Pharmacokinetic bioequivalence, safety and acceptability of Ornibel<sup>®</sup>, a new polymer composition contraceptive vaginal ring (etonogestrel/ethinylestradiol 11.00/3.474 mg) compared with Nuvaring<sup>®</sup> (etonogestrel/ethinylestradiol 11.7/2.7 mg)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To show the clinical development of Ornibel® (ExeltisHealthcare, Spain) a contraceptive vaginal ring manufactured with a new polymer composition and containing etonogestrel/ethinylestradiol, compared to Nuvaring® (MSD, Spain).Subjects and methods: Randomised, single dose, 2-period, 2-sequence, 2-stage crossover, comparative bioavailability study conducted in 40 healthy female subjects. All subjects received both treatments for 28 days in each of two periods, separated by a 28 days washout. Ornibel® contains etonogestrel/ethinylestradiol 11.00/3.47 mg and Nuvaring® contains etonogestrel/ethinylestradiol 11.7/2.7 mg, both rings delivering 120/15 µg/day. For the calculation of pharmacokinetic parameters, 37 blood samples were collected up to 840 h after each ring insertion to quantify plasma concentrations of etonogestrel and ethinylestradiol using a validated MS/MS-HPLC. Safety was assessed by adverse events recording, clinical laboratory and vital signs and tolerability by vaginal examination. Acceptability was investigated by a 5-point scale questionnaire.Results: Bioequivalence was demonstrated in the first stage as the 94.12% Confidence Intervals of the primary parameters laid within the 80–125% acceptance range for both etonogestrel (Cmax: 96.81–112.20%; AUC0-504h: 98.71-108.61%; AUC0-t: 100.14–109.10%) and ethinylestradiol. (Cmax: 105.91–120.62%; AUC0-504h: 105.47–114.59%; AUC0-t: 108.31-117.61%). During the first day of use a burst effect was observed with Nuvaring®, with significantly higher level of ethinylestradiol (Cmax0-24h ratio: 78.34%, 94.12CI: 73.55–83.45%). Both products were well tolerated and accepted, without significant differences between them.Conclusion: Ornibel® is bioequivalent to Nuvaring® in terms of efficacy, safety, tolerability and acceptability. The new polymer composition provides Ornibel® with more stability and gradual hormonal release during the first day of use, particularly for ethinylestradiol.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".