Hormone-related side effects in new users of a levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine device.

BACKGROUND: Although the levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine device is locally active and has low systemic hormone exposure, hormonal intrauterine device users sometimes report hormone-related side effects. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate hormone-related adverse event rates among all participants and compare these among those who used combined hormonal or no hormonal contraception in the month before enrollment. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 1714 women aged 16-45 years old received a levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine device in a multicenter phase 3 trial to evaluate contraceptive efficacy and safety for up to 10 years. This analysis evaluated a subset of participants who used combined hormonal or no hormonal contraception in the month prior to device placement. We assessed all non-expulsion, non-bleeding-related events with ≥1% incidence at 180 days with a plan to include weight increase regardless of incidence; we excluded events considered non-hormonal. We computed 180-day side effect frequency rates based on the number of days a side effect was reported during the study period. We created a multivariable model for side effect incidence at 180 days based on age, race, ethnicity, body mass index at enrollment, parity, and contraception use in the month before enrollment. For those side effects with a p-value <0.2 on univariate comparison between combined-hormonal and no-hormonal contraception users, we secondarily evaluated 360-day event rates. RESULTS: Overall, 644 participants used combined hormonal contraception (primarily oral [n=499, 77.5%]) and 855 used no hormonal method before IUD placement. Individual side effect rates over the first 180 days did not differ between prior combined-hormonal and no-hormonal contraception users except for acne (84 [13.0%] versus 73 [8.5%], respectively), p=0.006, OR 1.61 (95% CI 1.15-2.24). However, this association was weaker after adjustment for age, race, ethnicity, obesity status, and parity (aOR 1.40, 95% CI 0.99-1.98) At 360 days, prior combined hormonal contraception users were more likely to report acne (101 [15.7%] vs. 91 [10.6%], respectively, p=0.005) and orgasm/libido problems (20 [3.1%] vs. 12 [1.4%], respectively, p=0.03). Over the first 180 days, all side effects other than acne were reported in less than 3% of days; acne was reported an average of 13 days (7.4%) per prior combined hormonal contraception user and 9 days (5.0%) per prior non-hormonal contraception user (p<0.0001). Discontinuation for evaluated side effects occurred in 83 (5.5%) participants with no difference between those who used combined hormonal (36 [5.6%]) or no hormonal contraception (47 [5.5%]), p=1.0) before study entry. CONCLUSIONS: Using combined hormonal contraception prior to levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine device placement is only weakly associated with reporting hormonally related side effects like acne. Only a small percentage of levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine device users experienced potentially hormone-related side effects during the initial 6 months of use that resulted in discontinuation.

Effects of E4/DRSP on self-reported physical and emotional premenstrual and menstrual symptoms: data from the phase 3 clinical trial in Europe and Russia.

PURPOSE: To describe the effects of estetrol (E4) 15 mg/drospirenone (DRSP) 3 mg on physical and emotional premenstrual and menstrual symptoms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used Menstrual Distress Questionnaire (MDQ) data from a phase-3 trial (NCT02817828) in Europe and Russia with participants (18 - 50 years) using E4/DRSP for up to 13 cycles. We assessed mean changes in MDQ-t-scores from baseline to end of treatment in premenstrual (4 days before most recent flow) and menstrual (most recent flow) scores for 4 MDQ domains in starters and switchers (use of hormonal contraception in prior 3 months) and performed a shift analysis on individual symptoms within each domain. RESULTS: Of 1,553 treated participants, 1,398(90.0%), including 531(38%) starters, completed both MDQs. Starters reported improvements for premenstrual Pain (-1.4), Water Retention (-3.3) and Negative Affect (-2.5); and for menstrual Pain (-3.5), Water Retention (-3.4), and Negative Affect (-2.7) (all p < 0.01). For switchers, no changes were significant except an increase in premenstrual (+1.0, p = 0.02) and menstrual (+1.5, p = 0.003) Water Retention. We observed a change in symptom intensity in >40% of participants for Cramps, Backache and Fatigue (domain Pain), Painful or Tender Breast and Swelling (domain Water Retention) and Mood Swings and Irritability (domain Negative Affect). CONCLUSION: E4/DRSP starters experienced significant improvements in the domains Pain, Water Retention and Negative Affect particularly benefiting those with more severe baseline symptoms. Switchers showed minimal changes.

A phase 3 study in Europe and Russia showed that Estetrol/Drospirenone, a new combined oral contraceptive, significantly improved the MDQ scores for domains Pain, Water Retention and Negative Affect in women starting COC use, while switchers showed minimal changes.

Levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system efficacy and safety through 8 years of use.

BACKGROUND: Extending hormonal intrauterine system duration will allow users to have less need for procedures to provide long-term contraception. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system during years 7 and 8 of use. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 1751 nulliparous and multiparous participants aged 16 to 45 years enrolled in a phase 3, multicenter trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the use of the Liletta levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system for up to 10 years. Participants aged 36 to 45 years at enrollment underwent safety evaluation only. After the first year, we evaluated participants every 6 months for intrauterine system location confirmation and urine pregnancy testing at each visit. We assessed the Pearl Indices in years 7 and 8 and the life-table analysis for cumulative pregnancy rates through 8 years of use. For the primary efficacy analyses, all participants aged 16 to 35 years at enrollment were included through year 6; years 7 and 8 included only users aged ≤39 years at the start of each use year. Safety outcomes were assessed in all participants regardless of duration of use. We assessed amenorrhea rates, defined as no bleeding or spotting in the 90 days before the end of the year. RESULTS: After intrauterine system placement, we followed 1568 participants aged 16 to 35 years and 146 participants aged 36 to 45 years. The 16- to 35-year-old participants included 986 (57.5%) nulliparous and 433 (25.3%) obese users. Overall, 569 participants started year 7, 478 completed year 7 (380 aged ≤39 years at beginning of year) and 343 completed year 8 (257 aged ≤39 years at beginning of year); 77 completed 10 years of use. Eleven pregnancies occurred over 8 years, 7 (64%) of which were ectopic. Two pregnancies occurred in year 7 (Pearl Index, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-1.78), 1 in a participant with implantation 4 days after a desired removal; no pregnancies occurred in year 8. The cumulative life-table pregnancy rate in the primary efficacy population through year 8 was 1.32 (95% confidence interval, 0.69-2.51); without the postremoval pregnancy, the rate was 1.09 (95% confidence interval, 0.56-2.13). Two perforations (0.1%) occurred, none noted after year 1. Expulsion occurred in 71 (4.1%) participants overall, with 3 in year 7 and 2 in year 8. Pelvic infection was diagnosed in 16 (0.9%) participants during intrauterine system use, 1 each in years 7 and 8. Only 44 (2.6%) participants overall discontinued because of bleeding complaints (4 total in years 7 and 8) with rates per year of 0.1% to 0.5% for years 3 to 8. Amenorrhea rates were 39% at both years 7 and 8. CONCLUSION: The levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system is highly effective over 8 years of use and has an excellent extended safety profile. This report details the longest period of efficacy and safety data for continuous use of a levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system for contraception.

Mifepristone Pretreatment for the Medical Management of Early Pregnancy Loss.

BACKGROUND: Medical management of early pregnancy loss is an alternative to uterine aspiration, but standard medical treatment with misoprostol commonly results in treatment failure. We compared the efficacy and safety of pretreatment with mifepristone followed by treatment with misoprostol with the efficacy and safety of misoprostol use alone for the management of early pregnancy loss. METHODS: We randomly assigned 300 women who had an anembryonic gestation or in whom embryonic or fetal death was confirmed to receive pretreatment with 200 mg of mifepristone, administered orally, followed by 800 µg of misoprostol, administered vaginally (mifepristone-pretreatment group), or 800 µg of misoprostol alone, administered vaginally (misoprostol-alone group). Participants returned 1 to 4 days after misoprostol use for evaluation, including ultrasound examination, by an investigator who was unaware of the treatment-group assignments. Women in whom the gestational sac was not expelled were offered expectant management, a second dose of misoprostol, or uterine aspiration. We followed all participants for 30 days after randomization. Our primary outcome was gestational sac expulsion with one dose of misoprostol by the first follow-up visit and no additional intervention within 30 days after treatment. RESULTS: Complete expulsion after one dose of misoprostol occurred in 124 of 148 women (83.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 76.8 to 89.3) in the mifepristone-pretreatment group and in 100 of 149 women (67.1%; 95% CI, 59.0 to 74.6) in the misoprostol-alone group (relative risk, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.43). Uterine aspiration was performed less frequently in the mifepristone-pretreatment group than in the misoprostol-alone group (8.8% vs. 23.5%; relative risk, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.68). Bleeding that resulted in blood transfusion occurred in 2.0% of the women in the mifepristone-pretreatment group and in 0.7% of the women in the misoprostol-alone group (P=0.31); pelvic infection was diagnosed in 1.3% of the women in each group. CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment with mifepristone followed by treatment with misoprostol resulted in a higher likelihood of successful management of first-trimester pregnancy loss than treatment with misoprostol alone. (Funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; PreFaiR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02012491 .).

Pharmacists' knowledge, perspectives, and experiences with mifepristone dispensing for medication abortion.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) restricts dispensing of mifepristone for medication abortion to certified health care providers at clinical facilities, thus prohibiting pharmacist dispensing. Allowing mifepristone dispensing by pharmacists could improve access to medication abortion. OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of pharmacists dispensing mifepristone to patients who have undergone evaluation for eligibility and counseling for medication abortion by a clinician. METHODS: Before providing a study training on medication abortion, we administered baseline surveys to pharmacists who participated in a multisite mifepristone-dispensing intervention. The survey assessed medication abortion knowledge-using a 15-item score-and perceptions about the benefits and challenges of the model. We administered follow-up surveys in the study's final month that also assessed the pharmacists' satisfaction and experiences with mifepristone dispensing. To investigate the association of the study intervention with the pharmacists' knowledge, perceptions, and experiences dispensing mifepristone, we conducted multivariable linear regression analyses using generalized estimating equation models, accounting for clustering by individual. RESULTS: Among the 72 pharmacists invited from 6 pharmacies, 47 (65%) completed the baseline surveys, and 56 (78%) received training. At the study's end (mean 18 months later), 43 of the 56 pharmacists who received training (77%) completed the follow-up surveys. At follow-up, 36 (83%) respondents were very or somewhat satisfied with mifepristone dispensing, and 24 (56%) reported experiencing no challenges dispensing mifepristone. Four (6%) of the 72 pharmacists invited objected to participating in mifepristone dispensing. In regression analyses, average knowledge scores, perceived ease of implementation, and level of support for the pharmacist-dispensing model were higher at follow-up (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Most pharmacists were willing to be trained, dispensed mifepristone with few challenges when given the opportunity, were satisfied with the model, and had higher knowledge levels at follow-up. Our findings support removal of FDA's restriction on pharmacist dispensing of mifepristone.

Management of early pregnancy loss with mifepristone and misoprostol: clinical predictors of treatment success from a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Early pregnancy loss is a common event in the first trimester, occurring in 15%-20% of confirmed pregnancies. A common evidence-based medical regimen for early pregnancy loss uses misoprostol, a prostaglandin E1 analog, with a dosage of 800 µg, self-administered vaginally. The clinical utility of this regimen is limited by suboptimal effectiveness in patients with a closed cervical os, with 29% of patients experiencing early pregnancy loss requiring a second dose after 3 days and 16% of patients eventually requiring a uterine aspiration procedure. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate clinical predictors associated with treatment success in patients receiving medical management with mifepristone-misoprostol or misoprostol alone for early pregnancy loss. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a planned secondary analysis of a randomized trial comparing mifepristone-misoprostol with misoprostol alone for management of early pregnancy loss. The published prediction model for treatment success of single-dose misoprostol administered vaginally included the following variables: active bleeding, type of early pregnancy loss (anembryonic pregnancy or embryonic and/or fetal demise), parity, gestational age, and treatment site; previous significant predictors were vaginal bleeding within the past 24 hours and parity of 0 or 1 vs >1. To determine if these characteristics predicted differential proportions of patients with treatment success or failure, we performed bivariate analyses; given the small proportion of treatment failures in the combined treatment arm, both arms were combined for analysis. Thereafter, we performed a logistic regression analysis to assess the effect of these predictors collectively in each of the 2 treatment groups separately as well as in the full cohort as a proxy for the combined treatment arm. Finally, by using receiver operating characteristic curves, we tested the ability of these predictors in association with misoprostol treatment success to discriminate between treatment success and treatment failure. To quantify the ability of the score to discriminate between treatment success and treatment failure in each treatment arm as well as in the entire cohort, we calculated the area under the curve. Using multivariable logistic regression, we then assessed our study population for other predictors of treatment success in both treatment groups, with and without mifepristone pretreatment. RESULTS: Overall, 297 evaluable participants were included in the primary study, with 148 in the mifepristone-misoprostol combined treatment group and 149 in the misoprostol-alone treatment group. Among patients who had vaginal bleeding at the time of treatment, 15 of 17 (88%) in the mifepristone-misoprostol combined treatment group and 12 of 17 (71%) in the misoprostol-alone treatment group experienced expulsion of pregnancy tissue. Among patients with a parity of 0 or 1, 94 of 108 (87%) in the mifepristone-misoprostol treatment group and 66 of 95 (69%) in the misoprostol-alone treatment group experienced expulsion of pregnancy tissue. These clinical characteristics did not predict treatment success in the combined cohort alone (area under the curve=0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.64). No other baseline clinical factors predicted treatment success in the misoprostol-alone treatment arm or mifepristone pretreatment arm. In the full cohort, the significant predictors of treatment success were pretreatment with mifepristone (adjusted odds ratio=2.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.43-4.43) and smoking (adjusted odds ratio=2.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-4.49). CONCLUSION: No baseline clinical factors predicted treatment success in women receiving medical management with misoprostol for early pregnancy loss. Adding mifepristone to the medical management regimen of early pregnancy loss improved treatment success; thus, mifepristone treatment should be considered for management of early pregnancy loss regardless of baseline clinical factors.

Bleeding changes after levonorgestrel 52-mg intrauterine system insertion for contraception in women with self-reported heavy menstrual bleeding.

BACKGROUND: The levonorgestrel 52-mg intrauterine system has proven efficacy for heavy menstrual bleeding treatment in clinical trials, but few data exist to demonstrate how rapidly the effects occur and the effects in women with self-reported heavy bleeding, as seen commonly in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate changes in bleeding patterns in women with self-reported heavy menstrual bleeding before levonorgestrel 52-mg intrauterine system insertion. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 1714 women aged 16-45 years old received a levonorgestrel 52-mg intrauterine system in a multicenter trial evaluating contraceptive efficacy and safety for up to 10 years. At screening, participants described their baseline menstrual bleeding patterns for the previous 3 months. Participants completed daily diaries with subjective evaluation of bleeding information for the first 2 years. For this analysis, we included women with at least 1 complete 28-day cycle of intrauterine system use and excluded women using a hormonal or copper intrauterine contraception in the month prior to study enrollment. We evaluated changes in menstrual bleeding and discontinuation for bleeding complaints per 28-day cycle over 26 cycles (2 years) in women who self-reported their baseline pattern as heavy. We also compared rates of amenorrhea, defined as no bleeding or spotting, within the entire study population in women with subjective heavy menstrual bleeding at baseline compared with those who did not complain of heavy menstrual bleeding. RESULTS: Of the 1513 women in this analysis, 150 (9.9%) reported baseline heavy menstrual bleeding. The majority of women reported no longer experiencing heavy menstrual bleeding by the end of cycle 1 (112/150, 74.7%) with even greater rates by cycle 2 (124/148, 83.8%). At the end of cycles 6, 13, and 26, 129 of 140 (92.1%; 95% confidence interval, 87.7%-96.6%), 114 of 123 (92.7%; 95% confidence interval, 88.1%-97.3%), and 100 of 103 (97.1%; 95% confidence interval, 93.8%-100%) women reported no heavy menstrual bleeding, respectively. After cycles 13 and 26, 63 of 123 (51.2%; 95% confidence interval, 42.4%-60.1%) and 66 of 103 (64.1%; 95% confidence interval, 54.8%-73.3%), respectively, reported their bleeding as amenorrhea or spotting only. A lower proportion of women with baseline self-reported heavy menstrual bleeding reported amenorrhea as compared with women in the overall study cohort without heavy menstrual bleeding at the end of 6 cycles (319 [25.5%] vs 21 [15.0%], P=.005) and 13 cycles (382 [34.4%] vs 26 [21.1%], P=.003); differences were not significant after 19 cycles (367 [37.2%] vs 36 [31.0%], P=.022) and 26 cycles (383 [43.5%] vs 38 [36.9%], P=.21). Only 4 (2.7%) women with baseline heavy menstrual bleeding discontinued for bleeding complaints (2 for heavy menstrual bleeding and 2 for irregular bleeding), all within the first year. CONCLUSION: Most women who self-report heavy menstrual bleeding experience significant improvement quickly after levonorgestrel 52-mg intrauterine system insertion. Discontinuation for bleeding complaints among women with baseline heavy menstrual bleeding is very low.

Comparing Postpartum Visit Attendance with a Scheduled 2- to 3-Week or 6-Week Visit after Delivery.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether scheduling a 2- to 3-week versus 6-week postpartum visit results in higher visit attendance. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a secondary analysis of a quasi-experimental before-after study to compare postpartum visit attendance after changing routine scheduling of visits from 6 weeks to 2 to 3 weeks after delivery. Secondary outcomes include patient satisfaction and breastfeeding continuation at 3 and 6 months postpartum. We collected postpartum visit information through a chart review and conducted telephonic interviews at 3 and 6 months postpartum to assess satisfaction with visit timing and breastfeeding status. We performed multivariable analyses to assess predictors of visit attendance. RESULTS: Women scheduled at 2 to 3 weeks postpartum demonstrated higher visit attendance (90.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 86.6-93.9%) compared with 6 weeks (81.6%; 95% CI: 76.3-86.2%; p < 0.01). Predictors for visit attendance include postpartum visit timing, age, education, parity, prior miscarriage, and high-risk index pregnancy in multivariate analysis. Scheduling at 2 to 3 weeks postpartum increased visit completion in women who were younger and had lower educational attainment, high-risk index pregnancy, and no prior miscarriages. We found no differences in patient satisfaction or breastfeeding continuation at 3 and 6 months postpartum related to postpartum visit timing. CONCLUSION: Scheduling a 2- to 3-week postpartum visit is associated with higher attendance.

A strategic action framework for multipurpose prevention technologies combining contraceptive hormones and antiretroviral drugs to prevent pregnancy and HIV.

