Cycle control, quality of life and acne with two low-dose oral contraceptives containing 20 microg ethinylestradiol. Comparison of efficacy, cycle control, and tolerability of two low-dose oral contraceptives in a multicenter clinical study. Treatment of functional dysmenorrhea; a double-blind study. Latin american experience with two low-dose oral contraceptives containing 30 microg ethinylestradiol/75 microg gestodene and 20 microg ethinylestradiol/150 microg desogestrel. Primary dysmenorrhea treatment with a desogestrel-containing low-dose oral contraceptive. Primary dysmenorrhea: combination vs sequential therapy. A comparison of the cycle control and tolerability of two ultra low-dose oral contraceptives containing 20 micrograms ethinylestradiol and either 150 micrograms desogestrel or 75 micrograms gestodene. Dysmenorrhoea unrelieved by an oral contraceptive.
Poor cycle control and tolerability can be reasons for irregular pill intake. This study compared the tolerability of two low-dose oral contraceptives and their effect on cycle control.
                In this open, group-comparative, randomized multicenter trial in Germany and the Netherlands, women received either 20 microg ethinylestradiol plus 150 microg desogestrel (20EE/DSG; n = 500) or 20 microg ethinylestradiol plus 100 microg levonorgestrel (20EE/LNG; n = 498) for six treatment cycles. Cycle control, dysmenorrhea and premenstrual syndrome (PMS) were assessed using diary cards. Tolerability was assessed using the self-administered questionnaires Psychological General Well-Being Index (PGWBI) and the Profile of Mood States (POMS). Acne was assessed by objective (acne counts) and subjective (no, moderate, mild, severe) acne scoring of the facial area at baseline and treatment cycles 1, 3 and 6.
                A total of 404 (78.1%) and 384 (75.3%) women in the 20EE/DSG and 20EE/LNG groups, respectively, completed the trial. The occurrence rate of irregular bleeding and spotting was statistically significantly higher with 20EE/LNG than with 20EE/DSG (0.18 vs. 0.13; p < 0.05). The mean number of bleeding-spotting days per cycle was statistically significantly higher with 20EE/LNG than with 20EE/DSG (0.63 vs. 0.48; p < 0.05). Early withdrawal bleeding was more frequent with 20EE/LNG (0.15 vs. 0.08; p < 0.005), whereas continued withdrawal bleeding was more frequent with 20EE/DSG (0.32 vs. 0.45; p < 0.001); absence of withdrawal bleeding was comparable (0.06 vs. 0.04, respectively). Thirteen subjects in the 20EE/LNG group and three in the 20EE/DSG group discontinued due to unacceptable bleeding (p < 0.05). Dysmenorrhea and PMS decreased comparably in both groups. There were no differences between groups for the mean total scores of PGWBI or POMS at all time-points. Fewer acne lesions were counted with 20EE/DSG vs. 20EE/LNG after six cycles (p < 0.05). The subjective acne scores supported this finding.
                20EE/DSG provided better cycle control than 20EE/LNG with less treatment discontinuation due to unacceptable bleeding. There were no apparent differences between the two groups regarding tolerability and quality of life. There was less acne with 20EE/DSG.
