Impact of obesity on the pharmacokinetics of levonorgestrel-based emergency contraception: single and double dosing

Emergency contraception - A narrative review of literature

BACKGROUND

Emergency contraception includes several methods of contraception that can be used after unprotected sexual intercourse, after failure of any used method of contraception or in case of sexual abuse, to prevent pregnancy.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The aim of the study was to analyze the available methods of emergency contraception, their mechanisms of action, efficacy, forms of administration, clinical applications and possible adverse effects.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane datebases were searched for articles from 2010 to 2024 about emergency contraception.

RESULTS

The analyzed types of emergency contraception included single oral dose of ulipristal acetate, single oral dose of levonorgestrel and intrauterine system releasing levonorgestrel or copper intrauterine device. Taking emergency contraception in the optimum time according to the drug characteristics allows for avoiding pregnancy in more than 90% of cases (depending on the type of emergency contraception and time from unprotected intercourse). The analyzed literature shows that intrauterine copper intrauterine device is the most effective method of emergency contraception, also together with intrauterine system releasing levonorgestrel leading to the lowest rate of adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Taking emergency contraception can result in various adverse effects, therefore it should be introduced after thorough analysis of woman's medical history, including gynecological and obstetric history and potential contraindications. Additionally, the patient should receive detailed information about the drug mechanism of efficacy and potential adverse effects.

Double dosing ulipristal acetate emergency contraception for individuals with obesity: a randomised crossover trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether increasing the dose of ulipristal acetate (UPA)-containing emergency contraception (EC) improves pharmacodynamic outcomes in individuals with obesity.

STUDY DESIGN

We enrolled healthy, regularly-cycling, confirmed ovulatory, reproductive-age individuals with body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m2 and weight >80 kg in a randomised crossover study. We monitored participants with transvaginal ultrasound and blood sampling for progesterone, luteinising hormone (LH), and estradiol every other day until a dominant follicle measuring >15 mm was visualised. At that point, participants received either oral UPA EC 30 mg or 60 mg and returned for daily monitoring up to 7 days. After a no treatment washout cycle, participants returned for a second monitored cycle and received the other UPA dose. Our primary outcome was the proportion of subjects with no follicle rupture 5 days post-dosing (yes/no). For reference, we also enrolled a control group with BMI <25 kg/m2 and weight <80 kg who received UPA EC 30 mg during a single cycle. We also obtained blood samples for pharmacokinetic parameters for UPA and its active metabolite, N-monodemethyl-UPA (NDM-UPA) as an optional substudy.

RESULTS

We enrolled a total of 52 participants with BMI >30 kg/m2 and 12 controls, with the following cycles completed: 12 controls, 49 UPA 30 mg, and 46 UPA 60 mg. The entire cohort demographics were a mean (SD) age of 29.8 (3.4) years and BMI by group: controls 22.5 (1.4) kg/m2, group 1 37.9 (6.7) kg/m2, and group 2 39.3 (5.4) kg/m2. All 12 (100%) of controls had a delay of at least 5 days for follicle rupture. Among the high BMI group, dosing groups (UPA EC 30 mg vs 60 mg) were similar in the proportion of cycles without follicle rupture over 5 days post-UPA dosing (UPA 30 mg: 47/49 (96%), UPA 60 mg: 42/46 (91%), Fisher's exact test p=0.43). However, after excluding cycles where dosing occurred too late (after LH surge), a delay of at least 5 days occurred in all participants at both doses. The 60 mg UPA dose resulted in a twofold increase in maximum observed concentration and the area under the curve of both UPA and NDM-UPA levels compared with 30 mg.

CONCLUSION

A standard 30 mg dose of UPA is sufficient to delay ovulation regardless of BMI or weight. Results of our study do not support dose adjustment for body size.

Emergency contraception for individuals weighing 80 kg or greater: A randomized trial of 30 mg ulipristal acetate and 1.5 mg or 3.0 mg levonorgestrel

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of emergency contraception (EC) regimens used within 72 hours of unprotected intercourse in individuals weighing ≥80 kg.

STUDY DESIGN

We enrolled reproductive-aged healthy women in a multicenter, single-blind, randomized study of levonorgestrel 1.5 mg (LNG1X) and 3.0 mg (LNG2X) and ulipristal acetate 30 mg (UPA) (enrollment goal 1200). Key eligibility requirements included regular cycles, weight >/= 80kg, unprotected intercourse within 72 hours, no recent use of hormonal contraception, a negative urine pregnancy test (UPT), and willingness to abstain from intercourse until next menses. To assess our primary outcome of incidence of pregnancy, participants completed home UPTs; if no menses by 2-weeks post-treatment, or a positive UPT, they returned for an in-person visit with quantitative serum human chorionic gonadotropin and ultrasound.

RESULTS

We enrolled and randomized 532; 44 were not dosed or not evaluable for primary end point, leaving an analyzable sample of 488 (173 LNG1X, 158 LNG2X, 157 UPA) with similar demographics between groups (mean age 29.6 years [5.74], body mass index 37.09 kg/m2 [6.95]). Five pregnancies occurred (LNG1X n = 1, LNG2X n = 1, UPA n = 3); none occurred during the highest at-risk window (day of ovulation and the 3 days prior). We closed the study before achieving our enrollment goal because the low pregnancy rate in all groups established futility based on an interim blinded analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Although slow enrollment limited our study power, we found no differences in pregnancy rates between EC regimens among women weighing 80 kg or more. Our results are not able to refute or support differences between the treatment arms.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clincialtrials.gov Clinical trials#: NCT03537768.

IMPLICATIONS

Women weighing 80 kg or more experienced no differences in pregnancy rates between oral EC regimens but due to several significant study limitations including sample size and the lack of a study population at high risk of pregnancy, our results are not able to determine if differences in treatment effectiveness exist.

Pharmacodynamic evaluation of the etonogestrel contraceptive implant initiated midcycle with and without ulipristal acetate: An exploratory study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the incidence of ovulation suppression within five days of etonogestrel 68 mg implant insertion in the presence of a dominant follicle with and without same-day ulipristal acetate.

STUDY DESIGN

This single site non-masked, exploratory randomized trial recruited people age 18-35 years with regular menstrual cycles, no pregnancy risk, and confirmed ovulatory function. We initiated transvaginal ultrasound examinations on menstrual day 7-9 and randomized participants 1:1 to etonogestrel implant alone or with concomitant ulipristal acetate 30 mg oral when a dominant follicle reached ≥14 mm in diameter. We completed daily sonography and serum hormone levels for up to seven days or transitioned to labs alone if sonographic follicular rupture occurred. We defined ovulation as follicular rupture followed by progesterone >3 ng/mL. We calculated point estimates, risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals for ovulation for each group. Ovulation suppression of ≥44% in either group (the follicular rupture suppression rate with oral levonorgestrel emergency contraception), would prompt future method testing.

RESULTS

From October 2020 to October 2022, we enrolled 40 people and 39 completed primary outcome assessments: 20 with etonogestrel implant alone (mean follicular size at randomization: 15.2 mm ± 0.9 mm) and 19 with etonogestrel implant + ulipristal acetate (mean follicular size at randomization: 15.4 mm ± 1.2 mm, p = 0.6). Ovulation suppression occurred in 13 (65%) of etonogestrel implant-alone participants (Risk ratio 0.6 (95% CI: 0.3, 1.1), p = 0.08) and seven (37%) of implant + ulipristal acetate participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Ovulation suppression of the etonogestrel implant alone exceeds threshold testing for future research while the implant + ulipristal acetate does not.

IMPLICATIONS

Data are lacking on midcycle ovulation suppression for the etonogestrel implant with and without oral ulipristal acetate. In this exploratory study, ovulation suppression occurred in 65% of implant participants and 37% of implant + ulipristal acetate participants. Ovulation suppression of the implant alone exceeds threshold testing for future emergency contraception research.

A randomized trial of double vs single-dose etonogestrel implant to overcome the interaction with efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy

BACKGROUND

Concomitant use of efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy and a standard-dose etonogestrel contraceptive implant led to 82% lower etonogestrel exposure when compared with women who do not receive antiretroviral therapy. The clinical impact of this reduced exposure is supported by retrospective cohort evaluations that demonstrated higher rates of unintended pregnancies when contraceptive implants were combined with efavirenz. We hypothesized that placement of 2 etonogestrel implants in those taking efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy could increase etonogestrel exposure and improve measures of contraceptive efficacy.

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the rate of ovulation and etonogestrel pharmacokinetics among women on efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy who received 2 etonogestrel implants (136 mg; double implant group) in comparison with those who received 1 etonogestrel implant (68 mg; control group).

