An open label, comparative study of the effects of a dose-reduced oral contraceptive containing 20 microg ethinyl estradiol and 100 microg levonorgestrel on hemostatic, lipids, and carbohydrate metabolism variables.

In this open label, randomized study we compared the influence of a dose-reduced oral contraceptive containing 20 microg ethinyl estradiol (EE) and 100 microg levonorgestrel (20 EE) with a reference preparation containing 30 microg EE and 150 microg levonorgestrel (30 EE) on hemostatic, lipids, and carbohydrate metabolism variables. Data from 48 volunteers were obtained. The direction of the change (increase or decrease) in most of the hemostatic variables were similar in both treatment groups. In particular, prothrombin fragment 1 + 2 increased during treatment, reaching a median percent change of 40% in the 20 EE group and of 17% in the 30 EE group after one year. D-Dimer fibrin split products remained virtually unchanged, with no change at Cycle 13. The median HDL2 cholesterol levels decreased by 26% in the 20 EE group and by 39.8% in 30 EE group (p = 0.0045 for group difference) after one year. The median one year change for LDL cholesterol was 3.23% in the 20 EE group, compared to 25% in the 30 EE group, for VLDL 11.1% compared to 38.8%, respectively, and for total triglycerides 10.0% compared to 37.5%, respectively. The median absolute change for the area under the curve (AUC)(0-3h) for glucose at treatment Cycle 13 was 41.25 mmol/L x min in the 20 EE group and 73.50 mmol/L x min in the 30 EE group. The AUC(0-3h) insulin at treatment Cycle 13 decreased in the 20 EE group by 1635.0 pmolL x min and increased in the 30 EE group by 11797.5 pmolL x min (p = 0.0491 for group difference). Both study treatments were safe and well tolerated by the volunteers. In conclusion, the balanced one-third dose reduction in this new oral contraceptive evoked similar effects on the hemostatic variables, but favorable results for the lipid and carbohydrate profiles.

A double-blind comparative study of the effects of a 23-day oral contraceptive regimen with 20 microg ethinyl estradiol and 75 microg gestodene and a 21-day regimen with 30 microg ethinyl estradiol and 75 microg gestodene on hemostatic variables, lipids, and carbohydrate metabolism.

In this double-blind study we compared the influence of two oral contraceptives, a 23-day regimen with 20 microg ethinyl estradiol and 75 microg gestodene (23-day 20/75) and a 21-day regimen with 30 microg ethinyl estradiol and 75 microg gestodene (21-day 30/75), on hemostatic variables, lipids, and carbohydrate metabolism. The volunteers received the preparations daily for six 28-day cycles. Hemostatic variables and lipids were measured at baseline and after six treatment cycles. Carbohydrate metabolism was assessed by determination of the area under the curve (AUC) of carbohydrate parameters after oral glucose tolerance tests performed at baseline and after three treatment cycles. Data from 33 volunteers in each group were obtained. No significant differences between the effects of both treatments on the hemostatic system were detected. Neither the overall change of all hemostatic variables from baseline to treatment Cycle 6 [defined as primary target variable in the study] nor the change of any of the individual hemostatic parameters differed significantly between the treatment groups. Likewise, no significant nor clinically relevant differences in the effects of both treatments on the volunteers' lipid profiles were detected. The data on carbohydrate variables suggested a slightly more favorable influence of the 23-day 20/75 regimen. The increase of the glucose AUCs after three cycles tended to be stronger with the 21-day 30/75 regimen than with the 23-day 20/75 regimen. In addition, the AUCs for insulin and C-peptide were slightly reduced after three cycles with the 23-day 20/75 regimen but slightly increased with the 21-day 30/75 regimen. Both study treatments were safe and well tolerated by the volunteers as shown by the nature and frequency of adverse events, the routine laboratory examinations, and the physical and gynecological examinations. Both preparations provided adequate contraceptive reliability. The only pregnancy during treatment was attributable to intake errors. In conclusion, the prolongation of the treatment phase of an oral contraceptives with 20 microg ethinyl estradiol does not evoke more pronounced metabolic effects than a conventional 21-day regimen with 30 microg ethinyl estradiol.

Impact of oral contraceptive use on APC-resistance: a prospective, randomized clinical trial with three low-dose preparations.

The evaluation of the study was of the impact of oral contraceptive (OC) use on activated protein C (APC-resistance). Eight hundred eighteen young fertile women were screened for a study designed to compare three different marketed OC preparations. The women could have used either other oral contraceptive preparations before switching to the study medications (switchers) or were not using hormonal contraceptives (new starters) before the study began. Prior to study drug intake and during treatment, APC-resistance was determined with three different tests. Forty-one of 809 women evaluated (5.07%) carried the Factor V Leiden mutation. Twenty-two further participants (2.72%) had a positive screening test, but did not provide samples for the confirmatory mutation test. Two women with homozygous Factor V Leiden mutations and 39 women with heterozygous mutations were identified. The homozygous carriers were identified in all three of the screening tests employed, whereas none of the tests detected all 39 heterozygotes. In the pretreatment screening tests, previous OC users (switchers) had slightly lower APC ratios than the women using non-hormonal birth control methods (starters). During treatment the difference between starters and switchers was no longer apparent, but the APC ratio values of the screening tests slightly increased for both. The homozygous carriers were not treated. Differences in APC-resistance between users of the three different oral contraceptive preparations were not found. In conclusion, laboratory screening for APC-resistance using Coatest APC, ProC Global, or ProC APC-FV-Leiden clearly identifies homozygous mutant carriers. However, with regard to heterozygous mutant carriers, the sensitivity and specificity of the tests, especially during OC intake, is limited. The results of APC screening tests should have, at present, no impact on contraceptive counseling because the predictive value for thromboembolic risk of the test results and even the mutant status is low.

Double-blind, multicenter comparison of efficacy, cycle control, and tolerability of a 23-day versus a 21-day low-dose oral contraceptive regimen containing 20 microg ethinyl estradiol and 75 microg gestodene.

This prospective, double-blind, randomized study was conducted to compare the contraceptive reliability, cycle control, and tolerability of a 23-day versus a 21-day oral contraceptive regimen containing 20 microg ethinyl estradiol and 75 microg gestodene. Participants took trial medication daily for 28 days, either 23 tablets with active substances plus 5 placebo tablets or 21 tablets with active substances plus 7 placebo tablets. Contraceptive efficacy, cycle control, and tolerability were evaluated over a period of seven cycles. Efficacy data gathered from 4,878 treatment cycles (23-day regimen: 2,362 cycles; 21-day regimen: 2,516 cycles) were obtained from 703 participants (23-day regimen, n = 342; 21-day regimen, n = 361). Both preparations proved to be effective contraceptives and provided good cycle control. One pregnancy because of method failure was recorded in each treatment group. This resulted in a study Pearl Index of 0.5 for each treatment. For the 23-day regimen, 36.0% of participants reported at least one intracyclic bleeding episode during Cycles 2-4 (primary target) compared to 37.1% in the 21-day regimen. In the 23-day regimen group, intracyclic bleeding episodes were reported by 42.4% of the participants in Cycle 1 but only in 14% in Cycle 7 and in the 21-day regimen group by 44.6% in Cycle 1 and only 17.3% in Cycle 7. Overall, intracyclic bleeding was reported in 21.9% of the 23-day regimen cycles and in 22.7% of the 21-day regimen cycles.A greater number of 23-day regimen participants had shorter withdrawal bleeding periods than with the 21-day regimen. In significantly (p <0.0001) more cycles in the 23-day regimen group, participants reported withdrawal bleeding periods that lasted only 1-4 days compared to the 21-day regimen group. For the majority of the treatment cycles, the median number of bleeding days in the 23-day regimen group was 4 days and in the 21-day regimen group 5 days. Both preparations were well tolerated and showed a similar adverse events pattern. The discontinuation rate because of adverse events was low (23-day regimen, 6%; 21-day regimen, 4%). No serious vascular adverse events were reported. More than 75% of the women in both groups either lost more than 2 kg of weight or did not gain weight during the study. The treatment effect on blood pressure was negligible. There were no appreciable changes in mean laboratory values over the course of the study.

Open, multicenter comparison of efficacy, cycle control, and tolerability of a 23-day oral contraceptive regimen with 20 microg ethinyl estradiol and 75 microg gestodene and a 21-day regimen with 20 microg ethinyl estradiol and 150 microg desogestrel.

