Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T04:41:18.181Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Antifertility effects of antigestogens

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 March 2009

David T Baird  and
Jane E Norman
David T Baird*
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh, UK
Jane E Norman
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh, UK
*
Professor David T Baird, MRC Clinical Research Professor of Reproductive Endocrinology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Centre for Reproductive Biology, University of Edinburgh, 37 Chalmers Street, Edinburgh EH3 9EW, UK.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Since the discovery of the structure and function of steroids over 60 years ago, it has long been recognized that synthetic antagonists of the natural hormones would have potential therapeutic uses. Antagonists of mineralocorticoids, androgens and oestrogens, for example spironolactine, cyproterone, flutamide and tamoxifen, have already found a place in the management of hormone dependent conditions. In 1982, chemists at Roussel UCLAF announced that they had synthesized mifepristone (RU486) 17β-hydroxy-11(p-(dimethylamino)phenyl)-17-(1-propynyl) estra-411, 9-dien-3-one) a derivative of norethindrone which had potent antiprogestogenic as well as antiglucocorticoid activity. Although it was immediately realised that this compound would potentially have wide clinical application, its development in the last 10 years has been dominated by its abortifacient action. In the original clinical report by Herrman and colleagues it was shown that bleeding occurred when it was given to female volunteers in the second half of the menstrual cycle. In addition, complete abortion occurred in eight of 11 women who took the drug in the early weeks of pregnancy. These findings, which demonstrated that mifepristone could be used as the basis of a medical method of inducing abortion, were immediately made the focus of groups opposed to abortion on moral grounds. Experience over the last 10 years has confirmed the promise of these early studies and mifepristone, in combination with a suitable prostaglandin, is now licensed in France, UK and Sweden for use as a medical method of inducing abortion in early pregnancy.

Type
Articles
Information
Reproductive Medicine Review , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , July 1993 , pp. 95 - 108
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Pincus, G. Control of Fertility. New York, London: Academic Press, 1965.Google Scholar
2Philibert, D, Deraedt, R, Tournemine, C, Mary, I, Teutsch, G. RU 38486 – an antiglucocorticoid with a new mechanism of antihormone activity. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 1982; 17: 68.Google Scholar
3Herrman, W, Wyss, R, Riondel, A et al. Effet d'un stéroide antiprogesterone chez la femme: interruption du cycle menstrual et de la grossesse au débit. C R Acad Sci III 1982; 294: 933–38.Google Scholar
4Baird, DT. Antigestogens. In: Baird, DT, Drife, JO eds. British Medical Bulletin, ‘Contraception’ Vol. 49. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 1993 (in Press).Google Scholar
5Ulmann, A, Teutsch, G, Philibert, D. RU486. Sci Am 1990; 262: 18–24.Google Scholar
6Teutsch, G. Analogues of RU486 for the mapping of the progestin receptor; synthetic and structural aspects. In: Baulieu, EE, Segal, SJ eds. The antiprogestin steroid RU486 and human fertility control. New York: Plenum Press, 1985: 27–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Baulieu, EE. Contragestion and other clinical applications of RU486 an antiprogesterone at the receptor. Science 1989; 245: 1351–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8El-Ashry, D, Onate, SA, Nordeen, SK, Edwards, DP. Human progesterone receptor complexed with the antagonist RU486 binds to hormone response elements in a structurally altered form. Mol Endocrinol 1989; 3: 1545–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9Bagchi, MK, Tsai, M-J, O'Malley, BW. Identification of a functional intermediate in receptor activation in progesterone-dependent cell-free transcription. Nature 1990; 345: 547–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10Bertagna, X, Bertagna, C, Luton, JP, Musson, M, Girard, F. The new steroid analog RU486 inhibits glucocorticoid action in man. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1984; 59: 25–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Csapo, AI, Pulkinnen, MO, Wiest, WG. Effects of lute-ectomy and progesterone replacement therapy in early pregnant patients. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1973; 115: 759–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Webster, MA, Pattison, NS, Phipps, SL, Gillmer, MDG. Myometrial activity in first trimester human pregnancy after Epostane therapy. Effect of intravenous oxytocin. Er J Obstet Gynaecol 1985; 92: 957–62.Google ScholarPubMed
13Bygdeman, M, Swahn, M-L. Progesterone receptor blockage. Effect on uterine contractility and early pregnancy. Contraception 1985; 32: 45–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14Webster, MA, Phipps, SL, Gillmer, MDG. Interruption of first trimester human pregnancy following Epostane therapy. Effect of prostaglandin E2 pessaries. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1985; 92: 963–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Abel, MH, Baird, DT. The effect of 17β-estradiol and progesterone on prostaglandin production by human endometrium maintained in organ culture. Endocrinology 1980; 106: 1599–606.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16Maathuis, JB, Kelly, RW. Concentrations of prostaglandins F2α and E2 in the endometrium throughout the human menstrual cycle, after the administration of clomiphene or an oestrogen-progestogen pill and in early pregnancy. J Endocrinol 1978; 77: 361–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17Smith, SK, Kelly, RW. The effect of the antiprogestins RU 496 and ZK 98 734 on the synthesis and metabolism of prostaglandins F-α and E2 in separated cells from early human decidua. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1987; 66: 527–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18Hill, NCW, Lopéz Bernal, A, Ferguson, J, MacKenzie, IZ. The effect of the antiprogestin mifepristone (RU 486) on plasma prostaglandin metabolite levels in early pregnancy and its influence on pregnancy termination. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1990; 69: 321–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19Norman, JE, Wu, WX, Kelly, RW, Glasier, AF, McNeillyi, AS, Baird, DT. Effects of mifepristone in vivo on decidual prostaglandin synthesis and metabolism. Contraception 1991; 44: 89–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20Norman, JE, Kelly, RW, Baird, DT. Uterine activity and decidua prostaglandin production in women in early pregnancy in response to mifepristone with or without indomethacin in vivo. Hum Reprod 1991; 6: 740–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21Kelly, RW, Healy, DL, Cameron, MJ, Cameron, IT, Baird, DT. The stimulation of prostaglandin production by two antiprogesterone steroids in human endometrial cells. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1986; 62: 1116–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22Casey, ML, Hemsell, DL, Johnston, JM, MacDonald, PC. NAD dependent 15-hydroxy prostaglandin dehydrogenase activity in human endometrium. Prostaglandins 1980; 19: 115–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23Falkay, G, Sas, M. Correlation between the concentrations of prostaglandin dehydrogenase and progesterone in the early human placenta. J Endocrinol 1978; 76: 173–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24Cheng, L, Kelly, RW, Thong, KJ, Hume, R, Baird, DT. The effects of mifepristone (RU 486) on prostaglandin dehydrogenase in decidual and chorionic tissue in early pregnancy. Hum Reprod 1993 (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25Swahn, M-L, Bygdeman, M. The effect of the antiprogestin RU 486 on uterine contractility and sensitivity to prostaglandin and oxytocin. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1988; 95: 126–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26Mishell, DR Jr, Shoupe, D, Brenner, PF et al. Termination of early gestation with the antiprogestin steroid RU 486: medium versus low dose. Contraception 1987; 35: 307–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27Schwarzmann, G, Wiegandt, H, Rose, B, Zimmerman, A, Ben-Haim, D, Loewenstein, WR, Diameter of the cell-to-cell junctional membrane channels as probed with neutral molecules. Science 1981; 213: 551–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28Ichikawa, S, Bortoff, A. Tissue resistance of the progesterone-dominated rabbit myometrium. Am J Physiol 1970; 219: 1763–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29Bortoff, A, Gilloteaux, J. Specific tissue impedances of estrogen- and progesterone-treated rabbit myometrium. Am J Physiol 1980; 238: C34–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30Garfield, RE, Baulieu, E-E. The antiprogesterone steroid RU 486: a short pharmacological and clinical review, with emphasis on the interruption of pregnancy. Baillieres Clin Endocrinol Metab 1987; 1: 207–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31Sakai, N, Blennerhassett, MG, Garfield, RE. Effects of antiprogesterones on myometrial cell-to-cell coupling in pregnant guinea pigs. Biol Reprod 1992; 46: 358–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
32Marshall, JM. Effects of estrogen and progesterone on single uterine muscle fibres in the rat. Am J Physiol 1959; 197: 935–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33Carsten, ME. Calcium accumulation by human uterine microsomal preparations: effects of progesterone and oxytocin. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1979; 133: 598–601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
34Thorbert, G, Alm, P, Björklund, AB, Owman, C, Sjobert, N-O. Adrenergic innervation of the human uterus. Disappearance of the transmitter and transmitter-forming enzymes during pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1979; 135: 223–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
35Vivat, V, Cohen-Tannoudji, J, Revelli, J-P, Maltier, J-P, Legrand, C. Progesterone transcriptionally regulates the B-2 adrenergic receptor gene in pregnant rat myometrium. J Biol Chem 1992; 267: 7975–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36Schindler, AM, Zanon, P, Obradovic, D, Wyss, R, Graff, P, Herrmann, WL. Early ultrastructural changes in RU-486-exposed decidua. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1985; 20: 62–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
37King, A, Loke, YW. Human trophoblast and JEG chorio-carcinoma cells are sensitive to lysis by IL-2 stimulated decidual NK cells. Cell Immunol 1990; 129: 435–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
38Hansen, KA, Opsahl, MS, Nieman, LK, Baker, JR Jr, Klein, TA. Natural killer cell activity from pregnant subjects is modulated by RU 486. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 166: 87–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
39Lazar, G, Duda, E, Lazar, G. Effect of RU 38486 on TNF production and toxicity. FEBS Lett 1992; 308: 137–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
40Oppenheim, JJ, Ruscelli, FW, Faltynek, C. Cytokines. In: Sites, DP, Terr, AI eds. Basic human immunology. ConnecticutAppleton and Lange, 1991: 78–100.Google Scholar
41World Health Organization Task Force. The use of mifepristone (RU 486) for cervical preparation in first trimester pregnancy termination by vacuum aspiration. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990; 97: 260–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42Cohn, M, Stewart, P. Pretreatment of the primigravid uterine cervix with mifepristone 30 h prior to termination of pregnancy: a double blind study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1991; 98: 778–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
43Radestad, A, Bygdeman, M, Gréen, K. Induced cervical ripening with mifepristone (RU 486) and bioconversion of arachidonic acid in human pregnant uterine cervix in the first trimester. Contraception 1990; 38: 301–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
44Norman, JE. Menstrual induction: methods and mechanisms of action [Thesis]. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, 1992.Google Scholar
45Heidvall, K, Radestad, A, Christensen, NJ, Lindgren, JA. Production of 12-hydroxyeicosatetraenoic acid in early pregnant uterine cervix – lack of correlation to mifepristone-induced cervical ripening. A doubleblind randomized biomechanical and biochemical study. Prostaglandins 1992; 43: 473–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
46Kelly, RW, Leask, R, Calder, AA. Choriodecidual production of interleukin-8 and mechanism of parturition. Lancet 1992; 339: 776–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
47Colditz, IG. Effect of exogenous prostaglandin E2 and actinomycin D on plasma leakage induced by neutrophil activating peptide-1/interleukin 8. Immunol Cell Biol 1990; 68: 397–403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
48Uldberg, N, Ulmsten, U, Ekman, G. The ripening of the human uterine cervix in terms of connective tissue biochemistry. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1983; 26: 14–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
49Van Look, PFA, Bygdeman, M. Antiprogestational steroids: a new dimension in human fertility regulation. Ox Rev Reprod Biol 1989; 11: 1–60.Google ScholarPubMed
50Couzinet, B, Strat, NL, Ulmann, A, Baulieu, EE, Schaison, G. Termination of early pregnancy by the progesterone antagonist RU 486 (mifepristone). N Eng J Med 1986; 315: 1565–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
51Ulmann, A. Uses of RU 486 for contragestation: an update. Contraception 1987; 36 (suppl): 27–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
52Cameron, IT, Michie, A, Baird, DT. Therapeutic abortion in early pregnancy with antiprogestogen RU 486 alone or in combination with a prostaglandin analogue (gemeprost). Contraception 1986; 34: 459–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
53Rodger, MW, Baird, DT. Induction of therapeutic abortion in early pregnancy with mifepristone in combination with prostaglandin pessary. Lancet 1987; ii: 1415–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
54Ulmann, A, Silvestre, L, Chemama, L et al. Medical termination of early pregnancy with mifepristone (RU 486) followed by a prostaglandin analogue. Study in 16,369 women. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1992; 71: 278–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
55UK Multicentre Trial. The efficacy and tolerance of mifepristone and prostaglandin in first trimester of pregnancy. Br Obstet Gynaecol 1990; 97: 480–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
56Norman, JE, Thong, KJ, Rodger, MW, Baird, DT. Medical abortion in women of < 56 days amenorrhoea: a comparison between gemeprost (a PGE1 analogue) alone and mifepristone and gemeprost. Br J Ostet Gynaecol 1992; 99: 601–606.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
57WHO Task Force. Early pregnancy termination with mifepristone and gemeprost: a multicentre comparison between repeated doses and a single dose of mifepristone. Fertil Steril 1991; 56: 32–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
58Rodger, MW, Logan, AF, Baird, DT. Induction of early abortion with mifepristone (RU 486) and two different doses of prostaglandin pessary (gemeprost). Contraception 1989; 39: 497–502.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
59 Anonymous. A death associated with mifepristone/sulprostone. Lancet 1991; 337: 969–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
60Department of Health, Welsh Office, Scottish Home and Health Department, Department of Health and Social Services, Northern Ireland. Report on confidential enquiries into maternal deaths in the United Kingdom, 1985–1987. London: HMSO, 1991.Google Scholar
61Rodger, MW, Baird, DT. Blood loss following induction of early abortion using mifepristone (RU 486) and a prostaglandin analogue (gemeprost). Contraception 1989; 40: 439–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
62Maurice, J. WHO suggests lower dose of mifepristone. Br Med J 1991; 303: 944.Google Scholar
63Silvestre, L, Dubois, C, Renault, M, Rezvani, Y, Baulieu, E-E, Ulmann, A. Voluntary interruption of pregnancy with mifepristone (RU 486) and a prostaglandin analogue. A large scale French experience. N Engl J Med 1990; 332: 645–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
64Lim, BH, Lees, DAR, Bjornsson, S et al. Normal development after exposure to mifepristone in early pregnancy [Letter]. Lancet 1990; 336: 257–58.Google ScholarPubMed
65Pons, JC, Elefant, E, Herckorn, P, Pariernik, E. Development after exposure to mifepristone in early pregnancy. Lancet 1991; 338: 763.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
66Cameron, IT, Baird, DT. Early pregnancy termination: a comparison between vacuum aspiration and medical abortion using prostaglandin (16,16 dimethyl-trans Δ2-PGE1 methyl ester) or the antigestogen RU 486. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1988; 95: 271–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
67Legarth, J, Peen, UB, Michelsen, JW. Mifepristone or vacuum aspiration in termination of early pregnancy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1991; 41: 91–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
68Henshaw, RC, Templeton, AA. Mifepristone. Separating fact from fiction. Drugs 1992; 44: 531–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
69Rosén, A-S, Von Knorring, K, Bygdeman, M, Christensen, MJ. Randomised comparison of prostaglandin treatment in hospital or at home with vacuum aspiration for termination of early pregnancy. Contraception 1984; 29: 423–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
70Csapo, AI, Peskin, EG, Sauvage, JP et al. Menstrual induction in preference to abortion. Lancet 1980; i: 90–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
71Bachelot, A, Cludy, L, Spira, A. Conditions for choosing between drug-induced and surgical abortions. Contraception 1992; 45: 547–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
72Urquhart, DR, Templeton, AA. Acceptability of medical pregnancy termination. Lancet 1988; ii: 106–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
73Hill, NCW, Selinger, M, Ferguson, J, Lopéz Bernal, A, MacKenzie, IZ. The physiological and clinical effects of progesterone inhibition with mifepristone (RU 486) in the second trimester. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990; 97: 487–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
74Thong, KJ, Dewar, M, Baird, DT. What do women want during a medical abortion? Contraception 1992; 46: 435–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
75Norman, JE, Thong, KJ, Baird, DT. Increase in uterine contractility and induction of abortion in early pregnancy by misoprostol and mifepristone. Lancet 1991; 338: 1233–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
76Aubeny, E, Baulieu, EE. Activité contragestive de association and RU 486 d'une prostaglandine active pour voie orale. C R Acad Sci III 1991; 312: 539–46.Google Scholar
77Thong, KJ, Baird, DT. Induction of abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol in early pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992; 99: 1004–1007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
78Urquhart, DR, Templeton, AA. Mifepristone (RU 486) and second trimester termination. Lancet 1987; ii: 1405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
79Rodger, MW, Baird, DT. Pretreatment with mifepristone (RU 486) reduces prostaglandin abortion interval in midtrimester therapeutic abortion. Br J Obstet and Gynaecol 1990; 97: 41–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
80Thong, KJ, Baird, DT. A study of gemeprost alone, dilapan or mifepristone in combination with gemeprost for the termination of second trimester pregnancy. Contraception 1992; 46: 11–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
81Thong, KJ, Baird, DT. Induction of second trimester abortion with mifepristone and gemeprost. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1993 (in press).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
82Shoupe, D, Mishell, DR, Page, MA, Madkour, H, Sptiz, IM, Lobo, RA. Effects of the antiprogesterone RU 486 in normal follicular phase. Am J Obstet and Gynecol 1987; 157: 1421–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
83Luukkainen, T, Heikinheimo, O, Haukkamaa, M, Lahteenmaki, P. Inhibition of folliculogenesis and ovulation by the antiprogesterone RU 486. Fertil Steril 1988; 49: 961–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
84Liu, JH, Garzo, G, Morris, S, Stuenkel, C, Ulmann, A, Yen, SSC. Disruption of follicular restoration and delay of ovulation after administration of the antiprogesterone RU 486. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1987; 65: 1135–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
85Schaison, G, George, M, Lestrat, N, Reinberg, A, Baulieu, EE. Effects of the antiprogesterone steroid RU 486 during the mid luteal phase in normal women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1985; 61: 484–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
86Swahn, M-L, Johannison, E, Daniore, V, de la Torre, B, Bygdeman, M. The effect of RU 486 administered during the proliferative and secretory phase of the cycle on the bleeding pattern, hormonal parameters and the endometrium. Hum Reprod 1988; 3: 915–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
87Danforth, DR, Dubois, C, Ulmann, A, Baulieu, EE, Hodgen, GD. Contraceptive potential of RU 486 by ovulation inhibition: preliminary observations on the weekly oral administration. Contraception 1989; 40: 195–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
88Spitz, IM, Croxatto, HR, Salvatierra, AM, Heikinheimo, O. Response to intermittent RU 486 in women. Fertil Steril 1993 (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
89Everett, JW. The mammalian female reproductive cycle and its controlling mechanisms. In: Young, WC ed. Sex and internal Secretions, Vol. I. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1961: 497–555.Google Scholar
90Batista, MC, Cartledge, TP, Zellmer, W, Nieman, LK, Merriam, GR, Loriaux, DL. Evidence for a critical role of progesterone in the regulation of the midcycle gonadotropin surge and ovulation. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1992; 74: 565–70.Google ScholarPubMed
91Ledger, WL, Sweeting, VM, Hillier, H, Baird, DT. Inhibition of ovulation by low dose mifepristone (RU 486). Hum Reprod 1992; 7: 945–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
92Chwalisz, K, Hegele-Hartung, C, Fritzemeier, K-H, Beier, HM, Elger, W. Inhibition of estradiolmediated endometrial gland formation by the antiprogestin onapristone in rabbits: relationship to uterine estrogen receptors. Endocrinology 1991; 129: 312–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
93 van Uem, JFHM, Hsiu, JG, Chillik, CF et al. Contraceptive potential of RU 486 by ovulation inhibition: pituitary versus ovarian action with blockade of estrogen induced endometrial proliferation. Contraception 1989; 40: 171–83.Google ScholarPubMed
94Neulen, J, Williams, RF, Hodgen, GD. RU 486 (mifepristone) induction of dose dependent elevations of estradici receptor in endometrium from ovariectomized monkeys. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1990; 71: 1074–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
95Swahn, M-L, Bygdeman, M, Cekan, S, Xing, S, Masironi, B, Johannison, E. The effect of RU 486 administered during the early luteal phase on bleeding patterns, hormone parameters and endometrium. Hum Reprod 1990; 5: 402–408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
96Permezel, JM, Lenton, EA, Roberts, I, Cooke, ID. Acute effects of progesterone and the antiprogestin RU 486 on gonadotrophin secretion in the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1989; 68: 960–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
97Greene, KE, Kettel, LM, Yen, SSC. Interruption of endometrial maturation without hormonal changes by an antiprogesterone during the first half of the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle: a contraceptive potential. Fertil Steril 1992; 58: 338–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
98Swahn, M-L, Gemzell, K, Bygdeman, M. Contraception with mifepristone. Lancet 1991; 338: 942–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
99Glasier, AF, Thong, KJ, Dewar, M, Mackie, M, Baird, DT. Mifepristone (RU 486) compared with high-dose estrogen and progestogen for emergency postcoital contraception. N Engl J Med 1992; 327: 1041–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
100Webb, AMC, Russel, J, Elstein, M. Comparison of Yuzpe regimen, danazol and mifepristone (RU 486) in oral postcoital contraception. Br Med J 1992; 302: 927–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
101Dubois, C, Ulmann, A, Baulieu, EE. Contragestion with late luteal administration of RU 486 (mifepristone). Fertil Steril 1988; 50: 593–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
102Couzinet, B, Le Strat, N, Silvestre, L, Schaison, G. Late luteal administration of the antiprogesterone RU 486 in normal women: effects on the menstrual cycle events and fertility control in a long term study. Fertil Steril 1990; 54: 1039–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
103van Santen, MR, Haspels, AA. Interception. IV: failure of mifepristone (RU 486) as a monthly contragestive, ‘lunarette’. Contraception 1987; 35: 433–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
104Baird, DT. Postcoital contraception and menstrual induction. In: Templeton, AA, Cusine, D eds. Reproductive medicine and the law. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 1990: 3–9.Google Scholar
105Cook, RJ. Antiprogestin drugs: medical and legal issues. Fam Plann Perspect 1989; 21: 267–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
106Rimmer, C, Horga, M, Cerar, V, Alder, EM, Baird, DT, Glasier, AF. Do women want a once-a-month pill. Hum Reprod 1992; 7: 608–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar