Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026
Estetrol/drospirenone for combined oral contraception: a systematic review of efficacy, cycle control, and safety.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sánchez-Prieto Manuel, Coll Sandra, Romero-Domínguez Marina, Avella-Marcos Marta, Castilla Mireia, Gómez Del Valle Margarita, Franco-Camps Silvia
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the evidence on the contraceptive efficacy, cycle control, safety, and selected noncontraceptive effects of estetrol 15 mg/drospirenone 3 mg (E4/DRSP) and to assess certainty of evidence by outcome using the GRADE approach.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched for eligible studies published through February 2026. Clinical trials and comparative studies evaluating E4/DRSP in women of reproductive age were included. Outcomes were grouped into contraceptive efficacy, bleeding/cycle control, safety and tolerability, hemostatic and endocrine-metabolic effects, ovarian suppression, and noncontraceptive clinical outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using design-specific tools, and certainty of evidence was graded by outcome.
RESULTS: A total of 25 eligible publications/study reports were included, comprising phase 2 dose-finding studies, pivotal phase 3 contraceptive trials, pooled analyses, mechanistic comparator studies, adolescent data, and indication-specific studies. E4/DRSP demonstrated robust contraceptive efficacy, predictable bleeding patterns, and an acceptable tolerability profile. Across mechanistic studies, E4/DRSP showed less pronounced hemostatic and endocrine-metabolic effects than ethinyl estradiol-containing comparators. The most consistent biological differentiation of E4/DRSP was observed for APC resistance and thrombin-generation endpoints, which were less affected than with EE-containing comparators. The strongest noncontraceptive evidence was observed for dysmenorrhea, supported by a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Certainty of evidence was moderate for contraceptive efficacy, cycle control, common adverse events, and surrogate hemostatic/metabolic outcomes; high for dysmenorrhea versus placebo; low for endometriosis-related and menstrual symptom outcomes; and very low for clinical thromboembolic risk.
CONCLUSIONS: E4/DRSP is an effective combined oral contraceptive with favorable cycle control and a consistent biologic profile suggesting lower hepatic/hemostatic impact than ethinyl estradiol-containing formulations. However, current evidence does not establish comparative thromboembolic safety, which requires dedicated postauthorization and real-world comparative studies.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched for eligible studies published through February 2026. Clinical trials and comparative studies evaluating E4/DRSP in women of reproductive age were included. Outcomes were grouped into contraceptive efficacy, bleeding/cycle control, safety and tolerability, hemostatic and endocrine-metabolic effects, ovarian suppression, and noncontraceptive clinical outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using design-specific tools, and certainty of evidence was graded by outcome.
RESULTS: A total of 25 eligible publications/study reports were included, comprising phase 2 dose-finding studies, pivotal phase 3 contraceptive trials, pooled analyses, mechanistic comparator studies, adolescent data, and indication-specific studies. E4/DRSP demonstrated robust contraceptive efficacy, predictable bleeding patterns, and an acceptable tolerability profile. Across mechanistic studies, E4/DRSP showed less pronounced hemostatic and endocrine-metabolic effects than ethinyl estradiol-containing comparators. The most consistent biological differentiation of E4/DRSP was observed for APC resistance and thrombin-generation endpoints, which were less affected than with EE-containing comparators. The strongest noncontraceptive evidence was observed for dysmenorrhea, supported by a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Certainty of evidence was moderate for contraceptive efficacy, cycle control, common adverse events, and surrogate hemostatic/metabolic outcomes; high for dysmenorrhea versus placebo; low for endometriosis-related and menstrual symptom outcomes; and very low for clinical thromboembolic risk.
CONCLUSIONS: E4/DRSP is an effective combined oral contraceptive with favorable cycle control and a consistent biologic profile suggesting lower hepatic/hemostatic impact than ethinyl estradiol-containing formulations. However, current evidence does not establish comparative thromboembolic safety, which requires dedicated postauthorization and real-world comparative studies.