Two distinct oral routes of misoprostol in mifepristone medical abortion: a randomized controlled trial

Brief of over 300 reproductive health researchers as Amici Curiae in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine

On January 30, 2024, over 300 researchers filed an amicus brief in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, a United States (US) Supreme Court case that could have severely impacted access to mifepristone, one of the two drugs commonly used in medication abortion. The researchers summarize the legal challenges to the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) original approval of mifepristone in 2000 and its 2016 and 2021 decisions modifying mifepristone's Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Program and label, the responses from the FDA and drug manufacturer to the challenges, and the potential implications of the Court's decision on access to mifepristone in the US. The researchers detail how the FDA relied on a robust scientific record analyzing tens of thousands of patient experiences that conclusively demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of the changes to the mifepristone REMS Program and label and urge the Supreme Court to rely on the clear scientific record and preserve access to mifepristone without reimposing restrictions. What follows is a reprint of this brief.

Combination of Mifepristone and Misoprostol for First-Trimester Medical Abortion: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature

Importance

Several medications have been used to achieve medical abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy. The most commonly used is the combination of mifepristone and misoprostol; however, different doses and routes of administration have been proposed.

Objective

The aim of this study was to summarize published data on the effectiveness, adverse effects, and acceptability of the various combinations of mifepristone and misoprostol in medical abortion protocols in the first trimester of pregnancy.

Evidence Acquisition

This was a comprehensive review, synthesizing the findings of the literature on the current use of mifepristone and misoprostol for first-trimester abortion.

Results

The combination of mifepristone and misoprostol seems to be more effective than misoprostol alone. Regarding the dosages and routes, mifepristone is administered orally, and the optimal dose is 200 mg. The route of administration of misoprostol varies; the sublingual and buccal routes are more effective; however, the vaginal route (800 μg) is associated with fewer adverse effects. Finally, the acceptability rates did not differ significantly.

Conclusions

Different schemes for first-trimester medical abortion have been described so far. Future research needs to focus on identifying the method that offers the best trade-off between efficacy and safety in first-trimester medical abortion.

Mailing abortion pills does not delay care: A cohort study comparing mailed to in-person dispensing of abortion medications in the United States

OBJECTIVE

Given the substantial barriers to abortion access in the United States, many clinics now mail patients abortion medications. We examined whether dispensing the medications by mail prolonged time to medication use.

STUDY DESIGN

We analyzed data from no-test medication abortions with medication provided either by mail or in a clinic from 11 United States clinics from February 2020 to January 2021. We examined mean number of days from patients' first contact with the clinic to mifepristone ingestion, its two-component intervals (first contact to medication dispensing and dispensing to mifepristone ingestion), and pregnancy duration at mifepristone ingestion. We used Poisson regression to compare mean outcomes across three dispensing methods: in-person, mailed from the clinic, and mailed from a mail-order pharmacy.

RESULTS

Among the 2600 records, patients took mifepristone on average at 49 days of gestation (95% CI, 47-51) and 7 days (95% CI, 4-10) after first contact. Mean time from first contact to mifepristone ingestion was 6 days when medications were dispensed in-person and 9 days when mailed (p = 0.38). While time from first contact to dispensing was similar across methods (6 days in-person, 5 days mailed, p = 0.77), more time elapsed from dispensing to mifepristone ingestion when medications were mailed (4 days from clinic, 5 days from mail-order pharmacy) versus dispensed in-person (0.3 days, p < 0.001). Time to mifepristone ingestion was shorter with higher pregnancy duration. Pregnancy duration at ingestion was similar across methods (48 days in-person, 50 days mailed).

CONCLUSIONS

Mailing medications did not significantly prolong time from patients' first contact with the clinic to mifepristone ingestion or increase pregnancy duration at mifepristone ingestion.

IMPLICATIONS

Abortion providers should offer a range of medication abortion dispensing options, prioritizing patient preference.

Medication abortion and uterine aspiration for undesired pregnancy of unknown location: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To compare days to diagnosis of pregnancy location for same-day medication abortion and same-day uterine aspiration with delayed treatment (expectant management) in patients with undesired pregnancy of unknown location (PUL).

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study at a single Planned Parenthood health center in Minnesota. We reviewed electronic health records and included patients presenting for induced abortion diagnosed with PUL (positive high-sensitivity urine pregnancy test and no evidence of intrauterine or extrauterine pregnancy on transvaginal ultrasonography) without symptoms or ultrasonographic imaging concerning for ectopic pregnancy (low risk). The primary outcome was days to pregnancy location clinical diagnosis.

RESULTS

Of 19,151 abortion encounters in 2016-2019, 501 (2.6%) had a low-risk PUL. Participants chose delay-for-diagnosis before treatment (148, 29.5%), immediate treatment medication abortion (244, 48.7%), or immediate treatment uterine aspiration (109, 21.8%). Median days to diagnosis were significantly lower in the immediate treatment uterine aspiration group (2 days, IQR 1-3 days, p < 0.001) and similar for immediate treatment medication abortion (4 days, IQR 3-9 days, p = 0.304) compared with delay-for-diagnosis (3 days, IQR 2-10 days). Thirty-three low-risk participants (6.6%) were treated for ectopic pregnancy, but no difference in ectopic rate was detected among groups (p = 0.725). Participants in the delay-for-diagnosis group were more likely to be nonadherent with follow-up (p < 0.001). For participants who completed follow-up, abortion completion rate was lower for immediate treatment medication abortion (85.2%) compared with immediate treatment uterine aspiration (97.6%, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with undesired PUL, diagnosis of pregnancy location was fastest with immediate treatment uterine aspiration and similar for expectant management and immediate treatment medication abortion. Medication abortion efficacy may be reduced in treatment of undesired PUL.

IMPLICATIONS

For PUL patients desiring induced abortion, the option of proceeding at initial encounter may help improve access and patient satisfaction. Uterine aspiration for PUL may help diagnose pregnancy location more quickly.

Short-term efficacy and safety of early medical abortion in Japan: A multicenter prospective study

Purpose

To evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of a combined mifepristone-misoprostol regimen in individuals seeking medical abortion at up to 63 days of gestational age.

Methods

This open-label, multicenter, prospective study evaluated the short-term efficacy and safety of medical abortion, with the primary outcome being the abortion success rate 24 h after misoprostol administration. The participants received 200 mg of mifepristone orally and 800 μg of misoprostol buccally in the hospital/clinic 36-48 h later. Bleeding and lower abdominal pain, which are the main symptoms associated with medical abortion, were recorded.

Results

The abortion success rate was 93.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87.3-97.1%) within 24 h of misoprostol administration, 63.3% (95% CI: 54.05-71.94%) within 4 h, and 90.0% (95% CI: 83.18-94.73%) within 8 h. The median time from misoprostol administration to a successful abortion was 3.93 h. Bleeding was most commonly observed 0-4 h prior to the confirmation of gestational sac (GS) expulsion. The most intense lower abdominal pain occurred 0-1 h before the confirmation of GS expulsion.

Conclusion

The combined regimen of mifepristone and buccal misoprostol for medical abortion showed short-term efficacy and a favorable safety profile.

Trend of serum beta-human chorionic gonadotropin levels after medical abortion in the early first trimester of pregnancy

AIM

This study aimed to study serum beta-human chorionic gonadotropin level trends after medical abortion using mifepristone and misoprostol in the early first trimester.

METHODS

We enrolled women at ≤63 days of gestation who were indicated for pregnancy termination. We excluded women with incomplete abortions, nonviable pregnancies, extrauterine pregnancies, and contraindications for mifepristone/misoprostol use. Women received oral mifepristone (200 mg), followed by vaginal misoprostol (800 mcg) after 48 h. Serum beta-human chorionic gonadotropin levels were monitored pre-mifepristone administration (day 1); 48 h post-mifepristone, pre-misoprostol administration (day 3); day 10; and weekly after day 10, until negative beta-human chorionic gonadotropin levels (<25 mIU/mL) were achieved.

RESULTS

Among 39 enrolled women, 36 (92.3%) who underwent complete abortion without further interventions were included. The median gestational age was 51 (32-61) days. Three phases of beta-human chorionic gonadotropin levels were observed: an increase of up to 5.1% within 48 h of taking mifepristone, before misoprostol administration; a rapid decline on day 10 (by 98.5% compared with initial levels); and a slow decline after day 10 until negative results were attained within 7 weeks.

CONCLUSION

Serum beta-human chorionic gonadotropin levels minimally increased 48 h after taking mifepristone, rapidly declined within 1 week of misoprostol administration, and slowly declined until negative within 7 weeks post-abortion.

Medical methods for first trimester abortion

BACKGROUND

Medical abortion became an alternative method of pregnancy termination following the development of prostaglandins and antiprogesterone in the 1970s and 1980s. Recently, synthesis inhibitors of oestrogen (such as letrozole) have also been used to enhance efficacy. The most widely researched drugs are prostaglandins (such as misoprostol, which has a strong uterotonic effect), mifepristone, mifepristone with prostaglandins, and letrozole with prostaglandins. More evidence is needed to identify the best dosage, regimen, and route of administration to optimise patient outcomes. This is an update of a review last published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and side effects of different medical methods for first trimester abortion.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, and LILACs on 28 February 2021. We also searched Clinicaltrials.gov and the World Health Organization's (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and reference lists of retrieved papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different medical methods for abortion before the 12th week of gestation. The primary outcome is failure to achieve complete abortion. Secondary outcomes are mortality, surgical evacuation, ongoing pregnancy at follow-up, time until passing of conceptus, blood transfusion, side effects and women's dissatisfaction with the method.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected and evaluated studies for inclusion, and assessed the risk of bias. We processed data using Review Manager 5 software. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 99 studies in the review (58 from the original review and 41 new studies). 1. Combined regimen mifepristone/prostaglandin Mifepristone dose: high-dose (600 mg) compared to low-dose (200 mg) mifepristone probably has similar effectiveness in achieving complete abortion (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.33; I2 = 0%; 4 RCTs, 3494 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Prostaglandin dose: 800 µg misoprostol probably reduces abortion failure compared to 400 µg (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.78; I2= 0%; 3 RCTs, 4424 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Prostaglandin timing: misoprostol administered on day one probably achieves more success on complete abortion than on day three (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.58; 1489 women; 1 RCT; moderate-certainty evidence). Administration strategy: there may be no difference in failure of complete abortion with self-administration at home compared with hospital administration (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.68 to 3.94; I2 = 84%; 2263 women; 4 RCTs; low-certainty evidence), but failure may be higher when administered by nurses in hospital compared to by doctors in hospital (RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.39 to 5.22; I2 = 66%; 3 RCTs, 3056 women; low-certainty evidence). Administration route: oral misoprostol probably leads to more failures than the vaginal route (RR 2.38, 95% CI 1.46 to 3.87; I2 = 39%; 3 RCTs, 1704 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and may be associated with more frequent side effects such as nausea (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.26; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 1380 women; low-certainty evidence) and diarrhoea (RR 1.80 95% CI 1.49 to 2.17; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 1379 women). Compared with the vaginal route, complete abortion failure is probably lower with sublingual (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.22 to 2.11; I2 = 59%; 2 RCTs, 3229 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and may be lower with buccal administration (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.46; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 479 women; low-certainty evidence), but sublingual or buccal routes may lead to more side effects. Women may experience more vomiting with sublingual compared to buccal administration (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.77; low-certainty evidence). 2. Mifepristone alone versus combined regimen The efficacy of mifepristone alone in achieving complete abortion compared to combined mifepristone/prostaglandin up to 12 weeks is unclear (RR of failure 3.25, 95% CI 0.81 to 13.09; I2 = 83%; 3 RCTs, 273 women; very low-certainty evidence). 3. Prostaglandin alone versus combined regimen Nineteen studies compared prostaglandin alone to a combined regimen (prostaglandin combined with mifepristone, letrozole, estradiol valerate, tamoxifen, or methotrexate). Compared to any of the combination regimens, misoprostol alone may increase the risk for failure to achieve complete abortion (RR of failure 2.39, 95% CI 1.89 to 3.02; I2 = 64%; 18 RCTs, 3471 women; low-certainty evidence), and with more diarrhoea. 4. Prostaglandin alone (route of administration) Oral misoprostol alone may lead to more failures in complete abortion than the vaginal route (RR 3.68, 95% CI 1.56 to 8.71, 2 RCTs, 216 women; low-certainty evidence). Failure to achieve complete abortion may be slightly reduced with sublingual compared with vaginal (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.28; I2 = 87%; 5 RCTs, 2705 women; low-certainty evidence) and oral administration (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.99; I2 = 66%; 2 RCTs, 173 women). Failure to achieve complete abortion may be similar or slightly higher with sublingual administration compared to buccal administration (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.74; 1 study, 401 women).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Safe and effective medical abortion methods are available. Combined regimens (prostaglandin combined with mifepristone, letrozole, estradiol valerate, tamoxifen, or methotrexate) may be more effective than single agents (prostaglandin alone or mifepristone alone). In the combined regimen, the dose of mifepristone can probably be lowered to 200 mg without significantly decreasing effectiveness. Vaginal misoprostol is probably more effective than oral administration, and may have fewer side effects than sublingual or buccal. Some results are limited by the small numbers of participants on which they are based. Almost all studies were conducted in settings with good access to emergency services, which may limit the generalisability of these results.

Medical abortion offered in pharmacy versus clinic-based settings

BACKGROUND

Medical abortion is usually offered in a clinic or hospital, but could potentially be offered in other settings such as pharmacies. In many countries, pharmacies are a common first point of access for women seeking reproductive health information and services. Offering medical abortion through pharmacies is a potential strategy to improve access to abortion.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and safety of medical abortion offered in pharmacy settings with clinic-based medical abortion.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases, two trials registries and grey literature websites in November 2020. We also handsearched key references and contacted authors to locate unpublished studies or studies not identified in the database searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We identified studies that compared women receiving the same regimen of medical abortion or post-abortion care in either a clinic or pharmacy setting. Studies published in any language employing the following designs were included: randomized trials and non-randomized studies including a comparative group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed both retrieved abstracts and full-text publications. A third author was consulted in case of disagreement. We intended to use the Cochrane risk of bias tool, RoB 2, for randomized studies and used the ROBINS-I tool (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions) to assess risk of bias in non-randomized studies. GRADE methodology was used to assess the certainty of the evidence. The primary outcomes were completion of abortion without additional intervention, need for blood transfusion, and presence of uterine or systemic infection within 30 days of medical abortion.

MAIN RESULTS

Our search yielded 2030 records. We assessed a total of 89 full-text articles for eligibility. One prospective cohort study met our inclusion criteria. The included study collected data on outcomes from 605 women who obtained a medical abortion in Nepal from either a clinic or pharmacy setting. Both sites of care were staffed by the same auxiliary nurse midwives. Over all domains, the risk of bias was judged to be low for our primary outcome. During the pre-intervention period, the study's investigators identified a priori appropriate confounders, which were clearly measured and adjusted for in the final analysis. For women who received medical abortion in a pharmacy setting, compared to a clinic setting, there may be little or no difference in complete abortion rates (adjusted risk difference (RD)) 1.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.8 to 3.8; 1 study, 600 participants; low certainty evidence). The study reported no cases of blood transfusion, and a composite outcome, comprised mainly of infection complications, showed there may be little or no difference between settings (adjusted RD 0.8, 95% CI -1.0 to 2.8; 1 study, 600 participants; very low certainty evidence). The study reported no events for hospital admission for an abortion-related event or need for surgical intervention, and there may be no difference in women reporting being highly satisfied with the facility where they were seen (38% pharmacy versus 34% clinic, P = 0.87; 1 study, 600 participants; low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Conclusions about the effectiveness and safety of pharmacy provision of medical abortion are limited by the lack of comparative studies. One study, judged to provide low certainty evidence, suggests that the effectiveness of medical abortion may not be different between the pharmacy and clinic settings. However, evidence for safety is insufficient to draw any conclusions, and more research on factors contributing to potential differences in quality of care is needed. It is important to note that this study included a care model where a clinician provided services in a pharmacy, not direct provision of care by pharmacists or pharmacy staff. Three ongoing studies are potentially eligible for inclusion in review updates. More research is needed because pharmacy provision could expand timely access to medical abortion, especially in settings where clinic services may be more difficult to obtain. Evidence is particularly limited on the patient experience and how the care process and quality of services may differ across different types of settings.

Medication Abortion Up to 70 Days of Gestation

Medication abortion, also referred to as medical abortion, is a safe and effective method of providing abortion. Medication abortion involves the use of medicines rather than uterine aspiration to induce an abortion. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medication abortion regimen includes mifepristone and misoprostol. The purpose of this document is to provide updated evidence-based guidance on the provision of medication abortion up to 70 days (or 10 weeks) of gestation. Information about medication abortion after 70 days of gestation is provided in other ACOG publications [1].

Medical termination for pregnancy in early first trimester (≤ 63 days) using combination of mifepristone and misoprostol or misoprostol alone: a systematic review

Background

A wide range of drugs have been studied for first trimester medical abortion. Studies evaluating different regimens, including combination mifepristone and misoprostol and misoprostol alone regimens, show varying results related to safety, efficacy and other outcomes. Thus, the objectives of this systematic review were to compare the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of medical abortion and to compare medical with surgical methods of abortion ≤63 days of gestation.

Methods

Pubmed and EMBASE were systematically searched from database inception through January 2019 using a combination of MeSH, keywords and text words.

Randomized controlled trials on induced abortion at ≤63 days that compared different regimens of medical abortion using mifepristone and/or misoprostol and trials that compared medical with surgical methods of abortion were included.

We extracted data into a pre-designed form, calculated effect estimates, and performed meta-analyses where possible. The primary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy and successful abortion.

Results

Thirty-three studies composed of 22,275 participants were included in this review. Combined regimens using mifepristone and misoprostol had lower rates of ongoing pregnancy, higher rates of successful abortion and satisfaction compared to misoprostol only regimens. In combined regimens, misoprostol 800 μg was more effective than 400 μg. There was no significant difference in dosing intervals between mifepristone and misoprostol and routes of misoprostol administration in combination or misoprostol alone regimens. The rate of serious adverse events was generally low.

Conclusion

In this systematic review, we find that medical methods of abortion utilizing combination mifepristone and misoprostol or misoprostol alone are effective, safe and acceptable. More robust studies evaluating both the different combination and misoprostol alone regimens are needed to strengthen existing evidence as well as assess patient perspectives towards a particular regimen.

A repeat dose of misoprostol 800 mcg following mifepristone for outpatient medical abortion at 64-70 and 71-77 days of gestation: A retrospective chart review

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of outpatient medical abortion with mifepristone 200 mg and two misoprostol 800 mcg doses at 64-70 and 71-77 days of gestation.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective chart review of medical abortion outcomes among clients with 64-77 day gestations at a Mexico City public clinic between February 2014 and November 2016 who took mifepristone 200 mg followed 24-48 h later by two doses of misoprostol 800 mcg four hours apart (first dose buccally, second dose sublingually). The primary outcome was successful medical abortion, defined as pregnancy expulsion without surgical intervention. We also assessed additional management and visits to other facilities. We compared outcomes by gestational age (64-70 vs 71-77 days).

RESULTS

Of 602 charts reviewed, we analyzed 232 and 218 in the respective groups for effectiveness; nearly 25% of clients were lost to follow up. Treatment success occurred in 231 (99.6%, 95% CI 97.6-100%) clients at 64-70 days and 213 (97.7%, 95% CI 94.7-99.3%) clients at 71-77 days (p = 0.11). Ongoing pregnancy occurred in 1 (0.4%, 95% CI 0-2.4%) and 3 (1.4%, 95% CI 0.3-4.0%) clients, respectively (p = 0.36). Two charts from the 71-77 days group documented visits to other facilities: one bleeding concern prior to scheduled follow up and a hemorrhage during an aspiration intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Regimen effectiveness was high at 64-70 and 71-77 days among clients who attended follow up. However, with 25% attrition, it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions about effectiveness and associated safety.

IMPLICATIONS

Mifepristone 200 mg followed by two doses of misoprostol 800 mcg four hours apart is a promising medical abortion regimen to improve efficacy in pregnancies from 64-77 days of gestation as compared to regimens with an initial single misoprostol dose. Prospective research is recommended to achieve more robust efficacy estimates.

Opioid Analgesia for Medical Abortion: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the effect of oral opioids on patient pain during first-trimester medical abortion.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial where patients up to 10 0/7 weeks of gestation undergoing a medical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol took 10 mg oral oxycodone or placebo at onset of painful cramping. Additionally, all patients received 800-mg ibuprofen tablets, 4-mg ondansetron oral dissolving tablets, and a written prescription for adjunctive pain medication (six tablets oxycodone 5 mg). Participants used a text-messaging service to report pain scores on a numerical rating scale from 0 to 10 (0 being no pain, 10 being worst pain) for 24 hours at start of misoprostol dosing. The primary outcome was maximum pain experienced within 24 hours postmisoprostol. Our secondary outcomes were maximum pain stratified by gestational age (less than 7 weeks of gestation, 7-10 weeks of gestation), duration of maximum pain, use of adjunctive medication, presence of nausea or vomiting, and satisfaction. We needed at least 76 participants per group to differentiate a clinically important pain difference of 2 points on the numerical rating scale.

RESULTS

From May 2017 to May 2018, we randomized 172 participants (placebo group with 86, oxycodone group with 86). The study groups had comparable baseline characteristics. We found no difference between groups in median maximum pain scores (placebo 8 [range 1-10], oxycodone 8 [range 2-10], P=.92) and the median duration of maximum pain (placebo 0.75 hours range 0.01-15 vs oxycodone 1 hour range 0.02-10, P=.39). Groups were also similar in the proportion obtaining (placebo 62%, oxycodone 49%, P=.09) and using (placebo 48%, oxycodone 40%, P=.28) adjunctive medication, experiencing nausea or vomiting (placebo 59%, oxycodone 65%, P=.43) and reported satisfaction with pain medications (placebo 62%, oxycodone 65%, P=.63).

CONCLUSION

Oxycodone does not reduce the maximum level of pain experienced by women undergoing medical abortion up to 10 0/7 weeks of gestation or improve satisfaction.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03139240.

Medical abortion in the late first trimester: a systematic review

Objective

To describe the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of medical abortion in the late first trimester.

Study design

We searched PubMed and Cochrane databases for articles in any language that examined the success of medical abortion at gestational ages (>63 to≤84 days gestation). We sought articles that compared: medical abortion with surgical abortion at this gestational age, combination mifepristone and misoprostol and/or misoprostol alone); different dosages of misoprostol; different routes of misoprostol administration; frequency of dosing; and location of medical abortion (in health care facility vs. outpatient management). Our primary outcome was complete abortion. Data was independently abstracted by two authors, graded for evidence quality, and assessed for risk of bias.

Results

The search strategy returned 3384 articles, nine of which met inclusion criteria. Medical abortion, as compared with surgical abortion, was effective in the late first trimester (94.6% versus 97.9% complete abortion). A combined regimen of mifepristone and misoprostol was significantly more effective than misoprostol alone (90.4 versus 81.6% complete abortion). Complete abortion rates for all regimens investigated ranged from 78.6% to 94.6%. Success rates were higher with repeat dosing of misoprostol both in combination regimens and alone, and with vaginal compared with oral administration for repeat dosing.

Conclusion

A limited body of evidence indicates a range of efficacy of medical abortion in the late first trimester and highlights the need for well-designed trials in this gestational age range.

Implications

This review highlights the need for research focused on the late first trimester to strengthen the body of evidence. The available evidence is limited but offers reassurance that adverse events are rare for later first trimester abortion. Importantly, new research demonstrates that efficacy remains unchanged in the 10th gestational week regardless of whether the medication is taken in a facility or at a woman's home.

Outcomes During Early Implementation of Mifepristone-Buccal Misoprostol Abortions up to 63 Days of Gestation in a Canadian Clinical Setting

OBJECTIVE

In January 2017, mifepristone became available in Canada. The goal of this study was to determine the effectiveness and safety of mifepristone-misoprostol abortion during its early implementation in a Canadian setting.

METHODS

This retrospective chart review included the first 477 patients who had a mifepristone-misoprostol abortion from March 13 to October 31, 2017, in an urban sexual health clinic. Women with pregnancies up to 63days of gestation had an initial dating ultrasound and β-human chorionic gonadotropin determination. They were provided mifepristone 200 mg orally in clinic, followed 24-48hours later with misoprostol 800 µg buccally at home. Follow-up, 7-14days later, in clinic or by telephone, used symptom review and follow-up β-human chorionic gonadotropin or ultrasound. The primary outcome was successful abortion, defined as expulsion of pregnancy without uterine aspiration.

RESULTS

Of 477 consecutive mifepristone abortions, 422 women (88.5%) had documented follow-up, with 408 (96.7%) successful abortions, including eight in women who had a repeat dose of misoprostol. Fourteen (3.3%) unsuccessful abortions required uterine aspiration, two (0.5%) for ongoing pregnancy and 12 (2.8%) for incomplete abortion or persistent bleeding. Seventeen women (4.0%) had emergency department visits, one (0.2%) of whom was hospitalized and three (0.7%) of whom received blood transfusion. Four women (1.0%) were treated for infection.

CONCLUSION

Mifepristone-misoprostol medical abortion was safe and effective during early implementation in Canada, comparable to previously published outcomes.

Sociodemographic Characteristics of Women Able to Obtain Medication Abortion Before and After Ohio's Law Requiring Use of the Food and Drug Administration Protocol

Purpose: In 2011, a law went into effect in Ohio that regulates how abortion care providers can offer medication abortion to their patients. We sought to evaluate changes in sociodemographic characteristics of Ohio medication abortion patients before and after the implementation of this law. Methods: We used a retrospective cohort design, comparing characteristics of women obtaining a medication abortion at four abortion facilities before and after the law. We used chart data from January 2010 to January 2011 and February 2011 to October 2014. For any significant changes in sociodemographics found before and after the law, we used stratified cross-tabulations to disentangle whether they were likely related to the restricted gestational limit imposed by the law (lowered from 9 to 7 weeks gestation), or whether they were likely related to other burdens brought on by the law, such as increased costs and visits. Results: Women obtaining a medication abortion after the law were more likely to be older (p=0.01), have higher levels of education (p<0.001), be of white race (p<0.001), have private insurance (p=0.001), have no children (p=0.002), and reside in a higher income zip code (p=0.03). Both the reduced gestational limit and the increased costs and visits likely contributed to declines among black women and women with lower levels of education. The reduced gestational limit for medication abortion likely contributed to a decline among younger women and Medicaid recipient groups. The increased costs and visits imposed by the law likely contributed to the decline in medication abortion among women with no insurance and women with children. Conclusion: The lower gestational limit, higher cost, and time and travel burdens exacted by Ohio's medication abortion law were associated with disproportionate reductions in medication abortion among the most disadvantaged groups. The law was associated with reduced access among women who were younger, of black race, less educated, and in lower socioeconomic groups.

Building Bridges: A Case for Community Health Worker Provision of Misoprostol-Only Abortion in the First Trimester

INTRODUCTION

The consequences of unsafe abortion are devastating to women, their families, and their communities. Medication abortion presents an important alternative to harmful self-induction practices and surgical intervention under questionable circumstances. In settings where mifepristone is unavailable, the use of misoprostol alone is a safe and effective option for terminating an unwanted pregnancy. Studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of administration of misoprostol by community health workers (CHW) for indications such as postpartum hemorrhage and treatment of incomplete abortion.

OBJECTIVES

The current study assesses the safety and efficacy of CHW managing misoprostol-only abortion in the first trimester.

METHODS

A retrospective review of clinical files of women who received abortion services in three countries in Latin America between April 2009 and December 2015 included analysis of 173 cases.

RESULTS

In 94% of cases, the pregnancy was terminated without any further intervention. In the remaining cases, clients were referred for manual vacuum aspiration. In four cases, a complication was reported by the provider. In one, the complication was promptly resolved through referral to a higher level of care; in the remaining three, the complication was resolved directly by the provider. In 98% of cases, women reported being satisfied with the treatment they received.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that CHW are able to provide misoprostol-only abortion services to women effectively and safely. The benefits of this model of care also extend beyond the abortion service: CHW are able to offer women a comprehensive range of quality health services, including contraceptive services, increasing access to vital healthcare in areas with few other options.

Safety, efficacy and acceptability of outpatient mifepristone-misoprostol medical abortion through 70 days since last menstrual period in public sector facilities in Mexico City

Extensive evidence exists regarding the efficacy and acceptability of medical abortion through 63 days since last menstrual period (LMP). In Mexico City's Secretariat of Health (SSDF) outpatient facilities, mifepristone-misoprostol medical abortion is the first-line approach for abortion care in this pregnancy range. Recent research demonstrates continued high rates of complete abortion through 70 days LMP. To expand access to legal abortion services in Mexico City (where abortion is legal through 12 weeks LMP), this study sought to assess the efficacy and acceptability of the standard outpatient approach through 70 days in two SSDF points of service. One thousand and one women seeking pregnancy termination were enrolled and given 200 mg mifepristone followed by 800 μg misoprostol 24-48 hours later. Women were asked to return to the clinic one week later for evaluation. The great majority of women (93.3%; 95% CI: 91.6-94.8) had complete abortions. Women with pregnancies ≤ 8 weeks LMP had significantly higher success rates than women in the 9th or 10th weeks (94.9% vs. 90.5%; p = 0.01). The difference in success rates between the 9th and 10th weeks was not significant (90.0% vs. 91.2%; p = 0.71). The majority of women found the side effects (82.9%) and the use of misoprostol (84.4%) to be very acceptable or acceptable. This study provides additional evidence supporting an extended outpatient medical abortion regimen through 10 weeks LMP.

Comparison of Outcomes before and after Ohio's Law Mandating Use of the FDA-Approved Protocol for Medication Abortion: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

In February 2011, an Ohio law took effect mandating use of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved protocol for mifepristone, which is used with misoprostol for medication abortion. Other state legislatures have passed or enacted similar laws requiring use of the FDA-approved protocol for medication abortion. The objective of this study is to examine the association of this legal change with medication abortion outcomes and utilization.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We used a retrospective cohort design, comparing outcomes of medication abortion patients in the prelaw period to those in the postlaw period. Sociodemographic and clinical chart data were abstracted from all medication abortion patients from 1 y prior to the law's implementation (January 2010-January 2011) to 3 y post implementation (February 2011-October 2014) at four abortion-providing health care facilities in Ohio. Outcome data were analyzed for all women undergoing abortion at ≤49 d gestation during the study period. The main outcomes were as follows: need for additional intervention following medication abortion (such as aspiration, repeat misoprostol, and blood transfusion), frequency of continuing pregnancy, reports of side effects, and the proportion of abortions that were medication abortions (versus other abortion procedures). Among the 2,783 medication abortions ≤49 d gestation, 4.9% (95% CI: 3.7%-6.2%) in the prelaw and 14.3% (95% CI: 12.6%-16.0%) in the postlaw period required one or more additional interventions. Women obtaining a medication abortion in the postlaw period had three times the odds of requiring an additional intervention as women in the prelaw period (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 3.11, 95% CI: 2.27-4.27). In a mixed effects multivariable model that uses facility-months as the unit of analysis to account for lack of independence by site, we found that the law change was associated with a 9.4% (95% CI: 4.0%-18.4%) absolute increase in the rate of requiring an additional intervention. The most common subsequent intervention in both periods was an additional misoprostol dose and was most commonly administered to treat incomplete abortion. The percentage of women requiring two or more follow-up visits increased from 4.2% (95% CI: 3.0%-5.3%) in the prelaw period to 6.2% (95% CI: 5.5%-8.0%) in the postlaw period (p = 0.003). Continuing pregnancy was rare (0.3%). Overall, 12.6% of women reported at least one side effect during their medication abortion: 8.4% (95% CI: 6.8%-10.0%) in the prelaw period and 15.6% (95% CI: 13.8%-17.3%) in the postlaw period (p < 0.001). Medication abortions fell from 22% (95% CI: 20.8%-22.3%) of all abortions the year before the law went into effect (2010) to 5% (95% CI: 4.8%-5.6%) 3 y after (2014) (p < 0.001). The average patient charge increased from US$426 in 2010 to US$551 in 2014, representing a 16% increase after adjusting for inflation in medical prices. The primary limitation to the study is that it was a pre/post-observational study with no control group that was not exposed to the law.

CONCLUSIONS

Ohio law required use of a medication abortion protocol that is associated with a greater need for additional intervention, more visits, more side effects, and higher costs for women relative to the evidence-based protocol. There is no evidence that the change in law led to improved abortion outcomes. Indeed, our findings suggest the opposite. In March 2016, the FDA-protocol was updated, so Ohio providers may now legally provide current evidence-based protocols. However, this law is still in place and bans physicians from using mifepristone based on any new developments in clinical research as best practices continue to be updated.

Medical Abortion

OBJECTIVE

This guideline reviews the evidence relating to the provision of first-trimester medical induced abortion, including patient eligibility, counselling, and consent; evidence-based regimens; and special considerations for clinicians providing medical abortion care.

INTENDED USERS

Gynaecologists, family physicians, registered nurses, midwives, residents, and other healthcare providers who currently or intend to provide pregnancy options counselling, medical abortion care, or family planning services.

TARGET POPULATION

Women with an unintended first trimester pregnancy.

EVIDENCE

Published literature was retrieved through searches of PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library between July 2015 and November 2015 using appropriately controlled vocabulary (MeSH search terms: Induced Abortion, Medical Abortion, Mifepristone, Misoprostol, Methotrexate). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, clinical trials, and observational studies published from June 1986 to November 2015 in English. Additionally, existing guidelines from other countries were consulted for review. A grey literature search was not required.

VALUES

The quality of evidence in this document was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force for Preventive Medicine rating scale (Table 1).

BENEFITS, HARMS AND/OR COSTS

Medical abortion is safe and effective. Complications from medical abortion are rare. Access and costs will be dependent on provincial and territorial funding for combination mifepristone/misoprostol and provider availability.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

Introduction Pre-procedure care Medical abortion regimens Providing medical abortion Post-abortion care

RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction Pre-procedure care Medical abortion regimens Providing medical abortion Post-abortion care.

Mifepristone With Buccal Misoprostol for Medical Abortion: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To summarize clinical outcomes and adverse effects of medical abortion regimens consisting of mifepristone followed by buccal misoprostol in pregnancies through 70 days of gestation.

DATA SOURCES

We used PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists from published reports to identify relevant studies published between November 2005 and January 2015 using the search terms "mifepristone and medical abortion" and "buccal and misoprostol."

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Studies were included if they presented clinical outcomes of medical abortion using mifepristone and buccal misoprostol through 70 days of gestation. Studies with duplicate data were excluded.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

We included 20 studies with a total of 33,846 women through 70 days of gestation. We abstracted efficacy and ongoing pregnancy rates as an overall rate and by gestational age in days in reference to completed weeks (eg, 49 days or less, 50-56 days, 57-63 days, 64-70 days) and adverse effects when reported. The overall efficacy of mifepristone followed by buccal misoprostol is 96.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 96.5-96.8%) and the continuing pregnancy rate is 0.8% (95% CI 0.7-0.9%) in approximately 33,000 pregnancies through 63 days of gestation. Only 332 women with pregnancies between 64 and 70 days of gestation are reported in the literature with an overall efficacy of 93.1% (95% CI 89.6-95.5%) and a continuing pregnancy rate of 2.9% (95% CI 1.4-5.7%). Currently available data suggest that regimens with a 24-hour time interval between mifepristone and buccal misoprostol administration are slightly less effective than those with a 24- to 48-hour interval. Rates of surgical evacuation for reasons other than ongoing pregnancy range from 1.8% to 4.2%. Severe adverse events like blood transfusion (0.03-0.6%) and hospitalization (0.04-0.9%) are uncommon.

CONCLUSION

Outpatient medical abortion regimens with mifepristone followed in 24-48 hours by buccal misoprostol are highly effective for pregnancy termination through 63 days of gestation. More data are needed to evaluate clinical outcomes with regimens containing mifepristone followed in 24 hours by buccal misoprostol and in pregnancies beyond 63 days of gestation.

Adolescent Girls and Abortion

Abortion is an extremely common procedure in the United States, with approximately 2% of women having an abortion before age 19 years. Although most pediatricians do not provide abortions, many will care for a young woman who is either considering an abortion or has already had one; therefore, the pediatrician should be able to provide accurate and appropriate counseling about this option. To provide the best care for adolescent patients considering abortion, pediatricians must be knowledgeable of aspects of abortion that are universal to all women and have an understanding of considerations specific to the adolescent patient. The purpose of this article is to (1) review recent statistics about teenagers and abortion, (2) explain the different types of abortion available to teenagers who desire to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, (3) discuss aspects of abortion unique to the adolescent population, such as insurance coverage and parental involvement laws, and (4) address common misconceptions about abortion. [Pediatr Ann. 2015;44(9):384-385,388,390,392.].

Efficacy and safety of medical abortion using mifepristone and buccal misoprostol through 63 days

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to report on the safety and efficacy of an evidence-based medical abortion regimen utilizing 200 mg of mifepristone orally followed by home use of 800 mcg misoprostol buccally 24-48 h later through 63 days estimated gestational age.

