Share this article on:

Levonorgestrel in contraceptives and multipurpose prevention technologies: does this progestin increase HIV risk or interact with antiretrovirals?

Polis, Chelsea B.; Phillips, Sharon J.; Hillier, Sharon L.; Achilles, Sharon L.

doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000001229
Opinion

aGuttmacher Institute, New York City, New York

bDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland

cDepartment of Family Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine/Boston Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts

dDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences and Magee-Womens Research Institute, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.

Correspondence to Chelsea B. Polis, 125 Maiden Lane, 7th Floor, Manhattan, New York City, NY 10038, USA. E-mail: cpolis@guttmacher.org

Received 20 June, 2016

Revised 18 July, 2016

Accepted 29 July, 2016

Back to Top | Article Outline

Introduction

Mounting observational evidence suggests that use of certain types of hormonal contraception, specifically the progestin-only injectable depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA), may be associated with an increased risk of HIV acquisition in women [1]. This relationship has been examined in several observational studies and is currently being assessed in a randomized trial, the evidence for contraceptive options and HIV outcomes (ECHO) study (NCT02550067). As evidence continues to evolve, it is also necessary to critically examine knowledge gaps for other contraceptive progestins. Levonorgestrel is used in many existing contraceptives and is being evaluated for use in multipurpose prevention technologies (MPTs). MPTs are designed to simultaneously prevent two or more of the following: unintended pregnancy, HIV, and other sexually transmitted infections. Potential drug–drug interactions and side-effect profiles must also be considered in developing products, including some MPTs, which would contain levonorgestrel and antiretrovirals. Vaginal rings containing dapivirine or tenofovir (NCT02235662) for HIV prevention combined with levonorgestrel as a contraceptive are in development as MPTs.

Back to Top | Article Outline

How does levonorgestrel compare with other progestins?

Although all progestogens are steroid hormones that bind and activate progesterone receptors, synthetic progestins and naturally occurring progesterone differ in chemical structure and steroid receptor-binding profiles that may mediate important noncontraceptive physiologic effects and may impact HIV acquisition risk. A variety of progestins are used in hormonal contraceptives, and belong to three main chemical families: progesterone derivatives (pregnanes), testosterone derivatives (estranes and gonanes), and spironolactone derivatives. Most contraceptive progestins (including levonorgestrel) are testosterone derivatives, with some notable exceptions: DMPA is a pregnane, and drospirenone is derived from spironolactone. Levonorgestrel and norethindrone enanthate (NET-EN; a 2-monthly injectable contraceptive used primarily in South Africa) are both testosterone derivatives, and as such, are more similar to each other than to DMPA. Despite their biochemical differences, DMPA and NET-EN have frequently been grouped together by researchers when assessing HIV acquisition risk as both are injectables used in high HIV prevalence populations.

Progestins differ significantly in binding affinities for all steroid receptors, including progesterone, androgen, mineralocorticoid, and glucocorticoid receptors [2]. Stimulation of glucocorticoid receptors with cortisol (natural ligand) influences inflammation and immune system signaling. Progestins have different binding affinities for glucocorticoid receptors: DMPA binds at 29–59% of total specific binding relative to cortisol, whereas levonorgestrel binds at 1–8% and NET-EN binds at 0–2% [3].

Back to Top | Article Outline

Which current and future products contain levonorgestrel?

Levonorgestrel is currently formulated in many existing contraceptives, and is being studied in several products in development (Table 1), in the form of oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) and emergency contraception pills, transdermal patches, vaginal rings, injectables, intrauterine devices (IUDs), and subdermal implants. Levonorgestrel is the first progestin incorporated into MPTs. Several MPT intravaginal rings containing a progestin plus an antiretrovirals for HIV prevention (such as tenofovir or dapivirine) or a combination of active ingredients (such as zinc acetate, carrageenan, and an antiretroviral for simultaneous prevention of HIV, herpes simplex virus-2, and human papillomavirus) are in development [4].

