Six-month safety follow-up of an adjuvanted SARS-CoV-2 trimeric S-protein subunit vaccine (SCB-2019) in adults: A phase 2/3, double-blind, randomized study.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the safety of SCB-2019, a protein subunit vaccine candidate containing a recombinant SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) trimer fusion protein, combined with CpG-1018/alum adjuvants. METHODS: This ongoing phase 2/3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial is being conducted in Belgium, Brazil, Colombia, the Philippines, and South Africa in participants ≥ 12 years of age. Participants were randomly assigned to receive 2 doses of SCB-2019 or placebo administered intramuscularly 21 days apart. Here, we present the safety results of SCB-2019 over the 6-month period following 2-dose primary vaccination series in all adult participants (≥18 years of age). RESULTS: A total of 30,137 adult participants received at least one dose of study vaccine (n = 15,070) or placebo (n = 15,067) between 24 March 2021 and 01 December 2021. Unsolicited adverse events, medically-attended adverse events, adverse events of special interest, and serious adverse events were reported in similar frequencies in both study arms over the 6-month follow-up period. Vaccine-related SAEs were reported by 4 of 15,070 SCB-2019 recipients (hypersensitivity reactions in two participants, Bell's palsy, and spontaneous abortion) and 2 of 15,067 placebo recipients (COVID-19, pneumonia, and acute respiratory distress syndrome in one participant and spontaneous abortion in the other one). No signs of vaccine-associated enhanced disease were observed. CONCLUSIONS: SCB-2019 administered as a 2-dose series has an acceptable safety profile. No safety concerns were identified during the 6-month follow-up after the primary vaccination. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04672395; EudraCT: 2020-004272-17.

Dose-response efficacy of mulberry fruit extract for reducing post-prandial blood glucose and insulin responses: randomised trial evidence in healthy adults.

Extracts of mulberry have been shown to reduce post-prandial glucose (PPG) and insulin (PPI) responses, but reliability of these effects and required doses and specifications are unclear. We previously found that 1·5 g of a specified mulberry fruit extract (MFE) significantly reduced PPG and PPI responses to 50 g carbohydrate as rice porridge, with no indications of intolerance. The trials reported here aimed to replicate that work and assess the efficacy of lower MFE doses, using boiled rice as the carbohydrate source. Two separate randomised controlled intervention studies were carried out with healthy Indian males and females aged 20-50 years (n 84 per trial), with PPG area under the curve over 2 h as the primary outcome. Trial 1 used doses of 0, 0·37, 0·75, 1·12 and 1·5 g MFE in boiled rice and 0 or 1·5 g MFE in rice porridge. Trial 2 used doses of 0, 0·04, 0·12, 0·37 g MFE in boiled rice. In trial 1, relative to control, all MFE doses significantly decreased PPG (-27·2 to -22·9 %; all P ≤ 0·02) and PPI (-34·6 to -14·0 %, all P < 0·01). Breath hydrogen was significantly increased only at 1·5 g MFE (in rice porridge), and self-reported gastrointestinal symptoms were uniformly low. In trial 2, only 0·37 g MFE significantly affected PPG (-20·4 %, P = 0·002) and PPI (-17·0 %, P < 0·001). Together, these trials show that MFE in doses as low as 0·37 g can reliably reduce PPG and PPI responses to a carbohydrate-rich meal, with no apparent adverse effects.

