Flexibility in starting ovarian stimulation at different phases of the menstrual cycle for treatment of infertile women with the use of in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection

Programming the onset of ovarian stimulation: from early follicular phase start to oral contraceptive pill, to luteal phase E2, Duostim, and random start oral contraceptive protocols

Ovarian stimulation has been the single most efficient measure ever taken in assisted reproductive technology for improving outcomes by harvesting multiple oocytes and ultimately, embryos. Today, ovarian stimulation protocols consist of administrating exogenous gonadotropins to override the natural mechanisms that control the ovulatory quota to one in humans. For practicality issues, there have been numerous attempts to control, or "program," when ovarian stimulation is initiated to improve functionality and in turn efficacy for assisted reproductive technology programs. The different options for controlling the onset of ovarian stimulation currently available are discussed here, as well as the novel possibility of using progestins for blocking premature ovulation.

Fertility preservation in patients undergoing gonadotoxic treatments: a Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society clinical practice guideline

The management of young patients with cancer presents several unique challenges. In general, these patients are ill prepared for the diagnosis and the impact on their fertility. With the improved survival for all tumour types and stages, the need for adequate fertility counselling and a multidisciplinary approach in the reproductive care of these patients is paramount. Recent advances in cryopreservation techniques allow for the banking of spermatozoa, oocytes, embryos and ovarian tissue without compromising survival. This Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society (CFAS) guideline outlines the current understanding of social and medical issues associated with oncofertility, and the medical and surgical technologies available to optimize future fertility.

Comparison of luteal phase stimulation with follicular phase stimulation in poor ovarian response: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In the last decade, luteal-phase ovarian stimulation (LPOS) has been suggested as an alternative controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocol for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) cycles mainly in women with a history of poor ovarian response (POR). The present randomized controlled trial study aimed to compare the outcomes of follicular phase ovarian stimulation (FPOS) and LPOS protocols in POR cases undergoing ICSI cycles.

METHODS

Seventy-eight POR patients who met the Bologna criteria and underwent an ICSI cycle were included. In this study, 39 POR cases were allocated to the FPOS group, and 39 POR cases were allocated to the LPOS group. The primary outcome was the number of metaphase II (MII) oocytes. In addition, the total number of oocytes, number of top-quality day 3 embryo, day 3 embryo development rate, chemical pregnancy and clinical pregnancy rates were defined as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The obtained results demonstrated that the number of MII oocytes significantly increased in the LPOS group compared to the FPOS group (P = 0.007). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the number of GV and MI oocytes, number of top-quality day 3 embryos and day 3 embryo development rate among both categories of patients. Also, the number of total and MII oocytes was significantly higher in the LPOS group (P = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that LPOS protocol effectively increases the number of mature oocytes in women with a history of POR.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

IRCT20210405050852N1 (Registered at Iranian registry of clinical trials; available at https://en.irct.ir/trial/55402 ).

Is controlled ovarian stimulation safe in patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy?

INTRODUCTION

Controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for oocyte/embryo cryopreservation is the method of choice for fertility preservation (FP) in young patients diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer (eBC). Nevertheless, some challenges still question its role, particularly in the neoadjuvant setting, where concerns arise about potential delay in the onset of anticancer treatment, and in hormone receptor-positive (HR+) disease, as cancer cells may proliferate under the estrogenic peak associated with stimulation. Therefore, this review aims to examine the available evidence on the safety of COS in eBC patients eligible for neoadjuvant treatment (NAT), particularly in HR+ disease.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify studies evaluating the feasibility and safety of COS in eBC and including patients referred to NAT and/or with HR+ disease. Time to NAT and survival outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Of the three matched cohort studies assessing the impact of COS on time to start NAT, only one reported a significant small delay in the cohort undergoing COS compared with the control group, whereas the other studies found no difference. Regarding survival outcomes, overall, no increased risk of recurrence or death was found, either in patients undergoing COS in the neoadjuvant setting regardless of HR expression or in HR+ disease regardless of the timing of COS relative to surgery. However, there are no data on the safety of COS in the specific combined scenario of HR+ disease undergoing NAT.

CONCLUSION

Neither the indication to NAT nor the HR positivity constitutes per se an a priori contraindication to COS. Shared decision making between clinicians and patients is essential to carefully weigh the risks and benefits in each individual case. Prospective studies designed to specifically investigate this issue are warranted.

Random-start ovarian stimulation in an oocyte donation programme: a large, single-centre, experience

RESEARCH QUESTION

Do live birth rates differ between recipients matched with donors using conventional ovarian stimulation compared with those using random-start protocols?

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of 891 ovarian stimulations in egg donors (January-December 2018) and clinical outcomes in matched recipients (n = 935). Donors commenced ovarian stimulation on day 1-3 of the menstrual cycle (n = 223) or in the mid/late-follicular (n = 388) or luteal phase (n = 280) under a conventional antagonist protocol. Live birth rate of matched recipients was the main outcome.

RESULTS

Duration of stimulation and total gonadotrophin dose were comparable between conventional versus random-start groups. The number of collected eggs were similar (17.6 ± 8.8 versus 17.2 ± 8.5, P = 0.6, respectively). Sub-group analysis showed that stimulation length (10.2 ± 1.8 versus 9.8 ± 1.7 versus 10.4 ± 1.7, P < 0.001) and gonadotrophin consumption (2041.5 ± 645.3 versus 2003.2 ± 647.3 versus 2158.2 ± 685.7 IU, P = 0.01) differed significantly between the conventional, mid/late follicular and luteal phase groups, respectively. In matched recipients receiving fresh oocytes and undergoing fresh embryo transfer, the biochemical pregnancy (63.8% and 63.3%; P = 0.9), clinical pregnancy (54.6% and 56.1%; P = 0.8) and live birth rates (47.7% and 46.6%; P = 0.7) per embryo-transfer were similar between conventional versus random groups. Similar results were obtained in recipients receiving vitrified eggs. Euploidy rate was also comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

No notable variations were found in clinical outcomes using oocytes obtained from random-start protocols and those proceeding from conventional ovarian stimulation in oocyte donation treatments. Luteal-phase stimulation seems to require longer stimulation and higher FSH consumption. Random-start stimulation strategy does not impair the potential of the oocyte yield or clinical outcomes in oocyte donation cycles.

The cumulative live birth rates of 18 593 women with progestin-primed ovarian stimulation-related protocols and frozen-thawed transfer cycles

STUDY QUESTION

What are the odds of achieving pregnancy when adopting progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS)-related protocols combined with repetitive frozen-thawed transfer (FET) cycles in patients with different clinical characteristics?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) of women undergoing different PPOS-related protocols can be significantly and consistently enhanced within six FET cycles when the female age is <40 years (or even <45 years) and when >5 oocytes are retrieved, regardless of antral follicle count (AFC).

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

There have been numerous studies on the live birth rate of the first FET cycle in patients with PPOS-related protocols. These studies have focused mainly on comparing pregnancy outcomes with those of other stimulation protocols. However, owing to the unique features of the PPOS-related strategy, such as its flexible timing of oocyte retrieval and repeated transfer of frozen embryos, studies using the CLBR as an overall indicator of success and investigating which types of patients would benefit from this protocol are lacking.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

This retrospective cohort study included 18 593 women who underwent PPOS-related protocols (dydrogesterone + hMG, medroxyprogesterone acetate + hMG, micronized progesterone + hMG treatment, and luteal-phase ovarian stimulation protocol) from 1 March 2011 to 31 September 2022 in our centre.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

The population was categorized by female age, number of oocytes retrieved, and AFC in the analysis of CLBR within six FET cycles. The age groups (Groups 1-5, respectively) were <30, 30-34, 35-39, 40-44, and ≥45 years. The number of oocytes retrieved was grouped as 1-5, 6-10, 11-15, 16-20, and >20. AFC was grouped as <5, 5-10, 11-15, and >15. The Kaplan-Meier analysis (optimistic method), which hypothesized that patients who did not continue treatment had the same chance of achieving a live birth as those who continued, and the competing risk method (conservative method) which hypothesized they had no chance of achieving a live birth, were applied. In further analyses, the Cox model and Fine-Gray model were adopted: the former corresponds to the optimistic scenario, and the latter corresponds to the pessimistic scenario.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

CLBR had a declining trend with female age over six FET cycles (Groups 1-5, respectively: optimistic: 96.9%, 96.6%, 91.4%, 67.3%, and 11.7%; conservative: 87.3%, 85.0%, 74.0%, 41.3%, and 7.5%), requiring more FET cycles to achieve a success rate of at least 50% (Groups 1-5, respectively: optimistic: 2, 2, 2, 4, and >6 cycles; conservative: 2, 2, 2, >,6 and >6 cycles). CLBR showed an increasing trend with the number of oocytes retrieved (Groups 1-5, respectively: optimistic: 93.8%, 94.3%, 95.8%, 96.0%, and 95.6%; conservative: 66.2%, 78.3%, 85.6%, 88.9%, and 91.0%). All groups needed the same number of FET cycles to achieve a success rate of at least 50% (Groups 1-5, respectively: optimistic: 2, 2, 2, 2, and 2 cycles; conservative: 2, 2, 2, 2, and 2 cycles). Furthermore, the CLBR within six FET cycles had an increasing trend with AFC number (Groups 1-4, respectively: optimistic: 89.2%, 94.8%, 95.9%, and 96.3%; conservative: 67.4%, 78.2%, 83.9%, and 88.1%), with all four groups achieving a success rate of at least 50% by the second FET cycle.

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

The current research is limited by its retrospective design and single-centre nature, which may restrict the generalizability of our findings.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This work describes two models (the Kaplan-Meier analysis and the competing risk method) to evaluate the clinical outcome of patients using PPOS-related protocols, which are especially useful for patients of advanced age or those with diminished ovarian reserve. Our findings encourage patients below 45 years old, especially younger than 40 years, and patients with lower AFCs and fewer retrieved oocytes to try this new protocol. Moreover, this study demonstrates the degree of improvement in the CLBR within six FET cycles for patients with different clinical characteristics, providing a valuable point of reference to determine whether to continue ART after a transfer failure.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The study was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82071603 to L.W., 82001502 to Y.L.). There are no conflicts of interest to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

The mediating role of pregnancy-induced hypertension on pre-pregnancy body mass index and adverse neonatal outcomes in women with assisted reproductive technology

OBJECTIVE

To explore whether pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH) mediates the association between pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) and adverse neonatal outcomes in women undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) for singleton pregnancies.

METHODS

This cohort study collected 79437 maternal data from the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) between 2020 and 2021. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were applied to estimate the association between pre-pregnancy BMI and PIH in women receiving ART as well as the associations between pre-pregnancy BMI and PIH and adverse neonatal outcomes. The mediation effect of PIH on the association between pre-pregnancy BMI and adverse neonatal outcomes was estimated according to the total effect, natural direct effect, natural indirect effect, and percentage of mediation.

RESULTS

There were 25769 participants had adverse neonatal outcomes at the end of the follow-up. After adjusting for confounding factors, an increased risk of PIH in women receiving ART was identified in those with pre-pregnancy BMI ≥25 kg/m2 [odds ratio (OR)=1.92, 95% confidence interval (CI):1.84-2.01]. Pre-pregnancy BMI ≥25 kg/m2 was associated with an increased risk of adverse neonatal outcomes (OR = 1.26, 95%CI:1.22-1.30). Women with PIH had an increased risk of adverse neonatal outcomes (OR = 1.79, 95%CI:1.71-1.87). The percentage mediated by PIH in the association between pre-pregnancy BMI and adverse neonatal outcomes was 21.30%.

CONCLUSION

PIH partially mediated the association between pre-pregnancy BMI and adverse neonatal outcomes in women receiving ART, which recommends that women control weight before receiving ART.

Outcomes and cost-effectiveness comparisons of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation, GnRH antagonist protocol, and luteal phase stimulation for fertility preservation

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) and the gonadotropin-releasing hormone-antagonist (GnRH-A) protocol in fertility preservation (FP) in cancer patients. The stimulation option when patients were in the luteal phase was also explored.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed clinical data from 163 patients who underwent FP. The number of retrieved oocytes and vitrified oocytes/embryos, total dose of gonadotropin, duration of stimulation, number of injections, and cost were compared among the PPOS, GnRH-A, and luteal phase stimulation (LPS) groups.

RESULTS

No significant differences were noted in the numbers of retrieved oocytes and vitrified oocytes/embryos among the three groups. In the multiple regression model, age (P = 0.02) and antral follicle count (AFC) (P < 0.001), but not the controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocols (P = 0.586), were associated with the number of retrieved oocytes. The number of injections and the cost were all significantly lower in the PPOS and LPS groups than in the GnRH-A group(P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

PPOS had similar clinical results but was superior medically and economically to GnRH-A. For patients in the luteal phase, LPS was an optional protocol with similar outcomes and costs to PPOS.

Free your patients and yourself from day 2-3: start ovarian stimulation any time in freeze-all cycles

Ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology is traditionally started in the early follicular phase. The essential rationale is to allow timely follicle growth and oocyte retrieval to ensure synchronization of the in-vitro cultured embryos with the receptive period of the endometrium in a fresh transfer cycle. In addition, conventional thought suggested that follicle recruitment happened only once, around menstruation. A deeper understanding of folliculogenesis, advances in cryobiology and an increasing proportion of freeze-all cycles provide a unique opportunity here. Experience from oncofertility patients as well as infertile women and oocyte donors who underwent ovarian stimulation in different phases of the menstrual cycle, dubbed 'random start' cycles, suggests that the number of oocytes collected and their reproductive potential do not depend on the time of starting ovarian stimulation, although the duration of stimulation and gonadotrophin consumption can vary slightly. It may be time to free both patients and clinics from the obsession with starting ovarian stimulation in the early follicular phase in planned freeze-all cycles. The flexibility provided by random start cycles is one aspect of individualizing treatment to patients' needs.

Comparison of Cumulative Live Birth Rates between Flexible and Conventional Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation Protocol in Poor Ovarian Response Patients According to POSEIDON Criteria: A Cohort Study

RESEARCH QUESTION

To compare the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) per oocyte retrieval cycle of a conventional progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (cPPOS) regimen with a flexible progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (fPPOS) regimen in poor ovarian response patients, according to POSEIDON criteria.

DESIGN

Poor ovarian response women, according to POSEIDON criteria, who underwent the first PPOS protocol for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) between January 2018 and December 2020 were included. The fPPOS group involved 113 participants, and the cPPOS group included 1119 participants. In the cPPOS group, medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) (10 mg/d) was administrated on the gonadotropin injection the same day as gonadotropin injections in the cPPOS group, while MPA was started either on the day when the leading follicle with mean diameter > 12mm was present and/or serum E2 was >300 pg/mL in the fPPOS protocol group. The primary outcome was CLBR.

RESULTS

The fPPOS protocol had higher CLBR per oocyte retrieval cycle compared to the cPPOS group, even without a statistically significant difference (29.6% vs. 24.9%, p = 0.365). The fPPOS group had fewer numbers of retrieved oocytes (2.87 ± 2.03 vs. 3.76 ± 2.32, p < 0.001) but a higher MII oocyte rate (89.8% vs. 84.7%, p = 0.016). In addition, the number of available embryos in the two groups was comparable (1.37 ± 1.24 vs. 1.63 ± 1.38, p = 0.095). There were five women in the fPPOS group, and 86 women in the cPPOS group had a premature LH surge (4.2% vs. 6.8%, p = 0.261). In the fPPOS group, there was one instance of premature ovulation, while in the cPPOS group, there were six occurrences of premature ovulation (0.8 vs. 0.5%, p = 1.000).

CONCLUSION(S)

The novel fPPOS protocol appears to achieve higher CLBR even without significant differences and with MPA consumption compared with cPPOS protocol in low-prognosis patients.

A delayed ovulation of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) by downregulating the LHCGR/PGR pathway

Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) is a new ovulation stimulation protocol, and its role in ovulation and regulatory mechanism is unclear. The clinical PPOS protocol was simulated in mice. The ovulated oocytes, estradiol, progesterone, and luteinizing hormone (LH) levels were analyzed at different hours after trigger. mRNA extraction and real-time PCR, hematoxylin and eosin staining, and immunofluorescence of ovaries were used to explore the involved signaling pathways. The PPOS group had a delayed ovulation at 12.5 h after trigger. Its suppressed LH level reduced the expression of luteinizing hormone/choriogonadotropin receptor (LHCGR) on the preovulatory follicles before trigger and significantly decreased the following progesterone synthesis, blood progesterone level, and progesterone receptor (PGR) expression within 4-6 h after trigger. Furthermore, the important ovulatory genes regulated by PGR including ADAMTS-1, VEGF-A, and EDN2 were downregulated, ultimately delaying the ovulation. PPOS suppresses the LH level before trigger and decreases the synthesis of progesterone after trigger, thus delaying the ovulation by downregulating the LHCGR-PGR pathway.

Progestin Primed Ovarian Stimulation (PPOS) protocol yields lower euploidy rate in older patients undergoing IVF

BACKGROUND

To explore if exogenous progestin required for progestin primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol compromises the euploidy rate of patients who underwent preimplantation genetic testing cycles when compared to those who received the conventional gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed 128 preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) cycles performed from January 2018 to December 2021 in a single university hospital-affiliated fertility center. Infertile women aged 27 to 45 years old requiring PGT-A underwent either PPOS protocol or GnRH-antagonist protocol with in-vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) for fertilization. Frozen embryo transfers were performed following each PGT-A cycle. Data regarding the two groups were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).

RESULTS

Patients who underwent PPOS treatment had significantly reduced blastocyst formation rate and euploidy rate compared to those who received the GnRH antagonist protocol. Subgroup-analysis was performed by stratifying patients' age into elder and young subgroups (elder: ≥ 38-year-old, young: < 38-year-old). In the elder sub-population, the blastocyst formation rate of the PPOS group was significantly lower than that of the GnRH-antagonist group (45.8 ± 6.1% vs. 59.9 ± 3.8%, p = 0.036). Moreover, the euploidy rate of the PPOS group was only about 20% of that of  the GnRH-antagonist group (5.4% and 26.7%, p = 0.006). In contrast, no significant differences in blastocyst formation rate (63.5 ± 5.7% vs. 67.1 ± 3.2%, p = 0.45) or euploidy rate (30.1% vs. 38.5%, p = 0.221) were observed in the young sub-population. Secondary outcomes, which included implantation rate, biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate, and miscarriage rate, were comparable between the two treatment groups, regardless of age.

CONCLUSION

When compared to the conventional GnRH-antagonist approach, PPOS protocol could potentially reduce the euploidy rate in aging IVF patients. However, due to the retrospective nature of this study, the results are to be interpreted with caution. Before the PPOS protocol is widely implemented, further studies exploring its efficacy in larger populations are needed to define the optimal patient selection suitable for this method.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Human Investigation and Ethical Committee of Chang Gung Medical Foundation (202200194B0).

Minding the Bathwater: Fertility and Reproductive Toxicity in the Age of Immuno-Oncology

Immune checkpoint inhibition has resulted in significant efficacy across many cancer types, including melanoma. Melanoma is the second most common cancer among those of reproductive age, yet the reproductive toxicities of adjuvant and first-line immunotherapy are largely unknown.The normal innate and adaptive immune systems play a vital role in reproductive organ homeostasis of men and women and are essential for implantation, fertility, and a successful pregnancy. The programmed cell death-1 receptor/programmed cell death receptor ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1) pathway is essential in several aspects of fertility and pregnancy. Recent studies have largely focused on the role of the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway in fetomaternal tolerance, highlighting the importance of intact immune regulation in promoting a successful pregnancy.In this review, we describe a case of a reproductive-aged female with stage IIIC melanoma who sought guidance on family planning after pembrolizumab therapy. We discuss the known fertility-related toxicities of immune checkpoint inhibitors, the potential targets for reproductive toxicity in males and nonpregnant females, and the implications of anti-PD-1 therapy in relation to fetomaternal tolerance. Informed decision making will benefit from data and consensus.

Comparison of blastocyst euploidy rates following luteal versus follicular phase stimulation in a GnRH antagonist protocol: a prospective study with repeated ovarian stimulation cycles

STUDY QUESTION

Is there any difference in the mean number of euploid embryos following luteal phase start (LS) and follicular phase start (FS) of ovarian stimulation?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The mean number of euploid blastocysts is equivalent independent of whether the inseminated oocytes are derived from FS or LS.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Starting ovarian stimulation at any time of the cycle ('random-start') is commonly used for emergency fertility preservation in cancer patients. A few retrospective studies have been published evaluating LS in women undergoing ovarian stimulation in the context of IVF, but there is a lack of robust data on the comparative efficacy of LS versus FS.Although 'random start' is commonly used in cancer survivors, few retrospective and uncontrolled studies have been published evaluating luteal phase stimulation in women undergoing ovarian stimulation in the context of IVF. Owing to this evident lack of robust data on the efficacy of LS, guidelines typically recommend the LS approach only for medical reasons and not in the context of IVF.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This is a prospective, equivalence study, with repeated stimulation cycles, conducted between May 2018 and December 2021. Overall, 44 oocyte donors underwent two identical consecutive ovarian stimulation cycles, one initiated in the FS and the other in the LS. The primary outcome of the study was to evaluate whether FS and LS in the same patient would result in equivalent numbers of euploid embryos following fertilization of oocytes with the same sperm sample.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Overall, 44 oocyte donors underwent two consecutive ovarian stimulation protocols with 150 μg corifollitropin alpha followed by 200 IU recombinant FSH (rFSH) in a fixed GnRH antagonist protocol. The only difference between the two cycles was the day of initiation of ovarian stimulation, which was in the early follicular phase (FS) in one cycle, and in the luteal phase (LS) in the other. Forty-four oocyte recipients participated in the study receiving a mean of six metaphase II (MII) oocytes from each stimulation cycle (FS and LS). All MIIs were inseminated with the corresponding recipient's partner sperm (which had been previously frozen) or donor sperm, in order to safeguard the use of the same sample for either the FS or LS. Following fertilization and blastocyst culture, all generated embryos underwent genetic analysis for aneuploidy screening (preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy).

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

FS resulted in a significantly shorter duration of ovarian stimulation (difference between means (DBM) -1.05 (95% CI -1.89; -0.20)) and a lower total additional dose of daily rFSH was needed (DBM -196.02 (95% CI -319.92; -72.12)) compared with LS. The donors' hormonal profile on the day of trigger was comparable between the two stimulation cycles, as well as the mean number of oocytes (23.70 ± 10.79 versus 23.70 ± 8.81) (DBM 0.00 (95% CI -3.03; 3.03)) and MII oocytes (20.27 ± 9.60 versus 20.73 ± 8.65) (DBM -0.45 (95% CI -2.82; 1.91)) between FS and LS cycles, respectively. Following fertilization, the overall blastocyst formation rate was 60.70% with a euploid rate of 57.1%. Comparisons between the two stimulation cycles did not reveal any significance differences in terms of fertilization rates (71.9% versus 71.4%), blastocyst formation rates (59.4% versus 62%) and embryo euploidy rates (56.9 versus 57.3%) for the comparison of FS versus LS, respectively. The mean number of euploid blastocysts was equivalent between the FS (1.59 ± 1.30) and the LS (1.61 ± 1.17), (DBM -0.02 (90%CI -0.48; 0.44)).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The study was performed in young, potentially fertile oocyte donors who are patients with high blastocyst euploidy rates. Although results may be extrapolated to young infertile women with good ovarian reserve, caution is needed prior to generalizing the results to infertile women of older age.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The current study provides evidence that initiation of ovarian stimulation in the luteal phase in young potentially fertile women may result in a comparable number of oocytes and comparable blastocyst euploidy rates compared with follicular phase stimulation. This may imply that in case of a freeze-all protocol in young patients with good ovarian reserve, clinicians may safely consider initiation of ovarian stimulation during the luteal phase.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This research was supported by an unrestricted grant from MSD/Organon. N.P.P. has received Research grants and honoraria for lectures from: Merck Serono, MSD/Organon, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Besins Intenational, Roche Diagnostics, IBSA, Theramex, Gedeon Richter. F.M., E.C., M.R. and S.G. declared no conflict of interests.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The study was registered at Clinical Trials Gov (NCT03555942).

Oocyte and embryo cryopreservation before gonadotoxic treatments: Principles of safe ovarian stimulation, a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Review the safety of fertility preservation through ovarian stimulation with oocyte or embryo cryopreservation, including cycle and medication options.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A systematic review of peer-reviewed sources revealed 2 applicable randomized control trials and 60 cohort studies as well as 20 additional expert opinions or reviews.

RESULTS

The capacity for future family building is important for the majority of reproductive age people, despite life-altering medical or oncologic diagnosis. Modern fertility preservation generates a high rate of oocyte yield while utilizing protocols that can be started at multiple points in the menstrual cycle and suppressing supra-physiologic levels of estrogen. Finally, more than one quarter of fertility preservation patients will return to later utilize fertility services.

CONCLUSION

For most patients, fertility preservation can safely be pursued and completed within 2 weeks without affecting disease severity or long-term survival.

The earlier the initiation of gonadotropin in poor responders in luteal phase stimulation protocols, the better

INTRODUCTION

Luteal-phase ovarian stimulation has been proved to be feasible for producing competent oocytes/embryos and achieving live births, yet there is no standardized stimulation protocol for luteal-phase ovarian stimulation (LPS). The aim of this study was to explore the optimal timing of gonadotropin initiation in the LPS protocol for poor ovarian responders.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in the reproductive medicine center of a tertiary hospital. A total of 327 poor responders fulfilling Bologna criteria underwent LPS with IVF/ICSI treatment. HMG and letrozole were administrated after ovulation. Patients were stratified into three groups according to the gonadotropin start day: early, early-mid, and mid-late luteal phase. A freeze-all strategy was performed for all cycles. The duration of ovarian stimulation, total gonadotropin dose, number of oocytes retrieved, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, and live birth rate after frozen/thawed embryo transfer cycles were included for evaluation.

RESULTS

The group accepted ovarian stimulation in the earlier phase tended to have a shorter duration of ovarian stimulation [8 (7,10) in early luteal group, 9 (8,10.25) in early-mid luteal group, and 11 (10,12) in mid-late luteal group; P <0.001] and lower gonadotropin consumption [1993.35 ± 720.31, 2282.73 ± 703.38, and 2764.83 ± 722.26, respectively; P <0.001]. Logistic regression and multiple linear regression were used to assess the associations between the phase of gonadotropin initiation and duration of ovarian stimulation (or total gonadotropin dose) by adjusting for confounding factors. Compared with the early luteal group, longer ovarian stimulation(>9 days) was more likely to occur in the early-mid and mid-late luteal groups, with the adjusted odds ratios 0.584 (0.327-1.042) and 0.116 (0.049-0.271), respectively (P-trend<0.001). Delayed gonadotropin initiation showed an 113.200 IU increase (95%CI: 70.469, 155.930) per-day in the total gonadotropin dosage. Meanwhile, there were no significant differences in the mean number of oocytes, utilizable embryos, pregnancy outcomes among three groups.

CONCLUSION

Although the timing of gonadotropin initiation is not associated with pregnancy outcomes, earlier initiation of gonadotropin therapy after ovulation was associated with a shorter duration of ovarian stimulation and lower gonadotropin consumption in poor responders in LPS.

Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation with Clomiphene Citrate Supplementation May Be More Feasible for Young Women with Diminished Ovarian Reserve Compared with Standard Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation: A Retrospective Study

Purpose

Patients and Methods

Results

Conclusion

Progesterone affects clinic oocyte yields by coordinating with follicle stimulating hormone via PI3K/AKT and MAPK pathways

•

Progesterone reduced oocyte yields in clinic. Yields were rescued by the higher dose of hMG.

•

Progesterone downregulated follicle growth and consequently reduced oocyte yields.

•

Progesterone inhibited granular cell proliferation via MAPK and PI3K/AKT pathways.

•

Progesterone and FSH coordinated follicle growth via signalling crosstalk in granular cells.

Introduction

As an effective inhibitor of premature ovulation, progestin was introduced to a novel ovarian stimulation regimen for infertility treatment. However, the local action of progestin on the ovary and its effect on clinical outcomes have not been described.

Objectives

The influence of progesterone administration on clinical oocyte outcomes and the mechanisms involved in the coordination of progesterone and follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) on follicle growth and oocyte yields were investigated.

Methods

Clinical outcomes of patients undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization were analyzed. The murine ovarian stimulation model and follicle culture system were used to evaluate the effects of progesterone on oocyte yield, follicle development, granular cell proliferation, and hormone secretion. Phospho-specific protein microarrays were used to explore involved signaling pathways.

Results

Progesterone decreased clinical oocyte yields, and yields were rescued with an increased dose of human menopausal gonadotropin. Administration of progesterone inhibited murine granular cell proliferation and reduced the growth rate of follicles; both of which were rescued by FSH. The phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase B (AKT) and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) were identified as pivotal signaling pathways to integrate progesterone into the FSH signaling network in granular cells.

Conclusion

Progesterone inhibited granular cell proliferation and antral follicle growth during ovarian stimulation, and subsequently influenced oocyte outcomes in the clinical setting. Progesterone coordinated with FSH to regulate follicle growth through PI3K/AKT and MAPK signaling pathways. These findings advance our knowledge regarding the ovarian response to gonadotropins during progestin-primed ovarian stimulation and create an opportunity to manipulate individual oocyte yields.

