No abstract

Background. Preventing unintended pregnancy in HIV-positive women can significantly reduce maternal-to-child HIV transmission as well as improve the woman's overall health. Hormonal contraceptives are safe and effective means to avoid unintended pregnancy, but there is concern that coadministration of antiretroviral drugs may alter contraceptive efficacy. Materials and Methods. We performed a literature search of PubMed and Ovid databases of articles published between January 1980 and February 2012 to identify English-language reports of drug-drug interactions between hormonal contraceptives (HCs) and antiretroviral drugs (ARVs). We also reviewed the FDA prescribing information of contraceptive hormone preparations and antiretrovirals for additional data and recommendations. Results. Twenty peer-reviewed publications and 42 pharmaceutical package labels were reviewed. Several studies of combined oral contraceptive pills (COCs) identified decreased serum estrogen and progestin levels when coadministered with certain ARVs. The contraceptive efficacy of injectable depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) and the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) were largely unaffected by ARVs, while data on the contraceptive patch, ring, and implant were lacking. Conclusions. HIV-positive women should be offered a full range of hormonal contraceptive options, with conscientious counseling about possible reduced efficacy of COCs and the contraceptive implant when taken with ARVs. DMPA and the LNG-IUS maintain their contraceptive efficacy when taken with ARVs.

Background Although biological markers of women’s exposure to semen from vaginal intercourse have been developed as surrogates for risk of infection or probability of pregnancy, data on their persistence time and clearance are limited. Study Design During 2006–2008, 52 couples were enrolled for three 14-day cycles of abstinence from vaginal sex during which women were exposed in the clinic to a specific quantity (10, 100 or 1000 μL) of their partner’s semen. Vaginal swabs were collected before and at 1, 6, 12, 24, 48, 72 and 144 h after exposure for testing for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and Y-chromosome DNA (Yc DNA). Results Immediately after exposure to 1000 μL of semen, the predicted sensitivity of being PSA positive was 0.96; this decreased to 0.65, 0.44, 0.21 and 0.07 at 6, 12, 24 and 48 h, respectively. Corresponding predicted sensitivity of being Yc DNA positive was 0.72 immediately postexposure; this increased to 0.76 at 1 h postexposure and then decreased to 0.60 (at 6 h), 0.63 (at 12 h), 0.49 (at 24 h), 0.21 (at 48 h), 0.17 (at 72 h) and 0.12 (at 144 h). Conclusions Overall findings suggest that PSA may be more consistent as a marker of very recent exposure and that Yc DNA is more likely to be detected in the vagina after 12 h postexposure compared to PSA.

No abstract