Impact of previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and of S-Trimer (SCB-2019) COVID-19 vaccination on the risk of reinfection: a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 2 and 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: We previously reported the efficacy of the adjuvanted-protein COVID-19 vaccine candidate S-Trimer (SCB-2019) in adults who showed no evidence of previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2. In this study, we aimed to investigate the extent of protection afforded by previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 on subsequent COVID-19 infection, as well as the efficacy, safety, and reactogenicity of SCB-2019 in participants who were enrolled in the Study evaluating Protective-Efficacy and safety of Clover's Trimeric Recombinant protein-based and Adjuvanted COVID-19 vaccine (SPECTRA) trial who had already been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 before vaccination. METHODS: In a phase 2 and 3 multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial (SPECTRA) done at 31 sites in five countries, participants were randomly assigned 1:1 using the Cenduit Interactive Response Technology system (IQVIA, Durham, NC, USA), with a block size of six, to receive two doses of either SCB-2019 or placebo 21 days apart. The primary outcomes of the SPECTRA trial were vaccine efficacy, measured by real-time PCR (rtPCR)-confirmed COVID-19 of any severity, with onset from 14 days after the second vaccine dose, as well as the safety and solicited local and systemic adverse events in the phase 2 subset. Here, we present secondary analyses to calculate the protective efficacy due to previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 against reinfection with COVID-19 according to severity in SPECTRA participants who had evidence of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 at baseline, including efficacy against identified viral variants, as well as efficacy of SCB-2019 vaccination in this population. FINDINGS: We enrolled 30 174 participants between March 24, 2021, and Aug 10, 2021. In the 14 670 participants who were randomly assigned to receive placebo, there were 418 (2·8%) confirmed cases of COVID-19; 65 (0·9%) of 7339 SARS-CoV-2-exposed participants, and 353 (4·8%) of 7331 SARS-CoV-2-naive participants (attack rates of 5·5 cases per 100 person-years for SARS-CoV-2-exposed participants and 32·4 cases per 100 person-years for SARS-CoV-2-naive participants). Protective efficacy due to previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 was 83·2% (95% CI 78·0-87·3) against any COVID-19, 92·5% (82·9-97·3) against moderate-to-severe COVID-19, and 100% (59·3-100) against severe COVID-19; no SARS-CoV-2-exposed participants had hospitalisation associated with COVID-19. Protective efficacy against variants were 100% for alpha (B.1.1.7) and lambda (C.37) variants, 88·6% (14·9-99·7) for B.1.623, 93·6% (80·1-98·7) for gamma (P.1), and 92·4% (81·2-97·6) for mu (B.1.621) variants, and lowest against beta (B.1.351; 72·2% [33·1-89·9]) and delta (B.1.617.2; 77·2% [61·3-87·2]) variants. In addition, one dose of SCB-2019 had 49·9% (1·5-75·6) efficacy against any symptomatic COVID-19, and two doses had 64·2% (26·5-83·8) efficacy. SCB-2019 was well tolerated in SARS-CoV-2-exposed participants, but was associated with higher rates of injection site pain (89 [33·8%] of 263 participants) than placebo (16 [6·7%] of 239 participants). Rates of solicited systemic adverse events, severe adverse events, and serious adverse events were similar between vaccine and placebo groups, and with rates in SARS-CoV-2-naive vaccine recipients. INTERPRETATION: Previous exposure to SARS-CoV-2 decreased the risk and severity of subsequent COVID-19 infection, even against newly emerging variants. Protection is further enhanced by one or two doses of SCB-2019. FUNDING: Clover Biopharmaceuticals, The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).

Prevention of influenza during mismatched seasons in older adults with an MF59-adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine: a randomised, controlled, multicentre, phase 3 efficacy study.

BACKGROUND: The absolute degree of protection from influenza vaccines in older adults has not been studied since 2001. This study aimed to show the clinical efficacy of an MF59-adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine (aQIV) in adults 65 years or older compared with adults not vaccinated to prevent influenza. METHODS: We did a randomised, stratified, observer-blind, controlled, multicentre, phase 3 study at 89 sites in 12 countries in 2016-17 northern hemisphere and 2017 southern hemisphere influenza seasons. We enrolled community-dwelling male and female adults aged 65 years and older who were healthy or had comorbidities that increased their risk of influenza complications. We stratified eligible participants by age (cohorts 65-74 years and ≥75 years) and risk of influenza complications (high and low) and randomly assigned them (1:1) via an interactive response technology to receive either aQIV or a non-influenza comparator vaccine. We masked participants and outcome assessors to the administered vaccine. Personnel administering the vaccines did not participate in endpoint assessment. The primary outcome was absolute vaccine efficacy assessed by RT-PCR-confirmed influenza due to any influenza strain in the overall study population (full analysis set) from day 21 to 180 or the end of the influenza season. Vaccine efficacy was calculated on the basis of a Cox proportional hazard regression model for time to first occurrence of RT-PCR-confirmed influenza due to any strain of influenza. Safety outcomes were assessed in the overall study population. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02587221. FINDINGS: Northern hemisphere enrolment occurred between Sept 30, 2016, and Feb 28, 2017, and southern hemisphere enrolment between May 26, 2017, and 30 June 30, 2017. aQIV was administered to 3381 participants, who subsequently had 122 (3·6%) RT-PCR-confirmed influenza cases, and the comparator was administered to 3380 participants, who subsequently had 151 (4·5%) influenza cases. The majority, 214 (78·4%) of 273, were caused by influenza A H3N2. Most antigenically characterised isolates were mismatched to the vaccine strain (118 [85%] of 139). Vaccine efficacy was 19·8% (multiplicity-adjusted 95% CI -5·3 to 38·9) against all influenza and 49·9% (-24·0 to 79·8) against antigenically matched strains, when the protocol definition of influenza-like illness was used. The most common local solicited adverse event was injection site pain, reported by 102 (16·3%) of 624 participants in the aQIV group and 71 (11·2%) of 632 of participants in the comparator group. Deaths were evenly distributed; none were considered related to study vaccines. The safety profile for aQIV was similar to previously reported trials. INTERPRETATION: The prespecified criterion for showing the efficacy of aQIV in older adults was not met during the influenza seasons with high amounts of vaccine strain mismatch. Vaccine efficacy was higher against influenza cases associated with higher fever, which represent more clinically significant disease. FUNDING: Seqirus UK.

Immunogenicity and safety of MF59-adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine versus standard and alternate B strain MF59-adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccines in older adults.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate whether adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine (aQIV) elicits a noninferior immune response compared with a licensed adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aTIV-1; Fluad™) and aTIV-2 containing an alternate B strain, examine whether aQIV had immunological superiority for the B strain absent from aTIV comparators, and evaluate reactogenicity and safety among adults ≥65 years. METHODS: In a multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled trial, adults ≥65 years were randomized 2:1:1 to vaccination with aQIV (n = 889), aTIV-1 (n = 445), or aTIV-2 (n = 444) during the 2017-2018 influenza season. Immunogenicity was assessed by hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay conducted on serum samples collected before vaccination and 21 days after vaccination for homologous influenza strains. RESULTS: aQIV met non-inferiority criteria for geometric mean titer ratios (GMT ratios) and seroconversion rate (SCR) differences against aTIV. The upper bounds of the 2-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for GMT ratios were <1.5 for all 4 strains (A/H1N1 = 1.27, A/H3N2 = 1.09, B-Yamagata = 1.08, B-Victoria = 1.08). The upper bounds of the 95% CI of the SCR differences were <10% for all 4 strains (A/H1N1 = 7.76%, A/H3N2 = 4.96%, B-Yamagata = 3.27%, B-Victoria = 2.55%). aQIV also met superiority criteria (upper bound of 95% CI for GMT ratios <1 and SCR differences <0) for B strain absent from aTIV comparators (B-Yamagata GMT ratio = 0.70, SCR difference = -8.81%; B-Victoria GMT ratio = 0.78, SCR difference = -8.11%). aQIV and aTIV vaccines were immunogenic and well-tolerated. The immunological benefit of aQIV was also demonstrated in age subgroups 65-74 years, 75-84 years, and ≥85 years and in those with high comorbidity risk scores. Reactogenicity profiles were generally comparable. CONCLUSION: aQIV induces a similar immune response as the licensed aTIV vaccine against homologous influenza strains and has a comparable reactogenicity and safety profile. Superior immunogenicity against the additional B strain was observed, indicating that aQIV could provide a broader protection than aTIV against influenza in older adults (NCT03314662).

Pro-Apoptotic Effects of Estetrol on Long-Term Estrogen-Deprived Breast Cancer Cells and at Low Doses on Hormone-Sensitive Cells.

PURPOSE: Postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancers often respond initially to tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor therapy. Resistance to these treatments usually develops within 12 to 18 months. Clinical studies have demonstrated that high-dose estrogen can induce regression of these endocrine-resistant tumors. However, side-effects of high-dose estradiol (E2) or diethylstilbestrol (DES) limit their usage. Estetrol (E4) is the most abundant estrogen during pregnancy and has a long half-life and a low potential for side-effects. Estetrol might then provide benefits similar to DES on tumor regression but with lesser toxicity. METHODS: In this study, we systematically evaluated the effects of E4 on cell proliferation and apoptosis in wild-type MCF-7 and long-term estrogen-deprived (LTED) MCF-7 cells and compared its effects with E2 and estriol (E3). RESULTS: Estetrol induced apoptosis in LTED cells but stimulated growth of MCF-7 cells at concentrations from 10-11 to 10-8 M. These effects of E4 are similar to those of E2 but require much higher doses. Differing from E2, E4 at 10-12 M induced apoptosis in MCF-7 cells and another pregnancy estrogen, E3, acted similarly. No antagonistic effect of E4 or E3 against E2 occurred when they were combined. CONCLUSIONS: The pro-apoptotic effects of E4 and E3 on LTED cells and at low doses on MCF-7 cells indicate that these steroids could be used as therapeutic agents for endocrine-resistant or sensitive breast cancer.

A Dose-Escalating Study With the Fetal Estrogen Estetrol in Healthy Men.

Context: Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists have replaced estrogens for endocrine treatment of advanced prostate cancer (PC) because of cardiovascular side effects. The fetal estrogen estetrol (E4) may be safer for PC treatment and is expected to decrease testosterone (T) and prevent estrogen deficiency. Objective: To investigate the safety and T-suppressive effect of E4 in healthy men. Design: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-escalating study. Setting: The study was conducted at a phase I clinical unit (QPS, Netherlands). Participants: Healthy male volunteers aged 40 to 70 years. Intervention(s): Three treatment cohorts of 15 volunteers with placebo (n = 5) and E4 (n = 10). Estetrol doses tested were 20, 40, and 60 mg/d. Subjects were treated for 4 weeks. Main Outcome Measures: Subjective side effects, pharmacodynamic effects on hemostatic variables, lipids, glucose, bone parameters, and endocrine parameters related to T metabolism. Results: Total and free T decreased dose-dependently and significantly. Nipple tenderness occurred in 40% and decrease of libido occurred in 30% of E4-treated men. The unwanted estrogenic effects on hemostasis were small, dose dependent, and in some cases significant. Lipid and bone parameters showed a favorable trend. Conclusion: The effect of E4 on testosterone levels is insufficient for standalone PC treatment. Taking all clinical and pharmacodynamic variables into consideration, a daily dose of 40 mg E4 seems safe for further evaluation of endocrine PC treatment in combination with LHRH analogs.

Pharmacodynamic effects of the fetal estrogen estetrol in postmenopausal women: results from a multiple-rising-dose study.

OBJECTIVE: Estetrol (E4) is an estrogen produced exclusively by the human fetal liver during pregnancy. In this study the pharmacodynamic effects of escalating doses of E4 in postmenopausal women were investigated. METHODS: This was a partly randomized, open-label, multiple-rising-dose study in 49 postmenopausal women. Participants were randomized to receive either 2 mg E4 or 2 mg estradiol-valerate (E2 V) for 28 days. Subsequent dose-escalation groups were (non-randomized): 10, 20 and 40 mg E4. Blood samples were collected regularly for measuring endocrine and hemostasis variables, lipids and lipoproteins, fasting glucose and bone turnover markers. RESULTS: Estetrol treatment resulted in a decrease of follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone and an increase of sex-hormone binding globulin. Changes in hemostasis variables were small. A lowering effect on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was accompanied with an increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and no or minimal changes in triglycerides. The considerable decrease in osteocalcin levels in the three highest E4 dose groups and the small decrease in C-telopeptide levels were comparable to the E2 V control group and suggest a preventive effect on bone loss. All changes observed were dose-dependent. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, estetrol treatment showed dose-dependent estrogenic effects on endocrine parameters, bone turnover markers, and lipids and lipoproteins. The effect on triglycerides was small as were the effects on hemostatic variables. These results support the further investigation of estetrol as a candidate for hormone therapy. Quantitatively, the effects of 10 mg estetrol were similar to the study comparator 2 mg estradiol valerate.

