Skip to main content
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
  • Blog
  • Newsroom
  • Find It Fast
  • Help Center
  • Subscribe
  • Careers
  • Contact Us

PCORI

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute

Search form

  • About Us
    Close mega-menu

    About Us

    • Our Programs
    • Governance
    • Financials and Reports
    • Procurement Opportunities
    • Our Staff
    • Our Vision & Mission
    • Contact Us

    Fact Sheets: Learn More About PCORI

    Download fact sheets about out work, the research we fund, and our programs and initiatives.

    Find It Fast

    Browse through an alphabetical list of frequently accessed and searched terms for information and resources.

    Subscribe to PCORI Email Alerts

    Sign up for weekly emails to stay current on the latest results of our funded projects, and more.

  • Research & Results
    Close mega-menu

    Research & Results

    • Explore Our Portfolio
    • Research Fundamentals
    • Research Results Highlights
    • Putting Evidence to Work
    • Peer Review
    • Evidence Synthesis
    • About Our Research

    Evidence Updates from PCORI-Funded Studies

    These updates capture highlights of findings from systematic reviews and our funded research studies.

    Journal Articles About Our Funded Research

    Browse through a collection of journal publications that provides insights into PCORI-funded work.

    Explore Our Portfolio of Funded Projects

    Find out about projects based on the health conditions they focus on, the state they are in, and if they have results.

  • Topics
    Close mega-menu

    Topics

    • Addressing Disparities
    • Arthritis
    • Asthma
    • Cancer
    • Cardiovascular Disease
    • Children's Health
    • Community Health Workers
    • COVID-19
    • Dementia and Cognitive Impairment
    • Diabetes
    • Kidney Disease
    • Medicaid
    • Men's Health
    • Mental and Behavioral Health
    • Minority Mental Health
    • Multiple Chronic Conditions
    • Multiple Sclerosis
    • Obesity
    • Older Adults' Health
    • Pain Care and Opioids
    • Rare Diseases
    • Rural Health
    • Shared Decision Making
    • Telehealth
    • Transitional Care
    • Veterans Health
    • Women's Health

    Featured Topic: Women's Health

    Learn more about the projects we support on conditions that specifically or more often affect women.

  • Engagement
    Close mega-menu

    Engagement

    • The Value of Engagement
    • Engagement in Health Research Literature Explorer
    • Influencing the Culture of Research
    • Engagement Awards
    • Engagement Resources
    • Engage with Us

    Engagement Tools and Resources for Research

    This searchable peer-to-peer repository includes resources that can inform future work in patient-centered outcomes research.

    Explore Engagement in Health Literature

    This tool enables searching for published articles about engagement in health research.

    Research Fundamentals: A New On-Demand Training

    It enables those new to health research or patient-centered research to learn more about the research process.

  • Funding Opportunities
    Close mega-menu

    Funding Opportunities

    • What & Who We Fund
    • What You Need to Know to Apply
    • Applicant Training
    • Merit Review
    • Awardee Resources
    • Help Center

    PCORI Funding Opportunities

    View and learn about the newly opened funding announcements and the upcoming PFAs in 2021.

    Tips for Submitting a Responsive LOI

    Find out what PCORI looks for in a letter of intent (LOI) along with other helpful tips.

    PCORI Awardee Resources

    These resources can help awardees in complying with the terms and conditions of their contract.

  • Meetings & Events
    Close mega-menu

    Meetings & Events

    • Upcoming
    • Past Events

    PCORI 2021 and Beyond

    During this webinar, PCORI leaders shared ways to get involved in PCOR, improvements to our funding opportunities, and more.

    Confronting COVID-19: A Webinar Series

    Learn more about the series and access recordings and summary reports of all six sessions.

    2020 PCORI Annual Meeting

    Watch recordings of all sessions, and view titles and descriptions of the posters presented at the virtual meeting.

You are here

  • Research & Results
  • Explore Our Portfolio
  • Evaluating Hormone Treatments for Wom...

This project has results

Evaluating Hormone Treatments for Women at Increased Risk for Preterm Birth – EPPPIC

Sign Up for Updates to This Study  

Results Summary and Professional Abstract

Results Summary
Download Summary Español (pdf) Audio Recording (mp3)

Results Summary

What was the research about?

A full-term pregnancy lasts about 40 weeks. In preterm birth, a baby is born before 37 weeks. When babies are born too soon, they are at higher risk for health problems, like difficulty breathing or feeding. Babies who are born before 34 weeks are also more likely than full-term babies to die during their first year.

Progestogens are hormones made by women’s bodies that help support pregnancy. They may help reduce the risk of preterm birth. In this study, the research team analyzed data from 30 previous studies to examine two types of hormone treatments for pregnant women who were at risk for preterm birth:

  • 17-OHPC, a hormone made in a lab and injected
  • Vaginal progesterone, a natural hormone given through a gel or tablet in the vagina

What were the results?

