ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01277211Updated Jun 20, 2024Results posted

A Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness of NuvaRing® to Prevent Pregnancies in Chinese Women (P06450)

A Phase 3 interventional study of ENG 120 µg + EE 15 µg intravaginal ring and DRSP 3 mg + EE 30 µg in Contraception, sponsored by Organon and Co. Completed. Open to female participants aged 18 Years to 40 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-06-20.

Sponsored by Organon and Co · Phase 3, Interventional, and Prevention

Phase
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
983
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 40 Years
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

This is a study to assess the effectiveness of NuvaRing® (SCH 900702) for the prevention of pregnancy in fertile Chinese women. The acceptability and safety of NuvaRing® will also be assessed and compared with that of Yasmin.

Read the detailed description

The purpose of this study is to assess the contraceptive efficacy of NuvaRing in fertile Chinese women; to assess vaginal bleeding pattern (cycle control), general safety, and acceptability of NuvaRing; and to evaluate the NuvaRing's effect on dysmenorrhea.

02

Conditions studied

  • Contraception

Keywords

  • Contraception
  • NuvaRing
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Organon and Co is the lead sponsor of 505 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.

Of its 22 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 18 (82%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 40 Years
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Eligibility criteria

Key Inclusion Criteria:

  • Sexually active Chinese women, at risk for pregnancy and not planning to use condoms during trial medication use
  • Women in need for contraception and willing to use a hormonal contraceptive method for 13 cycles
  • Body mass index ≥18 and ≤29 kg/m\^2

Key Exclusion Criteria:

  • Contraindications for contraceptive steroids
  • Abnormal cervical smear corresponding to indeterminate changes at screening
  • Clinically relevant abnormal laboratory result at screening as judged by the investigator.
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 3
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
983 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    ENG-EE (NuvaRing)

    Participants were to complete 13 cycles of etonogestrel (ENG) and ethinylestradiol (EE) use. Each cycle was 28 days, with a 21-day active treatment period followed by a 7-day ring-free period. Participants used one ring per cycle. Each ring contained 11.7 mg ENG and 2.7 mg EE, and released on average 120 mcg/day of ENG and 15 mcg/day of EE.

    Drug: ENG 120 µg + EE 15 µg intravaginal ring

  • Active comparator
    DRSP-EE

    Participants were to complete 13 cycles of drospirenone (DRSP) and ethinylestradiol (EE) use. Each cycle was 28 days, with a 21-day active treatment period followed by a 7-day tablet-free period. Participants received a total of 21 tablets of DRSP-EE per cycle. Each tablet contained 3 mg DRSP and 30 μg EE.

    Drug: DRSP 3 mg + EE 30 µg

Interventions

  • DrugENG 120 µg + EE 15 µg intravaginal ring

    Drug page: NuvaRing

    13 cycles of ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vaginal ring use. Each cycle 28 days, with a 21-day active treatment period followed by 7-day ring-free period. One ring per cycle, each ring containing 11.7 mg ENG and 2.7 mg EE, and releasing on average 120 mcg/day of ENG and 15 mcg/day of EE.

    Also known as: NuvaRing

  • DrugDRSP 3 mg + EE 30 µg

    Drug page: Drospirenone

    13 cycles of DRSP-EE tablet use. Each cycle 28 days, with a 21-day active treatment period followed by a 7-day tablet-free period. Participants received total of 21 tablets per cycle, each tablet contained 3 mg DRSP and 30 μg EE.

    Also known as: Yasmin

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Pearl Index, by Treatment Group

    Primary Efficacy Outcome measure for this study was contraceptive efficacy, or the prevention of in-treatment pregnancy. The total incidence of in-treatment pregnancies was expressed as the Pearl Index, which is defined as the number of in-treatment pregnancies per 100 woman-years of exposure (one woman-year defined as a period of 365.25 days).

    Time frame: Up to 1 year

Secondary outcomes

  1. Percentage of Participants With Intermenstrual (Breakthrough) Bleeding/Spotting, by Cycle

    Participants kept diaries to record vaginal bleeding events. They were asked to record, on a daily basis, whether they experienced vaginal bleeding, which included BLEEDING or SPOTTING, at any time during a cycle other than normal menstruation while in the study. (This is also known as "breakthough" bleeding.) Vaginal bleeding that required \>=2 pads/tampons per day was classified as BLEEDING. Vaginal bleeding that required \<=1 pad/tampon per day was classified as SPOTTING.

    Time frame: Up to 1 year

  2. Percentage of Participants With Absence of Withdrawal Bleeding, by Cycle

    Participants kept diaries to record vaginal bleeding events. They were asked to record, on a daily basis, whether vaginal bleeding was present. Absence of withdrawal bleeding was defined as no bleeding/spotting during the expected bleeding period.

