ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2022
Pharmacokinetics of levonorgestrel and etonogestrel contraceptive implants over 48 weeks with rilpivirine- or darunavir-based antiretroviral therapy.
Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Immediate postpartum long acting reversible contraceptive uptake and associated factors at Asella Referral and Teaching Hospital, Ethiopia.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2025Article
- Effect of double-dose levonorgestrel subdermal implant in women taking efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy: The DoubLNG pharmacokinetic study.Contraception · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPharmacokinetic data are lacking for progestin-releasing subdermal contraceptive implants when used with either rilpivirine- or darunavir/ritonavir-based ART.
objectivesTo characterize the pharmacokinetics of etonogestrel or levonorgestrel implants when administered with these ART regimens over 48 weeks. PATIENTS AND
methodsTwo separate, parallel, three-group, non-randomized, pharmacokinetic studies evaluated either etonogestrel or levonorgestrel in women receiving rilpivirine- or darunavir-based ART compared with women without HIV (control group). Participants on ART were switched to rilpivirine-based ART with a run-in period of 6 weeks or darunavir-based ART with a run-in of 2 weeks prior to implant insertion. Plasma was collected on Day 0, and 1, 4, 12, 24, 36 and 48 weeks post-insertion. Plasma progestin concentrations were compared between ART and control groups by geometric mean ratio (GMR) and 90% CI.
resultsAt the primary endpoint of Week 24, progestin concentrations were similar between the rilpivirine and control groups [etonogestrel: 1.18 (0.99-1.37); levonorgestrel: 1.16 (0.97-1.33)]. At Week 24, progestin exposure was higher in the darunavir groups compared with the control group [etonogestrel: 2.56 (1.69-3.28); levonorgestrel: 1.89 (1.38-2.29)]. Results remained consistent through to Week 48. No differences in etonogestrel-related adverse events were observed, but both ART groups experienced more menstrual abnormalities versus the control group with levonorgestrel.
conclusionsEtonogestrel and levonorgestrel concentrations were not altered by rilpivirine-based ART. Although progestin concentrations were higher in the ART groups containing ritonavir-boosted darunavir, no implant-related serious adverse events were observed. Both progestin-releasing implants are an appropriate contraceptive option with either rilpivirine- or darunavir/ritonavir-based ART.
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.