Clinical Drug Investigation

, Volume 26, Issue 3, pp 143–150 | Cite as

Efficacy and Safety of a Low-Dose 21-Day Combined Oral Contraceptive Containing Ethinylestradiol 20μg and Drospirenone 3mg

  • D. Cibula
  • U. Karck
  • H. G. Weidenhammer
  • J. Kunz
  • S. Alincic
  • J. Marr
Original Research Article


Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of a new low-dose oral contraceptive containing ethinylestradiol 20μg and drospirenone 3mg (EE 20μg/drsp 3mg).

Methods: This was an open-label, non-comparative, multicentre study conducted at 33 centres in Germany and Switzerland. The combined contraceptive was administered over 26 cycles of treatment, with each cycle consisting of once-daily treatment for 21 consecutive days followed by a 7-day hormone-free interval.

Results: A total of 527 women were randomised, of whom 516 (97.9%) started treatment and had at least one study observation. Two pregnancies occurred during 11 165 cycles of treatment, giving a Pearl Index of 0.23 (upper limit of 97.5% CI 0.84). The corresponding 2-year cumulative pregnancy rate was 0.44% (95% CIs 0, 1.05). One of the two pregnancies was attributed to non-compliance with treatment, giving an adjusted Pearl Index of 0.12 (upper limit of 97.5% CI 0.67) over 10 827 compliant cycles. Only three (0.6%) women discontinued treatment because of bleeding problems in this long-term study, suggesting an acceptable bleeding profile. Overall, the study drug was well tolerated and adverse events experienced were typical of hormonal contraceptive use. The majority of women who responded (435 of 501; 86.8%) were satisfied or very satisfied with the study treatment and most (367 of 501; 73.3%) would continue with it if given the choice.

Conclusion: The EE 20μg/drsp 3 mg combined oral contraceptive is an effective and well tolerated contraceptive with an acceptable bleeding pattern.


Combine Oral Contraceptive Contraceptive Efficacy Drospirenone Withdrawal Bleeding Normal Menstruation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The authors would like to thank Dr Michael Kunz and Dietmar Trummer (study biometricians), and Andrea Schneider and Richard Glover for their editorial assistance. Funding for this study (protocol number 303860) was provided by Schering AG, Berlin, Germany.

Drs Alincic and Marr are employees of Schering AG, Berlin, Germany. The other authors have no potential conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the contents of this study.


  1. 1.
    Trussell J. Contraceptive efficacy. In: Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Stewart F, editors. Contraceptive technology. 17th revised ed. New York (NY): Ardent Media Inc., 1998: 779–844Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shvarts S, Besinque K, Atkinson R, et al. New advances in contraception. J Continuing Education 2002; 11-22Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rosenberg MJ, Waugh MS, Long S. Unintended pregnancies and use, misuse and discontinuation of oral contraceptives. J Reprod Med 1995 May; 40(5): 355–60PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rosenberg MJ, Waugh MS. Oral contraceptive discontinuation: a prospective evaluation of frequency and reasons. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998 Sep; 179(3 Pt 1): 577–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Thorneycroft IH. Yasmin: the reason why. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2002 Dec; 7Suppl. 3: 13–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Muhn P, Krattenmacher R, Beier S, et al. Drospirenone: a novel progestogen with antimineralocorticoid and antiandrogenic activity: pharmacological characterization in animal models. Contraception 1995 Feb; 51(2): 99–110PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fuhrmann U, Krattenmacher R, Slater EP, et al. The novel progestin drospirenone and its natural counterpart progesterone: biochemical profile and antiandrogenic potential. Contraception 1996 Oct; 54(4): 243–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Parsey KS, Pong A. An open-label, multicenter study to evaluate Yasmin, a low-dose combination oral contraceptive containing drospirenone, a new progestogen. Contraception 2000 Feb; 61(2): 105–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huber J, Foidart JM, Wuttke W, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of a monophasic oral contraceptive containing ethinylestradiol and drospirenone. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2000 Mar; 5(1): 25–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Foidart JM, Wuttke W, Bouw GM, et al. A comparative investigation of contraceptive reliability, cycle control and tolerance of two monophasic oral contraceptives containing either drospirenone or desogestrel. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2000 Jun; 5(2): 124–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Vloten WA, van Haselen CW, van Zuuren EJ, et al. The effect of 2 combined oral contraceptives containing either drospirenone or cyproterone acetate on acne and seborrhea. Cutis 2002 Apr; 69(4 Suppl.): 2–15PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Thorneycroft H, Gollnick H, Schellschmidt I. Superiority of a combined contraceptive containing drospirenone to a triphasic preparation containing norgestimate in acne treatment. Cutis 2004 Aug; 74(2): 123–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gerlinger C, Endrikat J, van der Meulen EA, et al. Recommendation for confidence interval and sample size calculation for the Pearl Index. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2003 Jun; 8(2): 87–92PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Archer DF, Maheux R, DelConte A, et al. A new low-dose monophasic combination oral contraceptive (Alesse) with levonorgestrel 100 micrograms and ethinyl estradiol 20 micrograms. North American Levonorgestrel Study Group (NALSG). Contraception 1997 Mar; 55(3): 139–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Archer DF, Maheux R, DelConte A, et al. Efficacy and safety of a low-dose monophasic combination oral contraceptive containing 100 microg levonorgestrel and 20 microg ethinyl estradiol (Alesse). North American Levonorgestrel Study Group (NALSG). Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999 Nov; 181(5 Pt 2): 39–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Akerlund M, Rode A, Westergaard J. Comparative profiles of reliability, cycle control and side effects of two oral contraceptive formulations containing 150 micrograms desogestrel and either 30 micrograms or 20 micrograms ethinyl oestradiol. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1993 Sep; 100(9): 832–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Endrikat J, Dusterberg B, Ruebig A, et al. Comparison of efficacy, cycle control, and tolerability of two low-dose oral contraceptives in a multicenter clinical study. Contraception 1999 Nov; 60(5): 269–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    The Mircette Study Group. An open-label, multicenter, noncomparative safety and efficacy study of Mircette, a lowdose estrogen-progestin oral contraceptive. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998 Jul; 179(1): S2–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Endrikat J, Jaques MA, Mayerhofer M, et al. A twelve-month comparative clinical investigation of two low-dose oral contraceptives containing 20 micrograms ethinylestradiol/75 micrograms gestodene and 20 micrograms ethinylestradiol/150 micrograms desogestrel, with respect to efficacy, cycle control and tolerance. Contraception 1995 Oct; 52(4): 229–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dusterberg B, Ellman H, Muller U, et al. A three-year clinical investigation into efficacy, cycle control and tolerability of a new low-dose monophasic oral contraceptive containing gestodene. Gynecol Endocrinol 1996 Feb; 10(1): 33–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Anderson FD, Hait H. A multicenter, randomized study of an extended cycle oral contraceptive. Contraception 2003 Aug; 68(2): 89–96PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bounds W, Vessey M, Wiggins P. A randomized double-blind trial of two low dose combined oral contraceptives. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1979 Apr; 86(4): 325–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Endrikat J, Muller U, Dusterberg B. A twelve-month comparative clinical investigation of two low-dose oral contraceptives containing 20 micrograms ethinylestradiol/75 micrograms gestodene and 30 micrograms ethinylestradiol/75 micrograms gestodene, with respect to efficacy, cycle control, and tolerance. Contraception 1997 Mar; 55(3): 131–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Endrikat J, Cronin M, Gerlinger C, et al. Open, multicenter comparison of efficacy, cycle control, and tolerability of a 23-day oral contraceptive regimen with 20 microg ethinyl estradiol and 75 microg gestodene and a 21-day regimen with 20 microg ethinyl estradiol and 150 microg desogestrel. Contraception 2001 Sep; 64(3): 201–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Cibula
    • 1
  • U. Karck
    • 2
  • H. G. Weidenhammer
    • 3
  • J. Kunz
    • 4
  • S. Alincic
    • 5
  • J. Marr
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, General Faculty HospitalCharles UniversityPragueCzech Republic
  2. 2.Department of Obstetrics and GynaecologyUniversity of FreiburgFreiburgGermany
  3. 3.KlarastrFreiburgGermany
  4. 4.Hospital ZollikerbergZollikerbergSwitzerland
  5. 5.Schering AG, MDG G&ABerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations