Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016:5:38-47.
doi: 10.1007/s13669-016-0140-8. Epub 2016 Jan 29.

Male Hormonal Contraception: Where Are We Now?

Affiliations
Review

Male Hormonal Contraception: Where Are We Now?

Christina Wang et al. Curr Obstet Gynecol Rep. 2016.

Abstract

Hormonal male contraception clinical trials began in the 1970s. The method is based on the use of exogenous testosterone alone or in combination with a progestin to suppress the endogenous production of testosterone and spermatogenesis. Studies using testosterone alone showed that the method was very effective with few adverse effects. Addition of a progestin increases the rate and extent of suppression of spermatogenesis. Common adverse effects include acne, injection site pain, mood change including depression, and changes in libido that are usually mild and rarely lead to discontinuation. Current development includes long-acting injectables and transdermal gels and novel androgens that may have both androgenic and progestational activities. Surveys showed that over 50 % of men will accept a new male method and female partners will trust their partner to take oral "male pills." Partnership between government, nongovernment agencies, academia, and industry may generate adequate interest and collaboration to develop and market the first male hormonal contraception.

Keywords: Androgens; Contraceptive efficacy; Male contraception; Progestins; Spermatogenesis suppression.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Darroch JE, Singh S. Trends in contraceptive need and use in developing countries in 2003, 2008, and 2012: an analysis of national surveys. Lancet. 2013;381(9879):1756–62. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60597-8. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Peterson HB, Darmstadt GL, Bongaarts J. Meeting the unmet need for family planning: now is the time. Lancet. 2013;381(9879):1696–9. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60999-X. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Alkema L, Kantorova V, Menozzi C, et al. National, regional, and global rates and trends in contraceptive prevalence and unmet need for family planning between 1990 and 2015: a systematic and comprehensive analysis. Lancet. 2013;381(9878):1642–52. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)62204-1. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Trussell J. Contraceptive failure in the United States. Contraception. 2011;83(5):397–404. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2011.01.021. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nieschlag E. Hormonal male contraception: end of a dream or start of a new era? Endocrine. 2013;43(3):535–8. doi: 10.1007/s12020-012-9832-7. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources