Endometrin as luteal phase support in assisted reproduction

Lower Pregnancy and Live Birth Rates with Vaginal Endometrin Plus Intramuscular Progesterone Every Third Day Versus Intramuscular Progesterone Alone in Programmed Frozen Embryo Transfers: A Retrospective Case-control Study

This study aimed to determine whether the use of vaginal Endometrin plus intramuscular progesterone on every third day (VIM) in programmed frozen embryo transfer (FET) is associated with lower pregnancy and live birth rates compared to daily intramuscular progesterone (IM). FET data from a single program were collected between November 2018 and December 2021. A total of 903 FETs were analyzed, including 504 FETs in the IM group, and 399 FETs in the VIM group. Inclusion criteria were women undergoing FETs with either 50 mg daily IM progesterone only (control) or 200 mg Endometrin twice daily plus 50 mg IM progesterone on every third day, with the transfer of a single day 5 or 6 frozen embryo. There were no significant differences in patient age at time of FETs, BMI, endometrial thickness, blastocyst quality, or infertility diagnosis between the groups. The VIM had significantly lower positive hCG and clinical pregnancy rates compared to the IM (60.2% vs 72.0% and 40.6% vs 56.7%, respectively, P = 0.0002 and P < 0.0001). The live birth rate was 36.1% in the VIM, compared to 49.4% in the IM (P < 0.0001). These findings also remained significant when excluding FETs with donor egg (35.9% vs 50.1%, P < 0.0001). This study demonstrated that VIM in FET cycles yields significantly lower pregnancy and live birth rates compared to IM along. IM progesterone alone may be preferable to combined Endometrin and IM progesterone in patients undergoing programmed frozen embryo transfers.

Progesterone: The Key Factor of the Beginning of Life

Progesterone is the ovarian steroid produced by the granulosa cells of follicles after the LH peak at mid-cycle. Its role is to sustain embryo endometrial implantation and ongoing pregnancy. Other biological effects of progesterone may exert a protective function in supporting pregnancy up to birth. Luteal phase support (LPS) with progesterone is the standard of care for assisted reproductive technology. Progesterone vaginal administration is currently the most widely used treatment for LPS. Physicians and patients have been reluctant to change an administration route that has proven to be effective. However, some questions remain open, namely the need for LPS in fresh and frozen embryo transfer, the route of administration, the optimal duration of LPS, dosage, and the benefit of combination therapies. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the uterine and extra-uterine effects of progesterone that may play a role in embryo implantation and pregnancy, and to discuss the advantages of the use of progesterone for LPS in the context of Good Medical Practice.

Beyond the uterine first pass: optimizing programmed frozen embryo transfers. A mini-review

With the greatly increased popularity of segmented in vitro fertilization and frozen embryo transfers, progesterone replacement strategies in programmed cycles are being reexamined. Bidirectionality and the limited capacity of the uterine first pass provide an explanation for disconnects between the endometrial and serum levels when either vaginal or intramuscular progesterone is used alone. Whereas monotherapy departs from the physiology of spontaneous pregnancies, combined therapy provides physiologic replacement while minimizing the number of injections.

Individualised luteal phase support in artificially prepared frozen embryo transfer cycles based on serum progesterone levels: a prospective cohort study

STUDY QUESTION

Does an individualised luteal phase support (iLPS), according to serum progesterone (P4) level the day prior to euploid frozen embryo transfer (FET), improve pregnancy outcomes when started on the day previous to embryo transfer?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Patients with low serum P4 the day prior to euploid FET can benefit from the addition of daily subcutaneous P4 injections (Psc), when started the day prior to FET, and achieve similar reproductive outcomes compared to those with initial adequate P4 levels.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The ratio between FET/IVF has spectacularly increased in the last years mainly thanks to the pursuit of an ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome free clinic and the development of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT). There is currently a big concern regarding the endometrial preparation for FET, especially in relation to serum P4 levels around the time of embryo transfer. Several studies have described impaired pregnancy outcomes in those patients with low P4 levels around the time of FET, considering 10 ng/ml as one of the most accepted reference values. To date, no prospective study has been designed to compare the reproductive outcomes between patients with adequate P4 the day previous to euploid FET and those with low, but restored P4 levels on the transfer day after iLPS through daily Psc started on the day previous to FET.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A prospective observational study was conducted at a university-affiliated fertility centre between November 2018 and January 2020 in patients undergoing PGT for aneuploidies (PGT-A) IVF cycles and a subsequent FET under hormone replacement treatment (HRT). A total of 574 cycles (453 patients) were analysed: 348 cycles (leading to 342 euploid FET) with adequate P4 on the day previous to FET, and 226 cycles (leading to 220 euploid FET) under iLPS after low P4 on the previous day to FET, but restored P4 levels on the transfer day.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Overall we included 574 HRT FET cycles (453 patients). Standard HRT was used for endometrial preparation. P4 levels were measured the day previous to euploid FET. P4 > 10.6 ng/ml was considered as adequate and euploid FET was performed on the following day (FET Group 1). P4 < 10.6 ng/ml was considered as low, iLPS was added in the form of daily Psc injections, and a new P4 analysis was performed on the following day. FET was only performed on the same day when a restored P4 > 10.6 ng/ml was achieved (98.2% of cases) (FET Group 2).