A comprehensive evaluation of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol in patients with or without PCOS undergoing in vitro fertilization

Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) regimen was established for assisted reproduction. However, its feasibility and outcomes in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) patients need further evaluation. The outcomes of infertile patients with PCOS (study group) and normal ovaries (control group with unexplained infertility and tubal factor infertility) who underwent PPOS and IVF/ICSI protocol were retrospectively studied. The baseline information, primary, and secondary outcomes of patients were collected. The dynamic changes of hormones were closely monitored. 198 PCOS patients and 374 controls were included in this study. After controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH), 15 oocytes were retrieved from PCOS patients on average, which was more than those from the controls (p < 0.001). The oocytes and embryos obtained from the PCOS patients exhibited better developmental potential as the number of fertilized oocytes, cleaved embryos, top-quality embryos, viable embryos, cryopreserved embryos, the rate of fertilization, and viable embryo per oocyte retrieved in PCOS patients were significantly higher than those in the controls (all p < 0.001). No significant difference between the two groups was identified regarding the primary outcome, ongoing pregnancy, and other secondary outcomes. No moderate to severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) was diagnosed in either group. With the proposed PPOS protocol, the quantity, quality, developmental potential of oocytes, and embryos obtained from PCOS patients were superior to those from controls. The protocol was efficient and safe in terms of pregnancy, obstetric, and perinatal outcomes. OHSS was effectively mitigated in the patients, with or without PCOS, who underwent COH.

ART outcomes following ovarian stimulation in the luteal phase:a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of luteal phase ovarian stimulation (LPS) on the outcomes of assisted reproductive technology (ART) for infertile couples and patients desiring non-urgent egg cryopreservation.

METHODS

We included all studies reported patients who received LPS and that used follicular phase ovarian stimulation (FPS) as a comparison group until January 2021. Prior meta-analysis regarding the outcomes of LPS in double stimulation and fertility preservation have already been published, so these studies were excluded. Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions was used to assess the study quality. The study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews database (CRD42020183946).

RESULTS

Twelve studies with a total of 4433 patients were included. The regimen employed can be categorized into two groups, but there is currently no evidence to support one over the other. After we excluded the largest study, the clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate were similar after FPS and LPS. There were significantly more stimulation days and total gonadotropins used in the LPS group. After subgroup analysis, we found that poor responders received significantly more cumulus oocyte complexes (+0.64) in the LPS group.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence indicates that patients in the LPS group could achieve pregnancy outcomes non-inferior to those in the FPS group. Because of current debate over freeze-all policy and the limited data about live birth rate, the universal use of LPS is considered controversial. In the future, more well-designed studies are necessary to investigate the indications for LPS and its cost-effectiveness.

Live birth rate with double ovarian stimulation is superior to follicular phase ovarian stimulation per started cycle in poor ovarian responders

AIM

To compare the outcome of double ovarian stimulation (DOS) with follicular phase ovarian stimulation (FPS) per started cycle in poor ovarian responders (PORs).

METHODS

A total of 204 PORs who underwent ovulation induction for in vitro fertilization, cryopreservation of all embryos available, and frozen embryo transfer cycle were retrospectively analyzed. Of those, 146 received single FPS, and 58 received DOS. All viable embryos were cryopreserved and subsequently transferred within 1-6 months.

RESULTS

The number of oocytes collected and the number of mature oocytes per started cycle were higher in the DOS group compared to the FPS group (6.0 ± 1.9 vs. 2.8 ± 1.3 and 4.3 ± 1.3 vs. 2.2 ± 1.2, respectively, p = 0.001). Clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate per started cycle were also significantly higher in the DOS group than the FPS group (41.4% vs. 16.4% and 36.2% vs. 15.1%, respectively, p < 0.001). The cancellation rate of embryo transfer due to no viable embryo was significantly lower in the DOS group (10.3%) than the FPS group (40.4%) (p = 0.001). In the DOS group, numbers of oocytes (3.2 ± 1.2 vs. 2.7 ± 1.1, p = 0.006), MII oocytes (2.6 ± 1.0 vs. 2.1 ± 0.8, p = 0.001), and cryopreserved blastocysts (1.5 ± 0.8 vs. 1.1 ± 0.7, p = 0.002) were significantly higher in the luteal ovarian stimulation compared to follicular ovarian stimulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Live birth per started cycle with DOS is superior to FPS in PORs. Luteal phase stimulation contributes to improving pregnancy rates in these patients.

The euploid blastocysts obtained after luteal phase stimulation show the same clinical, obstetric and perinatal outcomes as follicular phase stimulation-derived ones: a multicenter study

STUDY QUESTION

Are the reproductive outcomes (clinical, obstetric and perinatal) different between follicular phase stimulation (FPS)- and luteal phase stimulation (LPS)-derived euploid blastocysts?

SUMMARY ANSWER

No difference was observed between FPS- and LPS-derived euploid blastocysts after vitrified-warmed single embryo transfer (SET).

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Technical improvements in IVF allow the implementation non-conventional controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocols for oncologic and poor prognosis patients. One of these protocols begins LPS 5 days after FPS is ended (DuoStim). Although, several studies have reported similar embryological outcomes (e.g. fertilization, blastulation, euploidy) between FPS- and LPS-derived cohort of oocytes, information on the reproductive (clinical, obstetric and perinatal) outcomes of LPS-derived blastocysts is limited to small and retrospective studies.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Multicenter study conducted between October 2015 and March 2019 including all vitrified-warmed euploid single blastocyst transfers after DuoStim. Only first transfers of good quality blastocysts (≥BB according to Gardner and Schoolcraft's classification) were included. If euploid blastocysts obtained after both FPS and LPS were available the embryo to transfer was chosen blindly. The primary outcome was the live birth rate (LBR) per vitrified-warmed single euploid blastocyst transfer in the two groups. To achieve 80% power (α = 0.05) to rule-out a 15% difference in the LBR, a total of 366 first transfers were required. Every other clinical, as well as obstetric and perinatal outcomes, were recorded.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Throughout the study period, 827 patients concluded a DuoStim cycle and among them, 339 did not identify any transferable blastocyst, 145 had an euploid blastocyst after FPS, 186 after LPS and 157 after both FPS and LPS. Fifty transfers of poor quality euploid blastocysts were excluded and 49 patients did not undergo an embryo transfer during the study period. Thus, 389 patients had a vitrified-warmed SET of a good quality euploid blastocyst (182 after FPS and 207 after LPS). For 126 cases (32%) where both FPS- and LPS-derived good quality blastocysts were available, the embryo transferred was chosen blindly with a 'True Random Number Generator' function where '0' stood for FPS-derived euploid blastocysts and '1' for LPS-derived ones (n = 70 and 56, respectively) on the website random.org. All embryos were obtained with the same ovarian stimulation protocol in FPS and LPS (GnRH antagonist protocol with fixed dose of rec-FSH plus rec-LH and GnRH-agonist trigger), culture conditions (continuous culture in a humidified atmosphere with 37°C, 6% CO2 and 5% O2) and laboratory protocols (ICSI, trophectoderm biopsy in Day 5-7 without assisted hatching in Day 3, vitrification and comprehensive chromosome testing). The women whose embryos were included had similar age (FPS: 38.5 ± 3.1 and LPS: 38.5 ± 3.2 years), prevalence of male factor, antral follicle count, basal hormonal characteristics, main cause of infertility and previous reproductive history (i.e. previous live births, miscarriages and implantation failures) whether the embryo came from FPS or LPS. All transfers were conducted after warming in an artificial cycle. The blastocysts transferred after FPS and LPS were similar in terms of day of full-development and morphological quality.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The positive pregnancy test rates for FPS- and LPS-derived euploid blastocysts were 57% and 62%, biochemical pregnancy loss rates were 10% and 8%, miscarriage rates were 15% and 14% and LBRs were 44% (n = 80/182, 95% CI 37-51%) and 49% (n = 102/207, 95% CI 42-56%; P = 0.3), respectively. The overall odds ratio for live birth (LPS vs FPS (reference)) adjusted for day of blastocyst development and quality, was 1.3, 95% CI 0.8-2.0, P = 0.2. Among patients with euploid blastocysts obtained following both FPS and LPS, the LBRs were also similar (53% (n = 37/70, 95% CI 41-65%) and 48% (n = 27/56, 95% CI 35-62%) respectively; P = 0.7). Gestational issues were experienced by 7.5% of pregnant women after FPS- and 10% of women following LPS-derived euploid single blastocyst transfer. Perinatal issues were reported in 5% and 0% of the FPS- and LPS-derived newborns, respectively. The gestational weeks and birthweight were similar in the two groups. A 5% pre-term delivery rate was reported in both groups. A low birthweight was registered in 2.5% and 5% of the newborns, while 4% and 7% showed high birthweight, in FPS- and LPS-derived euploid blastocyst, respectively. Encompassing the 81 FPS-derived newborns, a total of 9% were small and 11% large for gestational age. Among the 102 LPS-derived newborns, 8% were small and 6% large for gestational age. No significant difference was reported for all these comparisons.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The LPS-derived blastocysts were all obtained after FPS in a DuoStim protocol. Therefore, studies are required with LPS-only, late-FPS and random start approaches. The study is powered to assess differences in the LBR per embryo transfer, therefore obstetric and perinatal outcomes should be considered observational. Although prospective, the study was not registered.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This study represents a further backing of the safety of non-conventional COS protocols. Therefore, LPS after FPS (DuoStim protocol) is confirmed a feasible and efficient approach also from clinical, obstetric and perinatal perspectives, targeted at patients who need to reach the transfer of an euploid blastocyst in the shortest timeframe possible due to reasons such as cancer, advanced maternal age and/or reduced ovarian reserve and poor ovarian response.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

None.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Extensive monitoring of the natural menstrual cycle using the serum biomarkers estradiol, luteinizing hormone and progesterone

Expected values for estradiol (E2), luteinizing hormone (LH), and progesterone determined in serum allow accurate assessment of menstrual cycle phase. Automated immunoassays demonstrate variable degrees of bias, emphasizing the need to establish method-specific reference values. We therefore established method-specific reference intervals for the Elecsys® LH assay and new generation Elecsys Estradiol III and Progesterone III assays (cobas e 801 analyzer) in 85 apparently healthy women aged 22–37 (US)/18–37 (EU) years over one natural menstrual cycle. Cycle length and day of ovulation were standardized; phases were defined by LH surge and/or progesterone/E2 levels. Median (5th–95th percentile) concentrations (follicular/ovulation/luteal) were E2: 198 ​pmol/L (114–332), 757 ​pmol/L (222–1959) and 412 ​pmol/L (222–854); LH: 7.14 IU/L (4.78–13.2), 22.6 IU/L (8.11–72.7) and 6.24 IU/L (2.73–13.1); progesterone: 0.212 ​nmol/L (0.159–0.616), 1.81 ​nmol/L (0.175–13.2) and 28.8 ​nmol/L (13.1–46.3). Sub-phase (early/intermediate/late) reference values were also determined for follicular and luteal phases. This multicenter study established reliable, method-specific E2, LH and progesterone reference values that could assist clinical decision-making in women with fertility disorders and monitoring of natural cycles in assisted reproductive treatment.