Table 1

Table 1

Back to Top | Article Outline

What biological and immunological evidence is available for levonorgestrel and risk of HIV acquisition?

Multiple biological and immunological mechanisms exist by which progestins could theoretically impact HIV acquisition risk [5]. At a cellular level, progestins and other sex steroid hormones act via interactions with steroid receptors that result in alterations in gene transcription and cellular functions [6]. Glucocorticoid receptors have an important role in immune regulation and exert complex actions on the primary immune cell targets for HIV infection; representing a potential mechanism by which progestin exposure could alter HIV acquisition risk. Currently, limited data support or refute hypothetical mechanisms of progestin impact on HIV acquisition risk. Adding further complexity, many researchers have grouped hormonal contraceptives groups by type (e.g. OCPs or injectables) rather than by specific progestin, limiting levonorgestrel-specific data. Progress has been slow, in part given the lack of a biomarker for HIV acquisition risk. Researchers have, therefore, studied a range of immune and tissue responses to steroid hormones.

Interpretation of hormonally driven immunomodulatory changes in women is also challenging because of potentially important environmental differences between individuals and populations that may influence secretion of immunomodulatory molecules. However, some researchers have evaluated levonorgestrel using ex-vivo and human studies. One recent study evaluated specific progestogens by testing their impact on peripheral blood mononuclear cells collected from healthy premenopausal women at mid-cycle. Investigators found that DMPA, but not progesterone or levonorgestrel, inhibited cytokine production [7]. In a cohort of sub-Saharan African women, samples collected prior to HIV seroconversion compared with samples from nonseroconverting women were analyzed by contraceptive and genital tract infection status. Most biomarker changes associated with DMPA were different than changes associated with levonorgestrel, and for many biomarkers, presence of genital infection amplified changes, suggesting that both specific progestin and genital tract environment (including infections) are important determinants of HIV acquisition risk [8].

Lectins are carbohydrate-binding proteins that may interfere with HIV-specific binding necessary for viral transmission. In a cross-sectional study using a lectin microarray to evaluate the glycome in the vaginal fluid of women using contraception, DMPA users had differences in carbohydrate-binding patterns as compared with women using OCPs, levonorgestrel IUDs, or no hormonal contraception [9]. These data suggest that changes in some carbohydrate epitopes associated with immune function in the reproductive tract differ for women using DMPA compared with women using levonorgestrel-based methods or no contraceptives. Finally, HIV target cells in the genital tract [CC chemokine receptor (CCR)-5+ T cells] decreased after initiation of levonorgestrel IUD compared with baseline [10]. Though few, these studies suggest that levonorgestrel is unlikely to increase risk for HIV acquisition.

Back to Top | Article Outline

What epidemiological evidence is available on levonorgestrel and risk of HIV acquisition?

A recent systematic review summarized epidemiological data published through 15 January 2016 on various hormonal contraceptive methods and risk of HIV acquisition in women [1]. Authors used a quality assessment framework to determine which studies were considered to be higher quality, although all currently available analyses are based on observational data, and therefore, vulnerable to residual or uncontrolled confounding. Below, we describe results from higher quality studies, with specific focus on levonorgestrel-containing contraceptives.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Oral contraceptive pills

Most data do not suggest that OCPs increase a woman's risk of HIV acquisition. Among 11 currently available higher quality studies assessing OCPs and risk of HIV acquisition [11–23], one reported a marginally significant increase in risk [adjusted hazard ratio (adjHR) 1.50, P = 0.05], whereas 10 reported nonsignificant estimates (ranging from adjusted incidence rate ratio (adjIRR) 0.66 to 1.80) [1]. Studies did not specify if the OCPs contained levonorgestrel, although it is a common progestin in OCPs used in sub-Saharan Africa. Furthermore, most estimates pertained to combined OCPs (COCs), which contain both progestin and estrogen. Only one study separately assessed COCs and progestin-only pills, and reported similar point estimates [adjHR 0.86 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.58–1.28) and adjHR: 0.98 (95% CI: 0.56–1.73), respectively] [18]. In COCs, the relative contribution of the progestin component (versus the estrogen component) to HIV risk is unknown and may be important; some researchers hypothesize that estrogen may protect against HIV acquisition [24]. Thus, while existing data on OCPs and risk of HIV acquisition are generally reassuring, our ability to draw conclusions specific to levonorgestrel based on currently available OCP data is limited.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Implants

