The influence of the triphasic pill and a desogestrel-containing combination pill on some physical, biochemical and hormonal parameters: a preliminary report
The triphasic pill contains the lowest dose of progestogens given per cycle. The recently introduced desogestrel-containing combination pill is claimed to have less androgenic side-effects than combination pills containing levonorgestrel. A better comparison would be between the triphasic pill and the desogestrel-containing pill. This is the purpose of this report. The following items were measured during the follicular and luteal phase of a control cycle and during the third week of pill intake of both the third and sixth pill cycle: body-weight, blood pressure, total cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, fasting triglycerides and testosterone. Blood glucose and insulin levels were measured during a glucose tolerance test at the beginning and the end of the study. Body-weight increased and blood pressure remained unchanged during the control cycle. Both pill types had no influence on these parameters. Total cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol and fasting triglycerides showed no significant changes during the control cycle or during pill intake except for a significant decrease of total cholesterol in the desogestrel group. The triphasic pill did not alter the glucose or insulin response to glucose. In the desogestrel group both these responses increased significantly. Testosterone increased significantly during the control cycle but no significant changes were observed during pill intake in both groups. It is concluded that the observed changes in biochemical and hormonal parameters are minor and only reach the level of significance in the desogestrel group.
KeywordsOral Contraceptive Insulin Response Serum Testosterone Ethinyl Estradiol Serum Testosterone Level
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Zador, G. (1982). Clinical performance of a triphasic administration of ethinyl estradiol and levonorgestrel in comparison with the 30 + 150 μg fixed-dose regime. In Haspels, A. A. and Rolland, R. (eds.). Benefits and Risks of Hormonal Contraception, pp. 43–55. (Lancaster: MTP Press)Google Scholar
- 2.Viinikka, L. (1978). Biological effects and metabolism of ORG 2969, a new synthetic progestagen, in man. Acta Universitatis Ouluensis Series D, Medica no. 38, Clinica Chemica nr. 3.Google Scholar
- 4.Thomas, C. M. G. and Rolland, R. (1983). Methods of measurements of testosterone in serum and saliva as performed in our laboratory will be published in the final report.Google Scholar
- 5.Demacker, P. N. M., Hijmans, A. G. M., Vos-Jansen, H. E., van ‘t Laar, A. and Jansen, A. P. (1980). A study of the use of polyethylene glycol in estimating cholesterol in high density lipoprotein. Clin. Chem., 26/13, 1775Google Scholar
- 6.Briggs, M. H. (1982). Comparative investigation of oral contraceptives using randomized, prospective protocols. In Haspels, A. A. and Rolland R. (eds.). Benefits and Risks of Hormonal Contraception, pp. 115–30. (Lancaster: MTP Press)Google Scholar