Search

Telehealth abortion has become critical to addressing surges in demand in states where abortion remains legal but evidence on its effectiveness and safety is limited. California Home Abortion by Telehealth (CHAT) is a prospective study that follows pregnant people who obtained medication abortion via telehealth from three virtual clinics operating in 20 states and Washington, DC between April 2021 and January 2022. Individuals were screened using a standardized no-test protocol, primarily relying on their medical history to assess medical eligibility. We assessed effectiveness, defined as complete abortion after 200 mg mifepristone and 1,600 μg misoprostol (or lower) without additional intervention; safety was measured by the absence of serious adverse events. We estimated rates using multivariable logistic regression and multiple imputation to account for missing data. Among 6,034 abortions, 97.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 97.2-98.1%) were complete without subsequent known intervention or ongoing pregnancy after the initial treatment. Overall, 99.8% (99.6-99.9%) of abortions were not followed by serious adverse events. In total, 0.25% of patients experienced a serious abortion-related adverse event, 0.16% were treated for an ectopic pregnancy and 1.3% abortions were followed by emergency department visits. There were no differences in effectiveness or safety between synchronous and asynchronous models of care. Telehealth medication abortion is effective, safe and comparable to published rates of in-person medication abortion care.

This analysis explores the basis for the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requiring a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) for mifepristone for the termination of intrauterine pregnancy. Controversies surround mifepristone and its REMS. The safety and efficacy of mifepristone are briefly reviewed with respect to FDA's actions. It is difficult to justify the continued requirement for a REMS for mifepristone by applying the regulatory framework and considering mifepristone's safety record. Drugs with higher risks are on the US market without an FDA‐mandated REMS. Canada removed all restrictions on the use of mifepristone for abortion, which has not resulted in patient safety concerns. All pharmacists should be permitted to dispense mifepristone. The continued requirement for a mifepristone REMS in the US appears to be based more on politics rather than evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectivesTo assess access to abortion pills offered by clinics providing state-funded family planning services in California.MethodsWe attempted to make two scripted calls to a 20% random sample of family planning clinics in California, stratified by county, as "secret shoppers" in 2020 and 2021.ResultsClinic staff responded to 407 calls. Only 50 respondents (12%) reported their clinic offered abortion pills and 23 respondents (6%) accurately indicated to callers that abortion pills were available free to low-income individuals in California. Most (68%) clinics that did not offer abortion pills could not direct callers to a clinic that did offer abortion pills.ConclusionsEfforts are needed to increase the number of clinics providing medication abortion services in California. Clinic staff need training to provide accurate information about medication abortion.

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

BACKGROUND: In recent years a growing number of manufacturers and medical abortion products have entered country markets and health systems, with varying degrees of quality and accessibility. An interplay of factors including pharmaceutical regulations, abortion laws, government policies and service delivery guidelines and providers knowledge and practices influence the availability of medical abortion medicines. We assessed the availability of medical abortion in eight countries to increase understanding among policymakers of the need to improve availability and affordability of quality-assured medical abortion products at regional and national levels. METHODS: Using a national assessment protocol and an availability framework, we assessed the availability of medical abortion medicines in Bangladesh, Liberia, Malawi, Nepal, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone and South Africa between September 2019 and January 2020. RESULTS: Registration of abortion medicines-misoprostol or a combination of mifepristone and misoprostol-was established in all countries assessed, except Rwanda. Mifepristone and misoprostol regimen for medical abortion was identified on the national essential medicines list/standard treatment guidelines for South Africa as well as in specific abortion care service and delivery guidelines for Bangladesh, Nepal, Nigeria, and Rwanda. In Liberia, Malawi, and Sierra Leone-countries with highly restrictive abortion laws and no abortion service delivery guidelines or training curricula-no government-supported training on medical abortion for public sector providers had occurred. Instead, training on medical abortion was either limited in scope to select private sector providers and pharmacists or prohibited. Community awareness activities on medical abortion have been limited in scope across the countries assessed and where abortion is broadly legal, most women do not know that it is an option. CONCLUSION: Understanding the factors that influence the availability of medical abortion medicines is important to support policymakers improve availability of these medicines. The landscape assessments documented that medical abortion commodities can be uniquely impacted by the laws, policies, values, and degree of restrictions placed on service delivery programs. Results of the assessments can guide actions to improve access.

BACKGROUND: Availability of quality-assured medical abortion medicines plays a crucial role in providing comprehensive abortion care. However, access to these medicines is still restricted for many abortion seekers. Increasing availability of affordable, quality-assured mifepristone and misoprostol is important to improve access to safe medical abortion services. Driven by the outcomes of a global consultation hosted by the World Health Organization and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency in 2018, we decided to holistically examine access to medical abortion medicines from supply to demand. The overarching principle of the national landscape assessments was to generate evidence to support policy dialog and policymaking that is contextual to the needs of the country. This paper aims to describe the framework and methodological approach used in the World Health Organization landscape assessments of medical abortion medicines at country-level. METHODS: A country assessment protocol was developed to guide the methodology of the World Health Organization landscape assessments. The assessment protocol included adaptation of an existing availability framework, an online desk review and literature review for existing data available for the country of interest, country-level key informant interviews, and analysis of the data to identify barriers and opportunities to improve medical abortion availability. CONCLUSION: The availability framework and methodology will allow the identification of key barriers that limit readiness of medical abortion medicines, and the development of opportunities to overcome those barriers. The national landscape assessments will provide directions for future investments and offer guidance for policy and programming on medical abortion care.

ObjectiveTo develop a drug facts label prototype for a combination mifepristone and misoprostol product and to conduct a label-comprehension study to assess understanding of key label concepts.MethodsWe followed U.S. Food and Drug Administration guidance, engaged a multidisciplinary group of experts, and conducted cognitive interviews to develop a drug facts label prototype for medication abortion. To assess label comprehension, we developed 11 primary and 13 secondary communication objectives related to indications for use, eligibility, dosing regimen, contraindications, warning signs, side effects, and recognizing the risk of treatment failure, with corresponding target performance thresholds (80-90% accuracy). We conducted individual structured video interviews with people with a uterus aged 12-49 years, recruited through social media. Participants reviewed the drug facts label and responded to questions to assess their understanding of each communication objective. After transcribing and coding interviews, we estimated the proportion of correct responses and exact binomial 95% CIs by age and literacy group.ResultsWe interviewed 851 people (of 1,507 people scheduled); responses from 844 were eligible for analysis, and 35.7% (n=301) of participants were aged 12-17 years. The overall sample met performance criteria for 10 of the 11 primary communication objectives (93-99% correct) related to indications for use, eligibility for use, the dosing regimen, and contraindications; young people met nine and people with limited literacy met eight of the 11 performance criteria. Only 79% (95% CI 0.76-0.82) of the overall sample understood to contact a health care professional if little or no bleeding occurred soon after taking misoprostol, not meeting the prespecified threshold of 85.0%.ConclusionOverall, high levels of comprehension suggest that people can understand most key drug facts label concepts for a medication abortion product without clinical supervision and recommend minor modifications.

Early pregnancy loss can be treated medically with mifepristone followed by misoprostol, with ultrasonographic confirmation of pregnancy expulsion. Alternative strategies that ascertain treatment success remotely are needed. We compared percent decline in human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) level with treatment success or failure between patients who received mifepristone pretreatment followed by misoprostol or misoprostol alone for early pregnancy loss between 5 and 12 weeks of gestation to determine a threshold decline that might predict success. Early pregnancy loss treatment success was associated with a greater percent hCG level decline compared with treatment failure, but no threshold was able to predict success. Additional research is needed to understand hCG trends after medical management of early pregnancy loss to develop reliable protocols for remote follow-up.

ObjectivesIn 2000, the United States' Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved mifepristone for medication abortion. In this article, we explore how the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) criteria for mifepristone specifically impede family physicians' ability to provide medication abortion in primary care settings.Study designWe conducted 56 qualitative interviews with a national sample of family physicians across the US who were not opposed to abortion. We examined how the REMS criteria for mifepristone impact family physicians' ability to provide medication abortion.ResultsOf the 56 interviews conducted, 23 participants (41%) raised the REMS criteria as a barrier to providing medication abortion in primary care. These participants reported the REMS added a layer of bureaucratic complexity that made it difficult for family physicians to navigate, even when trained, to provide abortion care. These family physicians described 2 predominant ways the REMS impede their ability to provide medication abortion: (1) The REMS require substantial involvement of clinic administration, who can be unsupportive; (2) The complexity of navigating the REMS results in physicians and clinic administration in primary care viewing medication abortion as not worth the effort, since it is only a small component of services offered in primary care.ConclusionRemoving the REMS could simplify integration of medication abortion into primary care, which could meet patient preferences, improve access, and reduce abortion stigma. The FDA's revised REMS criteria may ease administrative burden but will likely maintain key barriers to integrating medication abortion into family physicians' practice.ImplicationsOur study highlights that the REMS criteria are barriers to family physicians' ability to integrate medication abortion into their primary care practices. The FDA's removal of in person dispensing criteria may provide some impetus for trained family physicians to integrate medication abortion into their scope of practice but the revised REMS criteria maintain key barriers to broader adoption.

Objective(s)To estimate the effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of medication abortion with mifepristone dispensed by a mail-order pharmacy after in-person clinical assessment.Study designThis is an interim analysis of an ongoing prospective cohort study conducted at five sites. Clinicians assessed patients in clinic and, if they were eligible for medication abortion and ≤ 63 days' gestation, electronically sent prescriptions for mifepristone 200 mg orally and misoprostol 800 mcg buccally to a mail-order pharmacy, which shipped medications for next-day delivery. Participants completed surveys three and 14 days after enrollment, and we abstracted medical chart data.ResultsBetween January 2020 and April 2021 we enrolled 240 participants and obtained clinical outcome information for 227 (94.6%); 3 reported not taking either medication. Of those with abortion outcome information (N = 224), 216 (96.4%) completed day-3 and 212 (94.6%) day-14 surveys. Of the 224 that took medications, none reported taking past 70 days' gestation, and complete medication abortion occurred for 217 participants (96.9%, 95% CI 93.7%-98.7%). Most received medications within three days (82.1%, 95% CI 76.5%-86.9%). In the day-3 survey, 95.4% (95% CI 91.7%-97.8%) reported being very (88.4%) or somewhat (6.9%) satisfied with receiving medications by mail. In the day-14 survey, 89.6% (95% CI 84.7%-93.4%) said they would use the mail-order service again if needed. Eleven (4.9%, 95% CI 2.5%-8.6%) experienced adverse events; two were serious (one blood transfusion, one hospitalization), and none were related to mail-order pharmacy dispensing.ConclusionsMedication abortion with mail-order pharmacy dispensing of mifepristone appears effective, feasible, and acceptable to patients.ImplicationsThe in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone, codified in the drug's Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, should be removed.

ObjectivesTo evaluate mifepristone impact on osmotic dilator placement and procedural outcomes when given 18 to 24 hours before dilator placement for dilation and evacuation (D&E) at 18 weeks 0 days to 23 weeks 6 days gestation.Study designWe performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial from April 2019 through February 2021, enrolling participants undergoing osmotic dilator (Dilapan) placement for a planned, next-day D&E. Participants took mifepristone 200 mg or placebo orally 18 to 24 hours before dilator placement. We used a gestational age-based protocol for minimum number of dilators. Our primary outcome was the proportion of participants for whom 2 or more additional dilators could be placed compared to the minimum gestational age-based standard. We secondarily evaluated cervical dilation after dilator removal in the operating room, subjective procedure ease, and complication rates (cervical laceration, uterine perforation, blood transfusion, infection, hospitalization, or extramural delivery).ResultsOf the planned 66 participants, we enrolled 44 (stopped due to coronavirus disease 2019-related obstacles), and 41 (19 mifepristone; 22 placebo) completed the study. We placed 2 or more additional dilators compared to standard in 7 (36.8%) and 3 (13.6%) participants after mifepristone and placebo, respectively (p = 0.14). We measured greater median initial cervical dilation in the mifepristone (3.2 cm[2.6-3.6]) compared to placebo (2.6 cm[2.2-3.0]) group, p = 0.03. Surgeon's perception of procedure being "easy" (8/19[42.1] vs 9/22[40.9], respectively, p = 1.00) and complication rate (3/19[15.8%] vs 3/22[13.6], respectively, p = 1.00) did not differ.ConclusionOur underpowered study did not demonstrate a difference in cervical dilator placement, but mifepristone 18 to 24 hours prior to dilators increases cervical dilation without increasing complications.ImplicationsMifepristone 18 to 24 hours prior to cervical dilator placement may be a useful adjunct to cervical dilators based on increased cervical dilation at time of procedure; however, logistical barriers, such as an additional visit, may preclude routine adoption without definite clinical benefit.

BackgroundA growing body of evidence indicates that some people seek options to terminate a pregnancy without medical assistance, but experiences doing so have largely been documented only among people accessing a clinic-based abortion. We aim to describe self-managed abortion (SMA) experiences of people recruited outside of clinics, including their motivations for SMA, pregnancy confirmation and decision-making processes, method choices, and clinical outcomes.MethodsIn 2017, we conducted 14 in-depth interviews with self-identified females of reproductive age who recently reported in an online survey administered to Ipsos' KnowledgePanel that, since 2000, they had attempted SMA while living in the United States. We asked participants about their reproductive histories, experiences seeking reproductive health care, and SMA experiences. We used an iterative process to develop codes and analyzed transcripts using thematic content analysis methods.ResultsMotivations and perceptions of effectiveness varied by whether participants had confirmed the pregnancy prior to SMA. Participants who confirmed their pregnancies chose SMA because it was convenient, accessible, and private. Those who did not test for pregnancy were motivated by a preference for autonomy and felt empowered by the ability to try something on their own before seeking facility-based care. Participants prioritized methods that were safe and available, though not always effective. Most used herbs or over-the-counter medications; none used self-sourced abortion medications, mifepristone and/or misoprostol. Five participants obtained facility-based abortions and one participant decided to continue the pregnancy after attempting SMA. The remaining eight reported being no longer pregnant after SMA. None of the participants sought care for  SMA complications; one participant saw a provider to confirm abortion completion.ConclusionsThere are many types of SMA experiences. In addition to those who pursue SMA as a last resort (after facing barriers to facility-based care) or as a first resort (because they prefer homeopathic remedies), our findings show that some individuals view SMA as a potential interim step worth trying after suspecting pregnancy and before accessing facility-based care. These people in particular would benefit from a medication abortion product available over the counter, online, or in the form of a missed-period pill.

BackgroundThe U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) restricts dispensing of mifepristone for medication abortion to certified health care providers at clinical facilities, thus prohibiting pharmacist dispensing. Allowing mifepristone dispensing by pharmacists could improve access to medication abortion.ObjectiveTo assess the feasibility of pharmacists dispensing mifepristone to patients who have undergone evaluation for eligibility and counseling for medication abortion by a clinician.MethodsBefore providing a study training on medication abortion, we administered baseline surveys to pharmacists who participated in a multisite mifepristone-dispensing intervention. The survey assessed medication abortion knowledge-using a 15-item score-and perceptions about the benefits and challenges of the model. We administered follow-up surveys in the study's final month that also assessed the pharmacists' satisfaction and experiences with mifepristone dispensing. To investigate the association of the study intervention with the pharmacists' knowledge, perceptions, and experiences dispensing mifepristone, we conducted multivariable linear regression analyses using generalized estimating equation models, accounting for clustering by individual.ResultsAmong the 72 pharmacists invited from 6 pharmacies, 47 (65%) completed the baseline surveys, and 56 (78%) received training. At the study's end (mean 18 months later), 43 of the 56 pharmacists who received training (77%) completed the follow-up surveys. At follow-up, 36 (83%) respondents were very or somewhat satisfied with mifepristone dispensing, and 24 (56%) reported experiencing no challenges dispensing mifepristone. Four (6%) of the 72 pharmacists invited objected to participating in mifepristone dispensing. In regression analyses, average knowledge scores, perceived ease of implementation, and level of support for the pharmacist-dispensing model were higher at follow-up (P < 0.001).ConclusionMost pharmacists were willing to be trained, dispensed mifepristone with few challenges when given the opportunity, were satisfied with the model, and had higher knowledge levels at follow-up. Our findings support removal of FDA's restriction on pharmacist dispensing of mifepristone.

