Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32685920›Full record

ArticleContraception: X2020

A novel vaginal pH regulator: results from the phase 3 AMPOWER contraception clinical trial.

Michael A Thomas, B Todd Chappell, Bassem Maximos, Kelly R Culwell, Clint Dart, Brandon Howard

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contraception: X, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Non-hormonal Contraception: Current and Emerging Targets.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Contraception in Medically Complex Adolescents and Young Adults.Open access journal of contraception · 2024
    Article
  9. Non-Hormonal Contraception.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Review
  10. Review
  11. New Contraception Update - Annovera, Phexxi, Slynd, and Twirla.Current obstetrics and gynecology reports · 2022
    Article
  12. The therapeutic importance of acid-base balance.Biochemical pharmacology · 2021
    Review
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael A ThomasUniversity of Cincinnati, 231 Albert Sabin Way, Cincinnati, OH, 45219, USA.
B Todd ChappellAdams Patterson Gynecology & Obstetrics, 1727 Kirby Parkway, Memphis, TN, 38210, USA.
Bassem MaximosMaximos Obstetrics and Gynecology, 651 Egret Bay Boulevard, League City, TX, 77573, USA.
Kelly R CulwellEvofem Biosciences, Inc., 12400 High Bluff Drive, Suite 600, San Diego, CA, 92130, USA.
Clint DartHealth Decisions, 2510 Meridian Parkway, Durham, NC, 27713, USA.
Brandon HowardEvofem Biosciences, Inc., 12400 High Bluff Drive, Suite 600, San Diego, CA, 92130, USA.
Health Decisions (United States) · USUniversity of Cincinnati · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective was to evaluate the contraceptive effectiveness, safety, and acceptability of a novel vaginal pH regulator over seven cycles of use. STUDY

designA single-arm, open-label, phase 3 study was conducted across 112 sites in the United States in sexually active 18-35-year-old women at risk of pregnancy. Women administered the study treatment ≤ 1 h before each episode of intercourse. Women recorded use of study drug, coital information, and any symptoms experienced in electronic diaries. The primary outcome was the seven-cycle cumulative pregnancy rate as calculated using the Kaplan-Meier methodology; secondary outcomes included safety. Overall satisfaction was assessed via written questionnaires.

resultsA total of 1384 women were enrolled in the study from July 2017 to November 2018. Mean age was 27.7 ± 4.4 years; most women were white (69.0%). The seven-cycle cumulative pregnancy percentage was 13.7% [95% confidence interval (CI): 10.0%-17.5%], meeting the prespecified primary endpoint of having the upper bound 95% CI ≤ 21%. Most common adverse events (AEs) occurring in ≥ 2% of women were vulvovaginal burning sensation, vulvovaginal pruritus, urinary tract infection, vulvovaginal pain, mycotic infection, bacterial vaginosis, and nasopharyngitis. Of 1330 women who used the study drug at least once, fewer than 2% of women discontinued due to any AEs, and < 1% of women discontinued due to genitourinary symptoms. Overall, > 80% of women reported being "very satisfied" or "satisfied" with study treatment.

conclusionsIn this phase 3 study, the novel vaginal pH regulator demonstrated 86.3% contraceptive effectiveness, was safe and well tolerated, and was highly acceptable. IMPLICATIONS: This novel vaginal pH regulator is a safe, nonhormonal, woman-controlled method of contraception that expands women's options.

Indexed as

ContraceptionNonhormonalPhase 3 trialVaginal gel

Identifiers

PMID32685920
PMCPMC7358659
OpenAlexW3038240286

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.