•

E2, LH and progesterone are biomarkers for assessing natural menstrual cycle phase.

•

These biomarkers support diagnosis, monitoring and treatment of fertility disorders.

•

E2, LH and progesterone profiles were derived using new generation Elecsys® assays.

•

Expected serum values are presented for each menstrual cycle phase and sub-phase.

•

Data will inform clinical decision-making for women with fertility disorders.

Ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation in women with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing random and conventional starts

OBJECTIVE

In female cancer patients anticipating chemotherapy or radiation, oocyte retrieval for fertility should be performed as efficiently as possible to avoid postponing cancer treatments. Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes among female cancer patients who underwent a conventional early follicular phase-start ovarian stimulation cycle and those who underwent a random-start ovarian stimulation cycle.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A systematic review of the literature was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Medline, Embase.com, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched to identify all original research published in English through July 2020 on the topic of female cancer patients undergoing ovarian stimulation with a random or conventional start. Studies lacking a comparison group or including women who had already undergone chemotherapy at the time of ovarian stimulation were excluded. The primary author assessed all identified article titles and abstracts, and two independent reviewers assessed full-text articles and extracted data. A meta-analysis with a random-effects model was used to calculate weighted mean differences (WMDs) for outcomes of interest. The primary outcome was the number of mature (meiosis II) oocytes retrieved. Secondary outcomes included duration of stimulation, total dose of gonadotropins, total number of oocytes retrieved, fertilization rate, and number of embryos or zygotes cryopreserved.

RESULTS

A total of 446 articles were screened, and 9 full-text articles (all retrospective cohort or prospective observational) were included for review. Additionally, pooled primary retrospective data from two institutions were included. In total, data from 10 studies including 1653 women were reviewed. Five studies reported the number of embryos cryopreserved, and four reported fertilization rates. Random-start cycles were slightly longer (WMD 0.57 days, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.0-1.14 days) and used more total gonadotropins (WMD 248.8 international units, 95 % CI 57.24-440.40) than conventional-start cycles. However, there were no differences in number of mature oocytes retrieved (WMD 0.41 oocytes, 95 % CI -0.84-1.66), number of total oocytes retrieved (WMD 0.90 oocytes, 95 % CI -0.21-2.02), fertilization rates (WMD -0.12, 95 % CI -1.22-0.98), or number of embryos cryopreserved (WMD 0.12 embryos, 95 %CI -0.98-1.22) between random-start and conventional-start cycles. All outcomes except for the parameter "total oocytes retrieved" yielded an I² of over 50 %, indicating substantial heterogeneity between studies.

CONCLUSION(S)

Although random-start cycles may entail a longer duration of stimulation and use more total gonadotropins than conventional-start cycles, the absolute differences are small and likely do not significantly affect treatment costs. The similar numbers of mature oocytes retrieved, fertilization rates, and number of embryos cryopreserved in the two start-types suggest that they do not differ in any clinically important ways. Given that random-start cycles can be initiated quickly, they may help facilitate fertility preservation for cancer patients.

Fertility preservation for genetic diseases leading to premature ovarian insufficiency (POI)

PURPOSE

The current review aims to summarize the data available concerning the applicability of fertility preservation techniques to genetic conditions at risk of premature ovarian insufficiency (POI).

METHODS

A literature review through the PubMed Database was carried out.

RESULTS

About 10% of cases of POI is related to genetic diseases. The most frequent conditions associated with POI are Turner syndrome and fragile X pre-mutation; mutation of BRCA 1-2 genes and several other mutations and genetic syndromes have recently been highlighted, although they rarely occur. If a diagnosis is issued before POI onset, counseling on currently available fertility preservation techniques is advisable. In case of spontaneous menarche (this can occur variably depending on the mutation) established techniques like embryo or oocyte cryopreservation can be proposed, even if, in some cases, their effectiveness may be reduced by ovarian alterations connected to the mutation. Ovarian tissue cryopreservation has recently been defined as an established medical procedure for fertility preservation in young cancer patients and may be an option for prepubertal patients. However, it is still experimental in special populations with genetic diseases causing POI. New innovative experimental techniques, like in vitro maturation of immature oocytes (IVM) and vitro activation (IVA) of immature follicles on ovarian tissue, have shown limited but encouraging data and they will be probably available in the near future. For a correct risk-benefit evaluation, the following aspects should be considered: actual knowledge about the pathology-specific efficacy of the various techniques, the average age of onset of POI, the possible risks associated with the procedure in relation to the underlying pathology, the probability of spontaneous conception, as well as the health implications of a possible future pregnancy..

CONCLUSIONS

Fertility preservation techniques represent a crucial opportunity for patients with genetic risk of POI. Early diagnosis increases the chances to apply these techniques. No specific recommendations concerning fertility preservation for each genetic pathology are available, and clinicians should first counsel the patient and her relatives about known risks and benefits of the available techniques, both those established and those considered as experimental.

Luteal Phase Ovarian Stimulation versus Follicular Phase Ovarian Stimulation results in different Human Cumulus cell genes expression: A pilot study

Background: Luteal-phase ovarian stimulation (LPOS) is an alternative in vitro fertilization (IVF) protocol. However, limited data showed the genes expression of cumulus cells (CCs) in LPOS. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate CC genes expression between LPOS and follicular-phase ovarian stimulation (FPOS) in poor ovarian responders (PORs) undergoing IVF cycles. Methods: This was a prospective non-randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03238833). A total of 36 PORs who met the Bologna criteria and underwent IVF cycles were enrolled. Fifteen PORs were allocated to the LPOS group, and 21 PORs were allocated to the FPOS group. The levels of CC genes involved in inflammation (CXCL1, CXCL3, TNF, PTGES), oxidative phosphorylation (NDUFB7, NDUFA4L2, SLC25A27), apoptosis (DAPK3, BCL6B) and metabolism (PCK1, LDHC) were analyzed using real-time quantitative PCR and compared between the two groups. Results: The number of retrieved oocytes, metaphase II oocytes, fertilized oocytes, day-3 embryos and top-quality day-3 embryos, clinical pregnancy rates and live birth rates were similar between the two groups except for significantly high progesterone levels in the LPOS group. The mRNA expression levels of CXCL1 (0.51 vs 1.00, p < 0.001) and PTGES (0.30 vs 1.00, p < 0.01) were significantly lower in the LPOS group than in the FPOS group. The LPOS group had significantly lower mRNA expression of NDUFB7 (0.12 vs 1.00, p < 0.001) and NDUFA4L2 (0.33 vs 1.00, p < 0.01) than the FPOS group. DAPK3 (3.81 vs 1.00, p < 0.05) and BCL6B (2.59 vs 1.00, p < 0.01) mRNA expression was significantly higher in the LPOS group than in the FPOS group. Increased expression of PCK1 (3.13 vs. 1.00, p < 0.001) and decreased expression of LDHC (0.12 vs. 1.00, p < 0.001) were observed in the LPOS group compared to the FPOS group. Conclusions: Our data revealed different CC genes expression involving in inflammation, oxidative phosphorylation, apoptosis and metabolism between LPOS and FPOS in PORs. However, the results are non-conclusive; further large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to validate the results.

Live-Birth Outcomes and Congenital Malformations After Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation in Maternal Endometriosis

Purpose

In patients who had advanced endometriosis, we use different protocols including GnRH agonist, GnRH antagonist and progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocols to assess live-birth congenital malformations delivered after in vitro fertilization (IVF) and vitrified embryo transfer cycles.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study is conducted by us. It includes 1495 live-born infants in maternal endometriosis. From January 2010 to January 2017, we brought into infants who underwent either gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist long protocol, gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol or PPOS. We chose neonatal outcomes and congenital malformations as our major measures.

Results

Neonatal outcomes, as well as congenital malformations, were considered as the main measures, and gestational age, birth weight, birth length, multiple births and early neonatal death are included. All groups were comparable. The GnRH antagonist group (1.41%) and the GnRH antagonist protocol group (1.8%) had the same incidence of live-birth defects as the PPOS groups (1.33%) were similar. There were no apparent differences when it came to congenital malformations among the three groups. Multivariate logistic regression showed that infertility-time factors as well as multiple births combined to add the risk of congenital malformations; the adjusted odds were 1.143 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.988–1.323) and 3.253 (95% CI: 1.359–7.788). Besides, no association was found among various ovarian stimulations as well as congenital birth defect programs, maternal age, body mass index, parity or infant sex.

Conclusion

This study suggests that, in contrast to conventional ovarian stimulation, PPOS neither has any effect on neonatal outcomes in IVF adverse effects nor does it elevate the rate of congenital malformations in late endometriosis. However, randomized controlled trials of the long-term outcomes of children born after PPOS protocols for maternal endometriosis are needed and the follow-up studies were conducted to confirm this result.

How effective are the non-conventional ovarian stimulation protocols in ART? A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the effectiveness of starting the ovarian stimulation on the early follicular phase ("Conventional") with the newer range of non-conventional approaches starting in the luteal phase ("Luteal"), random-start, and studies implementing them in DuoStim ("Conventional"+"Luteal").

METHODS

Systematic review. We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, and Embase, on March 2020. We included randomized and non-randomized controlled trials that compared "Luteal," random-start ovarian stimulation or DuoStim with "Conventional"; we analyzed them by subgroups: oocyte freezing and patients undergoing ART treatments, both, in the general infertile population and among poor responders.

