A triphasic oral contraceptive pill, CTR-05: clinical efficacy and safety. Ovarian activity suppression by two different low-dose triphasic oral contraceptives. 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. Evidence that treatment with monophasic oral contraceptive formulations containing ethinylestradiol plus gestodene reduces bone resorption in young women. Modifying the Yuzpe regimen of emergency contraception: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Comparison of contraceptive acceptability of levonorgestrel and ethinyl oestradiol administered in one three-phasic (Trionetta) and one monophasic (Neovletta) version. Effects of two low-dose oral contraceptives containing ethinylestradiol and either desogestrel or levonorgestrel on serum lipids and lipoproteins with particular regard to LDL size. A comparison between monophasic levonorgestrel-ethinyl estradiol 150/30 and triphasic levonorgestrel-ethinyl estradiol 50-75-125/30-40-30 contraceptive pills for side effects and patient satisfaction: a study in Iran. A prospective, controlled study of the effects of hormonal contraception on bone mineral density. Comparative study on intermittent versus continuous use of a contraceptive pill administered by vaginal route. Adverse endometrial effects during long cycle hormone replacement therapy. Scandinavian Long Cycle Study Group.
The primary objective of this study was to compare the safety, contraceptive efficacy, and menstrual cycle patterns in women using triphasic oral contraceptive pills, namely CTR-05, containing 50/100/150 micrograms desogestrel and 35/30/30 micrograms ethinylestradiol, and Orthonovum777 containing 500/750/1000 micrograms norethindrone and 35/35/35 micrograms ethinylestradiol.
                Forty-six female volunteers, satisfying the selection criteria, were evaluated for six cycles, in an open-label, randomized study. Volunteers using CTR-05 were studied for 13 additional cycles for efficacy and safety.
                No serious adverse effects were observed in either group. The incidences of other drug-related adverse effects, such as headache and nausea, were transient in both groups. CTR-05 did not lower levels of high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol. This may be attributed to the lower androgenicity of its progestin component, desogestrel. No pregnancies were reported in either group. Clinical and laboratory parameters remained within normal limits in both groups. In the CTR-05 group, the lower dose of ethinylestradiol did not affect the safety, efficacy and acceptability of the product.
                Desogestrel, with little estrogenic activity and only minimal androgenic activity, leads to lipoprotein changes, resulting in a favorable cardiovascular profile, as well as minimal androgen-related effects, such as hirsutism and acne. In an open, randomized study in an outpatient clinic of a large teaching hospital, thirty-one female volunteers with regular cycles and established ovulation by ultrasonography were given one of two triphasic oral contraceptives containing ethinylestradiol combined with levonorgestrel or desogestrel during six cycles of treatment. The main outcome measures were transvaginal ultrasonography and serum E2 and P measurements in pill cycles 1, 3 and 6. No ovarian activity was found in 10 subjects. Among the remaining 21 women who showed ovarian activity, most follicle-like structures developed in the pill-free week and decreased in size or disappeared in the first pill week. One women taking triphasic desogestrel had evidence of a luteinized unruptured follicle and one women taking triphasic levonorgestrel had a possible ovulation. The latter women also showed symptoms of lower abdominal pain. A statistically significant difference in ovarian activity between the two oral contraceptives could not be established. The two triphasic oral contraceptives suppressed ovarian activity to the same degree. A trend was seen towards increasing ovarian activity with duration of use in both treatment groups. This study was undertaken to compare the effects of 2 oral contraceptive regimens on menstrual cycle control and laboratory findings.
                In a multicenter randomized study 100 microg levonorgestrel with 20 microg ethinyl estradiol (Alesse or Loette) was given to 155 healthy women. A triphasic preparation of 500, 750, and 1000 microg norethindrone with 35 microg ethinyl estradiol (Ortho-Novum 7/7/7 or TriNovum) was given to 167 women for 1 to 4 cycles of treatment.
                Overall, the percentages of normal menstrual cycles and the percentages of cycles with intermenstrual and withdrawal bleeding were similar between the 2 treatment groups. In the levonorgestrel with ethinyl estradiol group, there was a statistically significantly longer latent period and a statistically significantly shorter withdrawal bleeding episode. Adverse events were similar between treatment groups, and none were serious. Most mean changes from baseline laboratory values were comparable between groups, although the mean increase in cholesterol concentration was statistically significantly lower in the levonorgestrel with ethinyl estradiol group. Changes in triglyceride and glucose concentrations were not statistically significantly different between groups.
                Levonorgestrel (100 microg) with ethinyl estradiol (20 microg) provides menstrual cycle control equivalent to that obtained with triphasic norethindrone with ethinyl estradiol (75% higher estrogen dose) with similar safety and tolerability. The aim of the study was to evaluate if a pill containing the same dose of the same type of progestin compound (gestodene, GES, 75 microg) but different doses of ethinylestradiol (EE2) (20 or 30 microg) differently influences specific markers of bone resorption (urinary levels of pyridinoline (PYR) and dexoxypyridinoline (D-PYR)). During the 12 months of the study a significant decrease of urinary levels of PYR and D-PYR was found in 2 groups of young post-adolescent women taking the pills with 20 and 30 microg of EE2 in comparison with control women (subjects of the same age group with normal menstrual cycle who did not use contraception). In women taking pills with 20 or 30 microg EE2, the levels of sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) significantly increased during treatment in comparison with baseline, whereas in the same time period no changes occurred in control women. These findings suggest that similar to the pill containing 30 microg EE2, the lower dosage of the EE2 pill (20 microg) is also capable of reducing bone resorption. Twenty and 30 microg EE2 pills exert the same biological estrogenic effect. In fact, SHBG levels significantly increased with both pills. However, an additional effect of the progestin compound that could act directly on progestin or estrogen receptors of bone cannot be excluded. Since contraception with a pill containing the lowest estrogen dose is associated with the lowest incidence of side effects, these findings further suggest a pill containing 20 microg EE2 for young post-adolescent women would be the best choice. Emergency contraceptives can prevent unintended pregnancy after unprotected intercourse. The best-studied regimen ("Yuzpe") consists of ordinary combined oral contraceptives containing levonorgestrel and ethinyl estradiol. Women traditionally take one dose within 72 hours after unprotected intercourse, and a second dose 12 hours later. Historically, half experience nausea and a fifth vomit. The purpose of this study was to determine whether 1). women could use combined oral contraceptives other than those containing levonorgestrel and 2). eliminating the second dose improves comfort and convenience.
                Women presenting within 72 hours after unprotected intercourse were randomized to receive 1). standard two-dose Yuzpe, 2). a variant of Yuzpe substituting norethindrone for levonorgestrel, or 3). only the first dose of Yuzpe, followed 12 hours later by a placebo.
                Perfect-use failure rates were low in all groups and did not differ in a statistically significant way (standard Yuzpe 2.0% [n = 589], norethindrone-ethinyl estradiol 2.7% [n = 547], single dose of Yuzpe 2.9% [n = 546]). Typical-use failure rates were slightly higher but similarly did not differ significantly. Side effects were similar across groups, except that women taking the single dose reported half the vomiting. Taking the pills with food did not seem to reduce nausea or vomiting, and the pills were not more effective when started sooner after unprotected intercourse.
                Oral contraceptives containing norethindrone-ethinyl estradiol work approximately as well for emergency contraception as levonorgestrel-ethinyl estradiol formulations and should be offered when first-line therapies are not available. In a Swedish multicenter study, a total number of 835 women completed a total of 6472 treatment cycles. Half of them were allotted at random to use the monophasic oral contraceptive Neovletta, also known as Microgynon 30 (30 micrograms ethinyl oestradiol + 150 micrograms levonorgestrel in each tablet). The second half was allotted to Trionetta, also known as Triquilar, Trigynon and Logynon (6 tablets with 30 micrograms ethinyl oestradiol + 50 micrograms levonorgestrel, 5 tablets with 40 micrograms ethinyl oestradiol + 75 micrograms levonorgestrel and 10 tablets with 30 micrograms ethinyl oestradiol + 125 micrograms levonorgestrel). The latter version was also present in a 28-day version containing in addition 7 "placebo" tablets to be used in the otherwise tablet-free interval. The contraceptive reliability was excellent although one pregnancy occurred in the three-phase version. It could be attributed to patient failure. In all aspects of bleeding control, the three-phasic pill proved to be superior to the reference monophasic preparation. The extreme low incidence of missed withdrawal bleeding and stability already during the first months of use are noteworthy features. For both preparations, continuation rate was at six months of use about 85% and at 12 months it was a similar figure. The most common reason for withdrawal was bleeding, about 5% each for both preparation. No serious side-effects were reported. The study clearly indicates that the three-phasic version is a major improvement in spite of a considerably decreased total dose of the gestagen. This study was designed to determine the effects of two low-dose oral contraceptives, most frequently given in our area, monophasic desogestrel/ethinylestradiol (DG/EE) and triphasic levonorgestrel/ethinylestradiol (LNG/EE), on lipoprotein parameters, especially LDL particle size and HDL subclass distribution (determined by lipid-stained 2%-20% polyacrylamide gradient gel electrophoresis) in 37 healthy normolipidemic women aged 19 to 27 years. Lipid and lipoprotein parameters were measured before the start of treatment and in the third month of oral contraceptive use. Results reflected the estrogen-progestin balance. As compared with baseline values, with both formulations, plasma total cholesterol, phospholipids, and HDL3 cholesterol increased, and LDL-predominant peak size decreased, with a translation of LDL pattern A towards pattern I. With DG/EE, plasma triglycerides, apolipoproteins AI and B increased. With LNG/EE, LDL cholesterol increased, and HDL2 cholesterol decreased. All these modifications were moderate, within threshold limits. Estrogen-dominant monophasic DG/EE appears to be more favorable than progestin-dominant triphasic LNG/EE, since the reduction in LDL-predominant peak size is not associated with an increase in LDL cholesterol or with a decrease in HDL2 cholesterol. Oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) are one of the most effective reversible and accessible contraceptives, and patient acceptance for their use depends partly on the unfavorable adverse effects. The present study compared the two kinds of OCPs (monophasic; levonorgestrel (LNG)-ethinyl estradiol (EE) 150/30 versus triphasic; LNG-EE 50-75-125/30-40-30) for adverse effects and patient satisfaction.
                A randomized clinical trial was performed on 314 women who used OCPs for the first time, as their contraception, for 6 months. Overall, 1884 cycles were studied. In the monophasic group (n=159 who finally finished the study), monophasic pills LNG-EE 150/30mcg, and in the triphasic group (n=155 who finally finished the study), triphasic pills LNG-EE 50-75-125/30-40-30 mcg were used. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 10: Chi square test, Fisher exact test and Student's t-test were used.
                There were no significant differences between the two groups for common side effects, including nausea, headache, nervousness, facial hyperpigmentation (chloasma), and body weight (increase or decrease) but breakthrough bleeding and spotting (BTB/S) were less in the triphasic group, occurring in 30 cycles (18.86%) versus 10 cycles (6.45%), P=0.009*. Patient satisfaction for the two OCPs was similar and high. The rates of side effects were low.
                It seems that the monophasic and triphasic pills are similar according to patient satisfaction and side effects; therefore there is no benefit of one over the other except for BTB/S, for which triphasic is superior.
                Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. To compare the effect of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) and two types of oral contraceptives (OC) on bone mineral density (BMD) among women 18-33 years of age with those not using hormonal contraception.