    Time frame: Up to 1 year

07

Results

Posted Sep 15, 2014

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneENG-EE (NuvaRing)DRSP-EE
Started738245
Treated714232
Completed588182
Not completed15063
Withdrew: Adverse event6022
Withdrew: Pregnancy94
Withdrew: Lost to follow-up149
Withdrew: Did not wish to continue170
Withdrew: Withdrew consent99
Withdrew: Non-compliance with protocol134
Withdrew: Did not meet protocol eligibility10
Withdrew: Administrative30
Withdrew: Pregnancy wish02
Withdrew: Discontinued prior to treatment2413

Outcome measures

PrimaryPearl Index, by Treatment Group

Primary Efficacy Outcome measure for this study was contraceptive efficacy, or the prevention of in-treatment pregnancy. The total incidence of in-treatment pregnancies was expressed as the Pearl Index, which is defined as the number of in-treatment pregnancies per 100 woman-years of exposure (one woman-year defined as a period of 365.25 days).

Time frame:
Up to 1 year
Reported as:
Mean · Pregnancies per 100 woman-years
Pearl Index, by Treatment Group
Pregnancies per 100 woman-yearsENG-EE (NuvaRing)DRSP-EE
Pearl Index, by Treatment Group1.92 (0.92 to 3.53)3.12 (1.01 to 7.29)
Statistical analysis
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Poisson distribution method · p = 0.531 · Ratio of pearl indices: 0.61 · 95% CI 0.19 to 2.29Differences between treatment groups was explored using an exact 95% CI for the ratio of the two Pearl Indices based on the Poisson distribution.
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Intermenstrual (Breakthrough) Bleeding/Spotting, by Cycle

Participants kept diaries to record vaginal bleeding events. They were asked to record, on a daily basis, whether they experienced vaginal bleeding, which included BLEEDING or SPOTTING, at any time during a cycle other than normal menstruation while in the study. (This is also known as "breakthough" bleeding.) Vaginal bleeding that required \>=2 pads/tampons per day was classified as BLEEDING. Vaginal bleeding that required \<=1 pad/tampon per day was classified as SPOTTING.

Time frame:
Up to 1 year
Reported as:
Number · Percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Intermenstrual (Breakthrough) Bleeding/Spotting, by Cycle
Percentage of participantsENG-EE (NuvaRing)DRSP-EE
Cycle 1 (n=598,199)18.6 (15.5 to 21.9)21.6 (16.1 to 28.0)
Cycle 2 (n=604,195)12.3 (9.7 to 15.1)18.5 (13.3 to 24.6)
Cycle 3 (n=578,196)8.5 (6.3 to 11.1)14.3 (9.7 to 20.0)
Cycle 4 (n=587,194)7.5 (5.5 to 9.9)15.5 (10.7 to 21.3)
Cycle 5 (n=592,187)6.8 (4.9 to 9.1)8.0 (4.6 to 12.9)
Cycle 6 (n=590,185)6.9 (5.0 to 9.3)10.8 (6.7 to 16.2)
Cycle 7 (n=583,186)7.5 (5.5 to 10.0)11.3 (7.1 to 16.7)
Cycle 8 (n=585,188)6.3 (4.5 to 8.6)10.6 (6.6 to 16.0)
Cycle 9 (n=576,187)6.9 (5.0 to 9.3)8.0 (4.6 to 12.9)
Cycle 10 (n=572,183)5.9 (4.2 to 8.2)10.4 (6.4 to 15.7)
Cycle 11 (n=578,177)4.2 (2.7 to 6.1)7.9 (4.4 to 12.9)
Cycle 12 (n=569,176)5.3 (3.6 to 7.4)9.7 (5.7 to 15.0)
Cycle 13 (n=544,173)6.4 (4.5 to 8.8)11.0 (6.7 to 16.6)
Statistical analysis
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.346 · Difference in percentages, cycle 1: -3.0 · 95% CI -9.9 to 3.1
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.029 · Difference in percentages, cycle 2: -6.2 · 95% CI -12.7 to -0.6
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.019 · Difference in percentages, cycle 3: -5.8 · 95% CI -11.8 to -0.9
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.001 · Difference in percentages, cycle 4: -8.0 · 95% CI -14.0 to -2.9
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.556 · Difference in percentages, cycle 5: -1.3 · 95% CI -6.4 to 2.6
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.089 · Difference in percentages, cycle 6: -3.9 · 95% CI -9.5 to 0.5
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.110 · Difference in percentages, cycle 7: -3.7 · 95% CI -9.4 to 0.8
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.049 · Difference in percentages, cycle 8: -4.3 · 95% CI -9.8 to -0.0
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.621 · Difference in percentages, cycle 9: -1.1 · 95% CI -6.2 to 2.9
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.041 · Difference in percentages, cycle 10: -4.4 · 95% CI -10.0 to -0.2
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.046 · Difference in percentages, cycle 11: -3.8 · 95% CI -8.9 to -0.1
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.037 · Difference in percentages, cycle 12: -4.4 · 95% CI -9.9 to -0.2
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.048 · Difference in percentages, cycle 13: -4.5 · 95% CI -10.4 to -0.0
SecondaryPercentage of Participants With Absence of Withdrawal Bleeding, by Cycle

Participants kept diaries to record vaginal bleeding events. They were asked to record, on a daily basis, whether vaginal bleeding was present. Absence of withdrawal bleeding was defined as no bleeding/spotting during the expected bleeding period.

Time frame:
Up to 1 year
Reported as:
Number · Percentage of participants
Percentage of Participants With Absence of Withdrawal Bleeding, by Cycle
Percentage of participantsENG-EE (NuvaRing)DRSP-EE
Cycle 1 (n=596,199)8.6 (6.4 to 11.1)14.6 (10.0 to 20.3)
Cycle 2 (n=602,195)4.8 (3.2 to 6.8)9.7 (6.0 to 14.8)
Cycle 3 (n=577,196)5.2 (3.5 to 7.3)11.7 (7.6 to 17.1)
Cycle 4 (n=586,194)4.1 (2.6 to 6.0)7.7 (4.4 to 12.4)
Cycle 5 (n=590,187)5.4 (3.7 to 7.6)6.4 (3.4 to 10.9)
Cycle 6 (n=588,185)5.8 (4.0 to 8.0)9.7 (5.9 to 14.9)
Cycle 7 (n=581,186)3.4 (2.1 to 5.3)7.5 (4.2 to 12.3)
Cycle 8 (n=583,188)5.0 (3.4 to 7.1)6.9 (3.7 to 11.5)
Cycle 9 (n=575,187)4.3 (2.8 to 6.4)8.6 (5.0 to 13.5)
Cycle 10 (n=571,183)3.7 (2.3 to 5.6)6.6 (3.4 to 11.2)
Cycle 11 (n=576,177)3.0 (1.7 to 4.7)7.3 (4.0 to 12.2)
Cycle 12 (n=568,176)4.0 (2.6 to 6.0)10.2 (6.2 to 15.7)
Cycle 13 (n=543,173)5.9 (4.1 to 8.2)10.4 (6.3 to 15.9)
Statistical analysis
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.015 · Difference in percentages, cycle 1: -6.0 · 95% CI -12.0 to -1.1
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.012 · Difference in percentages, cycle 2: -4.9 · 95% CI -10.1 to -1.0
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.002 · Difference in percentages, cycle 3: -6.5 · 95% CI -12.0 to -2.2
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.044 · Difference in percentages, cycle 4: -3.6 · 95% CI -8.5 to -0.1
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.609 · Difference in percentages, cycle 5: -1.0 · 95% CI -5.7 to 2.5
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.062 · Difference in percentages, cycle 6: -3.9 · 95% CI -9.3 to 0.2
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.019 · Difference in percentages, cycle 7: -4.1 · 95% CI -9.0 to -0.6
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.308 · Difference in percentages, cycle 8: -1.9 · 95% CI -6.7 to 1.6
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.027 · Difference in percentages, cycle 9: -4.2 · 95% CI -9.3 to -0.4
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.098 · Difference in percentages, cycle 10: -2.9 · 95% CI -7.6 to 0.5
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.009 · Difference in percentages, cycle 11: -4.4 · 95% CI -9.4 to -1.0
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.002 · Difference in percentages, cycle 12: -6.2 · 95% CI -11.7 to -2.1
  • ENG-EE (NuvaRing) vs DRSP-EE · Miettinen and Nurminen method · p = 0.043 · Difference in percentages, cycle 13: -4.5 · 95% CI -10.2 to -0.1

Adverse events

Collected over Up to 1 year. Non-serious events are listed at a 5% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
ENG-EE (NuvaRing)—2/714 (0.3%)0/714 (0%)
DRSP-EE—4/232 (1.7%)0/232 (0%)
Most frequent serious events
Most frequent serious events
EventENG-EE (NuvaRing)DRSP-EE
Abortion spontaneousPregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions0/7142/232
Invasive ductal breast carcinomaNeoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)0/7141/232
Deep vein thrombosisVascular disorders0/7141/232
SinusitisInfections and infestations1/7140/232
Intraductal proliferative breast lesionNeoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)1/7140/232

Baseline characteristics

All Subjects Treated (AST) group, which consisted of all randomized participants who used at least one ring/pill.

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(Years)ENG-EE (NuvaRing)DRSP-EETotal
Mean31.8 ± 4.031.2 ± 3.931.7 ± 4.0
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)ENG-EE (NuvaRing)DRSP-EETotal
Female714232946
Male000
08

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

09

References and documents

Publications

  • Fan GS, Ren M, Di W, Su P, Chang Q, Wu S, Qin Y, Korver T, Marintcheva-Petrova M, Yacik C, McCrary Sisk C, Wang G. Efficacy and safety of the contraceptive vaginal ring (NuvaRing) compared with a combined oral contraceptive in Chinese women: a 1-year randomised trial. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2016 Aug;21(4):303-9. doi: 10.1080/13625187.2016.1186269. Epub 2016 Jun 24. PubMed 27339759 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jun 20, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01277211
Lead sponsor
Organon and Co
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jan 14, 2011
Start date
Sep 19, 2011
Primary completion
Sep 18, 2013
Completion
Sep 18, 2013
Results posted
Sep 15, 2014
Last update
Jun 20, 2024

Study contacts

Medical Director
study director · Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2022. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Studies of the drug tested here: NuvaRing

Start the discussion