Women pregnant with one baby. Compared with getting no hormones, women with a short cervix or previous preterm birth who received either 17-OHPC or vaginal progesterone

  • Had a lower chance of their baby being born before 34 weeks
  • Might have a lower chance of their baby dying or having serious problems
  • Might have more health problems

The study found no evidence that either 17-OHPC or vaginal progesterone was better than the other in reducing

  • Preterm birth before 34 weeks
  • Women’s health problems
  • Newborns’ health problems

Women pregnant with twins or triplets. Compared with no hormones, the study found no evidence that either 17-OHPC or vaginal progesterone reduced the chances of preterm birth before 34 weeks, or women’s or newborns’ health problems for women with no other risk factors.

Who was in the study?

Researchers analyzed 30 trials, which included 9,936 women at increased risk for preterm birth and their 14,477 babies. Most women who were pregnant with one baby either had a previous preterm birth or a short cervix. Most women who were pregnant with twins or triplets didn’t have other risk factors.

What did the research team do?

The research team combined data from the trials and analyzed it together. Combining data from multiple trials provides more reliable results that just looking at single trials. The team compared the treatments to no treatment and to each other using these data, to see how well they reduced preterm birth and women’s and babies’ health problems.

Women who had given birth preterm and members of patient and family advocacy organizations gave input on the study.

What were the limits of the study?

The research team could not be certain about the treatments’ effects on serious problems for babies or mothers, as these problems happened only rarely in the trials. Also, only two trials directly compared 17-OHPC and vaginal progesterone.

After the team completed their analysis, other researchers published results from a large trial looking at women receiving 17-OHPC. If this trial was included, the study results for 17-OHPC might change. Future research could update the study with results from this large trial.

How can people use the results?

Doctors and women at risk for preterm birth can use these results when talking about options to help reduce the chance of their babies being born preterm.

Professional Abstract

Professional Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of progestogens versus placebo or no intervention in reducing preterm birth (PTB) and associated maternal and neonatal complications 

Study Design

Design Element Description
Design IPD meta-analysis
Population 5,598 women with a singleton pregnancy at risk for PTB mostly due to prior PTB or short cervix; 4,338 women with multifetal pregnancy, mostly with no other risk factors
Interventions/
Comparators
  • Injectable 17-OHPC (a synthetic hormone) versus placebo or no intervention
  • Vaginal progesterone (a natural hormone) versus placebo or no intervention
  • Oral progesterone (a natural hormone) versus placebo or no intervention
  • Injectable 17-OHPC versus vaginal progesterone
Outcomes PTB before 28, 34, and 37 weeks; perinatal death; serious neonatal complications; maternal complications
Timeframe Not applicable

This individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of progestogens versus placebo or no intervention in reducing PTB and associated neonatal and maternal complications.

Researchers searched bibliographic databases and international registries for published and unpublished randomized controlled trials completed prior to July 2016. They invited trial investigators to join a collaborative group and supply their data sets for re-analysis. The IPD meta-analysis included 30 trials with data from 9,936 women and 14,477 babies.

Researchers analyzed singleton and multiple gestation pregnancies separately and compared each form of progestogen with placebo or no intervention. They then compared injectable 17α-hydroxyprogesterone caproate (17-OHPC) with vaginal progesterone using network meta-analysis.

Women who had experienced PTB and members of patient and family advocacy organizations were part of the collaborative group.

Results

Singleton pregnancies at high risk for PTB, mostly due to prior PTB or short cervix.

Compared with untreated women, women who received injectable 17-OHPC

  • Were less likely to have babies who were born before 34 weeks (risk ratio [RR]=0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59, 0.94)
  • Had reduced risk of perinatal death, but this was very uncertain (RR=0.88; 95% CI: 0.54, 1.45)
  • Were more likely to experience maternal complications (RR=1.34; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.71)
  • Had babies with reduced risk of serious neonatal complications, but this was uncertain (RR=0.76; 95% CI: 0.54, 1.08)

Compared with untreated women, women who received vaginal progesterone

  • Were less likely to have babies who were born before 34 weeks (RR=0.78; 95% CI: 0.68, 0.90)
  • Had reduced risk of perinatal death, but this was uncertain (RR=0.74; 95% CI: 0.52, 1.07)
  • Were more likely to have maternal complications, but this was uncertain (RR=1.14; 95% CI: 0.93, 1.40)
  • Had babies with reduced risk of serious neonatal complications, but this was uncertain (RR=0.82; 95% CI: 0.65, 1.04)

Comparing 17-OHPC with vaginal progesterone, network meta-analysis found no clear evidence that either was more effective in reducing PTB before 34 weeks, serious neonatal complications, overall maternal complications, or perinatal death.

Evidence for oral progesterone was insufficient.

Multiple gestation pregnancies, mostly with no additional risk factors

Overall, the study found no evidence that 17-OHPC or vaginal progesterone reduced PTB before 34 weeks or associated complications in unselected multifetal pregnancies. Data were too few for reliable analysis of women with additional risk factors.