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Patient's demographics and cycle parameters were comparable between both euploid FET groups (FET Group 1 and FET Group 2) in terms of age, weight, oestradiol and P4 levels and number of embryos transferred. No statistically significant differences were found in terms of clinical pregnancy rate (56.4% vs 59.1%: rate difference (RD) -2.7%, 95% CI [-11.4; 6.0]), ongoing pregnancy rate (49.4% vs 53.6%: RD -4.2%, 95% CI [-13.1; 4.7]) or live birth rate (49.1% vs 52.3%: RD -3.2%, 95% CI [-12; 5.7]). No significant differences were also found according to miscarriage rate (12.4% vs 9.2%: RD 3.2%, 95% CI [-4.3; 10.7]).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Only iLPS through daily Psc was evaluated. The time for Psc injection was not stated and no serum P4 determinations were performed once the pregnancy was achieved.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Our study provides information regarding an 'opportunity window' for improved ongoing pregnancy rates and miscarriage rates through a daily Psc injection in cases of inadequate P4 levels the day previous to FET (P4 < 10.6 ng/ml) and restored values the day of FET (P4 > 10.6 ng/ml). Only euploid FET under HRT were considered, avoiding one of the main reasons of miscarriage and implantation failure and overcoming confounding factors such as female age, embryo quality or ovarian stimulation protocols.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No external funding was received. B.C. reports personal fees from MSD, Merck Serono, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, IBSA and Gedeon Richter outside the submitted work. N.P. reports grants and personal fees from MSD, Merck Serono, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Theramex and Besins International and personal fees from IBSA and Gedeon Richter outside the submitted work. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03740568.

Intramuscular progesterone optimizes live birth from programmed frozen embryo transfer: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether vaginal progesterone for programmed endometrial preparation is noninferior to intramuscular progesterone in terms of live birth rates from frozen embryo transfer (FET).

DESIGN

Three-armed, randomized, controlled noninferiority trial.

SETTING

Multicenter fertility clinic.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 1,346 volunteer subjects planning vitrified-warmed transfer of high-quality nonbiopsied blastocysts were screened, of whom 1,125 subjects were ultimately enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment.

INTERVENTION(S)

The subjects were randomly assigned to receive, in preparation for FET, 50 mg daily of intramuscular progesterone (control group), 200 mg twice daily of vaginal micronized progesterone plus 50 mg of intramuscular progesterone every third day (combination treatment), or 200 mg twice daily of vaginal micronized progesterone.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The primary outcome was live birth rate per vitrified-warmed embryo transfer. The secondary outcomes were a positive serum human chorionic gonadotropin test 2 weeks after FET, biochemical pregnancy loss, clinical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy loss, total pregnancy loss, serum luteal progesterone concentration 2 weeks after FET, and patient's experience and attitudes regarding the route of progesterone administration, on the basis of a survey administered to the subjects between FET and pregnancy test.

RESULT(S)

A total of 1,060 FETs were completed. The live birth rate was significantly lower in women receiving only vaginal progesterone (27%) than in women receiving intramuscular progesterone (44%) or combination treatment (46%). Fifty percent of pregnancies in women receiving only vaginal progesterone ended in miscarriage.

CONCLUSION(S)

The live birth rate after vaginal-only progesterone replacement was significantly reduced, due primarily to an increased rate of miscarriage. Vaginal progesterone supplemented with intramuscular progesterone every third day was noninferior to daily intramuscular progesterone, offering an effective alternative regimen with fewer injections.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02254577.

Luteal phase support in fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles

Nearly 5 million babies have been delivered following assisted conception (IVF/ICSI) and the demand is increasing. Meticulous ovarian stimulation and well programmed luteal phase support are the landmarks of treatment success. Although the importance of luteal phase support in IVF/ICSI cycles is well established, the optimal route, dose and duration of this support is still a matter of debate. Regardless of the ovarian stimulation, parenteral and vaginal progesterone has been one of the most common routes. However, oral or subcutaneous routes are also well-investigated and reveal satisfactory clinical outcomes. It is obviously critical to choose a progesterone with adequate clinical efficacy and patient tolerability as well. Moreover, fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles markedly different from each other in terms of physiological changes and luteal support concept should be modified accordingly. The aim of this narrative review is to provide evidence-based take home messages for the luteal phase support in either fresh or frozen embryo transfer cycles in the context of a recent scientific evidence.

Addition of intramuscular progesterone to vaginal progesterone in hormone replacement therapy in vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer cycles

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does intramuscular progesterone supplementation ensure ongoing pregnancy rates (OPR) comparable with vaginal progesterone only in hormone replacement therapy cycles for vitrified-warmed embryo transfer; and is there a window of serum progesterone concentration out of which reproductive outcomes may be negatively affected?

DESIGN

Retrospective longitudinal cohort study carried out at a single IVF clinic. In total, 475 consecutive, day-5 to day-6 vitrified-warmed embryo transfer cycles using hormone replacement therapy regimen were included. Vaginal progesterone only was given to 143 patients; supplementation of vaginal progesterone only with intramuscular progesterone supplementation every third day was given to 332 patients. On the sixth day of progesterone administration, immediately before frozen-thawed embryo transfer, circulating progesterone levels were measured. Main outcome measure was OPR.

RESULTS

The baseline demographic features and embryological data of the vaginal progesterone only and intramuscular progesterone supplementation groups were comparable. The OPR were 48.3% and 51.8%, respectively (P = 0.477). Neither the circulating progesterone level nor the type of progesterone administration were independent predictors of OPR. The effect of serum progesterone levels on OPR was evaluated by percentiles (<10%, 10-49%, 50-90% and >90%), taking 50-90% as the reference sub-group. All percentiles in the intramuscular progesterone supplementation group and in the vaginal progesterone only group had similar OPR.

CONCLUSIONS

Intramuscular progesterone supplementation every third day, overall, does not enhance OPR compared with vaginal progesterone only.

Comparison of daily vaginal progesterone gel plus weekly intramuscular progesterone with daily intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase support in single, autologous euploid frozen-thawed embryo transfers

PURPOSE

To compare outcomes between daily intramuscular progesterone (IMP) and daily vaginal progesterone (VP) gel plus weekly intramuscular hydroxyprogesterone caproate (IMHPC) for luteal phase support (LPS) in single, autologous euploid frozen-thawed blastocyst transfers (FBTs) following artificial endometrial preparation (EP).

METHODS

The retrospective cohort study included 767 single, autologous FBTs from 731 patients between January 2015 and March 2018. LPS was performed either with IMP (100 mg/day) or with VP gel (90 mg, twice daily) plus IMHPC (250 mg/week). Oral estrogen was prescribed in combination of both regimes. Oral estrogen was discontinued following the visualization of fetal cardiac activity on ultrasound and progesterone at 10 weeks of gestation. The primary outcome was live birth rate. The secondary outcomes included implantation, clinical pregnancy, and multiple pregnancy rates.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics did not differ in LPS regimes. Of 767 FBTs, 608 had IMP (100 mg/day) for LPS and 159 had VP gel (90 mg, twice daily) plus IMHPC (250 mg/week) for LPS. The live birth rate was 51.8% and 50.3%, respectively (p = 0.737, OR 0.94, 95%CI 0.66-1.33). The implantation rate was 62.7% and 64.2%, respectively (p = 0.730, OR 1.06, 95%CI 0.74-1.53). The clinical pregnancy rates were also similar in both groups (59.5% vs. 61.6%, respectively, p = 0.631, OR 1.09, 95%CI 0.76-1.56).

CONCLUSIONS

We did not observe significant differences in the rates of live birth, implantation, and clinical pregnancy between daily IMP and daily VP gel plus weekly IMHPC for LPS in single, autologous euploid FBTs after artificial EP.

Effectiveness of high-dose transvaginal progesterone supplementation for women who are undergoing a frozen-thawed embryo transfer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness of high-dose progesterone supplementation for women who are undergoing a frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET).

