Comparison of plasma etonogestrel concentrations sampled from the contralateral-to-implant and ipsilateral-to-implant arms of contraceptive implant users.

OBJECTIVE: To compare plasma etonogestrel concentrations sampled from the contralateral- versus ipsilateral-to-implant arm. STUDY DESIGN: Sub-analysis of a cross-sectional study in Botswana in 33 participants who provided contralateral and ipsilateral blood samples. RESULTS: Plasma etonogestrel concentrations in contralateral and ipsilateral specimens were highly correlated (correlation coefficient = 0.99; p < 0.0001). Bland-Altman analysis of agreement showed that etonogestrel levels were on average 5.9 pg/mL higher (2.1%) in ipsilateral compared to contralateral specimens (95% confidence interval: -4.1, 15.9 pg/mL). CONCLUSIONS: We found no meaningful differences in plasma etonogestrel concentrations between samples taken from the contralateral- versus ipsilateral-to-implant arm. IMPLICATIONS: Our data suggest that etonogestrel plasma concentrations are unlikely to be meaningfully different between samples drawn from the ipsilateral- versus the contralateral-to-implant arms in etonogestrel contraceptive implant users.

Etonogestrel concentrations among contraceptive implant users in Botswana using and not using dolutegravir-based antiretroviral therapy.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether etonogestrel concentrations are reduced to a level that could potentially reduce contraceptive efficacy when the etonogestrel contraceptive implant is used concomitantly with dolutegravir-based antiretroviral therapy (ART). STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a non-randomized, open-label, cross-sectional pharmacokinetic study among women using single-rod etonogestrel contraceptive implants in Botswana. We compared plasma etonogestrel concentrations, sampled at a single time-point between 3 and 12 months from implant insertion, among implant users living with HIV and receiving dolutegravir-based ART with HIV-negative implant users. We also assessed concentrations among implant users living with HIV and receiving efavirenz-based ART. We compared geometric mean etonogestrel concentrations analyzing data from 142 participants: 97 HIV-negative, 30 using dolutegravir, and 15 using efavirenz. RESULTS: The groups were similar. Duration of implant use was between 3 and 12 months (median = 5). Geometric mean etonogestrel plasma concentrations and 90% confidence intervals of the mean were 227.5(212.4-243.8), 289.6(251.8-333.0) and 76.4(63.9-91.4) pg/mL among the HIV-negative, dolutegravir- and efavirenz-based ART groups, respectively. All women in the HIV-negative and dolutegravir-based ART groups had etonogestrel concentrations above 90 pg/mL; 9/15 women (60%) using efavirenz-based ART had concentrations below 90 pg/mL. On average, etonogestrel levels were lower among individuals who had implants inserted for longer durations. CONCLUSIONS: Implant users receiving dolutegravir-based ART had a higher mean etonogestrel concentration compared to HIV-negative women, and none had etonogestrel concentrations below the posited threshold for ovulation suppression. In contrast, women in the efavirenz-group had much lower etonogestrel concentrations. Overall, these data provide evidence that the etonogestrel implant may be effectively combined with dolutegravir-based ART regimens. IMPLICATIONS: The etonogestrel implant remains a highly effective contraceptive option for women living with HIV who use dolutegravir-based ART.