                Copyright 2004 Elsevier Inc. This study compares the contraceptive reliability, cycle control, and tolerability of two oral contraceptive preparations containing 20 micrograms of ethinyl estradiol combined with either 75 micrograms of gestodene (EE/GSD) or 150 micrograms of desogestrel (EE/DSG). Women received the trial preparations daily for 21 days, followed by a 7-day pill-free interval. Contraceptive efficacy, cycle control, and tolerability were evaluated over a period of 12 cycles. Efficacy data of 14,700 treatment cycles (EE/GSD: 7299; EE/DSG: 7401) were obtained from 1476 women (EE/GSD, n = 740; EE/DSG, n = 736). Both preparations provided effective contraception and good cycle control with a similarly low incidence of both spotting and breakthrough bleeding. The spotting rates in both treatment groups decreased from 35.1% (EE/GSD) and 37.5% (EE/DSG) in the first treatment cycle to approximately 10% in the fourth treatment cycle. The spotting incidence as percent of the total number of cycles was 12.7% for EE/GSD and 14.3% for EE/DSG. The breakthrough bleeding incidence was 5.2% of all cycles for EE/GSD and 6.0% of all cycles for EE/DSG. For 84.7% of the cycles in the gestodene group and for 82.5% of the cycles in the desogestrel group, neither spotting nor breakthrough bleeding were recorded. Overall, the spotting and breakthrough bleeding incidence tended to be lower with EE/GSD than with EE/DSG. However, the difference was not statistically significant. Amenorrhea was recorded in 2.7% of the cycles with EE/GSD and in 2.9% with EE/DSG. Both preparations were well tolerated and showed a similar pattern of adverse events. More than 83% of the women in both groups either did not gain weight or lost more than 2 kg. Both preparations had a beneficial effect on dysmenorrhea. Both regimens provided reliable contraception and good cycle control. The incidence of adverse events was relatively low and both preparations were well tolerated. nan The objective of this study was to compare cycle control, efficacy and tolerance of an oral contraceptive containing 20 microg ethinylestradiol and 150 microg desogestrel with a preparation containing 30 microg ethinylestradiol combined with 75 microg gestodene. This study involved 342 women and 4104 cycles use in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Mexico. Contraceptive efficacy was good with both formulations. Two pregnancies occurred in the desogestrel group but were not due to method failure. With respect to cycle control, the incidence of intermenstrual bleeding was higher during the first 3 cycles in the desogestrel group; it was significant (p <0.01) during the first 3 days of the cycle for a normal or heavy bleeding only in the Mexican group. Amenorrhea was not reported for any group, but the incidence of dysmenorrhea was significantly higher (p <0.01) in the Brazilian desogestrel group (13.8%) and was significantly lower (p <0.01) in the Mexican gestodene group (8.5%). Adverse events were similar in all the countries with headache, breast tension, and nausea, the most frequently reported symptoms. The range of mean increase in body weight varied from 0.2 kg in the Argentine group to 2.6 kg in the Chilean group (95% confidence limit, +/- 2.51) in the gestodene group, and 0.2 kg in the Argentine group to 2.5 kg in Brazilian group (95% confidence limit, +/- 2.36) in the desogestrel group. Fifteen women discontinued because of headache, but there were no significant differences between the groups regarding discontinuation for this and other medical or non-medical reasons. Both oral contraceptive preparations are reliable and well tolerated, and both have favorable effects on control cycle. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled exploratory study examined the efficacy and safety of a low-dose oral contraceptive (Mircette), desogestrel/ethinyl estradiol [DSG/EE] and ethinyl estradiol [EE]) in relieving the symptoms of dysmenorrhea. Twenty-three clinics in the United States enrolled 77 women (age < or =32 years) with primary dysmenorrhea documented for at least four consecutive cycles. Forty participants received DSG/EE&EE and 37 received placebo for four consecutive 28-day cycles. The intensity of menstrual-related distress was measured with the Menstrual Distress Questionnaire (MDQ). Patient diaries were used to assess number of school/work days missed as well as the use of rescue medication. Participants receiving DSG/EE&EE recorded reduced menstrual pain severity, lower total MDQ scores, and significantly less menstrual cramping. No significant change in bloating, anxiety, loneliness, weight gain, or acne was reported. The DSG/EE&EE formulation shows promise for the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea and was well tolerated by the participants in this study.
                Copyright 2002 Elsevier Science Inc. nan To compare the cycle control and tolerability of two oral contraceptives containing 20 micrograms ethinylestradiol and either 150 micrograms desogestrel or 75 micrograms gestodene.
                A randomized, multicenter study was conducted in which 1016 healthy adult women received the desogestrel (n = 509) or the gestodene (n = 507) preparation for six treatment cycles.
                No significant differences in bleeding patterns were detected between the two treatments. The incidence and duration of irregular bleeding decreased markedly, and to a similar extent, during each treatment. The occurrence of irregular bleeding per cycle decreased from 24.6 to 9.4% in the desogestrel group and from 19.7 to 8.6% in the gestodene group. Its duration fell from 1.1 to 0.2 days and from 0.9 to 0.3 days, respectively. There was a consistently low incidence of amenorrhea (1.0-2.8%). There were no significant differences between treatments for the incidence, intensity or emergence of dysmenorrhea. During both treatments, the incidence of premenstrual syndrome and complaints such as breast tenderness, nausea and headache dropped markedly.
                Ultra low-dose oral contraceptives containing desogestrel or gestodene offer equivalent, good cycle control and improvements in dysmenorrhea and premenstrual syndrome and have similar, excellent tolerability profiles. nan
There is limited evidence for pain improvement with the use of the OCP (both low and medium dose oestrogen) in women with dysmenorrhoea. There is no evidence of a difference between different OCP preparations.