"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.

Emergency contraception: past, present and future

Women have been using emergency contraception (EC) for decades. Population studies have not shown that increased access to EC decreases abortion rates this is likely because of inconsistent and infrequent use even when it is available. Special populations, such as adolescents, have been shown to be just as good as their adult counterparts in comprehending EC instructions, and its use does not lead to more risky sexual practices or behaviors. There is little evidence on the administration of EC to victims of sexual assault, but what is available reveals more women who are victims of sexual assault should be offered EC as an option. Methods of EC include high doses of ethinyl estradiol; DES; Danzaol; combination ethinyl estradiol with a progestin; progestin alone and copper IUDs. This review describes the history of EC as well as newer medications such as the antiprogestins (gestrinone and uliprisatal acetate) and cyclooxygenase inhibitors(meloxifam). These methods have been added to the armamentarium and may prove to be more effective than current regimens. Finding a product that is highly effective with minimal side effects is a worthy goal, for it presents a woman with her last chance to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.

Ulipristal acetate versus levonorgestrel for emergency contraception: a randomised non-inferiority trial and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Emergency contraception can prevent unintended pregnancies, but current methods are only effective if used as soon as possible after sexual intercourse and before ovulation. We compared the efficacy and safety of ulipristal acetate with levonorgestrel for emergency contraception.

METHODS

Women with regular menstrual cycles who presented to a participating family planning clinic requesting emergency contraception within 5 days of unprotected sexual intercourse were eligible for enrolment in this randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial. 2221 women were randomly assigned to receive a single, supervised dose of 30 mg ulipristal acetate (n=1104) or 1.5 mg levonorgestrel (n=1117) orally. Allocation was by block randomisation stratified by centre and time from unprotected sexual intercourse to treatment, with allocation concealment by identical opaque boxes labelled with a unique treatment number. Participants were masked to treatment assignment whereas investigators were not. Follow-up was done 5-7 days after expected onset of next menses. The primary endpoint was pregnancy rate in women who received emergency contraception within 72 h of unprotected sexual intercourse, with a non-inferiority margin of 1% point difference between groups (limit of 1.6 for odds ratio). Analysis was done on the efficacy-evaluable population, which excluded women lost to follow-up, those aged over 35 years, women with unknown follow-up pregnancy status, and those who had re-enrolled in the study. Additionally, we undertook a meta-analysis of our trial and an earlier study to assess the efficacy of ulipristal acetate compared with levonorgestrel. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00551616.

FINDINGS

In the efficacy-evaluable population, 1696 women received emergency contraception within 72 h of sexual intercourse (ulipristal acetate, n=844; levonorgestrel, n=852). There were 15 pregnancies in the ulipristal acetate group (1.8%, 95% CI 1.0-3.0) and 22 in the levonorgestrel group (2.6%, 1.7-3.9; odds ratio [OR] 0.68, 95% CI 0.35-1.31). In 203 women who received emergency contraception between 72 h and 120 h after sexual intercourse, there were three pregnancies, all of which were in the levonorgestrel group. The most frequent adverse event was headache (ulipristal acetate, 213 events [19.3%] in 1104 women; levonorgestrel, 211 events [18.9%] in 1117 women). Two serious adverse events were judged possibly related to use of emergency contraception; a case of dizziness in the ulipristal acetate group and a molar pregnancy in the levonorgestrel group. In the meta-analysis (0-72 h), there were 22 (1.4%) pregnancies in 1617 women in the ulipristal acetate group and 35 (2.2%) in 1625 women in the levonorgestrel group (OR 0.58, 0.33-0.99; p=0.046).

INTERPRETATION

Ulipristal acetate provides women and health-care providers with an effective alternative for emergency contraception that can be used up to 5 days after unprotected sexual intercourse.

FUNDING

HRA Pharma.

Women’s preferences for the provision of emergency hormonal contraception services

OBJECTIVE

To elicit women's preferences for routes of supply for emergency hormonal contraception (EHC). The objectives were to identify which attributes of services women regard as important and to identify how women trade off reductions in one attribute for an improvement in another.