STUDY DESIGN

This randomized, open-label study enrolled Ugandan women with regular menstrual periods who were receiving efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy for the treatment of HIV. Participants were randomized 1:1 to the double implant or control group, and the etonogestrel implant(s) were placed in the same arm at enrollment. All participants used a copper intrauterine device to prevent pregnancy. Ovulation was evaluated by weekly serum progesterone concentrations measured over 4 consecutive weeks at months 3 (weeks 9-12), 6 (weeks 21-24), and 12 (weeks 45-48). Progesterone concentrations >3 ng/mL were interpreted as ovulation. The ovulation rate in each group was compared using Fisher's exact tests for each month and generalized estimating equations over 48 weeks. Plasma was collected at day 3 and weeks 1, 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 after implant placement and analyzed using a validated liquid chromatography-triple quadrupole mass spectrometry method for etonogestrel. Etonogestrel concentrations were summarized as median (interquartile range) and compared between groups by geometric mean ratio with 90% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

All participants (n=72) were cisgender Ugandan women with a median age of 31 years (interquartile range, 29-36), and 36 participants were enrolled in each study group. Two participants in the control group discontinued the trial; 1 at week 1 because of undetected pregnancy at entry and another at week 45 because of clinically significant depression. There were 47 ovulations over 104 person-months (45%) in 25 of 34 participants in the control group, and 2 ovulations over 108 person-months (2%) in 2 of 36 participants in the double implant group (month 3: 11 [31%] vs 0 [0%]; month 6: 17 [49%] vs 0 [0%]; month 12: 19 [56%] vs 2 [6%], respectively; all P<.001). The odds of ovulation were reduced by 97.7% (95% confidence interval, 90.1-99.5) in the double implant group over 48 weeks. At each time point, etonogestrel concentration was more than 2-fold higher in the double implant group than in the controls (geometric mean ratio, 2.30-2.83) with a geometric mean ratio of 2.83 (90% confidence interval, 1.89-3.35) at week 48. There were no differences in the adverse events between groups and no participant discontinued because of adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Over 48 weeks of combined use, placing 2 etonogestrel implants suppressed ovulation and increased plasma etonogestrel exposure when compared with 1 etonogestrel implant among women on efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy. Doubling the dose of etonogestrel during efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy could improve contraceptive effectiveness.

The efficacy, safety, and tolerability of an estrogen-free oral contraceptive drospirenone 4 mg (24/4-day regimen) in obese users

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare contraceptive efficacy and safety of drospirenone 4 mg in a 24/4-day regimen in nonobese and obese users and describe pharmacokinetics according to bodyweight.

STUDY DESIGN

We analyzed data from three drospirenone 4 mg trials (2 European and 1 United States) to report outcomes in nonobese (body mass index <30 kg/m2) and obese (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2) users. We used data from the US trial to calculate the Pearl Index (pregnancies per 100 woman-years) in nonbreastfeeding participants aged ≤35 years at enrollment for confirmed pregnancies. We assessed safety outcomes from all trials based on reported treatment-emergent adverse events. We evaluated pharmacokinetics by bodyweight in the US trial.

RESULTS

The three trials combined comprised 2152 nonobese and 425 obese participants, including 590 nonobese and 325 obese participants in the US trial. Eight nonobese and four obese participants had confirmed pregnancies in the US trial, resulting in Pearl Indices of 3.0 (95% CI: 1.3-5.8) and 2.9 (95% CI: 0.8-7.3), respectively. Two-hundred forty-four (11.3%) nonobese and 39 (9.2%) obese participants discontinued due to a treatment-emergent adverse event. The pharmacokinetic analysis included 814 participants with a median weight of 73 (interquartile range 61-89) kg and median plasma drospirenone exposure (AUC0-24ss) of 661.3 (interquartile range 522-828) ng∙h/mL. Changing bodyweight from the median to the fifth percentile (51 kg) or 95th percentile (118 kg) changed drospirenone exposure (AUC0-24,ss) by 22.2% and -23.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Drospirenone 4 mg demonstrated similar contraceptive efficacy for both nonobese and obese users despite a difference in exposure based on bodyweight.

IMPLICATIONS

Our limited comparison between obese and nonobese users of drospirenone-only oral contraception demonstrated no evidence that efficacy or discontinuation for adverse events differs between groups. Serum drospirenone levels vary by bodyweight and may correlate with bleeding outcomes.

An overview of contraception in women with obesity

The use of safe and effective contraception is essential for preventing unplanned pregnancy in women of all body sizes. When counseling women with obesity about contraception, it is important to consider the pharmacokinetic alterations of obesity on various modern contraceptive methods. However, evidence is reassuring that most contraceptive methods are safe and effective in women with obesity. Individual countries and the World Health Organization have published Medical Eligibility Criteria to guide contraceptive selection in women with medical issues including obesity. When choosing contraception, specific risks of the method relative to any underlying medical disorders must also be balanced against the risks of unintended pregnancy in this group.

Incomplete Data and Potential Risks of Drugs in People with Obesity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide examples of knowledge gaps in current pharmaceutical treatments for people with obesity and call for changes to regulatory and pharmaceutical clinical research requirements during the drug discovery and development process.

RECENT FINDINGS

Treatment of obesity and its comorbidities often require the use of prescription drugs, many of which have not been fully evaluated in people with obesity. Despite a growing body of research on this topic, the impact of obesity on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of drugs is often under-studied by drug sponsors and regulators, and subsequently underappreciated by clinicians and caretakers. There are currently multiple opportunities for pharmaceuticals to include dosing information specifically for patients with obesity in order to ensure safety and efficacy of drugs in this population. Additionally, there are serious gaps between what is known about the effects of obesity on drug disposition and the current use of drugs according to drug prescribing information and clinical practice. There is currently no requirement to test drugs in people with obesity during the drug approval process, even when preliminary data suggests there may be altered kinetics in this population. The lack of information on the safe and effective use of drugs in people with obesity may be contributing to poorer health outcomes in this population.

Pharmacogenetic interactions of efavirenz or rifampin and isoniazid with levonorgestrel emergency contraception during treatment of HIV or tuberculosis

OBJECTIVE

In AIDS Clinical Trials Group study A5375, a pharmacokinetic trial of levonorgestrel emergency contraception, double-dose levonorgestrel (3 mg, versus standard dose 1.5 mg) offset the induction effects of efavirenz or rifampin on plasma levonorgestrel exposure over 8 h post-dose (AUC 0-8h ). We characterized the pharmacogenetics of these interactions.

METHODS

Cisgender women receiving efavirenz- or dolutegravir-based HIV therapy, or on isoniazid-rifampin for tuberculosis, were followed after a single oral dose of levonorgestrel. Linear regression models, adjusted for BMI and age, characterized associations of CYP2B6 and NAT2 genotypes (which affect plasma efavirenz and isoniazid exposure, respectively) with levonorgestrel pharmacokinetic parameters.

RESULTS

Of 118 evaluable participants, 17 received efavirenz/levonorgestrel 1.5 mg, 35 efavirenz/levonorgestrel 3 mg, 34 isoniazid-rifampin/levonorgestrel 3 mg, and 32 (control group) dolutegravir/levonorgestrel 1.5 mg. There were 73 Black and 33 Asian participants. Regardless of genotype, women on efavirenz and isoniazid-rifampin had higher levonorgestrel clearance. In the efavirenz/levonorgestrel 3 mg group, CYP2B6 normal/intermediate metabolizers had levonorgestrel AUC 0-8h values similar to controls, while CYP2B6 poor metabolizers had AUC 0-8h values of 40% lower than controls. In the isoniazid-rifampin group, NAT2 rapid/intermediate acetylators had levonorgestrel AUC 0-8h values similar to controls, while NAT2 slow acetylators had AUC 0-8h values 36% higher than controls.

CONCLUSION

CYP2B6 poor metabolizer genotypes exacerbate the efavirenz-levonorgestrel interaction, likely by increased CYP3A induction with higher efavirenz exposure, making the interaction more difficult to overcome. NAT2 slow acetylator genotypes attenuate the rifampin-levonorgestrel interaction, likely by increased CYP3A inhibition with higher isoniazid exposure.

