurin at steady state has no clinically relevant PK interaction on hormonal contraceptives. All treatments were well tolerated.

Objective To assess the risk of venous thrombosis in current users of different types of hormonal contraception, focusing on regimen, oestrogen dose, type of progestogen, and route of administration.Design National cohort study.Setting Denmark, 1995-2005.Participants Danish women aged 15-49 with no history of cardiovascular or malignant disease.Main outcome measures Adjusted rate ratios for all first time deep venous thrombosis, portal thrombosis, thrombosis of caval vein, thrombosis of renal vein, unspecified deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism during the study period.Results 10.4 million woman years were recorded, 3.3 million woman years in receipt of oral contraceptives. In total, 4213 venous thrombotic events were observed, 2045 in current users of oral contraceptives. The overall absolute risk of venous thrombosis per 10 000 woman years in non-users of oral contraceptives was 3.01 and in current users was 6.29. Compared with non-users of combined oral contraceptives the rate ratio of venous thrombembolism in current users decreased with duration of use (<1 year 4.17, 95% confidence interval 3.73 to 4.66, 1-4 years 2.98, 2.73 to 3.26, and >4 years 2.76, 2.53 to 3.02; P<0.001) and with decreasing dose of oestrogen. Compared with oral contraceptives containing levonorgestrel and with the same dose of oestrogen and length of use, the rate ratio for oral contraceptives with norethisterone was 0.98 (0.71 to 1.37), with norgestimate 1.19 (0.96 to 1.47), with desogestrel 1.82 (1.49 to 2.22), with gestodene 1.86 (1.59 to 2.18), with drospirenone 1.64 (1.27 to 2.10), and with cyproterone 1.88 (1.47 to 2.42). Compared with non-users of oral contraceptives, the rate ratio for venous thromboembolism in users of progestogen only oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel or norethisterone was 0.59 (0.33 to 1.03) or with 75 μg desogestrel was 1.12 (0.36 to 3.49), and for hormone releasing intrauterine devices was 0.90 (0.64 to 1.26).Conclusion The risk of venous thrombosis in current users of combined oral contraceptives decreases with duration of use and decreasing oestrogen dose. For the same dose of oestrogen and the same length of use, oral contraceptives with desogestrel, gestodene, or drospirenone were associated with a significantly higher risk of venous thrombosis than oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel. Progestogen only pills and hormone releasing intrauterine devices were not associated with any increased risk of venous thrombosis.

Objective To assess the risk of venous thrombosis in current users of non-oral hormonal contraception.Design Historical national registry based cohort study.Setting Four national registries in Denmark.Participants All Danish non-pregnant women aged 15-49 (n=1 626 158), free of previous thrombotic disease or cancer, were followed from 2001 to 2010.Main outcome measures Incidence rate of venous thrombosis in users of transdermal, vaginal, intrauterine, or subcutaneous hormonal contraception, relative risk of venous thrombosis compared with non-users, and rate ratios of venous thrombosis in current users of non-oral products compared with the standard reference oral contraceptive with levonorgestrel and 30-40 µg oestrogen. Diagnoses were confirmed by at least four weeks of anticoagulation therapy after the diagnosis.Results Within 9 429 128 woman years of observation, 5287 first ever venous thrombosis events were recorded, of which 3434 were confirmed. In non-users of hormonal contraception the incidence rate of confirmed events was 2.1 per 10 000 woman years. Compared with non-users of hormonal contraception, and after adjustment for age, calendar year, and education, the relative risk of confirmed venous thrombosis in users of transdermal combined contraceptive patches was 7.9 (95% confidence interval 3.5 to 17.7) and of the vaginal ring was 6.5 (4.7 to 8.9). The corresponding incidences per 10 000 exposure years were 9.7 and 7.8 events. The relative risk was increased in women who used subcutaneous implants (1.4, 0.6 to 3.4) but not in those who used the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (0.6, 0.4 to 0.8). Compared with users of combined oral contraceptives containing levonorgestrel, the adjusted relative risk of venous thrombosis in users of transdermal patches was 2.3 (1.0 to 5.2) and of the vaginal ring was 1.9 (1.3 to 2.7).Conclusion Women who use transdermal patches or vaginal rings for contraception have a 7.9 and 6.5 times increased risk of confirmed venous thrombosis compared with non-users of hormonal contraception of the same age, corresponding to 9.7 and 7.8 events per 10 000 exposure years. The risk was slightly increased in women using subcutaneous implants but not in those using the levonorgestrel intrauterine system.

Background Oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) are double agents, which downregulate endogenous concentrations of oestradiol and progesterone whilst simultaneously providing daily supplementation of exogenous oestrogen and progestin during the OCP-taking days. This altered hormonal milieu differs significantly from that of eumenorrheic women and might impact exercise performance, due to changes in ovarian hormone-mediated physiological processes. Objective To explore the effects of OCPs on exercise performance in women and to provide evidence-based performance recommendations to users. Methods This review complied with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A between-group analysis was performed, wherein performance of OCP users was compared with naturally menstruating women, and a within-group analysis was conducted, wherein performance during OCP consumption was compared with OCP withdrawal. For the between-group analysis, women were phase matched in two ways: (1) OCP withdrawal versus the early follicular phase of the menstrual cycle and (2) OCP consumption versus all phases of the menstrual cycle except for the early follicular phase. Study quality was assessed using a modified Downs and Black Checklist and a strategy based on the recommendations of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation working group. All meta-analyses were conducted within a Bayesian framework to facilitate probabilistic interpretations. Results 42 studies and 590 participants were included. Most studies (83%) were graded as moderate, low or very low quality, with 17% achieving high quality. For the between-group meta-analysis comparing OCP users with naturally menstruating women, posterior estimates of the pooled effect were used to calculate the probability of at least a small effect ( d  ≥ 0.2). Across the two between-group comparison methods, the probability of a small effect on performance favouring habitual OCP users was effectually zero ( p  < 0.001). In contrast, the probability of a small effect on performance favouring naturally menstruating women was moderate under comparison method (1) ( d  ≥ 0.2; p  = 0.40) and small under comparison method (2) ( d  ≥ 0.2; p  = 0.19). Relatively large between-study variance was identified for both between-group comparisons ( τ 0.5  = 0.16 [95% credible interval (CrI) 0.01–0.44] and τ 0.5  = 0.22 [95% CrI 0.06–0.45]). For the within-group analysis comparing OCP consumption with withdrawal, posterior estimates of the pooled effect size identified almost zero probability of a small effect on performance in either direction ( d  ≥ 0.2; p  ≤ 0.001). Conclusions OCP use might result in slightly inferior exercise performance on average when compared to naturally menstruating women, although any group-level effect is most likely to be trivial. Practically, as effects tended to be trivial and variable across studies, the current evidence does not warrant general guidance on OCP use compared with non-use. Therefore, when exercise performance is a priority, an individualised approach might be more appropriate. The analysis also indicated that exercise performance was consistent across the OCP cycle.

Purpose of Review We examine recent studies that investigate the effects of hormonal contraception on mood in different populations of women, including women in the general population and women with diagnosed psychiatric and gynecologic disorders. We address the mechanisms of several types of hormonal contraceptives and assess how these may affect mood and gynecologic disorders. Recent Findings The effects of hormonal contraceptives seem to be most relevant in selected subsets of women, as they may promote improved mental health in particular psychiatric disorders such as PMDD. Summary Currently, there is no consistent evidence for negative effects of most hormonal contraceptives in the general population. Even though some studies reveal that certain individuals appear susceptible to negative mood effects from some forms of hormonal contraceptives, more research is needed to better identify these susceptible individuals.

Estrogens and progestogens influence the bone. The major physiological effect of estrogen is the inhibition of bone resorption whereas progestogens exert activity through binding to specific progesterone receptors. New estrogen-free contraceptive and its possible implication on bone turnover are discussed in this review. Insufficient bone acquisition during development and/or accelerated bone loss after attainment of peak bone mass (PBM) are 2 processes that may predispose to fragility fractures in later life. The relative importance of bone acquisition during growth versus bone loss during adulthood for fracture risk has been explored by examining the variability of areal bone mineral density (BMD) (aBMD) values in relation to age. Bone mass acquired at the end of the growth period appears to be more important than bone loss occurring during adult life. The major physiological effect of estrogen is the inhibition of bone resorption. When estrogen transcription possesses binds to the receptors, various genes are activated, and a variety modified. Interleukin 6 (IL-6) stimulates bone resorption, and estrogen blocks osteoblast synthesis of IL-6. Estrogen may also antagonize the IL-6 receptors. Additionally, estrogen inhibits bone resorption by inducing small but cumulative changes in multiple estrogen-dependent regulatory factors including TNF-α and the OPG/RANKL/RANK system. Review on existing data including information about new estrogen-free contraceptives. All progestins exert activity through binding to specific progesterone receptors; hereby, three different groups of progestins exist: pregnanes, gonanes, and estranges. Progestins also comprise specific glucocorticoid, androgen, or mineralocorticoid receptor interactions. Anabolic action of a progestogen may be affected via androgenic, anti-androgenic, or synadrogenic activity. The C 19 nortestosterone class of progestogens is known to bind with more affinity to androgen receptors than the C21 progestins. This article reviews the effect of estrogens and progestogens on bone and presents new data of the currently approved drospirenone-only pill. The use of progestin-only contraceptives leading to an estradiol level between 30 and 50 pg/ml does not seem to lead to an accelerate bone loss.