Skip to content

Oral Contraceptives in the Metabolic Syndrome

Oral Contraceptives in the Metabolic Syndrome

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00205504
Enrollment
46
Registered
2005-09-20
Start date
2005-06-30
Completion date
2009-06-30
Last updated
2018-08-08

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Cardiovascular Diseases, Insulin Resistance, Metabolic Syndrome X, Obesity

Keywords

Inflammatory markers, oral contraceptions, obesity, metabolic syndrome X

Brief summary

Oral contraceptives (OCs) are the most widely used method of reversible birth control. However, the long-term cardiovascular safety of the widely used low-dose OCs (ethinyl-estradiol \< 50 mcg) is still debated. Although cardiovascular events are rare in young women whether they use OCs or not, the risks of myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke are increased among users of OCs who have conventional cardiovascular risk factors such as use of tobacco, diabetes or hypercholesterolemia. However, the risk of cardiovascular events in OC users with emerging cardiovascular risk factors (such as obesity and the metabolic syndrome) have not been investigated. Recently, the metabolic syndrome has been linked with the risk of cardiovascular disease. The syndrome is a clustering of risk factors in a single individual, and its underlying cause may be insulin resistance. Whether the metabolic syndrome predicts a higher cardiovascular risk in OC users has not been studied. This is a critical problem because the metabolic syndrome is prevalent in 24% of adults. Until the cardiovascular risks in users of OC are clearly defined, the appropriate use of OC with the least harm would not be possible. The investigator's long-term goal is to understand the best way to prevent and treat cardiovascular disease in women. The objective of this particular project is to obtain pilot data on the extent to which the metabolic syndrome and obesity affects glucose metabolism and cardiovascular risks in women taking OCs. The researchers hypothesize that women with metabolic syndrome and obese women will have worsened glucose metabolism and elevated cardiovascular risks associated with OC use, when compared to normal weight women without the metabolic syndrome. Results of this study will clarify the risk factors for cardiovascular events in women taking OCs, and will serve as pilot data for a National Institutes of Health (NIH) proposal. Once the cardiovascular risk factors of OC users are understood, clinicians can make better informed decisions about contraceptive choices for their patients.

Interventions

DRUGOrtho Tri Cyclen

Ortho Tri Cyclen, one tablet daily, for 6 cycles

Sponsors

Virginia Commonwealth University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
18 Years to 40 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

1. Acceptable health based on interview, medical history, physical examination, and laboratory tests (comprehensive metabolic panel - SMA20, and complete blood count - CBC); 2. Have not taken oral contraceptives (OCs) in the past 3 months; 3. Ability to comply with the requirements of the study; 4. Ability and willingness to provide signed, witnessed informed consent. In addition, women with the metabolic syndrome must meet the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) defined criteria of the metabolic syndrome, that is, having at least 3 of the 5 factors: 1. increased waist circumference \> 35 inches, 2. hypertriglyceridemia ≥ 150 mg/dL, 3. low high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol \< 50 mg/dL in women, 4. hypertension (≥ 130/≥ 85 mmHg), 5. fasting glucose ≥ 100 mg/dL. Obese women with or without the metabolic syndrome should have a Body Mass Index (BMI) \> 30 kg/m2 and lean women should have a Body Mass Index BMI \< 25 kg/m2.

Exclusion criteria

1. Diabetes mellitus by fasting glucose or a 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT); 2. Clinically significant pulmonary, cardiac (including but not limited to ischemic heart disease, stable/unstable angina, and congestive heart failure), renal, hepatic, cholestatic, neurologic, psychiatric, infectious, and malignant disease (other than melanoma skin cancer); 3. History of thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, vascular disease, known coagulopathy, prolonged immobilization, or recent major surgery (within past 6 months); 4. Systolic blood pressure greater than 160 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure greater than 100 mmHg (mild hypertension is not an exclusion criterion); 5. History of breast cancer, migraine headaches, or age ≥ 35 years and smoker of ≥ 20 cigarettes/day; 6. Use of metformin, thiazolidinediones, anti-hyperlipidemic drugs, anti-hypertensive drugs, glucocorticoids, or anti-androgens (spironolactone, flutamide, etc.) within 3 months; 7. Documented or suspected illicit drug abuse or alcoholism within one year; 8. Ingestion of any investigational drugs within 3 months prior to the study onset; and 9. Pregnancy or lactation (≤ 6 weeks postpartum); 10. Hematocrit \< 33g/dL. These

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Changes in Insulin Sensitivity Associated With Oral Contraceptive (OC) Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline and 6 monthsInsulin sensitivity was assessed by frequent sampling intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIVGTT).

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Changes in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline and 6 monthsThe lipid profile is assessed through blood sample analysis for low-density lipoprotein (LDL), Triglycerides and high-density lipoprotein (HDL).
Changes in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline and 6 months
Changes in Waist-to-Hip Ratio Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline and 6 monthsWaist-to-hip ratio is assessed through calculated ratio of waist and hip circumference.
Inflammatory Marker Changes (MCP-1) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline and 6 monthsInflammatory marker is assessed through blood analysis for Monocyte chemotactic protein-1 (MCP-1).
Inflammatory Marker Changes, High Sensitive C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) and Adiponectin, Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline and 6 monthsInflammatory markers are assessed through blood analysis for C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and adiponectin.
Changes in Body Mass Index (BMI) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline and 6 monthsBody Mass Index is a calculation of height and weight: kg/m²
Changes in Waist Circumference Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline and 6 months
Inflammatory Marker Changes, Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) and Soluble Intercellular Adhesion Molecule (sICAM), Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline and 6 monthsThese inflammatory markers are assessed through blood analysis of Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) and soluble intercellular adhesion molecule (sICAM).
Changes in Blood Pressure Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline and 6 months

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Pre-assignment details

Although 46 completed informed consent, only 36 initiated the study. Among The participants who did not begin the study were lost to follow-up prior to beginning the protocol, were no shows, or withdrew from the study before beginning study procedures.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Obese Women
Women with Body Mass Index (BMI) \>30 kg/m². Note: Only two arms were analyzed for the results. Women who were candidates for taking oral contraceptive pills and had the metabolic syndrome could not be recruited. That is because some inclusion criteria for metabolic syndrome are actually exclusion criteria for safe oral contraceptive use.
21
Lean Women
Women with Body Mass Index)BMI \<25 kg/m²
15
Total36

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicLean WomenObese WomenTotal
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
15 Participants21 Participants36 Participants
Age, Continuous21.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.3
25.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.9
23.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.8
Region of Enrollment
United States
15 participants21 participants36 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
15 Participants21 Participants36 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
2 / 212 / 15
serious
Total, serious adverse events
1 / 210 / 15

Outcome results

Primary

Changes in Insulin Sensitivity Associated With Oral Contraceptive (OC) Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women

Insulin sensitivity was assessed by frequent sampling intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIVGTT).

Time frame: Baseline and 6 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Obese WomenChanges in Insulin Sensitivity Associated With Oral Contraceptive (OC) Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Insulin sensitivity4.36 mIU/LStandard Deviation 2.32
Obese WomenChanges in Insulin Sensitivity Associated With Oral Contraceptive (OC) Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Insulin sensitivity3.82 mIU/LStandard Deviation 3.12
Lean WomenChanges in Insulin Sensitivity Associated With Oral Contraceptive (OC) Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Insulin sensitivity6.62 mIU/LStandard Deviation 3.69
Lean WomenChanges in Insulin Sensitivity Associated With Oral Contraceptive (OC) Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Insulin sensitivity8.23 mIU/LStandard Deviation 3.3
Secondary

Changes in Blood Pressure Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women

Time frame: Baseline and 6 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Obese WomenChanges in Blood Pressure Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Systolic Blood Pressure121.1 mm HgStandard Deviation 3.2
Obese WomenChanges in Blood Pressure Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Systolic Blood Pressure123.5 mm HgStandard Deviation 11.7
Obese WomenChanges in Blood Pressure Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Diastolic Blood Pressure74.4 mm HgStandard Deviation 1.8
Obese WomenChanges in Blood Pressure Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Diastolic Blood Pressure73.4 mm HgStandard Deviation 6.6
Lean WomenChanges in Blood Pressure Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Diastolic Blood Pressure66.5 mm HgStandard Deviation 6.8
Lean WomenChanges in Blood Pressure Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Systolic Blood Pressure105.7 mm HgStandard Deviation 8.6
Lean WomenChanges in Blood Pressure Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Diastolic Blood Pressure68.0 mm HgStandard Deviation 3.7
Lean WomenChanges in Blood Pressure Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Systolic Blood Pressure106.5 mm HgStandard Deviation 12.2
Secondary

Changes in Body Mass Index (BMI) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women

Body Mass Index is a calculation of height and weight: kg/m²

Time frame: Baseline and 6 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Obese WomenChanges in Body Mass Index (BMI) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline BMI37.1 kg/m²Standard Deviation 6.7
Obese WomenChanges in Body Mass Index (BMI) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months BMI37.6 kg/m²Standard Deviation 4.7
Lean WomenChanges in Body Mass Index (BMI) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline BMI21.3 kg/m²Standard Deviation 1.8
Lean WomenChanges in Body Mass Index (BMI) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months BMI21.4 kg/m²Standard Deviation 4.9
Secondary

Changes in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women

Time frame: Baseline and 6 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 4ME20.89 pg/mLStandard Deviation 0.79
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 2ME21.48 pg/mLStandard Deviation 1.06
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline E234.11 pg/mLStandard Deviation 15.61
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 2ME125.92 pg/mLStandard Deviation 11.03
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months E274.73 pg/mLStandard Deviation 117.52
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 2ME21.5 pg/mLStandard Deviation 1.11
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 2OHE1101.07 pg/mLStandard Deviation 126.04
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 4ME15.26 pg/mLStandard Deviation 3.58
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 2OHE1135.95 pg/mLStandard Deviation 220.24
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline E1217.23 pg/mLStandard Deviation 170.88
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 2OHE29.81 pg/mLStandard Deviation 5.85
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 16aE1421.6 pg/mLStandard Deviation 286.57
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 2OHE211.55 pg/mLStandard Deviation 21.74
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months E1315.03 pg/mLStandard Deviation 339.15
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 4OHE133.78 pg/mLStandard Deviation 16.52
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 4ME16.1 pg/mLStandard Deviation 3.29
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 4OHE127.29 pg/mLStandard Deviation 25.65
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 4ME20.73 pg/mLStandard Deviation 0.55
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Total plasma1068 pg/mLStandard Deviation 472.78
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 2ME152.84 pg/mLStandard Deviation 54.29
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Total plasma1342.21 pg/mLStandard Deviation 1166.36
Obese WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 16aE1314.76 pg/mLStandard Deviation 179.73
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Total plasma1007.89 pg/mLStandard Deviation 977.81
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 16aE1317.47 pg/mLStandard Deviation 159.8
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 16aE1383.39 pg/mLStandard Deviation 452.98
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 2ME132.39 pg/mLStandard Deviation 9.3
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 2ME145.58 pg/mLStandard Deviation 23.83
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 4ME14.45 pg/mLStandard Deviation 3.13
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 4ME17.42 pg/mLStandard Deviation 8.55
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 2ME20.91 pg/mLStandard Deviation 0.82
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 2ME21.74 pg/mLStandard Deviation 2.15
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline E1245.99 pg/mLStandard Deviation 128.41
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months E1227.4 pg/mLStandard Deviation 271.6
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 4ME20.59 pg/mLStandard Deviation 0.54
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 4ME21.14 pg/mLStandard Deviation 1.41
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline E236.796 pg/mLStandard Deviation 17.28
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months E247.32 pg/mLStandard Deviation 61.82
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 2OHE185.62 pg/mLStandard Deviation 48.08
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 2OHE157.96 pg/mLStandard Deviation 70.02
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 2OHE28.01 pg/mLStandard Deviation 3.62
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 2OHE26.05 pg/mLStandard Deviation 4.69
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline 4OHE133.98 pg/mLStandard Deviation 25.86
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months 4OHE129.12 pg/mLStandard Deviation 15.08
Lean WomenChanges in Estrogen Metabolites (Plasma) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Total plasma1022.16 pg/mLStandard Deviation 295.61
Secondary

Changes in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women

The lipid profile is assessed through blood sample analysis for low-density lipoprotein (LDL), Triglycerides and high-density lipoprotein (HDL).

Time frame: Baseline and 6 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Obese WomenChanges in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline LDL95 mg/dLStandard Deviation 18.4
Obese WomenChanges in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months LDL113 mg/dLStandard Deviation 25.2
Obese WomenChanges in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Triglycerides72 mg/dLStandard Deviation 50.3
Obese WomenChanges in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Triglycerides83 mg/dLStandard Deviation 51.1
Obese WomenChanges in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline HDL51 mg/dLStandard Deviation 10.7
Obese WomenChanges in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months HDL58 mg/dLStandard Deviation 12.4
Lean WomenChanges in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline HDL53 mg/dLStandard Deviation 10
Lean WomenChanges in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline LDL84 mg/dLStandard Deviation 24.3
Lean WomenChanges in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Triglycerides106 mg/dLStandard Deviation 52.9
Lean WomenChanges in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months LDL104 mg/dLStandard Deviation 26.1
Lean WomenChanges in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months HDL61 mg/dLStandard Deviation 12.8
Lean WomenChanges in Lipid Profile Compared Associated With OC Use Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Triglycerides72 mg/dLStandard Deviation 52
Secondary

Changes in Waist Circumference Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women

Time frame: Baseline and 6 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Obese WomenChanges in Waist Circumference Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Waist circumference100.0 cmStandard Deviation 14.4
Obese WomenChanges in Waist Circumference Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Waist circumference101.0 cmStandard Deviation 10.5
Lean WomenChanges in Waist Circumference Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Waist circumference70.2 cmStandard Deviation 4.1
Lean WomenChanges in Waist Circumference Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Waist circumference70.9 cmStandard Deviation 10.7
Secondary

Changes in Waist-to-Hip Ratio Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women

Waist-to-hip ratio is assessed through calculated ratio of waist and hip circumference.

Time frame: Baseline and 6 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Obese WomenChanges in Waist-to-Hip Ratio Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Waist-Hip Ratio0.79 ratioStandard Deviation 0.059
Obese WomenChanges in Waist-to-Hip Ratio Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Waist-Hip Ratio0.81 ratioStandard Deviation 0.057
Lean WomenChanges in Waist-to-Hip Ratio Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Waist-Hip Ratio0.73 ratioStandard Deviation 0.027
Lean WomenChanges in Waist-to-Hip Ratio Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Waist-Hip Ratio0.73 ratioStandard Deviation 0.057
Secondary

Inflammatory Marker Changes, High Sensitive C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) and Adiponectin, Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women

Inflammatory markers are assessed through blood analysis for C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and adiponectin.

Time frame: Baseline and 6 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Obese WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, High Sensitive C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) and Adiponectin, Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Hs-CRP4908.76 ng/mLStandard Deviation 5215.07
Obese WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, High Sensitive C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) and Adiponectin, Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Hs-CRP6207.76 ng/mLStandard Deviation 4566.8
Obese WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, High Sensitive C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) and Adiponectin, Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Adiponectin17568.86 ng/mLStandard Deviation 5680.86
Obese WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, High Sensitive C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) and Adiponectin, Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Adiponectin18408.43 ng/mLStandard Deviation 4934.39
Lean WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, High Sensitive C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) and Adiponectin, Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Adiponectin22221.36 ng/mLStandard Deviation 11160.97
Lean WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, High Sensitive C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) and Adiponectin, Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Hs-CRP2050.77 ng/mLStandard Deviation 4748.75
Lean WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, High Sensitive C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) and Adiponectin, Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline Adiponectin21976.53 ng/mLStandard Deviation 8322.05
Lean WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, High Sensitive C-reactive Protein (Hs-CRP) and Adiponectin, Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months Hs-CRP2266.02 ng/mLStandard Deviation 3443.3
Secondary

Inflammatory Marker Changes (MCP-1) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women

Inflammatory marker is assessed through blood analysis for Monocyte chemotactic protein-1 (MCP-1).

Time frame: Baseline and 6 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Obese WomenInflammatory Marker Changes (MCP-1) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline MCP-1209.56 pg/mLStandard Deviation 125.92
Obese WomenInflammatory Marker Changes (MCP-1) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months MCP-1219.86 pg/mLStandard Deviation 159.85
Lean WomenInflammatory Marker Changes (MCP-1) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline MCP-1156.14 pg/mLStandard Deviation 36.29
Lean WomenInflammatory Marker Changes (MCP-1) Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months MCP-1206.66 pg/mLStandard Deviation 76.15
Secondary

Inflammatory Marker Changes, Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) and Soluble Intercellular Adhesion Molecule (sICAM), Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women

These inflammatory markers are assessed through blood analysis of Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) and soluble intercellular adhesion molecule (sICAM).

Time frame: Baseline and 6 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Obese WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) and Soluble Intercellular Adhesion Molecule (sICAM), Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline sVCAM905 ng/mLStandard Deviation 190.63
Obese WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) and Soluble Intercellular Adhesion Molecule (sICAM), Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months sVCAM880.14 ng/mLStandard Deviation 180.08
Obese WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) and Soluble Intercellular Adhesion Molecule (sICAM), Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline sICAM163.34 ng/mLStandard Deviation 50.44
Obese WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) and Soluble Intercellular Adhesion Molecule (sICAM), Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months sICAM163.2 ng/mLStandard Deviation 27.71
Lean WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) and Soluble Intercellular Adhesion Molecule (sICAM), Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months sICAM160.21 ng/mLStandard Deviation 74.88
Lean WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) and Soluble Intercellular Adhesion Molecule (sICAM), Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline sVCAM1139.6 ng/mLStandard Deviation 159.57
Lean WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) and Soluble Intercellular Adhesion Molecule (sICAM), Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean WomenBaseline sICAM182.11 ng/mLStandard Deviation 91.17
Lean WomenInflammatory Marker Changes, Soluble Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule (sVCAM) and Soluble Intercellular Adhesion Molecule (sICAM), Associated With OC Use Compared Among (1) Obese Women and (2) Lean Women6 months sVCAM1003.29 ng/mLStandard Deviation 256.62

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026