Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Male contraception: where are we going and where have we been?
  1. John Joseph Reynolds-Wright,
  2. Richard A Anderson
  1. MRC Centre for Reproductive Health, The Queen's Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr John Joseph Reynolds-Wright, MRC Centre for Reproductive Health, The Queen's Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH16 4TJ, UK; john.reynolds-wright{at}nhs.net

Abstract

Progress in developing new reversible male contraception has been slow. While the hormonal approach has been clearly shown to be capable of providing effective and reversible contraception, there remains no product available. Currently, trials of a self-administered gel combination of testosterone and the progestogen Nestorone® are under way, complementing the largely injectable methods previously investigated. Novel long-acting steroids with both androgenic and progestogenic activity are also in early clinical trials. The non-hormonal approach offers potential advantages, with potential sites of action on spermatogenesis, and sperm maturation in the epididymis or at the vas, but remains in preclinical testing. Surveys indicate the willingness of men, and their partners, to use a new male method, but they continue to lack that opportunity.

  • hormonal contraception
  • male contraception
  • review

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Correction notice Since this article was first published online the middle intial A has been added to the author Richard Anderson.

  • Contributors JJR-W and RA contributed equally to the manuscript.

  • Funding The authors' work in this field is supported by funding from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) and is carried out at the MRC Centre for Reproductive Health, which is funded by MRC Centre (grant MR/N022556/1).

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles

  • Highlights from this issue
    British Medical Journal Publishing Group
  • Miscellaneous
    British Medical Journal Publishing Group