mobic and ulipristal-acetate

mobic has been researched along with ulipristal-acetate* in 3 studies

Reviews

1 review(s) available for mobic and ulipristal-acetate

ArticleYear
Emergency contraception: Focus on the facts.
    JAAPA : official journal of the American Academy of Physician Assistants, 2016, Volume: 29, Issue:1

    Significant progress on contraception, and in particular emergency contraception, has been made in the past decade. Emergency contraception was first introduced as a stand-alone prescription in 1998, and the interaction of politics and medicine meant a tumultuous course to the drug becoming available over the counter. This article reviews how emergency contraception works, the effectiveness of different methods, pros and cons, and the history of emergency contraception.

    Topics: Contraception; Contraception, Postcoital; Contraceptives, Oral, Hormonal; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Female; Health Services Accessibility; Humans; Intrauterine Devices; Levonorgestrel; Meloxicam; Mifepristone; Norpregnadienes; Ovulation Inhibition; Pregnancy; Thiazines; Thiazoles

2016

Trials

1 trial(s) available for mobic and ulipristal-acetate

ArticleYear
Ulipristal acetate prevents ovulation more effectively than levonorgestrel: analysis of pooled data from three randomized trials of emergency contraception regimens.
    Contraception, 2013, Volume: 88, Issue:5

    The days just prior to ovulation are the most crucial for emergency contraception (EC) efficacy. Ulipristal acetate (UPA) and levonorgestrel's (LNG) capacity to inhibit follicular rupture have never been compared directly at this time of the cycle.. Raw data from three pharmacodynamics studies with similar methodology were pooled to allow direct comparison of UPA, LNG and LNG + meloxicam's ability to prevent ovulation when administered orally in the advanced follicular phase, with a leading follicle of ≥ 18 mm.. Forty eight LNG-treated (1.5 mg) cycles, 31 LNG (1.5 mg) + meloxicam (15 mg), 34 UPA (30 mg) cycles and 50 placebo cycles were compared. Follicle rupture was delayed for at least 5 days in 14.6%, 38.7%, 58.8% and 4% of the LNG-, LNG + meloxicam-, UPA- and placebo-treated cycles, respectively. UPA was more effective than LNG and placebo in inhibiting follicular rupture (p = .0001), while LNG, when administered at this time of the cycle, was not different than placebo. The addition of meloxicam improved the efficacy of LNG in preventing follicular rupture (p = .0292 vs. LNG; p = .0001 vs. placebo; non-significant vs. UPA). UPA was effective in preventing rupture in the 5 days following treatment, even when administered at the time of the luteinizing hormone (LH) surge (UPA 79%, LNG 14% and placebo 10%). None of the treatments were effective when administered on the day of the LH peak. The median time from treatment to rupture was 6 days during the ulipristal cycles and 2 days in the placebo and LNG/LNG + meloxicam cycles (p = .0015).. Although no EC treatment is 100% effective in inhibiting follicular rupture when administered in the late follicular phase, UPA is the most effective treatment, delaying ovulation for at least 5 days in 59% of the cycles. LNG is not different from placebo in inhibiting follicular rupture at this advanced phase of the cycle. No treatment was effective in postponing rupture when administered on the day of LH peak.

    Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Chile; Contraceptives, Postcoital, Hormonal; Contraceptives, Postcoital, Synthetic; Cross-Over Studies; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Dominican Republic; Double-Blind Method; Drug Combinations; Female; Humans; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Levonorgestrel; Luteinization; Luteinizing Hormone; Meloxicam; Norpregnadienes; Ovarian Follicle; Ovulation; Thiazines; Thiazoles; Young Adult

2013

Other Studies

1 other study(ies) available for mobic and ulipristal-acetate

ArticleYear
Potential candidate for oral pericoital contraception: evaluating ulipristal acetate plus cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor for ovulation disruption.
    BMJ sexual & reproductive health, 2022, Volume: 48, Issue:3

    There remains considerable global unmet contraceptive need, with almost 200 million women reporting desire to limit or space childbearing without contraceptive use. Researchers have documented worldwide interest in an oral, on-demand contraceptive option were it available. Candidates for use include ulipristal acetate (UA), levonorgestrel and cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors alone or in combination.. We performed an exploratory, prospective study of matched menstrual cycles: one baseline cycle and one treatment cycle of UA 30 mg plus meloxicam 30 mg just prior to ovulation. The primary outcome was ovulation disruption, defined as unruptured dominant follicle for 5 days. Secondary outcomes included comparing cycle length, endometrial stripe thickness, and side effects.. Nine participants completed all study procedures in both cycles. Ovulatory disruption occurred in 66.7% (n=6) of treatment cycles and all but one demonstrated features of ovulatory dysfunction. Cycle length (mean±SD) was longer in the treatment cycle (31.9. UA plus the COX-2 inhibitor meloxicam disrupts ovulation at peak luteal surge and is a promising candidate for evaluation as a pericoital oral contraceptive.. NCT03354117.

    Topics: Contraception; Contraceptive Agents; Cyclooxygenase 2; Female; Humans; Meloxicam; Norpregnadienes; Ovulation; Prospective Studies

2022