Clomiphene citrate ‘stair-step’ protocol vs. traditional protocol in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome: a randomized controlled trial

Evaluation and Management of Infertility for Patients Without Insurance Coverage

Infertility is a common condition which causes substantial patient distress and prompts patients to seek care in outpatient gynecologic offices. The evaluation and treatment of infertility can be costly and insurance coverage for these services varies widely. Obstetrician-gynecologists and other women's health care professionals often struggle with the approach for patients without insurance coverage for infertility care. This article reviews the status of insurance coverage for infertility services, reviews options for both the evaluation and management of infertility for patients who do not have infertility insurance coverage, and provides resources for ongoing advocacy and support for these patients.

Endometrial and follicular development following stair-step and traditional protocols in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: An RCT

Background

Various strategies have been proposed for polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) treatment.

Objective

To investigate and compare the number and size of ovarian follicles, endometrial thickness, and ovulation rate by traditional protocol (TP) and stair-step protocol (SSP).

Materials and Methods

Sixty infertile PCOS women were allocated into two groups (SSP = 30 and control TP = 30) between May and October 2019 in the Besat Hospital, Sanandaj, Iran. In the SSP group, the infertile women were treated with 50 mg/daily clomiphene citrate (CC) for five days, while the nonresponsive women were prescribed 100 mg daily CC for five days in the same cycle. The maximum dose (150 mg) was administered until ovulation occurred. In the control group, in non-ovulatory cases, the dose was increased in the next cycle. Ultrasound was used to detect ovulation.

Results

Endometrial thickness changes with various doses of CC were significantly different in the TP. The comparison of both protocols showed a significant difference in endometrial thickness only at 50 mg CC. The number of follicles in the left ovary was significantly different in both protocols at 150-mg CC. The size of ovarian follicles in the left ovary was significantly different between the two protocols at 100-mg CC. The ovulation rate was significantly different in the SSP at 100- and 150-mg doses of CC. Moreover, 86% of ovulation occurred at 100-mg CC in the SSP, while this rate was 73% in the TP.

Conclusion

The most appropriate dose for ovulation in patients with PCOS is 100 mg CC.

Comparison of the efficacy of letrozole stair-step protocol with clomiphene citrate stair-step protocol in the management of clomiphene citrate-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome patients

PURPOSE

We sought to compare the efficacy of the letrozole (LTZ) stair-step protocol with clomiphene citrate (CC) stair-step protocol in the management of 150 mg dose of CC-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively compared a total of 61 patients diagnosed as being resistant to the traditional CC protocol who were subsequently managed using the LTZ stair-step protocol with CC-resistant 56 patients who were treated with CC stair-step protocol. The number of follicles ≥18 mm, endometrial thickness, time to ovulation, clinical pregnancy rates, multiple pregnancy rates, spontaneous abortion rates, live birth rates, and systemic side effects in patients were evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean time to ovulation was significantly shorter in the LTZ stair-step group than the CC stair-step group (17.3 ± 7.7 and 22.4 ± 8.1 days, respectively, p < 0.001). The ovulation rate was significantly higher in patients treated with LTZ stair-step protocol than those treated with the CC stair-step protocol (83.6% and 64.2%, respectively, p = 0.007). The clinical pregnancy rate was higher in the LTZ stair-step than the CC stair-step group (32.7% and 17.8%, respectively, p = 0.015). LTZ stair-step group had a significantly higher live birth rate than that of the CC stair-step group (27.8% and 14.2%, respectively, p = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

The LTZ stair-step protocol revealed higher ovulation, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rates with a shorter time to achieve ovulation than the CC stair-step protocol. Increment of the dose in the same cycle in both protocols did not cause any additional severe side effects.

Chinese herbal medicine for subfertile women with polycystic ovarian syndrome

BACKGROUND

Polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) is characterised by both metabolic and reproductive disorders, and affects 5% to 15% of women of reproductive age. Different western medicines have been proposed for PCOS-related subfertility, such as oral contraceptives, insulin sensitisers and laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD). Chinese herbal medicines (CHM) have also been used for subfertility caused by PCOS for decades, and are expected to become an alternative treatment for subfertile women with PCOS.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) for subfertile women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and six other databases, from inception to 2 June 2020. In addition, we searched three trials registries, the reference lists of included trials and contacted experts in the field to locate trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CHM versus placebo, no treatment or conventional (western) therapies for the treatment of subfertile women with PCOS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened trials for inclusion, assessed the risk of bias in included studies and extracted data. We contacted primary study authors for additional information. We conducted meta-analyses. We used the odds ratios (ORs) to report dichotomous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight RCTs with 609 participants. The comparisons in the included trials were as follows: CHM versus clomiphene, CHM plus clomiphene versus clomiphene (with or without ethinyloestradiol cyproterone acetate (EE/CPA)), CHM plus follicle aspiration plus ovulation induction versus follicle aspiration plus ovulation induction alone, and CHM plus laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) versus LOD alone. The overall certainty of the evidence for most comparisons was very low. None of the included studies reported the primary outcome, live birth rate. Most studies reported the secondary outcomes, and only one study reported data on adverse events. In trials that compared CHM to clomiphene (with or without LOD in both study arms), we are uncertain of the effect of CHM on pregnancy rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63 to 3.19; I² = 28%; 3 studies, 140 participants; very low certainty evidence). Results suggest that if the chance of pregnancy following clomiphene is assumed to be 21.5%, the chance following CHM would vary between 14.7% and 46.7%. No study reported data on adverse events. When CHM plus clomiphene was compared to clomiphene (with or without EE/CPA), there was low certainty evidence of a higher pregnancy rate in the CHM plus clomiphene group (OR 3.06, 95% CI 2.05 to 4.55; I² = 10%; 6 studies, 470 participants; low certainty evidence). Results suggest that if the chance of pregnancy following clomiphene is assumed to be 31.5%, the chance following CHM plus clomiphene would vary between 48.5% and 67.7%. No data were reported on adverse events. In trials that compared CHM plus follicle aspiration and ovulation induction to follicle aspiration and ovulation induction alone, we are uncertain of the effect of CHM on pregnancy rates (OR 1.62, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.68; 1 study, 44 women; very low certainty evidence). Results suggest that if the chance of pregnancy following follicle aspiration and ovulation induction is assumed to be 29.2%, the chance following CHM with follicle aspiration and ovulation induction would vary between 15.9% and 70%. Reported adverse events included severe luteinised unruptured follicle syndrome (LUFS) (Peto OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.06 to 6.14; 1 study, 44 women; very low certainty evidence), ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (Peto OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.00 to 8.19; 1 study, 44 women; very low certainty evidence) or multiple pregnancy (Peto OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.06 to 6.14; 1 study, 44 women; very low certainty evidence). These results suggest that if the chances of LUFS, OHSS, and multiple pregnancy following follicle aspiration and ovulation induction are assumed to be 8.3%, 4.2%, and 8.3% respectively, the chances following CHM with follicle aspiration and ovulation induction would be 0.5% to 35.8%, 0% to 26.3% and 0.5% to 35.8% respectively.  In trials that compared CHM plus LOD to LOD alone, we are uncertain if CHM improves pregnancy rates (OR 3.50, 95% CI 0.72 to 17.09; 1 study, 30 women; very low certainty evidence). Results suggest that if the chance of pregnancy following LOD is assumed to be 40%, the chance following CHM with LOD would vary between 32.4% and 91.9%. No data were reported on adverse events. We are uncertain of the results in the comparison groups for all outcomes. The certainty of the evidence for all other comparisons and outcomes was very low. The main limitations in the evidence were failure to report live birth or adverse events, failure to describe study methods in adequate detail and imprecision due to very low event rates and wide CIs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to support the use of CHM for subfertile women with PCOS. No data are available on live birth. We are uncertain of the effect of CHM on pregnancy rates for there is no consistent evidence to indicate that CHM influences fertility outcomes. However, we find that the addition of CHM to clomiphene may improve pregnancy rates, but there is very limited, low certainty evidence for this outcome. Furthermore, there is insufficient evidence on adverse effects to indicate whether CHM is safe. In the future, well-designed, carefully conducted RCTs are needed, with a particular focus on the live birth rate and other safety indexes.