Pharmacokinetics of dose-adjusted levonorgestrel emergency contraception combined with efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy or rifampicin-containing tuberculosis regimens

OBJECTIVES

To determine if double-dose levonorgestrel emergency contraception (EC) in combination with efavirenz or rifampicin, 2 drugs known to decrease levonorgestrel exposure, resulted in similar pharmacokinetics compared to standard-dose levonorgestrel EC without drug-drug interactions.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a phase 2, open-label, multicenter, partially randomized, 4 parallel group trial in pre-menopausal females ≥16 years old without an indication for EC and not on hormonal contraception. Participants on dolutegravir-based antiretroviral therapy (ART) received levonorgestrel 1.5 mg (control group); those on rifampicin-containing tuberculosis therapy received levonorgestrel 3 mg; those on efavirenz-based ART were randomized 1:2 to levonorgestrel 1.5 mg or 3 mg. Plasma was collected through 48 hours post-dose to assess levonorgestrel pharmacokinetics. Area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) over 8 hours was the primary outcome. Levonorgestrel pharmacokinetic parameters were compared between groups using geometric mean ratios (GMR) with 90% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

The median (Q1, Q3) age for all participants (n = 118) was 34 (27, 41) years and BMI was 23.2 (20, 26.3) kg/m2. Participants receiving levonorgestrel 1.5mg plus efavirenz (n = 17) had 50% lower AUC0-8h compared to the control group (n = 32) [0.50 (0.40, 0.62)]. Participants receiving levonorgestrel 3 mg had a similar AUC0-8h when receiving either efavirenz (n = 35) [0.99 (0.81, 1.20)] or rifampicin (n = 34) [1.16 (0.99, 1.36)] compared to control. Levonorgestrel 3 mg resulted in similar or higher maximum concentration with either efavirenz [1.17 (0.96, 1.41)] or rifampicin [1.27 (1.09, 1.49)] compared to the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Doubling the dose of levonorgestrel EC successfully increased levonorgestrel exposure over the first 8 hours in participants receiving either efavirenz-based ART or rifampicin-containing tuberculosis therapy.

IMPLICATIONS

Adjusting levonorgestrel emergency contraception from 1.5 mg to 3 mg improves levonorgestrel pharmacokinetic exposure in participants receiving either efavirenz-based antiretroviral regimens or rifampicin-containing tuberculosis therapy. These data support guideline recommendations to double the dose of levonorgestrel emergency contraception in persons on medications that decrease levonorgestrel exposure by inducing levonorgestrel metabolism.

Effect of double-dose levonorgestrel subdermal implant in women taking efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy: The DoubLNG pharmacokinetic study

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the pharmacokinetics of double-dose levonorgestrel (LNG) implants to overcome the drug-drug interaction with efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy (ART).

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a nonrandomized, open-label, parallel-group, longitudinal pharmacokinetic study among Ugandan women ages 18-45 years. Participants with HIV on ART containing efavirenz 600 mg received 300 mg of LNG implants (Jadelle®, Bayer, New Zealand): 300LNG+ART group. We compared our outcomes with women without HIV using standard dose, 150 mg of LNG implants: 150LNG group. The implant was placed on day zero in both groups, and we quantified plasma LNG concentrations over 48 weeks post implant insertion. LNG pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated using noncompartmental techniques. Our primary outcome was the geometric mean ratio with 90% confidence intervals of LNG area under the concentration-time curve over 24 weeks (AUC_0-24w) between groups. Demographic data were described as median (interquartile range). A secondary outcome compared between-group percent of LNG concentrations ≥300 pg/mL, a minimum threshold selected a priori based on observed pregnancies in Ugandan women on standard-dose LNG implants plus efavirenz.

RESULTS

We enrolled 27 women in the 300LNG+ART group (34 [28.0 to 40.5] years and 61.0 [49.8-66.0] kg) and 19 women in the 150LNG group (33 [30.0 to 34.5] years and 64.9 [59.0 to 74.5] kg). LNG AUC_0-24w was 34% lower for 300LNG+ART versus 150LNG (geometric mean 9998 vs. 15,231 pg*week/mL, respectively [geometric mean ratio 0.66 (90% confidence intervals, 0.54 to 0.80)]). The percentage of participants with LNG concentrations ≥300 pg/mL was not statistically different between groups at week 24 (300LNG+ART: 74.1%; 150LNG: 89.5%; p = 0.27).

CONCLUSION

Double-dose LNG implant did not completely overcome the drug-drug interaction with efavirenz.

IMPLICATION

In women using ART containing efavirenz, placing two implant systems (300 mg) did not normalize LNG pharmacokinetics compared with the standard-dose implant (150 mg), and some women had evidence of ovulatory activity. Alternative ART without drug-drug interactions, such as dolutegravir, is recommended with contraceptive implants.

Contraceptive methods in adolescence: a narrative review of guidelines

PURPOSE

Adolescent pregnancy, while recently in decline, remains a matter in need of addressing. Education and counselling are deemed crucial and this review aims at comparing published contraceptive guidelines, thus resolving any surrounding misconceptions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Recently published contraception guidelines regarding adolescent pregnancy were retrieved. In particular, guidelines and recommendations from ACOG, RCOG, SOCG, AAP, CPS, NICE, CDC, and WHO were compared and reviewed based on each guideline's method of reporting.

RESULTS

Three categories of contraceptive methods are available for adolescents and recommendations on their initiation should be made based on their efficacy, according to all guidelines. Therefore, long acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) should be highly recommended as the most effective method (typical use failure rate: 0.05%), followed by short-acting hormonal contraceptives (typical use failure rate: 3-9%). The third contraceptive option includes contraceptives used in the moment of intercourse and displays the lowest effectiveness (typical use failure rate: 12-25%), mostly due to its dependence on personal consistency, however offers protection against STI transmission.

CONCLUSION

Adolescents should be encouraged to initiate contraception, with LARCs being the primary choice followed by short-acting hormonal contraception. However, regardless of the chosen effective contraceptive method, the use of condom is necessary for STI prevention.

Society of Family Planning Clinical Recommendation: Emergency contraception

Emergency contraception (EC) refers to several contraceptive options that can be used within a few days after unprotected or under protected intercourse or sexual assault to reduce the risk of pregnancy. Current EC options available in the United States include the copper intrauterine device (IUD), levonorgestrel (LNG) 52 mg IUD, oral LNG (such as Plan B One-Step, My Way, Take Action), and oral ulipristal acetate (UPA) (ella). These clinical recommendations review the indications, effectiveness, safety, and side effects of emergency contraceptive methods; considerations for the use of EC by specific patient populations and in specific clinical circumstances and current barriers to emergency contraceptive access. Further research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of LNG IUDs for emergency contraceptive use; address the effects of repeated use of UPA at different times in the same menstrual cycle; assess the impact on ovulation of initiating or reinitiating different regimens of regular hormonal contraception following UPA use; and elucidate effective emergency contraceptive pill options by body mass indices or weight.

Management of obesity across women's life course: FIGO Best Practice Advice

Obesity is a chronic, progressive, relapsing, and treatable multifactorial, neurobehavioral disease. According to the World Health Organization, obesity affects 15% of women and has long-term effects on women's health. The focus of care in patients with obesity should be on optimizing health outcomes rather than on weight loss. Appropriate and common language, considering cultural sensitivity and trauma-informed care, is needed to discuss obesity. Pregnancy is a time of significant physiological change. Pre-, ante-, and postpartum clinical encounters provide opportunities for health optimization for parents with obesity in terms of, but not limited to, fertility and breastfeeding. Pre-existing conditions may also be identified and managed. Beyond pregnancy, women with obesity are at an increased risk for gastrointestinal and liver diseases, impaired kidney function, obstructive sleep apnea, and venous thromboembolism. Gynecological and reproductive health of women living with obesity cannot be dismissed, with accommodations needed for preventive health screenings and consideration of increased risk for gynecologic malignancies. Mental wellness, specifically depression, should be screened and managed appropriately. Obesity is a complex condition and is increasing in prevalence with failure of public health interventions to achieve significant decrease. Future research efforts should focus on interprofessional care and discovering effective interventions for health optimization.

Best Practice Contraception Care for Women with Obesity: A Review of Current Evidence

The prevalence of obesity among females of reproductive age is increasing globally. Access to the complete range of appropriate contraceptive options is essential for upholding the reproductive rights of this population group. People with obesity can experience stigma and discrimination when seeking healthcare, and despite limited evidence for provider bias in the context of contraception, awareness for its potential at an individual provider and health systems level is essential. While use of some hormonal contraceptives may be restricted due to increased health risks in people with obesity, some methods provide noncontraceptive benefits including a reduced risk of endometrial cancer and a reduction in heavy menstrual bleeding which are more prevalent among individuals with obesity. In addition to examining systems-based approaches which facilitate the provision of inclusive contraceptive care, including long-acting reversible contraceptives which require procedural considerations, this article reviews current evidence on method-specific advantages and disadvantages for people with obesity to guide practice and policy.

Double Dosing Levonorgestrel-Based Emergency Contraception for Individuals With Obesity: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Increasing the dose of levonorgestrel-containing emergency contraception from 1.5 mg to 3 mg did not improve rates of ovulation delay in individuals with obesity.

OBJECTIVE:

To assess whether dose escalation (ie, doubling the dose) of emergency contraception that contains levonorgestrel (LNG) improves pharmacodynamic outcomes in individuals with obesity.

METHODS:

We enrolled healthy, reproductive-age individuals with regular menstrual cycles, body mass index (BMI) higher than 30, and weight at least 176 lbs in a randomized pharmacodynamic study. After confirming ovulation (luteal progesterone level greater than 3 ng/mL), we monitored participants with transvaginal ultrasonography and blood sampling for progesterone, luteinizing hormone, and estradiol every other day until a dominant follicle measuring 15 mm or greater was visualized. At that point, participants received either oral emergency contraception with LNG 1.5 mg or 3 mg (double dose) and returned for daily monitoring for up to 7 days. Our primary outcome was the difference in the proportion of participants with no follicle rupture 5 days postdosing (yes or no) between groups. The study had 80% power to detect a 30% difference in the proportion of cycles with at least a 5-day delay in follicle rupture (50% decrease).

RESULTS:

A total of 70 enrolled and completed study procedures. The two groups had similar baseline demographics (mean age 28 years, BMI 38). We found no difference between groups in the proportion of participants without follicle rupture more than 5 days post–LNG dosing (LNG 1.5 mg: 18/35 [51.4%]; LNG 3.0 mg: 24/35 [68.6%], P=.14). Among participants with follicle rupture before 5 days, the time to rupture did not differ between groups (day at 75% probability of no rupture is day 2 for both groups).

CONCLUSION:

Individuals with higher BMIs and weights experience a higher risk of failure of emergency contraception with LNG and exhibit an altered pharmacokinetic profile. However, the simple strategy of doubling the dose does not appear to be an effective intervention to improve outcomes.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:

ClinicalTrials.gov, 02859337.

The use of serum segesterone acetate levels to assess adherence of trial participants with a contraceptive vaginal ring

OBJECTIVE(S)

To determine the incidence of out-of-range segesterone acetate (NES) concentrations in participants of a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic trial of a continuous use contraceptive vaginal ring (CVR) releasing NES and estradiol (E2). We hypothesized that out-of-range concentrations reflect nonadherent ring use and predict ovulation risk.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a prospective, multi-centered, randomized, Phase IIa dose-finding trial for a CVR releasing NES and E2. Our primary outcome was the risk of ovulation associated with out-of-range NES events. We calculated the 5th and 95th percentile NES concentrations of subjects at steady state to determine high and low cutoffs. We used a Fisher's exact test to determine group differences, and calculated the relative risk of ovulation for each group.

RESULTS

We analyzed available serum NES data from cycles 2 (n=172), 3 (n=156) and 7 (n=115) to determine the 5th and 95th percentile of all NES concentrations (64, 296 pg/mL). In the 443 cycles of observation, no ovulations occurred in participants with NES concentrations within the expected range. In contrast, we found ovulatory elevations of progesterone in 21 cycles with out-of-range values. Of these, 15 (71%) cycles had evidence of one or more nonadherent low and 6 (29%) one or more unexpected peak. The relative risk of ovulation increased with evidence of multiple non-adherent levels.

CONCLUSION(S)

We found out-of-range NES concentrations, suggestive of improper use of a CVR associated with an increased risk of ovulation, with a direct relationship between the number of out-of-range events and the relative risk.

IMPLICATIONS

The results of this study support the use of out-of-range serum NES values as a marker of adherence in contraceptive clinical trials of continuous vaginal rings, and suggest that non-adherence occurs even in early phase clinical trials with close monitoring.

The new low-dose transdermal contraceptive system (Twirla®): results from preclinical and Phase III trials

A new low-dose, once-a-week contraceptive transdermal delivery system (TDS) with 2.3-mg ethinyl estradiol (EE) and 2.6-mg levonorgestrel (LNG; Twirla^®) has recently been approved by the US FDA for contraception of women with BMI <30 kg/m². The rationale for developing this new patch, the preclinical study results and the results from two innovative Phase III clinical trials demonstrate that this patch has an acceptable Pearl index (4.3%) for its indicated users and has safety and tolerability comparable to other similar dose oral combined hormonal contraceptives. This new TDS provides an improvement over the existing TDS products, with significantly lower steady-state estrogen exposure, a level equal to that with 30-µg EE containing oral contraceptives.

Contraception for Women With Psychiatric Disorders

OBJECTIVE

Mental health care for women includes decision support to prepare for major life events, including preconception planning for treatment during pregnancy and the postpartum period. The authors discuss contraceptive choices and their effectiveness, side effects, and impact on psychiatric symptoms. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's recommendations, Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, provided the structure for review of contraceptive choices.

METHODS

A search of PsycINFO, PubMed, Embase, and Scopus was conducted for publications on the management of contraception for women with mental illness. Publications were selected if they included, based on the authors' consensus, data supporting evidence-based care important for psychiatrists who treat women desiring contraceptives.

RESULTS

The majority of women choose combined oral contraceptives. Although long-acting reversible contraceptives (implants, intrauterine devices) are associated with low failure rates, favorable safety profiles, rapid return to fertility after removal, and few contraindications, they are chosen by only 14% of women. All methods are acceptable for women with depression, although medical comorbidities may dictate a specific type. The impact of hormonal contraceptives on the risk for depression is controversial; however, clinical studies and randomized placebo-controlled trials of women with psychiatric disorders have generally reported similar or lower rates of mood symptoms in hormonal contraceptive users compared with nonusers. Although interactions between psychotropic drugs and contraceptives are rare, clozapine, anticonvulsants, and St. John's Wort are exceptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Proactive management of mental illness, contraception, and pregnancy improves a woman's capacity to function and optimizes her mental and reproductive health.

Quantitative Assessment of Levonorgestrel Binding Partner Interplay and Drug-Drug Interactions Using Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling

Levonorgestrel (LNG) is the active moiety in many hormonal contraceptive formulations. It is typically coformulated with ethinyl estradiol (EE) to decrease intermenstrual bleeding. Due to its widespread use and CYP3A4‐mediated metabolism, there is concern regarding drug‐drug interactions (DDIs), particularly a suboptimal LNG exposure when co‐administered with CYP3A4 inducers, potentially leading to unintended pregnancies. The goal of this analysis was to determine the impact of DDIs on the systemic exposure of LNG. To this end, we developed and verified a physiologically‐based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model for LNG in PK‐Sim (version 8.0) accounting for the impact of EE and body mass index (BMI) on LNG’s binding to sex‐hormone binding globulin. Model parameters were optimized following intravenous and oral administration of 0.09 mg LNG. The combined LNG‐EE PBPK model was verified regarding CYP3A4‐mediated interaction by comparing to published clinical DDI study data with carbamazepine, rifampicin, and efavirenz (CYP3A4 inducers). Once verified, the model was applied to predict systemic LNG exposure in normal BMI and obese women (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²) with and without co‐administration of itraconazole (competitive CYP3A4 inhibitor) and clarithromycin (mechanism‐based CYP3A4 inhibitor). Total and free LNG exposures, when co‐administered with EE, decreased 2‐fold in the presence of rifampin, whereas they increased 1.5‐fold in the presence of itraconazole. Although changes in total and unbound exposure were decreased in obese women compared with normal BMI women, the relative impact of DDIs on LNG exposure was similar between both groups.

Pharmacokinetics of Hormonal Contraception in Individuals with Obesity: a Review

Purpose of Review

Obesity continues to affect many women globally. In the USA, almost 40% of all women are obese and many of these women use hormonal contraception for pregnancy prevention. How well hormonal contraceptive works for these individuals has been an area of ongoing research. Pharmacokinetics (PK), the study of drug passage through the body, can shed light on how differences in physiology between obese and non-obese populations can impact drug disposition and subsequent efficacy. This review aims to reflect on these types of studies and empower clinicians with information to help tackle the challenges of the obesity epidemic and help them provide the best contraceptive options to their patients. Here, we present the basics of the mechanisms of action of hormonal contraception, fundamental pharmacokinetic principles, and the latest research into pharmacokinetics, obesity, and hormonal contraception.

Recent Findings

New studies focused on the PK of hormonal contraception in women with obesity have shown that while there are distinct differences in how steroid hormones are processed in women with different body mass indices, contraceptive efficacy is likely the same. This is replicated in studies involving a variety of hormonal contraceptive methods.

Summary

PK studies allow for a detailed analysis of steroid hormone processing in individuals with obesity. Observing PK parameters at each stage of the passage of these hormones through the body, researchers have drilled down on physiologic differences that accompany obesity. In reviewing these PK parameter differences, however, it appears that while processes are different, the end result of pregnancy prevention is likely not compromised in the setting of obesity. Emergency contraception, which functions by a different mechanism from that of continuous hormonal contraception, is the one area in which obesity has been demonstrated to impact efficacy.

Levonorgestrel emergency contraception and bodyweight: are current recommendations consistent with historic data?