ObjectivesTo compare participant-reported bleeding and pain with two medication regimens for early pregnancy loss (EPL).Study designWe performed a secondary analysis of a randomized trial in which participants took either mifepristone 200 mg orally followed by misoprostol 800 mcg vaginally 24 hours later or misoprostol alone for medical management of EPL. Participants reported bleeding and pain (Numeric Pain Rating Scale, NPRS, 0-10) with daily paper diaries and at study visits on trial days 3, 8, and 30. We used, Fisher's exact, Pearson chi-square, Wilcoxon rank sum, and Student's t-tests to compare onset, duration, and severity of bleeding and pain symptoms between trial arms after misoprostol administration.ResultsAmong 291 participants who submitted diary data, 143 received mifepristone pretreatment. A larger proportion of this group reported moderate or heavy bleeding on trial day 2, the day of misoprostol administration, compared with those who did not receive pretreatment (73% vs 47%, p < 0.01). Between days 4 and 8, more mifepristone-pretreatment participants reported mild or no bleeding, compared with the misoprostol-only arm (78% vs 61%, p < 0.01). Average pain score for trial days 2-4 was higher for the pretreatment group compared with the misoprostol-only group (6.9 vs 6.0, p = 0.01), and there was a trend toward shorter total duration of pain (15 vs 19 hours, p = 0.08). These differences remained after controlling for treatment success across arms.ConclusionsMifepristone pretreatment increased the severity of pain but not bleeding and resulted in a shorter trajectory of symptoms during medical management of EPL.ImplicationsMifepristone pretreatment decreases the duration of heavy bleeding and there was a trend toward decreased duration of pain during medical management of miscarriage, indicating that this medication improves the efficiency, in addition to the efficacy, of this treatment.

ObjectivesTo determine the time interval between mifepristone and misoprostol administration associated with the most efficacious early pregnancy loss (EPL) management.Study designWe performed a secondary analysis of a randomized trial. Participants with EPL were instructed to take 200 mg oral mifepristone followed by 800 mcg vaginal misoprostol 24 hours later. The primary outcome was gestational sac expulsion at the first follow-up visit (1-4 days after misoprostol use) after a single dose of misoprostol and no additional intervention within 30 days after treatment. Despite specification of drug timing, participants used the medication over a range of time. We graphed sliding average estimates of success and assessed the proportion of treatment successes over time to define timing interval cohorts for analysis. We used multivariable generalized linear regression to assess the association between time interval and success.ResultsOf 139 eligible participants, 70 (50.4%) self-administered misoprostol before 24 hours, and 69 (49.6%) at or after 24 hours. We defined the following time intervals: 0 to 6 hours (n = 22); 7 to 20 hours (n = 29); and 21 to 48 hours (n = 88). Success occurred in 96.6% of the 7- to 20-hour cohort compared to 54.6% and 87.5% of the cohorts self-administering misoprostol earlier or later, respectively. When adjusting for race, gestational age, diagnosis, bleeding at presentation, insurance status, and enrollment site, participants administering misoprostol between 0 and 6 hours (adjusted risk ratio 0.58, 95% CI 0.40-0.85) and 21 to 48 hours (adjusted risk ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.72-0.99) had a lower risk of success when compared to participants administering 7 to 20 hours after mifepristone.ConclusionsThese data suggest that medical management of EPL has the highest likelihood of success when misoprostol is self-administered 7 to 20 hours after mifepristone.ImplicationsThese preliminary data suggest that patients have the highest likelihood of success when misoprostol is taken between 7 and 20 hours after mifepristone. In contrast with medical abortion, simultaneous medication administration may not be as effective as delayed. Future research is needed to confirm the optimal medication time interval.

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.

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].

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 ().

Abortion and miscarriage are common, affecting millions of US women each year. By age 45, one in four women in the USA will have had an abortion, and at least as many will have had a miscarriage. Most individuals seeking abortion services do so before 10 weeks gestation when medication abortions are a safe and effective option, using a regimen of oral mifepristone followed by misoprostol tablets. When a pregnancy is non-viable before 13 weeks gestation, it is referred to as an early pregnancy loss or miscarriage and can be managed using the same mifepristone and misoprostol regimen. Given their safety and efficacy, mifepristone and misoprostol can be offered in ambulatory settings without special equipment or on-site emergency services. As more patients find it difficult to access clinical care when faced with an undesired pregnancy or a miscarriage, it is important for general internists and primary care providers to become familiar with how to use medications to manage these common conditions. We summarize the most recent evidence regarding the use of mifepristone with misoprostol for early abortion and miscarriage. We discuss clinical considerations and resources for integrating mifepristone and misoprostol into clinical practice. By learning to prescribe mifepristone and misoprostol, clinicians can expand access to time-sensitive health services for vulnerable populations.

