Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate associations between contraceptive failures and concomitant CYP3A4-inducing medications by route of administration. STUDY DESIGN: Comparison of unintended pregnancy outcomes within U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Adverse Event Reporting System by couse of CYP3A4-inducing drugs and route of administration for levonorgestrel and etonogestrel/desogestrel. RESULTS: Among 14,504 levonorgestrel case reports, the reporting odds ratio (ROR) was increased for oral (ROR = 4.2 [3.0-5.7]), implants (ROR = 8.0 [5.8-11.0]), but not intrauterine (ROR = 0.9 [0.6-1.3]) levonorgestrel products. For 9348 etonogestrel/desogestrel case reports, oral and vaginal products were not associated with contraceptive failure. Etonogestrel containing implants (ROR = 4.9 [4.1-5.9]) were associated with increased contraceptive failure. CONCLUSION: Levonorgestrel containing combination oral products and implants containing levonorgestrel or etonogestrel were prone to CYP3A4-inducing drug-drug interactions that may increase contraceptive failures. IMPLICATIONS: The progestin components of hormonal contraceptives are susceptible to drug-drug interactions, but this susceptibility is influenced by route of administration. This study provides evidence from an Adverse Event Reporting System that CYP3A4-inducing medications increase the risk of unintended pregnancy for oral and implant contraceptives but not intrauterine or vaginal devices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sunaga et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: