MedElevator
Войти в исследования Contraception · 2018
Combined oral contraceptive interference with the ability of ulipristal acetate to delay ovulation: A prospective cohort study.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Edelman Alison B, Jensen Jeffrey T, McCrimmon Sara, Messerle-Forbes Marci, O'Donnell Andrea, Hennebold Jon D
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine if a combined oral contraceptive (COC) initiated shortly after ulipristal acetate (UPA) administration interferes with its mechanism of action.
STUDY DESIGN: Healthy, reproductive-age women of normal BMI with proven ovulation (serum progesterone >3 ng/ml) were enrolled for three cycles (Cycle 1, UPA only; Cycle 2 washout; Cycle 3 UPA plus COC). During Cycles 1 and 3, subjects were monitored with transvaginal ultrasound and blood sampling for progesterone and LH every other day until a dominant follicle measuring >15 mm was visualized. In both treatment cycles, subjects received UPA (30mg) and were followed daily with similar monitoring for up to 7 days. In Cycle 3 only, subjects initiated a daily COC (0.15 mg levonorgestrel/30 μg ethinyl estradiol) 2 days after UPA. The study had 80% power to detect a 15% difference in the proportion of cycles with at least a 5-day delay in follicle rupture. We assessed follicle rupture as >50% decrease in mean size and adjudicated unclear outcomes with serum hormones.
RESULTS: A total of 36 women enrolled and 33 completed all study procedures [age 28.4 years (SD 3.9); BMI 23.4 (SD 2.4)]. Compared to Cycle 1, more subjects demonstrated evidence of follicle rupture in <5 days in Cycle 3 [1/33 (3%) vs. 9/33 (27%), p = .008]. We also included data from 2 subjects who experienced rupture prior to COC dosing in the analysis.
CONCLUSION: UPA's effectiveness is significantly reduced by administering COCs 2 days later.
IMPLICATIONS: This study demonstrates that UPA's efficacy as an emergency contraceptive is reduced with early exposure to COCs.
STUDY DESIGN: Healthy, reproductive-age women of normal BMI with proven ovulation (serum progesterone >3 ng/ml) were enrolled for three cycles (Cycle 1, UPA only; Cycle 2 washout; Cycle 3 UPA plus COC). During Cycles 1 and 3, subjects were monitored with transvaginal ultrasound and blood sampling for progesterone and LH every other day until a dominant follicle measuring >15 mm was visualized. In both treatment cycles, subjects received UPA (30mg) and were followed daily with similar monitoring for up to 7 days. In Cycle 3 only, subjects initiated a daily COC (0.15 mg levonorgestrel/30 μg ethinyl estradiol) 2 days after UPA. The study had 80% power to detect a 15% difference in the proportion of cycles with at least a 5-day delay in follicle rupture. We assessed follicle rupture as >50% decrease in mean size and adjudicated unclear outcomes with serum hormones.
RESULTS: A total of 36 women enrolled and 33 completed all study procedures [age 28.4 years (SD 3.9); BMI 23.4 (SD 2.4)]. Compared to Cycle 1, more subjects demonstrated evidence of follicle rupture in <5 days in Cycle 3 [1/33 (3%) vs. 9/33 (27%), p = .008]. We also included data from 2 subjects who experienced rupture prior to COC dosing in the analysis.
CONCLUSION: UPA's effectiveness is significantly reduced by administering COCs 2 days later.
IMPLICATIONS: This study demonstrates that UPA's efficacy as an emergency contraceptive is reduced with early exposure to COCs.