Abortion and miscarriage are common, affecting millions of US women each year. By age 45, one in four women in the USA will have had an abortion, and at least as many will have had a miscarriage. Most individuals seeking abortion services do so before 10 weeks' gestation when medication abortions are a safe and effective option, using a regimen of oral mifepristone followed by misoprostol tablets. When a pregnancy is non-viable before 13 weeks' gestation, it is referred to as an early pregnancy loss or miscarriage and can be managed using the same mifepristone and misoprostol regimen. Given their safety and efficacy, mifepristone and misoprostol can be offered in ambulatory settings without special equipment or on-site emergency services. As more patients find it difficult to access clinical care when faced with an undesired pregnancy or a miscarriage, it is important for general internists and primary care providers to become familiar with how to use medications to manage these common conditions. We summarize the most recent evidence regarding the use of mifepristone with misoprostol for early abortion and miscarriage. We discuss clinical considerations and resources for integrating mifepristone and misoprostol into clinical practice. By learning to prescribe mifepristone and misoprostol, clinicians can expand access to time-sensitive health services for vulnerable populations.

ImportanceEarly pregnancy loss (EPL) is the most common complication of pregnancy. A multicenter randomized clinical trial compared 2 strategies for medical management and found that mifepristone pretreatment is 25% more effective than the standard of care, misoprostol alone. The cost of mifepristone may be a barrier to implementation of the regimen.ObjectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of medical management of EPL with mifepristone pretreatment plus misoprostol vs misoprostol alone in the United States.Design, setting, and participantsThis preplanned. prospective economic evaluation was performed concurrently with a randomized clinical trial in 3 US sites from May 1, 2014, through April 30, 2017. Participants included 300 women with anembryonic gestation or embryonic or fetal demise. Cost-effectiveness was computed from the health care sector and societal perspectives, with a 30-day time horizon. Data were analyzed from July 1, 2018, to July 3, 2019.InterventionsMifepristone pretreatment plus misoprostol administration vs misoprostol alone.Main outcomes and measuresCosts in 2018 US dollars, effectiveness in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and treatment efficacy. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of mifepristone and misoprostol vs misoprostol alone were calculated, and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were generated.ResultsAmong the 300 women included in the randomized clinical trial (mean [SD] age, 30.4 [6.2] years), mean costs were similar for groups receiving mifepristone pretreatment and misoprostol alone from the health care sector perspective ($696.75 [95% CI, $591.88-$801.62] vs $690.88 [95% CI, $562.38-$819.38]; P = .94) and the societal perspective ($3846.30 [95% CI, $2783.01-$4909.58] vs $4845.62 [95% CI, $3186.84-$6504.41]; P = .32). The mifepristone pretreatment group had higher QALYs (0.0820 [95% CI, 0.0815-0.0825] vs 0.0806 [95% CI, 0.0800-0.0812]; P = .001) and a higher completion rate after first treatment (83.8% vs 67.1%; P

ObjectiveTo estimate the efficacy and safety of mifepristone antagonization with high-dose oral progesterone.MethodsWe planned to enroll 40 patients in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial. We enrolled patients at 44-63 days of gestation with ultrasound-confirmed gestational cardiac activity who were planning surgical abortion. Participants ingested mifepristone 200 mg and initiated oral progesterone 400 mg or placebo 24 hours later twice daily for 3 days, then once daily until their planned surgical abortion 14-16 days after enrollment. Follow-up visits were scheduled 3±1, 7±1, and 15±1 days after mifepristone intake with ultrasonography and blood testing for human chorionic gonadotropin and progesterone. Participants exited from the study when they had their surgical abortion or earlier for gestational cardiac activity absence, gestational sac expulsion, or medically indicated suction aspiration. We assessed the primary outcome of continued gestational cardiac activity at approximately 2 weeks (15±1 day), side effects after drug ingestion, and safety outcomes including hemorrhage and emergent treatment.ResultsWe enrolled participants from February to July 2019 and stopped enrollment after 12 patients for safety concerns. Mean gestational age was 52.5 days. Two (one per group) voluntarily discontinued 3 days after mifepristone ingestion for subjective symptoms (nausea and vomiting, bleeding). Among the remaining 10 patients (five per group), gestational cardiac activity continued for 2 weeks in four in the progesterone group and two in the placebo group. One patient in the placebo group had no gestational cardiac activity 3 days after mifepristone use. Severe hemorrhage requiring ambulance transport to hospital occurred in three patients; one received progesterone (complete expulsion, no aspiration) and two received placebo (aspiration for both, one required transfusion). We halted enrollment after the third hemorrhage. No other significant side effects were reported.ConclusionWe could not estimate the efficacy of progesterone for mifepristone antagonization due to safety concerns when mifepristone is administered without subsequent prostaglandin analogue treatment. Patients in early pregnancy who use only mifepristone may be at high risk of significant hemorrhage.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03774745.

ObjectiveTo evaluate outcomes with mifepristone 200 mg orally followed 24-48 h later by misoprostol 800 mcg vaginally for medical abortion at 64-70 days of gestation.Study designWe reviewed electronic databases and medical records for medical abortion cases at 64-70 days' gestation at British Pregnancy Advisory Service clinics in England and Wales from May 2015 through October 2016. Women selected in-office follow-up or self-evaluation of abortion outcome using a checklist along with low-sensitivity urine pregnancy testing. We excluded cases in which we could not locate records and when women did not proceed with medical abortion, did not use misoprostol following mifepristone if abortion had not occurred and did not attend a scheduled follow-up assessment. We analyzed demographic characteristics, treatment outcomes and significant adverse events. We defined treatment success as complete abortion without surgical evacuation and without continuing pregnancy.ResultsOf 2743 cases identified, we could not locate 40 charts and excluded 30 cases, leaving a final sample of 2673. Overall, 2538 (94.9%, 95% CI 94.1-95.8) women had a successful medical abortion. Reasons for failure included continuing pregnancy (n=90, 3.4%, 95% CI 2.7-4.1), retained nonviable pregnancy (n=2, 0.1%, 95% CI 0-0.2) and incomplete abortion (n=43, 1.6%, 95% CI 1.1-2.1). Of those with continuing pregnancies, 81 underwent a uterine aspiration and 9 opted to continue the pregnancy. Thirty-five (1.3%, 95% CI 0.9-1.7) women had significant adverse events; 16 (0.6%, 95% CI 0.3-0.9) underwent an in-hospital aspiration. Pelvic infection (n=4, 0.2%) and transfusion (n=1, 0.03%) occurred rarely.ConclusionMedical abortion from 64 to 70 days with mifepristone and vaginal misoprostol is effective with a low rate of serious adverse events.ImplicationsMedical abortion between 64 and 70 days of gestation may be offered on an outpatient basis using mifepristone and vaginal misoprostol. Service provision without an in-person follow-up is feasible. Not all women with a continuing pregnancy after medical abortion treatment opt to have an aspiration procedure.

IntroductionAbortion is legal in India and medication abortion (MA) using a combined regimen of mifepristone and misoprostol is the preferred method. Users increasingly purchase MA kits directly from pharmacies, in some cases experiencing perceived complications and approaching a facility for care. We present findings of a qualitative research tracing the decision-making pathway(s) of MA users in Uttar Pradesh, India, to help understand knowledge and behaviour gaps, and recommend ways to improve the overall quality of care at these service delivery points.MethodsForty in-depth interviews were conducted with recent MA users (20 each of clinic and pharmacy clients) across three districts. Providers were purposively selected in collaboration with an international organization selling MA kits, using their list of pharmacies and clinics. MA users were identified from the clients of the selected providers, and additionally through the snow ball method. Interviews were conducted in Hindi with verbal informed consent in a private place convenient to the respondent. Transcripts were translated to English and analysed thematically.ResultsUsers first sought MA kits at pharmacies out of convenience, low cost and customer anonymity. Men often purchased kits for their partners and trusted the chemist for guidance on dosage, progression and side effects. For side effects or other concerns after using an MA kit, users first visited their neighbourhood doctor or traditional practitioner. These providers either attempted to treat the issue and failed, or directly advised her to consult a gynaecologist. The final point of care was gynaecologists, preferably female private practitioners with their own clinics. They diagnosed most abortion-related cases as incomplete abortions, emptying the uterus using the dilation and curettage method. Comparatively low cost and convenience made users inclined towards repeat use of MA.ConclusionThere are information gaps at various stages in the MA pathway that need to be addressed. Large scale public information programmes are required on safe abortion care- when is it legal, where to obtain MA, dosage, side effects and signs of possible complications. Pharmacists could be trained or incentivized to improve their quality of care to facilitate adequate exchange of information on MA. Since, for most couples, the male partner purchases MA, information approaches or tools are needed that pharmacists can give men to share directly with the MA user.

ObjectiveTo evaluate whether conducting a bimanual examination prior to medication abortion (MAB) provision results in meaningful changes in gestational age (GA) assessment after patient-reported last menstrual period (LMP) in Nepal.Study designWomen ages 16-45 (n=660) seeking MAB at twelve participating pharmacies and government health facilities, between October 2014 and September 2015, self-reported LMP. Trained auxiliary nurse midwives assessed GA using a bimanual exam after recording LMP. We compared GA assessments as measured via patient-reported LMP alone versus via LMP plus bimanual exam.ResultsOverall, 660 women (326 at pharmacies, 334 at health facilities) presented for MAB, and 95% were able to provide an LMP. Overall agreement between LMP alone and LMP with bimanual exam was 99.3%. If LMP alone had been used without bimanual exam, fewer than one in 200 women would have been given MAB beyond the legal gestational limit. Among the three women who were ≤63 days by LMP but >63 days by bimanual exam, only one would have received MAB beyond 70 days gestation. Fewer than one in 600 women would not have received MAB care when eligible by adding a bimanual exam.ConclusionThere was high agreement between LMP alone and LMP plus bimanual exam. Routine bimanual exam may not be essential for safe and effective MAB care for women who are able to report an LMP. Removing the bimanual exam requirement could decrease barriers to provision outside of currently approved clinical settings and allow for expanded abortion access through provision by providers without bimanual exam training or facilities.ImplicationsRoutine bimanual exams may not be essential for safe medication abortion provision by trained clinicians in pharmacies and health facilities in low resource settings like Nepal.

BackgroundMedical management of early pregnancy loss is an alternative to uterine aspiration, but standard medical treatment with misoprostol commonly results in treatment failure. We compared the efficacy and safety of pretreatment with mifepristone followed by treatment with misoprostol with the efficacy and safety of misoprostol use alone for the management of early pregnancy loss.MethodsWe randomly assigned 300 women who had an anembryonic gestation or in whom embryonic or fetal death was confirmed to receive pretreatment with 200 mg of mifepristone, administered orally, followed by 800 μg of misoprostol, administered vaginally (mifepristone-pretreatment group), or 800 μg of misoprostol alone, administered vaginally (misoprostol-alone group). Participants returned 1 to 4 days after misoprostol use for evaluation, including ultrasound examination, by an investigator who was unaware of the treatment-group assignments. Women in whom the gestational sac was not expelled were offered expectant management, a second dose of misoprostol, or uterine aspiration. We followed all participants for 30 days after randomization. Our primary outcome was gestational sac expulsion with one dose of misoprostol by the first follow-up visit and no additional intervention within 30 days after treatment.ResultsComplete expulsion after one dose of misoprostol occurred in 124 of 148 women (83.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 76.8 to 89.3) in the mifepristone-pretreatment group and in 100 of 149 women (67.1%; 95% CI, 59.0 to 74.6) in the misoprostol-alone group (relative risk, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.43). Uterine aspiration was performed less frequently in the mifepristone-pretreatment group than in the misoprostol-alone group (8.8% vs. 23.5%; relative risk, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.68). Bleeding that resulted in blood transfusion occurred in 2.0% of the women in the mifepristone-pretreatment group and in 0.7% of the women in the misoprostol-alone group (P=0.31); pelvic infection was diagnosed in 1.3% of the women in each group.ConclusionsPretreatment with mifepristone followed by treatment with misoprostol resulted in a higher likelihood of successful management of first-trimester pregnancy loss than treatment with misoprostol alone. (Funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; PreFaiR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02012491 .).

The accumulation of dysfunctional mitochondria has been implicated in aging, but a deeper understanding of mitochondrial dynamics and mitophagy during aging is missing. Here, we show that upregulating Drp1-a Dynamin-related protein that promotes mitochondrial fission-in midlife, prolongs Drosophila lifespan and healthspan. We find that short-term induction of Drp1, in midlife, is sufficient to improve organismal health and prolong lifespan, and observe a midlife shift toward a more elongated mitochondrial morphology, which is linked to the accumulation of dysfunctional mitochondria in aged flight muscle. Promoting Drp1-mediated mitochondrial fission, in midlife, facilitates mitophagy and improves both mitochondrial respiratory function and proteostasis in aged flies. Finally, we show that autophagy is required for the anti-aging effects of midlife Drp1-mediated mitochondrial fission. Our findings indicate that interventions that promote mitochondrial fission could delay the onset of pathology and mortality in mammals when applied in midlife.Mitochondrial fission and fusion are important mechanisms to maintain mitochondrial function. Here, the authors report that middle-aged flies have more elongated, or 'hyper-fused' mitochondria, and show that induction of mitochondrial fission in midlife, but not in early life, extends the health and life of flies.

BackgroundIn 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 findingsWe 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.ConclusionsOhio 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.

Little evidence exists regarding medical abortion for women with inherited bleeding disorders. A 21-year-old primigravid hemophilia A carrier desired a medical abortion. After counseling, she chose medical abortion, which occurred without excess bleeding or surgical intervention.

The synthetic steroid mifepristone blocks the growth of ovarian cancer cells, yet the mechanism driving such effect is not entirely understood. Unbiased genomic and proteomic screenings using ovarian cancer cell lines of different genetic backgrounds and sensitivities to platinum led to the identification of two key genes upregulated by mifepristone and involved in the unfolded protein response (UPR): the master chaperone of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), glucose regulated protein (GRP) of 78 kDa, and the CCAAT/enhancer binding protein homologous transcription factor (CHOP). GRP78 and CHOP were upregulated by mifepristone in ovarian cancer cells regardless of p53 status and platinum sensitivity. Further studies revealed that the three UPR-associated pathways, PERK, IRE1α, and ATF6, were activated by mifepristone. Also, the synthetic steroid acutely increased mRNA translation rate, which, if prevented, abrogated the splicing of XBP1 mRNA, a non-translatable readout of IRE1α activation. Moreover, mifepristone increased LC3-II levels due to increased autophagic flux. When the autophagic-lysosomal pathway was inhibited with chloroquine, mifepristone was lethal to the cells. Lastly, doses of proteasome inhibitors that are inadequate to block the activity of the proteasomes, caused cell death when combined with mifepristone; this phenotype was accompanied by accumulation of poly-ubiquitinated proteins denoting proteasome inhibition. The stimulation by mifepristone of ER stress and autophagic flux offers a therapeutic opportunity for utilizing this compound to sensitize ovarian cancer cells to proteasome or lysosome inhibitors.

ObjectivesCompare proportion lost to follow-up, successful abortion, and staff effort in women who choose office or telephone-based follow-up evaluation for medical abortion at a teaching institution.Study designWe performed a chart review of all medical abortions provided in the first three years of service provision. Women receiving mifepristone and misoprostol could choose office follow-up with an ultrasound evaluation one to two weeks after mifepristone or telephone follow-up with a scheduled telephone interview at one week post abortion and a second telephone call at four weeks to review the results of a home urine pregnancy test.ResultsOf the 176 medical abortion patients, 105 (59.7%) chose office follow-up and 71 (40.3%) chose telephone follow-up. Office evaluation patients had higher rates of completing all required follow-up compared to telephone follow-up patients (94.3% vs 84.5%, respectively, p=.04), but proportion lost to follow-up was similar in both groups (4.8% vs 5.6%, respectively, p=1.0). Medical abortion efficacy was 94.0% and 92.5% in women who chose office and telephone follow-up, respectively. We detected two (1.2%) ongoing pregnancies, both in the office group. Staff rescheduled 15.0% of appointments in the office group. For the telephone follow-up cohort, staff made more than one phone call to 43.9% and 69.4% of women at one week and four weeks, respectively.ConclusionsProportion lost to follow-up is low in women who have the option of office or telephone follow-up after medical abortion. Women who choose telephone-based evaluation compared to office follow-up may require more staff effort for rescheduling of contact, but overall outcomes are similar.ImplicationsAlthough women who choose telephone evaluation may require more rescheduling of contact as compared to office follow-up, having alternative follow-up options may decrease the proportion of women who are lost to follow-up.

Psychological stress and glucocorticoids are associated with heightened cardiovascular disease risk. We investigated whether stress or cortisol would be associated with reduced circulating angiogenic cell (CAC) function, an index of impaired vascular repair. We hypothesized that minority-race individuals who experience threat in interracial interactions would exhibit reduced CAC function, and that this link might be explained by cortisol. To test this experimentally, we recruited 106 African American participants for a laboratory interracial interaction task, in which they received socially evaluative feedback from Caucasian confederates. On a separate day, a subset of 32 participants (mean age=26years, 47% female) enrolled in a separate biological substudy and provided blood samples for CAC isolation and salivary samples to quantify the morning peak in cortisol (the cortisol awakening response, CAR). CAC function was quantified using cell culture assays of migration to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and secretion of VEGF into the culture medium. Heightened threat in response to an interracial interaction and trait anxiety in vivo were both associated with poorer CAC migratory function in vitro. Further, threat and poorer sustained attention during the interracial interaction were associated with a higher CAR, which in turn, was related to lower CAC sensitivity to glucocorticoids. In vitro, higher doses of cortisol impaired CAC migratory function and VEGF protein secretion. The glucocorticoid receptor antagonist RU486 reversed this functional impairment. These data identify a novel, neuroendocrine pathway by which psychological stress may reduce CAC function, with potential implications for cardiovascular health.

Alcoholism, or alcohol use disorder, is a major public health concern that is a considerable risk factor for morbidity and disability; therefore, effective treatments are urgently needed. Here, we demonstrated that the glucocorticoid receptor (GR) antagonist mifepristone reduces alcohol intake in alcohol-dependent rats but not in nondependent animals. Both systemic delivery and direct administration into the central nucleus of the amygdala, a critical stress-related brain region, were sufficient to reduce alcohol consumption in dependent animals. We also tested the use of mifepristone in 56 alcohol-dependent human subjects as part of a double-blind clinical and laboratory-based study. Relative to placebo, individuals who received mifepristone (600 mg daily taken orally for 1 week) exhibited a substantial reduction in alcohol-cued craving in the laboratory, and naturalistic measures revealed reduced alcohol consumption during the 1-week treatment phase and 1-week post-treatment phase in mifepristone-treated individuals. Mifepristone was well tolerated and improved liver-function markers. Together, these results support further exploration of GR antagonism via mifepristone as a therapeutic strategy for alcoholism.

ObjectiveTo 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 sourcesWe 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 selectionStudies 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 resultsWe 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.ConclusionOutpatient 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.

We employed molecular modeling to design and then synthesize fluorescent ligands for the human progesterone receptor. Boron dipyrromethene (BODIPY) or tetramethylrhodamine were conjugated to the progesterone receptor antagonist RU486 (Mifepristone) through an extended hydrophilic linker. The fluorescent ligands demonstrated comparable bioactivity to the parent antagonist in live cells and triggered nuclear translocation of the receptor in a specific manner. The BODIPY labeled ligand was applied to investigate the dependency of progesterone receptor nuclear translocation on partner proteins and to show that functional heat shock protein 90 but not immunophilin FKBP52 activity is essential. A tissue distribution study indicated that the fluorescent ligand preferentially accumulates in tissues that express high levels of the receptor in vivo. The design and properties of the BODIPY-labeled RU486 make it a potential candidate for in vivo imaging of PR by positron emission tomography through incorporation of (18)F into the BODIPY core.

Augmentation of the peak bone mass (PBM) may be one of the most effective interventions to reduce the risk of developing osteoporosis later in life; however treatments to augment PBM are currently limited. Our study evaluated whether a greater PBM could be achieved either in the progesterone nuclear receptor knockout mice (PRKO) or by using a nuclear progesterone receptor (nPR) antagonist, RU486 in mice. Compared to their wild type (WT) littermates the female PRKO mice developed significantly higher cancellous and cortical mass in the distal femurs, and this was associated with increased bone formation. The high bone mass phenotype was partially reproduced by administering RU486 in female WT mice from 1-3 months of age. Our results suggest that the inhibition of the nPR during the rapid bone growth period (1-3 months) increases osteogenesis, which results in acquisition of higher bone mass. Our findings suggest a crucial role for progesterone signaling in bone acquisition and inhibition of the nPR as a novel approach to augment bone mass, which may have the potential to reduce the burden of osteoporosis.