Manuela Farris, Carlo Bastianelli, Marwan Habiba, Giuseppe Benagiano
{"title":"激素避孕,过去、现在和未来:优化口服避孕药组合以降低健康妇女的风险。","authors":"Manuela Farris, Carlo Bastianelli, Marwan Habiba, Giuseppe Benagiano","doi":"10.1080/17512433.2025.2517747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Pincus and his group's initial research on hormonal contraception focused on progesterone. However, the natural compound could not be utilized in clinical practice because of the high incidence of breakthrough bleeding and its low oral availability. This led to the introduction of orally active progestins. The estrogen was added to ensure proper cycle control.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>Concern about side effects of combined oral contraceptive pills (COC) and specifically the increased occurrence of thromboembolism was raised at the very early stages of clinical use. These were attributed to the estrogenic component, ethinyl estradiol (EE). The first pill scare followed the publication in 1977 of evidence of thromboembolism-related mortality in COC users. This and subsequent alarming publications acted as the engine for a successful attempt to substantially decrease the daily content of EE in a COC. Over time, adverse events were also reported for the newer progestins compared to levonorgestrel.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>Attempts have been made to utilize natural estrogens in COC based on the assumption that this will reduce adverse effects. The wide range of progestins available for use in COC renders comparisons between preparations more challenging. Each progestin has its own androgenic, antiandrogenic, antiestrogenic, and mineralocorticoid activity and, consequently, a unique risk and benefit profile.</p>","PeriodicalId":12207,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":"361-372"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hormonal contraception, past, present, and future part 2: optimizing combined oral contraceptives to decrease risks for healthy women.\",\"authors\":\"Manuela Farris, Carlo Bastianelli, Marwan Habiba, Giuseppe Benagiano\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17512433.2025.2517747\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Pincus and his group's initial research on hormonal contraception focused on progesterone. However, the natural compound could not be utilized in clinical practice because of the high incidence of breakthrough bleeding and its low oral availability. This led to the introduction of orally active progestins. The estrogen was added to ensure proper cycle control.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>Concern about side effects of combined oral contraceptive pills (COC) and specifically the increased occurrence of thromboembolism was raised at the very early stages of clinical use. These were attributed to the estrogenic component, ethinyl estradiol (EE). The first pill scare followed the publication in 1977 of evidence of thromboembolism-related mortality in COC users. This and subsequent alarming publications acted as the engine for a successful attempt to substantially decrease the daily content of EE in a COC. Over time, adverse events were also reported for the newer progestins compared to levonorgestrel.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>Attempts have been made to utilize natural estrogens in COC based on the assumption that this will reduce adverse effects. The wide range of progestins available for use in COC renders comparisons between preparations more challenging. Each progestin has its own androgenic, antiandrogenic, antiestrogenic, and mineralocorticoid activity and, consequently, a unique risk and benefit profile.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12207,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"361-372\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17512433.2025.2517747\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17512433.2025.2517747","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Hormonal contraception, past, present, and future part 2: optimizing combined oral contraceptives to decrease risks for healthy women.
Introduction: Pincus and his group's initial research on hormonal contraception focused on progesterone. However, the natural compound could not be utilized in clinical practice because of the high incidence of breakthrough bleeding and its low oral availability. This led to the introduction of orally active progestins. The estrogen was added to ensure proper cycle control.
Areas covered: Concern about side effects of combined oral contraceptive pills (COC) and specifically the increased occurrence of thromboembolism was raised at the very early stages of clinical use. These were attributed to the estrogenic component, ethinyl estradiol (EE). The first pill scare followed the publication in 1977 of evidence of thromboembolism-related mortality in COC users. This and subsequent alarming publications acted as the engine for a successful attempt to substantially decrease the daily content of EE in a COC. Over time, adverse events were also reported for the newer progestins compared to levonorgestrel.
Expert opinion: Attempts have been made to utilize natural estrogens in COC based on the assumption that this will reduce adverse effects. The wide range of progestins available for use in COC renders comparisons between preparations more challenging. Each progestin has its own androgenic, antiandrogenic, antiestrogenic, and mineralocorticoid activity and, consequently, a unique risk and benefit profile.
期刊介绍:
Advances in drug development technologies are yielding innovative new therapies, from potentially lifesaving medicines to lifestyle products. In recent years, however, the cost of developing new drugs has soared, and concerns over drug resistance and pharmacoeconomics have come to the fore. Adverse reactions experienced at the clinical trial level serve as a constant reminder of the importance of rigorous safety and toxicity testing. Furthermore the advent of pharmacogenomics and ‘individualized’ approaches to therapy will demand a fresh approach to drug evaluation and healthcare delivery.
Clinical Pharmacology provides an essential role in integrating the expertise of all of the specialists and players who are active in meeting such challenges in modern biomedical practice.