← All drugs
Drug · FAERS side-effect profile with label screen

Levonorgestrel side effects: what 200,207 FDA adverse event reports show

Levonorgestrel · Liletta · 1,249 reaction terms · 465,560 drug–reaction co-reports · data 2026-09-14
Share: X Facebook Reddit Email

Drug class

Progestin, Progestin-containing Intrauterine System

FDA label (Established Pharmacologic Class) · compare the class

Brand names

Liletta

openFDA label

Who reports

200,207 reports · 33% serious · 268 with death outcome · 99% female

openFDA FAERS counts, all years, deduplication not applied

Used for

LILETTA is a progestin-containing intrauterine system indicated for: Prevention of pregnancy for up to 8 years ( 1.1 ) Treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding for up to 5 years in patients who choose intrauterine contraception as their method of contraception ( 1.2 ) 1.1 Contraception LILETTA is indicated for prevention of pregnancy for up to 8 years.

FDA label, Indications and Usage

What it is

Levonorgestrel is the ()-enantiomer of norgestrel. It has a role as a female contraceptive drug, a synthetic oral contraceptive and a progestin.

PubChem CID 13109 (ChEBI)

Boxed warning

None in the current label

How to read this page. FAERS is a spontaneous-reporting system: counts are not incidence rates and a signal is not proof of causation. Each reaction below is run through an automated screen — is the term in the FDA label (known), in the indications (the disease being treated), an administrative/coding term, or none of these (unlabeled)? That screen is mechanical text matching, not a causality assessment. The 30 hand-written Bradford Hill assessments are on the causality assessment page. Not medical advice.

Causality screen of the 40 strongest signals

Labeled adverse reaction 3Labeled (related wording) 18Reporting / coding artifact 9Not in label — unassessed 10
What the badges mean

Strongest disproportionality signals

Flagged terms (PRR ≥ 2, χ² ≥ 4, n ≥ 10), ranked by PRR; infinite PRRs (no comparator reports) excluded. The EBGM column is a second, shrinkage-based estimate (MGPS) with its 5th percentile EB05 and the BCPNN IC025; a pair flagged by PRR alone is marked PRR-only and should be read as fragile. The strata column recomputes the PRR on serious reports only (and, for the 300 most-reported drugs, adjusted for age band), and flags pairs whose reports are unusually skewed by sex or come mostly from consumers. Each row also shows the PRR against the other drugs of the same FDA class, which removes most confounding by the condition being treated, and a calibrated p-value: on validation, known non-causes average an ROR of about 2, so significance is judged against that empirical null (✓ = p < 0.05 after calibration). 1,209 further terms are in the interactive explorer. Reaction links open the term's cross-drug page.

Show:
ReactionReportsPRR 95% CI · ROR · χ²/pEBGM EB05 · IC025Label screenSerious-only & strataTrial cross-check
Iucd complication2,4401,560.9
1,330.2–1,831.5ROR 1,580.1 · calibrated p 2e-19 ✓
96.9 EB05 93.7 · IC025 +6.5
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Reporting / coding artifactserious n=567not reported in cached trials
Medical device monitoring error2531,233.1
790.1–1,924.4ROR 1,234.6 · calibrated p 6e-17 ✓
94.8 EB05 85.4 · IC025 +6.1
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Not in label — unassessedserious n=131not reported in cached trials
Uterine perforation7,439759.1
710.8–810.7ROR 788.4 · calibrated p 4e-16 ✓
91.1 EB05 89.3 · IC025 +6.5
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Labeled adverse reaction
exact term
serious PRR 159.9not reported in cached trials
Contraindicated device used281737.5
527.6–1,030.8ROR 738.5 · calibrated p 4e-15 ✓
90.2 EB05 81.7 · IC025 +6.1
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Reporting / coding artifactserious n=138not reported in cached trials
Genital haemorrhage11,128693.6
658.7–730.4ROR 734.4 · calibrated p 9e-16 ✓
90.0 EB05 88.7 · IC025 +6.5
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: PRR 3,218.0 (2,394.1–4,325.6)
Not in label — unassessedserious PRR 156.1not reported in cached trials
Uterine cervix stenosis445576.5
453.9–732.4ROR 577.8 · calibrated p 3e-14 ✓
87.4 EB05 80.8 · IC025 +6.2
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Not in label — unassessedserious n=75not reported in cached trials
Post procedural discomfort1,693485.4
433.1–544.0ROR 489.5 · calibrated p 8e-14 ✓
85.3 EB05 81.9 · IC025 +6.3
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Reporting / coding artifactserious n=442not reported in cached trials
Device expulsion45,531247.6
243.5–251.6ROR 320.1 · calibrated p 5e-12 ✓
73.1 EB05 72.6 · IC025 +6.2
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: PRR 261.7 (251.2–272.5)
Reporting / coding artifactserious PRR 97.6not reported in cached trials
Uterine stenosis25159.9
85.4–299.5ROR 159.9 · calibrated p 5e-8 ✓
60.3 EB05 42.9 · IC025 +4.2
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Not in label — unassessed–not reported in cached trials
Medical device entrapment44140.7
89.3–221.9ROR 140.8 · calibrated p 4e-8 ✓
58.4 EB05 45.3 · IC025 +4.7
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Not in label — unassessedserious n=32not reported in cached trials
Fallopian tube perforation49122.3
80.8–185.2ROR 122.4 · calibrated p 8e-8 ✓
55.1 EB05 43.3 · IC025 +4.7
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Not in label — unassessedserious n=49 · 76% consumernot reported in cached trials
Device implantation error45115.1
75.2–176.3ROR 115.2 · calibrated p 1e-7 ✓
53.5 EB05 41.7 · IC025 +4.6
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: PRR 22.0 (13.6–35.7)
Reporting / coding artifact100% cliniciannot reported in cached trials
Uterine spasm944111.3
101.5–122.0ROR 111.8 · calibrated p 5e-8 ✓
53.8 EB05 51.0 · IC025 +5.6
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: PRR 572.0 (371.2–881.3)
Labeled adverse reaction
exact term
serious n=231not reported in cached trials
Device misuse681108.7
97.6–121.1ROR 109.1 · calibrated p 6e-8 ✓
53.2 EB05 49.9 · IC025 +5.6
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Reporting / coding artifactserious n=399not reported in cached trials
Loop electrosurgical excision procedure72106.8
76.8–148.6ROR 106.8 · calibrated p 1e-7 ✓
52.1 EB05 42.8 · IC025 +4.9
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Reporting / coding artifactserious n=41not reported in cached trials
Internal injury324102.0
87.5–119.0ROR 102.2 · calibrated p 1e-7 ✓
51.4 EB05 46.9 · IC025 +5.4
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Not in label — unassessedserious n=324not reported in cached trials
Device dislocation20,44193.4
91.7–95.2ROR 104.0 · calibrated p 8e-8 ✓
49.3 EB05 48.8 · IC025 +5.6
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: PRR 94.8 (91.3–98.5)
Reporting / coding artifactage-adj. PRR 65.6 · serious PRR 82.4not reported in cached trials
Uterine fibrosis2889.6
53.9–148.7ROR 89.6 · calibrated p 1e-6 ✓
46.8 EB05 34.0 · IC025 +4.1
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Not in label — unassessedserious n=25not reported in cached trials
Hypomenorrhoea1,16184.0
77.7–90.7ROR 84.5 · calibrated p 4e-7 ✓
46.5 EB05 44.3 · IC025 +5.4
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: PRR 61.6 (53.6–70.7)
Not in label — unassessedserious n=323 · 85% consumernot reported in cached trials
Device component issue6783.6
60.6–115.5ROR 83.7 · calibrated p 8e-7 ✓
45.9 EB05 37.4 · IC025 +4.7
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Reporting / coding artifactserious n=34 · 71% consumernot reported in cached trials
Cervix injury3080.8
50.1–130.4ROR 80.8 · calibrated p 2e-6 ✓
44.4 EB05 32.6 · IC025 +4.1
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Not in label — unassessedserious n=24 · 100% cliniciannot reported in cached trials
Dyspareunia1,97879.3
74.8–84.1ROR 80.1 · calibrated p 6e-7 ✓
45.1 EB05 43.5 · IC025 +5.4
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: PRR 433.9 (334.3–563.2)
Labeled adverse reaction
exact term
serious n=1,103not reported in cached trials

Clinical concept groups

MedDRA splits one clinical problem across several terms (e.g. "neutropenia", "neutrophil count decreased", "agranulocytosis"), which dilutes term-level signals. These rows count reports with any term in a concept group (an exact union, not a sum), compared with all other drugs. Groups are hand-built and listed in the methods.

ConceptReportsPRR 95% CIReading
Depression5,5572.12.0–2.1signal
Opportunistic infection6250.50.4–0.5lower than other drugs
Suicidality8920.40.4–0.4lower than other drugs
Venous thromboembolism7580.40.3–0.4lower than other drugs
Tendon disorder1080.30.2–0.4lower than other drugs
Serious infection2,1800.30.3–0.3lower than other drugs
Seizure5040.30.2–0.3lower than other drugs
Malignancy6310.20.2–0.2lower than other drugs
Anaphylaxis / angioedema2050.20.1–0.2lower than other drugs
Anaemia4270.10.1–0.2lower than other drugs
Stroke2840.10.1–0.1lower than other drugs
Pancreatitis840.10.1–0.1lower than other drugs
Liver injury2530.10.1–0.1lower than other drugs
Arrhythmia / qt1490.10.1–0.1lower than other drugs
Extrapyramidal690.10.1–0.1lower than other drugs
Hypoglycaemia590.10.0–0.1lower than other drugs

Trial evidence (ClinicalTrials.gov)

✓ Trial adverse-event data found on ClinicalTrials.gov

Largest completed trials with posted results that list Levonorgestrel as a study intervention. The right-hand column of the signal table shows whether each FAERS term was also recorded in these trials, with a real denominator (0 of 40 signal terms matched).

Caveats: trial populations, doses and follow-up differ from the reporting population; AE terms are sponsor-coded and matched here by wording; absence from a trial list means the term was not reported above the sponsor's frequency threshold, not that it cannot occur.

Most frequently reported reactions

By raw co-report count, regardless of disproportionality. Common terms here are often the illness itself or generic outcomes.

