A multicenter randomized comparison of cycle control and laboratory findings with oral contraceptive agents containing 100 microg levonorgestrel with 20 microg ethinyl estradiol or triphasic norethindrone with ethinyl estradiol

Combined oral contraceptive pill for primary dysmenorrhoea

BACKGROUND

Dysmenorrhoea (painful menstrual cramps) is common and a major cause of pain in women. Combined oral contraceptives (OCPs) are often used in the management of primary dysmenorrhoea, but there is a need for reporting the benefits and harms. Primary dysmenorrhoea is defined as painful menstrual cramps without pelvic pathology.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of combined oral contraceptive pills for the management of primary dysmenorrhoea.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date 28 March 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing all combined OCPs with other combined OCPs, placebo, or management with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Participants had to have primary dysmenorrhoea, diagnosed by ruling out pelvic pathology through pelvic examination or ultrasound.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary outcomes were pain score after treatment, improvement in pain, and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 RCTs (3723 women). Eleven RCTs compared combined OCP with placebo, eight compared different dosages of combined OCP, one compared two OCP regimens with placebo, and one compared OCP with NSAIDs. OCP versus placebo or no treatment OCPs reduce pain in women with dysmenorrhoea more effectively than placebo. Six studies reported treatment effects on different scales; the result can be interpreted as a moderate reduction in pain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.74 to -0.41; I² = 28%; 6 RCTs, 588 women; high-quality evidence). Six studies also reported pain improvement as a dichotomous outcome (risk ratio (RR) 1.65, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.10; I² = 69%; 6 RCTs, 717 women; low-quality evidence). The data suggest that in women with a 28% chance of improvement in pain with placebo or no treatment, the improvement in women using combined OCP will be between 37% and 60%. Compared to placebo or no treatment, OCPs probably increase the risk of any adverse events (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.43; I² = 79%; 7 RCTs, 1025 women; moderate-quality evidence), and may also increase the risk of serious adverse events (RR 1.77, 95% CI 0.49 to 6.43; I² = 22%; 4 RCTs, 512 women; low-quality evidence). Women who received OCPs had an increased risk of irregular bleeding compared to women who received placebo or no treatment (RR 2.63, 95% CI 2.11 to 3.28; I² = 29%; 7 RCTs, 1025 women; high-quality evidence). In women with a risk of irregular bleeding of 18% if using placebo or no treatment, the risk would be between 39% and 60% if using combined OCP. OCPs probably increase the risk of headaches (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.04; I² = 44%; 5 RCTs, 656 women; moderate-quality evidence), and nausea (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.30; I² = 39%; 8 RCTs, 948 women; moderate-quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of OCP on weight gain (RR 1.83, 95% CI 0.75 to 4.45; 1 RCT, 76 women; low-quality evidence). OCPs may slightly reduce requirements for additional medication (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.98; I² = 0%; 2 RCTs, 163 women; low-quality evidence), and absence from work (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.97; I² = 0%; 2 RCTs, 148 women; low-quality evidence). One OCP versus another OCP Continuous use of OCPs (no pause or inactive tablets after the usual 21 days of hormone pills) may reduce pain in women with dysmenorrhoea more effectively than the standard regimen (SMD -0.73, 95% CI -1.13 to 0.34; 2 RCTs, 106 women; low-quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine if there was a difference in pain improvement between ethinylestradiol 20 μg and ethinylestradiol 30 μg OCPs (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.74; 1 RCT, 326 women; moderate-quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference between third- and fourth-generation and first- and second-generation OCPs (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05; 1 RCT, 178 women; moderate-quality evidence). The standard regimen of OCPs may slightly increase the risk of any adverse events over the continuous regimen (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.22; I² = 76%; 3 RCTs, 602 women; low-quality evidence), and probably increases the risk of irregular bleeding (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.69; 2 RCTs, 379 women; moderate-quality evidence). Due to lack of studies, it is uncertain if there is a difference between continuous and standard regimen OCPs in serious adverse events (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.24; 1 RCT, 212 women), headaches (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.76; I² = 0%; 2 RCTs, 435 women), or nausea (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.30; I² = 23%; 2 RCTs, 435 women) (all very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain if one type of OCP reduces absence from work more than the other (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.99; 1 RCT, 445 women; very low-quality evidence). OCPs versus NSAIDs There were insufficient data to determine whether OCPs were more effective than NSAIDs for pain (mean difference -0.30, 95% CI -5.43 to 4.83; 1 RCT, 91 women; low-quality evidence). The study did not report on adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

OCPs are effective for treating dysmenorrhoea, but they cause irregular bleeding, and probably headache and nausea. Long-term effects were not covered in this review. Continuous use of OCPs was probably more effective than the standard regimen but safety should be ensured with long-term data. Due to lack of data, we are uncertain whether NSAIDs are better than OCPs for treating dysmenorrhoea.

Effects of oral contraceptives on metabolic parameters in adult premenopausal women: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the effect of oral contraceptives (OC) containing different progestins on parameters of lipid and carbohydrate metabolism through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Premenopausal women aged 18 or older, who received oral contraceptives containing chlormadinone, cyproterone, drospirenone, levonorgestrel, desogestrel, dienogest, gestodene or norgestimate, for at least 3 months. Outcome variables were changes in plasma lipids, BMI, insulin resistance and plasma glucose. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for randomized trials and estimated the pooled within-group change in each outcome variable using a random-effects model. We performed subgroup analyses by study duration (<12 months vs ≥12 months) and polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) status.

RESULTS

Eighty-two clinical trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All progestins (except dienogest) increased plasma TG, ranging from 12.1 mg/dL for levonorgestrel (P < 0.001) to 35.1 mg/dL for chlormadinone (P < 0.001). Most progestins also increased HDLc, with the largest effect observed for chlormadinone (+9.6 mg/dL, P < 0.001) and drospirenone (+7.4 mg/dL, P < 0.001). Meanwhile, levonorgestrel decreased HDLc by 4.4 mg/dL (P < 0.001). Levonorgestrel (+6.8 mg/dL, P < 0.001) and norgestimate (+11.5 mg/dL, P = 0.003) increased LDLc, while dienogest decreased it (-7.7 mg/dL, P = 0.04). Cyproterone slightly reduced plasma glucose. None of the progestins affected BMI or HOMA-IR. Similar results were observed in subgroups defined by PCOS or study duration.

CONCLUSION

Most progestins increase both TG and HDLc, their effect on LDLc varies widely. OC have minor or no effects on BMI, HOMA-IR and glycemia. The antiandrogen progestins dienogest and cyproterone displayed the most favorable metabolic profile, while levonorgestrel displayed the least favorable.