RESULTS

The following results come from a sensitivity analysis that included only the low/moderate risk of bias studies. When comparing "Luteal" to "Conventional," clinically relevant differences in MII oocytes were ruled out in all subgroups. We found that "Luteal" probably increases the COH length both, in the general infertile population (OR 2.00 days, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.19, moderate-quality evidence) and in oocyte freezing cycles (MD 0.85 days, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.18, moderate-quality evidence). When analyzing DuoStim among poor responders, we found that it appears to generate a higher number of MII oocytes in comparison with a single "Conventional" (MD 3.35, 95%CI 2.54-4.15, moderate-quality evidence).

CONCLUSION

Overall, this systematic review of the available data demonstrates that in poor responders, general infertile population and oocyte freezing for cancer stimulation in the late follicular and luteal phases can be utilized in non-conventional approaches such as random-start and DuoStim cycles, offering similar outcomes to the conventional cycles but potentially with increased flexibility, within a reduced time frame. However, more well-designed trials are required to establish certainty.

DuoStim: a new option for fertility preservation for a woman with Turner syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Turner syndrome (TS) is associated with hypergonadotropic hypogonadism due to gonadal dysgenesis, which results in premature ovarian failure and subsequent infertility. Therefore, counseling and evaluation for fertility preservation are required as early as possible for women with TS.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 23-year-old unmarried woman with mosaic TS (45, X [4/30] 46, XX [26/30]) presented to the pediatric department of our hospital for fertility counseling; she was accompanied by her mother. She was referred to the reproduction center of our hospital for ovarian reserve assessment and counseling regarding fertility preservation. We decided to retrieve oocytes using DuoStim as the controlled ovarian stimulation protocol. During the first and second oocyte retrievals, a total of 17 (9 and 8, respectively) mature metaphase II oocytes were cryopreserved.

CONCLUSION

DuoStim may be a useful option for fertility preservation for women with TS and reduced ovarian reserve. This new strategy may obtain the required number of oocytes in the shortest time and preserve the future fertility of women with TS.

Treatment potential of bone marrow-derived stem cells in women with diminished ovarian reserves and premature ovarian failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We review the techniques recently tested in both animal models and humans to provide a state-of-the-art on adult stem cell ovarian transplant to achieve ovarian rejuvenation in patients with diminished ovarian reserves.

RECENT FINDINGS

As the firsts reports of spontaneous pregnancies achieved after bone marrow transplantation in oncologic women with primary ovarian insufficiency, increasing evidence supports the regenerative effects of stem cell-based therapies in the ovarian niche. Adult stem cells from several origins promote follicular development, increase ovarian local vascularization, increase follicle and stromal cell proliferation and reduce cell apoptosis and follicular atresia, although they do not modify embryo quality. Therefore, residual quiescent follicles of aged or damaged ovaries might produce competent oocytes in an adequate ovarian environment. Nevertheless, further research is needed to properly evaluate underlying mechanisms, identify best cell sources and design less invasive infusion techniques.

SUMMARY

Stem cells may be a relevant therapeutic alternative for ovary regeneration and follicular development in patients with impaired ovaries, such as poor ovarian responders or women diagnosed with primary ovarian insufficiency.

Comparison Between PPOS and GnRHa-Long Protocol in Clinical Outcome with the First IVF/ICSI Cycle: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Purpose

To investigate whether progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) can be an alternative as gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) long protocol for infertile women with normal ovarian reserve during IVF/ICSI.

Methods

A prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) including 257 patients was conducted between 1 August 2017 to 1 January 2018. Computerized randomization was performed to assign participants into two treatment groups at a 1:1 ratio: PPOS (130 patients) or GnRHa long protocol (127 patients) followed by their first IVF/ICSI with fresh/frozen embryo transfer. The primary outcome was the number of oocytes retrieved. Patients with normal ovarian reserve undergoing their first IVF/ICSI procedure were included. The embryological and clinical outcomes were measured. Only the first embryo transfer cycle was followed-up.

Results

Basic characteristics such as infertility duration, age, and body mass index (BMI) were comparable in both groups. No significant difference was found in the number (mean ± SD) oocytes retrieved [11.8 ± 6.5 for PPOS vs 11.3 ± 5.6 for GnRHa long protocol] or viable embryos [4.5 ± 3.0 for PPOS vs 4.2 ± 2.9 for GnRHa long protocol] between the groups. No patient from either group experienced a premature LH surge during the whole process of ovarian stimulation. Besides, there was no moderate or severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome during the ovarian stimulation in PPOS group while three patients suffered it in the GnRHa long protocol group. There was no significant difference in the clinical pregnancy rate of the first embryos transfer cycle between the two groups.

Conclusion

PPOS in combination with embryo cryopreservation as an ovarian stimulation regimen was as effective as GnRHa long protocol during controlled ovarian stimulation (COH) under different endocrinal mechanisms. It can also achieve comparable embryological and clinical outcomes while reducing the incidence of moderate and severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and HMG dosage. It can be an alternative of the treatments for infertile patients with normal ovarian reserve undergoing IVF as well as traditional protocols.

Trial Registration Number

ChiCTR-INR-17012089.

Trial Registration Date

Chictr.org.cn: 23 July 2017.

Date of First Patient’s Enrollment

1 August 2017.

Borderline form of empty follicle syndrome treated with a novel dual trigger method combined with delayed oocyte retrieval: A case report

BACKGROUND

Borderline form of empty follicle syndrome is a condition in which only a few mature or immature oocytes are recovered after meticulous follicular aspiration, despite adequate ovarian response to stimulation. It is a rare phenomenon with an unclear cause. Currently, the condition still lacks effective treatment.

CASE SUMMARY

A patient with secondary infertility who had undergone three cycles of assisted reproductive technique (ART) is described. With regard to good follicular response, two oocytes were obtained in the first two ART cycles, but no embryo was formed. In the third ART cycle, which is the subject of this study, ovulation was induced by dual trigger of a supernormal dose of human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) combined with a delayed oocyte retrieval approach. The method involved administration of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist, recombinant HCG, and urinary HCG 39 h before ovum pick-up. Ten oocytes were recovered, two out of three mature eggs were fertilized after intracytoplasmic sperm injection, resulting in two embryos that were subsequently cryopreserved. The case report guidelines have been used herein to present the first case of this novel dual trigger method.

CONCLUSION

This approach provides a new treatment option for patients with a similar condition in the future. This study can also inspire further investigation on the effects of various β-HCG serum levels 36 h after intramuscular HCG administration.

Late Follicular Phase Ovarian Stimulation Without Exogenous Pituitary Modulators

Introduction: A gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist is the most common modulator used to prevent the premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surge when ovarian stimulation was initiated in the late follicular phase. We aimed in this study to evaluate the feasibility of performing ovarian stimulation in the late follicular phase without the use of exogenous pituitary modulators. Methods: Data were retrospectively collected from 404 normo-ovulatory patients who underwent their first in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment in our department. One hundred sixteen subjects in the study group received ovarian stimulation when a dominant follicular diameter of ≥ 10 mm was confirmed by transvaginal ultrasonography after menstrual cycle day 6, which entailed a daily injection of gonadotropin until the trigger day, while 288 subjects in the control group received ovarian stimulation in the early follicular phase under a progesterone protocol. The primary outcome was the number of mature oocytes. Results: There was no statistical difference in the number of mature oocytes between the two groups (9.67 ± 5.33 in the study group vs. 9.38 ± 5.15 in the control group, P = 0.693). No secondary LH surges in the study group and no premature LH surges in the control group were found during ovarian stimulation. The good-quality embryo rate per oocyte retrieved showed no significant difference between the two groups (35.22 vs. 35.91%, P = 0.665). The clinical pregnancy rate per transfer was 54.55% in the study group and 56.48% in the control group (P = 0.718), and the implantation rate was similar between the two groups (36.94 vs. 37.77%, P = 0.829). Conclusions: Our study revealed that late follicular phase ovarian stimulation could be performed without an exogenous pituitary modulator.

Ovulation induction with high progesterone levels may be more suitable for elderly patients with low ovarian response

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to explore the outcomes of using the progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol in aged infertile women. The patients recruited in the study had displayed a poor ovarian response (POR) in the first IVF/ICSI-ET cycles with the ultra-short gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) protocols.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A self-controlled retrospective study was conducted to investigate the clinical outcomes of 117 aged infertile women who met the inclusion criteria. The patients were grouped into two; group B included patients who had displayed a poor ovarian response (POR) in the first IVF/ICSI-ET cycle with the ultra-short GnRH-a protocol. Group A was made up of patients who underwent the PPOS protocol in the second cycle. The study was done between January 2015 to May 2018 in the reproductive and genetic centre of integrated traditional and western medicine, Affiliated hospital of Shandong University of traditional Chinese medicine. Reproduction-related clinical outcomes in the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in the serum levels of LH, E_2, and P on the trigger day between group A and group B (P＞0.05). The number of follicles with a diameter > 14 mm was significantly higher in the PPOS protocol patients than in the ultra-short GnRH-a protocol group (4.83 ± 2.82 vs. 3.25 ± 2.53, P < 0.01). The duration and total dosage of gonadotropin of the PPOS protocol group were less than in the previous ultra-short GnRH-a protocol, although the statistical differences were not significant (P > 0.05). The number of eggs obtained in the PPOS group was significantly higher than that of the previous one (4.29 ± 3.11 vs. 2.76 ± 2.33, P < 0.05). The numbers of MII eggs, cleavage, 2 P N, transplantable embryos, and high quality embryos were higher in the PPOS protocol group than that in the ultra-short protocol group. However, the differences between the two groups in all the above parameters were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). The rate of high-quality embryos was significantly higher in the PPOS protocol group than in the ultra-short protocol group (38.61(100/259) vs. 32.02(65/203), P < 0.05). Although not statistically significant (P > 0.05), the abortion rate of the PPOS protocol group was higher than that of the ultra-short protocol group. The clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were significantly higher in the PPOS protocol group than in the ultra-short protocol group (p < 0.05). The clinical pregnancy rates in the PPOS protocol group and the ultra-short protocol group were 32.35 % and 25.53 % respectively while the live birth rates were 27.45 % and 21.28 % respectively.