OBJECTIVE: Multipurpose prevention technologies (MPTs) are an innovative class of products that deliver varied combinations of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention, other sexually transmitted infection (STI) prevention, and contraception. Combining separate strategies for different indications into singular prevention products can reduce the stigma around HIV and STI prevention, improve acceptability of and adherence to more convenient products, and be more cost-effective by addressing overlapping risks. METHODS: This article outlines a strategic action framework developed as an outcome of a series of expert meetings held between 2014 and 2016. The meetings focused on identifying opportunities and challenges for MPTs that combine hormonal contraception (HC) with antiretroviral drugs into single products. The framework aims to present an actionable strategy, by addressing key research gaps and outlining the key areas for progress, to guide current and future HC MPT development. RESULTS: We identified eight primary action areas for the development of impactful HC MPTs, and includes aspects from epidemiology, pharmacology, clinical trial design, regulatory requirements, manufacturing and commercialisation, behavioural science, and investment needs for research and development. CONCLUSION: Overall, the challenges involved with reconciling the critical social-behavioural context that will drive MPT product use and uptake with the complexities of research and development and regulatory approval are of paramount importance. To realise the potential of MPTs given their complexity and finite resources, researchers in the MPT field must be strategic about the way forward; increased support among policy-makers, advocates, funders and the pharmaceutical industry is critical.

Bleeding patterns for the Liletta® levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system.

PURPOSE: Evaluate bleeding patterns for the Liletta® levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system (IUS) using the World Health Organization Belsey definitions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective multicenter trial evaluates the efficacy and safety of Liletta® (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00995150). We evaluated bleeding patterns for 1700 nulliparous and multiparous women using a daily diary completed by participants for the first 2 years and by questionnaire every 3 months thereafter. We assessed amenorrhea rates over 3 years and the proportion of subjects with infrequent, frequent, prolonged and irregular bleeding per 90-day reference period over 2 years for the entire study population as well as comparing nulliparous and parous women and obese and non-obese women. RESULTS: Amenorrhea rates at 1 and 3 years in levonorgestrel 52 mg IUS users were 19 and 37%, respectively. The infrequent bleeding rate increased from 14% in the first 90 days to 30% at the end of Year 1, and was maintained at the same rate through Year 2. Frequent, prolonged and irregular bleeding declined to low levels by the end of the first year. Discontinuation for bleeding-related complaints occurred in 35 (2.1%, 95% CI 1.3-2.7%) women during the first 36 months; only one subject discontinued for amenorrhea (in Year 2). Outcomes did not vary for nulliparous versus parous or obese versus non-obese women. CONCLUSIONS: Among Liletta users, amenorrhea and infrequent bleeding become more prevalent over time and amenorrhea rates continue to increase after the first year of use. Bleeding patterns do not differ significantly by parity or by obesity-status. Discontinuation for bleeding concerns is uncommon with this product.

A prospective assessment of pelvic infection risk following same-day sexually transmitted infection testing and levonorgestrel intrauterine system placement.

BACKGROUND: Misperceptions persist that intrauterine device placement is related to pelvic infections and Chlamydia and gonorrhea testing results are needed prior to placement. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the relationship of Chlamydia and gonorrhea screening to pelvic infection for up to 2 years following placement of the levonorgestrel 52-mg intrauterine system. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 1751 nulliparous and multiparous females 16 to 45 years old enrolled in a multicenter trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new levonorgestrel intrauterine system for up to 7 years. Participants had Chlamydia screening at study entry and yearly if they were age ≤25 years. Women also had baseline gonorrhea screening if testing had not been performed since starting their current sexual relationship. Those who changed sexual partners during the trial had repeated Chlamydia and gonorrhea testing. Intrauterine system insertion could occur on the same day as screening. Participants did not receive prophylactic antibiotics for intrauterine system placement. Investigators performed pelvic examinations after 12 and 24 months and when clinically indicated during visits at 3, 6, and 18 months after placement and unscheduled visits. Pelvic infection included any clinical diagnosis of pelvic inflammatory disease or endometritis. RESULTS: Most participants (n = 1364, 79.6%) did not have sexually transmitted infection test results available prior to intrauterine system placement. In all, 29 (1.7%) participants had positive baseline testing for a sexually transmitted infection (Chlamydia, n = 25; gonorrhea, n = 3; both, n = 1); 6 of these participants had known results (all with Chlamydia infection) prior to intrauterine system placement and received treatment before enrollment. The 23 participants whose results were not known at the time of intrauterine system placement received treatment without intrauterine system removal and none developed pelvic infection. The incidence of positive Chlamydia testing was similar among those with and without known test results at the time of intrauterine system placement (1.9% vs 1.5%, respectively, P = .6). Nine (0.5%) participants had a diagnosis of pelvic infection over 2 years after placement, all of whom had negative Chlamydia screening on the day of or within 1 month after intrauterine system placement. Infections were diagnosed in 3 participants within 7 days, 1 at 39 days, and 5 at ≥6 months. Seven participants received outpatient antibiotic treatment and 2 (diagnoses between 6-12 months after placement) received inpatient treatment. Two (0.1%) participants had intrauterine system removal related to infection (at 6 days and at 7 months after placement), both of whom only required outpatient treatment. CONCLUSION: Conducting Chlamydia and gonorrhea testing on the same day as intrauterine system placement is associated with a low risk of pelvic infection (0.2%). Over the first 2 years of intrauterine system use, infections are infrequent and not temporally related to intrauterine system placement. Pelvic infection can be successfully treated in most women with outpatient antibiotics and typically does not require intrauterine system removal. Women without clinical evidence of active infection can have intrauterine system placement and sexually transmitted infection screening, if indicated, on the same day.