                Data from 155 women were analyzed. Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate was administered to 33 women; 63 women who chose oral contraception were randomly assigned to receive either a norethindrone-containing pill (n = 28) or a desogestrel-containing pill (n = 35). Fifty-nine women who did not use hormonal contraception served as controls. Lumbar spine BMD was determined using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry at baseline and after 12 months of contraceptive use. We analyzed method-related percent change in BMD while controlling for body mass index, calcium intake, exercise, and smoking. We had approximately 90% power to detect a 2.5% difference between any two groups.
                Users of DMPA experienced a mean BMD loss of 2.74% over 12 months compared with controls who sustained a 0.37% loss (P = .01). Users of OCs generally demonstrated a gain (2.33% for norethindrone-containing pills, 0.33% for desogestrel-containing pills), which was different from controls among users of norethindrone-containing pills (P = .01), but not among users of desogestrel-containing pills (P = .99). Observed changes in BMD among DMPA users differed from women who used either type of pill (P < .002).
                Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate has an adverse effect on BMD, in comparison with OCs or nonhormonal methods, when used for 12 months. Results must be interpreted cautiously until it is determined whether these effects endure or are reversible. A multicenter, international, randomized, comparative trial was conducted to assess the acceptability, efficacy and safety of two different schedules of a contraceptive pill, containing 250 micrograms levonorgestrel and 50 micrograms ethinyl estradiol, administered by the vaginal route. One schedule of daily administration for 21 days with a seven-day interruption to allow withdrawal bleeding was compared to daily administration without interruption for bleeding. A total of 900 women were recruited in three countries, Brazil, Egypt and China; 7,090 women-months of vaginal pill use were recorded (3,364 using the pills intermittently and 3,726 continuously). Four undesired pregnancies occurred, one in Egypt and three in China, all four in women using the pills intermittently. There was a statistically significant difference (p = 0.486) in pregnancy rate between the two groups. There were no other significant differences in discontinuation rates despite marked differences in bleeding patterns, amenorrhea predominating in the continuous use group. Hemoglobin levels increased significantly in the two groups but hematocrit was significantly higher in the continuous use group. Treatment with unopposed estrogen is known to increase the risk of endometrial hyperplasia, atypia, and carcinoma, and therefore the administration of a progestin during hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is recommended. The addition of a progestin may cause unwanted side effects. Progestin administration of various durations are therefore used in HRT.
                Data were obtained about endometrial histopathology, bleeding interval and compliance in 240 early postmenopausal women receiving HRT with a progestin administered for 10 days during 12 week or 4 week cycles of estrogen administration. These regimens were studied for as long as 4 years. The daily estrogen given was 17beta-estradiol 2 mg per day which was reduced to 1 mg day during the last 6 days of each cycle. The progestin used was norethindrone acetate, given at a dose of 1 mg per day.
                The incidence of endometrial hyperplastic changes, i.e. simple or complex hyperplasia, atypia or cancer, was significantly higher in the 12 weeks cycle than in the monthly cycle group (P = 0.003), with an overall annual incidence of 5.6% in the 12 weeks cycle group and 1% in the monthly cycle group. One case of atypical hyperplasia and one case of endometrial adenocarcinoma was observed in the long cycle group. Long cycle treatment produced more irregular bleeding pattern. Accordingly, the rate of drop-out due to bleeding was significantly higher in the long cycle group (P<0.01).
                We conclude that the long cycle HRT modality investigated did not improve compliance and may increase the risk of endometrial hyperplasia and eventually cancer compared to conventional HRT with a monthly cycle. Caution using long cycle HRT regimens is advisable, and careful monitoring of the endometrium during treatment is recommended.
The available evidence is limited and the internal validity of these trials is questionable. Given the high losses to follow up, these reports may even be considered observational. Given that caveat, the biphasic pill containing norethindrone was associated with inferior cycle control compared with the triphasic pill containing levonorgestrel. The choice of progestin may be more important than the phasic regimen in determining bleeding patterns.