CONCLUSION

Compared with the ultra-short protocol, the PPOS protocol improves the number of follicles, the number of eggs, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rates in POR patients. The PPOS protocol could, therefore, provide a novel treatment strategy for inducing ovulation in POR patients.

Elective and Onco-fertility preservation: factors related to IVF outcomes

STUDY QUESTION

Is the indication for fertility preservation (FP) related to success in IVF cycles after elective-FP (EFP) for age-related fertility decline and FP before cancer treatment (Onco-FP)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Although success rates were lower in cancer patients, there was no statistically significant association between malignant disease and reproductive outcome after correction for age and controlled-ovarian stimulation (COS) regime.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

FP is increasingly applied in assisted reproduction, but little is known about the outcome of IVF cycles with vitrified oocytes in FP patients.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Retrospective, observational multicenter study of vitrification cycles for FP and of the warming cycles of women who returned to attempt pregnancy from January 2007 to May 2018.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

In all, 6362 women (EFP = 5289 patients; 7044 cycles + Onco-FP = 1073 patients; 1172 cycles) had their oocytes vitrified for FP. A logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the impact of indication for FP corrected for age at vitrification. The protocol used for COS was also included as a possible confounder. The main outcome measures were oocyte survival and live birth. A detailed description of the baseline and clinical data is provided, with comparisons between EFP and Onco-FP. The cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) per utilized oocyte according to age at vitrification was analyzed in those patients returning to use their oocytes.

MAIN RESULTS AND ROLE OF CHANCE

Age at vitrification was significantly older in EFP patients (37.2 ± 4.9 vs. 32.3 ± 3.5 year; P < 0.0001). Fewer oocytes were retrieved and vitrified per cycle in EFP (9.6 ± 8.4 vs. 11.4 ± 3.5 and 7.3 ± 11.3 vs. 8.7 ± 2.1, respectively; P < 0.05), but numbers became comparable when analyzed per patient (12.8 ± 7.4 vs. 12.5 ± 3.2 and 9.8 ± 6.4 vs. 9.5 ± 2.6). Storage time was shorter in EFP (2.1 ± 1.6 vs. 4.1 ± 0.9 years; P < 0.0001). In all, 641 (12.1%) EFP and 80 (7.4%) Onco-FP patients returned to attempt pregnancy (P < 0.05). Overall oocyte survival was comparable (83.9% vs. 81.8%; NS), but lower for onco-FP patients among younger (≤35 year) subjects (81.2% vs. 91.4%; P > 0.05). Fewer EFP cycles finished in embryo transfer (50.2% vs. 72.5%) (P < 0.05). The implantation rate was 42.6% and 32.5% in EFP versus Onco-FP (P < 0.05). Ongoing pregnancy (57.7% vs. 35.7%) and live birth rates (68.8% vs. 41.1%) were higher in EFP patients aged ≤35 than the Onco-FP matching age patients (P < 0.05). The reason for FP per se had no effect on oocyte survival (OR = 1.484 [95%CI = 0.876-2.252]; P = 0.202) or the CLBR (OR = 1.275 [95%CI = 0.711-2.284]; P = 0.414). Conversely, age (<36 vs. ≥36 y) impacted oocyte survival (adj.OR = 1.922 [95%CI = 1.274-2.900]; P = 0.025) and the CLBR (adj.OR= 3.106 [95%CI = 2.039-4.733]; P < 0.0001). The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a significantly higher cumulative probability of live birth in patients <36 versus >36 in EFP (P < 0.0001), with improved outcomes when more oocytes were available for IVF.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Statistical power to compare IVF outcomes is limited by the few women who came to use their oocytes in the Onco-FP group. The patients' ages and the COS protocols used were significantly different between the EFP and ONCO-PP groups.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Although the implantation rate was significantly lower in the Onco-FP patients the impact of cancer disease per se was not proven'. EFP patients should be counseled according to their age and number of available oocytes.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No external funding was used for this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Oocyte donation in donors with levonorgestrel intrauterine device: a good match?

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) influence cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) in oocyte donor cycles?

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study based on prospectively collected data from 1 May 2009 to 31 December 2017, without attrition, consisting of 491 consecutive cycles of vitrified oocyte donation, none lost to follow-up (unique donor-recipient pairs). All donors underwent ovarian stimulation using gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist co-treatment and GnRH agonist trigger. CLBR was chosen as primary outcome measure.

RESULTS

In total, 103 (21.0%) cycles were carried out in donors carrying a LNG-IUD. In 388 (79.0%) cycles, no LNG-IUD was present. After confounder-adjustment, the use of an LNG-IUD did not have a statistically significant influence on CLBR.

CONCLUSIONS

The LNG-IUD does not negatively affect CLBR.

MTHFR C677T polymorphism is associated with follicle-stimulating hormone levels and controlled ovarian hyperstimulation response: a retrospective study from the clinical database

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) C677T polymorphism with clinical data analysis in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) of infertile women in the Intravenous Infusion Safety Evaluation Center of Hunan Province, People's Republic of China.

DESIGN

Genetic Association Study.

SETTING

Reproductive medicine clinical.

PATIENT(S)

This genetic association study included 722 infertile women who received the standard long treatment protocol with accessible and complete electronic medical records.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The clinical parameters were obtained from the Intravenous Infusion Safety Evaluation center.

RESULT(S)

Basal FSH levels in the TT group were significantly higher than those of the CC group. The FSH levels after down-regulation in the TT group were higher than those of CC/CT genotypes. The TT genotype patients received significantly higher total doses of GnRH agonist and FSH compared with CC/CT genotypes, whereas the total dose of hCG was higher in the CT genotypes compared with the CC/TT genotypes. Further association analysis between hormone levels and COH outcomes indicated significantly negative correlation of basal FSH levels with antral follicle count and number of oocytes as well as the down-regulation FSH levels with the number of metaphase II oocytes and oocytes.

CONCLUSION(S)

The MTHFR C677T polymorphism was associated with high doses of ovarian stimulation medications, as well as higher FSH levels. The negative correlation between FSH levels and the number of oocytes suggested that C677T polymorphism may play a role in the poor prognosis of COH oocytes. This needs to be studied in future prospective studies with longer follow-up.

Evaluation of Ovarian Stimulation Initiated From the Late Follicular Phase Using Human Menopausal Gonadotropin Alone in Normal-Ovulatory Women for Treatment of Infertility: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Objective: To investigate the feasibility of ovarian stimulation initiated in the late follicular phase using human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) alone in ovulatory patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatments by comparison with that of the short gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) protocol in terms of ovarian response, embryological characteristics, and pregnancy outcomes following frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: A university-affiliated tertiary hospital. Patients: 135 infertile women undergoing their first IVF/ICSI treatment with the freeze-all strategy. Interventions: In the study group, ovarian stimulation was initiated in the late follicular phase using hMG alone, with the confirmation of dominant follicular diameter ≥ 14 mm, while a short GnRH-a protocol was adopted in the control group. Oocyte maturation was induced by human chorionic gonadotropin in both groups. All good quality embryos were cryopreserved for later transfer. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the incidence of premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surge. Secondary outcomes were the number of mature oocytes retrieved, good-quality embryo rate per oocyte retrieved, and clinical pregnancy rate following FET cycles. Results: No premature LH surge was detected during ovarian stimulation in the study group. There was no statistically significant difference in the number of mature oocytes between the two groups (10 ± 5.6 in the study group vs. 8.51 ± 5.03 in the control group, P = 0.11). Good-quality embryo rate per oocyte retrieved did not differ between the two groups: 40.18% (313/779) vs. 36.67% (253/690), P = 0.167. Clinical pregnancy rate per transfer following FET was comparable between the two groups (61.33 vs. 52.5%, P = 0.267). Conclusions: Our study shows that ovarian stimulation initiated in the late follicular phase using hMG alone may be a feasible alternative for normal-ovulatory women undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment with the freeze-all strategy.

Immature Oocyte for Fertility Preservation

In vitro maturation (IVM) of human immature oocytes has been offered to women who are at risk of developing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) caused by gonadotropin stimulation, such as PCO(S) patients or who have poor ovarian reserve. Cryopreservation of oocytes matured in vivo obtained in IVF cycles has improved after implementing the vitrification method and many successful results have been reported. Now, this procedure can be successfully offered to fertility preservation programs for patients who are in danger of losing their ovarian function due to medical or social reasons, and to oocyte donation programs. This vitrification technique has also been applied to cryopreserve oocytes obtained from IVM program. Some advantages of oocytes vitrification related with IVM are: (1) eliminating costly drugs and frequent monitoring; (2) completing treatment within 2 to 10 days (3) avoiding the use of hormones in cancer patients with hormone-sensitive tumors; and (4) retrieving oocytes at any point in menstrual cycle, even in the luteal phase. In addition, immature oocytes can also be collected from extracorporeal ovarian biopsy specimens or ovaries during caesarian section. Theoretically, there are two possible approaches for preserving immature oocytes: oocyte cryopreservation at the mature stage (after IVM) and oocyte cryopreservation at the Germinal Vesicle (GV)-stage (before IVM). Both vitrification of immature oocyte before/after IVM is not currently satisfactory. Nevertheless, many IVF centers worldwide are doing IVM oocyte cryopreservation as one of the options to preserve fertility for female cancer. Therefore, more studies are urgently required to improve IVM- and vitrification method to successfully preserve oocytes collected from cancer patients. In this review, present oocyte maturation mechanisms and recent progress of human IVM cycles will be discussed first, followed by some studies of the vitrification of human IVM oocyte.