METHODS

Among the 2010 FET cycles that were included in the present study, 1188 were 1200 mg/d of vaginal progesterone, while 822 were 900 mg/d. The dose of progesterone that was used was decided by the treatment period and additional progesterone supplementation was used when the serum progesterone levels were <9 ng/mL on luteal day 5.

RESULTS

The clinical pregnancy rate was higher in the 1200 mg group than in the 900 mg group. The mean serum progesterone level on luteal day 5 in the 1200 mg and 900 mg groups was 12.6 ng/mL and 13.4 ng/mL, respectively. The rate of additional progesterone supplementation was higher in the 1200 mg group. A logistic regression analysis identified a younger age (≤37 years) and the use of 1200 mg progesterone as independent predictive factors for the clinical pregnancy outcome. The analysis of the infant outcomes revealed no significant difference in the distribution of birth ages and weights.

CONCLUSION

High-dose transvaginal progesterone of 1200 mg/d as luteal support contributed to good pregnancy outcomes.

Vitrified blastocyst transfer cycles with the use of only vaginal progesterone replacement with Endometrin have inferior ongoing pregnancy rates: results from the planned interim analysis of a three-arm randomized controlled noninferiority trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the noninferiority of vaginal P (Endometrin) compared with daily intramuscular P for replacement in programmed vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer cycles and to assess the noninferiority of vaginal P in combination with intramuscular progesterone every third day compared with daily intramuscular P.

DESIGN

Three-arm randomized controlled noninferiority study. To enable early recognition of inferiority if present, an a priori interim analysis was planned and completed once ongoing pregnancy data were available for 50% of the total enrollment goal. The results of this interim analysis are presented here.

SETTING

Assisted reproduction technology practice.

PATIENT(S)

Women undergoing transfer of nonbiopsied high quality vitrified-warmed blastocyst(s) in a programmed cycle.

INTERVENTION(S)

Vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer with mode of P replacement determined by randomization to either: (1) 50 mg daily intramuscular P only; (2) 200 mg twice daily vaginal Endometrin; or (3) 200 mg twice daily Endometrin plus 50 mg intramuscular P every 3rd day.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Live birth. The primary outcome of this interim analysis was ongoing pregnancy.

RESULT(S)

A total of 645 cycles were randomly assigned to one of the three treatment arms, received at least one dose of P replacement therapy according to this assignment and underwent vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer. These cycles were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The study team, including the statistician, were blinded to the identity of the treatment arms, which were randomly labeled "A," "B," and "C" in the dataset. Ongoing pregnancy occurred in 50%, 47%, and 31% of cycles in arms A, B, and C respectively. Although arm C had an rate of positive hCG equivalent to the other two arms, the rate of pregnancy loss for arm C was significantly higher than for either of the two arms, resulting in a more than one-third lower rate of ongoing pregnancy. There were no statistically significant differences for any outcome tested between arms A and B. Results of a per-protocol analysis were nearly identical to those of the intention-to-treat analysis. On completion of these analyses, arm C was revealed to be the vaginal P only arm.

CONCLUSION(S)

Relative to regimens inclusive of intramuscular P, vaginal-only P replacement for vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer results in decreased ongoing pregnancy, due to increased miscarriage, and should be avoided. Randomization to the vaginal-only arm was terminated with these findings. This trial is ongoing to assess the noninferiority of the vaginal plus every 3rd day intramuscular P arm compared with daily intramuscular P in terms of live birth.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NLM identifier NCT02254577.

Progesterone administration for luteal phase deficiency in human reproduction: an old or new issue?

Luteal phase deficiency (LPD) is described as a condition of insufficient progesterone exposure to maintain a regular secretory endometrium and allow for normal embryo implantation and growth. Recently, scientific focus is turning to understand the physiology of implantation, in particular the several molecular markers of endometrial competence, through the recent transcriptomic approaches and microarray technology. In spite of the wide availability of clinical and instrumental methods for assessing endometrial competence, reproducible and reliable diagnostic tests for LPD are currently lacking, so no type-IA evidence has been proposed by the main scientific societies for assessing endometrial competence in infertile couples. Nevertheless, LPD is a very common condition that may occur during a series of clinical conditions, and during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) and hyperstimulation (COH) programs. In many cases, the correct approach to treat LPD is the identification and correction of any underlying condition while, in case of no underlying dysfunction, the treatment becomes empiric. To date, no direct data is available regarding the efficacy of luteal phase support for improving fertility in spontaneous cycles or in non-gonadotropin induced ovulatory cycles. On the contrary, in gonadotropin in vitro fertilization (IVF) and non-IVF cycles, LPD is always present and progesterone exerts a significant positive effect on reproductive outcomes. The scientific debate still remains open regarding progesterone administration protocols, specially on routes of administration, dose and timing and the potential association with other drugs, and further research is still needed.

Patients' administration preferences: progesterone vaginal insert (Endometrin®) compared to intramuscular progesterone for Luteal phase support

Background

Administration of exogenous progesterone for luteal phase support has become a standard of practice. Intramuscular (IM) injections of progesterone in oil (PIO) and vaginal administration of progesterone are the primary routes of administration. This report describes the administration preferences expressed by women with infertility that were given progesterone vaginal insert (PVI) or progesterone in oil injections (PIO) for luteal phase support during fresh IVF cycles.

Methods

A questionnaire to assess the tolerability, convenience, and ease of administration of PVI and PIO given for luteal phase support was completed by infertile women diagnosed with PCOS and planning to undergo IVF. The women participated in an open-label study of highly purified human menopausal gonadotropins (HP-hMG) compared with recombinant FSH (rFSH) given for stimulation of ovulation.

Results

Most women commented on the convenience and ease of administration of PVI, while a majority of women who administered IM PIO described experiencing pain. In addition, their partners often indicated that they had experienced at least some anxiety regarding the administration of PIO. The most distinguishing difference between PVI and PIO in this study was the overall patient preference for PVI. Despite the need to administer PVI either twice a day or three times a day, 82.6% of the patients in the PVI group found it “very” or “somewhat convenient” compared with 44.9% of women in the PIO group.

Conclusions

The results of this comprehensive, prospective patient survey, along with findings from other similar reports, suggest that PVI provides an easy-to-use and convenient method for providing the necessary luteal phase support for IVF cycles without the pain and inconvenience of daily IM PIO. Moreover, ongoing pregnancy rates with the well-tolerated PVI were as good as the pregnancy rates with PIO.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT00805935

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1742-4755-11-78) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Progesterone replacement with vaginal gel versus i.m. injection: cycle and pregnancy outcomes in IVF patients receiving vitrified blastocysts

STUDY QUESTION

Does the type of luteal support affect pregnancy outcomes in recipients of vitrified blastocysts?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Luteal support with vaginal progesterone gel or i.m. progesterone (IMP) results in comparable implantation and pregnancy rates in IVF patients receiving vitrified blastocysts.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

In fresh IVF cycles, both IMP and vaginal progesterone have become the standard of care for luteal phase support. Due to conflicting data in replacement cycles, IMP is often considered to be the standard of care.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Retrospective analysis of 920 frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles between 1 January 2010 and 1 September 2012.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Patients from a large, private practice undergoing autologous and donor FET using IMP or vaginal progesterone gel for luteal support were included in the analysis. IMP was used for luteal support in 682 FET cycles and vaginal progesterone gel was used in 238 FET cycles. Standard clinical outcomes of positive serum hCG levels, implantation, clinical pregnancy, spontaneous abortion and live birth were reported.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The IMP and vaginal progesterone gel groups had similar patient demographics for all characteristics assessed. Implantation rates (46.4 versus 45.6%, P = 0.81), clinical pregnancy rates (61.7 versus 60.5%, P = 0.80) and live birth rates (49.1 versus 48.9%, P > 0.99) were not significantly different between IMP and vaginal progesterone gel, respectively.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

This study is limited by its retrospective design and by its lack of randomization to the type of luteal support. In addition, because no a priori expected rates of success could be provided for this retrospective investigation, it was not possible to estimate statistical power associated with the various outcomes presented.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

With the recent trends toward single embryo transfer (SET) and use of vitrified blastocysts in FET cycles, our data with ∼40% of cycles being SET and use of exclusively vitrified blastocysts are more relevant to current practices than previous studies.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

Support for data collection and analysis was provided by Actavis, Inc. D.S. has received honoraria for lectures and participation in Scientific Advisory Boards for Actavis, Inc. J.P. is an employee of Actavis, Inc. N.E. has received payment from Actavis, Inc., for her time for data collection. H.H. has received payment from Actavis, Inc., for statistical analyses. Z.P.N. has nothing to disclose.