OBJECTIVE: To estimate whether serum etonogestrel concentrations influence bleeding patterns and related side effects in contraceptive implant users. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study with healthy, reproductive-aged women using etonogestrel implants for 12-36 months. Participants completed a brief questionnaire to assess their current bleeding pattern and any experience of abnormal bleeding with the implant. We then measured serum etonogestrel concentrations. We also reviewed the charts of participants to determine whether a prescription for oral contraceptive pills was ever given for treatment of implant-related bothersome bleeding. We performed multivariable logistic regression to test for associations between serum etonogestrel concentrations and both bleeding patterns and related side effects. RESULTS: We enrolled 350 women, and 59.4% reported having experienced abnormal bleeding with the contraceptive implant. Only 14.9% of participants reported amenorrhea and 37.7% reported monthly periods. Among participants with reviewable medical records (n=253), roughly 20% had received a prescription for oral contraceptive pills during implant use. Increasing serum etonogestrel concentrations were significantly associated with increasing odds of reporting abnormal bleeding (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.005, P=.015) and increasing odds of having received an oral contraceptive pill prescription (aOR 1.008, P=.002). For every 100 pg/mL increase in serum etonogestrel concentration, contraceptive implant users in this study had 1.6 times the odds of reporting abnormal bleeding and 2.3 times the odds of having received a prescription as treatment for bothersome bleeding. CONCLUSION: We found both objective and subjective evidence that higher levels of progestin from the contraceptive implant were associated with bleeding side effects experienced by women in this study. Pharmacologic variation may influence the side effects women experience with a variety of hormonal contraceptive methods, in turn affecting patient satisfaction and discontinuation rates.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate whether serum etonogestrel concentrations influence bleeding patterns and related side effects in contraceptive implant users. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study with healthy, reproductive-aged women using etonogestrel implants for 12-36 months. Participants completed a brief questionnaire to assess their current bleeding pattern and any experience of abnormal bleeding with the implant. We then measured serum etonogestrel concentrations. We also reviewed the charts of participants to determine whether a prescription for oral contraceptive pills was ever given for treatment of implant-related bothersome bleeding. We performed multivariable logistic regression to test for associations between serum etonogestrel concentrations and both bleeding patterns and related side effects. RESULTS: We enrolled 350 women, and 59.4% reported having experienced abnormal bleeding with the contraceptive implant. Only 14.9% of participants reported amenorrhea and 37.7% reported monthly periods. Among participants with reviewable medical records (n=253), roughly 20% had received a prescription for oral contraceptive pills during implant use. Increasing serum etonogestrel concentrations were significantly associated with increasing odds of reporting abnormal bleeding (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.005, P=.015) and increasing odds of having received an oral contraceptive pill prescription (aOR 1.008, P=.002). For every 100 pg/mL increase in serum etonogestrel concentration, contraceptive implant users in this study had 1.6 times the odds of reporting abnormal bleeding and 2.3 times the odds of having received a prescription as treatment for bothersome bleeding. CONCLUSION: We found both objective and subjective evidence that higher levels of progestin from the contraceptive implant were associated with bleeding side effects experienced by women in this study. Pharmacologic variation may influence the side effects women experience with a variety of hormonal contraceptive methods, in turn affecting patient satisfaction and discontinuation rates.
Authors: Daniel R Mishell; John Guillebaud; Carolyn Westhoff; Anita L Nelson; Andrew M Kaunitz; James Trussell; Ann Jeanette Davis Journal: Contraception Date: 2006-10-13 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Carolyn L Westhoff; Anupama H Torgal; Elizabeth R Mayeda; Malcolm C Pike; Frank Z Stanczyk Journal: Contraception Date: 2010-02-20 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Aaron Lazorwitz; Christina L Aquilante; Jonathan A Shortt; Jeanelle Sheeder; Stephanie Teal; Christopher R Gignoux Journal: Clin Transl Sci Date: 2021-05-02 Impact factor: 4.689