Oral contraception in diabetic women. A cross-over study on serum and high density lipoprotein (HDL) lipids and diabetes control during progestogen and combined estrogen/progestogen contraception. Contraception in perimenopausal women with diabetes mellitus. Investigation of the influence of two low-dose monophasic oral contraceptives containing 20 micrograms ethinylestradiol/75 micrograms gestodene and 30 micrograms ethinylestradiol/75 micrograms gestodene, on lipid metabolism in an open randomized trial. Effects of a monophasic combined oral contraceptive containing nomegestrol acetate and 17β-oestradiol compared with one containing levonorgestrel and ethinylestradiol on haemostasis, lipids and carbohydrate metabolism.
Twenty-three young women with insulin-dependent diabetes were randomly allocated to contraceptive treatment with either a progestogen only (Lynestrenol 0.5 mg) (LYN) or a combined oral contraceptive (OC) (ethinyl estradiol 50 micrograms + lynestrenol 2.5 micrograms) (EE + LYN). After six months treatment the medication was withdrawn for at least two months, after which the patients were placed on the other preparation. Diabetes control and serum and high density lipoprotein (HDL) lipids were assessed before and after 1, 3 and 6 months of treatment. Low-dose LYN administration did not alter the insulin requirement, blood glucose or body weight while the combined EE + LYN treatment increased the insulin requirement (p less than 0.01) without altering blood glucose or body weight. Low-dose LYN reduced serum triglycerides (p less than 0.001), serum cholesterol (p less than 0.001) and serum phospholipids (p less than 0.01) without affecting HDL lipids, while EE + LYN gave an inconsistent increase in serum triglycerides (p less than 0.01) but no change in HDL lipids. These findings confirm our earlier results and we conclude that EE + LYN influences diabetes control slightly more (although still not seriously) than the low-dose LYN. It is suggested that insulin-dependent diabetics (in contrast to non-diabetics) are more sensitive to the influence of 19-norprogestogens than to alkylated estrogens, with respect to lipid metabolism. To assess the effect of combined oral contraceptives (COCs) and intrauterine devices (IUDs) on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism and hemostasis in perimenopausal diabetic women.
                The open randomized study included a total of 113 diabetic women using COCs with different estrogen/progestogen profiles - ethinylestradiol (EE) 20 microg/desogestrel 150 microg, EE 30 microg/desogestrel 150 microg and EE 30 microg/gestodene 75 microg - and levonorgestrel-releasing or copper IUDs. Average daily insulin requirements, levels of glycosylated hemoglobin, total cholesterol, triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, the state of coagulation hemostatis and fibrinolytic activity were determined at baseline and after 3, 6, 9 and 12 months of contraception. The control group was composed of 40 age-matched diabetic women who did not use any methods of contraception.
                Neither COCs nor IUDs influenced glycosylated hemoglobin and had little or no influence on the elevation in the requirements for insulin preparations. The majority of the preparations did not exert any unfavorable effect on the blood lipid profile. Taking COCs was accompanied by increased intravascular activation of blood platelets and to a lesser degree by alterations in parameters of hemostatic homeostasis. The use of IUDs had a neutral effect on blood coagulation and fibrinolysis systems.
                Comparing lipid levels and hemostatic variables as a function of glycosylated hemoglobin level, we conclude that diabetes control has greater influence on these parameters than the type and dose of steroids involved in the contraceptive devices. An open comparison at a single center was performed in volunteers (n = 58) randomly allocated to two treatment groups, one receiving tablets containing 20 micrograms ethinylestradiol (EE) + 75 micrograms gestodene, and the other 30 micrograms EE + 75 micrograms gestodene. The study consisted of three treatment-free pre-cycles, followed by thirteen 28-day treatment cycles. Analysis of results revealed that there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups with regard to the plasma levels of HDL-cholesterol and its subfractions, LDL-cholesterol and apolipoproteins. There was, however, a trend toward a more favorable effect on HDL-cholesterol in the 20 micrograms EE group, where levels increased by 3% compared with the 30 micrograms EE group, where levels decreased by 9%. There was a statistically significant difference between the adjusted mean values of total triglycerides in the two groups in favor of the 20 micrograms EE group (+21%), compared with the 30 micrograms EE group (+64%) (p = 0.029). Two serious adverse events were reported (lymphadenopathy and vertigo), but neither were considered to be causally related to either study medication. The formulation containing 75 micrograms gestodene and 20 micrograms EE was shown to be a reliable and well tolerated oral contraceptive, with a favorable lipid profile. To compare the effects of a combined oral contraceptive (COC) containing nomegestrol acetate and 17β-oestradiol (NOMAC/E2) on haemostasis, lipids, carbohydrate metabolism, C-reactive protein (CRP) and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) with those of a COC containing levonorgestrel and ethinylestradiol (LNG/EE).
                In a randomised, open-label study, 121 healthy women, 18-50 years of age, were randomly assigned to receive NOMAC/E2 (2.5 mg/1.5 mg) in a 24/4-day regimen (n=60) or LNG/EE (150 μg/30 μg) in a 21/7-day regimen (n=61) for six cycles. The primary outcome was the change from baseline to cycle 6 for all indices.
                All parameters were similar at baseline between the two groups. Over six cycles, NOMAC/E2 had less effect on most haemostatic indices than LNG/EE. Lipids were essentially unchanged with NOMAC/E2, whereas with LNG/EE high-density lipoprotein cholesterol decreased and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides slightly increased. NOMAC/E2 induced negligible changes in glucose and insulin parameters, in contrast to LNG/EE. A much smaller increase in CRP was observed with NOMAC/E2 than with LNG/EE. NOMAC/E2 was associated with a greater increase in SHBG.
                The monophasic COC NOMAC/E2 had less influence on haemostasis, lipids and carbohydrate metabolism than the COC LNG/EE.
The four included randomised controlled trials in this systematic review provided insufficient evidence to assess whether progestogen-only and combined contraceptives differ from non-hormonal contraceptives in diabetes control, lipid metabolism and complications. Three of the four studies were of limited methodological quality, sponsored by pharmaceutical companies and described surrogate outcomes. Ideally, an adequately reported, high-quality randomised controlled trial analysing both intermediate outcomes (that is glucose and lipid metabolism) and true clinical endpoints (micro- and macrovascular disease) in users of combined, progestogen-only and non-hormonal contraceptives should be conducted. However, due to the low incidence of micro- and macrovascular disease and accordingly the large sample size and long follow-up period needed to observe differences in risk, a randomised controlled trial might not be the ideal design.