The use of high-dose estrogens for the treatment of breast cancer.

Estrogens are known to stimulate the growth of breast cancer but they are also an effective treatment for this disease (this has been termed the 'estrogen paradox'). The fact that estrogens can be an effective treatment for breast cancer is something that has almost been forgotten, whereas the fear for estrogens remains. This paper reviews the use of estrogens for the treatment of breast cancer and identifies possible applications. The data summarised in this review demonstrate that high-dose estrogens are effective for the treatment of advanced breast cancer, both as first-line treatment as well as for treatment after occurrence of endocrine resistance to TAM and AIs. Essential for efficacy is an extended period of estrogen deprivation before the tumour is subject to estrogen treatment (the gap hypothesis). Research on the mechanism of action has shown that apoptosis induced by estrogens is regulated via the estrogen receptor and growth factor signalling pathways. High-dose estrogens have a negative safety image, especially in terms of side-effects and increased rates of cardiovascular disease, but the safety data reviewed in this paper do not give rise to major concerns. Taking into account their side-effect profile together with their observed clinical efficacy, high-dose estrogens should be considered a valuable alternative to chemotherapy in selected patients.

Clinical effects of the fetal estrogen estetrol in a multiple-rising-dose study in postmenopausal women.

OBJECTIVE: Estetrol (E4) is a natural fetal estrogen. The safety of increasing doses of E4 and its preliminary effects on the vagina, endometrium and menopausal vasomotor symptoms were investigated. STUDY DESIGN: This was a partly randomized, open-label, multiple-rising-dose study in 49 postmenopausal women. Subjects with an intact uterus were randomized to receive either 2mg E4 or 2mg estradiol-valerate (E2V) for 28days. Subsequent dose-escalation groups (non-randomized) were: 10mg E4 (intact uterus and ≥35 hot flushes/week); and 20mg and 40mg E4 (hysterectomized subjects). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Adverse events (AEs) and vaginal cytology were evaluated in all treatment groups; hot flushes/sweating and endometrial proliferation were analyzed with 2 and 10mg E4 and 2mg E2V. RESULTS: Estetrol appeared to be safe, without serious drug-related AEs. In all the groups there was a clear shift from parabasal to superficial vaginal cells, indicating an estrogenic effect and a potential for the treatment of vulvovaginal atrophy. The endometrial thickness remained stable in the 2mg E4 group and increased with E2V and 10mg E4. A decrease in the mean number of hot flushes and sweating was seen with 2 and 10mg E4 and 2mg E2V. CONCLUSIONS: Estetrol in a dose range of 2-40mg per day improved vaginal cytology and vasomotor symptoms in postmenopausal women. Endometrial proliferation occurred with the 10mg dose. Estetrol seems a safe and suitable candidate to develop further for hormone therapy.

The effect of a low-fat spread with added plant sterols on vascular function markers: results of the Investigating Vascular Function Effects of Plant Sterols (INVEST) study.

BACKGROUND: Plant sterols (PSs) lower LDL cholesterol, an established risk factor for coronary artery disease (CAD). No direct evidence is available supporting a reduced risk of CAD for foods with added PSs. Endothelial dysfunction is seen as an early indicator of atherosclerotic damage. OBJECTIVES: This study was primarily designed to investigate the effect of a low-fat spread with added PSs on brachial artery endothelial function as measured by flow-mediated dilation (FMD). Second, effects on arterial stiffness, blood pressure, serum lipids, and plasma PS concentrations were investigated. We hypothesized that PSs would not worsen FMD but would rather modestly improve FMD. DESIGN: This study had a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel design. After a 4-wk run-in period, 240 hypercholesterolemic but otherwise healthy men and women consumed 20 g/d of low-fat spread without (control) or with added PSs (3 g/d) during 12 wk. Pre- and postintervention, vascular function measurements and blood sampling were performed. RESULTS: In total, 232 participants completed the study period. For the primary endpoint FMD, 199 participants were included in the statistical analysis. PS intake did not affect FMD (+0.01 percentage points; 95% CI: -0.73, 0.75) compared with control. Measures of arterial stiffness (pulse wave velocity and augmentation index) and blood pressure were also not significantly changed compared with control. After PS intervention, LDL cholesterol significantly decreased on average by 0.26 mmol/L (95% CI: -0.40, -0.12) or 6.7% compared with control. Plasma sitosterol and campesterol concentrations significantly increased in the PS group up to on average 11.5 µmol/L and 13.9 µmol/L (expressed as geometric means), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The intake of a low-fat spread with added PSs neither improved nor worsened FMD or other vascular function markers in hypercholesterolemic men and women. As expected, serum LDL cholesterol decreased, whereas plasma PSs increased after PS intake. This study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01803178.

Effects on bone mineral density of a monophasic combined oral contraceptive containing nomegestrol acetate/17ß-estradiol in comparison to levonorgestrel/ethinylestradiol.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of a monophasic combined oral contraceptive containing nomegestrol acetate/17ß-estradiol (NOMAC/E2) on bone mineral density with a combined oral contraceptive containing levonorgestrel/ethinylestradiol (LNG/EE). DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, open-label, comparative clinical study. SETTING: Gynecology center in Norway. POPULATION: One hundred and ten women (20-35 years old) actively seeking contraception. Methods. For 26 consecutive 28-day cycles, women received one of the following two treatments: NOMAC/E2 (2.5 mg/1.5 mg) in a 24/4-day regimen (n= 56); or LNG/EE (150 µg/30 µg) in a 21/7-day regimen (n= 54). Main outcome measures. Bone mineral density of the lumbar spine, femoral neck, hip and trochanter (measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry); associated z-scores of the lumbar spine and femoral neck. RESULTS: In NOMAC/E2 users, mean (±SD) z-score change from baseline for lumbar spine and femoral neck were 0.019 ± 0.242 and -0.007 ± 0.228, respectively, vs. 0.121 ± 0.269 and 0.044 ± 0.253 in LNG/EE users, respectively. Differences between treatment groups were not significant (p= 0.19 and p= 0.57, respectively). There were no significant differences between changes in hip and trochanter z-scores between NOMAC/E2 and LNG/EE treatments. CONCLUSIONS: After two years, NOMAC/E2 had no clinically relevant effect on bone mineral density. No significant difference in the effect on bone mineral density between NOMAC/E2 and LNG/EE was observed.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a monophasic oral contraceptive containing nomegestrol acetate and 17ß-estradiol: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the efficacy, cycle control, tolerability, and safety of a monophasic combined oral contraceptive containing nomegestrol acetate and 17ß-estradiol (E2) in comparison with drospirenone and ethinyl E2. METHODS: In a randomized, open-label, comparative multicenter trial, healthy women (n=2,281; age 18-50 years) at risk for pregnancy and in need of contraception were allocated in a 3:1 ratio to receive nomegestrol acetate (2.5 mg) and 17ß-E2 (1.5 mg) in a 24-4-day regimen (investigational drug) or drospirenone (3.0 mg) and ethinyl E2 (30 micrograms) in a 21-7-day regimen (comparator) for 13 consecutive, 28-day cycles. The primary end point was the Pearl Index. RESULTS: The Pearl Indices for 18- to 35-year-old women in the investigational (n=1,375) and comparator (n=463) groups were 1.27 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-2.22) and 1.89 (95% CI 0.69-4.11), respectively. Respective 1-year cumulative pregnancy rates were 1.22 (95% CI 0.69-2.16) and 1.82 (95% CI 0.81-4.05). By the end of the trial, shorter, lighter scheduled bleeding or an absence of scheduled bleeding occurred with greater frequency (32.9%) in the investigational group, whereas unscheduled bleeding or spotting episodes were low (16.2% and 15.0% in the investigational and comparator groups, respectively). Acne prevalence decreased from approximately 33% at baseline to 22% and 14% at cycle 13 in the respective groups. In the investigational group, the most frequently reported adverse events were acne (16.4%), weight gain (9.5%), and irregular withdrawal bleeding (9.1%). CONCLUSION: Nomegestrol acetate and 17ß-E2 were well tolerated and provided excellent contraceptive efficacy and acceptable cycle control. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00413062. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Efficacy and tolerability of a monophasic combined oral contraceptive containing nomegestrol acetate and 17ß-oestradiol in a 24/4 regimen, in comparison to an oral contraceptive containing ethinylestradiol and drospirenone in a 21/7 regimen.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to assess the efficacy, cycle control and tolerability of a monophasic combined oral contraceptive (COC) containing nomegestrol acetate (NOMAC) and 17ß-oestradiol (E2). Effects on acne were evaluated as a secondary objective. Results were compared to those of a COC containing drospirenone (DRSP) and ethinylestradiol (EE). METHODS: Women (aged 18-50 years) were randomised to receive NOMAC/E2 (2.5 mg/1.5 mg) in a 24/4-day regimen (n=1591) or DRSP/EE (3 mg/30 µg) in a 21/7-day regimen (n=535) for 13 cycles. RESULTS: Estimated Pearl Indices for NOMAC/E2 and DRSP/EE were 0.38 and 0.81 in women aged≤35 years and 0.31 and 0.66 for all women (18-50 years), respectively. Scheduled withdrawal bleedings were shorter and lighter among users of NOMAC/E2 and were sometimes absent altogether. Intracyclic bleeding/spotting was infrequent in both groups, and decreased over time. Type and frequency of adverse events were similar to those typically reported for COCs. CONCLUSIONS: These data show that NOMAC/E2 provides high contraceptive efficacy with acceptable cycle control as well as an overall adverse event profile similar to that of DRSP/EE.