The daily systemic dose of levonorgestrel for implants is lower than for OCPs and similar to or lower than what might be expected for intravaginal rings. Only two higher quality studies assessed levonorgestrel-containing contraceptive implants: adjHR for Norplant [12,25]: 1.6 (95% CI: 0.5–5.7) and adjHR for either Norplant or Jadelle [13]: 0.96 (95% CI: 0.29–1.34). Thus, while data are sparse and 95% CIs are wide, neither study suggested a statistically significant increased risk of HIV acquisition in women using levonorgestrel-containing implants.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Will drug interactions occur if levonorgestrel is used in products containing antiretrovirals?

Simultaneous use of antiretrovirals and levonorgestrel-containing contraceptives

Levonorgestrel is metabolized hepatically through the cytochrome P450 isoenzyme 3A4. Antiretrovirals that induce cytochrome P450 isoenzyme 3A4, including nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs; such as efavirenz or nevirapine) and protease inhibitors (such as nelfinavir or ritonavir), could decrease contraceptive efficacy by increasing the metabolism of levonorgestrel, thus lowering bioavailable levels [26].

Contraceptive failures have been observed among levonorgestrel implant users taking certain antiretrovirals, including specific NNRTIs. Although pregnancy among levonorgestrel implant users is rare (0.4 per 100 woman-years) [27], in a study of 570 HIV-positive levonorgestrel implant-using women, 2.8% (n = 16) became pregnant, 15 of whom were using efavirenz-based antiretrovirals regimens [28]. Another study of levonorgestrel implant users found a pregnancy incidence of 4.2 per 100 person-years among users of efavirenz-based antiretrovirals and 1.0 per 100 person-years among users of nevirapine-based antiretrovirals [29]. In a pharmacokinetic study of HIV-positive implant users, levonorgestrel serum concentrations decreased 47% by 24 weeks among women using efavirenz-based antiretrovirals, and 15% of these women became unintentionally pregnant within 1 year, compared with women either using nevirapine-based antiretrovirals or no antiretrovirals, who had no pregnancies and no change in serum levonorgestrel levels [30].

Certain antiretrovirals may lower levonorgestrel levels in users of levonorgestrel emergency contraceptive pills. In healthy HIV-negative patients who took two 0.75 mg doses of levonorgestrel 12 h apart, the area under the curve at 12 h was reduced by 56%, and maximum levonorgestrel serum concentration was reduced 41% after 14 days of efavirenz [31]. However, in a small study of nine women taking COCs (ethinyl estradiol/norgestrel), levonorgestrel levels were higher both among women taking nevirapine-based antiretrovirals and HIV-positive women not on antiretrovirals compared with HIV-negative women [32].

Back to Top | Article Outline

Potential for drug interactions for antiretrovirals in multipurpose prevention technologies in development (tenofovir, dapivirine)

Tenofovir is a nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor not metabolized by the cytochrome P450 (CYP450) system [26], so may not be subject to interactions with levonorgestrel. In a pharmacokinetic study, women using levonorgestrel implants who were using either tenofovir-based preexposure prophylaxis or placebo had similar levonorgestrel levels, and no pregnancies were reported [33].

Dapivirine is an NNRTI that has been used vaginally in ring and gel formulations and has a very low systemic concentration [34], which is unlikely to alter hepatic CYP450 metabolism of coadministered drugs. However, it remains unclear whether higher dapivirine concentrations in the vagina could impact local metabolism by CYP450 enzymes expressed in vaginal tissue; additional studies are needed [35].

Back to Top | Article Outline

Implications

With respect to HIV acquisition risk, levonorgestrel-specific data, either from biological or immunological studies, or from epidemiological studies, are sparse. However, existing data generally do not indicate an association between levonorgestrel and increased risk of HIV acquisition in women. Most published biological studies comparing levonorgestrel with DMPA show different impacts on immunomodulatory molecules, suggesting that levonorgestrel is unlikely to impart similar biological and immunological changes to those seen with DMPA, which may be associated with increased HIV risk. Epidemiological data on OCPs and HIV acquisition is of limited value to understand the relationship between levonorgestrel and HIV risk. Few epidemiological studies on levonorgestrel implants and HIV risk are available; none suggests an increased HIV risk. Epidemiological data on NET-EN (another testosterone derivative progestin) are more reassuring with respect to risk of HIV acquisition than are data on DMPA, a progesterone derivative, progestin. No epidemiological data are currently available on levonorgestrel-containing IUDs and risk of HIV acquisition. Theoretically, drug–drug interactions may be of concern between levonorgestrel and antiretrovirals, although the extent to which this is problematic is uncertain. Studies suggest decreased levonorgestrel levels and contraceptive failures with efavirenz; evidence to date does not suggest such an effect for nevirapine. Little is known about the potential interactions with other antiretrovirals that are candidates for MPTs. Assessing the potential for drug interactions between levonorgestrel and dapivirine prior to clinical studies of dapivirine-containing MPT rings would be useful.

Given the leading role of levonorgestrel in current and future contraceptive and MPT products, it is critical to elucidate the relationship between levonorgestrel and HIV acquisition, and potential levonorgestrel/antiretroviral interactions, particularly with antiretrovirals used in MPTs. The nearly complete Quantification of Immune Cells in Women Using Contraception (CHIC) (NCT01873170) and HIV-Target Cell Response in Women Initiating Various Contraceptive Methods in High HIV-Incidence Areas (ZIMCHIC) (NCT02038335) studies are aimed at closing some of these critical research gaps, including controlled and verified progestin exposure in women with respect to measured changes in immune cells and soluble mediators. The recently completed A Study to Prevent Infection with a Ring for Extended Use (ASPIRE) study [36] and the ongoing ECHO trial (http://echo-consortium.com) are likely to provide additional epidemiological information about levonorgestrel implants and risk of HIV acquisition. Future biological, immunological, and epidemiological analyses should, wherever possible, provide disaggregated estimates by progestin type, delivery method, and dose (both systemic and local). Drug interaction studies should focus on clinical outcomes, such as ovulation and pregnancy, rather than pharmacokinetic outcomes alone. Such studies would fill a critical research gap in the search for effective MPTs, and the ongoing need to understand the role of progestins in risk of HIV acquisition.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Acknowledgements

S.L.H. conceived of the topic; C.B.P. drafted the outline and managed the overall writing process; all authors contributed components to the writing and endorsed the final version.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Conflicts of interest

Support for drafting this manuscript was provided by the Guttmacher Institute (C.R.P.), the Microbicide Trials Network (grant AI 068633, Dr Hillier), and the US National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Allergy and infectious Diseases (NIH R01-AI102835, S.L.A.).

