Management of early pregnancy loss with mifepristone and misoprostol: clinical predictors of treatment success from a randomized trial.

BackgroundEarly pregnancy loss is a common event in the first trimester, occurring in 15%-20% of confirmed pregnancies. A common evidence-based medical regimen for early pregnancy loss uses misoprostol, a prostaglandin E1 analog, with a dosage of 800 μg, self-administered vaginally. The clinical utility of this regimen is limited by suboptimal effectiveness in patients with a closed cervical os, with 29% of patients experiencing early pregnancy loss requiring a second dose after 3 days and 16% of patients eventually requiring a uterine aspiration procedure.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate clinical predictors associated with treatment success in patients receiving medical management with mifepristone-misoprostol or misoprostol alone for early pregnancy loss.Study designWe performed a planned secondary analysis of a randomized trial comparing mifepristone-misoprostol with misoprostol alone for management of early pregnancy loss. The published prediction model for treatment success of single-dose misoprostol administered vaginally included the following variables: active bleeding, type of early pregnancy loss (anembryonic pregnancy or embryonic and/or fetal demise), parity, gestational age, and treatment site; previous significant predictors were vaginal bleeding within the past 24 hours and parity of 0 or 1 vs >1. To determine if these characteristics predicted differential proportions of patients with treatment success or failure, we performed bivariate analyses; given the small proportion of treatment failures in the combined treatment arm, both arms were combined for analysis. Thereafter, we performed a logistic regression analysis to assess the effect of these predictors collectively in each of the 2 treatment groups separately as well as in the full cohort as a proxy for the combined treatment arm. Finally, by using receiver operating characteristic curves, we tested the ability of these predictors in association with misoprostol treatment success to discriminate between treatment success and treatment failure. To quantify the ability of the score to discriminate between treatment success and treatment failure in each treatment arm as well as in the entire cohort, we calculated the area under the curve. Using multivariable logistic regression, we then assessed our study population for other predictors of treatment success in both treatment groups, with and without mifepristone pretreatment.ResultsOverall, 297 evaluable participants were included in the primary study, with 148 in the mifepristone-misoprostol combined treatment group and 149 in the misoprostol-alone treatment group. Among patients who had vaginal bleeding at the time of treatment, 15 of 17 (88%) in the mifepristone-misoprostol combined treatment group and 12 of 17 (71%) in the misoprostol-alone treatment group experienced expulsion of pregnancy tissue. Among patients with a parity of 0 or 1, 94 of 108 (87%) in the mifepristone-misoprostol treatment group and 66 of 95 (69%) in the misoprostol-alone treatment group experienced expulsion of pregnancy tissue. These clinical characteristics did not predict treatment success in the combined cohort alone (area under the curve=0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.64). No other baseline clinical factors predicted treatment success in the misoprostol-alone treatment arm or mifepristone pretreatment arm. In the full cohort, the significant predictors of treatment success were pretreatment with mifepristone (adjusted odds ratio=2.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.43-4.43) and smoking (adjusted odds ratio=2.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-4.49).ConclusionNo baseline clinical factors predicted treatment success in women receiving medical management with misoprostol for early pregnancy loss. Adding mifepristone to the medical management regimen of early pregnancy loss improved treatment success; thus, mifepristone treatment should be considered for management of early pregnancy loss regardless of baseline clinical factors

Does size matter? A randomized controlled trial to assess the impact of external diameter on adherence to 3 different intravaginal rings among 24 US couples

Background: Intravaginal rings (IVRs) are being developed as multipurpose prevention technologies (MPTs) for simultaneous HIV and pregnancy prevention. However, no empirical data exists to support the current 54-58mm size as ideal. Understanding the impact of IVR size on adherence is critical for developing a product that can be used correctly and consistently. Methods: We conducted a randomized, open-label, 3-way crossover trial comparing adherence, preference, and acceptability of 3 non-medicated silicone IVRs of differing external diameters: 46mm, 56mm and 66mm. 24 couples in Atlanta, GA and Bronx, NY were randomized to the sequence of IVR use, used each continuously for ~30 days. The primary objective was to compare ring adherence, defined as never having the IVR out of the vagina for \u3e 30 minutes in 24h. Women reported occurrence and duration of expulsions and removals via daily text. We summarized the proportion of days the IVR was removed, expelled, or out all day, and the proportion of women adherent to each IVR. We used mixed methods logistic regression models with random intercepts (per participant) to compare the probability of each event happening per day of IVR use, per IVR. Results: 23/24 couples completed the study. 78%, 75% and 59% of participants were adherent to the IVRs of diameter 46mm, 56mm and 66mm respectively (Table 1). The 46mm and 66mm IVR performed similarly, with more expulsions and 24h outages for the 66mm IVR. When adjusting for size and sequence, women had \u3e 15 times the odds of the 66mm IVR being out all day versus the 56mm IVR (15.7, 95% CI: 3.4, 72.6). Conclusions: External diameter of these non-medicated IVRs had a significant impact on frequency of removal and expulsion. Product developers should prioritize IVRs in the range of 46mm-56mm