[Hypertension and contraception]

Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular diseases. Because of the high frequency of hormonal contraceptives use, assessing their side effects is an important public health issue. In this perspective, we conducted a review of the risk of hypertension associated with the use of hormonal contraceptives, either combined estrogen-progestin or only progestin. The use of combined hormonal contraceptives, regardless of its type and route of administration, is associated with a slight increase in blood pressure, both systolic and diastolic blood pressures. The frequency of onset of hypertension in women who use combined hormonal contraception is between 0.6% and 8.5%. Progestin-only contraception seems safe with respect to the risk of hypertension. It is therefore important to remember that the use of combined hormonal contraception is contra-indicated in hypertensive women, even well controlled. Finally, we propose a prescription assistance algorithm according to the recommendations of an expert panel. It should be remembered that taking blood pressure at each contraceptive consultation (initial and follow-up) is essential.

Ethynilestradiol 20 mcg plus Levonorgestrel 100 mcg: Clinical Pharmacology

Estroprogestins (EPs) are combinations of estrogen and progestin with several actions on women's health. The different pharmacological composition of EPs is responsible for different clinical effects. One of the most used low-dose EP associations is ethinylestradiol 20 mcg plus levonorgestrel 100 mcg in monophasic regimen (EE20/LNG100). This review summarizes clinical pharmacology, cycle control, and effects on lipid and glucose metabolism, coagulation, body weight/body composition, acne, and sexuality of EE20/LNG100. Overall, EE20/LNG100 combination is safe and well tolerated, and in several studies the incidence of adverse events in the treated group was comparable to that of the placebo group. Cycle control was effective and body weight/body composition did not vary among treated and untreated groups in most studies. The EE20/LNG100 combination shows mild or no effect on lipid and glucose metabolism. Lastly, EE20/LNG100 is associated with a low risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). In conclusion, in the process of decision making for the individualization of EPs choice, EE20/LNG100 should be considered for its favorable clinical profile.

Steroidal contraceptives: effect on carbohydrate metabolism in women without diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Many hormonal contraceptives have been associated with changes in carbohydrate metabolism. Alterations may include decreased glucose tolerance and increased insulin resistance, which are risk factors for Type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease. These issues have been raised primarily with contraceptives containing estrogen.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of hormonal contraceptives on carbohydrate metabolism in healthy women and those at risk for diabetes due to overweight.

SEARCH METHODS

In April 2014, we searched the computerized databases MEDLINE, POPLINE, CENTRAL, and LILACS for studies of hormonal contraceptives and carbohydrate metabolism. We also searched for clinical trials in ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP. The initial search also included EMBASE.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials were considered if they examined carbohydrate metabolism in women without diabetes who used hormonal contraceptives for contraception. Comparisons could be a placebo, a non-hormonal contraceptive, or another hormonal contraceptive that differed in drug, dosage, or regimen. Interventions included at least three cycles. Outcomes included glucose and insulin measures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed all titles and abstracts identified during the literature searches. The data were extracted and entered into RevMan. We wrote to researchers for missing data. For continuous variables, the mean difference (MD) was computed with 95% confidence interval (CI) using a fixed-effect model. For dichotomous outcomes, the Peto odds ratio with 95% CI was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 31 trials that met the inclusion criteria. No new trials were eligible in 2014. Twenty-one trials compared combined oral contraceptives (COCs); others examined different COC regimens, progestin-only pills, injectables, a vaginal ring, and implants. None included a placebo. Of 34 comparisons, eight had any notable difference between the study groups in an outcome.Twelve trials studied desogestrel-containing COCs, and the few differences from levonorgestrel COCs were inconsistent. A meta-analysis of two studies showed the desogestrel group had a higher mean fasting glucose (MD 0.20; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.41). Where data could not be combined, single studies showed lower mean fasting glucose (MD -0.40; 95% CI -0.72 to -0.08) and higher means for two-hour glucose response (MD 1.08; 95% CI 0.45 to 1.71) and insulin area under the curve (AUC) (MD 20.30; 95% CI 4.24 to 36.36).Three trials examined the etonogestrel vaginal ring and one examined an etonogestrel implant. One trial showed the ring group had lower mean AUC insulin than the levonorgestrel-COC group (MD -204.51; 95% CI -389.64 to -19.38).Of eight trials of norethisterone preparations, five compared COCs and three compared injectables. In a COC trial, a norethisterone group had smaller mean change in glucose two-hour response than a levonorgestrel-COC group (MD -0.30; 95% CI -0.54 to -0.06). In an injectable study, a group using depot medroxyprogesterone acetate had higher means than the group using norethisterone enanthate for fasting glucose (MD 10.05; 95% CI 3.16 to 16.94), glucose two-hour response (MD 17.00; 95% CI 5.67 to 28.33), and fasting insulin (MD 3.40; 95% CI 2.07 to 4.73).Among five recent trials, two examined newer COCs with different estrogen types. One showed the group with nomegestrel acetate plus 17β-estradiol had lower means than the levonorgestrel group for incremental AUC glucose (MD -1.43; 95% CI -2.55 to -0.31) and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (MD -0.10; 95% CI -0.18 to -0.02). Two trials compared extended versus conventional (cyclic) regimens. With a dienogest COC, an extended-use group had greater mean change in AUC glucose (MD 82.00; 95% CI 10.72 to 153.28). In a small trial using two levonorgestrel COCs, the lower-dose group showed smaller mean change in fasting glucose (MD -3.00; 95% CI -5.89 to -0.11), but the obese and normal weight women did not differ significantly.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests no major differences in carbohydrate metabolism between different hormonal contraceptives in women without diabetes. We cannot make strong statements due to having few studies that compared the same types of contraceptives. Many trials had small numbers of participants and some had large losses. Many of the earlier studies had limited reporting of methods.We still know very little about women at risk for metabolic problems due to being overweight. More than half of the trials had weight restrictions as inclusion criteria. Only one small trial stratified the groups by body mass index (obese versus normal).

20 µg versus >20 µg estrogen combined oral contraceptives for contraception

BACKGROUND

Concern about estrogen-related adverse effects has led to progressive reductions in the estrogen dose in combination oral contraceptives (COCs). However, reducing the amount of estrogen to improve safety could result in decreased contraceptive effectiveness and unacceptable changes in bleeding patterns.

OBJECTIVES

To test the hypothesis that COCs containing ≤ 20 μg ethinyl estradiol (EE) perform similarly as those containing > 20 μg in terms of contraceptive effectiveness, bleeding patterns, discontinuation, and side effects.

SEARCH METHODS

In July 2013, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and POPLINE, and examined references of potentially eligible trials. We also searched for recent clinical trials using ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP. No new trials met the inclusion criteria. Previous searches included EMBASE. For the initial review, we wrote to oral contraceptive manufacturers to identify trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

English-language reports of randomized controlled trials were eligible that compare a COC containing ≤ 20 μg EE with a COC containing > 20 μg EE. We excluded studies where the interventions were designed to be administered for less than three consecutive cycles or to be used primarily as treatment for non-contraceptive conditions. Trials had to report on contraceptive effectiveness, bleeding patterns, trial discontinuation due to bleeding-related reasons or other side effects, or side effects to be included in the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author evaluated all titles and abstracts from literature searches to determine whether they met the inclusion criteria. Two authors independently extracted data from studies identified for inclusion. We wrote to the researchers when additional information was needed. Data were entered and analyzed with RevMan.

MAIN RESULTS

No differences were found in contraceptive effectiveness for the 13 COC pairs for which this outcome was reported. Compared to the higher-estrogen pills, several COCs containing 20 μg EE resulted in higher rates of early trial discontinuation (overall and due to adverse events such as irregular bleeding) as well as increased risk of bleeding disturbances (both amenorrhea or infrequent bleeding and irregular, prolonged, frequent bleeding, or breakthrough bleeding or spotting).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

While COCs containing 20 μg EE may be theoretically safer, this review did not focus on the rare events required to assess this hypothesis. Data from existing randomized controlled trials are inadequate to detect possible differences in contraceptive effectiveness. Low-dose estrogen COCs resulted in higher rates of bleeding pattern disruptions. However, most trials compared COCs containing different progestin types, and changes in bleeding patterns could be related to progestin type as well as estrogen dose. Higher follow-up rates are essential for meaningful interpretation of results.

Steroidal contraceptives: effect on carbohydrate metabolism in women without diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Many hormonal contraceptives have been associated with changes in carbohydrate metabolism. Alterations may include decreased glucose tolerance and increased insulin resistance, which are risk factors for Type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease. These issues have been raised primarily with contraceptives containing estrogen.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of hormonal contraceptives on carbohydrate metabolism in healthy women and those at risk for diabetes due to overweight.

SEARCH METHODS

In February 2012, we searched the computerized databases MEDLINE, POPLINE, CENTRAL, and LILACS for studies of hormonal contraceptives and carbohydrate metabolism. We also searched for clinical trials in ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP. Previous searches also included EMBASE.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials were considered if they examined carbohydrate metabolism in women without diabetes who used hormonal contraceptives for contraception. Comparisons could be a placebo, a non-hormonal contraceptive, or another hormonal contraceptive that differed in drug, dosage, or regimen. Interventions included at least three cycles. Outcomes included glucose and insulin measures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed all titles and abstracts identified during the literature searches. The data were extracted and entered into RevMan. We wrote to researchers for missing data. For continuous variables, the mean difference (MD) was computed with 95% confidence interval (CI) using a fixed-effect model. For dichotomous outcomes, the Peto odds ratio with 95% CI was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 31 trials that met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-one trials compared combined oral contraceptives (COCs); others examined different COC regimens, progestin-only pills, injectables, a vaginal ring, and implants. None included a placebo. Of 34 comparisons, eight had any notable difference between the study groups in an outcome.Twelve trials studied desogestrel-containing COCs, and the few differences from levonorgestrel COCs were inconsistent. A meta-analysis of two studies showed the desogestrel group had a higher mean fasting glucose (MD 0.20; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.41). Where data could not be combined, single studies showed lower mean fasting glucose (MD -0.40; 95% CI -0.72 to -0.08) and higher means for two-hour glucose response (MD 1.08; 95% CI 0.45 to 1.71) and insulin area under the curve (AUC) (MD 20.30; 95% CI 4.24 to 36.36).Three trials examined the etonogestrel vaginal ring and one examined an etonogestrel implant. One trial showed the ring group had lower mean AUC insulin than the levonorgestrel-COC group (MD -204.51; 95% CI -389.64 to -19.38).Of eight trials of norethisterone preparations, five compared COCs and three compared injectables. In a COC trial, a norethisterone group had smaller mean change in glucose two-hour response than a levonorgestrel-COC group (MD -0.30; 95% CI -0.54 to -0.06). In an injectable study, a group using depot medroxyprogesterone acetate had higher means than the group using norethisterone enanthate for fasting glucose (MD 10.05; 95% CI 3.16 to 16.94), glucose two-hour response (MD 17.00; 95% CI 5.67 to 28.33), and fasting insulin (MD 3.40; 95% CI 2.07 to 4.73).Among five recent trials, two examined newer COCs with different estrogen types. One showed the group with nomegestrel acetate plus 17β-estradiol had lower means than the levonorgestrel group for incremental AUC glucose (MD -1.43; 95% CI -2.55 to -0.31) and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (MD -0.10; 95% CI -0.18 to -0.02). Two trials compared extended versus conventional (cyclic) regimens. With a dienogest COC, an extended-use group had greater mean change in AUC glucose (MD 82.00; 95% CI 10.72 to 153.28). In a small trial using two levonorgestrel COCs, the lower-dose group showed smaller mean change in fasting glucose (MD -3.00; 95% CI -5.89 to -0.11), but the obese and normal weight women did not differ significantly.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests no major differences in carbohydrate metabolism between different hormonal contraceptives in women without diabetes. We cannot make strong statements due to having few studies that compared the same types of contraceptives. Many trials had small numbers of participants and some had large losses. Many of the earlier studies had limited reporting of methods.We still know very little about women at risk for metabolic problems due to being overweight. More than half of the trials had weight restrictions as inclusion criteria. Only one small trial stratified the groups by body mass index (obese versus normal).

Triphasic versus monophasic oral contraceptives for contraception

BACKGROUND

Side effects of oral contraceptive (OC) pills discourage adherence to and continuation of OC regimens. Strategies to decrease adverse effects led to the introduction of the triphasic OC in the 1980s. Whether triphasic OCs have higher accidental pregnancy rates than monophasic pills is unknown. Nor is it known if triphasic pills give better cycle control and fewer side effects than the monophasic pills.

OBJECTIVES

To compare triphasic OCs with monophasic OCs in terms of efficacy, cycle control, and discontinuation due to side effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the computerized databases of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, POPLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS, as well as clinical trials databases (ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP)) in May 2011. Additionally, we searched the reference lists of relevant articles. We also contacted researchers and pharmaceutical companies to identify other trials not found in our search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any triphasic OC with any monophasic pill used to prevent pregnancy. Interventions had to include at least three treatment cycles.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed the studies found in the literature searches for possible inclusion and for their methodological quality. We contacted the authors of all included studies and of possibly randomized trials for supplemental information about the methods used and outcomes studied. We entered the data into RevMan and calculated odds ratios for the outcome measures of efficacy, breakthrough bleeding, spotting, withdrawal bleeding and discontinuation.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 23 trials included, 19 examined contraceptive effectiveness. The triphasic and monophasic preparations did not differ significantly. Several trials reported favorable bleeding patterns, that is less spotting, breakthrough bleeding or amenorrhea, in triphasic versus monophasic OC users. However, meta-analysis was generally not possible due to differences in measuring and reporting the cycle disturbance data as well as differences in progestogen type and hormone dosages. No significant differences were found in the numbers of women who discontinued due to medical reasons, cycle disturbances, intermenstrual bleeding or adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence is insufficient to determine whether triphasic OCs differ from monophasic OCs in effectiveness, bleeding patterns or discontinuation rates. Therefore, we recommend monophasic pills as a first choice for women starting OC use. Large, high-quality RCTs that compare triphasic and monophasic OCs with identical progestogens are needed to determine whether triphasic pills differ from monophasic OCs. Future studies should follow the recommendations of Belsey or Mishell on recording menstrual bleeding patterns and the CONSORT reporting guidelines.

20 µg versus >20 µg estrogen combined oral contraceptives for contraception

BACKGROUND

Concern about estrogen-related adverse effects has led to progressive reductions in the estrogen dose in combination oral contraceptives (COCs). However, reducing the amount of estrogen to improve safety could result in decreased contraceptive effectiveness and unacceptable changes in bleeding patterns.

OBJECTIVES

To test the hypothesis that COCs containing ≤ 20 μg ethinyl estradiol (EE) perform similarly as those containing > 20 μg in terms of contraceptive effectiveness, bleeding patterns, discontinuation, and side effects.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, POPLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP, and examined references of eligible trials. Initially, we wrote to oral contraceptive manufacturers to identify trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

English-language reports of randomized controlled trials were eligible that compare a COC containing ≤ 20 μg EE with a COC containing > 20 μg EE. We excluded studies where the interventions were designed to be administered for less than three consecutive cycles or to be used primarily as treatment for non-contraceptive conditions. Trials had to report on contraceptive effectiveness, bleeding patterns, trial discontinuation due to bleeding-related reasons or other side effects, or side effects to be included in the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author evaluated all titles and abstracts from literature searches to determine whether they met the inclusion criteria. Two authors independently extracted data from studies identified for inclusion. We wrote to the researchers when additional information was needed. Data were entered and analyzed with RevMan.

MAIN RESULTS

No differences were found in contraceptive effectiveness for the 13 COC pairs for which this outcome was reported. Compared to the higher-estrogen pills, several COCs containing 20 μg EE resulted in higher rates of early trial discontinuation (overall and due to adverse events such as irregular bleeding) as well as increased risk of bleeding disturbances (both amenorrhea or infrequent bleeding and irregular, prolonged, frequent bleeding, or breakthrough bleeding or spotting).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

While COCs containing 20 μg EE may be theoretically safer, this review did not focus on the rare events required to assess this hypothesis. Data from existing randomized controlled trials are inadequate to detect possible differences in contraceptive effectiveness. Low-dose estrogen COCs resulted in higher rates of bleeding pattern disruptions. However, most trials compared COCs containing different progestin types, and changes in bleeding patterns could be related to progestin type as well as estrogen dose. Higher follow-up rates are essential for meaningful interpretation of results.

Safety, efficacy and patient satisfaction with continuous daily administration of levonorgestrel/ethinylestradiol oral contraceptives

The progestational steroid norgestrel was synthesized and tested between 1960 and 1965 through an international cooperation between Wyeth, USA and Schering, Berlin. It is a mixture of two "enantiomers," with only one form (designated as levonorgestrel) biologically active. When taken orally, it is rapidly absorbed, not subjected to a "first-pass" effect and is approximately 90% bioavailable, with a circulating half-life around 15 hours. Its contraceptive action is exerted at the central (hypothalamic) and peripheral (cervical mucus and endometrium) levels. Levonorgestrel (LNG), alone or in combination with ethinyl estradiol (EE), is the most widely employed contraceptive progestin: it is used in combined oral contraceptives, progestogen-only pills, long-acting contraceptive implants, intrauterine contraceptive systems and in emergency contraception. It is also the steroid of choice for new oral contraceptive regimens aimed at reducing the frequency of bleeding episodes. This novel approach, already tried more than 30 years ago, gained interest around the year 2000 when surveys of women's attitudes toward monthly menstrual bleeding started to show a major change: more and more women declared that they would welcome a hormonal contraceptive method that reduced bleeding episodes to 4, 2 or even 1 per year. At this point, while the debate on the significance and "usefulness" of menstruation went on, attention focused on new regimens. The first new modality consisted of changing the 7-day medication-free interval, either shortening it to fewer than 7 days, or by the administration of low-dose estrogens during the interval between packages. Then, continuous administration regimens started to be investigated. This, however, did not happen suddenly, since, in specific situations, doctors had for years empirically utilized various continuous administration regimens. The first extended-cycle oral contraceptive regimen introduced in clinical practice is an 84-day regimen that results in bleeding only 4 times a year. A commercial product specifically packed for continuous use is now available in Europe and contains 30 mug EE and 150 mug LNG. In a variation of this regimen, after administration of the same combination for 84 days, women are given 7 pills containing 10 mug EE. A 6-monthly regimen has also been tested in a small study using EE 20 mug plus LNG 100 mug taken with and without a hormone-free interval. Women in the continuous group reported significantly fewer bleeding days requiring protection and were more likely to have amenorrhea; in addition they also reported significantly fewer days of bloating and menstrual pain. A yearly regimen is now being developed. Each pill of this novel formulation contains EE 20 mug and LNG 90 mug to be taken continuously for 364 days (13 cycles) per year. A phase III trial has now evaluated safety, efficacy and menses inhibition. At the end of the 1-year trial amenorrhea was present in 58.7% of the women and a complete absence of bleeding in 79.0%. Overall, the number of bleeding and spotting days per pill pack declined with time and adverse events and discontinuations were comparable to those reported for cyclic oral contraceptive regimens.

Oral contraceptive pill for primary dysmenorrhoea

BACKGROUND

Dysmenorrhoea (painful menstrual cramps) is common. Combined OCPs are recommended in the management of primary dysmenorrhoea.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of combined oral contraceptive pills for the management of primary dysmenorrhoea.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We conducted electronic searches for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Register of controlled trials CENTRAL, CCTR, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL (first conducted in 2001, updated on 5 November 2008).

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs comparing all combined OCPs with other combined OCPs, placebo, no management, or management with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) were considered.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Twenty three studies were identified and ten were included. Six compared the combined OCP with placebo and four compared different dosages of combined OCP.

MAIN RESULTS

One study of low dose oestrogen and four studies of medium dose oestrogen combined OCPs compared with placebo, for a combined total of 497 women, reported pain improvement. For the outcome of pain relief across the different OCPs the pooled OR suggested benefit with OCPs compared to placebo (7 RCTs: Peto OR 2.01 [95% CI 1.32, 3.08]).The Chi-squared test for heterogeneity showed there is significant heterogeneity with an I(2) statistic of 64% and a significant chi-square test (14.06, df=5, p=0.02). A sensitivity analysis removing the studies with inadequate allocation concealment suggested significant benefit of treatment with the pooled OR of 2.99 (95% CI 1.76, 5.07) and heterogeneity no longer statistically significant and I(2) statistic of 0%.Three studies reported adverse effects (Davis 2005; Hendrix 2002; GPRG 1968) The adverse effects were nausea, headaches and weight gain. Two studies reported if women experienced any side effect and no evidence of an effect was found (3 RCTs: OR = 1.45 (95% 0.71, 2.94). There was no evidence of statistical heterogeneity.There were no studies identified that compared combined OCP versus non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugsThere was no evidence of a difference for the pooled studies for 3rd generation pro gestagens (OR = 1.11 (95% CI 0.79 - 1.57)). For the 2nd generation versus 3rd generation the OR was 0.44 (95% CI 0.23-0.84) suggesting benefit of the 3rd generation OCP but this was for a single study (Winkler 2003).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence for pain improvement with the use of the OCP (both low and medium dose oestrogen) in women with dysmenorrhoea. There is no evidence of a difference between different OCP preparations.

Steroidal contraceptives: effect on carbohydrate metabolism in women without diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Many hormonal contraceptives have been associated with changes in carbohydrate metabolism. Alterations may include decreased glucose tolerance and increased insulin resistance, which are risk factors for Type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease. These issues have been raised with progestin-only contraceptives as well as contraceptives containing estrogen. Such potential effects could influence recommendations for, and use of, these widely used and effective contraceptives.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of hormonal contraceptives on carbohydrate metabolism in healthy women and those at risk for diabetes due to overweight.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the computerized databases MEDLINE, POPLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, and LILACS for studies of hormonal contraceptives and carbohydrate metabolism. We also searched for clinical trials in ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP. We wrote to investigators for information about other published or unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials were considered if they examined carbohydrate metabolism in women without diabetes who used hormonal contraceptives for contraception. Interventions could include comparisons of a hormonal contraceptive with a placebo, a non-hormonal contraceptive, or another hormonal contraceptive that differed in drug, dosage, or regimen. Interventions included at least three cycles. Outcomes included glucose and insulin levels, which were generally reported as fasting value or response to an oral glucose tolerance test.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed for inclusion all titles and abstracts identified during the literature searches with no language limitations. The data were abstracted and entered into RevMan. Studies were examined for methodological quality. For continuous variables, the mean difference was computed with 95% confidence interval (CI) using a fixed-effect model. For dichotomous outcomes, the Peto odds ratio with 95% CI was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 43 trials that met the inclusion criteria. No study stratified by body weight (normal-weight versus overweight women). Results for desogestrel were often favorable regarding carbohydrate metabolism but inconsistent overall. Glucose and insulin means were more favorable for norethisterone in studies of progestin-only contraceptives. For other progestins, little or no difference was noted across trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that hormonal contraceptives have limited effect on carbohydrate metabolism in women without diabetes. Strong statements cannot be made, though, due to having few studies that compared any particular types of contraceptives. Many trials had small numbers of participants and some had large losses. Many studies had poor reporting of methods. No information was available regarding the effects among women who were overweight.

Oral contraceptive pill as treatment for primary dysmenorrhoea

BACKGROUND

Dysmenorrhoea (painful menstrual cramps) is common. Combined OCPs are recommended in the management of primary dysmenorrhoea.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of combined oral contraceptive pills for the management of primary dysmenorrhoea.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We conducted electronic searches for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Register of controlled trials CENTRAL, CCTR, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL (first conducted in 2001, updated on 5 November 2008).

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs comparing all combined OCPs with other combined OCPs, placebo, no management, or management with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) were considered.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Twenty three studies were identified and ten were included. Six compared the combined OCP with placebo and four compared different dosages of combined OCP.

MAIN RESULTS

One study of low dose oestrogen and four studies of medium dose oestrogen combined OCPs compared with placebo, for a combined total of 497 women, reported pain improvement. For the outcome of pain relief across the different OCPs wthe pooled OR suggested benefit with OCPs compared to placebo (7 RCTs: Peto OR 2.01 [95% CI 1.32, 3.08]).The Chi-squared test for heterogeneity showed there is significant heterogeneity with an I(2) statistic of 64% and a significant chi-square test (14.06, df=5, p=0.02). A sensitivity analysis removing the studies with inadequate allocation concealment suggested significant benefit of treatment with the pooled OR of 2.99 (95% CI 1.76, 5.07) and hereterogeneity no longer statistically significant and I(2) statistic of 0%.Three studies reported adverse effects (Davis 2005; Hendrix 2002; GPRG 1968) The adverse effects were nausea, headaches and weight gain. Two studies reported if women experienced any side effect and no evidence of an effect was found (3 RCTs: OR = 1.45 (95% 0.71, 2.94). There was no evidence of statistical heterogeneity.There were no studies identified that compated combined OCP versus non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. There was no evidence of a difference for the pooled studies for 3rd generation progestagens (OR = 1.11 (95% CI 0.79 - 1.57)). For the 2nd generation versus 3rd generation the OR was 0.44 (95% CI 0.23-0.84) suggesting benefit of the 3rd generation OCP but this was for a single study (Winkler 2003).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence for pain improvement with the use of the OCP (both low and medium dose oestrogen) in women with dysmenorrhoea. There is no evidence of a difference between different OCP preparations.

20 microg versus >20 microg estrogen combined oral contraceptives for contraception

BACKGROUND

Concern about estrogen-related adverse effects has led to progressive reductions in the estrogen dose in combination oral contraceptives (COCs). However, reducing the amount of estrogen to improve safety could result in decreased contraceptive effectiveness and unacceptable changes in bleeding patterns.

OBJECTIVES

To test the hypothesis that COCs containing </=20 microg ethinyl estradiol (EE) perform similarly as those containing >20 microg in terms of contraceptive effectiveness, bleeding patterns, discontinuation, and side effects.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched computerized databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and POPLINE) up to January 2008, and searched the references of eligible trials. We wrote to oral contraceptive manufacturers to identify eligible trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

English-language reports of randomized controlled trials were eligible that compare a COC containing </=20 microg EE with a COC containing >20 microg EE. We excluded studies where the interventions were designed to be administered for less than three consecutive cycles or to be used primarily as treatment for non-contraceptive conditions. Trials had to report on contraceptive effectiveness, bleeding patterns, trial discontinuation due to bleeding-related reasons or other side effects, or side effects to be included in the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary reviewer evaluated all titles and abstracts located in the literature searches to determine whether they met the inclusion criteria. Two reviewers independently extracted data from the studies identified for inclusion. We wrote to the authors when clarifications or additional data were needed. Data were entered and analyzed with RevMan 4.2.

MAIN RESULTS

No differences were found in contraceptive effectiveness for the 13 COC pairs for which this outcome was reported. Compared to the higher-estrogen pills, several COCs containing 20 microg EE resulted in higher rates of early trial discontinuation (overall and due to adverse events such as irregular bleeding) as well as increased risk of bleeding disturbances (both amenorrhea or infrequent bleeding and irregular, prolonged, frequent bleeding, or breakthrough bleeding or spotting).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

While COCs containing 20 microg EE may be theoretically safer, this review did not focus on the rare events required to assess this hypothesis. Data from existing randomized controlled trials are inadequate to detect possible differences in contraceptive effectiveness. Low-dose estrogen COCs resulted in higher rates of bleeding pattern disruptions. However, most trials compared COCs containing different progestin types, and changes in bleeding patterns could be related to progestin type as well as estrogen dose. Higher follow-up rates are essential for meaningful interpretation of results.

Steroidal contraceptives: effect on carbohydrate metabolism in women without diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Many hormonal contraceptives have been associated with changes in carbohydrate metabolism. Alterations may include decreased glucose tolerance and increased insulin resistance, which are risk factors for Type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease. These issues have been raised with progestin-only contraceptives as well as contraceptives containing estrogen. Such potential effects could influence recommendations for, and use of, these widely used and effective contraceptives.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of hormonal contraceptives on carbohydrate metabolism in healthy women and those at risk for diabetes due to overweight.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the computerized databases MEDLINE, POPLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, and LILACS for studies of hormonal contraceptives and carbohydrate metabolism. The latest search was conducted in March 2006. We wrote to investigators for information about other published or unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were considered if they examined carbohydrate metabolism in women without diabetes who used hormonal contraceptives for contraception. Interventions included comparisons of a hormonal contraceptive with a placebo, a non-hormonal contraceptive, or another hormonal contraceptive that differed in drug, dosage, or regimen. Interventions included at least three cycles. Outcomes included glucose and insulin levels, which were generally reported as fasting value or response to an oral glucose tolerance test.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed for inclusion all titles and abstracts identified during the literature searches with no language limitations. The data were abstracted and the information was entered into RevMan. Studies were examined for methodological quality. For continuous variables, the weighted mean difference was computed with 95% confidence interval (CI) using a fixed-effect model. For dichotomous outcomes, the Peto odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 39 trials met the inclusion criteria. No study stratified by body weight (normal-weight versus overweight women). Results for desogestrel were often favorable regarding carbohydrate metabolism but inconsistent overall. Glucose and insulin means were more favorable for norethisterone in studies of progestin-only contraceptives. For other progestins, little or no difference was noted across trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that hormonal contraceptives have limited effect on carbohydrate metabolism in women without diabetes. Strong statements cannot be made, though, due to having few studies that compared any particular types of contraceptives. Many trials had small numbers of participants and some had large losses to follow up. Most studies had poor reporting of methods. No information was available regarding the effects among women who were overweight.

Insulin resistance, the metabolic syndrome, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease risk in women with PCOS

Polycystic ovary syndrome is the most common endocrinopathy of reproductive aged women affecting 6-10% of the population. Traditionally considered a reproductive disorder manifesting as chronic anovulation, infertility, and hyperandrogenism, management has primarily focused on short-term reproductive outcomes. Recently, however, significant metabolic aspects in conjunction with longer-term health sequealae of PCOS have been recognized. The metabolic features are primarily related to underlying insulin resistance (IR), which is now understood to play an important role in both the pathogenesis and long-term sequelae of PCOS.

Insulin resistance, the metabolic syndrome, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease risk in women with PCOS

Polycystic ovary syndrome is the most common endocrinopathy of reproductive aged women affecting 6-10% of the population. Traditionally considered a reproductive disorder manifesting as chronic anovulation, infertility, and hyperandrogenism, management has primarily focused on short-term reproductive outcomes. Recently, however, significant metabolic aspects in conjunction with longer-term health sequealae of PCOS have been recognized. The metabolic features are primarily related to underlying insulin resistance (IR), which is now understood to play an important role in both the pathogenesis and long-term sequelae of PCOS.

Triphasic versus monophasic oral contraceptives for contraception

BACKGROUND

Side effects of oral contraceptive pills (OCs) discourage adherence to and continuation of OC regimens. Strategies to decrease adverse effects led to the introduction of the triphasic OC in the 1980s. Whether triphasic OCs have higher accidental pregnancy rates than monophasic pills is unknown. Nor is it known if triphasic pills give better cycle control and fewer side effects than the monophasic pills.

OBJECTIVES

To compare triphasic OCs with monophasic OCs in terms of efficacy, cycle control, and discontinuation due to side effects.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the computerized databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, POPLINE, LILACS and CENTRAL. Additionally, we searched the reference lists of relevant articles and book chapters. We also contacted researchers and pharmaceutical companies in Europe and the U.S. to identify other trials not found in our search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any triphasic OC with any monophasic pill used to prevent pregnancy. Interventions had to include at least three treatment cycles.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed the studies found in the literature searches for possible inclusion and for their methodological quality. We contacted the authors of all included studies and of possibly randomized trials for supplemental information about the methods and outcomes studied. We entered the data into RevMan 4.2 and calculated odds ratios for the outcome measures of efficacy, breakthrough bleeding, spotting, withdrawal bleeding and discontinuation.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 21 trials included, 18 examined contraceptive effectiveness: the triphasic and monophasic preparations did not differ significantly. Several trials reported favorable bleeding patterns, i.e. less spotting, breakthrough bleeding or amenorrhea, in triphasic versus monophasic OC users. However, meta-analysis was generally not possible due to differences in measuring and reporting the cycle disturbance data as well as differences in progestogen type and hormone dosages. No significant differences were found in the numbers of women who discontinued due to medical reasons, cycle disturbances, intermenstrual bleeding or adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence is insufficient to determine whether triphasic OCs differ from monophasic OCs in effectiveness, bleeding patterns or discontinuation rates. Therefore, we recommend monophasic pills as a first choice for women starting OC use. Large, high-quality RCTs that compare triphasic and monophasic OCs with identical progestogens are needed to determine whether triphasic pills differ from monophasic OCs. Future studies should follow the WHO recommendations on recording menstrual bleeding patterns and the CONSORT reporting guidelines.

Low-dose ethinylestradiol/levonorgestrel

Low-dose ethinylestradiol/levonorgestrel 20 microg/100 microg is a combined oral contraceptive that prevents pregnancy primarily by inhibiting ovulation. The Pearl index (pregnancies per 100 woman-years of use) with ethinylestradiol/levonorgestrel 20 microg/100 microg was 0.88 and the cumulative pregnancy rate was 1.9% at the end of a 3-year open-label trial (1708 women with 26 554 evaluable cycles). The contraceptive efficacy of ethinylestradiol/levonorgestrel 20 microg/100 microg was similar to that of other low-dose combined oral contraceptives containing ethinylestradiol 20 or 35 microg in a 6-cycle trial (463 evaluable women). Ethinylestradiol/levonorgestrel 20 microg/100 microg is well tolerated; adverse events were those commonly associated with combined oral contraceptives. Headache and metrorrhagia (2% of women) were the most common adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation in the 3-year trial. Cycle control in open-label trials in women receiving up to 36 cycles of ethinylestradiol/levonorgestrel 20 microg/100 microg was generally good, with the incidence of intermenstrual bleeding being highest during the first few cycles of use and decreasing thereafter.

Twenty micrograms vs. >20 microg estrogen oral contraceptives for contraception: systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Concern about estrogen-related adverse effects has led to progressive reductions in the estrogen dose in combination oral contraceptives (COCs). This review of randomized controlled trials tested the hypothesis that COCs containing <or=20 microg ethinyl estradiol (EE) perform similarly to those containing >20 microg in terms of contraceptive effectiveness, bleeding patterns, discontinuation and side effects. Data from the 18 eligible trials conducted to date are inadequate for detecting possible differences in contraceptive effectiveness. Several COCs containing 20 microg EE resulted in higher rates of early trial discontinuation (overall and due to adverse events such as irregular bleeding) as well as increased risk of bleeding disturbances (both amenorrhea/infrequent bleeding and irregular, prolonged, frequent bleeding or breakthrough bleeding or spotting) than their higher-estrogen comparison pills. However, most trials compared COCs containing different progestin types, and changes in bleeding patterns could be related to progestin type as well as estrogen dose. While health care providers and women might select COCs containing 20 microg EE based on theoretical improvements in safety profile from the reduced dose of estrogen, no evidence is available to support this choice.

20 mcg versus >20 mcg estrogen combined oral contraceptives for contraception

BACKGROUND

Concern about estrogen-related adverse effects has led to progressive reductions in the estrogen dose in combination oral contraceptives (COCs). However, reducing the amount of estrogen to improve safety also could result in decreased contraceptive effectiveness and unacceptable changes in bleeding patterns.

OBJECTIVES

To test the hypothesis that COCs containing </=20 mcg ethinyl estradiol (EE) perform similarly as those containing >20 mcg in terms of contraceptive effectiveness, bleeding patterns, discontinuation, and side effects.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched computerized databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and POPLINE) from their inception to November 2003, searched the references of eligible trials, and wrote to oral contraceptive manufacturers to identify eligible trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

English-language reports of randomized controlled trials that compare a COC containing </=20 mcg EE with a COC containing >20 mcg EE were eligible. We excluded studies where the interventions were designed to be administered for less than three consecutive cycles or to be used primarily as treatment for non-contraceptive conditions. Trials had to report on contraceptive effectiveness, bleeding patterns, trial discontinuation due to bleeding-related reasons or other side effects, or side effects to be included in the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary reviewer evaluated all titles and abstracts located in the literature searches to determine whether they met the inclusion criteria. Two reviewers independently extracted data from the studies identified for inclusion. We wrote to the authors when clarifications or additional data were needed. Data were entered and analyzed with RevMan 4.2.

MAIN RESULTS

No differences were found in contraceptive effectiveness for the 11 COC pairs for which this outcome was reported. Several COCs containing 20 mcg EE resulted in higher rates of early trial discontinuation (overall and due to adverse events such as irregular bleeding) as well as increased risk of bleeding disturbances (both amenorrhea/infrequent bleeding and irregular, prolonged, frequent bleeding, or breakthrough bleeding or spotting) than their higher-estrogen comparison pills.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

While COCs containing 20 mcg EE may be theoretically safer, this review did not focus on the rare events required to assess this hypothesis. Data from randomized controlled trials are inadequate to detect possible differences in contraceptive effectiveness. Low-dose estrogen COCs resulted in higher rates of bleeding pattern disruptions. However, most trials compared COCs containing different progestin types, and changes in bleeding patterns could be related to progestin type as well as estrogen dose.

Hormonal Contraception and Physiology: A Research-based Theory of Discontinuation Due to Side Effects

Side effects influence the acceptability and continuation of hormonal contraceptives. Counseling the client about the management of side effects is a principal approach advocated for increasing continuation. Evidence of a biological basis for variation in women's tolerance of hormonal contraceptives argues, however, that greater attention should be given to altering the product rather than principally attempting to alter a woman's ability to deal with the product. Discontinuation rates for hormonal contraceptives, largely attributable to side effects and health concerns, are high in nearly all less-developed countries for which Demographic and Health Survey data are available. Oral contraceptives appear to be particularly problematic for Latin American women, most notably in Bolivia. Clinical trials suggest substantial variation in the physiological response to exogenous hormones, and new evidence confirms the hypothesis that the normal hormonal profiles of Bolivian women are significantly lower than those of women in the United States. These findings suggest a need for more population-specific physiological research linked to analyses of the possible association between endogenous hormone differences and contraceptive continuation. Appropriately adjusting the level of the steroid delivered may benefit women's health and improve the acceptability and continuation of hormonal contraceptives.

Superior cycle control with a contraceptive vaginal ring compared with an oral contraceptive containing 30 μg ethinylestradiol and 150 μg levonorgestrel: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

This trial was conducted to compare cycle control with vaginal ring a combined contraceptive vaginal ring, and a combined oral contraceptive (COC) delivering 30 mug ethinylestradiol (EE) and 150 mug levonorgestrel.

METHODS

This open-label, randomized, multi-centre, Phase III study involved adult women from 11 countries. Subjects were treated with either vaginal ring or a COC for 13 cycles (12 months).

RESULTS

A total of 1030 subjects (vaginal ring, n=512; COC, n=518) comprised the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. The percentage of women in the ITT population who completed the trial was 70.9% for vaginal ring and 71.2% for the COC group. The incidence of breakthrough bleeding and spotting over cycles 2-13, the primary efficacy parameter, was lower with vaginal ring (range 2.0-6.4%) than the COC (range 3.5-12.6%), and for cycles 2 and 9 the lower incidence with vaginal ring was confirmed as statistically significant (P=0.003 and P=0.002 respectively). The incidence of intended bleeding was significantly higher over all cycles with vaginal ring (58.8-72.8%) than with the COC (43.4-57.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Cycle control with vaginal ring was excellent and superior to that of a COC containing 30 mug EE.

Serum lipid and lipoprotein changes induced by preparations containing low-dose ethinylestradiol plus levonorgestrel

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effects on lipid metabolism of a new low-dose monophasic combination oral contraceptive with 100 microg levonorgestrel and 20 microg ethinylestradiol. Sixty healthy women aged 18-45 years were administered the medication during three cycles. The study participants were screened for lipid changes. The differences in cholesterol and triglyceride levels were not statistically significant, but high-density lipoprotein levels were significantly lower and low-density lipoprotein levels were significantly higher than the baseline. Women at risk of cardiovascular disease should be carefully monitored even when using low-dose preparations.

Bleeding patterns and patient acceptability of standard or continuous dosing regimens of a low-dose oral contraceptive: a randomized trial

The purpose of this study is to compare bleeding patterns and acceptability of a contraceptive regimen of combined 20 microg ethinyl estradiol/100 microg levonorgestrel taken with and without a hormone-free interval. Thirty-two women desiring oral contraception were randomized to six 28-day cycles (standard group) or 168 days without a pill-free interval (continuous group). Participants kept a daily bleeding calendar documenting bleeding events (none, spotting or required sanitary protection) and side effects (headache, nausea, breast tenderness, depression, premenstrual syndrome and bloating). Primary outcome was number of bleeding days. Secondary outcomes included bleeding days requiring sanitary protection, amenorrhea, patient acceptability of bleeding patterns, method satisfaction and affective side effects. There were no differences in the baseline characteristics of the two groups. Although total bleeding days were fewer in the continuous group (mean = 25.9 vs. 34.9 days), this result did not reach statistical significance. However, women in the continuous group reported significantly fewer bleeding days that required protection (18.4 vs. 33.8 days, p < 0.01), and were more likely to have amenorrhea. Although both groups reported a high level of satisfaction with bleeding patterns and side effect profiles, women in the continuous group reported significantly fewer days of bloating (0.7 vs. 11.1 days, p = 0.04), and menstrual pain (1.9 vs. 13.3 days, p < 0.01). Continuous use of 20 microg ethinyl estradiol/100 microg levonorgestrel is associated with less bleeding requiring protection, and more amenorrhea than standard administration. Taken with or without a hormone-free interval, this oral contraceptive formulation is highly acceptable with regard to bleeding patterns and side effect profile. The continuous group had fewer light and moderate bleeding days, less bloating and menstrual pain. For patients who are seeking these results, this method may be more desirable.

Efficacy of a low-dose oral contraceptive containing 20 microg of ethinyl estradiol and 100 microg of levonorgestrel for the treatment of moderate acne: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Acne is a multifactorial disease in which androgens appear to play an important role. A low-dose oral contraceptive containing 20 microg of ethinyl estradiol and 100 microg of levonorgestrel (EE/LNG) has been shown to improve biochemical markers of androgenicity. Lowering bioavailable androgens may improve acne.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a low-dose oral contraceptive containing 20 microg of EE and 100 microg of LNG for the treatment of moderate acne.

METHODS

In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, healthy female subjects (n = 371; >/=14 years old) with regular menstrual cycles and moderate facial acne were randomly assigned to receive EE/LNG or placebo for 6 cycles of 28 days. Acne lesion counts and clinician global assessment were performed at the end of each cycle. Patient self-assessments were collected and biochemical markers of androgenicity were also measured.

RESULTS

At the end of the study, the number of inflammatory and total lesions was significantly lower with EE/LNG compared with placebo (P <.05). Patients in the EE/LNG group also had significantly better scores for clinician global and patient self-assessments than those in the placebo group (P <.05). Biochemical markers of androgenicity improved during EE/LNG treatment compared with placebo and baseline values.

CONCLUSION

A low-dose oral contraceptive containing EE/LNG is effective and safe for the treatment of moderate acne.

Using a low-dose contraceptive in women 35 years of age and over: 20 microg estradiol/100 microg levonorgestrel

The efficacy, safety, and cycle control of a low-dose oral contraceptive (OC) containing 20 microg ethinyl estradiol (EE) and 100 microg levonorgestrel (LNG) has been demonstrated in a large trial with 1708 women (>or=15 years old with regular menstrual cycles). The objective of this study was to analyze the same parameters in 218 of the 1708 women who were 35 years of age and older. Women were administered the 28-day, combination OC (20 microg EE/100 microg LNG; 21 days active medication/7 days placebo) for up to 3 years. During 3859 cycles evaluated for efficacy, one pregnancy occurred (Pearl index 0.34). The most common adverse events cited as reasons for discontinuation were hypertension (3% of subjects), headache (2%), and metrorrhagia (2%). One subject withdrew as a result of a serious adverse event. Breakthrough bleeding, spotting, and bleeding and spotting occurred in 2.9%, 11.0%, and 6.8%, respectively, of the 3739 cycles evaluated for cycle control. This low-dose, monophasic regimen of 20 microg EE/100 microg LNG is an effective, safe, and tolerable contraceptive and provides good cycle control for women 35 years of age and older.

Multicenter, comparative study of cycle control, efficacy and tolerability of two low-dose oral contraceptives containing 20 microg ethinylestradiol/100 microg levonorgestrel and 20 microg ethinylestradiol/500 microg norethisterone

A comparison of cycle control, efficacy and tolerability of two oral contraceptive preparations containing 20 microg ethinylestradiol combined with either 100 microg levonorgestrel (EE/LNG 20/100) or 500 microg norethisterone (EE/NET 20/500) was conducted. These results were compared to a standard reference preparation, containing 30 microg ethinylestradiol combined with 150 microg levonorgestrel (EE/LNG 30/150). Efficacy data from 8,544 treatment cycles were obtained from 767 women. Good cycle control and effective contraception was achieved with the two LNG preparations, however, the cycle control results were less favorable with EE/NET 20/500. The cumulative incidence of women with at least one episode of intermenstrual bleeding from cycles 2 to 7 (primary target variable) was 43.9% for EE/LNG 20/100, 72.7% for EE/NET 20/500, and 15.7% for the standard EE/LNG 30/150. The difference between the 2 20 microg of EE preparations, which favored EE/LNG 20/100, was statistically significant (p = 0.001). The overall spotting rates (cycles 1-13) were 9.3% for EE/LNG 20/100, 21.7% for EE/NET 20/500, and 3.3% for the standard EE/LNG 30/150. Amenorrhea was reported in 7.1% (EE/LNG 20/100), 20.6% (EE/NET 20/500), and 0.9% (standard EE/LNG 30/150), respectively. Intermenstrual bleeding episodes were shorter with EE/LNG 20/100 and EE/LNG 30/150 of the 13 treatment cycles. The study Pearl indices were 0.9 for EE/LNG 20/100, 1.9 for EE/NET 20/500, and 0.0 for EE/LNG 30/150. All three treatments were well tolerated. However, tolerability was somewhat less favorable with EE/NET 20/500. A total of 160 women prematurely discontinued the study for various reasons (EE/LNG 20/100: 7%; EE/NET 20/500: 18%; EE/LNG 30/150: 4%). The overall adverse event incidence rate during the trial was low in all groups. Blood pressure remained largely unaffected. Thirteen serious adverse events were recorded for all treatment groups, all but one were assessed as not related to the treatments. There were no remarkable treatment related differences in mean body weight throughout the study and the laboratory values were largely unaffected in all three treatments groups.

The emerging use of the 20-microg oral contraceptive

OBJECTIVE

To highlight studies that investigated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of low-dose oral contraceptives (OCs) containing 20 microg of ethinyl estradiol (EE) and to discuss the use of these low-dose contraceptives in women from adolescence to menopause and the noncontraceptive health benefits likely to be afforded by low-dose contraceptives.

DESIGN

Relevant literature was identified by searching MEDLINE and EMBASE. Other sources were located by consulting the bibliographies of the material collected from Medline and EMBASE. Sources for additional information included documents from the United States Food and Drug Administration and the Physicians' Desk Reference (54th ed.).

CONCLUSION(S)

The current lowest available dose of EE used for OCs in the United States is 20 microg. Formulations with 20 microg of EE are efficacious and have a low incidence of estrogen-related side effects. Since this lowest effective EE dose inhibits ovarian activity, 20 microg of EE should also provide the noncontraceptive health benefits of OCs. Both contraceptive and noncontraceptive benefits of OCs are available to most women from adolescence to menopause without complications.

Low-dose oral contraceptives: health consequences of discontinuation

Presently, the lowest effective estrogen dose available as a combination oral contraceptive (OC) in the United States is 20 microg of ethinyl estradiol (EE) with different progestins. Twenty micrograms of EE coupled with levonorgestrel results in fewer side effects and cycle control comparable with higher-dose pills. Differences between therapeutically equivalent and brand-name, low-dose oral contraceptives, with respect to the bioavailability of hormones, may interfere with contraceptive efficacy and increase breakthrough bleeding. One of the most common reasons why women discontinue OCs is increased breakthrough bleeding. Because after OC discontinuation most women switch to a less-effective method, or no method, of contraception, an increase in breakthrough bleeding could ultimately result in an increase in unintended pregnancy. Thus, substituting a therapeutically equivalent for a brand-name low-dose oral contraceptive may have significant clinical and economic effects on individual and public health.