Puzzling Over the Hurt Down-Under
Serious Mental Illness and Contraception
New 13-Cycle Vaginal Contraceptive System
The Future of Family Planning in Post-COVID America
New ASCCP Guidelines: Implications for FP
On the alert: mood disorders during 2020 stressors
Challenges old and new during the pandemic
Reproductive health in the time of Covid-19
Missed Pills: The Problem That Hasn’t Gone Away
Find the “yes! . . . and” rather than “no” or “but”
Digital Family Planning: the Future is Now
Irregular Bleeding Due to Contraceptives
Ouch! Best approaches to menstrual pain
Contraceptive efficacy: understanding how user and method characteristics play their part
Strategizing treatment for chronic heavy menstrual bleeding
Untangling the literature on obesity and contraception
High tech apps for no-tech FABM
Menstrual exacerbation of other medical conditions
From Princeton University: Thomas James Trussell (1949-2018)
The Short and Long of IUD Use Duration
Selecting a Method When Guidance Isn’t Clear-cut
Healthcare in the Time of Digital Expansion
The Scoop on Two New FDA-Approved Contraceptive Methods
Pregnancy of unknown location—meeting the challenge
Big “yes” (with caveats) to CHCs during perimenopause
The role of IUDs (LNG IUDs, too!) in emergency contraception
Combined pills’ effect on mood disorders
Abortion in the U.S.: safe, declining, and under threat
Hope for ovarian cancer screening test
Breast cancer still a small risk with some hormonal contraceptives
Record rate of HPV-related throat cancer
Viruses in semen potentially transmissible
Don’t Abstain from Your Role in Abstinence
Teens births declining but geographic ‘hotspots’ defy trend
Online Medical Abortion Service Effective and Safe
Do Women Really Need to Wait That Long?
Reassuring news on depression and OC use
PMDD: Genetic clues may lead to improved treatment
Breast cancer risk when there is a family history
Body weight link to breast and endometrial cancers (and 11 others)
Family Planning in 2017 and Beyond
Make Me Cry: Depression Link (Again)?
Managing implant users’ bleeding and spotting
Zika: Updated guidance for providers
Pharmacist-prescribed contraceptives
Hot off the press! 2016 MEC and SPR
Zika virus fears prompt increased request for abortion in nations outlawing abortions
Opioid use epidemic among reproductive-age women
Good news on the family planning home front!
War Against Planned Parenthood Hurts Women
Win-win for both treatment and prevention
Menopause, mood, mental acuity, and hormone therapy
Emergency contraception for teens
Postpartum Contraception: Now, Not Later
Are we practicing what we preach?
Be alert to VTE in hormonal contraceptive users
LARC among teens increased 15-fold, but not enough
Brain cancer and hormonal contraception
Free tools: Easy access to the US Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use
Alcohol consumption when pregnancy is unwanted or unintended
Latest Data on Contraceptive Use in the United States
LateBreaker sampler from Contraceptive Technology conference
Emergency Contraceptive Pill Efficacy and BMI/Body Weight
Handout on Unintended Pregnancy and Contraceptive Choice
Ask About Withdrawal (Really!)
Rules to Practice By: Safety First and Cleanliness is Close to. . .
What’s Vanity Fair Got Against the NuvaRing?
Promising New Treatment for Hepatitis C
Numbers matter, so make them simple for patients
The Recession’s Effect on Unintended Pregnancies
Lessons Learned from the Contraceptive CHOICE Project: The Hull LARC Initiative
Applying the “New” Cervical Cytology Guidelines in Your Practice
Acute Excessive Uterine Bleeding: New Management Strategies
Medical indications for IUD use in teens

Combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs) raise the greatest number of clinical issues for patients in the perimenopausal age group, but they may also provide the greatest numbers of noncontraceptive benefits, according Amanda Black and Anita Nelson, writing in the soon to be published 21st edition of Contraceptive Technology.1 During the perimenopause, CHCs offer healthy candidates effective contraception as well as good cycle control (with the possibility of amenorrhea), decreased blood loss, treatment of vaso¬motor symptoms, at least partial protection against bone loss, and reduction in the risks of several cancers. These benefits must be weighed against additional health issues that can develop with age and that increase the risk of using an estrogen-containing contraceptive method.