Extended regimens of the contraceptive vaginal ring: a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the bleeding patterns and tolerability of 3 different extended ring regimens with those of the standard 28-day cycle with 21 days of contraceptive vaginal ring use followed by 7 ring-free days. METHODS: Following a run-in 28-day ring cycle, women were randomized to 1 of 4 regimens: monthly (28-day cycle), every other month (49-day cycle), every third month (91-day cycle), or continuous (364-day cycle). Treatment duration was 1 year. Daily bleeding diary, interval visit questionnaire, and examination data were collected. RESULTS: A total of 561 women were enrolled, 429 were subsequently randomized, and 289 (67.4%) women completed the entire year. All schedules were well tolerated and acceptable to women, but study completion rates were higher for the shorter cycles. Bleeding days were reduced with postponement of the withdrawal bleeding (ring-free) week, but spotting days increased. For example, women using the continuous or 364-day ring cycle reported a median of zero bleeding days but 10-12 days of spotting during the first 3 months of extended use. Unscheduled bleeding during ring use was the lowest with the traditional 28-day cycle. Adverse events, blood pressure, body weight, and laboratory findings were comparable over the 4 treatment groups. CONCLUSION: The combination vaginal contraceptive ring can be used for extended cycles to alter the bleeding schedule. Women willing to tolerate some spotting might choose the longer extensions to have fewer menstrual periods. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Efficacy and safety of a contraceptive vaginal ring (NuvaRing) compared with a combined oral contraceptive: a 1-year randomized trial.

This open-label, randomized, Phase III study compared the efficacy and tolerability of and compliance with NuvaRing, a combined contraceptive vaginal ring releasing 15 microg of ethinylestradiol (EE) and 120 microg of etonogestrel daily, with those of and with a combined oral contraceptive (COC) containing 150 microg of levonorgestrel (LNG) and 30 microg of EE. Subjects received NuvaRing or a COC for 13 cycles (3 weeks of ring/pill treatment followed by a 1-week ring-/pill-free period). A total of 1030 subjects (NuvaRing, n=512; COC, n=518) was randomized and started treatment (intent-to-treat [ITT] population). The percentage of women in the ITT population who completed the trial was 70.9% for the NuvaRing group and 71.2% for the COC group. Five in-treatment pregnancies occurred in each group, giving Pearl indices of 1.23 for NuvaRing and 1.19 for the COC. Compliance with both treatments was excellent and both were well tolerated. In conclusion, NuvaRing has comparable efficacy and tolerability with a COC containing 150 microg of LNG and 30 microg of EE and does not require daily dosing.

Follicular growth during contraceptive pill or vaginal ring treatment depends on the day of ovulation in the pretreatment cycle.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the day of ovulation and the duration of a pretreatment cycle were related to the degree of follicular growth during subsequent contraceptive treatment. METHODS: This randomized, open-label study was performed in 40 healthy female volunteers, who were randomized by a computer-generated list after stratification for the ovulation day in a pretreatment cycle. They received two cycles of NuvaRing (21 subjects) or a combined oral contraceptive (COC) containing 30 microg ethinylestradiol and 150 microg levonorgestrel (19 subjects). Follicular diameter and serum hormone concentrations (FSH, LH, 17beta-estradiol, progesterone) were measured every third day. Data from treatment day 20 onwards were used for analysis. RESULTS: In the NuvaRing users, subjects with short cycles and early ovulations in the pretreatment cycle developed larger follicles during treatment than subjects with longer cycles and late ovulations. In the COC users, subjects with early ovulations in the pretreatment cycle developed larger follicles during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The degree of follicular growth during treatment with a combined hormonal contraceptive is influenced by the duration of the pretreatment cycle and particularly by the duration of the follicular phase.

Ovarian function with the contraceptive vaginal ring or an oral contraceptive: a randomized study.

BACKGROUND: The effects on ovarian function of the combined contraceptive vaginal ring NuvaRing and a combined oral contraceptive (COC) were compared. METHODS: This randomized, open-label study was performed in 40 healthy female volunteers, who were randomized by a computer-generated list after stratification for the ovulation day in a pretreatment cycle. They received two cycles of NuvaRing (21 subjects) or a COC (30 microg ethinylestradiol and 150 microg levonorgestrel, 19 subjects). NuvaRing was started on cycle day 5, COC on cycle day 1. Follicular diameter, endometrial thickness and FSH, LH, 17beta-estradiol (E2) and progesterone concentrations were determined. RESULTS: The median maximum follicular diameter (maxFD) was < or =11 mm during treatment. In the first treatment cycle the maxFD was lower in the COC than in the NuvaRing group, due to the different starting procedures. MaxFD were not different in the second treatment cycle. In both groups, E2 and progesterone levels remained low during treatment. Ovulations did not occur. CONCLUSIONS: In both groups, ovarian activity was adequately suppressed. Due to the different starting procedures, lower ovarian activity was observed in the COC group in the first treatment cycle. In the second cycle, ovarian suppression was comparable with NuvaRing and COC treatment.

The combined contraceptive vaginal ring, NuvaRing, and tampon co-usage.

We investigated the effect of tampon co-usage on systemic exposure to etonogestrel (ENG) and ethinylestradiol (EE) from the combined contraceptive vaginal ring, NuvaRing. One cycle of ring use consists of 3 weeks of ring use followed by a 1-week ring-free period. Fourteen healthy women were randomized to use both NuvaRing and tampons (Kotex( regular) or NuvaRing alone for one cycle; participants then switched to the alternate treatment regimen for a second cycle of ring use. The first tampon was self-administered on day 8 of the interaction cycle; 4 tampons a day were used for 3 consecutive days. Tampon co-usage did not result in any changes in serum ENG or EE concentrations and is thus not expected to compromise the ring's contraceptive efficacy.