The stair-step approach in treatment of anovulatory PCOS patients

Clomiphene citrate (CC) is a widely accepted first-line treatment for anovulatory patients with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS). The current practice is to prescribe CC with gradual dose increments until ovulation is achieved. Typically, progesterone withdrawal bleeding is induced between each dose increment and before the commencement of gonadotropin therapy in CC-resistant patients. It has been recently suggested that dose increments of CC can be administered once failure to induce ovulation at a certain dose has been documented, without induction of progesterone withdrawal bleeding, and this approach has been nicknamed the clomiphene-citrate stair-step (CC-SS) protocol. The same principle has been found feasible before introducing gonadotropin therapy in CC-resistant PCOS patients. Our objective was to review the world literature on the CC-SS protocol and to summarize our own experience with extending the CC-SS approach to initiation of gonadotropin therapy. Studies on CC-SS protocol (n = 4) have found that this approach leads to a significant reduction of the time to ovulation and to an increased ovulation rate. In our own retrospective case series, 18 CC-resistant PCOS patients initiated gonadotropin stimulation without induction of progesterone withdrawal bleeding, using the chronic low-dose regimen. The time to ovulation in the study group was 54.2 ± 6.2 days, while the estimated time to ovulation calculated according to the traditional approach was approximately 110 days. The clinical pregnancy rate was 44% (8/18), and all pregnancies were singletons. One patient miscarried; hence, the live birth rate was 38.9% (7/18). In summary, the CC-SS approach and its extension to the initiation of gonadotropin therapy results in considerable reduction of the time to ovulation, and favorable ovulation rates and reproductive outcome. Large-scale confirmation of these findings by properly designed randomized controlled trials may lead to a change of practice in the treatment of anovulatory infertility in PCOS patients, allowing simplification of treatment and a shorter time to ovulation and pregnancy.

Ovulation rates in a stair-step protocol with Letrozole vs clomiphene citrate in patients with polycystic ovarian syndrome

PURPOSE

To compare ovulation rates between Letrozole and Clomiphene Citrate (CC) using a stair-step protocol to achieve ovulation induction in women with Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS).

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort of predominantly Hispanic PCOS women of reproductive age who completed ovulation induction (OI) comparing women who underwent Letrozole stair-step protocol to those who underwent OI with CC stair-step. All women had a diagnosis of PCOS based on the 2003 Rotterdam criteria. For both protocols, sequentially higher doses of Letrozole or CC were given 7 days after the last dose if no dominant follicles were seen on ultrasonography. The primary outcome was ovulation rate (determined by presence of a dominant follicle) between the two treatment groups. Secondary outcomes included time to ovulation, clinical pregnancy rates and side effects.

RESULTS

49 PCOS patients completed a Letrozole stair-step cycle and 43 completed a CC stair-step cycle for OI. Overall, demographics were comparable between both groups. Ovulation rates with the Letrozole stair-step protocol were equivalent to CC stair-step protocol (96% vs 88%, p = 0.17). Although the mean time (days) to ovulation was shorter in the Letrozole group (19.5 vs 23.1, p = 0.027), the pregnancy rates were similar for both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to date that has compared the efficacy of the stair-step protocol in PCOS patients using Letrozole and CC. Both Letrozole and CC can be prescribed in a stair-step fashion. Letrozole stair-step was as efficacious as CC stair-step; patients achieved comparable rates of ovulation and clinical pregnancy. Time to ovulation was shorter in the Letrozole protocol.

Ovulation Induction for the General Gynecologist

The practice of ovulation induction often falls to the reproductive endocrinology and infertility specialist. However, attitudes toward the evaluation and treatment of infertility has shifted among general obstetrician-gynecologists (OB-GYN). This review discusses the underlying scientific basis of anovulation and clinical guidelines regarding the use of different medications for the purpose of promoting follicular recruitment and ovulation for the general OB-GYN.

Ovulation Induction Using Clomiphene Citrate Using Stair - Step Regimen versus Traditional Regimen in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Women - A Randomized Control Trial

Objective:

To determine the efficacy of the stair-step protocol (SSP) using clomiphene citrate (CC) in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and compare it with traditional regimen.

Design:

This was randomized control trial.

Setting:

Infertility Clinic.

Patient(s):

Sixty infertile PCOS women.

Intervention(s):

Patients were randomized into the study (SSP – 30 patients) and control group (traditional protocol – 30 patients). In the SSP, patients were treated with CC 50 mg/day for 5 days and in nonresponsive patients, the dosage was increased to 100 mg/day for 5 days in the same cycle. Maximum dose of 150 mg was given until the dominant follicle was generated. In control group, the dose increment in nonovulatory cases was done in subsequent cycle. Ultrasonography follow-up was done to detect ovulation.

Main Outcome Measure(s):

Ovulation rate and duration of treatment.

Results:

Ovulation (66.7% vs. 50% respectively) and pregnancy rates (26.7% vs. 15.7%) were similar between the stair step and the control group. The duration of treatment was significantly shorter in stair step compared to traditional protocol (17.23 vs. 53 days). CC 100 mg was the most effective dose for ovulation in either group. There were no significant differences in the systemic side effect.

Conclusions:

By using SSP, effective treatment is provided in significantly shorter time period without any detrimental effect on the ovulation and pregnancy rates.

Clomiphene Stair-Step Protocol for Women With Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To compare time to ovulation, ovulation rates, and side effect profile of traditional and the stair-step protocol for ovulation induction using clomiphene citrate in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of women seeking care for infertility with a diagnosis of PCOS at a university-based infertility clinic from July 2012 to July 2014. We included patients who were resistant to the initial starting dose of 50 mg clomiphene. The primary outcome was time to ovulation. Secondary outcomes included ovulation rates, clinical pregnancy rates, and mild and moderate-to-severe side effects based on dose. For the traditional protocol, higher doses of clomiphene were used each subsequent month if no ovulation occurred. For the stair-step protocol, higher doses of clomiphene were given 7 days after the last dose if no dominant follicles were seen on ultrasonography. Our study had 80% power to detect a 20% difference in ovulation.

RESULTS

One hundred nine patients were included in the analysis with 66 (60.6%) in the traditional and 43 (39.4%) in the stair-step protocol. Age and body mass index were similar between groups. The time to ovulation was decreased in the stair-step protocol group compared with the traditional protocol group (23.1±0.9 days vs 47.5±6.3 days). Ovulation rates were increased in the stair-step group compared with the traditional group at 150 mg (16 [37%] vs 8 [12%], P=.004) and at 200 mg (9 [21%] vs 3 [5%], P=.01). Pregnancy rates were similar between groups once ovulation was achieved (12 [18.1%] vs 7 [16.3%], P=.08). The stair-step protocol had an increased incidence of mild side effects (vasomotor flushes, headaches, gastrointestinal disturbance, mastalgia, changes in mood; 18 [41%] vs 8 [12%]), but there was no difference in the incidence of severe side effects (headaches, visual disturbances).

CONCLUSION

For women with PCOS, the stair-step clomiphene protocol is associated with decreased time to ovulation and increased ovulation rates at higher doses when compared with the traditional protocol.

