Search

As the world human population continues to explode, the need for effective, safe and convenient contraceptive methods escalates. Historically, women have borne the brunt of responsibility for contraception and family planning. Except for the condom, there are no easily reversible, male-based contraceptive options. Recent surveys have confirmed that the majority of men and women would consider using a hormonal male contraceptive if a safe, effective and convenient formulation were available. Investigators have sought to develop a male hormonal contraceptive based on the observation that spermatogenesis depends on stimulation by gonadotropins, follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinising hormone (LH). Testosterone (T) and other hormones such as progestins suppress circulating gonadotropins and spermatogenesis and have been studied as potential male contraceptives. Results from two large, multi-centre trials demonstrated that high-dosage T conferred an overall contraceptive efficacy comparable to female oral contraceptives. This regimen was also fully reversible after discontinuation. However, this regimen was not universally effective and involved weekly im. injections that could be painful and inconvenient. In addition, the high dosage of T suppressed serum high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels, an effect that might increase atherogenesis. Investigators have attempted to develop a hormonal regimen that did not cause androgenic suppression of HDL cholesterol and that was uniformly effective by suppressing spermatogenesis to zero in all men. Studies of combination regimens of lower-dosage T and a progestin or a gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue have demonstrated greater suppression of spermatogenesis than the WHO trials of high-dosage T but most of these regimens cause modest weight gain and suppression of serum HDL cholesterol levels. Overall, the data suggest that we are close to developing effective male hormonal contraceptives. The focus is now on developing effective oral regimens that could be safely taken daily or long-acting depot formulations of a male hormonal contraception that could be conveniently injected every 3 - 6 months. In this article, we shall review the exciting new developments in male hormonal contraception.

Objective: To test the hypothesis that oral desogestrel (DSG) plus testosterone would uniformly and rapidly suppress sperm concentrations in young men as effectively as levonorgestrel (LNG) plus testosterone and cause less high-density lipoprotein (HDL) suppression and weight gain., Design: Single-blind, randomized trial., Setting: VA Puget Sound and University of Washington, Seattle, Washington., Patient(s): Twenty-four healthy young men, aged 20-49., Intervention(s): Subjects were randomized to three groups of men who were administered 6 months of therapy with oral DSG plus im testosterone enanthate: 150 microg of DSG plus 50 mg of testosterone (DSG 150-T 50), 150 microg of DSG plus 100 mg of testosterone (DSG 150-T 100) or 300 microg of DSG plus 100 mg of testosterone (DSG 300-T 100). We compared these three groups to two groups of historical controls of 100 mg of im testosterone alone or 150 microg of oral LNG plus 100 mg of im testosterone (LNG 125-T 100 group) enrolled in similar studies., Main Outcome Measure(s): Suppression of sperm counts to severe oligoazoospermia (sperm counts <1 x 10(6)/mL) and azoospermia, weight gain, and serum high-density cholesterol (HDL) suppression., Result(s): Azoospermia was achieved in all eight men receiving DSG 150-T 100 and seven of the eight men in the DSG 300-T 100 group. DSG 150 or 300 plus T 100 suppressed spermatogenesis as effectively as LNG 125-T 100 and more effectively than DSG 50-T 100 or testosterone alone. All groups tended to gain weight compared with their baseline, but the weight gain was greatest (and statistically significant) in the DSG 150-T 100, DSG 300-T 100, and LNG 125-T 100 groups. Serum HDL levels were modestly suppressed in all groups, and this effect was greatest in the DSG 300-T 100 and LNG 125-T 100 groups., Conclusion(s): The combination of DSG plus testosterone is a very effective regimen for suppression of spermatogenesis and has acceptably low side effects.

Studies using exogenous high-dosage testosterone (T) or a combination regimen of physiologic T plus high-dosage levonorgestrel (LNG) administration in normal men have shown that oligoazoospermia (<3 million/mL) or azoospermia can be achieved in the majority of the men. However, these hormonal regimens have been associated with significant weight gain and suppression of serum high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels. We hypothesized that a combination of physiologic exogenous testosterone and lower dosage LNG would result in uniform severe oligoazoospermia or azoospermia in normal men but would cause fewer adverse metabolic side effects. We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, single-blind trial comparing 6 months of T enanthate (100 mg IM, weekly) plus LNG, 125 microg by mouth, daily (LNG 125; n = 18) or LNG, 250 microg by mouth, daily (LNG 250; n = 18) and compared these regimens with our previous study of the same dosage of T enanthate combined with placebo LNG (LNG 0; n = 18) or with 500 mg of LNG (LNG= 500; n = 18). All three combination regimens of T enanthate and LNG suppressed spermatogenesis more rapidly and resulted in significantly more uniform severe oligoazoospermia (<1 million/mL) than the T-alone regimen. Severe oligoazoospermia was achieved in 89% of the LNG 125, 89% of the LNG 250, and 78% of the LNG 500 groups, respectively, versus 56% of the men in LNG 0 (P < 0.05 for the combination groups vs. LNG 0), but there were no significant differences between the combination regimens (P = NS). All four groups gained significant weight compared with their baselines, although the gain tended to be greater as the dosage of LNG increased (2.0+/-0.9, 2.9+/-1.1, 3.6+/-1.0, and 5.4+/-1.0 kg gained, compared with baseline in the LNG 0, 125, 250, and 500 groups respectively; P < 0.05 compared with baseline). Serum levels of HDL cholesterol decreased in all of the groups, but the effect was larger as the dosage of LNG increased (4+/-4% vs. 13+/-4%, 20+/-3%, and 22+/-4% decrease in HDL levels from baseline in the LNG 0, LNG 125, LNG 250, and LNG 500 groups respectively; P = 0.06 for LNG 125 compared with LNG 0, and P < 0.05 for LNG 250 and LNG 500 compared with LNG 0). We conclude that 1) the combination of physiologic exogenous T enanthate and LNG suppresses spermatogenesis more effectively than T enanthate alone and that 2) the combination regimen of T enanthate plus lower dosage LNG suppresses sperm production comparably to T enanthate plus higher dosage LNG, while causing less weight gain and HDL cholesterol suppression. A combination regimen of physiologic testosterone plus a low dosage of levonorgestrel offers great promise as a safe and effective male contraceptive regimen.

