Thromb Haemost 2011; 105(03): 560-567
DOI: 10.1160/TH10-05-0327
New Technologies, Diagnostic Tools and Drugs
Schattauer GmbH

Haemostatic effects of a new combined oral contraceptive, nomegestrol acetate/17β-estradiol, compared with those of levonorgestrel/ethinyl estradiol

A double-blind, randomised study
Pascale Gaussem
1   Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France
2   Inserm UMRS 765, Faculté de Pharmacie, Paris, France
3   AP-HP, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
,
Martine Alhenc-Gelas
2   Inserm UMRS 765, Faculté de Pharmacie, Paris, France
3   AP-HP, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
,
Jean-Louis Thomas
4   Laboratoire Théramex, Monaco
,
Christilla Bachelot-Loza
2   Inserm UMRS 765, Faculté de Pharmacie, Paris, France
,
Veronique Remones
3   AP-HP, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
,
Fouad Dali Ali
3   AP-HP, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
,
Martine Aiach
1   Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France
2   Inserm UMRS 765, Faculté de Pharmacie, Paris, France
3   AP-HP, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
,
Pierre-Yves Scarabin
5   National Institute of Health and Medical Research (Inserm), Villejuif Cedex, France
› Author Affiliations

Financial support: This study was funded by Théramex, part of the Merck-Serono division.
Further Information

Publication History

Received: 28 May 2010

Accepted after minor revision: 10 January 2010

Publication Date:
27 November 2017 (online)

Preview

Summary

Use of oral contraceptives (OC) that combine a progestogen with synthetic ethinyl estradiol (EE) is associated with increased risk of venous thromboembolism. NOMAC/E2 is a new monophasic OC that combines nomegestrol acetate (NOMAC), a highly selective progestogen, with 17β-estradiol (E2). The study objective was to compare the effects on markers of haemostasis of NOMAC/E2 (2.5 mg/1.5 mg) versus the second-generation OC, levonorgestrel (LNG)/EE (100 μg/20 μg). Healthy women (age 18–38 years) received once-daily treatment for three consecutive 28-day cycles in a double-blind, randomised study: either NOMAC/E2 for 24 days with a four-day placebo interval (n=45) or LNG/ EE for 21 days with a seven-day placebo interval (n=45) per cycle. Mean changes from baseline to end-of-treatment in coagulation markers, including prothrombin fragment 1+2 (primary endpoint), fibrinolysis markers and platelet functions were assessed. Mean prothrombin fragment 1+2 levels (primary endpoint) did not increase with NOMAC/E2 compared with LNG/EE ( –0.02 vs. +0.08 nM, p<0.01). Other significant differences between NOMAC/E2 and LNG/EE were mean changes in antithrombin (+0.3% vs. –4.4%, p<0.001), activated protein C resistance – normalised ratio (+0.20 vs. +0.46, p<0.01), D-dimer ( –53 vs. +43 ng/ml, p<0.001), plasminogen (+6% vs. +30%, p<0.0001) and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 ( –3.1 vs. –8.0 ng/ml, p<0.001). There was no effect of either treatment on platelet aggregation. The NOMAC/E2 pill regimen has fewer adverse effects on blood biological coagulation and fibrinolysis markers than LNG/EE. This suggests that NOMAC/E2 could have a more favourable venous thromboembolism risk profile than LNG/EE; further epidemiological data are required to confirm this.