Comparison of plasma etonogestrel concentrations sampled from the contralateral-to-implant and ipsilateral-to-implant arms of contraceptive implant users

Alida M Gertz; Ian J Bishop; Simon Boikhutso; Kwana Lechiile; Opelo Badubi; Aamirah Mussa; Carolyn L Westhoff; Chelsea Morroni

doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2020.08.011

Comparison of plasma etonogestrel concentrations sampled from the contralateral-to-implant and ipsilateral-to-implant arms of contraceptive implant users

Alida M Gertz, Ian J Bishop, Simon Boikhutso, Kwana Lechiile, Opelo Badubi, Aamirah Mussa, Carolyn L Westhoff, Chelsea Morroni

International Public Health

Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Objective

To compare plasma etonogestrel concentrations sampled from the contralateral- versus ipsilateral-to-implant arm.

Study design

Sub-analysis of a cross-sectional study in Botswana in 33 participants who provided contralateral and ipsilateral blood samples.

Results

Plasma etonogestrel concentrations in contralateral and ipsilateral specimens were highly correlated (correlation coefficient = 0.99; p < 0.0001). Bland–Altman analysis of agreement showed that etonogestrel levels were on average 5.9 pg/mL higher (2.1%) in ipsilateral compared to contralateral specimens (95% confidence interval: −4.1, 15.9 pg/mL).

Conclusions

We found no meaningful differences in plasma etonogestrel concentrations between samples taken from the contralateral- versus ipsilateral-to-implant arm.

Implications

Our data suggest that etonogestrel plasma concentrations are unlikely to be meaningfully different between samples drawn from the ipsilateral- versus the contralateral-to-implant arms in etonogestrel contraceptive implant users.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	403-405
Number of pages	3
Journal	Contraception
Volume	102
Issue number	6
Early online date	26 Aug 2020
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2020.08.011
Publication status	Published - 1 Dec 2020

Keywords

Contraceptive implant
Contralateral arm
Etonogestrel
Ipsilateral arm
Pharmacokinetics

Access to Document

10.1016/j.contraception.2020.08.011

Gertz IMP Contra Ipsi Revised Ms 1 13 Aug 2020 FinalAccepted author manuscript, 57.2 KBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{4267944c36ef4a7caa5ccef787a52101,

title = "Comparison of plasma etonogestrel concentrations sampled from the contralateral-to-implant and ipsilateral-to-implant arms of contraceptive implant users",

abstract = "ObjectiveTo compare plasma etonogestrel concentrations sampled from the contralateral- versus ipsilateral-to-implant arm.Study designSub-analysis of a cross-sectional study in Botswana in 33 participants who provided contralateral and ipsilateral blood samples.ResultsPlasma etonogestrel concentrations in contralateral and ipsilateral specimens were highly correlated (correlation coefficient = 0.99; p < 0.0001). Bland–Altman analysis of agreement showed that etonogestrel levels were on average 5.9 pg/mL higher (2.1\%) in ipsilateral compared to contralateral specimens (95\% confidence interval: −4.1, 15.9 pg/mL).ConclusionsWe found no meaningful differences in plasma etonogestrel concentrations between samples taken from the contralateral- versus ipsilateral-to-implant arm.ImplicationsOur data suggest that etonogestrel plasma concentrations are unlikely to be meaningfully different between samples drawn from the ipsilateral- versus the contralateral-to-implant arms in etonogestrel contraceptive implant users.",

keywords = "Contraceptive implant, Contralateral arm, Etonogestrel, Ipsilateral arm, Pharmacokinetics",

author = "Gertz, \{Alida M\} and Bishop, \{Ian J\} and Simon Boikhutso and Kwana Lechiile and Opelo Badubi and Aamirah Mussa and Westhoff, \{Carolyn L\} and Chelsea Morroni",

year = "2020",

month = dec,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.contraception.2020.08.011",

language = "English",

volume = "102",

pages = "403--405",

journal = "Contraception",

issn = "0010-7824",

publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of plasma etonogestrel concentrations sampled from the contralateral-to-implant and ipsilateral-to-implant arms of contraceptive implant users

AU - Gertz, Alida M

AU - Bishop, Ian J

AU - Boikhutso, Simon

AU - Lechiile, Kwana

AU - Badubi, Opelo

AU - Mussa, Aamirah

AU - Westhoff, Carolyn L

AU - Morroni, Chelsea

PY - 2020/12/1

Y1 - 2020/12/1

N2 - ObjectiveTo compare plasma etonogestrel concentrations sampled from the contralateral- versus ipsilateral-to-implant arm.Study designSub-analysis of a cross-sectional study in Botswana in 33 participants who provided contralateral and ipsilateral blood samples.ResultsPlasma etonogestrel concentrations in contralateral and ipsilateral specimens were highly correlated (correlation coefficient = 0.99; p < 0.0001). Bland–Altman analysis of agreement showed that etonogestrel levels were on average 5.9 pg/mL higher (2.1%) in ipsilateral compared to contralateral specimens (95% confidence interval: −4.1, 15.9 pg/mL).ConclusionsWe found no meaningful differences in plasma etonogestrel concentrations between samples taken from the contralateral- versus ipsilateral-to-implant arm.ImplicationsOur data suggest that etonogestrel plasma concentrations are unlikely to be meaningfully different between samples drawn from the ipsilateral- versus the contralateral-to-implant arms in etonogestrel contraceptive implant users.

AB - ObjectiveTo compare plasma etonogestrel concentrations sampled from the contralateral- versus ipsilateral-to-implant arm.Study designSub-analysis of a cross-sectional study in Botswana in 33 participants who provided contralateral and ipsilateral blood samples.ResultsPlasma etonogestrel concentrations in contralateral and ipsilateral specimens were highly correlated (correlation coefficient = 0.99; p < 0.0001). Bland–Altman analysis of agreement showed that etonogestrel levels were on average 5.9 pg/mL higher (2.1%) in ipsilateral compared to contralateral specimens (95% confidence interval: −4.1, 15.9 pg/mL).ConclusionsWe found no meaningful differences in plasma etonogestrel concentrations between samples taken from the contralateral- versus ipsilateral-to-implant arm.ImplicationsOur data suggest that etonogestrel plasma concentrations are unlikely to be meaningfully different between samples drawn from the ipsilateral- versus the contralateral-to-implant arms in etonogestrel contraceptive implant users.

KW - Contraceptive implant

KW - Contralateral arm

KW - Etonogestrel

KW - Ipsilateral arm

KW - Pharmacokinetics

U2 - 10.1016/j.contraception.2020.08.011

DO - 10.1016/j.contraception.2020.08.011

M3 - Article

SN - 0010-7824

VL - 102

SP - 403

EP - 405

JO - Contraception

JF - Contraception

IS - 6

ER -

Comparison of plasma etonogestrel concentrations sampled from the contralateral-to-implant and ipsilateral-to-implant arms of contraceptive implant users

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this