METHOD

A stated preference discrete choice experiment. Women attending sexual health services in a Primary Care Trust in the North West of England were invited to complete a self-completion questionnaire. Each respondent completed a questionnaire containing nine pair-wise choices. Demographic data were also collected. Conditional logit models were used to analyse the data.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Women's preferences for, and trade-offs between, the attributes of opening hours, medical staff seen, cost of EHC, length of wait for an appointment, privacy of consultation and attitude of staff.

RESULTS

Two hundred and sixty-nine women attending clinics (mean age 23.8 years, SD+/-8.69) completed the questionnaire. Almost two thirds of the sample had previously used EHC. All six attributes of EHC services were statistically significant factors influencing women's preferences for the supply of EHC. A significant proportion of women indicated on at least one occasion that they would risk pregnancy rather than choose one of the services offered to them.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that the way in which a service is configured and presented to women is likely to influence which service is chosen. In this study, women prioritised visiting a service where they would be treated in a sympathetic and non-judgemental manner. They also prioritised privacy. The results also suggest that if women are dissatisfied with aspects of an EHC service, they may choose not to visit it, thereby risking an unwanted pregnancy.

A qualitative study of women's use of emergency contraception

BACKGROUND

While the use of emergency contraception (EC) is becoming more widespread in Australia, little is known about the reasons for, and the social context of, this use.

METHODS

In order to explore the use of EC from the perspective of users, a qualitative study was conducted with women presenting to one of three health care settings in Melbourne, Australia for EC.

RESULTS

Thirty-two women ranging in age from 18 to 45 years were interviewed. While a number of themes were discussed with the women, this paper reports on four 'types of users' of EC identified from the data. 'Controllers' experienced failure of their contraceptive method and were very uncomfortable needing EC. They changed their contraceptive strategy in an attempt to avoid needing EC in the future. 'Thwarted controllers' were similar to controllers except that they could not improve their contraceptive strategy due to medical or social limitations. 'Risk takers' saw the use of EC as a component of their overall contraceptive strategy. They did not rely on EC regularly, but were comfortable to use it occasionally when the need arose. A final group of women were 'caught short' by a sexual experience that was unplanned and therefore they did not manage to use their chosen contraceptive strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this study challenge the assumptions that are often made about the users of EC and highlight the need to acknowledge the different ways that women make sense of, and make decisions about, contraception.

Minimum effectiveness of the levonorgestrel regimen of emergency contraception

The standard method for estimating the effectiveness of emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs) uses external data to calculate the proportion of expected pregnancies averted by the treatment. Because these data may not be applicable to ECP study populations, this approach could result in substantial overestimation of effectiveness. We used data from two published randomized trials of the levonorgestrel and Yuzpe ECP regimens to calculate the minimum effectiveness of the levonorgestrel regimen. Conservatively assuming that the Yuzpe regimen was entirely ineffective in these trials, we estimate that the levonorgestrel regimen prevented at least 49% of expected pregnancies (95% confidence interval: 17%, 69%). Because physiologic data suggests that the Yuzpe regimen does, in fact, have some efficacy, the effectiveness of the levonorgestrel regimen is likely to be higher than our minimum estimate.

Why do university students use hormonal emergency contraception?

OBJECTIVES

To establish why university students in Finland, who have easy access to well-affordable health services, still use hormonal emergency contraception.

METHOD

All students who sought emergency contraception in the Tampere Student Health Station during the period from 1 September 2000 to 31 December 2001 received a questionnaire on their use of it. Of the total, 114 (67%) were returned.

RESULTS

Two-thirds of respondents experienced condom failure, and the remainder used no contraception. In open answers, respondents gave many explanations as to why they had used no contraception, e.g. having been over-passionate or drunk.

CONCLUSION

Finnish students use emergency contraception, but to no great extent. Our results indicate that service providers should pay attention to sexual health in the full sense but not omit to give detailed advice on condom use during counselling.

Estimating the effectiveness of emergency contraceptive pills

OBJECTIVE

We use new estimates of conception probabilities by cycle day of intercourse, where cycle day is measured with day 1 being the first day of bleeding in a cycle, to propose a new approach for estimating the effectiveness of emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs). We use this new approach to examine the absolute effectiveness and the cost-effectiveness of ECPs and whether ECPs are more effective the sooner after unprotected intercourse they are initiated.

METHODS

Using the new set of conception probabilities, we employ data from two recent clinical trials of ECPs, one from the Population Council and the other from the World Health Organization (WHO), to examine the effectiveness of the combined ECP regimen.

RESULTS

The expected pregnancy rate among typical users was 6.2% in the Population Council trial and 7.4% in the WHO trial based on conception probabilities by cycle day relative to the day of ovulation. Based on conception probabilities by cycle day relative to the first day of bleeding, the expected pregnancy rates dropped to 5.4% and 5.2%, respectively. The two trials yield conflicting evidence regarding whether effectiveness declines with treatment delay.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that the absolute levels of effectiveness for the Yuzpe regimen of emergency contraception and the cost-effectiveness of this regimen have probably been overstated when based on conception probabilities by cycle day relative to day of ovulation.

Effectiveness of the Yuzpe regimen of emergency contraception by cycle day of intercourse: implications for mechanism of action

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to provide evidence about the mechanism of action of the Yuzpe method of emergency contraception by examining effectiveness by cycle day of intercourse relative to ovulation.

METHODS

Through a literature search, we identified eight studies that present the number of women treated and outcome of treatment by cycle day of unprotected intercourse relative to expected day of ovulation. Using five sets of external estimates of conception probabilities by cycle day of intercourse among women not using contraception, we assessed and compared the effectiveness of the Yuzpe regimen by whether intercourse occurred on or before the second day before ovulation or afterward, and whether intercourse occurred on or before the first day before ovulation or afterward.

RESULTS

In 36 of the 45 pairs of estimates of effectiveness, based on eight separate studies and the eight studies combined and five different sets of conception probabilities by cycle day, effectiveness was higher-and in most cases substantially higher-when intercourse occurred on or before the second day before ovulation (day -2) than when it occurred later. When data were stratified by whether intercourse occurred on or before the day before ovulation (day -1), effectiveness was greater when intercourse occurred early in 43 of 45 pairs.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that one hypothesized mechanism of action of the Yuzpe method, inhibiting implantation of a fertilized egg, is unlikely to be the primary mechanism of action.

Emergency contraception

Emergency contraception is used to prevent pregnancy after a coital act not adequately protected by a regular method of contraception. In contrast to early medical abortion, emergency contraception prevents a pregnancy from starting and does not disrupt an established pregnancy. The most commonly used approaches consist of two oral doses of contraceptive steroids. The levonorgestrel-only regimen (levonorgestrel, 0.75 mg, repeated in 12 hours) appears to be more effective and better tolerated than the Yuzpe regimen (ethinyl estradiol, 100 microg, and levonorgestrel, 0.5 mg, repeated in 12 hours). In the largest randomized, controlled trial to date, levonorgestrel prevented about 85% of pregnancies that would have occurred without its use. Hormonal emergency contraception has no known medical contraindications, although it is not indicated for suspected or confirmed pregnancy. However, if hormonal emergency contraception is inadvertently taken in early pregnancy, neither the woman nor the fetus will be harmed. Nausea and vomiting associated with the Yuzpe regimen can be reduced by prophylactic use of meclizine. A strong medical and legal case exists for making hormonal emergency contraception available over the counter, as has happened in countries other than the United States. Easier access to and wider use of emergency contraception could dramatically lower the high rates of unintended pregnancy and induced abortion in the United States.

Emergency hormonal contraception: the community pharmacy perspective

OBJECTIVE

To explore the views of community pharmacists in the North West of England towards the deregulation of emergency hormonal contraception (EHC) and to examine their support and training needs.

DESIGN

Two focus group discussions.

SUBJECTS

Fourteen community pharmacists, of whom eight were currently participating in a scheme to supply EHC free of charge through a patient group direction (PGD).

RESULTS

A number of themes emerged from the discussions, which appeared to influence participants' views towards the use of EHC and towards deregulation. A number of participants appeared to lack detailed knowledge about the mode of action of EHC and misunderstandings about this, coupled with erroneously held beliefs about the adverse effects of the drug, appeared to influence their attitudes to deregulation. Participants identified risks associated with pharmacy supply of EHC, both to women and to themselves, in the form of litigation. EHC was accorded a special status which seemed to go beyond its pharmacological properties and risk-benefit profile. A key and recurring theme was abuse, an ill-defined concept which appeared to refer to multiple or repeated use. It is interesting to note that none of those participants supplying EHC under a PGD could provide any examples of such abuse from their own experience.

CONCLUSIONS

This small-scale study provides useful insights into the attitudes of these pharmacists towards EHC, the impact of increased availability of the drug, and the type of women who they believed would use EHC.

A multicenter clinical study on two types of levonorgestrel tablets administered for postcoital contraception

Contraceptive efficacy, cycle control and side effects of two types of 0.75 mg levonorgestrel tablets taken postcoitally during the periovulatory period of one cycle were studied in a multicenter trial involving 361 women. No significant differences were found between the two types of levonorgestrel pills in terms of contraceptive efficacy, cycle control and side effects. The failure rate observed (1.4% per treated cycle) was similar to that reported for other hormonal approaches to emergency postcoital contraception. Intermenstrual bleeding or spotting occurred in 11.5% of the cycles and anovulation as assessed from BBT charts in 14.4% of cycles. One or more side effects were reported by 22.2% of subjects. The relatively frequent occurrence of cycle disturbances and subjective side effects make it unlikely that the repeated postcoital use of levonorgestrel would be an acceptable routine method of contraception for most women.

Postcoital interception with steroids

At present there is a high demand for PCI. The psychological distress experienced by women after unprotected intercourse while awaiting the onset of her next menses could be avoided with effective postcoital treatment. As demonstrated in countries with good health services, the availability of PCI leads to low abortion rates. PCI is designed for use as an emergency method after unprotected intercourse as an isolated incident. Women who have frequent intercourse however, do better to use a regular, very effective, method of contraception such as a combined oral contraceptive. Postcoital progestagens can well be used in infrequent intercourse since they are to be taken after each coitus, if applicable several times a month. Such use however leads to menstrual cycle disturbances and irregular bleedings. The estrogen-only and the estrogen-progestin combination are recommended, but need to be given within 2 or 3 days after the event of unprotected intercourse, preferably periovulatory. The latest development of the anti-progestins as a morning-after pill is promising. Taken from day 27 through 30 of the menstrual cycle it induces menstruation at the expected day. Side effects are minimal and the efficacy is good. Because of the imperfectness of PCI to prevent all pregnancies, sofar this regimen cannot be recommended for monthly use and does not replace regular oral contraceptives. PCI has a definite place in family-planning and fertility regulation. Since different methods are available today careful assessment of individual needs can help to decide for the best suitable method for the individual person.

[New approaches to interception--postcoital use of a gestagen/estrogen combination]

Postcoital application of high doses of ethenyloestradiol (EE) over a period of 5-6 days can, in the majority of cases, prevent pregnancy if therapy is initiated early enough (failure rate 1%), but such doses are attended by a high rate of side effects. Yuzpe et al. have tested an alternative formulation for interception: in a series of studies conducted in Canada and USA they administered a total dose of only 0.2 mg EE in combination with 2.0 mg DL-norgestrel (potency equivalent to a dose of 1.0 mg D-norgestrel) which was given in 2 portions separated by a 12-hour interval. The results of these studies and, in particular, those of a double-blind study (high doses of EE versus EE/norgestrel combination) in the Netherlands appear to indicate that the interceptive efficacy of the oestrogen-gestagen combination is equivalent to that of the high-dose oestrogen formulation. Distinct advantages are: the much lower active substance content, the shorter period of therapy (12 hours as opposed to 5 days), which is important as regards patient compliance, the limited duration of concomitant gastro-intestinal effects which can no longer be responsible for premature termination of therapy, the absence of breast tension and menstrual disorders. However, even application of the new method, which is facilitated by the commercial preparation Tetragynon, is intended for emergencies only.