BACKGROUND: This trial was conducted to compare cycle control with vaginal ring a combined contraceptive vaginal ring, and a combined oral contraceptive (COC) delivering 30 mug ethinylestradiol (EE) and 150 mug levonorgestrel. METHODS: This open-label, randomized, multi-centre, Phase III study involved adult women from 11 countries. Subjects were treated with either vaginal ring or a COC for 13 cycles (12 months). RESULTS: A total of 1030 subjects (vaginal ring, n=512; COC, n=518) comprised the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. The percentage of women in the ITT population who completed the trial was 70.9% for vaginal ring and 71.2% for the COC group. The incidence of breakthrough bleeding and spotting over cycles 2-13, the primary efficacy parameter, was lower with vaginal ring (range 2.0-6.4%) than the COC (range 3.5-12.6%), and for cycles 2 and 9 the lower incidence with vaginal ring was confirmed as statistically significant (P=0.003 and P=0.002 respectively). The incidence of intended bleeding was significantly higher over all cycles with vaginal ring (58.8-72.8%) than with the COC (43.4-57.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Cycle control with vaginal ring was excellent and superior to that of a COC containing 30 mug EE.

Superior cycle control with a contraceptive vaginal ring compared with an oral contraceptive containing 30 microg ethinylestradiol and 150 microg levonorgestrel: a randomized trial.

BENEDETTO, Chiara;
2005-01-01

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This trial was conducted to compare cycle control with vaginal ring a combined contraceptive vaginal ring, and a combined oral contraceptive (COC) delivering 30 mug ethinylestradiol (EE) and 150 mug levonorgestrel. METHODS: This open-label, randomized, multi-centre, Phase III study involved adult women from 11 countries. Subjects were treated with either vaginal ring or a COC for 13 cycles (12 months). RESULTS: A total of 1030 subjects (vaginal ring, n=512; COC, n=518) comprised the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. The percentage of women in the ITT population who completed the trial was 70.9% for vaginal ring and 71.2% for the COC group. The incidence of breakthrough bleeding and spotting over cycles 2-13, the primary efficacy parameter, was lower with vaginal ring (range 2.0-6.4%) than the COC (range 3.5-12.6%), and for cycles 2 and 9 the lower incidence with vaginal ring was confirmed as statistically significant (P=0.003 and P=0.002 respectively). The incidence of intended bleeding was significantly higher over all cycles with vaginal ring (58.8-72.8%) than with the COC (43.4-57.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Cycle control with vaginal ring was excellent and superior to that of a COC containing 30 mug EE.
2005
20(2)
557
562
NuvaRing; Contraceptive; Pill; Efficacy; Compliance; Tolerability
ODDSSON K.; LEIFELS-FISCHER B.; WIEL-MASSON D.; DE MELO N.R.; C. BENEDETTO; VERHOEVEN C.H.; DIEBEN T.O.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Superior cycle control with a contraceptive vaginal ring 2005.pdf

Accesso riservato

Tipo di file: POSTPRINT (VERSIONE FINALE DELL’AUTORE)
Dimensione 169.53 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
169.53 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/40937
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 5
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact