Comparisons of GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol in supposed normal ovarian responders undergoing IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis

A Patient Friendly Corifollitropin Alfa Protocol without Routine Pituitary Suppression in Normal Responders

The release of corifollitropin alfa simplifies daily injections of short-acting recombinant follicular stimulating hormone (rFSH), and its widely-used protocol involves short-acting gonadotropins supplements and a fixed GnRH antagonist regimen, largely based on follicle size. In this study, the feasibility of corifollitropin alfa without routine pituitary suppression was evaluated. A total of 288 patients were stimulated by corifollitropin alfa on cycle day 3 following with routine serum hormone monitoring and follicle scanning every other day after 5 days of initial stimulation, and a GnRH antagonist (0.25 mg) was only used prophylactically when the luteinizing hormone (LH) was ≧ 6 IU/L (over half of the definitive LH surge). The incidence of premature LH surge (≧ 10 IU/L) was 2.4% (7/288) before the timely injection of a single GnRH antagonist, and the elevated LH level was dropped down from 11.9 IU/L to 2.2 IU/L after the suppression. Two hundred fifty-one patients did not need any antagonist (87.2% [251/288]) throughout the whole stimulation. No adverse effects were observed regarding oocyte competency (fertilization rate: 78%; blastocyst formation rate: 64%). The live birth rate per OPU cycle after the first cryotransfer was 56.3% (161/286), and the cumulative live birth rate per OPU cycle after cyrotransfers was 69.6% (199/286). Of patients who did and did not receive GnRH antagonist during stimulation, no significant difference existed in the cumulative live birth rates (78.4% vs. 68.3%, p = 0.25). The results demonstrated that the routine GnRH antagonist administration is not required in the corifollitropin-alfa cycles using a flexible and hormone-depended antagonist regimen, while the clinical outcome is not compromised. This finding reveals that the use of a GnRH antagonist only occasionally may be needed.

Risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol: RCT including 1050 first IVF/ICSI cycles

STUDY QUESTION

Is the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) similar in a short GnRH antagonist and long GnRH agonist protocol in first cycle IVF/ICSI patients less than 40 years of age?.

SUMMARY ANSWER

There is an increased risk of severe OHSS in the long GnRH agonist group compared with the short GnRH antagonist protocol. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY?: In the most recent Cochrane review, the GnRH antagonist protocol was associated with a similar live birth rate (LBR), a similar on-going pregnancy rate (OPR), and a lower incidence of OHSS (odds ratio (OR) = 0.43 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33-0.57) compared with the traditional GnRH agonist protocol. Previous trials comparing the two protocols mainly included selected patient populations, a limited number of patients and the applied OHSS criteria differed, making direct comparisons difficult. In two recent large meta-analyses, no significant differences in LBR (OR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.72-1.02) or in the incidence of severe OHSS were reported, while others found a lower LBR (OR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.68-0.97) and a reduced risk of severe OHSS using the GnRH antagonist protocol (OR = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.40-0.88).

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Phase IV, dual-centre, open-label, RCT including 1050 women allocated to either short GnRH antagonist or long GnRH agonist protocol in a 1:1 ratio and enrolled over a 5-year period using a web-based concealed randomization code. This is a superiority study designed to detect a difference in severe OHSS, the primary outcome, between the two groups with a power of 80% and stratified for age, assisted reproductive technology (ART) clinic and planned fertilization procedure (IVF/ICSI). The secondary aims were to compare rates of mild and moderate OHSS, positive plasma (p)-hCG, on-going pregnancy and live birth between the two arms. None of the women had undergone previous ART treatment.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

All infertile women referred for their first IVF/ICSI at two public fertility clinics, less than 40 years of age and with no uterine malformations were asked to participate. A total of 1099 subjects were randomized, including women with poor ovarian reserve, polycystic ovary syndrome and irregular cycles. A total of 49 women withdrew their consent, thus 1050 subjects were allocated to the GnRH antagonist (n = 534) and agonist protocol (n = 516), respectively. In total 1023 women started recombinant human follitropin-β (rFSH) stimulation, 528 in the GnRH antagonist group and 495 in the GnRH agonist group. All subjects were given a fixed rFSH dose of 150 IU or 225 IU according to age ≤36 years or >36 years, with the option to adjust dose at stimulation day 6. Clinical OHSS parameters were collected at oocyte retrieval, and Days 3 and 14 post-transfer. On-going pregnancy was determined by transvaginal ultrasonography at gestational weeks 7-9. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis for reproductive outcomes, 1050 subjects were included. For the ITT analyses on OHSS 1023 subjects who started gonadotrophin stimulation were included.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The incidence of severe OHSS [5.1% (27/528) versus 8.9% (44/495) (difference in proportion percentage point (Δpp) = -3.8pp; 95% CI: -7.1 to -0.4; P = 0.02)] and moderate OHSS [10.2% (54/528) versus 15.6% (77/495) (Δpp = -5.3pp; 95% CI: -9.6 to -1.0; P = 0.01) ] was significantly lower in the GnRH antagonist group compared with the agonist group, respectively. In the GnRH antagonist and agonist group, respectively, 4.7% (25/528) versus 8.5% (42/495) women were seen by a physician due to OHSS (P = 0.01), and 1.7% (9/528) versus 3.6% (18/495) were admitted to hospital due to OHSS (P = 0.06). No women had ascites-puncture in the GnRH antagonist group versus 2.0% (10/495) in the GnRH agonist group (P < 0.01). LBRs were 22.8% (122/534) versus 23.8% (123/516) (Δpp = -1.0pp; 95% CI: -6.3 to 4.3; P = 0.70) and OPRs were 24.9% (133/528) versus 26.2% (135/516) (Δpp = -1.3pp; 95% CI: -6.7 to 4.2; P = 0.64) per randomized subject in the GnRH antagonist versus agonist group, with a mean number of 1.1 versus 1.2 embryos transferred in the two groups. Pregnancy rates (PR) per randomized subject, per started gonadotrophin stimulation and per embryo transfer were all similar in the two groups.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

A possible limitation is the duration of the trial, with new methods, such as 'freeze all' and 'GnRH agonist triggering', being developed during the trial, the new methods were sought avoided, however a total number of 32 women had 'freeze all' and 'GnRH agonist triggering' was performed in three cases. Ultrasonic measurements were performed by different physicians and inter-observer bias may be present. Measures of anti-Mullerian hormone and antral follicle count, to estimate ovarian reserve and thus predict risk of OHSS, were not performed. Finally, the physicians were not blinded to GnRH treatment group after randomization.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The short GnRH antagonist protocol should be the protocol of choice for patients undergoing their first ART cycle in females <40 years of age including both low and high responders when an age-dependent initially fixed gonadotrophin dose is used, as an increased risk of severe OHSS and the associated complications is seen in the long GnRH agonist group and as PRs and LBRs are similar in the two groups. Patients at risk of OHSS particularly benefit from the short GnRH antagonist treatment as GnRH agonist triggering can be used.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

An unrestricted research grant is funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA (MSD). The funders had no influence on the data collection, analyses or conclusions of the study. No conflict of interests to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EudraCT #: 2008-005452-24. ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT00756028. Trial registration date: 18 September 2008. Date of first patient's enrolment: 14 January 2009.

Sub-optimal responders following controlled ovarian stimulation: an overlooked group?

Individualization of IVF treatment and tailored stimulation based on predicted ovarian response may maximize treatment success and minimize the risks following IVF. Whilst there has been a consensus in defining poor ovarian response and an attempt to elucidate the threshold for excessive ovarian response based on the number of oocytes retrieved following ovarian stimulation, no systematic effort has been made in order to refine the oocyte yield thresholds for a normal responder. In this opinion article we discuss the evidence behind the oocyte number thresholds for the ovarian response categories and present the rationale and merits in recognizing a new, overlooked, ovarian response group: The sub-optimal ovarian responders.

Embryonic early-cleavage rate is decreased with aging in GnRH agonist but not inantagonist protocols

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between embryonic early-cleavage status and the age of patients receiving either a GnRH agonist long protocol or a GnRH antagonist protocol.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 534 patients undergoing a fresh cycle of oocyte retrieval and day-3 embryo transfer. Of the 534 patients treated, 331 received a GnRH agonist long stimulation protocol (GnRH agonist group) for ovarian stimulation and 203 patients received a GnRH antagonist protocol (GnRH antagonist group).

RESULTS

By logistic regression analysis, the rate of embryonic early-cleavage was significantly decreased with increasing age of women in the agonist (P < 0.001) but not in antagonist groups (P = 0.61). Based on the results of this study, maternal age is a critical factor for embryonic early-cleavage in agonist protocol but not in antagonist protocol. The results also showed that early-cleavage embryos were of better quality and resulted in a higher pregnancy rate than late-cleavage embryos in the GnRH agonist group. However, embryo quality and pregnancy rate was not significantly different between early and late cleavage embryos in the GnRH antagonist group.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that embryonic early-cleavage status is negatively correlated with aging in women receiving GnRH agonist long down-regulation but not in GnRH antagonist protocols. We also conclude that early cleavage of the zygote is not a reliable predictor for pregnancy potential using the GnRH antagonist protocol.

Comparison of GnRH agonist, GnRH antagonist, and GnRH antagonist mild protocol of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in good prognosis patients

The reports on how to stimulate the ovaries for oocyte retrieval in good prognosis patients are contradictory and often favor one type of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH). For this reason, we retrospectively analyzed data from IVF/ICSI cycles carried out at our IVF Unit in good prognosis patients (aged <38 years, first and second attempts of IVF/ICSI, more than 3 oocytes retrieved) to elucidate which type of COH is optimal at our condition. The included patients were undergoing COH using GnRH agonist, GnRH antagonist or GnRH antagonist mild protocol in combination with gonadotrophins. We found significant differences in the average number of retrieved oocytes, immature oocytes, fertilized oocytes, embryos, transferred embryos, embryos frozen per cycle, and cycles with embryo freezing between studied COH protocols. Although there were no differences in live birth rate (LBR), miscarriages, and ectopic pregnancies between compared protocols, pregnancy rate was significantly higher in GnRH antagonist mild protocol in comparison with both GnRH antagonist and GnRH agonist protocols and cumulative LBR per cycle was significantly higher in GnRH antagonist mild protocol in comparison to GnRH agonist protocol. Our data show that GnRH antagonist mild protocol of COH could be the best method of choice in good prognosis patients.

ART Outcomes in GnRH Antagonist Protocol (Flexible) and Long GnRH Agonist Protocol during Early Follicular Phase in Patients with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Since increased LH in the early follicular phase in PCOS patients especially in GnRH antagonist protocol could be associated with reduced oocyte quality and pregnancy and impared implantation. The current study was conducted to determine ART outcomes in GnRH antagonist protocol (flexible) and long GnRH agonist protocol and compare them with adding GnRH antagonist in GnRH antagonist (flexible) protocol during early follicular phase in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome undergoing ICSI.

METHODS

In this randomized clinical trial, 150 patients with polycystic ovary syndrome undergoing ICSI were enrolled from 2012 to 2014 and randomly assigned to receive either GnRH antagonist protocol during early and late follicular phase or GnRH antagonist protocol (flexible) or long GnRH agonist protocol. The clinical and laboratory pregnancy in three groups was determined and compared. In this context, the chi-square and Fisher's exact test and ANOVA were used for data analysis. Statistical significance was defined as p<0.05.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference with respect to chemical pregnancy and clinical pregnancy between the three groups. Also, other indices such as number and quality of oocytes and embryos were alike.

CONCLUSION

Totally, according to our results, GnRH antagonist protocol during early and late follicular phase and GnRH antagonist protocol (flexible) and long GnRH agonist protocol in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome undergoing ICSI are similarly effective and use of each one based on patients' condition and physicians' opinion could be considered.