Norethindrone acetate or dienogest for the treatment of symptomatic endometriosis: a before and after study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the proportion of patients satisfied with their treatment before and after a systematic change from norethindrone acetate to dienogest as the first-line progestin for symptomatic endometriosis. DESIGN: Before and after study. SETTING: Academic department. PATIENT(S): The last 90 new consecutive endometriosis patients in whom norethindrone acetate was used, and the first 90 new consecutive endometriosis patients in whom dienogest was used. INTERVENTION(S): Norethindrone acetate at the oral dose of 2.5 mg once a day until June 6, 2013, then dienogest at the oral dose of 2 mg once a day thereafter. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Degree of satisfaction with treatment after 6 months of progestin therapy and assessment of any variations in pain symptoms, psychological status, sexual function, or health-related quality of life associated with the introduction of dienogest. RESULT(S): The proportion of satisfied plus very satisfied women after 6 months of treatment was 71% in the "before" period (norethindrone acetate) and 72% in the "after" period (dienogest). The implementation of dienogest was not associated with statistically significant ameliorations in overall pain relief, psychological status, sexual functioning, or health-related quality of life. Treatment was well tolerated by 58% of norethindrone acetate users compared with 80% of dienogest users. After dienogest implementation, the absolute risk reduction in the occurrence of any side effect was 13.9% (95% confidence interval, 0.8%-28.6%). CONCLUSION(S): Considering the large difference in the cost of the two drugs, dienogest should be suggested selectively in women who do not tolerate norethindrone acetate.

Letrozole combined with norethisterone acetate compared with norethisterone acetate alone in the treatment of pain symptoms caused by endometriosis.

BACKGROUND: The available data on effectiveness of aromatase inhibitors in treating pain symptoms related to endometriosis is limited. We compared the efficacy and tolerability of the aromatase inhibitor letrozole combined with norethisterone acetate versus norethisterone acetate alone in treating pain symptoms. METHODS: This prospective, open-label, non-randomized trial included 82 women with pain symptoms caused by rectovaginal endometriosis. Patients received either a combination of letrozole and norethisterone acetate (group L) or norethisterone acetate alone (group N) for 6 months. Changes in pain symptoms during treatment and in the 12 months of follow-up were evaluated. Side effects of each treatment protocol were recorded. RESULTS: Intensity of chronic pelvic pain and deep dyspareunia significantly decreased during treatment (P < 0.001 versus baseline by 3 months) in both study groups. At both 3- and 6-month assessment, the intensity of chronic pelvic pain (P < 0.001, P = 0.002, respectively) and deep dyspareunia (P < 0.001, P = 0.005, respectively) was significantly lower in group L than group N. At completion of treatment, 63.4% of women in group N were satisfied with treatment compared with 56.1% in group L (P = 0.49). Pain symptoms recurred after the completion of treatment; at 6-month follow-up no difference was observed in the intensity of pain symptoms between the groups. Adverse effects were more frequent in group L than in group N (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The combination drug regimen was more effective in reducing pain and deep dyspareunia than norethisterone acetate; however, letrozole caused a higher incidence of adverse effects, cost more and did not improve patients' satisfaction or influence recurrence of pain.

Economic evaluation of norethisterone acetate/ethinylestradiol (FemHRT) for women with menopausal symptoms.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of a continuous combined oral preparation of norethisterone (norethindrone) acetate and ethinylestradiol (NA/EE) [FemHRT] as both a first-line and second-line therapy for menopausal women. PERSPECTIVE: Third-party payer. METHODS: The cost effectiveness of NA/EE was assessed as both a first- and second-line therapy in comparison with conjugated equine oestrogen 0.625mg and medroxyprogesterone acetate 2.5mg (CEE/MPA) and no therapy. Analysis was conducted within a Markov model with states relating to the presence and absence of vaginal bleeding, menopausal symptoms and hip fracture. Analysis forecasted life expectancy, QALYs and lifetime costs for a 50-year-old menopausal woman. Compliance was modelled related to menopausal symptoms and vaginal bleeding. For the base-case analysis, it was assumed that compliant women would take therapy for up to 5 years. Sensitivity analysis assumed therapy was taken only for 1 year. RESULTS: Compared with both CEE/MPA and no therapy, NA/EE led to an increase in both costs and QALYs, both as a first- and second-line therapy. For first-line therapy, the incremental cost per QALY gained for NA/EE was $2200 Canadian dollars ($Can; 1999 values) [compared with no therapy] and was $Can20 300 (compared with CEE/MPA). For second-line therapy, the incremental cost per QALY gained for NA/EE was $Can900 (compared with no therapy) and was $Can16 400 (compared with CEE/MPA). Results were robust to most sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: NA/EE is a cost-effective therapy for women with menopausal symptoms both as a first-line and second-line therapy.

Counting the costs: comparing depot medroxyprogesterone acetate and norethisterone oenanthate utilisation patterns in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: In South Africa, where health care resources are limited, it is important to ensure that drugs provision and use is rational. The Essential Drug List includes depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) and norethisterone oenanthate (NET-EN) as injectable progestagen-only contraceptives (IPCs), and both products are extensively used. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: Utilisation patterns of the injectable contraceptive products DMPA and NET-EN are compared in the context of current knowledge of the safety and efficacy of these agents. Utilisation patterns were analysed by means of a Pareto (ABC) analysis of IPCs issued from 4 South African provincial pharmaceutical depots over 3 financial years. A case study from rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, is used to examine utilisation patterns and self-reported side effects experienced by 187 women using IPCs. RESULTS: IPCs accounted for a substantial share of total state expenditure on drugs. While more DMPA than NET-EN was issued, NET-EN distribution from 2 depots increased over the 3-year period. Since DMPA was cheaper, if all NET-EN clients in the 1999/2000 financial year (annualised) had used DMPA, the 4 depots could have saved 4.95 million South African Rands on product acquisition costs alone. The KZN case study showed slightly more NET-EN (54%) than DMPA (46%) use; no significant differences in self-reported side effects; and that younger women were more likely to use NET-EN than DMPA (p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Providing IPCs on the basis of age is not appropriate or cost effective. Rational use of these products should include consideration of the cost of prescribing one over another.

Economic impact of tibolone compared with continuous-combined hormone replacement therapy. In the management of postmenopausal women with climacteric symptoms in the UK.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the economic impact of using tibolone 2.5 mg compared with 17 beta-estradiol 2 mg/norethisterone acetate 1 mg (E2/NETA) in postmenopausal women with climacteric symptoms. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a modelling study performed from the perspective of the UK's National Health Service (NHS). METHODS: The clinical outcomes from a previously reported trial were used as the clinical basis for the analysis, which showed that 48 weeks' treatment with tibolone and E2/NETA significantly alleviated the climacteric symptoms experienced by postmenopausal women. These data were combined with resource utilisation estimates derived from a panel of 10 GPs and 3 gynaecologists, enabling us to construct a Markov model depicting changes in the health status of postmenopausal women. The model was used to estimate the expected NHS costs and consequences after 48 weeks' treatment with tibolone and E2/NETA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS: The mean expected direct healthcare cost of using tibolone and E2/NETA to manage postmenopausal women for 48 weeks was estimated to be 260 Pounds and 239 Pounds (1997/1998 prices) per patient, respectively. Starting hormone replacement therapy (HRT) with tibolone instead of E2/NETA was equally effective in alleviating climacteric symptoms (65.9 and 62.2%, respectively; p = 0.516) over 48 weeks and significantly reduced the incidence of vaginal bleeding by 36% (p < 0.0001) and breast tenderness by 57% (p < 0.0001) for a mean additional cost of 21 Pounds (ranging between -3 Pounds and 42 Pounds) per patient. The acquisition cost of HRT was the primary cost driver for tibolone-treated patients, whereas the cost of managing adverse events was the primary cost driver for E2/NETA-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: The true cost of prescribing tibolone and E2/NETA is impacted on by a broad range of resources, not only drug acquisition costs. Although the acquisition cost of tibolone is higher than that of E2/NETA, the difference in the expected NHS cost of the first year of treatment between the 2 HRTs is negligible. This is because of the higher incidence of adverse events among E2/NETA-treated patients, which also results in a higher continuation rate among tibolone-treated patients. Factors such as patient preferences should also be taken into consideration so that treatment choices are not decided solely on the basis of acquisition costs.

Comparative assessment of two low-dose oral contraceptives, Lo-Femenal and Lo-Estrin, in Mexican women.

This trial was designed to determine the differences in effectiveness, clinical acceptability, and one-year discontinuation rates of two low-dose oral contraceptives: Lo-Estrin (norethindrone acetate 1.5 mg plus ethinyl estradiol 0.030 mg) and Lo-Femenal (norgestrel 0.30 mg plus ethinyl estradiol 0.030 mg) in 148 Mexican women. In addition, the effects of both oral contraceptive preparations on blood lipids were prospectively evaluated in a subgroup of 41 women. The results indicated that there were no differences in pregnancy rates, discontinuation or clinical acceptability between the two groups. The lipid changes observed were minimal for the Lo-Femenal subgroup and somewhat greater for the Lo-Estrin group, mainly an increase in serum triglycerides. These changes were interpreted as estrogen induced effects of norethindrone-containing oral contraceptives. Overall, the data indicate that both Lo-Femenal and Lo-Estrin are effective and safe combined oral contraceptives.

Contraceptive compliance with a levonorgestrel triphasic and a norethindrone monophasic oral contraceptive in adolescent patients.