In particular, endometrial cancer rates can be reduced by about 50%, regardless of the age of the user.2 Ovarian cancer risk reduction has been impressively demonstrated in younger users, but it is not clear how much the risk of ovarian cancer is reduced with CHC use in the later reproductive-age years.3 More recently, the lifetime risk of colorectal cancer has been showed to be reduced by COC use, although the magnitude of the effect is not known when pills are used only during later reproductive years.4,5
Breast cancer risks alarm women, but the earlier studies that raised the con¬cerns for increased breast cancer risk involved the use of high-dose formu¬lations. Today, there does not appear to be an excess risk of breast cancer associated with long-term use of combined oral contraceptives, either during CHC use or later in life.6,7
Carefully monitor patients in this age group for development of cate¬gory 4 conditions or combinations of category 3 conditions of the U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria. Given the prevalence of obesity and under-diagnosed hypertension, diabetes, and cardiovascular risks, thorough periodic analysis of the health status of older CHC users must be done over time. Those found to be healthy without other contra¬indications to estrogen-containing methods can continue to use combined hormonal methods until menopause in the United States. However, the lack of evidence of the safety of CHCs in this population has prompted more conservative approaches in other countries. In Canada and in the United Kingdom, guidelines recommend considering changing at the age of 50 from CHC methods to a progestin-only method.8
Some companies have marketed lower-dose oral contraceptives spe¬cifically for this age group, but there is no consistent evidence that for¬mulations with 10 or 20 mcg ethinyl estradiol are safer. Estrogen potency may be important; formulations with weaker estrogens may pose less thrombotic risk.
Specifically for perimenopausal patients, write Carrie Cwiak and Alison Edelman in the new edition of CT,9 COCs can reduce irregular menstrual bleeding and the risk of en-dometrial hyperplasia associated with anovulatory cycling. Black and Nelson further advise that, in the late reproductive years, extended-cycle use of combined hormonal contraceptives (oral contraceptive pills and vaginal rings) may be particularly appealing, not only to achieve amenorrhea, but also to avoid development of vasomotor symptoms during hormone-free intervals. Cwiak and Edelman agree, reporting that one 3-year observational study found that 90% of perimenopausal women with vasomotor symp¬toms had relief with COC therapy compared with 40% with placebo.10 Extended use of COCs may be more effective as users would not experience a drop in EE during the placebo week.
If the user wants scheduled bleeding, try to limit the number of hormone-free days with use of 24/4 formulations or 24/4 ring-use patterns. Some pill formulations have only 2 placebo pills and include low-dose estrogen-only pills during the rest of the scheduled bleeding days; this can reduce symptoms associated with estrogen withdrawal. Of note, the vaginal contraceptive ring increases vaginal lubrication and may help relieve symptoms of vaginal dryness and dyspareunia.
Conclusions
Healthy patients without contraindications to estrogen can safely use COCs until they reach menopause, say Cwiak and Edelman. Though it may be difficult to detect when meno¬pause occurs, because COC users in their 40s or early 50s may not experience traditional symptoms of menopause while taking COCs. They will not experience menstrual irregularities or hot flashes, especially if COCs are used on an extended basis.
- Black A, Nelson AL. Contraception in the later reproductive years. In: Hatcher RA, Nelson AL, Trussell J, et al. (eds) Contraceptive Technology. 21st edition. New York, NY: Ayer Company Publishers, Inc. In press.
- Iversen L, Sivasubramaniam S, Lee AJ, Fielding S, Hannaford PC. Lifetime cancer risk and combined oral contraceptives: the Royal College of General Practitioners’ Oral Contraception Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017;216:580.e1-e9.
- Braem MC, Onland-Moret NC, van den Brandt PA, et al. Reproductive and hormonal factors in association with ovarian cancer in the Netherlands cohort study. Am J Epidemiol 2010;172:1181-9.
- Gierisch JM, Coeytaux RR, Urrutia RP, et al. Oral contraceptive use and risk of breast, cervical, colorectal, and endometrial cancers: a systematic review. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2013;22:1931-43.
- Bosetti C, Bravi F, Negri E, La Vecchia C. Oral contraceptives and colorectal cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2009;15:489-98.
- Hannaford PC, Iversen L, Macfarlane TV, Elliot AM, Angus V, Lee AJ. Mortality among contraceptive pill users: cohort evidence from Royal College of General Practitioners’ Oral Contraception Study. BMJ 2010;340:c927.
- Thorbjanardardottir T, Olafsdottir EJ, Valdimarsdottir UA, Olafsson O, Tryggvadottir L. Oral contraceptives, hormone replacement therapy and breast cancer risk: a cohort study of 16,928 women 48 years and older. Acta Oncol 2014;53:752-8.
- Faculty of Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare CEU. FSRH Guideline: Contraception for women aged over 40 years:2017:1-66.
- Cwiak C, Edelman AB. Combined oral contraceptives (COCs). In: Hatcher RA, Nelson AL, Trussell J, et al. (eds) Contraceptive Technology. 21st edition. New York, NY: Ayer Company Publishers, Inc. In press.
- Shargil AA. Hormone replacement therapy in perimenopausal women with a triphasic contraceptive compound: a three-year prospective study. Int J Fertil 1985;30:15, 8-28.