STUDY DESIGN

We analyzed outcomes in women presenting for medical abortion between April 1, 2006, and May 31, 2011, using an evidence-based alternative to the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved regimen. Cases were identified for this descriptive study from our electronic practice management (EPM) database, and our electronic database on adverse events was queried for information on efficacy and safety. The primary outcome was successful abortion. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of successful abortion.

RESULTS

Among the 13,373 women who completed follow-up, efficacy of the regimen was 97.7%. Efficacy was highest at 29 to 35 days (98.8%) and 36 to 42 days (98.8%) of gestation and lowest at 57 to 63 days (95.5%). The odds of needing aspiration for any reason were greatest at higher gestational ages. Rates of infection requiring hospitalization and rates of transfusion were 0.01 and 0.03%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

An evidence-based regimen of 200 mg of mifepristone orally followed by home use of 800 mcg of buccal misoprostol 24-48 h later is safe and effective through 63 days estimated gestational age. Further, the need for aspiration for any reason was low, and hospitalization was rare.

IMPLICATIONS

This study reinforces the safety and efficacy of the evidence-based regimen for medical abortion (200 mg mifepristone orally followed by home use of 800 mcg of misoprostol buccally 24-48 h later) through 63 days estimated gestational age, and contributes to the existing evidence against restrictions requiring use of the FDA-approved regimen.

What happens when we routinely give doxycycline to medical abortion patients?

OBJECTIVES

Routine provision of antibiotics following medical abortion is common yet practitioners and professional societies differ on its utility. Our study compares the side effects experienced by women who were prescribed doxycycline following medical abortion to those who were not and assesses the adherence to one prescribed regimen.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a prospective, observational, open-label study from a convenience sample. Women seeking medical abortion were enrolled in nine study sites, including four clinics that routinely prescribe a seven-day course of doxycycline (Doxycycline arm) and five clinics that do not routinely prescribe any antibiotics (No Doxycycline arm). Seven to fourteen days following the administration of mifepristone, women were asked to self-administer a computer-based survey. The survey asked about side effects experienced (both arms) and adherence to the regimen (Doxycycline arm only).

RESULTS

Five hundred eighty-one women were enrolled (278 in the Doxycycline arm and 303 in the No Doxycycline arm). There was a trend toward increased nausea in the Doxycycline arm (47.8% vs. 40.9%; p=.056) and a statistically significant difference in vomiting (25.2% vs. 18.5%; p=.032). Almost all women in the Doxycycline arm reported taking at least one pill, however only 28.3% reported "perfect adherence." The most common reasons reported for taking fewer pills than instructed were that participants were still taking them (beyond 7 days) or that they forgot to take them.

CONCLUSION

Women who were prescribed doxycycline following medical abortion reported moderate adherence and experienced significantly more vomiting than their counterparts.

IMPLICATIONS

In the absence of robust evidence that prescribing 7 days of doxycycline following medical abortion is effective at reducing serious infections, these data can assist the public health community with deciding whether routine provision is the most appropriate strategy.

Pain during medical abortion, the impact of the regimen: a neglected issue? A review

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate pain and other early adverse events associated with different regimens of medical abortion up to nine weeks of amenorrhoea.

METHODS

The literature was searched for comparative studies of medical abortion using mifepristone followed by the prostaglandin analogue misoprostol. Publications, which included pain assessment were further analysed.

RESULTS

Of the 1459 publications on medical abortion identified, only 23 comparative, prospective trials corresponded to the inclusion criteria. Patients in these studies received different dosages of mifepristone in combination with different dosages of misoprostol administered via diverse routes or at various intervals. Information on pain level was reported in 12/23 papers (52%), information regarding systematic administration of analgesics in 12/23 articles (52%) and information concerning analgesia used was available for only 10/23 studies (43%).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither pain nor its treatment are systematically reported in clinical trials of medical abortion; this shortcoming reflects a neglect of the individual pain perception. When data are mentioned, they are too inconsistent to allow for any comparison between different treatment protocols. Standardised evaluation of pain is needed and the correlation between the dosage of misoprostol and the intensity of pain must be assessed in future studies.

Reduction in infection-related mortality since modifications in the regimen of medical abortion

BACKGROUND

From 2001 to March 2006 Planned Parenthood health centers throughout the United States provided medical abortion by a regimen of oral mifepristone followed 24-48 h later by vaginal misoprostol. In response to concerns about serious infections, in early 2006 Planned Parenthood changed the route of misoprostol administration to buccal and required either routine antibiotic coverage or universal screening and treatment for chlamydia; in July 2007, Planned Parenthood began requiring routine antibiotic coverage for all medical abortions.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of Planned Parenthood cases assessing the rates of mortality caused by infection following medical abortion during a time period when misoprostol was administered vaginally (2001 through March 2006), as compared with the rate from April 2006 to the end of 2012 after a change to buccal administration of misoprostol and after initiation of new infection-reduction strategies.

RESULTS

The mortality rate dropped significantly in the 81-month period after the joint change to (1) buccal misoprostol replacing vaginal misoprostol and (2) either sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening or routine preventative antibiotic coverage (15 month period) or universal routine preventative antibiotic coverage as part of the medical abortion (66-month period), from 1.37/100,000 to 0.00/100,000, P=.013 (difference=1.37/100,000, 95% CI 0.47-4.03 per 100,000).

CONCLUSION

The infection-caused mortality rate following medical abortion declined by 100% following a change from vaginal to buccal administration of misoprostol combined with screen-and-treat or, far more commonly, routine antibiotic coverage.

SIGNIFICANCE

Deaths from infection following medical abortion declined to zero after a change in the regimen.