Objective

To assess the consistency between current recommendations that women of body weight (BW) or body mass index (BMI) above a defined threshold should use a double dose of levonorgestrel (LNG) for emergency contraception (EC) and observed frequency of pregnancy in historic studies of single-dose LNG for EC.

Methods

We applied double dose recommendation criteria to individual participant level data from three historic studies of the WHO’s Human Reproductive Program to categorize subjects into single dose-recommended (SDR) and double dose-recommended (DDR) groups and compared the latter to the former using pregnancy risk ratios (RR).

Results

A total of 5859 subjects with 59 pregnancies made up the full dataset. Depending on the recommendation source (USA or UK) and inclusion or exclusion of heavy outlier data, DDR criteria were satisfied by 3.7% to 18.9% of subjects. Pregnancy proportions were mostly lower in DDR than in SDR subjects, with risk ratio estimates ranging from zero to 1.17, exceeding unity only when the USA criterion was used with outliers included. DDR subjects had a significantly lower relative frequency of pregnancy than SDR subjects when the UK criteria were used and outliers excluded (RR = 0.17 [95% CI: 0.04; 0.70], p = .0024).

Conclusions

Our findings are consistent with the notion that there is no real loss of pregnancy control with single-dose LNG-EC in high-BMI and/or high-BW users, and today’s double dose recommendations were prematurely issued and remain questionable.

"My BMI is too high for Plan B." A changing population of women seeking ulipristal acetate emergency contraception online

Emergency contraceptive (EC) pills may be less effective for women with higher body mass index (BMI), but little is known about public response to the fact that EC may lose efficacy as weight increases. In November 2013, European authorities changed the label for a levonorgestrel EC product to warn of a reduction in effectiveness for women with higher BMI, garnering significant media coverage in the United States. Ulipristal acetate (UPA) EC may be more effective than levonorgestrel for women with BMI levels designated as obese. Among 8,019 women who received UPA from the online pharmacy KwikMed from 2011 to 2015 and self-reported their height, weight and reasons for seeking UPA online, we analyzed changes in the proportion of women in different BMI categories before and after the label change. For the 25 month-period after the label change, the proportion of women in the obese category rose by 26.7 percentage points relative to the 35 months before (B = 0.2665, p < .01). Mean BMI (25.5 versus 29.4, p < .001) and average weight (148.6 pounds versus 175.5 pounds, p < .001) of users were higher after the label change. Some women appear to have acted on the information that EC efficacy may be associated with body weight.

Influence of obesity on pharmacokinetics and analgesic effect of ketoprofen administered intravenously to patients after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Ketoprofen is an analgesic drug commonly applied in the postoperative period, e.g., to patients after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Many patients who undergo this procedure are obese. As pathophysiological changes are observed in obesity, the efficacy of ketoprofen may be altered in this group of patients. The aim of the study was to compare the pharmacokinetic parameters and analgesic effect of ketoprofen administered to obese and non-obese patients after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

The study was conducted on 41 patients after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, who were divided into two groups: obese (n = 21) and non-obese (n = 20). Ketoprofen was administered intravenously at a dose of 100 mg. Plasma ketoprofen concentrations were measured by means of validated high-performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection. The pharmacokinetic parameters of the drug were calculated using the non-compartmental method. Additionally, pain intensity was assessed during the study using NRS scale.

RESULTS

The obese patients had significantly lower AUC_0-∞ (1.4-fold), AUMC_0-t (1.8-fold), AUMC_0-∞ (3.2-fold), MRT_0-t (1.4-fold), MRT_0-∞ (2.3-fold), t_0.5 (2.3-fold) and V_z/kg (2.3-fold) and higher k_el (2.2-fold) than the non-obese group. Moreover, 4 h and 6 h after the administration of the drug, pain intensity was significantly higher in the obese patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The drug was eliminated faster and the analgesic effect of ketoprofen in the obese patients was decreased as compared with the non-obese subjects. However, pain intensity did not increase to the level, which required additional analgesic treatment. Therefore, it seems that dosage adjustment of intravenous ketoprofen is not necessary in obese patients.

Emergency contraception and impact on abortion rates

Emergency contraception (EC) is a drug or a device that is taken after sexual intercourse to prevent unintended pregnancy. The most effective EC is the copper-bearing intrauterine device (Cu-IUD), but oral EC methods are more commonly used and include a single dose of either levonorgestrel (1.5 mg) or ulipristal acetate (30 mg). Although all EC methods are extremely safe, access to EC is often limited due to prevailing misconceptions over how EC works. Although EC can prevent unintended pregnancy for an individual woman, it has failed to make an impact on abortion rates at a population level. This may be because it is not used after every episode of unprotected sex and because existing oral EC methods are only effective if used before ovulation. Future strategies around EC should focus on maximising uptake of Cu-IUD, facilitating initiation of effective regular contraception after EC and developing a more effective oral EC.

Levonorgestrel emergency contraception and bodyweight

Objectives: Emergency contraception (EC) provides an opportunity to avoid an unwanted pregnancy following unprotected sexual intercourse (UPSI), failure of a regular contraceptive method, or after sexual assault. Two main methods are currently available: oral pills or the copper-T intrauterine device. In recent years there has been some debate regarding the efficacy of oral therapy in obese women. In this brief commentary we review new evidence, published after the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) referral of 2014, relating to the effect of obesity on the pharmacokinetics and clinical efficacy of levonorgestrel EC in light of some of the concerns that have been raised. Methods: A PubMed literature search ("levonorgestrel" and "emergency contraception") was conducted between 1 January 2005 to 31 March 2018; results from the main clinical trials are discussed. Additional literature known to the authors and identified from the reference lists of cited publications was included. Results: Overall, it should be noted that, in studies which determined pregnancy rates across different weight or BMI categories, the overall pregnancy rate was low (1-2%) and there was no direct evidence that lower levonorgestrel plasma levels contributed to an increased pregnancy rate in obese women. This conclusion was reached by the EMA referral in 2014 and they concluded that emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs) could be taken regardless of body weight or BMI, as soon as possible after UPSI. Since the EMA review, additional evidence has been published regarding this topic. This includes PK data (which can neither support, nor deny the previously submitted meta-analyses during the Article 31 Referral procedure), or re-analyses of the previously submitted data. Conclusions: Evidence published since the EMA referral in 2014 does not change the original conclusions of the agency, which recommended that ECPs could be taken regardless of body weight or BMI, as soon as possible after UPSI.

Comparing cervical mucus changes in response to an oral progestin or oestrogen withdrawal in ovarian-suppressed women: a clinical pilot

Purpose: Prior studies evaluating the effect of administered progestogens on peak cervical mucus have not controlled for the influence of endogenous hormones. To address this, we treated women with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist to suppress the hypothalamus-pituitary-ovarian (HPO) axis and used transdermal oestradiol replacement to stimulate peak cervical mucus and then evaluated the effects of an oral progestin or oestradiol withdrawal. Materials and methods: We used a crossover design to examine cervical mucus changes in women receiving transdermal oestradiol replacement following intramuscular administration of leuprolide acetate. After increasing oestradiol patches to mid-cycle levels, subjects were assigned to either 0.35 mg oral norethindrone with continuation of the patches (NET) or oestradiol withdrawal by patch removal (E2WD). We collected serum and cervical mucus samples at 0, 2, 4, 6, 22 and 24 h following the intervention. Results: We analysed 12 cycles (6 NET, 6 E2WD) from three subjects. Baseline cervical mucus scores were favourable to sperm penetration [NET median 11, interquartile range (9-12), E2WD 13 (12-13)]. Two hours after removal of oestradiol patch or administration of norethindrone, cervical mucus scores declined [NET 8.5 (4-9), E2WD 10.5 (10-12)]. Low cervical mucus scores persisted at 24 h with NET [8.0 (7-8)] but not E2WD [10.5 (8-11)]. Conclusions: We observed a rapid decline in cervical mucus Insler scores following administration of a single dose of oral norethindrone, and scores remained lower and unfavourable through 24 h. Oestradiol withdrawal did not result in similar unfavourable changes.

Ulipristal acetate compared to levonorgestrel emergency contraception among current oral contraceptive users: a cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of ulipristal acetate (UPA) and levonorgestrel (LNG) emergency contraception (EC) on pregnancy prevention among combined oral contraceptive (COC) pill users with an extended pill-free interval. We accounted for the potential interaction of COCs and obesity on EC efficacy.

METHODS

We built a decision-analytic model using TreeAge software to evaluate the optimal oral EC strategy in a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 twenty-five-year-old women midcycle with a prolonged "missed" pill episode (8-14 days). We used a 5-year time horizon and 3% discount rate. From a healthcare perspective, we obtained probabilities, utilities and costs inflated to 2018 dollars from the literature. We set the threshold for cost-effectiveness at a standard $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. We included the following clinical outcomes: number of protected cycles, unintended pregnancies, abortions, deliveries and costs.

RESULTS

We found that UPA was the optimal method of oral EC, as it resulted in 720 fewer unintended pregnancies, 736 fewer abortions and 80 fewer deliveries at a total cost savings of $50,323 and 79 additional adjusted life-years. UPA continued to be the optimal strategy even in the case of obesity or COCs impacting UPA efficacy, in which a COC interaction would have to change efficacy of UPA by 160% before LNG was the dominant strategy.

CONCLUSION

Our models found that UPA was the dominant choice of oral EC among COC users with a prolonged "missed" pill episode, regardless of body mass index or an adverse interaction of COCs on UPA.

IMPLICATIONS

Ulipristal acetate is the dominant choice of oral emergency contraception among combined oral contraceptive users.

Pharmacokinetics of the 1.5 mg levonorgestrel emergency contraceptive in women with normal, obese and extremely obese body mass index

OBJECTIVE

To assess the pharmacokinetics (PK) of levonorgestrel after 1.5 mg oral doses (LNG-EC) in women with normal, obese and extremely obese body mass index (BMI).

STUDY DESIGN

The 1.5 mg LNG dose was given to healthy, reproductive-age, ovulatory women with normal BMI (mean 22.0), obese (mean 34.4), and extremely obese (mean 46.6 kg/m2) BMI. Total serum LNG was measured over 0 to 96 h by radioimmunoassay while free and bioavailable LNG were calculated. The maximum concentration (Cmax), time to maximum concentration (Tmax), and area under the curve (AUC) of LNG were assessed. Pharmacokinetic parameters calculated included half-life (t1/2), clearance (CL) and volume of distribution (Vss).

RESULTS

Ten normal-BMI, 11 obese-BMI, 5 extremely obese-BMI women were studied. After LNG-EC, mean total LNG metrics were lower in the obese and extremely obese groups compared to normal (Cmax 10.5 and 10.5 versus 16.2 ng/mL, both p<.01; AUC 208 and 197 versus 360 h × ng/mL, both p<.05). Mean bioavailable LNG Cmax was lower in obese (7.03 ng/mL, p<.05) and extremely obese (7.53 ng/ml, p=.198) compared to normal BMI (9.39 ng/mL). Mean bioavailable LNG AUC values were lower in obese and extremely obese compared to normal (131.6 and 127.5 vs 185.0 h × ng/mL, p<.05 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

Obese and extremely obese women were exposed to lower total and bioavailable LNG than normal BMI women.

IMPLICATIONS

Lower 'bioavailable' (free plus albumin bound) LNG AUC in obese women may play a role in the purported reduced efficacy of LNG-EC in obese users.

Altered pharmacokinetics of combined oral contraceptives in obesity - multistudy assessment

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PKs) of levonorgestrel (LNG)-containing combined oral contraceptives (COCs) in obese women.

STUDY DESIGN

We pooled and reanalyzed data from 89 women with different body mass index (BMI) categories from four clinical studies. The LNG and ethinyl estradiol (EE) PKs were analyzed utilizing a zero-order absorption (K0), two-compartment PK model to evaluate key PK parameters in relation to a range of weights, BMI and body surface area (BSA).

RESULTS

Increasing of body habitus metrics is correlated with decreasing Cmax (p<.0001) and AUCτ (p<.05) for both LNG and EE, but no correlation was found for Cmin (p≥.17). Increasing weight and BMI were associated with a modest increase (p≤.056) of clearance (CL) and appreciable increases of central volume (V1, p<.05), distribution clearance (CLd, p≤.001) and peripheral volume (V2, p<.0001) for LNG. For EE, increases in CL (p≤.009) were found with greater weight, BMI and BSA. Values of V1, CLd and V2 also increased (p<.0001) in obese subjects. The half-life and steady-state volume were greater among obese women (p<.0001) for both LNG and EE. LNG and EE PK parameters correlated well (p≤.006 for all), indicating that individual subject physiology affected both drugs similarly.

CONCLUSIONS

The primary effects of obesity on LNG and EE were a modest increase in CL and a marked increase in distribution parameters. We observed no obesity-related differences in trough LNG and EE concentrations.

IMPLICATIONS

This population PK analysis demonstrated reduced systemic exposure to LNG/EE oral contraceptives in obese subjects (Cmax and AUCτ); these particular differences are unlikely to lower contraceptive effectiveness among obese women who are correctly using LNG-containing contraceptives.

Use of levonorgestrel as emergency contraception in overweight women

OBJECTIVE

Levonorgestrel (LNG) emergency contraception (EC) may have decreased efficacy for women with body mass indices (BMI)≥26kg/m². This study aims to evaluate the prevalence of LNG EC use and EC counseling among overweight women.

METHODS

The 2013-2015 dataset from the National Survey of Family Growth was analyzed to determine the proportion of women with BMI≥26kg/m² who report recent use of LNG EC and EC counseling.

RESULTS

Overall, 2.4% of respondents reported recent use of LNG EC. Among women using oral LNG for EC, 29.8% of survey participants reported BMI≥26kg/m². Additionally, 40.2% of women with BMI≥26kg/m² using oral LNG EC reported having a doctor or medical provider talk to them about emergency contraception within the last 12 months, compared to 18.3% of LNG EC users with BMI<26kg/m² (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite recent counseling from clinicians and concerns for decreased efficacy, a significant number of overweight women continue to use LNG for EC. Clinicians should counsel women with BMI≥26kg/m² on the potential limitations of oral LNG for EC and offer more effective EC methods, including the copper intrauterine device and oral ulipristal acetate.

Interventions for emergency contraception

BACKGROUND

Emergency contraception (EC) is using a drug or copper intrauterine device (Cu-IUD) to prevent pregnancy shortly after unprotected intercourse. Several interventions are available for EC. Information on the comparative effectiveness, safety and convenience of these methods is crucial for reproductive healthcare providers and the women they serve. This is an update of a review previously published in 2009 and 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To determine which EC method following unprotected intercourse is the most effective, safe and convenient to prevent pregnancy.

SEARCH METHODS

In February 2017 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Popline and PubMed, The Chinese biomedical databases and UNDP/UNFPA/WHO/World Bank Special Programme on Human Reproduction (HRP) emergency contraception database. We also searched ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov as well as contacting content experts and pharmaceutical companies, and searching reference lists of appropriate papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials including women attending services for EC following a single act of unprotected intercourse were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary review outcome was observed number of pregnancies. Side effects and changes of menses were secondary outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 115 trials with 60,479 women in this review. The quality of the evidence for the primary outcome ranged from moderate to high, and for other outcomes ranged from very low to high. The main limitations were risk of bias (associated with poor reporting of methods), imprecision and inconsistency.Comparative effectiveness of different emergency contraceptive pills (ECP)Levonorgestrel was associated with fewer pregnancies than Yuzpe (estradiol-levonorgestrel combination) (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.84, 6 RCTs, n = 4750, I² = 23%, high-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of pregnancy using Yuzpe is assumed to be 29 women per 1000, the chance of pregnancy using levonorgestrel would be between 11 and 24 women per 1000.Mifepristone (all doses) was associated with fewer pregnancies than Yuzpe (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.41, 3 RCTs, n = 2144, I² = 0%, high-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of pregnancy following Yuzpe is assumed to be 25 women per 1000 women, the chance following mifepristone would be between 1 and 10 women per 1000.Both low-dose mifepristone (less than 25 mg) and mid-dose mifepristone (25 mg to 50 mg) were probably associated with fewer pregnancies than levonorgestrel (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.99, 14 RCTs, n = 8752, I² = 0%, high-quality evidence; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.83, 27 RCTs, n = 6052, I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence; respectively). This suggests that if the chance of pregnancy following levonorgestrel is assumed to be 20 women per 1000, the chance of pregnancy following low-dose mifepristone would be between 10 and 20 women per 1000; and that if the chance of pregnancy following levonorgestrel is assumed to be 35 women per 1000, the chance of pregnancy following mid-dose mifepristone would be between 16 and 29 women per 1000.Ulipristal acetate (UPA) was associated with fewer pregnancies than levonorgestrel (RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.35 to 0.99, 2 RCTs, n = 3448, I² = 0%, high-quality evidence).Comparative effectiveness of different ECP dosesIt was unclear whether there was any difference in pregnancy rate between single-dose levonorgestrel (1.5 mg) and the standard two-dose regimen (0.75 mg 12 hours apart) (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.33, 3 RCTs, n = 6653, I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence).Mid-dose mifepristone was associated with fewer pregnancies than low-dose mifepristone (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.97, 25 RCTs, n = 11,914, I² = 0%, high-quality evidence).Comparative effectiveness of Cu-IUD versus mifepristoneThere was no conclusive evidence of a difference in the risk of pregnancy between the Cu-IUD and mifepristone (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.74, 2 RCTs, n = 395, low-quality evidence).Adverse effectsNausea and vomiting were the main adverse effects associated with emergency contraception. There is probably a lower risk of nausea (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.76, 3 RCTs, n = 2186 , I² = 59%, moderate-quality evidence) or vomiting (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.20, 3 RCTs, n = 2186, I² = 0%, high-quality evidence) associated with mifepristone than with Yuzpe. levonorgestrel is probably associated with a lower risk of nausea (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.44, 6 RCTs, n = 4750, I² = 82%, moderate-quality evidence), or vomiting (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.35, 5 RCTs, n = 3640, I² = 78%, moderate-quality evidence) than Yuzpe. Levonorgestrel users were less likely to have any side effects than Yuzpe users (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.86; 1 RCT, n = 1955, high-quality evidence). UPA users were more likely than levonorgestrel users to have resumption of menstruation after the expected date (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.42 to 1.92, 2 RCTs, n = 3593, I² = 0%, high-quality evidence). Menstrual delay was more common with mifepristone than with any other intervention and appeared to be dose-related. Cu-IUD may be associated with higher risks of abdominal pain than mifepristone (18 events in 95 women using Cu-IUD versus no events in 190 women using mifepristone, low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Levonorgestrel and mid-dose mifepristone (25 mg to 50 mg) were more effective than Yuzpe regimen. Both mid-dose (25 mg to 50 mg) and low-dose mifepristone(less than 25 mg) were probably more effective than levonorgestrel (1.5 mg). Mifepristone low dose (less than 25 mg) was less effective than mid-dose mifepristone. UPA may be more effective than levonorgestrel.Levonorgestrel users had fewer side effects than Yuzpe users, and appeared to be more likely to have a menstrual return before the expected date. UPA users were probably more likely to have a menstrual return after the expected date. Menstrual delay was probably the main adverse effect of mifepristone and seemed to be dose-related. Cu-IUD may be associated with higher risks of abdominal pain than ECPs.