ReactionReportsPRR 95% CI · ROR · χ²/pEBGM EB05 · IC025Label screenSerious-only & strataTrial cross-check
Device expulsion45,531247.6
243.5–251.6ROR 320.1 · calibrated p 5e-12 ✓
73.1 EB05 72.6 · IC025 +6.2
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: PRR 261.7 (251.2–272.5)
Reporting / coding artifactserious PRR 97.6not reported in cached trials
Device dislocation20,44193.4
91.7–95.2ROR 104.0 · calibrated p 8e-8 ✓
49.3 EB05 48.8 · IC025 +5.6
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: PRR 94.8 (91.3–98.5)
Reporting / coding artifactage-adj. PRR 65.6 · serious PRR 82.4not reported in cached trials
Vaginal haemorrhage14,92656.4
55.3–57.5ROR 60.9 · calibrated p 4e-6 ✓
36.7 EB05 36.2 · IC025 +5.2
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: PRR 66.3 (63.8–68.8)
Not in label — unassessedage-adj. PRR 37.4 · serious PRR 33.6 · 80% consumernot reported in cached trials
Genital haemorrhage11,128693.6
658.7–730.4ROR 734.4 · calibrated p 9e-16 ✓
90.0 EB05 88.7 · IC025 +6.5
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: PRR 3,218.0 (2,394.1–4,325.6)
Not in label — unassessedserious PRR 156.1not reported in cached trials
Abdominal pain8,5884.0
3.9–4.1ROR 4.1 · calibrated p 0.357
3.9 EB05 3.8 · IC025 +1.9
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: PRR 134.4 (125.2–144.3)
Labeled adverse reaction
exact term
age-adj. PRR 3.2 · serious PRR 4.9not reported in cached trials
Nausea8,5191.1
1.1–1.2ROR 1.1 · calibrated p 0.398
1.1 EB05 1.1 · IC025 +0.1
vs other Progestins: PRR 65.4 (62.2–68.8)
Labeled adverse reaction
exact term
age-adj. PRR 0.9 · serious PRR 1.1 · 86% consumernot reported in cached trials
Procedural pain8,45846.0
44.8–47.1ROR 47.9 · calibrated p 2e-5 ✓
32.0 EB05 31.5 · IC025 +5.0
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: PRR 1,098.2 (900.3–1,339.6)
Not in label — unassessedage-adj. PRR 46.0 · serious PRR 33.3not reported in cached trials
Pain7,5301.3
1.3–1.3ROR 1.3 · calibrated p 0.505
1.3 EB05 1.3 · IC025 +0.3
vs other Progestins: PRR 77.8 (73.4–82.6)
Labeled adverse reaction
exact term
age-adj. PRR 1.3 · serious PRR 2.7not reported in cached trials
Uterine perforation7,439759.1
710.8–810.7ROR 788.4 · calibrated p 4e-16 ✓
91.1 EB05 89.3 · IC025 +6.5
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: only this drug
Labeled adverse reaction
exact term
serious PRR 159.9not reported in cached trials
Drug ineffective (drug did not work)7,1520.6
0.6–0.6ROR 0.6 · calibrated p 0.065
0.6 EB05 0.6 · IC025 -0.9
PRR-only: not supported by EBGM or IC
vs other Progestins: PRR 244.6 (220.6–271.3)
Reporting / coding artifactage-adj. PRR 0.6 · serious PRR 2.3not reported in cached trials
Pelvic pain6,85363.2
61.3–65.1ROR 65.4 · calibrated p 2e-6 ✓
39.4 EB05 38.7 · IC025 +5.3
3/3 methods agree
vs other Progestins: PRR 192.1 (174.8–211.0)
Labeled adverse reaction
exact term
serious PRR 52.9not reported in cached trials
Headache6,4511.1
1.1–1.1ROR 1.1 · calibrated p 0.361
1.1 EB05 1.1 · IC025 +0.1
vs other Progestins: PRR 39.4 (37.6–41.3)
Labeled adverse reaction
exact term
age-adj. PRR 0.9 · serious PRR 1.8 · 78% consumernot reported in cached trials

Unlabeled candidate signals

These flagged terms were not found in the FDA label text and do not match an artifact pattern. They are the pairs that would merit a structured assessment (temporality, dose-response, biological plausibility, consistency across databases, trial or cohort evidence). The screen has not done that; string-matching misses label wording, and a strong PRR can still be stimulated reporting, co-medication, or the disease itself.

Want to assess one of these properly? The runbook describes the Bradford Hill / trial-evidence workflow used on the assessment page, and handoff_top1000_signals.csv lists the strongest unassessed pairs across all drugs.

Common questions

What are the most reported side effects of Levonorgestrel?

In FDA FAERS, the most frequently co-reported reaction terms for Levonorgestrel are menstruation irregular, vaginal haemorrhage, genital haemorrhage, abdominal pain lower, abdominal pain, nausea. These are report counts, not rates: FAERS has no denominator, reporting is voluntary and uneven, and a term can be reported because of the illness being treated rather than the drug.

Does Levonorgestrel have an FDA boxed warning?

No. The FDA label retrieved for Levonorgestrel has no boxed warning; see the label's Warnings and Precautions for the recognised risks.

Do FAERS signals prove that Levonorgestrel causes these side effects?

No. A disproportionality signal (PRR, ROR) means a reaction is reported more often with this drug than with others in the database. That can reflect a real effect, but also the disease being treated, stimulated reporting after news or litigation, co-medications, or how reports are coded. Causality needs temporality, dose-response, biological plausibility, consistency across data sources and, ideally, trial or cohort evidence. This page screens each term against the FDA label and ClinicalTrials.gov results; it does not establish causation.

Sources & methods

Page generated 2026-10-14. Label and PubChem text are retrieved automatically and may lag the current label; always check the current prescribing information. OpenPV is a beta research tool of the Open Source Medicine Foundation.