GnRH antagonists plus testosterone (T) suppress LH and FSH levels and inhibit spermatogenesis to azoospermia or severe oligozoospermia. High-dose T treatment alone has been shown to be an effective male contraceptive (contraceptive efficacy rate of 1.4 per 100 person yr). Combined GnRH antagonist and T induces azoospermia more rapidly and at a higher incidence than T alone; this combination has therefore been proposed as a prototype male contraceptive. However, because GnRH antagonists are expensive to synthesize and difficult to deliver, it would be desirable to rapidly suppress sperm counts to low levels with GnRH antagonist plus T and maintain azoospermia or severe oligozoospermia with T alone. In this study, 15 healthy men (age 21-41 yr) with normal semen analyses were treated with T enanthate (TE) 100 mg im/week plus 10 mg Nal-Glu GnRH antagonist sc daily for 12 weeks to induce azoospermia or severe oligozoospermia. At 12-16 weeks, 10 of 15 subjects had zero sperm counts, and 14 of 15 had sperm counts less than 3 x 10(6)/mL. The 14 who were suppressed on combined treatment were maintained on TE alone (100 mg/week im) for an additional 20 weeks. Thirteen of 14 subjects in the TE alone phase had sperm counts maintained at less than 3 x 10(6)/mL for 20 weeks. Ten remained persistently azoospermic or had sperm concentration of 0.1 x 10(6)/mL once during maintenance. Mean LH and FSH levels in the subjects were suppressed to 0.4+/-0.2 IU/L and 0.5+/-0.2 IU/L in the induction phase, which was maintained in the maintenance phase. The 1 subject who failed to suppress sperm counts during induction had serum LH and FSH reduced to 0.3 and 0.5 IU/L, respectively. The subject who failed to maintenance had LH and FSH suppressed to 1.0 and 0.2 IU/L, respectively, during the induction phase but these rose to 1.6 and 2.1 IU/L, respectively, during maintenance. Failure to suppress or maintain low sperm counts may be related to incomplete suppression of serum LH and FSH levels. We conclude that sperm counts suppressed with GnRH antagonist plus T can be maintained with relatively low dose TE treatment alone. This concept should be explored further in the development of effective, safe, and affordable hormonal male contraceptives.

Studies using high dose testosterone (T) administration in normal men as a male contraceptive have resulted in azoospermia rates of only 50-70%. Previous studies of T and progestogen combinations have shown comparable rates of azoospermia, but have been uncontrolled or used T in doses less than that associated with maximal suppression of sperm production. We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, single blind trial comparing 6 months of T enanthate administration (100 mg, im, weekly) with the same dose of T enanthate in conjunction with the progestogen levonorgestrel (LNG; 500 micrograms, orally, daily) in 36 normal men, aged 20-42 yr (n = 18 in each group). The primary end points were induction of azoospermia or severe oligospermia (< 3 million sperm/mL). The combination of T plus LNG was much more effective in suppressing sperm production than T alone. Sixty-seven percent of the T plus LNG group (12 of 18) and 33% of the T alone group (6 of 18) achieved azoospermia by 6 months (P = 0.06). Severe oligospermia or azoospermia developed in 94% of the T plus LNG (17 of 18) group compared to 61% of the T alone group (11 of 18; P < 0.05). T plus LNG also suppressed sperm production more rapidly than T alone. Time to azoospermia was 9.9 +/- 1.0 vs. 15.3 +/- 1.9 weeks in the T plus LNG and T alone groups, respectively (mean +/- SEM; P < 0.05). Serum high density lipoprotein cholesterol decreased 21.7 +/- 3.6% in men given T plus LNG (P < 0.05), compared to only a 1.8 +/- 3.8% decrease in men in the T alone group. Average weight gain was 5.3 +/- 0.8 kg in the T plus LNG group and 2.3 +/- 0.9 kg in the T alone group (P < 0.05). Acne and increase in hemoglobin were similar in the two groups. We conclude that combination hormonal therapy with T plus a progestogen might offer a reversible male contraceptive approach with a more rapid onset of action and more reliable induction of both azoospermia and severe oligospermia than T alone.