Clomiphene and other antioestrogens for ovulation induction in polycystic ovarian syndrome

BACKGROUND

Subfertility due to anovulation is a common problem in women. First-line oral treatment is with antioestrogens such as clomiphene citrate, but resistance may be apparent with clomiphene. Alternative and adjunctive treatments have been used including tamoxifen, dexamethasone, and bromocriptine. The effectiveness of these is to be determined.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative effectiveness of antioestrogen agents including clomiphene alone or in combination with other medical therapies in women with subfertility associated with anovulation, possibly caused by polycystic ovarian syndrome.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a search of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL (all from inception to August 2016) to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We searched the United Kingdom National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines and the references of relevant reviews and RCTs. We also searched the clinical trial registries for ongoing trials (inception until August 2016).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered RCTs comparing oral antioestrogen agents for ovulation induction (alone or in conjunction with medical therapies) in anovulatory subfertility. We excluded insulin-sensitising agents, aromatase inhibitors, and hyperprolactinaemic infertility.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed data extraction and quality assessment. The primary outcome was live birth; secondary outcomes were pregnancy, ovulation, miscarriage, multiple pregnancy, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, and adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

This is a substantive update of a previous review. We identified an additional 13 studies in the 2016 update. The review now includes 28 RCTs (3377 women) and five RCTs awaiting classification. Five of the 28 included trials reported live birth/ongoing pregnancy. Secondary outcomes were poorly reported.The quality of the evidence ranged from low to very low. The primary reasons for downgrading the evidence were imprecision and risk of bias associated with poor reporting. Antioestrogen versus placebo Live birth rate, miscarriage rate, multiple pregnancy rate, and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS)No data were reported for these outcomes. Clinical pregnancy rateClomiphene citrate was associated with an increased chance of a clinical pregnancy compared with placebo, though the size of the benefit was very uncertain (odds ratio (OR) 5.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.77 to 19.68; 3 studies; 133 women; low-quality evidence). If the chance of a clinical pregnancy was 5% in the placebo group, then between 8% and 50% of women would have a clinical pregnancy in the clomiphene group. Clomiphene citrate versus tamoxifen Live birth rateThere was no clear evidence of a difference in the chance of a live birth between the clomiphene citrate and tamoxifen groups (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.62; 2 studies; 195 women; low-quality evidence). If 20% of women in the tamoxifen group had a live birth, then between 13% and 40% of women in the clomiphene citrate group would have a live birth. Miscarriage rateThere was no clear evidence of a difference in the chance of a miscarriage between the clomiphene citrate and tamoxifen groups (OR 1.81, 95% CI 0.80 to 4.12; 4 studies; 653 women; low-quality evidence). If 3% of women in the tamoxifen group had a miscarriage, then between 2% and 10% in the clomiphene citrate group would have a miscarriage. Clinical pregnancy rateThere was no clear evidence of a difference in the chance of a clinical pregnancy between the clomiphene citrate and tamoxifen groups (OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.85; 5 studies; 757 women; I² = 69%; low-quality evidence). If 22% of women in the tamoxifen group had a clinical pregnancy, then between 21% and 35% in the clomiphene citrate group would have a clinical pregnancy. Multiple pregnancy rate There was insufficient evidence of a difference in the chance of a multiple pregnancy between the clomiphene citrate group (OR 2.34, 95% CI 0.34 to 16.04; 3 studies; 567 women; very low-quality evidence). If 0% of women in the tamoxifen group had a multiple pregnancy, then between 0% and 0.5% of women in the clomiphene group would have a multiple pregnancy. OHSSThere were no instances of OHSS in either the clomiphene citrate or the tamoxifen group reported from three studies. Clomiphene citrate with tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone Clinical pregnancy rateThere was insufficient evidence to determine whether there was a difference between groups (OR 3.32, 95% CI 0.12 to 91.60; 1 study; 20 women; very low-quality evidence). No data were reported for the other outcomes. Other comparisons of interestLimited evidence suggested that compared with a gonadotropin, clomiphene citrate was associated with a reduced chance of a pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, or live birth, with no clear evidence of a difference in multiple pregnancy rates.The comparison of clomiphene citrate plus medical adjunct versus clomiphene alone was limited by the number of trials reporting the comparison and poor reporting of clinical outcomes relevant to this systematic review and by the number of adjuncts reported (ketoconazole, bromocriptine, dexamethasone, combined oral contraceptive, human chorionic gonadotropin, hormone supplementation). The addition of dexamethasone or combined oral contraceptive suggested a possible benefit in pregnancy outcomes, but findings were very uncertain and further research is required to confirm this.There was limited evidence suggesting that a 10-day regimen of clomiphene citrate improves pregnancy outcomes compared with a 5-day regimen. Data for early versus late regimens of clomiphene citrate were insufficient to be able to make a judgement on differences for pregnancy outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found evidence suggesting that clomiphene citrate improves the chance of a clinical pregnancy compared with placebo, but may reduce the chance of live birth or ongoing pregnancy when compared with a gonadotropin. Due to low event rates, we advise caution interpreting these data.The comparison of clomiphene citrate plus medical adjunctive versus clomiphene alone was limited by the number of trials reporting the comparison. The evidence was very low quality and no firm conclusions could be drawn, but very limited evidence suggested a benefit from adjunctive dexamethasone or combined oral contraceptives. Low-quality evidence suggested that a 10-day regimen of clomiphene citrate improves pregnancy rates compared with a 5-day regimen, but further research is required.

