ArticleContraception: X2020
Levonorgestrel release rates measured through analysis of two-rod contraceptive explants.
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 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- The utilization of nanotechnology in the female reproductive system and related disorders.Heliyon · 2024Review
- Model-Based Analysis of In Vivo Release Data of Levonorgestrel Implants: Projecting Long-Term Systemic Exposure.Pharmaceutics · 2023Article
- Recent progress in advanced biomaterials for long-acting reversible contraception.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2022Review
- Models and methods to characterise levonorgestrel release from intradermally administered contraceptives.Drug delivery and translational research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective was to characterize and compare in vivo rates of levonorgestrel (LNG) release from Sino-implant (II) and Jadelle® contraceptive implants. STUDY
designWe sampled 48 Sino-implant (II) and 49 Jadelle® explant sets for residual LNG content from participants treated for up to 51 months in a randomized contraceptive efficacy trial in the Dominican Republic (DR). Additional Sino-implant (II) explants were obtained from 8 women who became pregnant in the DR trial and 10 who contributed 3 to 5 years of use in a cohort study in China. Baseline LNG loads were estimated from five unused implant sets per device type. Release profiles were estimated using mixture models that captured initial burst fractions and compared with efficacy and pharmacokinetics data from the DR trial.
resultsEstimated baseline LNG loads for Sino-implant (II) and Jadelle® were 142.8 mg and 150.5 mg, respectively (vs. the labeled 150 mg). There was an initial burst release of drug (5.6% and 7.9%, respectively) followed by an exponential decrease in LNG content evident for each device. Release rates were significantly lower for Sino-implant (II) throughout the treatment period, with estimated rates after 3 years of 24.2 mcg/day and 29.0 mcg/day for Sino-implant (II) and Jadelle®, respectively. The estimated Sino-implant (II) rate after 3 years was similar to the predicted rate after 5 years (23.6 mcg/day) for Jadelle® (rate ratio: 1.03; 95% confidence interval: 0.92-1.13).
conclusionsSino-implant (II) LNG release rates were significantly lower than Jadelle® with Sino-implant (II) rates through year 3 comparable to Jadelle® rates through year 5. These results reinforce the 3-year duration of action for which Sino-implant (II) was prequalified by the World Health Organization. IMPLICATIONS: This analysis confirms the WHO prequalification of Sino-implant (II) for 3 years of use and supports different durations of action for Jadelle® and Sino-implant (II). It provides additional evidence that this approach can complement efficacy trials in determining duration of action of hormonal contraceptives in general.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.