Back to Top | Article Outline

References

1. Polis CB, Curtis KM, Hannaford PC, Phillips SJ, Chipato T, Kiarie JN, et al An updated systematic review of epidemiological evidence on hormonal contraceptive methods and HIV acquisition in women. AIDS 2016; 30:2665–2683.
2. Kontula K, Paavonen T, Luukkainen T, Andersson LC. Binding of progestins to the glucocorticoid receptor. Correlation to their glucocorticoid-like effects on in vitro functions of human mononuclear leukocytes. Biochem Pharmacol 1983; 32:1511–1518.
3. Africander D, Verhoog N, Hapgood JP. Molecular mechanisms of steroid receptor-mediated actions by synthetic progestins used in HRT and contraception. Steroids 2011; 76:636–652.
4. Friend DR. An update on multipurpose prevention technologies for the prevention of HIV transmission and pregnancy. Expert Opin Drug Deliv 2016; 13:533–545.
5. Murphy K, Irvin SC, Herold BC. Research gaps in defining the biological link between HIV risk and hormonal contraception. Am J Reprod Immunol 2014; 72:228–235.
6. Stanczyk FZ, Hapgood JP, Winer S, Mishell DR Jr. Progestogens used in postmenopausal hormone therapy: differences in their pharmacological properties, intracellular actions, and clinical effects. Endocr Rev 2013; 34:171–208.
7. Huijbregts RP, Michel KG, Hel Z. Effect of progestins on immunity: medroxyprogesterone but not norethisterone or levonorgestrel suppresses the function of T cells and pDCs. Contraception 2014; 90:123–129.
8. Fichorova RN, Chen PL, Morrison CS, Doncel GF, Mendonca K, Kwok C, et al The contribution of cervicovaginal infections to the immunomodulatory effects of hormonal contraception. MBio 2015; 6:e00221–e00315.
9. Wang L, Koppolu S, Chappell C, Moncla BJ, Hillier SL, Mahal LK. Studying the effects of reproductive hormones and bacterial vaginosis on the glycome of lavage samples from the cervicovaginal cavity. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0127021.
10. Achilles SL, Creinin MD, Stoner KA, Chen BA, Meyn L, Hillier SL. Changes in genital tract immune cell populations after initiation of intrauterine contraception. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 211:489.
11. Heffron R, Donnell D, Rees H, Celum C, Mugo N, Were E, et al Use of hormonal contraceptives and risk of HIV-1 transmission: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis 2012; 12:19–26.
12. Baeten JM, Benki S, Chohan V, Lavreys L, McClelland RS, Mandaliya K, et al Hormonal contraceptive use, herpes simplex virus infection, and risk of HIV-1 acquisition among Kenyan women. AIDS 2007; 21:1771–1777.
13. Wall KM, Kilembe W, Vwalika B, Htee KN, Brill I, Chomba E, et al Hormonal contraception does not increase women's HIV acquisition risk in Zambian discordant couples, 1994–2012. Contraception 2015; 91:480–487.
14. Morrison CS, Chen P, Kwok C, Richardson BA, Chipato T, Mugerwa R, et al Hormonal contraception and HIV acquisition: reanalysis using marginal structural modeling. AIDS 2010; 24:1778–1781.
15. Morrison CS, Chen PL, Kwok C, Baeten JM, Brown J, Crook AM, et al Hormonal contraception and the risk of HIV acquisition: an individual participant data meta-analysis. PLoS Med 2015; 12:1–26.
16. Morrison CS, Richardson BA, Mmiro F, Chipato T, Celentano DD, Luoto J, et al Hormonal contraception and the risk of HIV acquisition. AIDS 2007; 21:85–95.
17. Morrison CS, Skoler-Karpoff S, Kwok C, Chen PL, van de Wijgert J, Gehret-Plagianos M, et al Hormonal contraception and the risk of HIV acquisition among women in South Africa. AIDS 2012; 26:497–504.
18. McCoy SI, Zheng W, Montgomery ET, Blanchard K, van der Straten A, de Bruyn G, et al Oral and injectable contraception use and risk of HIV acquisition among women in sub-Saharan Africa. AIDS 2013; 27:1001–1009.
19. Reid SE, Dai JY, Wang J, Sichalwe BN, Akpomiemie G, Cowan FM, et al Pregnancy, contraceptive use, and HIV acquisition in HPTN 039: relevance for HIV prevention trials among African women. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2010; 53:606–613.
