Male contraception: A realistic option?

Oleanolic acid causes reversible contraception in male mice by increasing the permeability of the germinal epithelium

The effects of oleanolic acid (OA) on the fertility of male mice were investigated using both invivo and invitro experimental models. The experimental group (n=12) was treated with a daily dose of 30mgOAkg-1 bodyweight (i.p.), while the control group (n=6) received a daily dose of 10% ethanol solution (1mLkg-1 bodyweight). The effect of OA on the permeability status of TM4 Sertoli monolayers was investigated by measuring the transepithelial electrical resistance (TER), intracellular electrical resistance and semiquantitative RT-PCR. After 45 days, OA-treated males produced no pregnancies but in the control group, all 12 females were impregnated (69 offspring). Male mice, which demonstrated sterility when exposed to OA, recovered their fertility after 30 days (78 offspring). Testicular histological observations of OA-treated mice showed detachment of adjacent Sertoli-Sertoli cells. A control monolayer developed TER of 300-400 Ω.cm2, but OA (50, 100, 200µgL-1) treated monolayers developed TER of approximately 100Ω.cm2. Intracellular electrophysiological and RT-PCR data supported the premise that OA compromised tight junctional permeability. The study demonstrated reversible contraception in male mice by increasing the permeability of the germinal epithelium and further postulates that contraceptive reversibility is brought about by the reconstitution of the paracellular junctions between adjacent Sertoli cells.

Steroid hormones for contraception in men

BACKGROUND

Male hormonal contraception has been an elusive goal. Administration of sex steroids to men can shut off sperm production through effects on the pituitary and hypothalamus. However, this approach also decreases production of testosterone, so 'add-back' therapy is needed.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of male hormonal contraception.

SEARCH METHODS

In January and February 2012, we searched the computerized databases CENTRAL, MEDLINE, POPLINE, and LILACS. We also searched for recent trials in ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP. Previous searches included EMBASE. We wrote to authors of identified trials to seek additional unpublished or published trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all RCTs that compared a steroid hormone with another contraceptive. We excluded non-steroidal male contraceptives, such as gossypol. We included both placebo and active-regimen control groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcome measure was the absence of spermatozoa on semen examination, often called azoospermia. Data were insufficient to examine pregnancy rates and side effects.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 33 trials that met our inclusion criteria. The proportion of men who reportedly achieved azoospermia or had no detectable sperm varied widely. A few important differences emerged. 1) Levonorgestrel implants (160 μg daily) combined with injectable testosterone enanthate (TE) were more effective than levonorgestrel 125 µg daily combined with testosterone patches. 2) Levonorgestrel 500 μg daily improved the effectiveness of TE 100 mg injected weekly. 3) Levonorgestrel 250 μg daily improved the effectiveness of testosterone undecanoate (TU) 1000 mg injection plus TU 500 mg injected at 6 and 12 weeks. 4) Desogestrel 150 μg was less effective than desogestrel 300 μg (with testosterone pellets). 5) TU 500 mg was less likely to produce azoospermia than TU 1000 mg (with levonorgestrel implants). 6) Norethisterone enanthate 200 mg with TU 1000 mg led to more azoospermia when given every 8 weeks versus 12 weeks. 7) Four implants of 7-alpha-methyl-19-nortestosterone (MENT) were more effective than two MENT implants. We did not conduct any meta-analysis due to intervention differences.Several trials showed promising efficacy in percentages with azoospermia. Three examined desogestrel and testosterone preparations or etonogestrel and testosterone, and two examined levonorgestrel and testosterone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No male hormonal contraceptive is ready for clinical use. Most trials were small exploratory studies. Their power to detect important differences was limited and their results imprecise. In addition, assessment of azoospermia can vary by sensitivity of the method used. Future trials need more attention to the methodological requirements for RCTs. More trials with adequate power would also be helpful.

Male hormonal contraception: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

This study was performed to assess spermatogenesis suppression and safety of a new combination of an etonogestrel (ENG) implant combined with testosterone undecanoate (TU) injections for male contraception. This is the first large placebo-controlled study for male hormonal contraception.

DESIGN AND STUDY SUBJECTS

In this double-blind, multicenter study, we randomly assigned 354 healthy men to receive either a low- or high-release ENG implant sc combined with im TU injections (750 mg every 10 or 12 wk or 1000 mg every 12 wk) or placebo implant and injections. Treatment duration was 42 or 44 wk and posttreatment follow-up at least 24 wk.

RESULTS

Overall, spermatogenesis was suppressed to 1 million/ml or less at wk 16 in 89% of men, with approximately 94% in two high-release ENG groups. Suppression was maintained up to the end of the treatment period in 91% of men. For all men who completed the treatment period, 3% never achieved 1 million/ml or less. Median recovery time to a sperm concentration above 20 million/ml was 15 wk (mean 17 wk, 95% confidence interval 16-18 wk). Treatment was well tolerated. As compared with the placebo group, more men in the active treatment groups reported adverse events such as weight gain, mood changes, acne, sweating, or libido change. For both spermatogenesis suppression and safety, differences were small between the active treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of an ENG implant with TU injections is a well-tolerated male hormonal method, providing effective and reversible suppression of spermatogenesis. Although the results are good, there is still room for improvement, possibly by adjusting the dose regimen or changing the mode of application.

Contraception and abortion

This article is the fourth in a series of articles on sexuality and sexual health.

More than eight years' hands-on experience with the novel long-acting parenteral testosterone undecanoate

Testosterone (T) as a compound for treatment of T deficiency has been available for almost 70 years, but the pharmaceutical formulations have been less than ideal. Traditionally, injectable T esters have been used for treatment, but they generate supranormal T levels shortly after the 2-3 weekly injection interval. T levels then decline very rapidly, becoming subnormal during the days preceding the next injection. The rapid fluctuations in plasma T are subjectively experienced as disagreeable. T undecanoate (TU) is a new injectable T preparation with a considerably better pharmacokinetic profile. After two initial injections separated by a 6-week interval, the following intervals between two injections are generally 12 weeks, eventually amounting to a total of four injections per year. Plasma T levels with this preparation are nearly always in the range of normal men, as are its metabolic products estradiol and dihydrotestosterone (DHT). It reverses the effects of hypogonadism on bone and muscle and metabolic parameters, and on sex functions. It is suitable for male contraception. Its safety profile is excellent because of the continuous normalcy of plasma T levels. No polycythemia has been observed and no adverse effects on lipid profiles. Prostate safety parameters are well within reference limits. TU is a valuable treatment option of androgen deficiency.

Steroid hormones for contraception in men

BACKGROUND

Male hormonal contraception has been an elusive goal. Administration of sex steroids to men can shut off sperm production through effects on the pituitary and hypothalamus. However, this approach also decreases production of testosterone, so 'add-back' therapy is needed.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize all randomized controlled trials of male hormonal contraception.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the computerized databases CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, POPLINE, and LILACS (each from inception to March 2006) for randomized controlled trials of hormonal contraception in men. We wrote to authors of identified trials to seek unpublished or published trials that we might have missed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials in any language that compared a steroid hormone with another contraceptive. We excluded non-steroidal male contraceptives, such as gossypol. We included both placebo and active-regimen control groups. All trials identified included only healthy men with normal semen analyses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Azoospermia (absence of spermatozoa on semen examination) was the primary outcome measure. Data were insufficient to examine pregnancy rates and side effects.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 30 trials that met our inclusion criteria. The proportion of men who achieved azoospermia varied widely in reports to date. A few important differences emerged from these trials: levonorgestrel implants combined with injectable testosterone enanthate (TE) were more effective than levonorgestrel 125 microg daily combined with testosterone patches; levonorgestrel 500 mug daily improved the effectiveness of TE 100 mg injected weekly; desogestrel 150 mug was less effective than desogestrel 300 mug (with testosterone pellets); testosterone undecanoate (TU) 500 mg was less likely to produce azoospermia than TU 1000 mg (with levonorgestrel implants); norethisterone enanthate 200 mg with TU 1000 mg led to more azoospermia when given every 8 weeks versus 12 weeks; four implants of 7-alpha-methyl-19-nortestosterone (MENT) were more effective than two MENT implants. Several trials showed promising efficacy in terms of percentages with azoospermia. Three examined desogestrel and testosterone preparations or etonogestrel (metabolite of desogestrel) and testosterone, and two examined levonorgestrel and testosterone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No male hormonal contraceptive is ready for clinical use. Most trials were small exploratory studies. As a result, their power to detect important differences was limited and their results imprecise. In addition, the definition of oligozoospermia has been imprecise or inconsistent. To avoid bias, future trials need more attention to the methodological requirements for randomized controlled trials. More trials with adequate power would also be helpful.