Evaluation of ovulation and safety outcomes in a multi-center randomized trial of three 84 day ulipristal acetate regimens
article
OA: closed
CC0
AI-generated summary
This multi-center trial evaluated ovulation and safety outcomes for three different 84-day regimens of ulipristal acetate.
One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works
Abstract
ObjectivesTo describe ovulation inhibition and safety of daily oral ulipristal acetate (UPA) over 84 days.Study designThis multi-center phase 1 and/or 2 trial randomized participants to use oral ulipristal 10 mg or 5 mg daily or a 3 cycle regimen of 5 mg for 24 days followed by four placebo days. We stratified randomization by body mass index (BMI) <32 or 32-40 kg/m2. To estimate ovulation inhibition, the primary outcome, participants underwent transvaginal ultrasound and blood sampling twice weekly; we analyzed compliant participants who completed the 84 day study. Safety endpoints included 3 endometrial biopsies and liver chemistry tests.ResultsWe enrolled 180 participants and included 137 in the ovulation inhibition analyses. Progesterone values that remained below 3ng/mL throughout treatment suggested consistent ovulation inhibition in 52 of 137 (38%) participants; 25 of 47(53%), 20 of 44(45%), and 7 of 46(15%) among participants randomized to the 10 mg, 5 mg, and cyclic treatments, respectively (p < 0.01). Progesterone values consistently 32kg/m2 (25/50(50%) vs 27/87(31%), p = 0.01). Average ulipristal concentrations were higher among participants with low progesterone concentrations (p < 0.01). Endometrial biopsies during treatment showed progesterone-receptor-modulator-associated endometrial changes in 52 of 164 participants (32%); 22 of 49(40%), 16 of 48(29%), and 14 of 51(26%) in women randomized to the 10 mg, 5 mg, and the cyclic treatments, respectively (p = 0.07, test-for-trend); these changes resolved after treatment cessation. Liver transaminase changes were rare.ConclusionsOral ulipristal acetate over 12 weeks did not reliably suppress ovulation, particularly in the 5 mg cyclic-dose group. Ovulation inhibition and endometrial changes were dose dependent. Reversible endometrial changes occurred during treatment.ImplicationsProgesterone-receptor modulators have been suggested for daily oral contraception. Since progesterone concentrations suggest that ovulation occurred during treatment, further studies would be necessary to assess whether these were functional ovulations and to evaluate other possible mechanisms of contraception.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Citation neighborhood (sparse)
Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.
Cites (4)
- Effects of the Progesterone Receptor Modulator VA2914 in a Continuous Low Dose on the Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Ovarian Axis and Endometrium in Normal Women: A Prospective, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial 2007
- Daily Low-Dose Mifepristone Has Contraceptive Potential by Suppressing Ovulation and Menstruation: A Double-Blind Randomized Control Trial of 2 and 5 mg per Day for 120 Days 2002
- A review of the endometrial histologic effects of progestins and progesterone receptor modulators in reproductive age women 2015
- Development of the selective progesterone receptor modulator CDB-2914 for clinical indications 2003
References (18)
- A review of the endometrial histologic effects of progestins and progesterone receptor modulators in reproductive age women via openalex
- Daily Low-Dose Mifepristone Has Contraceptive Potential by Suppressing Ovulation and Menstruation: A Double-Blind Randomized Control Trial of 2 and 5 mg per Day for 120 Days via openalex
- Development of the selective progesterone receptor modulator CDB-2914 for clinical indications via openalex
- Effects of the Progesterone Receptor Modulator VA2914 in a Continuous Low Dose on the Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Ovarian Axis and Endometrium in Normal Women: A Prospective, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial via openalex
- doi:10.1089/jwh.2011.2851 via openalex
- doi:10.1097/01.aog.0000239440.02284.45 via openalex
- doi:10.1210/clinem/dgz139 via openalex
- W6673106512 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2011.02.009 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2011.10.003 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2009.04.011 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.06.044 via openalex
- doi:10.1093/humrep/dem177 via openalex
- doi:10.1097/aog.0b013e3181e79440 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2017.01.004 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.02.008 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2014.08.006 via openalex
- doi:10.1056/nejmoa1103182 via openalex
Source provenance
- openalex
- last seen: 2026-05-11T06:37:04.871248+00:00
License: CC0
· commercial use OK