20. Crook AM, Ford D, Gafos M, Hayes R, Kamali A, Kapiga S, et al Injectable and oral contraceptives and risk of HIV acquisition in women: an analysis of data from the MDP301 trial. Hum Reprod 2014; 29:1810–1817.
21. Balkus JE, Brown ER, Hillier SL, Coletti A, Ramjee G, Mgodi N, et al Oral and injectable contraceptive use and HIV acquisition risk among women in four African countries: a secondary analysis of data from a microbicide trial. Contraception 2016; 93:25–31.
22. Myer L, Denny L, Wright TC, Kuhn L. Prospective study of hormonal contraception and women's risk of HIV infection in South Africa. Int J Epidemiol 2007; 36:166–174.
23. 2015; Morrison CS. Personal communication: subanalysis of previously unpublished data in IPD meta-analysis.
24. Smith SM, Baskin GB, Marx PA. Estrogen protects against vaginal transmission of simian immunodeficiency virus. J Infect Dis 2000; 182:708–715.
25. Lavreys L, Baeten JM, Martin HL, Overbaugh J, Mandaliya K, Ndinya-Achola JO, et al Hormonal contraception and risk of HIV-1 acquisition: results of a 10-year prospective study. AIDS 2004; 18:695–697.
26. Tittle V, Bull L, Boffito M, Nwokolo N. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug interactions between antiretrovirals and oral contraceptives. Clin Pharmacokinet 2015; 54:23–34.
27. Bahamondes L, Brache V, Meirik O, Ali M, Habib N, Landoulsi S, et al A 3-year multicentre randomized controlled trial of etonogestrel- and levonorgestrel-releasing contraceptive implants, with nonrandomized matched copper-intrauterine device controls. Hum Reprod 2015; 30:2527–2538.
28. Perry SH, Swamy P, Preidis GA, Mwanyumba A, Motsa N, Sarero HN. Implementing the Jadelle implant for women living with HIV in a resource-limited setting: concerns for drug interactions leading to unintended pregnancies. AIDS 2014; 28:791–793.
29. Patel RC, Onono M, Gandhi M, Blat C, Hagey J, Shade SB, et al Pregnancy rates in HIV-positive women using contraceptives and efavirenz-based or nevirapine-based antiretroviral therapy in Kenya: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet HIV 2015; 2:e474–e482.
30. Scarsi KK, Darin KM, Nakalema S, Back DJ, Byakika-Kibwika P, Else LJ, et al Unintended pregnancies observed with combined use of the levonorgestrel contraceptive implant and efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy: a three-arm pharmacokinetic evaluation over 48 weeks. Clin Infect Dis 2016; 62:675–682.
31. Carten ML, Kiser JJ, Kwara A, Mawhinney S, Cu-Uvin S. Pharmacokinetic interactions between the hormonal emergency contraception, levonorgestrel (plan B), and efavirenz. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol 2012; 2012:137192.
32. Stuart GS, Moses A, Corbett A, Phiri G, Kumwenda W, Mkandawire N, et al Combined oral contraceptives and antiretroviral PK/PD in Malawian women: pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of a combined oral contraceptive and a generic combined formulation antiretroviral in Malawi. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2011; 58:e40–e43.
33. Todd CS, Deese J, Wang M, Hubacher D, Steiner MJ, Otunga S, et al Sino-implant (II) continuation and effect of concomitant tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-emtricitabine use on plasma levonorgestrel concentrations among women in Bondo, Kenya. Contraception 2015; 91:248–252.
34. Nel A, Haazen W, Nuttall J, Romano J, Rosenberg Z, van Niekerk N. A safety and pharmacokinetic trial assessing delivery of dapivirine from a vaginal ring in healthy women. AIDS 2014; 28:1479–1487.
35. To EE, Hendrix CW, Bumpus NN. Dissimilarities in the metabolism of antiretroviral drugs used in HIV preexposure prophylaxis in colon and vagina tissues. Biochem Pharmacol 2013; 86:979–990.
36. Baeten JM, Palanee-Phillips T, Brown ER, Schwartz K, Soto-Torres LE, Govender V, et al Use of a vaginal ring containing dapivirine for HIV-1 prevention in women. N Engl J Med 2016; doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1506110. PubMed PMID: 26900902.
Keywords:

antiretrovirals; HIV; hormonal contraception; levonorgestrel; multipurpose prevention technologies; progestins

Copyright © 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.