State of emergency contraception in the U.S., 2018

Emergency contraception is indicated in instances of unprotected sexual intercourse, including reproductive coercion, sexual assault, and contraceptive failure. It plays a role in averting unintended pregnancies due to inconsistent use or non-use of contraception. Options for emergency contraception vary by efficacy as well as accessibility within the U.S. This paper provides an overview of levonorgestrel (Plan B One-Step and generic counterparts), ulipristal acetate (sold as ella), and the copper intrauterine device (IUD, sold as ParaGard), including the mechanisms of action, administration, efficacy, drug interactions, safety, side effects, advantages, and drawbacks. It will also review current misconceptions about emergency contraception and access for subpopulations, including adolescents, immigrants, survivors of sexual assault, rural populations, and military/veteran women. This paper will address barriers such as gaps in knowledge, and financial, health systems, and practice barriers. Continuing areas of research, including the impact of body weight on the efficacy of emergency contraceptive pills and potential interactions between ulipristal acetate and ongoing hormonal contraceptives, are also addressed.

Phase I/II pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation of two levonorgestrel-only contraceptive patches in a multicenter randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of two novel levonorgestrel (LNG)-only contraceptive patches.

STUDY DESIGN

This multi-center Phase I/II trial randomized participants to use a 7-day transdermal patch designed to deliver a 40 mcg or 75 mcg daily LNG dose for 11 consecutive weeks; randomization was stratified by body mass index (BMI) <32 or 32-40 kg/m2. Evaluations occurred twice weekly for 5 weeks, then once weekly with supplemental visits for participants reporting a urinary LH surge. We evaluated pharmacokinetics via the weekly trough serum LNG concentrations (≥180 pg/mL considered therapeutic). The primary pharmacodynamic outcomes were cervical mucus and ovulation, evaluated using modified Insler cervical mucus scores and serum markers of ovulation.

RESULTS

Randomization yielded similar groups. Of 121 enrolled women, 117 contributed analyzable data. Overall, mean LNG concentrations achieved with use of the 75 mcg patch [value] were roughly double those seen with the 40 mcg dose. Concentrations achieved in higher-BMI women (BMI=32-40 kg/m2) were 50% lower compared to lower-BMI women for both patches. During the study, 94/117 (80%) participants had at least one LNG concentration <180 pg/mL. Insler scores were ≥5 at least once in 102/117 (87%) of participants, and ovulation occurred at least once in 81/117 (69%). Sixty participants (51%) had at least one ovulation following an Insler score ≥5; this occurred most frequently among higher-BMI participants using the lower-dose patch (19/25, 76%).

CONCLUSIONS

Women using two investigational LNG patches did not achieve consistent concentrations of LNG >180 pg/mL, an efficacy benchmark established in other studies with LNG implants, and they experienced high rates of ovulation as well as cervical mucus scores not supportive of high contraceptive efficacy.

IMPLICATIONS

The novel LNG-only patches in this study may not adequately decrease pregnancy risk, particularly for higher-BMI women. Future studies of LNG-only contraceptive patches will need to employ higher LNG doses and assess the acceptability and safety of such dosing.

Ten Years of Experience in Contraception Options for Teenagers in a Family Planning Center in Thrace and Review of the Literature

Introduction: The goal of our study was to investigate and evaluate the contraceptive behavior in teenagers from our family planning centre that services two different religious and socioeconomic populations living in the Thrace area. Methods: During the last 10 years 115 Christian Orthodox (group A) and 53 Muslim teenagers (group B) were enrolled in our retrospective study. Contraceptive practice attitudes were assessed by a questionnaire. Religion, demographics, socio-economic characteristics were key factors used to discuss contraception and avoid unplanned pregnancy in each group and to compare with the contraceptive method used. Results: The most used contraceptive method—about two times more frequently—among Christian Orthodox participants was the oral contraceptive pill (p = 0.015; OR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.13–2.90), while in the other group the use of condoms and IUDs was seven and three times more frequent, respectively. Our family planning centre was the main source of information for contraception. Conclusions: During adolescence, the existence of a family planning centre and participation in family planning programs plays a crucial role to help the teenagers to improve their knowledge and choose an effective contraception method.

Contraceptive Care of Obese Women

Importance

In the United States, 27% of reproductive-aged women are overweight, and 35% are obese. Until recently, contraceptive research excluded women greater than 130% of their ideal body weight. Gaps in data limit evidence-based decision making for effective contraceptive counseling and management in this rapidly growing population.

Objectives

The aims of this summary are to review the benefits, adverse effects, and risk factors associated with contraceptive methods in obese women, with special attention to effectiveness, and provide contraceptive management and counseling recommendations for best clinical practice.

Evidence Acquisition

We performed a thorough search of PubMed for current literature, including original research articles, review articles, and guidelines on contraceptive counseling and management in obese women in the United States. We reviewed the body of evidence with special attention to studies published since recent Cochrane and systematic reviews on this topic.

Conclusions

Contraceptive use is safer than pregnancy, especially for obese women who have increased pregnancy risks. Baseline health is compromised by obesity, but contraceptive risks remain low. Long-acting, reversible contraceptive methods offer superior effectiveness, minimal risk, and numerous noncontraceptive benefits across body mass index groups. No substantial evidence supports ineffectiveness of any method in obese women except oral emergency contraception and the patch. Pharmacokinetic changes of obesity associated with other oral methods do not seem to result in clinically significant declines in effectiveness. Future contraceptive efficacy studies should include obese women to better discuss their contraceptive needs.

Relevance

This review is beneficial for all providers caring for reproductive-aged women wanting to avoid unintended pregnancy.

Update on emergency contraception

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Emergency contraception provides a critical and time-sensitive opportunity for women to prevent undesired pregnancy after intercourse. Both access and available options for emergency contraception have changed over the last several years.

RECENT FINDINGS

Emergency contraceptive pills can be less effective in obese women. The maximum achieved serum concentration of levonorgestrel (LNG) is lower in obese women than women of normal BMI, and doubling the dose of LNG (3 mg) increases its concentration maximum, approximating the level in normal BMI women receiving one dose of LNG. Repeated use of both LNG and ulipristal acetate (UPA) is well tolerated. Hormonal contraception can be immediately started following LNG use, but should be delayed for 5 days after UPA use to avoid dampening the efficacy of UPA. The copper intrauterine device (IUD) is the only IUD approved for emergency contraception (and the most effective method of emergency contraception), but use of LNG IUD as emergency contraception is currently being investigated. Accurate knowledge about emergency contraception remains low both for patients and healthcare providers.

SUMMARY

Emergency contraception is an important yet underutilized tool available to women to prevent pregnancy. Current options including copper IUD and emergency contraceptive pills are safe and well tolerated. Significant gaps in knowledge of emergency contraception on both the provider and user level exist, as do barriers to expedient access of emergency contraception.

Effect of menstrual cycle phase and hormonal treatments on evaluation of tubal patency in baboons

Background

We evaluated whether menstrual cycle phase influences the assessment of tubal patency by hysterosalpingography (HSG) in baboons.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of baseline tubal patency studies and serum estradiol (E₂) and progesterone (P4) values obtained from female baboons used as models for development of non‐surgical permanent contraception in women. The main outcome measure was bilateral tubal patency (BTP) in relationship with estradiol level.

Results

Female baboons (n = 110) underwent a single (n = 81), two (n = 26), or three (n = 3) HSG examinations. In 33/142 (23%) HSG examinations, one or both tubes showed functional occlusion (FO). The median E₂ in studies with BTP (49 pg/mL) was significantly higher than in those studies with FO (32 pg/mL, P = .005). Among 18 animals with repeat examinations where serum E₂ changed from <60 to ≥ 60 pg/mL, 13 results changed from FO to BTP (P = .0001). No sets showed a change from BTP to FO with an increase in estradiol.

Conclusion

In baboons, functional occlusion of the fallopian tube is associated with low estradiol levels, supporting a role for estrogen‐mediated relaxation of the utero‐tubal junction.

Interventions for emergency contraception

BACKGROUND

Emergency contraception (EC) is using a drug or copper intrauterine device (Cu-IUD) to prevent pregnancy shortly after unprotected intercourse. Several interventions are available for EC. Information on the comparative effectiveness, safety and convenience of these methods is crucial for reproductive healthcare providers and the women they serve. This is an update of a review previously published in 2009 and 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To determine which EC method following unprotected intercourse is the most effective, safe and convenient to prevent pregnancy.

SEARCH METHODS

In February 2017 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Popline and PubMed, The Chinese biomedical databases and UNDP/UNFPA/WHO/World Bank Special Programme on Human Reproduction (HRP) emergency contraception database. We also searched ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov as well as contacting content experts and pharmaceutical companies, and searching reference lists of appropriate papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials including women attending services for EC following a single act of unprotected intercourse were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary review outcome was observed number of pregnancies. Side effects and changes of menses were secondary outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 115 trials with 60,479 women in this review. The quality of the evidence for the primary outcome ranged from moderate to high, and for other outcomes ranged from very low to high. The main limitations were risk of bias (associated with poor reporting of methods), imprecision and inconsistency. Comparative effectiveness of different emergency contraceptive pills (ECP)Levonorgestrel was associated with fewer pregnancies than Yuzpe (estradiol-levonorgestrel combination) (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.84, 6 RCTs, n = 4750, I2 = 23%, high-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of pregnancy using Yuzpe is assumed to be 29 women per 1000, the chance of pregnancy using levonorgestrel would be between 11 and 24 women per 1000.Mifepristone (all doses) was associated with fewer pregnancies than Yuzpe (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.41, 3 RCTs, n = 2144, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of pregnancy following Yuzpe is assumed to be 25 women per 1000 women, the chance following mifepristone would be between 1 and 10 women per 1000.Both low-dose mifepristone (less than 25 mg) and mid-dose mifepristone (25 mg to 50 mg) were probably associated with fewer pregnancies than levonorgestrel (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.99, 14 RCTs, n = 8752, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.83, 27 RCTs, n = 6052, I2 = 0%, moderate-quality evidence; respectively). This suggests that if the chance of pregnancy following levonorgestrel is assumed to be 20 women per 1000, the chance of pregnancy following low-dose mifepristone would be between 10 and 20 women per 1000; and that if the chance of pregnancy following levonorgestrel is assumed to be 35 women per 1000, the chance of pregnancy following mid-dose mifepristone would be between 16 and 29 women per 1000.Ulipristal acetate (UPA) was associated with fewer pregnancies than levonorgestrel (RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.35 to 0.99, 2 RCTs, n = 3448, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence). Comparative effectiveness of different ECP dosesIt was unclear whether there was any difference in pregnancy rate between single-dose levonorgestrel (1.5 mg) and the standard two-dose regimen (0.75 mg 12 hours apart) (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.33, 3 RCTs, n = 6653, I2 = 0%, moderate-quality evidence).Mid-dose mifepristone was associated with fewer pregnancies than low-dose mifepristone (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.97, 25 RCTs, n = 11,914, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence). Comparative effectiveness of Cu-IUD versus mifepristoneThere was no conclusive evidence of a difference in the risk of pregnancy between the Cu-IUD and mifepristone (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.74, 2 RCTs, n = 395, low-quality evidence). Adverse effectsNausea and vomiting were the main adverse effects associated with emergency contraception. There is probably a lower risk of nausea (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.76, 3 RCTs, n = 2186 , I2 = 59%, moderate-quality evidence) or vomiting (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.20, 3 RCTs, n = 2186, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence) associated with mifepristone than with Yuzpe. levonorgestrel is probably associated with a lower risk of nausea (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.44, 6 RCTs, n = 4750, I2 = 82%, moderate-quality evidence), or vomiting (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.35, 5 RCTs, n = 3640, I2 = 78%, moderate-quality evidence) than Yuzpe. Levonorgestrel users were less likely to have any side effects than Yuzpe users (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.86; 1 RCT, n = 1955, high-quality evidence). UPA users were more likely than levonorgestrel users to have resumption of menstruation after the expected date (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.42 to 1.92, 2 RCTs, n = 3593, I2 = 0%, high-quality evidence). Menstrual delay was more common with mifepristone than with any other intervention and appeared to be dose-related. Cu-IUD may be associated with higher risks of abdominal pain than mifepristone (18 events in 95 women using Cu-IUD versus no events in 190 women using mifepristone, low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Levonorgestrel and mid-dose mifepristone (25 mg to 50 mg) were more effective than Yuzpe regimen. Both mid-dose (25 mg to 50 mg) and low-dose mifepristone(less than 25 mg) were probably more effective than levonorgestrel (1.5 mg). Mifepristone low dose (less than 25 mg) was less effective than mid-dose mifepristone. UPA was more effective than levonorgestrel.Levonorgestrel users had fewer side effects than Yuzpe users, and appeared to be more likely to have a menstrual return before the expected date. UPA users were probably more likely to have a menstrual return after the expected date. Menstrual delay was probably the main adverse effect of mifepristone and seemed to be dose-related. Cu-IUD may be associated with higher risks of abdominal pain than ECPs.

Pharmacokinetics of levonorgestrel and ulipristal acetate emergency contraception in women with normal and obese body mass index

OBJECTIVE

This study compares the pharmacokinetics (PK) of levonorgestrel (LNG) emergency contraceptive (EC) and ulipristal acetate (UPA)-EC between normal-body mass index (BMI) and obese-BMI women.

STUDY DESIGN

This prospective, randomized crossover study evaluates the PK of women after single doses of LNG-EC (1.5mg) and UPA-EC (30mg). Study procedures took place during clinical research unit admissions, where participants received a standardized meal and each study drug, in random order, during two separate 24-h admissions. Study staff collected 14 blood specimens (0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24 and 48h). We evaluated serum concentrations of LNG and UPA using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectroscopy and estimated the PK parameters of both drugs using noncompartmental analysis. The main outcome of this study was a comparison of between-group differences in AUC_0-24.

RESULTS

Thirty-two women completed the study (16 in each group). Among normal-BMI and obese-BMI participants, the mean BMIs were 22.0 (range 18.8-24.6) and 34.3 (range 30.6-39.9), respectively. After LNG-EC, mean AUC_0-24 and maximum concentration (C_max) were 50% lower among obese-BMI women than among normal-BMI women (AUC_0-24 100.8 vs. 208.5ng*h/mL, IQR_obese-BMI 35.8, IQR_normal-BMI 74.2, p≤.01; C_max 10.8 vs. 18.2ng/mL, p=.01). After UPA-EC, AUC_0-24 and C_max were similar between obese-BMI and normal-BMI women (AUC_0-24 362.5 vs. 293.5ng*h/mL, IQR_obese-BMI 263.2, IQR_normal-BMI 112.5, p=.15; C_max 95.6 vs. 89.3ng/mL, p=.70).

CONCLUSION

After a single dose of EC, obese-BMI women are exposed to lower concentrations of LNG and similar concentrations of UPA, when compared to normal-BMI women.

IMPLICATIONS

Differences in LNG-EC PK by BMI group may underlie and account for the lower LNG-EC efficacy reported among obese-BMI women, but modest differences in UPA-EC PK by BMI group provide less support for variable efficacy. A pharmacodynamic study may be able to clarify whether these PK differences account for observed differences in LNG-EC and UPA-EC efficacy.