Combined oral contraceptive treatment for bleeding complaints with the etonogestrel contraceptive implant: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Estimate symptom improvement rate of women with bleeding complaints using the etonogestrel contraceptive implant when started on continuous combined oral contraceptives (COC). METHODS: We conducted a double-blinded randomised controlled trial of women reporting troublesome bleeding related to their etonogestrel contraceptive implant and desiring intervention. Participants received continuous COCs or placebo for four weeks to evaluate self-reported bleeding improvement at four weeks. Participants could continue study treatment or prescribed COCs for another eight weeks if desired. We planned to enroll 130 participants between two sites (80% power to detect a 20% effect size at a 0.05 significance level, with 10% loss to follow up). RESULTS: We closed the study after enrolling 26 participants due to recruitment futility. All women on COCs and 75% of placebo users reported bleeding improvement at four weeks (p = 0.09), with 92% and 42%, respectively, reporting significant improvement (p = 0.03). The median number of days until bleeding stopped for at least four days in COC and placebo users was 1 day (range 1-9) and 4.5 days (range 1-28), respectively (p = 0.63). Eight (75%) COC and five (42%) placebo users opted to continue study treatment (p = 0.41). Despite bleeding improvement, women who desired implant removal at enrollment were more likely to re-request removal than those who initially considered other interventions (3 of 5 [60%] vs 1 of 17 [6%], p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Although women who have troublesome bleeding while using the contraceptive implant may experience improvement with no treatment over 4 weeks, women using COCs are more likely to report significant improvement. Clinicaltrials.gov registration number: NCT01963403.

Comparative analysis of the effects of nomegestrol acetate/17 ß-estradiol and drospirenone/ethinylestradiol on premenstrual and menstrual symptoms and dysmenorrhea.

OBJECTIVES: To compare premenstrual and menstrual symptoms in healthy women using nomegestrol acetate/17ß-estradiol (NOMAC/E2) and drospirenone/ethinylestradiol (DRSP/EE) via the Moos Menstrual Distress Questionnaire Form C (MDQ-C). METHODS: Women completed the MDQ-C at baseline and after completion of cycles 1, 3, 6 and 13, for the premenstrual (four days before most recent flow) and menstrual (most recent flow) phases in two randomized controlled trials. Treatment effects of NOMAC/E2 and DRSP/EE on the t-scores of eight MDQ-C symptom domains from 3522 women were examined, and the effects of both treatments on the score for cramps from 1779 women with moderate to severe cramps at baseline. Longitudinal data analysis methods were applied in both analyses. RESULTS: NOMAC/E2 users experienced a significant improvement in Pain, Water Retention, Negative Affect, Impaired Concentration and Behaviour Change domain scores in the menstrual phase compared with DRSP/EE users (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). However, Arousal (emotional and mental) scores worsened with NOMAC/E2 but not with DRSP/EE. Women with moderate to severe cramps experienced an improvement in the cramps score with NOMAC/E2 and DRSP/EE. CONCLUSIONS: NOMAC/E2 was effective in reducing most premenstrual and menstrual symptoms, and was associated with significantly greater improvements in many MDQ-C domain scores compared with DRSP/EE. ( ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00413062 and NCT00511199).

