Preliminary Efficacy of Topical Sildenafil Cream for the Treatment of Female Sexual Arousal Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of topical sildenafil cream, 3.6% among healthy premenopausal women with female sexual arousal disorder. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2b, exploratory, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of sildenafil cream. Coprimary efficacy endpoints were the change from baseline to week 12 in the Arousal Sensation domain of the SFQ28 (Sexual Function Questionnaire) and question 14 of the FSDS-DAO (Female Sexual Distress Scale-Desire, Arousal, Orgasm). RESULTS: Two hundred women with female sexual arousal disorder were randomized to sildenafil cream (n=101) or placebo cream (n=99). A total of 174 participants completed the study (sildenafil 90, placebo 84). Among the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, which included women with only female sexual arousal disorder and those with female sexual arousal disorder with concomitant sexual dysfunction diagnoses or genital pain, although the sildenafil cream group demonstrated greater improvement in the SFQ28 Arousal Sensation domain scores, there were no statistically significant differences between sildenafil and placebo cream users in the coprimary and secondary efficacy endpoints. An exploratory post hoc subset of the ITT population with an enrollment diagnosis of female sexual arousal disorder with or without concomitant decreased desire randomized to sildenafil cream reported significant increases in their SFQ28 Arousal Sensation domain score (least squares mean 2.03 [SE 0.62]) compared with placebo cream (least squares mean 0.08 [SE 0.71], P =.04). This subset achieved a larger mean improvement in the SFQ28 Desire and Orgasm domain scores. This subset population also had significantly reduced sexual distress and interpersonal difficulties with sildenafil cream use as measured by FSDS-DAO questions 3, 5, and 10 (all P ≤.04). CONCLUSION: Topical sildenafil cream improved outcomes among women with female sexual arousal disorder, most significantly in those who did not have concomitant orgasmic dysfunction. In particular, in an exploratory analysis of a subset of women with female sexual arousal disorder with or without concomitant decreased desire, topical sildenafil cream increased sexual arousal sensation, desire, and orgasm and reduced sexual distress. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04948151.

Safety testing of Ovaprene: An investigational nonhormonal monthly vaginal contraceptive.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the safety of Ovaprene, an investigational nonhormonal vaginal contraceptive designed for monthly use. STUDY DESIGN: Open-label, multicenter study enrolling heterosexually-active women with previous permanent contraception who underwent assessments during five menstrual cycles: baseline postcoital test cycle, diaphragm postcoital test cycle, Ovaprene safety cycle, and two Ovaprene postcoital test cycles. Safety outcomes included treatment-emergent adverse events, systemic laboratory findings, pelvic examinations, colposcopies, Nugent scores, determination of community state types of vaginal microbiota, and anti-Escherichia coli activity and inflammatory markers in cervicovaginal fluids. RESULTS: We enrolled 38 participants. Of these, 33 used Ovaprene and completed 77 Ovaprene cycles. The most common product-related urogenital treatment-emergent adverse events were bacterial vaginosis and vaginal odor. The frequency of transitioning from Lactobacillus-dominated community state type to community state type IV (not Lactobacillus-dominated) was similar before Ovaprene use and afterwards. Mean Nugent scores were <4 at each visit without a discernible upward trend. Inflammatory markers showed wide variation but no upward trend, and E. coli inhibitory activity of cervical secretions did not change. We found no Staphylococcus aureus, the causative agent in toxic shock syndrome, on used Ovaprenes or in vaginal samples. No clinically important changes in systemic laboratory findings, pelvic examinations, or colposcopies occurred during Ovaprene use. CONCLUSIONS: Ovaprene use did not result in cervicovaginal irritation or adverse effects on resident vaginal microbiota and did not impact transitions from a Lactobacillus-dominated community state type to community state type IV. IMPLICATIONS: The finding that the use of Ovaprene, an investigational monthly user-controlled nonhormonal vaginal contraceptive, does not appear to result in adverse changes in vaginal health during short-term use supports further evaluation of the contraceptive potential of the device.

Successful postcoital testing of Ovaprene: An investigational non-hormonal monthly vaginal contraceptive.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate reduction in progressively motile sperm per high power field (HPF) in midcycle cervical mucus after intercourse with Ovaprene: an investigational monthly non-hormonal vaginal contraceptive consisting of a vaginal ring and mechanical barrier, releasing spermiostatic ferrous gluconate. STUDY DESIGN: Open-label, multicenter study enrolling heterosexually-active women with previous permanent contraception. Participants underwent a baseline postcoital test cycle with no device to confirm the presence of sperm, followed by one diaphragm postcoital test cycle, one Ovaprene safety cycle, and two Ovaprene postcoital test cycles. In each postcoital test cycle, participants underwent a midcycle cervical mucus evaluation to confirm an Insler score ≥10 and absence of sperm, and then returned two to four hours after vaginal intercourse for repeat cervical mucus evaluation. We considered <5 progressively motile sperm/HPF indicative of preliminary contraceptive effectiveness. RESULTS: We enrolled 38 participants; 23 completed the study. All participants had ≥5 progressively motile sperm/HPF in the baseline cycle and <5 progressively motile sperm/HPF in all 49 Ovaprene cycles and all 35 diaphragm cycles, meeting the definition of a successful postcoital test. This was true regardless of examiner blinding, prior vaginal delivery or vaginal ring use, body mass index, or dislodgements noted by the participant or investigator. The mean of 27.2 (±17.9) progressively motile sperm/HPF in baseline postcoital test cycles was reduced to 0.5 (±1.1) and 0.5 (±1.3) progressively motile sperm/HPF in the first and second Ovaprene cycles, respectively. Ovaprene fit all participants and all could insert, position, and remove it. CONCLUSION: Use of Ovaprene resulted in meeting the prespecified criterion for contraceptive effect by all participants during all postcoital test cycles. IMPLICATIONS: The finding that use of Ovaprene, an investigational monthly non-hormonal vaginal contraceptive, resulted in postcoital testing of cervical mucus that met the pre-specified definition of success (<5 progressively motile sperm/HPF) supports further evaluation of contraceptive efficacy of the device in users at risk for pregnancy.

A phase 1/2, open-label, parallel group study to evaluate the preliminary efficacy and usability DARE-HRT1 (80 µg estradiol/4 mg progesterone and 160 µg estradiol/8 mg progesterone intravaginal RinGSM) over 12 weeks in healthy postmenopausal women.

OBJECTIVES: The exploratory objectives of this study were to evaluate the usability and acceptability and to conduct a preliminary evaluation of the efficacy of DARE-HRT1. DARE-HRT1 is an intravaginal ring (IVR) that releases 17ß2-estradiol (E2) with progesterone (P4) over 28 days. It is the first combination E2 and P4 IVR being developed for the treatment of vasomotor symptoms (VMS) in healthy postmenopausal women with an intact uterus. METHODS: This was a randomized, open-label, 2-arm, parallel group study in 21 healthy postmenopausal women. Women were randomized (1:1) to either DARE-HRT1 IVR1 (E2 80 µg/d with P4 4 mg/d) or DARE-HRT1 IVR2 (E2 160 µg/d with P4 8 mg/d). They used the assigned IVR for three 28-day cycles, inserting a new IVR monthly. Preliminary genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) treatment efficacy was estimated by measuring changes from baseline in vaginal pH, vaginal maturation index (VMI), and changes in the severity of GSM symptoms. Preliminary systemic VMS efficacy was measured by changes in responses to the Menopause-Specific Quality of Life (MENQOL) questionnaire. Acceptability was assessed by product experience surveys. RESULTS: Preliminary local GSM treatment efficacy was supported by significant decreases in vaginal pH and % parabasal cells, and significant increases in the overall VMI and % superficial cells for both IVR groups (all P values <0.01). Preliminary VMS efficacy was supported by significant decreases in all domains of the MENQOL questionnaire from baseline for both dosing groups (all P values <0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Data from this study support further development of DARE-HRT1 for the treatment of menopausal symptoms.

A phase 1/2, open-label, parallel group study to evaluate the safety and pharmacokinetics of DARE-HRT1 (80 µg estradiol/4 mg progesterone and 160 µg estradiol/8 mg progesterone intravaginal rings) over 12 weeks in healthy postmenopausal women.

OBJECTIVES: Primary objectives were to evaluate the safety and systemic pharmacokinetics (PK) of DARE-HRT1, an intravaginal ring (IVR), which releases 17ß2-Estradiol (E2) with progesterone (P4) for 28 days in healthy postmenopausal women. METHODS: This was a randomized, open-label, 2-arm, parallel group study in 21 healthy postmenopausal women with an intact uterus. Women were randomized (1:1) to either DARE-HRT1 IVR1 (E2 80 µg/d with P4 4 mg/d) or DARE-HRT1 IVR2 (E2 160 µg/d with P4 8 mg/d). They used the IVR for three 28-day cycles, inserting a new IVR monthly. Safety was measured by treatment emergent adverse events and changes in systemic laboratories and the endometrial bilayer width. Baseline adjusted plasma PK of E2, P4, and estrone (E1) was described. RESULTS: Both DARE-HRT1 IVR were safe. All treatment emergent adverse events were mild or moderate and were distributed similarly among IVR1 versus IVR2 users. Month 3 median maximum plasma ( Cmax ) P4 concentrations were 2.81 and 3.51 ng/mL and Cmax E2 was 42.95 and 77.27 pg/mL for IVR1 and IVR2 groups, respectively. Month 3 median steady state ( Css ) plasma P4 concentrations were 1.19 and 1.89 ng/mL, and Css E2 was 20.73 and 38.16 pg/mL for IVR1 and IVR2 users, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both DARE-HRT1 IVRs were safe and released E2 in systemic concentrations, which were in the low, normal premenopausal range. Systemic P4 concentrations predict endometrial protection. Data from this study support further development of DARE-HRT1 for the treatment of menopausal symptoms.