Paper # 934 
Pharmacokinetic Interactions between the Hormonal Emergency Contraception, Levonorgestrel, and Efavirenz
Monica Carten*1, J Kiser1, A Kwara2, S MaWhinney1, and S Cu-Uvin2
1Univ of Colorado Denver, Aurora, US and 2Warren Alpert Med Sch of Brown Univ, Providence, RI, US
Background: The majority of HIV-infected women are
of reproductive age and many are prescribed efavirenz (EFV) -containing
antiretroviral regimens. Few data are available on the pharmacokinetics of
progestin-based contraceptives with non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase
inhibitors, including EFV. Women taking EFV may use LNG for emergency
contraception and potential interactions between levonorgestrel (LNG) and EFV
could influence efficacy or toxicity during concomitant use.
Methods: In this open-label, single-arm study, we
prospectively determined the effect of EFV on the pharmacokinetics of LNG
(single-dose 0.75 mg) in HIV-seronegative women. We performed 12-hour intensive
pharmacokinetic sampling for LNG following a single dose of LNG and after 14
days of EFV (600 mg by mouth, every hour of sleep) following a standardized
meal. LNG plasma concentrations were measured by LC-MS and LNG pharmacokinetics
was determined with non-compartmental methods (WinNonLin). Equivalence was
defined as a decrease of less than 40% in LNG AUC after the addition of EFV.
Geometric means and 90% confidence intervals (CI) for the pharmacokinetics of
LNG were estimated. Relevant clinical parameters and liver function tests were
assessed prior to and during steady-state EFV. Paired t-tests were used
for analyses. Subjects were 18 to 45 years of age with normal body mass index
and no recent or current use of hormonal contraceptive agents.
Results: Of 24 women enrolled, 21 (67% white, 24 %
Latina, 10% African American, median age 33 years, mean body mass index 27)
completed study. LNG was well tolerated with no grade 3 or 4 treatment-related
toxicities or changes in liver function tests. The estimated 56% (49% to 62%)
decrease in LNG AUC was greater than the equivalence value of 40% (P <0.0001).
All other LNG pharmacokinetics parameters were also significantly changed (see
the table).
|
Pharmacokinetic
Parameter
|
LNG
Geometric means (CI)
|
LNG + EFV
Geometric means (CI)
|
P value
|
|
AUC0-12 h (ng*h/mL)
|
42.9 (37.0, 49.8)
|
17.8 (15.1, 21.1)
|
<0.0001
|
|
Cmax (ng/mL)
|
8.4 (7.4, 9.5)
|
4.6 (3.9 , 5.6)
|
<0.0001
|
|
Cmin
(ng/mL)
|
2.04 (1.7, 2.4)
|
0.6 (0.5, 0.8)
|
<0.0001
|
|
V/F (L)
|
143.7 (115.2, 311.6)
|
255.7 (209.9, 311.6)
|
0.0001
|
|
CL/F (L/h)
|
9.7 (7.7, 12.0)
|
32.1 (26.8, 38.5)
|
<0.0001
|
|
t1/2 (h)
|
10.3 (7.7, 13.9)
|
5.5 (4.4, 6.9)
|
0.0001
|
Conclusions: EFV significantly reduced LNG exposure.
Although the minimum effective concentration of LNG is unknown, higher LNG
doses may be required to prevent pregnancy in the setting of EFV. Further
research is needed of alternative LNG dosing strategies with EFV. These results
reinforce the importance of dual methods of contraception, including a barrier
device, in women taking EFV.
|