Contraception
Volume 53, Issue 1 , Pages 55-64, January 1996

Inhibition of ovulation by progestin analogs (agonists vs antagonists): Preliminary evidence for different sites and mechanisms of actions

  • Oskari Heikinheimo

      Affiliations

    • The Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, 601 Colley Avenue, Norfolk, VA 23507, USA
    • Steroid Research Laboratory, Department of Medical Chemistry, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 8, SF-00014, Helsinki, Finland
  • ,
  • Keith Gordon

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationName and address for correspondence: Keith Gordon, Ph.D., The Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, 601 Colley Avenue, Norfolk, VA 23507. Tel: (804) 446-8948; Fax (804) 446-8998
    • The Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, 601 Colley Avenue, Norfolk, VA 23507, USA
  • ,
  • Robert F. Williams

      Affiliations

    • The Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, 601 Colley Avenue, Norfolk, VA 23507, USA
  • ,
  • Gary D. Hodgen

      Affiliations

    • The Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, 601 Colley Avenue, Norfolk, VA 23507, USA

Received 4 August 1995; received in revised form 24 October 1995; accepted 27 October 1995.

Abstract 

Continuous administration of the antiprogesterone RU486 inhibits ovulation in women and in monkeys; in this regard RU486 may act as a progestin agonist rather than as an antagonist. We compared the site(s) and mechanism(s) of RU486-induced ovulation inhibition with those of levonorgestrel (LNG). Six regularly menstruating cynomolgus monkeys each received placebo, RU486 (1 mg/kg/d) or LNG (2 g/kg/d) im between days (cd) 2–22 of three separate menstrual cycles. Serum levels of estradiol (E2), progesterone (P4), androstenedione, LH and FSH were analyzed by RIAs in daily blood samples. Basal and GnRH-stimulated (1 and 50 g of GnRH iv 2 h apart) secretion of LH and FSH was assessed using serial blood samples collected for 12 h on cd 10. Mean cycle length was prolonged by RU486 and LNG treatments from 32 d to 70 d and 52 d, respectively (p < 0.02). Ovulation was inhibited in five of the six primates during RU486, and in all six during LNG treatment. During RU486 treatment, serum E2 levels were similar to those of the control cycle; despite peaks of E2 secretion, no LH peaks were seen. In contrast, E2 concentrations were profoundly suppressed during LNG treatment (p < 0.005). The reduction in serum E2 was accompanied by lower levels of androstenedione, and suppressed ratio of E2/androstenedione (p < 0.02) suggesting both reduced synthesis and aromatization of androgen precursors during administration of LNG. Consequently, LNG treatment was associated with higher levels of serum FSH and LH (p < 0.0001; 1-way ANOVA). Similarly, as during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle, the amplitude of basal LH-pulses was increased during LNG treatment (p < 0.05), whereas RU486 treatment did not affect basal LH secretion. The GnRH-stimulated release of LH was similar during the placebo, RU486 and LNG cycles; enhanced release of FSH was seen during administration of LNG. Thus, in the present model system, RU486 seems to inhibit ovulation mainly at the level of hypothalamus, possibly by interfering with the steroidal positive feedback signals from the ovary. However, LNG inhibits ovulation differently, most likely via direct progesterone-like effects on folliculogenesis and the hypothalamus. The pituitary does not appear to be the major site of action(s) of RU486 or LNG. Thus, the differential mechanisms of ovulation inhibition by RU486 and LNG seem to result from lesser intraovarian impact of RU486 as well as dissimilar influences on tonic gonadotropin secretory levels. We conclude that when inhibiting ovulation, RU486 does not act as a progestin agonist, but rather, functions through a hypothalamic mechanism(s), which might be unique to RU486 as a progesterone antagonist.

Keywords:  progestin agonist, progestin antagonist, ovulation inhibition, primates, RU486

No full text is available. To read the body of this article, please view the PDF online.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Presented at the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Society for Gynecologic Investigation, Chicago, IL, March 15–18, 1995

PII: 0010-7824(95)00255-3

Contraception
Volume 53, Issue 1 , Pages 55-64, January 1996