Advertisement

 

 

The safety of subcutaneously administered depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (104mg/0.65mL): A systematic review.

The safety of subcutaneously administered depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (104mg/0.65mL): A systematic review.
Author Information (click to view)

Dragoman MV, Gaffield ME,


Dragoman MV, Gaffield ME, (click to view)

Dragoman MV, Gaffield ME,

Advertisement
Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn

Contraception 2016 02 1094(3) 202-15 doi 10.1016/j.contraception.2016.02.003

Abstract
CONTEXT
Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA), a progestogen-only contraceptive injectable, has traditionally been formulated as a crystalline suspension delivered intramuscularly (IM) at a dose of 150mg/1.0mL. A new, lower dose formulation of DMPA (104mg/0.65mL) has been developed for subcutaneous administration (SC). Given its increasing global availability and public health relevance, DMPA-SC was prioritized for inclusion as a new method referenced in the World Health Organization (WHO) Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use (MEC), 5th Edition.

OBJECTIVE
This systematic review evaluated the published peer-reviewed literature regarding the safety of DMPA-SC among women with various characteristics or medical conditions. Results of this review informed the decision-making of a WHO Guideline Development Group in order to include recommendations on contraceptive eligibility within the revised MEC.

METHODS
We searched PubMed and Cochrane Library databases to identify all relevant evidence published in peer-reviewed journals regarding the safety of DMPA-SC when used by women of reproductive age, particularly those with select characteristics or conditions specified in the MEC, from inception through June 2015. The quality of each individual study was assessed using the system for grading evidence developed by the United States Preventive Services Task Force.

RESULTS
Fourteen studies met criteria for inclusion. Ten reported results relevant to DMPA users of varying age or with obesity, endometriosis or HIV; four compared the safety of DMPA-SC and DMPA-IM when used by general populations of healthy women. A randomized trial evaluating changes in bone mineral density among adult DMPA-SC and DMPA-IM users demonstrated no differences at 2years of follow-up. Limited evidence reported no consistent differences in weight change or bleeding patterns according to age; however, adolescents (<18years) were not included in any studies. Similar contraceptive efficacy, weight change, bleeding patterns and occurrence of other adverse effects among obese and nonobese DMPA-SC users were observed. Women with endometriosis using DMPA-SC over 6months had minimal decreases in bone mineral density, weight gain, few serious adverse events and experienced improved pain symptoms. Women living with HIV tolerated injection of DMPA-SC with rare complications. DMPA-SC and DMPA-IM also show therapeutic equivalence and similar effects on weight gain, changes in bleeding patterns and reports of other adverse effects when these different delivery systems were used by general populations of women. CONCLUSION
Evidence for use of DMPA-SC by women with select conditions and characteristics including age, obesity, endometriosis or HIV demonstrates that this method can generally be used safely in these contexts. Further, DMPA-SC and DMPA-IM appear to be therapeutically equivalent with similar safety profiles when used by healthy women.

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

one × two =

[ HIDE/SHOW ]