Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33476659›Full record

Trial reportContraception2021

Timing and efficacy of mifepristone pretreatment for medical management of early pregnancy loss.

Anne N Flynn, Andrea H Roe, Nathanael Koelper, Arden McAllister, Mary D Sammel, Courtney A Schreiber

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Contraception, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Methods for managing miscarriage: a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
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.

Anne N FlynnDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Electronic address: anne.flynn@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.
Andrea H RoeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Nathanael KoelperDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Arden McAllisterDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Mary D SammelDepartment of Biostatistics and Informatics, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, United States.
Courtney A SchreiberDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
University of Pennsylvania · USColorado School of Public Health · US

Funding

Comparative Effectiveness of Pregnancy Failure Management Regimens (Pre-Fai-R)R01HD071920 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI SCHREIBER, COURTNEY A. · 2013 to 2017
$2.8M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD071920
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine the time interval between mifepristone and misoprostol administration associated with the most efficacious early pregnancy loss (EPL) management. STUDY

designWe performed a secondary analysis of a randomized trial. Participants with EPL were instructed to take 200 mg oral mifepristone followed by 800 mcg vaginal misoprostol 24 hours later. The primary outcome was gestational sac expulsion at the first follow-up visit (1-4 days after misoprostol use) after a single dose of misoprostol and no additional intervention within 30 days after treatment. Despite specification of drug timing, participants used the medication over a range of time. We graphed sliding average estimates of success and assessed the proportion of treatment successes over time to define timing interval cohorts for analysis. We used multivariable generalized linear regression to assess the association between time interval and success.

resultsOf 139 eligible participants, 70 (50.4%) self-administered misoprostol before 24 hours, and 69 (49.6%) at or after 24 hours. We defined the following time intervals: 0 to 6 hours (n = 22); 7 to 20 hours (n = 29); and 21 to 48 hours (n = 88). Success occurred in 96.6% of the 7- to 20-hour cohort compared to 54.6% and 87.5% of the cohorts self-administering misoprostol earlier or later, respectively. When adjusting for race, gestational age, diagnosis, bleeding at presentation, insurance status, and enrollment site, participants administering misoprostol between 0 and 6 hours (adjusted risk ratio 0.58, 95% CI 0.40-0.85) and 21 to 48 hours (adjusted risk ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.72-0.99) had a lower risk of success when compared to participants administering 7 to 20 hours after mifepristone.

conclusionsThese data suggest that medical management of EPL has the highest likelihood of success when misoprostol is self-administered 7 to 20 hours after mifepristone. IMPLICATIONS: These preliminary data suggest that patients have the highest likelihood of success when misoprostol is taken between 7 and 20 hours after mifepristone. In contrast with medical abortion, simultaneous medication administration may not be as effective as delayed. Future research is needed to confirm the optimal medication time interval.

Indexed as

Abortifacient Agents, NonsteroidalAbortifacient Agents, SteroidalAbortion, InducedAbortion, SpontaneousMisoprostolFemaleHumansMifepristonePregnancyTreatment OutcomeAbortifacient Agents, NonsteroidalAbortifacient Agents, SteroidalMifepristoneMisoprostolEarly pregnancy lossMedical managementMifepristoneMiscarriage

Identifiers

PMID33476659
PMCPMC10302402
OpenAlexW3121392308

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.