The impact of premature progesterone rise on the outcome of intrauterine insemination cycles with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in unexplained infertility

Effect of prematurely elevated late follicular progesterone on pregnancy outcomes following ovarian stimulation-intrauterine insemination for unexplained infertility: secondary analysis of the AMIGOS trial

STUDY QUESTION

What is the relationship between late follicular phase progesterone levels and clinic pregnancy and live birth rates in couples with unexplained infertility undergoing ovarian stimulation with IUI (OS-IUI)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Late follicular progesterone levels between 1.0 and <1.5 ng/ml were associated with higher live birth and clinical pregnancy rates while the outcomes in groups with higher progesterone levels did not differ appreciably from the <1.0 ng/ml reference group.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Elevated late follicular progesterone levels have been associated with lower live birth rates after fresh embryo transfer following controlled ovarian stimulation and egg retrieval, but less is known about whether an association exists with outcomes in OS-IUI cycles. Existing studies are few and have been limited to ovarian stimulation with gonadotrophins, but the use of oral agents, such as clomiphene citrate and letrozole, is common with these treatments and has not been well studied.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

The study was a prospective cohort analysis of the Assessment of Multiple Intrauterine Gestations from Ovarian Stimulation (AMIGOS) randomized controlled trial. Frozen serum was available for evaluation from 2121 cycles in 828 AMIGOS participants. The primary pregnancy outcome was live birth per cycle, and the secondary pregnancy outcome was clinical pregnancy rate per cycle.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Couples with unexplained infertility in the AMIGOS trial, for whom female serum from day of trigger with hCG was available in at least one cycle of treatment, were included. Stored frozen serum samples from day of hCG trigger during treatment with OS-IUI were evaluated for serum progesterone level. Progesterone level <1.0 ng/ml was the reference group for comparison with progesterone categorized in increments of 0.5 ng/ml up to ≥3.0 ng/ml. Unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios (RR) and 95% CI were estimated using cluster-weighted generalized estimating equations to estimate modified Poisson regression models with robust standard errors.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Compared to the reference group with 110/1363 live births (8.07%), live birth rates were significantly increased in cycles with progesterone 1.0 to <1.5 ng/ml (49/401 live births, 12.22%) in both the unadjusted (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.14, 2.13) and treatment-adjusted models (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.10, 2.06). Clinical pregnancy rates were also higher in this group (55/401 clinical pregnancies, 13.72%) compared to reference group with 130/1363 (9.54%) (unadjusted RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.10, 1.94 and adjusted RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.07, 1.89). In cycles with progesterone 1.5 ng/ml and above, there was no evidence of a difference in clinical pregnancy or live birth rates relative to the reference group. This pattern remained when stratified by ovarian stimulation treatment group but was only statistically significant in letrozole cycles.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The AMIGOS trial was not designed to answer this clinical question, and with small numbers in some progesterone categories our analyses were underpowered to detect differences between some groups. Inclusion of cycles with progesterone values above 3.0 ng/ml may have included those wherein ovulation had already occurred at the time the IUI was performed. These cycles would be expected to experience a lower success rate but pregnancy may have occurred with intercourse in the same cycle.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Compared to previous literature focusing primarily on OS-IUI cycles using gonadotrophins, these data include patients using oral agents and therefore may be generalizable to the wider population of infertility patients undergoing IUI treatments. Because live births were significantly higher when progesterone ranged from 1.0 to <1.5 ng/ml, further study is needed to clarify whether this progesterone range may truly represent a prognostic indicator in OS-IUI cycles.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

Oklahoma Shared Clinical and Translational Resources (U54GM104938) National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS). AMIGOS was funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development: U10 HD077680, U10 HD39005, U10 HD38992, U10 HD27049, U10 HD38998, U10 HD055942, HD055944, U10 HD055936, and U10HD055925. Research made possible by the funding by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Dr Burks has disclosed that she is a member of the Board of Directors of the Pacific Coast Reproductive Society. Dr Hansen has disclosed that he is the recipient of NIH grants unrelated to the present work, and contracts with Ferring International Pharmascience Center US and with May Health unrelated to the present work, as well as consulting fees with May Health also unrelated to the present work. Dr Diamond has disclosed that he is a stockholder and a member of the Board of Directors of Advanced Reproductive Care, Inc., and that he has a patent pending for the administration of progesterone to trigger ovulation. Dr Anderson, Dr Gavrizi, and Dr Peck do not have conflicts of interest to disclose.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

The definition of unexplained infertility: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on tests required to either diagnose unexplained infertility or use for research inclusion criteria. This leads to heterogeneity and bias affecting meta-analysis and best practice advice.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review analyses the variability of inclusion criteria applied to couples with unexplained infertility. We propose standardised criteria for use both in future research studies and clinical diagnosis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

CINAHL and MEDLINE online databases were searched up to November 2022 for all published studies recruiting couples with unexplained infertility, available in full text in the English language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were collected in an Excel spreadsheet. Results were analysed per category and methodology or reference range.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 375 relevant studies, only 258 defined their inclusion criteria. The most commonly applied inclusion criteria were semen analysis, tubal patency and assessment of ovulation in 220 (85%), 232 (90%), 205 (79.5%) respectively. Only 87/220 (39.5%) studies reporting semen analysis used the World Health Organization (WHO) limits. Tubal patency was accepted if bilateral in 145/232 (62.5%) and if unilateral in 24/232 (10.3%). Ovulation was assessed using mid-luteal serum progesterone in 115/205 (56.1%) and by a history of regular cycles in 87/205 (42.4%). Other criteria, including uterine cavity assessment and hormone profile, were applied in less than 50% of included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights the heterogeneity among studied populations with unexplained infertility. Development and application of internationally accepted criteria will improve the quality of research and future clinical care.

Effect of elevated progesterone levels the day before ovulation on pregnancy outcomes in natural cycles of frozen thawed embryo transfer

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to analyze whether elevated progesterone levels on the day before ovulation affected pregnancy outcomes in natural cycles of frozen thawed embryo transfer (NC-FET).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted in a public university hospital. Data on clinical pregnancy, live birth, ectopic pregnancy, and miscarriage rates were collected, along with other patient data. Patients were divided into two groups according to their progesterone levels the day before ovulation: the progesterone elevation (PE) group (progesterone level >1.0 ng/mL) and the normal progesterone (NP) group (progesterone level ≤1.0 ng/mL). We assessed the effect of elevated progesterone levels in NC-FET by performing multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Overall 1159 women with tubal factor infertility who underwent NC-FET were enrolled, including 666 women who received cleavage-stage embryo transfers and 493 women who received blastocyst embryo transfers. When two cleavage-stage embryos were transferred, the clinical pregnancy rate was significantly higher in the PE than in the NP group following NC-FET (p < .05). After correcting for various confounders, we found that elevated progesterone levels (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.672; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.089-2.566, p = .018) improved the clinical pregnancy rate following transfer of two cleavage-stage embryos but did not affect the pregnancy rate when blastocyst-stage embryos were transferred (adjusted OR: 0.856; 95% CI: 0.536-1.369; p = .517).

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that in patients undergoing cleavage-stage NC-FET, progesterone levels >1.0 ng/mL improved the clinical pregnancy rates. However, the level of progesterone had no effect on the clinical pregnancy rate for patients undergoing blastocyst-stage NC-FET.

The curious case of premature luteinization

PURPOSE

Premature luteinization (PL) affects 12.3-46.7% of fresh in vitro fertilization cycles, and there is accumulating evidence confirming its negative effect on success rates. However, despite its clinical significance, PL is poorly understood and defined. This narrative review aims to provide a fresh look at the phenomenon of PL by summarizing the existing evidence and re-evaluating fundamental issues.

METHODS

A thorough electronic search was conducted covering the period from 1978 until January 2018 in PubMed, Embase, and Medline databases, and references of relevant studies were cross-checked. Meeting proceedings of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine were also hand searched.

RESULTS

In the curious case of PL, one should go back to the beginning and re-consider every step of the way. The pathogenesis, definition, measurement methods, clinical implications, and management strategies are discussed in detail, highlighting controversies and offering "food for thought" for future directions.

CONCLUSIONS

Authors need to speak the same language when studying PL in order to facilitate comparisons. The terminology, progesterone cut-off, measurement methods and days of measurement should be standardized and globally accepted; otherwise, there can be no scientific dialog. Future research should focus on specific patient profiles that may require a tailored approach. Progesterone measurements throughout the follicular phase possibly depict the progesterone exposure better than an isolated measurement on the day of hCG. Adequately powered randomized controlled trials should confirm which the best prevention and management plan of PL is, before introducing any strategy into clinical practice.

Progesterone luteal support after ovulation induction and intrauterine insemination: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of progesterone (P) for luteal phase support after ovulation induction (OI) and intrauterine insemination (IUI).

DESIGN

An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

Patients undergoing OI-IUI for infertility.

INTERVENTION(S)

Exogenous P luteal support after OI-IUI.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Live birth.

RESULT(S)

Eleven trials were identified that met inclusion criteria and constituted 2,842 patients undergoing 4,065 cycles, more than doubling the sample size from the previous meta-analysis. In patients receiving gonadotropins for OI, clinical pregnancy (relative risk [RR] 1.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21-2.02) and live birth (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.30-2.42) were more likely in P supplemented patients. These findings persisted in analysis of live birth per IUI cycle (RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.24-2.04). There were no data on live birth in clomiphene citrate or clomiphene plus gonadotropin cycles. There was no benefit on clinical pregnancy with P support for patients who underwent OI with clomiphene (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52-1.41) or clomiphene plus gonadotropins (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.90-1.76).

CONCLUSION(S)

Progesterone luteal phase support is beneficial to patients undergoing ovulation induction with gonadotropins in IUI cycles. The number needed to treat is 11 patients to have one additional live birth. Progesterone support did not benefit patients undergoing ovulation induction with clomiphene citrate or clomiphene plus gonadotropins.