Management of early pregnancy loss with mifepristone and misoprostol: clinical predictors of treatment success from a randomized trial.

BackgroundEarly pregnancy loss is a common event in the first trimester, occurring in 15%-20% of confirmed pregnancies. A common evidence-based medical regimen for early pregnancy loss uses misoprostol, a prostaglandin E1 analog, with a dosage of 800 μg, self-administered vaginally. The clinical utility of this regimen is limited by suboptimal effectiveness in patients with a closed cervical os, with 29% of patients experiencing early pregnancy loss requiring a second dose after 3 days and 16% of patients eventually requiring a uterine aspiration procedure.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate clinical predictors associated with treatment success in patients receiving medical management with mifepristone-misoprostol or misoprostol alone for early pregnancy loss.Study designWe performed a planned secondary analysis of a randomized trial comparing mifepristone-misoprostol with misoprostol alone for management of early pregnancy loss. The published prediction model for treatment success of single-dose misoprostol administered vaginally included the following variables: active bleeding, type of early pregnancy loss (anembryonic pregnancy or embryonic and/or fetal demise), parity, gestational age, and treatment site; previous significant predictors were vaginal bleeding within the past 24 hours and parity of 0 or 1 vs >1. To determine if these characteristics predicted differential proportions of patients with treatment success or failure, we performed bivariate analyses; given the small proportion of treatment failures in the combined treatment arm, both arms were combined for analysis. Thereafter, we performed a logistic regression analysis to assess the effect of these predictors collectively in each of the 2 treatment groups separately as well as in the full cohort as a proxy for the combined treatment arm. Finally, by using receiver operating characteristic curves, we tested the ability of these predictors in association with misoprostol treatment success to discriminate between treatment success and treatment failure. To quantify the ability of the score to discriminate between treatment success and treatment failure in each treatment arm as well as in the entire cohort, we calculated the area under the curve. Using multivariable logistic regression, we then assessed our study population for other predictors of treatment success in both treatment groups, with and without mifepristone pretreatment.ResultsOverall, 297 evaluable participants were included in the primary study, with 148 in the mifepristone-misoprostol combined treatment group and 149 in the misoprostol-alone treatment group. Among patients who had vaginal bleeding at the time of treatment, 15 of 17 (88%) in the mifepristone-misoprostol combined treatment group and 12 of 17 (71%) in the misoprostol-alone treatment group experienced expulsion of pregnancy tissue. Among patients with a parity of 0 or 1, 94 of 108 (87%) in the mifepristone-misoprostol treatment group and 66 of 95 (69%) in the misoprostol-alone treatment group experienced expulsion of pregnancy tissue. These clinical characteristics did not predict treatment success in the combined cohort alone (area under the curve=0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.64). No other baseline clinical factors predicted treatment success in the misoprostol-alone treatment arm or mifepristone pretreatment arm. In the full cohort, the significant predictors of treatment success were pretreatment with mifepristone (adjusted odds ratio=2.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.43-4.43) and smoking (adjusted odds ratio=2.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-4.49).ConclusionNo baseline clinical factors predicted treatment success in women receiving medical management with misoprostol for early pregnancy loss. Adding mifepristone to the medical management regimen of early pregnancy loss improved treatment success; thus, mifepristone treatment should be considered for management of early pregnancy loss regardless of baseline clinical factors

Association of cervical precancer with human papillomavirus types other than 16 among HIV co-infected women.

BackgroundHIV-seropositive women face high risk for infection with oncogenic human papillomavirus (oncHPV) types, abnormal Pap test results, and precancer, but cervical cancer risk is only modestly increased. Human papillomavirus (HPV)16 is highly oncogenic but only weakly associated with HIV status and immunosuppression, suggesting HPV16 may have a greater innate ability to evade host immune surveillance than other oncHPV types, which in turn should result in a greater relative increase in the prevalence of other oncHPV types among women with cervical precancer.ObjectiveWe sought to assess whether the underrepresentation of HPV16 among HIV-seropositive relative to HIV-seronegative women remains among those with cervical precancers.Study designHIV-seropositive and HIV-seronegative women in the Women's Interagency HIV Study were screened for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade ≥3 (CIN3(+)). DNA from >40 HPV types was detected by polymerase chain reaction in cervicovaginal lavage specimens obtained at the visit at which CIN3(+) was diagnosed.ResultsHPV16 was detected in 13 (62%) of 21 HIV-seronegative women with CIN3(+) but only 44 (29%) of 154 HIV-seropositive women with CIN3(+) (P = .01). The lower prevalence of HPV16 in CIN3(+) among HIV-seropositive women persisted after controlling for covariates (odds ratio [OR], 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.08-0.78). The prevalence of other members of the HPV16-related alpha-9 oncHPV clade as a group was similar in HIV-infected and uninfected women with CIN3(+) (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.53-1.94). The prevalence of non-alpha-9 oncHPV types was increased in HIV-seropositive vs HIV-seronegative women with CIN3(+) (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.3-11.8).ConclusionThe previously demonstrated increase in CIN3(+) incidence among HIV-seropositive women is associated with lower HPV16 and higher non-alpha-9 oncHPV prevalence. This is consistent with prior reports that HIV has a weak effect on infection by HPV16 relative to other oncHPV and supports use of nonavalent HPV vaccine in HIV-seropositive women

Declining Prevalence of Trichomonas vaginalis Diagnosed by Wet Mount in a Cohort of U.S. Women With and Without HIV

Women living with HIV (WLWH) are often coinfected with (TV), and annual screening is recommended. Our goal was to assess differences in TV prevalence at study entry and over time in enrollment cohorts of the Women's Interagency HIV Study. In a multisite study, TV was diagnosed by wet mount microscopy. Prevalence was determined across four enrollment waves: 1994-1995, 2001-2002, 2011-2012, and 2013-2015. Generalized estimating equation multivariable logistic regression models assessed changes in visit prevalence across waves after controlling for HIV disease severity and other risks. At 63,824 person-visits (3,508 WLWH and 1,262 women without HIV), TV was diagnosed by wet mount at 1979 visits (3.1%). After multivariable adjustment, HIV status was not associated with TV detection, which was more common among younger women, women with multiple partners, and irregular condom use. All enrollment waves showed a decline in TV detection over time, although -value for trend did not reach significance for most recent waves. To explore the potential utility of screening among WLWH, we assessed rates of TV detection among women without appreciable vaginal discharge on examination. Initial TV prevalence among asymptomatic women was 3.5%, and prevalence decreased to 0.5%-1% in the most recent wave (2013-2015) ( -trend <0.0001). In this cohort, TV rates are low among WLWH, and HIV does not increase TV risk. Screening may benefit newly diagnosed WLWH, women with risk factors, or those receiving care sporadically but is unlikely to further reduce the low rate of TV among women in care, especially older women without multiple partners. The clinical trials registration number for WIHS is NCT00000797

The Cervicovaginal Microbiota and Its Associations With Human Papillomavirus Detection in HIV-Infected and HIV-Uninfected Women.

Background Bacterial vaginosis (BV) is characterized by low abundance of Lactobacillus species, high pH, and immune cell infiltration and has been associated with an increased risk of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. We molecularly assessed the cervicovaginal microbiota over time in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected and HIV-uninfected women to more comprehensively study the HPV-microbiota relationship, controlling for immune status.Methods 16S ribosomal RNA gene amplicon pyrosequencing and HPV DNA testing were conducted annually in serial cervicovaginal lavage specimens obtained over 8-10 years from African American women from Chicago, of whom 22 were HIV uninfected, 22 were HIV infected with a stable CD4+ T-cell count of &gt; 500 cells/mm3, and 20 were HIV infected with progressive immunosuppression. Vaginal pH was serially measured.Results The relative abundances of Lactobacillus crispatus and other Lactobacillus species were inversely associated with vaginal pH (all P &lt; .001). High (vs low) L. crispatus relative abundance was associated with decreased HPV detection (odds ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, .24-.96; Ptrend = .03) after adjustment for repeated observation and multiple covariates, including pH and study group. However, there were no associations between HPV and the relative abundance of Lactobacillus species as a group, nor with Lactobacillus gasseri, Lactobacillus iners, and Lactobacillus jensenii individually.Conclusions L. crispatus may have a beneficial effect on the burden of HPV in both HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected women (independent of pH)