Ovulation suppression following subcutaneous administration of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate.

DMPA Depo-Provera Depo-subQ Provera Pharmacodynamics Pharmacokinetics

Journal

Contraception: X
ISSN: 2590-1516
Titre abrégé: Contracept X
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101767748

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2022
Historique:
received: 30 10 2021
revised: 05 02 2022
accepted: 11 02 2022
entrez: 14 3 2022
pubmed: 15 3 2022
medline: 15 3 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

To characterize the relationship between serum medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) concentrations and ovulation suppression, and to estimate the risk of ovulation for investigational subcutaneous regimens of Depo-Provera CI (Depo-Provera) and Depo-subQ Provera 104 (Depo-subQ). We performed a secondary analysis of 2 studies that assessed the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of MPA when Depo-Provera is administered subcutaneously rather than by the labeled intramuscular route. Each woman received a single 45 mg to 300 mg subcutaneous injection of Depo-Provera, a single 104 mg subcutaneous injection of Depo-subQ, or 2 injections of Depo-subQ at 3-month intervals. We used an elevation of serum progesterone ≥4.7 ng/mL as a surrogate for ovulation and non-parametric statistical methods to assess pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic relationships. This analysis included 101 women with body mass index (BMI) 18 to 34 kg/m The typical MPA concentration associated with loss of ovulation suppression is substantially less than the commonly cited threshold of 0.2 ng/mL. Based on our results, MPA levels would rarely be low enough to permit ovulation if the Depo-subQ reinjection interval were extended to four months or if 150 mg Depo-Provera were injected subcutaneously every 6 months. Extending the three-month Depo-subQ reinjection interval by one month would result in a 25% reduction in yearly MPA exposure, with little risk of pregnancy. Off-label subcutaneous administration of 150 mg Depo-Provera every 6 months would be a highly effective repurposing of an excellent product, with a similar reduction in cumulative exposure.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35281554
doi: 10.1016/j.conx.2022.100073
pii: S2590-1516(22)00002-8
pmc: PMC8907671
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

100073

Informations de copyright

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc.

Références

Clin Ther. 2004 Nov;26(11):1845-54
pubmed: 15639696
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1977 Jan;44(1):32-8
pubmed: 833262
J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn. 2003 Dec;30(6):405-16
pubmed: 15000422
EClinicalMedicine. 2022 Jan 29;44:101273
pubmed: 35128365
Contraception. 2010 Jun;81(6):487-95
pubmed: 20472115
Contraception. 2014 May;89(5):341-3
pubmed: 24267634
Contraception. 2004 Jul;70(1):11-8
pubmed: 15208047
Contracept X. 2021 Oct 02;3:100070
pubmed: 34746745
Contraception. 2009 Jul;80(1):7-17
pubmed: 19501210
Fertil Steril. 2021 Apr;115(4):1035-1043
pubmed: 33485608
Contraception. 2016 Sep;94(3):202-15
pubmed: 26874275
Contraception. 2004 Oct;70(4):269-75
pubmed: 15451329

Auteurs

Douglas J Taylor (DJ)

FHI 360, Durham, NC, United States.

Vera Halpern (V)

FHI 360, Durham, NC, United States.

Vivian Brache (V)

Profamilia, Biomedical Research Department, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.

Luis Bahamondes (L)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Campinas Faculty of Medical Sciences, Campinas, Brazil.

Jeffrey T Jensen (JT)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, United States.

Laneta J Dorflinger (LJ)

FHI 360, Durham, NC, United States.

Classifications MeSH