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to assess the impact of two low-dose oral contraceptive pills on compliance and side effects in adolescent patients. STUDY DESIGN: The use of a levonorgestrel-containing triphasic pill (N = 114) was compared with that of a monophasic (1 + 35) norethindrone-containing pill (N = 110) at two different sociodemographic sites. RESULTS: No significant difference in compliance or pill satisfaction was observed between the pills. Socioeconomic factors were the overriding predictors of compliance. At 3 and 12 months of follow-up, there were significantly fewer complaints of overall side effects (p less than 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively), breakthrough bleeding (p = 0.017 and p = 0.018), and pill amenorrhea (p = 0.002 and p less than 0.001) among users of the triphasic pill. Mean weight change at 12 months was +1.1 kg for the monophasic pill and -0.1 kg for the triphasic pill. All known pregnancies occurred among noncompliant city clinic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents experienced fewer side effects with the triphasic pill than with the monophasic one, but compliance was the same.

PIP: This study was undertaken to assess the impact of 2 low-dose oral contraceptives (OCs) on compliance and side effects on adolescent patients. The use of a levonorgestrel-containing triphasic (n=114) was compared with that of a monophasic (1+35) norethindrone-containing pill (n=110) at 2 different sociodemographic sites. No significant difference in compliance or pill satisfaction was seen between the groups. Socioeconomic factors were the overriding predictors of compliance. At 3 and 12 months of followup, there were far fewer complaints of overall side effects (p0.001 and p=0.004, respectively), breakthrough bleeding (p=0.017 and p=0.018), and pill amenorrhea (p=0.002 and p0.001) among users of the triphasic pill. Mean weight change at 12 months was +1.1 kg for the monophasic pill group and -0.1 kg for the triphasic pill group. All known pregnancies occurred among noncompliant city clinic patients. Adolescents experienced fewer side effects with the triphasic pill than with the monophasic one, but compliance was the same.

[Doctors and injectable contraception. Analysis of the logistics of prescribing in accordance with the views expressed by doctors]. / Médecins et contraception injectable. Analyse des logiques de prescription à partir des discours de médecins.

Injectable contraception (IC) using medroxyprogesterone acetate (Depoprovera) and norethisterone enanthate (Noristerat) has been discussed in numbers of publications since the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the USA have refused to authorize the use of Depoprovera as a contraceptive in America. This has provoked a large number of publications in the international literature. The refusal was based on the potential oncogenic risk of the molecule. The distribution of this product as a contraceptive in developing countries and its restricted authorisation in many industrialised countries including France has brought about contradictory debates about the assessment of this method (secondary effects, risks of developing cancer and teratogenesis). In 1986 we started a research using close collaboration between the health teams of Seine-Saint-Denis (which control clinics, family planning clinics and hospitals) in order to try to find some solution to this problem "for or against IC". The object of this research was to find out how acceptable this method was as compared with other contraceptive methods. The fact that many disciplines were involved (gynaecologists, sociologists, epidemiologists and pharmacologists) in this work made it possible first to find out the conditions under which IC was prescribed (by sociological analysis and discussions with doctors). And the socio-cultural features in which the doctors who prescribed this method of contraception were situated also came into play. The criteria under which ICs are prescribed are not mainly medical but are narrowly linked to socio-cultural factors and the socio-economic factors of the women for whom it is prescribed: and this is in comparison with other methods of contraception. Prescribing this substance has a degree of urgency about it.

A comparative clinical trial of Norinyl 1/35 versus Brevicon in Rio Clara, Brazil.

A comparative clinical trial of two combined oral contraceptives (OCs) with equivalent estrogen content, but different amounts of progestogens, was conducted at the Centro Medico Especializado em Planejamento Familiar in Rio Clara, Brazil. The study was designed to determine the differences in discontinuation rates between Norinyl 1/35 (Syntex) and Brevicon (Syntex) as well as the frequency of selected side effects which might contribute to method discontinuation. Both OCs contain 0.035 mg of ethinyl estradiol; Brevicon contains 0.5 mg and Norinyl 1/35 contains 1 mg norethindrone. Three-hundred women enrolled in the study were randomly assigned to either the Norinyl 1/35 or Brevicon OCs and follow-up visits were scheduled at 1, 4, 8 and 12 months after admission. Intermenstrual bleeding was reported by significantly more women in the Brevicon group than in the Norinyl group (p less than 0.05), and significantly more Brevicon users reported an increase in intermenstrual bleeding. At the end of the study period, no differences were found between the two OC groups in terms of discontinuation rates, but a large number of women in each group discontinued for menstrual problems. The total discontinuation rates at 11 months for both groups were extremely high: 68.2 for the Norinyl 1/35 group and 75.2 for the Brevicon users. The largest group of discontinuations were comprised of those discontinuing for menstrual problems, other personal reasons, planned pregnancy and side effects.