Limitations

A large trial of 17-OHPC in singleton pregnancies was completed after this meta-analysis. Incorporating these and other new trial data could change the estimated effects. Only two trials directly compared 17-OHPC with vaginal progesterone. The meta-analysis mainly used indirect evidence from trials comparing progestogens with placebo or no treatment.

Conclusions and Relevance

For women with singleton pregnancies with a previous PTB or short cervix, both 17-OHPC and vaginal progesterone reduced the risk of PTB before 34 weeks and improved other birth and neonatal outcomes. However, 17-OHPC increased overall maternal complications. Maternal complications also increased with vaginal progesterone, but this effect was smaller and more uncertain. The findings do not support the use of progestogens in unselected twin or triplet pregnancies.

Future Research Needs

This meta-analysis should be updated to include newly completed trials, including the recent large trial of 17-OHPC. Depending on the results of an update, further trials comparing vaginal progesterone, 17-OHPC, and potentially oral progesterone may be needed.

This project's final research report is expected to be available by October 2020.

Journal Articles

Related Articles

Systematic Reviews

Evaluating progestogens for prevention of preterm birth international collaborative (EPPPIC) individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis: protocol

More on this Project  

Protocol for this Review

Peer-Review Summary

Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.

The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments. 

Peer reviewers commented and the researchers made changes or provided responses. Those comments and responses included the following:

  • The reviewers commented that a limitation of the report is that it excluded observational studies, especially ones considering subgroups and neurodevelopmental outcomes. The researchers said they did not try to collect data from observational studies because of budget and time constraints but agreed that a future review of observational studies would be a useful addition to the evidence already collected. The researchers also revised the report to acknowledge that other trials of preterm birth preventive treatments have ended since they completed the current meta-analysis. However, these newer trials have not provided the individual patient data necessary for inclusion in the type of analysis described in this report. Once this information is available, the researchers hope to include the additional trials in an update to the current report.
  • The reviewers noted that there did not appear to be much patient and stakeholder engagement in this study, as is typical for PCORI-funded research. The researchers acknowledged that it was difficult to incorporate patient and stakeholder feedback in the study. They stated that given that this project was a meta-analysis combining data from already-completed clinical trials, there was little relevant support and guidance patient and stakeholder partners could provide. Instead, the researchers added a qualitative component to the study to gain information about patient perspectives related to treatment options for preterm birth, to help put the study results into perspective.
  • The reviewers questioned the presentation of the qualitative substudy, stating that the researchers presented the results in a way that made them seem like a minor portion of the work. The researchers said they tried to strengthen the patient voice in the study by conducting a small-scale qualitative analysis, which they believe provided insights that were integral to the report’s conclusions and recommendations. The researchers restructured the report so that a summary of the qualitative study methods is in the main report and much more detailed information is in an appendix.
  • The reviewers asked for a clearer explanation of how the researchers handled missing data. The researchers said they did not need to infer missing data since sets of variables were generally provided in their entirety or were completely missing in any one trial.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures

View the COI disclosure form.

Project Details

Principal Investigator
Lesley Stewart, PhD, MSc
Project Status
Completed; PCORI Public and Professional Abstracts Posted
Project Title
Evaluating Progestogen for Prevention of Preterm Birth International Collaborative (EPPPIC): Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis
Project End Date
December 2020
Organization
University of York (United Kingdom)
Year Awarded
2017
Year Completed
2019
Project Type
Research Project
Populations
Children -- 18 and under
Women
Project Budget
$581,286
Study Registration Information
HSRP20181696
Page Last Updated: 
December 10, 2020

About Us

  • Our Programs
  • Governance
  • Financials and Reports
  • Procurement Opportunities
  • Our Staff
  • Our Vision & Mission
  • Contact Us

Research & Results

  • Explore Our Portfolio
  • Research Fundamentals
  • Research Results Highlights
  • Putting Evidence to Work
  • Peer Review
  • Evidence Synthesis
  • About Our Research

Engagement

  • The Value of Engagement
  • Engagement in Health Research Literature Explorer
  • Influencing the Culture of Research
  • Engagement Awards
  • Engagement Resources
  • Engage with Us

Funding Opportunities

  • What & Who We Fund
  • What You Need to Know to Apply
  • Applicant Training
  • Merit Review
  • Awardee Resources
  • Help Center

Meetings & Events

March 8
Engagement Awards 2021 Special Cycle -- Applicant Office Hours (One)
March 15
Priorities on the Health Horizon: Informing PCORI's Strategic Plan (Webinar)
March 15
PCORI Workshop on Methodologic Challenges in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Research

PCORI

Footer contact address

Patient-Centered Outcomes
Research Institute

1828 L Street, NW, Suite 900
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 827-7700 | Fax: (202) 355-9558
[email protected]

Subscribe to Newsletter

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Vimeo

© 2011-2021 Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. All Rights Reserved.

Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademark Usage Guidelines | Credits | Help Center