Chinese herbal medicine for subfertile women with polycystic ovarian syndrome

BACKGROUND

Polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) is one of the most common reproductive endocrinology abnormalities, and affects 5% to 10% of women of reproductive age. Western medicines, such as oral contraceptives, insulin sensitizers and laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD), have been used to treat PCOS. Recently, many studies have been published that consider Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) as an alternative treatment for women with PCOS.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of CHM for subfertile women with PCOS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched sources, including the following databases, from inception to 9 June 2016: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED), PsycINFO, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, Wanfang and trial registries. In addition, we searched the reference lists of included trials and contacted experts in the field to locate trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that considered the use of CHM for the treatment of subfertile women with PCOS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened appropriate trials for inclusion, assessed the risk of bias in included studies and extracted data. We contacted primary study authors for additional information. We conducted meta-analyses. We used the odds ratios (ORs) to report dichotomous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five RCTs with 414 participants. The comparisons in the included trials were as follows: CHM versus clomiphene, CHM plus clomiphene versus clomiphene (with or without ethinyloestradiol cyproterone acetate (CEA)), CHM plus follicle aspiration plus ovulation induction versus follicle aspiration plus ovulation induction alone, and CHM plus laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) versus LOD alone. The overall quality of the evidence for most comparisons was very low.None of the included studies reported live birth rate, and only one study reported data on adverse events.When CHM was compared with clomiphene (with or without LOD in both arms), there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in pregnancy rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 5.06; two studies, 90 participants, I² statistic = 0%, very low quality evidence). No study reported data on adverse events. When CHM plus clomiphene was compared with clomiphene (with or without CEA), there was low quality evidence of a higher pregnancy rate in the CHM plus clomiphene group (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.14; three RCTs, 300 women, I² statistic = 0%,low quality evidence). No data were reported on adverse events.When CHM with follicle aspiration and ovulation induction was compared with follicle aspiration and ovulation induction alone, there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in pregnancy rates (OR 1.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.52; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence), severe luteinized unruptured follicle syndrome (LUFS) (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.06 to 6.14; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence), ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.00 to 8.19; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence) or multiple pregnancy (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.06 to 6.14; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence).When CHM with LOD was compared with LOD alone, there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates of pregnancy (OR 3.50, 95% CI 0.72 to 17.09; one study, 30 women, very low quality evidence), No data were reported on adverse events.There was no evidence of a difference between any of the comparison groups for any other outcomes. The quality of the evidence for all other comparisons and outcomes was very low. The main limitations in the evidence were failure to report live birth or adverse events, failure to describe study methods in adequate detail and imprecision due to very low event rates and wide CIs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to support the use of CHM for women with PCOS and subfertility. No data are available on live birth, and there is no consistent evidence to indicate that CHM influences fertility outcomes. However there is very limited low quality evidence to suggest that the addition of CHM to clomiphene may improve pregnancy rates. There is insufficient evidence on adverse effects to indicate whether CHM is safe.

