14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Endometrial safety of an oral contraceptive containing estradiol valerate and dienogest

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background:

          The purpose of this study was to investigate the endometrial safety of an oral contraceptive containing estradiol valerate/dienogest (E 2V/DNG) administered as an estrogen step-down and progestogen step-up regimen in women of reproductive age (18–50 years), using histological assessment of endometrial biopsy samples.

          Methods:

          Endometrial biopsies were taken in a subset of healthy women who took part in a multicenter, open-label, noncomparative study assessing the contraceptive efficacy and safety of an E 2V/DNG oral contraceptive. In each 28-day cycle, women received E 2V 3 mg on days 1–2, E 2V 2 mg/DNG 2 mg on days 3–7, E 2V 2 mg/DNG 3 mg on days 8–24, E 2V 1 mg on days 25–26, and placebo on days 27–28. Women underwent endometrial biopsy between days 12 and 19 of the cycle, both at screening and at cycle 20 (or at the final examination).

          Results:

          Of the 283 women who underwent an endometrial biopsy at screening, 218 underwent a follow-up biopsy at cycle 20. At screening, abnormal biopsy results, both classified as “simple hyperplasia without atypia”, were seen in two women, who were withdrawn from the trial. At cycle 20, there were no abnormal findings of endometrial hyperplasia or malignancy, and 80.9% of women had atrophic, inactive, or secretory endometrium.

          Conclusion:

          After 20 cycles of treatment, an oral contraceptive containing E 2V and DNG is safe and effective to transform the endometrium into a secretory/inactive or atrophic status, and exhibits no deleterious effects on endometrial histology in women aged 18–50 years.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy: scientific review.

          Although postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is widely used in the United States, new evidence about its benefits and harms requires reconsideration of its use for the primary prevention of chronic conditions. To assess the benefits and harms of HRT for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, thromboembolism, osteoporosis, cancer, dementia, and cholecystitis by reviewing the literature, conducting meta-analyses, and calculating outcome rates. All relevant English-language studies were identified in MEDLINE (1966-2001), HealthSTAR (1975-2001), Cochrane Library databases, and reference lists of key articles. Recent results of the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) and the Heart and Estrogen/progestin Replacement Study (HERS) are included for reported outcomes. We used all published studies of HRT if they contained a comparison group of HRT nonusers and reported data relating to HRT use and clinical outcomes of interest. Studies were excluded if the population was selected according to prior events or presence of conditions associated with higher risks for targeted outcomes. Meta-analyses of observational studies indicated summary relative risks (RRs) for coronary heart disease (CHD) incidence and mortality that were significantly reduced among current HRT users only, although risk for incidence was not reduced when only studies that controlled for socioeconomic status were included. The WHI reported increased CHD events (hazard ratio [HR], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.63). Stroke incidence but not mortality was significantly increased among HRT users in the meta-analysis and the WHI. The meta-analysis indicated that risk was significantly elevated for thromboembolic stroke (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.01-1.40) but not subarachnoid or intracerebral stroke. Risk of venous thromboembolism among current HRT users was increased overall (RR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.64-2.81) and was highest during the first year of use (RR, 3.49; 95% CI, 2.33-5.59) according to a meta-analysis of 12 studies. Protection against osteoporotic fractures is supported by a meta-analysis of 22 estrogen trials, cohort studies, results of the WHI, and trials with bone density outcomes. Current estrogen users have an increased risk of breast cancer that increases with duration of use. Endometrial cancer incidence, but not mortality, is increased with unopposed estrogen use but not with estrogen with progestin. A meta-analysis of 18 observational studies showed a 20% reduction in colon cancer incidence among women who had ever used HRT (RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.74-0.86), a finding supported by the WHI. Women symptomatic from menopause had improvement in certain aspects of cognition. Current studies of estrogen and dementia are not definitive. In a cohort study, current HRT users had an age-adjusted RR for cholecystitis of 1.8 (95% CI, 1.6-2.0), increasing to 2.5 (95% CI, 2.0-2.9) after 5 years of use. Benefits of HRT include prevention of osteoporotic fractures and colorectal cancer, while prevention of dementia is uncertain. Harms include CHD, stroke, thromboembolic events, breast cancer with 5 or more years of use, and cholecystitis.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            New progestagens for contraceptive use.

            The progestins have different pharmacologic properties depending upon the parent molecule, usually testosterone or progesterone (P), from which they are derived. Very small structural changes in the parent molecule may induce considerable differences in the activity of the derivative. In hormonal contraceptives, progestins represent the major agent designed for suppressing ovulation and are used in combination with estrogen (E) usually ethinyl-estradiol (EE). The development of new generations of progestins with improved selectivity profiles has been a great challenge. Steroidal and nonsteroidal progesterone receptor (PR) agonists have been synthesized as well, although the latter are still in a very early stage of development. Several new progestins, have been synthesized in the last two decades. These include dienogest (DNG), drospirenone (DRSP), Nestorone (NES), nomegestrol acetate (NOMAc) and trimegestone (TMG). These new progestins have been designed to have no androgenic or estrogenic actions and to be closer in activity to the physiological hormone P. DRSP differs from the classic progestins as it is derived from spirolactone. It is essentially an antimineralocorticoid steroid with no androgenic effect but a partial antiandrogenic effect. The antiovulatory potency of the different progestins varies. TMG and NES are the most potent progestins synthesized to date, followed by two of the older progestins, keto-desogestrel (keto-DSG) and levonorgestrel (LNG). The new molecules TMG, DRSP and DNG also have antiandrogenic activity. Striking differences exist regarding the side effects among the progestins and the combination with EE leads to other reactions related to the E itself and whether the associated progestin counterbalances, more or less, the estrogenic action. The 19-norprogesterone molecules and the new molecules DRSP and DNG are not androgenic and, therefore, have no negative effect on the lipid profile. Given their pharmacological properties, it is likely that the new progestins may have neutral effects on metabolic or vascular risks. However, this hypothesis must be confirmed in large clinical trials.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Dienogest is a selective progesterone receptor agonist in transactivation analysis with potent oral endometrial activity due to its efficient pharmacokinetic profile.

              Dienogest was introduced as an oral progestin. Yet its strong oral potency on endometrial activity is not clearly explained. To circumvent this situation, steroid hormone receptor profiling using transactivation assay and endometrial activity test in rabbits were carried out with determination of plasma drug concentration. Agonistic/antagonistic activity on human progesterone receptor (PR), androgen receptor (AR), glucocorticoid receptor (GR), mineralocorticoid receptor (MR), estrogen receptor alpha (ERalpha), or estrogen receptor beta (ERbeta) were determined. Dienogest activate PR (EC50=3.4 or 10.5 nmol/l) with antagonistic activity on AR (EC50=420.6 or 775.0 nmol/l) but not agonistic nor antagonistic action on GR, MR (3000 nmol/l). Dienogest activate neither ERalpha nor ERbeta (3000 nmol/l). Progesterone activated PR with antagonistic activity on AR and on MR. Dydrogesterone showed a similar profile to progesterone. Norethisterone activated PR, AR, and ERalpha. Medroxyprogesterone acetate activated PR, AR, and GR. Danazol activated PR and AR. Collectively, dienogest has a good specificity to PR compared with the other drugs. By oral treatment, dienogest showed the strongest endometrial activity (ED50=0.0042 mg/kg) in McPhail test among other progestins (ED50 values for MPA, DYG, NES were 0.074, 1.9, >0.05 mg/kg, respectively). Dienogest showed higher plasma concentrations than those of the other progestins with higher doses. The estimated plasma concentration of dienogest at ED50 (3.66 nmol/l) was close to its EC50 value to activate PR. Thus, the stronger oral activity of dienogest could be explained simply by its in vitro potency on PR and its oral pharmacokinetic profile.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Womens Health
                International Journal of Women's Health
                International Journal of Women's Health
                Dove Medical Press
                1179-1411
                2011
                18 April 2011
                : 3
                : 127-132
                Affiliations
                [1 ]University Hospital of Basel, Women’s Clinic, Basel, Switzerland;
                [2 ]Global Clinical Development, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Berlin, Germany;
                [3 ]Head of the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Evangelist Hospital Cologne-Weyertal, Cologne, Germany
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Susanne Parke, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Müllerstrasse 178, 13342 Berlin, Germany, Tel +49 30 4681 2634, Fax +49 30 4681 5348, Email susanne.parke@ 123456bayer.com
                Article
                ijwh-3-127
                10.2147/IJWH.S18735
                3089431
                21573149
                b8ecee53-ba00-4aab-b4b9-5a910e8e40b2
                © 2011 Bitzer et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 16 April 2011
                Categories
                Original Research

                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                estradiol valerate,dienogest,endometrial safety,oral contraceptive
                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                estradiol valerate, dienogest, endometrial safety, oral contraceptive

                Comments

                Comment on this article