Literature DB >> 2766722

Pharmacokinetics of three bioequivalent norethindrone/mestranol-50 micrograms and three norethindrone/ethinyl estradiol-35 micrograms OC formulations: are "low-dose" pills really lower?

S A Brody1, A Turkes, J W Goldzieher.   

Abstract

We have examined the pharmacokinetic parameters derived from the analysis of plasma ethinyl estradiol (EE) and norethindrone levels after administration of a single dose of three bioequivalent norethindrone-1mg/mestranol (ME)-50 micrograms formulations (Ortho-NovumR 1/50, NorinylR 1/50 and Norcept-MR 1/50) and three norethindrone-1mg/ethinyl estradiol-35 micrograms formulations (Ortho-Novum 1/35R, NorinylR 1/35, Norcept-ER 1/35) in a randomized crossover design involving 24 women for the 35 micrograms and 27 women for the 50 micrograms agents. Differences between the AUC-EE of pairs from the same manufacturer (1 + 35 and 1 + 50) were not significantly different, indicating that 50 micrograms of mestranol was equivalent to 35 micrograms ethinyl estradiol with respect to this pharmacokinetic parameter. The Cmax values were also similar. Inter-individual coefficients of variation (C.V.) for the AUC-EE were 47% and 57% for the 1 + 35 and 1 + 50 agents, respectively. Intra-individual C.V.s were 41% and 42%, respectively. For norethindrone, the AUC was larger with the 1 + 50 formulations than with the 1 + 35 group (87.9 vs. 72.8 pg hr/ml). Additionally, the Cmax values were larger for the 1/50 group (17.7 vs. 14.0). Since the amount of norethindrone in the two dosage groups was the same, this difference in the pharmacokinetics between the 35 micrograms EE and the 50 micrograms ME formulations remains unexplained. The inter-individual C.V. averaged 56% for both dosage groups. The intra-individual C.V.s were 17% and 46% for the 1 + 35 and 1 + 50 groups, respectively. The large variation in blood levels of ethinyl estradiol and norethindrone between and within individuals may overshadow clinical differences attributable to differences in dosage.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2766722     DOI: 10.1016/0010-7824(89)90092-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contraception        ISSN: 0010-7824            Impact factor:   3.375


  6 in total

1.  The effects of an oral contraceptive containing ethinyloestradiol and norgestrel on CYP3A activity.

Authors:  Donna J Belle; John T Callaghan; J Christopher Gorski; Juan F Maya; Omiema Mousa; Steven A Wrighton; Stephen D Hall
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 4.335

2.  Lansoprazole does not affect the bioavailability of oral contraceptives.

Authors:  W Fuchs; R Sennewald; U Klotz
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 4.335

3.  Recency, duration, and progestin content of oral contraceptives in relation to the incidence of endometrial cancer (Washington, USA).

Authors:  L F Voigt; Q Deng; N S Weiss
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 2.506

4.  Characterisation of the pharmacokinetics of ethinylestradiol and drospirenone in extended-cycle regimens: population pharmacokinetic analysis from a randomised Phase III study.

Authors:  Stefanie Reif; Nelleke Snelder; Hartmut Blode
Journal:  J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care       Date:  2013-04

5.  Editor's Highlight: Development of an In vitro Assay Measuring Uterine-Specific Estrogenic Responses for Use in Chemical Safety Assessment.

Authors:  Michelle M Miller; Rebecca A Alyea; Caroline LeSommer; Daniel L Doheny; Sean M Rowley; Kristin M Childs; Pergentino Balbuena; Susan M Ross; Jian Dong; Bin Sun; Melvin A Andersen; Rebecca A Clewell
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2016-08-07       Impact factor: 4.849

6.  Hormonal content and potency of oral contraceptives and breast cancer risk among young women.

Authors:  M D Althuis; D R Brogan; R J Coates; J R Daling; M D Gammon; K E Malone; J B Schoenberg; L A Brinton
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2003-01-13       Impact factor: 7.640

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.