Randomized Trial Comparing the Effect of Endometrial Shedding With Medroxyprogesterone Acetate With Random Start of Clomiphene Citrate for Ovulation Induction in Oligo-ovulatory and Anovulatory Women

OBJECTIVE

A recent retrospective study demonstrated that anovulatory infertile women who did not have a progestogen-induced withdrawal bleed before treatment with clomiphene citrate (CC) had higher pregnancy rates than women who had a withdrawal bleed and those who had spontaneous menstrual bleeding. We sought to assess endometrial thickness at the time of ovulation in oligo-ovulatory and anovulatory women who took CC with or without a preceding progestogen-induced withdrawal bleed.

METHODS

We conducted a pilot randomized trial in which women with infertility and oligomenorrhea or amenorrhea were randomly assigned to take either CC after a withdrawal bleed induced by medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) 10 mg daily for 10 days or to take CC without such a bleed. Study participants underwent cycle monitoring with ultrasound assessment of endometrial thickness at the time of LH surge or a human chorionic gonadotropin trigger, followed by timed intercourse or intrauterine insemination. Women who had not ovulated by cycle day 21 took an increased dose of CC, with or without an MPA-induced withdrawal bleed, to a maximum of three cycles. Participants and nurses were asked to complete a questionnaire about the study.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in endometrial thickness on the day of LH surge or human chorionic gonadotropin trigger between women who had a progestogen-induced withdrawal bleed and those who did not (P = 0.65). On average, the time to ovulation was 15 days longer in women who took MPA than in women who did not, but this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.65). Satisfaction with the study was reported as high by both patients and nurses.

CONCLUSION

In anovulatory or oligo-ovulatory women treated with CC, we found no significant difference in endometrial thickness whether or not the use of CC was preceded by a withdrawal bleed induced by MPA.

Mono-ovulation in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: a clinical review on ovulation induction

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) affects 5-10% of women of reproductive age and is the most common cause of anovulatory infertility. The treatment approaches to ovulation induction vary in efficacy, treatment duration and patient friendliness. The aim was to determine the most efficient, evidence-based method to achieve mono-ovulation in women diagnosed with PCOS. Publications in English providing information on treatment, efficacy and complication rates were included until September 2015. Systematic reviews, meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials were favoured over cohort and retrospective studies. Clomiphene citrate is recommended as primary treatment for PCOS-related infertility. It induces ovulation in three out of four patients, the risk of multiple pregnancies is modest and the treatment is simple and inexpensive. Gonadotrophins are highly efficient in a low-dose step-up regimen. Ovulation rates are improved by lifestyle interventions in overweight women. Metformin may improve the menstrual cycle within 1-3 months, but does not improve the live birth rate. Letrozole is effective for ovulation induction, but is an off-label drug in many countries. Ovulation induction in women with PCOS should be individualized with regard to weight, treatment efficacy and patient preferences with the aim of achieving mono-ovulation and subsequently the birth of a singleton baby.

Polycystic ovary syndrome: chemical pharmacotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is the most common reproductive endocrine disease among women of childbearing age. The clinical features are heterogeneous and vary in intensity. Hirsutism, menstrual disorders and infertility are the most frequent conditions observed; however, long-term complications (dyslipidemia, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, endometrial cancer) are also often described. Each disorder may be managed by tailored strategies, employing sequential or combined pharmacological and/or non-pharmacological treatment.

AREAS COVERED

The authors review the drugs used for PCOS management and discuss new approaches. A systematic MEDLINE search regarding the randomized controlled trials, retrospective and observational studies about medical treatments of PCOS, the Cochrane library for reviews and also search for registered trials on ClinicalTrials.gov is performed.

EXPERT OPINION

A uniform treatment for PCOS patients does not exist. Clinicians should perform an accurate evaluation of patients' characteristics, identifying the phenotypic target and, subsequently, the best-tailored treatment to manage one or more clinical issues. Lifestyle intervention should always be the first recommended approach unless other issues indicate that drug or hormonal interventions are superior.