This prospective, open, randomized study was conducted to compare the contraceptive reliability, cycle control, and tolerability of a 23-day regimen with 20 microg ethinyl estradiol (EE) and 75 microg gestodene (GSD) and a 21-day regimen with 20 microg EE and 150 microg desogestrel (DSG). Participants took either 23 tablets with active substances plus 5 placebo tablets (23-day EE/GSD) or 21 tablets with active substances followed by 7 days without pill-taking (21-day EE/DSG). Contraceptive efficacy, cycle control, and tolerability were evaluated over a period of seven cycles. Efficacy data gathered from 5967 treatment cycles (23-day EE/GSD: 2975 cycles; 21-day EE/DSG: 2992 cycles) were obtained from 890 participants (445 in each group). Both preparations proved to be effective contraceptives and provided good cycle control. No pregnancy during treatment was recorded. This resulted in a study Pearl Index of 0.0 for both treatments. For 23-day EE/GSD, 32.4% of participants reported at least one intracyclic bleeding episode during Cycles 2-4 (primary target) compared to 31.5% for 21-day EE/DSG. In the 23-day EE/GSD group, intracyclic bleeding episodes were reported by 48.8% of the participants in Cycle 1 but in only 15.1% in Cycle 7, and in the 21-day regimen group by 43.4% in Cycle 1 and only 14.2% in Cycle 7. Overall, intracyclic bleeding was reported in 20.9% of cycles for both treatments.A greater number of 23-day EE/GSD participants had shorter withdrawal bleeding periods than with 21-day EE/DSG. In significantly (p <0.0001) more cycles in the 23-day EE/GSD group participants reported withdrawal bleeding periods that lasted only 1-4 days compared to the 21-day EE/DSG group. For the majority of the treatment cycles, the median number of bleeding days in the 23-day EE/GSD group was 4 days and in the 21-day EE/DSG group 5 days. Both preparations were well tolerated and showed a similar adverse events pattern. The discontinuation rate because of adverse events was low (23-day EE/GSD: 6.1%; 21-day EE/DSG: 5.6%). No serious vascular adverse events were reported. More than 82% in the 23-day EE/GSD group and 79% in the 21-day EE/DSG group either lost more than 2 kg of weight or did not gain weight during the study. The treatment effect on blood pressure was negligible. There were no appreciable changes in mean laboratory values over the course of the study compared to baseline.

Blood pressure stability in a normotensive population during intake of a monophasic oral contraceptive containing 20 microg ethinylestradiol and 75 g gestodene.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluation of the impact of a monophasic gestodene-based oral contraceptive on blood pressure in a population that was normotensive at baseline. METHODS: Data on blood pressure were retrospectively analyzed from four large prospective clinical phase III trials with an oral contraceptive containing 20 microg ethinylestradiol and 75 microg gestodene. A total of 1342 young fertile women were evaluated after 12 treatment cycles. RESULTS: The mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure did not change during treatment. Approximately 89% of women were normotensive at baseline and 93% at the end of the treatment period. Only a few women (< or = 1%) were hypertensive at baseline; an increase in this prevalence was not found after 12 cycles of oral contraceptive use. The number of women who experienced a blood pressure increase was almost identical to the number who experienced a decrease. Approximately 90% of women had either a negligible blood pressure change of maximal +/- 10 mmHg or a decrease. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this retrospective analysis confirm that monophasic gestodene has a negligible effect on blood pressure in users who were normotensive before treatment began.

Body weight change during use of a monophasic oral contraceptive containing 20 microg ethinylestradiol and 75 microg gestodene with a comparison of the women who completed versus those who prematurely discontinued intake.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluation of the impact of an oral contraceptive on body weight with a comparison ofwomen who completed versus women who prematurely discontinued intake. METHODS: Data on body weight were retrospectively analyzed from four large prospective clinical trials with an oral contraceptive containing 20 microg ethinylestradiol and 75 microg gestodene (EE/GSD). A total of 1971 young fertile women were included in the evaluation, and 1467 completed 12 cycles. RESULTS: We found no clinically relevant change of body weight during treatment with an oral contraceptive containing 20 microg ethinylestradiol and 75 microg gestodene in the vast majority of users after 12 treatment cycles. The mean change of body weight was less than 0.3 kg in this time period for all users. Nearly 70% of women experienced a minor change in their body weight of +/- 2 kg. An additional 13% lost more than 2 kg body weight in the course of 12 treatment cycles. A total of 11% increased their weight by 2-4 kg. A total of 1255 (85.5%) of women had a body mass index (BMI) of < or = 25 at baseline compared to 1253 (85.4%) after 12 cycles of treatment. There was no significant difference in the change ofbody weight between the women completing 12 cycles of treatment and those who prematurely discontinued EE/GSD. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis confirms that there was only a negligible change of body weight during intake of an oral contraceptive containing 20 microg ethinylestradiol and 75 microg gestodene. There was no difference in weight change between the women completing the study or discontinuing intake.

Comparison of efficacy, cycle control, and tolerability of two low-dose oral contraceptives in a multicenter clinical study.

This study compares the contraceptive reliability, cycle control, and tolerability of two oral contraceptive preparations containing 20 micrograms of ethinyl estradiol combined with either 75 micrograms of gestodene (EE/GSD) or 150 micrograms of desogestrel (EE/DSG). Women received the trial preparations daily for 21 days, followed by a 7-day pill-free interval. Contraceptive efficacy, cycle control, and tolerability were evaluated over a period of 12 cycles. Efficacy data of 14,700 treatment cycles (EE/GSD: 7299; EE/DSG: 7401) were obtained from 1476 women (EE/GSD, n = 740; EE/DSG, n = 736). Both preparations provided effective contraception and good cycle control with a similarly low incidence of both spotting and breakthrough bleeding. The spotting rates in both treatment groups decreased from 35.1% (EE/GSD) and 37.5% (EE/DSG) in the first treatment cycle to approximately 10% in the fourth treatment cycle. The spotting incidence as percent of the total number of cycles was 12.7% for EE/GSD and 14.3% for EE/DSG. The breakthrough bleeding incidence was 5.2% of all cycles for EE/GSD and 6.0% of all cycles for EE/DSG. For 84.7% of the cycles in the gestodene group and for 82.5% of the cycles in the desogestrel group, neither spotting nor breakthrough bleeding were recorded. Overall, the spotting and breakthrough bleeding incidence tended to be lower with EE/GSD than with EE/DSG. However, the difference was not statistically significant. Amenorrhea was recorded in 2.7% of the cycles with EE/GSD and in 2.9% with EE/DSG. Both preparations were well tolerated and showed a similar pattern of adverse events. More than 83% of the women in both groups either did not gain weight or lost more than 2 kg. Both preparations had a beneficial effect on dysmenorrhea. Both regimens provided reliable contraception and good cycle control. The incidence of adverse events was relatively low and both preparations were well tolerated.

PIP: This study compares the contraceptive reliability, cycle control, and tolerability of two oral contraceptive preparations containing 20 mcg of ethinyl estradiol combined with either 75 mcg of gestodene (EE/GSD) or 150 mcg of desogestrel (EE/DSG). Women received the trial preparations daily for 21 days, followed by a 7-day pill-free interval. Contraceptive efficacy, cycle control, and tolerability were evaluated over a period of 12 cycles. Efficacy data of 14,700 treatment cycles (EE/GSD: 7299; EE/DSG: 7401) were obtained from 1476 women (EE/GSD, n = 740; EE/DSG, n = 736). Both preparations provided effective contraception and good cycle control with a similarly low incidence of both spotting and breakthrough bleeding. The spotting rates in both treatment groups decreased from 35.1% (EE/GSD) and 37.5% (EE/DSG) in the first treatment cycle to approximately 10% in the fourth treatment cycle. The spotting incidence as percent of the total number of cycles was 12.7% for EE/GSD and 14.3% for EE/DSG. The breakthrough bleeding incidence was 5.2% of all cycles for EE/GSD and 6.0% of all cycles for EE/GSD. For 84.7% of the cycles in the gestodene group and for 82.5% of the cycles in the desogestrel group, neither spotting nor breakthrough bleeding were recorded. Overall, the spotting and breakthrough bleeding incidence tended to be lower with EE/GSD than with EE/DSG. However, the difference was not statistically significant. Amenorrhea was recorded in 2.7% of the cycles with EE/GSD and in 2.9% with EE/DSG. Both preparations were well tolerated and showed a similar pattern of adverse events. More than 83% of the women in both groups either did not gain weight or lost more than 2 kg. Both preparations had a beneficial effect on dysmenorrhea. Both regimens provided reliable contraception and good cycle control. The incidence of adverse events was relatively low and both preparations were well tolerated.