Immediate versus delayed IUD insertion after uterine aspiration.

BACKGROUND: Intrauterine devices (IUDs) provide highly effective, reversible, long-term contraception that is appropriate for many women after first-trimester uterine aspiration. However, the effects of immediate versus delayed IUD insertion after uterine aspiration on rates of complications and IUD use are uncertain. METHODS: We performed a randomized noninferiority trial involving women undergoing uterine aspiration for induced or spontaneous abortion at 5 to 12 weeks of gestation who desired an IUD. Subjects were randomly assigned (in a 5:6 ratio) to IUD insertion immediately after the procedure or 2 to 6 weeks afterward (delayed insertion). The primary outcome was the rate of IUD expulsion 6 months after IUD insertion; an expulsion rate 8 percentage points higher in the immediate-insertion group was defined as inferior. RESULTS: Among 575 women who underwent randomization, an IUD was inserted in 100% (258 of 258) of the women in the immediate-insertion group and in 71.3% (226 of 317) of those in the delayed-insertion group (difference, 28.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 23.7 to 33.7). The 6-month expulsion risk was 5.0% (13 of 258 women) after immediate insertion and 2.7% (6 of 226) after delayed insertion (difference, 2.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.0 to 5.8), which was consistent with the predefined criterion for noninferiority. Six-month rates of IUD use were higher in the immediate-insertion group (92.3%, vs. 76.6% after delayed insertion; P<0.001). Adverse events were rare and did not differ significantly between groups. No pregnancies occurred in the immediate-insertion group; five occurred in the delayed-insertion group (P=0.07), all in women who never received an IUD. CONCLUSIONS: The 6-month rate of expulsion of an IUD after immediate insertion was higher than but not inferior to that after delayed insertion. Immediate insertion resulted in higher rates of IUD use at 6 months, without an increased risk of complications. (Funded by the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00562276.).

Changes in genital tract immune cell populations after initiation of intrauterine contraception.

OBJECTIVE: The primary target cells for the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in the genital tract are CD4 T cells that express CCR5 on the surface. Alterations in genital tract T cells that express CCR5 could impact HIV acquisition risk. We hypothesized that, when compared with baseline, the use of a hormonal intrauterine device (IUD) would alter HIV target cells (primarily CCR5+ CD4 cells) in the female genital tract more than a nonhormonal IUD. STUDY DESIGN: Thirty-four healthy HIV-negative women aged 18-40 years who were seeking an IUD for contraception were assigned randomly to receive a levonorgestrel IUD or a copper T380A IUD. A parallel group of 8 control women who did not need contraception was also enrolled. Genital tract mucosal immune cell populations that were collected by cervical cytobrush and endometrial biopsy before and 2 months after IUD placement were analyzed by flow cytometry. Mean differences in cell number and percent that expressed receptors from baseline to follow-up examination were evaluated with the use of paired Student t tests. RESULTS: Neither IUD altered the number of T cells within the upper and lower genital tracts. Levonorgestrel IUD users had a decrease in T cells that expressed the HIV coreceptor CCR5 in the endometrium and cervix after 2 months of use compared with baseline. There was a decrease in activated endometrial T cells in levonorgestrel IUD users and a decrease in activated cervical T cells in copper IUD users after 2 months of IUD use, compared with baseline. CONCLUSION: Women who use IUDs have reduced expression of the CCR5 HIV coreceptor on T cells in the endometrium and cervix compared with expression before IUD placement. These findings suggest that susceptibility to HIV infection would not be increased by IUD use.