Luteal phase stimulation, the future of fertility preservation? Retrospective cohort study of luteal phase versus follicular phase stimulation

RESEARCH QUESTION

Is luteal phase stimulation capable of improving fertility preservation?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of consecutive ovarian stimulations, during July 2012 and September 2018 at Strasbourg University Teaching Hospital in France. Enrollment criteria were patients aged below 40 who had been referred to our center following a diagnosis of cancer or requiring gonadotoxic treatment. All patients enrolled had regular menstrual cycles and normal ovulation. Non-enrollment criteria were an expected low ovarian response (defined by an anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level <0.75μg/L and/or an antral follicle count inferior (AFC) inferior than 5), polycystic ovarian syndrome, amenorrhea, prior history of infertility or gonadotoxic treatment. The primary endpoint is the number of mature oocytes (metaphase II) obtained. Secondary outcomes were oocyte yields obtained, stimulation duration, initial gonadotropin dose and total gonadotropin dose.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients were included: 20 in luteal phase and 80 in follicular phase. A larger number of mature oocytes was obtained in luteal phase versus follicular phase (13.1+/8.0 versus 9.2+/-5.8 with p=0.01). A greater amount of total (mature and immature) oocytes was obtained in luteal phase versus follicular phase with a significant difference (16.8+/-9.3 versus 11.8+/-7.3 with p=0.01). No difference was found for the initial and total doses of gonadotropin.

CONCLUSIONS

Luteal phase stimulation has the advantage of a better flexibility with positives results as to the number of oocytes obtained in fertility preservation.

Luteal Phase Ovarian Stimulation May Improve Oocyte Retrieval and Oocyte Quality in Poor Ovarian Responders Undergoing In Vitro Fertilization: Preliminary Results from a Single-Center Prospective Pilot Study

INTRODUCTION

Luteal phase ovarian stimulation (LPOS) has been proven a feasible protocol for infertile patients. High progesterone level in the luteal phase could physiologically inhibit premature luteinizing hormone surge, from which poor ovarian responders (PORs) could obtain benefits. Therefore, we aimed to compare clinical outcomes between LPOS and follicular phase ovarian stimulation (FPOS) protocol in PORs undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF).

METHODS

This prospective pilot study was performed at one tertiary center from January 2016 to October 2017. A total of 60 PORs who met Bologna criteria and undergoing IVF were enrolled. Thirty PORs were allocated to the LPOS group and 30 PORs were allocated to the FPOS group. Basic characteristics, cycle characteristics, and pregnancy outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The length of stimulation was significantly longer in the LPOS group than in the FPOS group. The numbers of retrieved oocytes, metaphase II oocytes, fertilized oocytes, and day-3 embryos were significantly higher in the LPOS group than in the FPOS group. Conversely, we could not find any significant difference for clinical pregnancy rate, ongoing pregnancy rate, abortion rate, and cancellation rate. The multivariate analysis showed that only LPOS (p = 0.007) was significantly associated the possibility to retrieve three or more oocytes, whereas basal follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) < 8 IU/l (p = 0.103) and antral follicle count (AFC) ≥ 3 (p = 0.143) did not significantly affect this event.

CONCLUSION

LPOS allows improved oocyte retrieval and oocyte quality in PORs with respect to FPOS, despite comparable pregnancy outcomes. LPOS may be considered a feasible option for oocytes accumulation in PORs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03238833.

Microdissection testicular sperm extraction in five Japanese patients with non-mosaic Klinefelter's syndrome

Cases

Microdissection testicular sperm extraction (micro‐TESE) was performed on five Japanese men with non‐mosaic Klinefelter's syndrome (KS) and non‐obstructive azoospermia in the authors' department. Here is reported the operative results and partner's clinical course for two cases where spermatozoa could be acquired. Also encountered was a man with non‐mosaic KS with the partial deletion of azoospermia factor (AZF)b. Because this is rare, it is reported in detail in the context of the previous literature. This case series describes the first experience of micro‐TESE by gynecologists in the current department.

Outcome

The egg collection date was adjusted to the micro‐TESE day by using the modified ultra‐long method. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was implemented for two men whose spermatozoa were acquired by micro‐TESE, with these progressing to the blastocyst stage. Subsequently, one case conceived after the transfer of fresh embryos and a healthy baby was delivered. However, spermatozoa could not be retrieved from the man with non‐mosaic KS who was harboring the partial deletion of AZFb.

Conclusion

These findings suggest that ovulation induction by using the modified ultra‐long method with micro‐TESE and ICSI on the same day represents an effective treatment option for men with non‐mosaic KS. As there are cases where AZF deletion is recognized among patients with non‐mosaic KS, screening before micro‐TESE is strongly recommended.

Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation with or without clomiphene citrate supplementation in normal ovulatory women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: A prospective randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the endocrinological profiles, cycle characteristics and pregnancy outcomes of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) with or without clomiphene citrate (CC) supplementation in normal ovulatory women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).

DESIGN

Prospective randomized controlled study.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 320 infertile women undergoing IVF/ICSI. Medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) and human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) were simultaneously administered on menstrual cycle day 3. The women were randomized into 2 equal groups with or without CC supplementation.

MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the percentage of women with profound pituitary suppression (luteinizing hormone [LH] <1.0 IU/L on the trigger day). The secondary outcomes were endocrinological profiles, cycle characteristics and pregnancy outcomes.

RESULTS

The percentage of women with profound pituitary suppression was significantly lower in the study group (hMG + MPA + CC) than in the control group (hMG + MPA) (1.9% vs 33.1%, P < .001). The mean LH level during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) was higher in the study group than in the control group (P < .001), but none of the patients in either group exhibited a premature LH surge. The doses of Gn in the study group were significantly lower than those in the control group (1334.06 ± 212.53 IU vs 1488.28 ± 325.08 IU, P < .001). The number of oocytes retrieved was similar between the 2 groups (10.03 ± 5.97 vs 10.34 ± 7.52, P > .05). No significant differences were observed in either the number of viable embryos or the pregnancy outcomes between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION(S)

Clomiphene citrate is an effective adjuvant to alleviate pituitary suppression in the PPOS protocol; however, it has no impact on clinical outcomes.

Neonatal outcomes and congenital malformations in children born after human menopausal gonadotropin and medroxyprogesterone acetate treatment cycles

PURPOSE

To investigate neonatal outcomes and congenital malformations in children born after in vitro fertilization (IVF) and vitrified embryo transfer cycles using human menopausal gonadotrophin and medroxyprogesterone acetate (hMG + MPA) treatment.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study including 4596 live born babies. During January 2014-June 2016, children born after either hMG + MPA treatment, gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist short protocol, or mild ovarian stimulation were included. The main outcome measures were neonatal outcomes and congenital malformations.

RESULTS

Neonatal outcomes both for singletons and twins such as mean birth weight and length, gestational age, the frequency of preterm birth were comparable between groups. Rate of stillbirth and perinatal death were also similar. No significant differences were found in the overall incidence of congenital malformations between the three groups. Multivariable logistic regression indicated that hMG + MPA regimen did not significantly increase the risk of congenital malformations compared with short protocol and mild ovarian stimulation, with adjusted odds ratio of 1.22 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-2.44] and 1.38 (CI 0.65-2.93), respectively, after adjusting for confounding factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggested that compared with conventional ovarian stimulations, hMG + MPA treatment neither compromised neonatal outcomes of IVF newborns, nor did increase the prevalence of congenital malformations.

Effect of Frozen Embryo Transfer and Progestin-primed Ovary Stimulation on IVF outcomes in women with high body mass index

Among women undergoing IVF, high BMI negatively affects pregnancy outcomes when using the conventional ovary stimulating protocols combined with fresh embryo transfer. Therefore, finding a proper treatment for these high BMI women is more important and urgent when obesity is prevalent. In our study, we reported a retrospective study of 4457 women who were divided into normal BMI group (18.5 kg/m²–24.9 kg/m²) and high BMI group (≥25 kg/m²) undergoing 4611 IVF treatment cycles with frozen embryo transfer (FET). We found the high BMI group originally had the poor oocytes performance, but after FET they got the similar pregnancy outcomes as the normal BMI group. Then under FET we analyzed the IVF outcomes of our new progestin-primed ovary stimulation (PPOS) protocol, indicating that the hMG + MPA (4 or 10 mg/d) groups had the obvious better pregnancy results than the conventional short group in the high BMI group, and binary logistic regression analysis showed the hMG + MPA (10 mg/d) group was associated with better pregnancy outcomes than the hMG + MPA (4 mg/d) group. These results indicate PPOS - hMG + MPA (10 mg/d) combined with FET might be a new potential treatment choice for the high BMI women undergoing IVF treatments.

New stimulation regimens: endogenous and exogenous progesterone use to block the LH surge during ovarian stimulation for IVF

BACKGROUND

The advent of embryo and oocyte vitrification today gives reproductive specialists an opportunity to consider new strategies for improving the practice and results of IVF attempts. As the freezing of entire cohorts does not compromise, and may even improve, the results of IVF attempts, it is possible to break away from the standard sequence of stimulation-retrieval-transfer. The constraints associated with ovarian stimulation in relation to the potential harmful effects of the hormonal environment on endometrial receptivity can be avoided.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

This review will look at the new stimulation protocols where progesterone is used to block the LH surge. Thanks to 'freeze all' strategies, the increase in progesterone could actually be no longer a cause for concern. There are two ways of using progesterone, whether it be endogenous, as in luteal phase stimulation, or exogenous, as in the use of progesterone in the follicular phase i.e. progestin primed ovarian stimulation.

SEARCH METHODS

A literature search was carried out (until September 2016) on MEDLINE. The following text words were utilized to generate the list of citations: progestin primed ovarian stimulation, luteal phase stimulation, luteal stimulation, duostim, double stimulation, random start. Articles and their references were then examined in order to identify other potential studies. All of the articles are reported in this review.

OUTCOMES

The use of progesterone during ovarian stimulation is effective in blocking the LH surge, whether endogenous or exogenous, and it does not affect the number of oocytes collected or the quality of the embryos obtained. Its main constraint is that it requires total freezing and delayed transfer. A variety of stimulation protocols can be derived from these two methods, and their implications are discussed, from fertility preservation to ovarian response profiles to organization for the patients and clincs. These new regimens enable more flexibility and are of emerging interest in daily practice. However, their medical and economic significance remains to be demonstrated.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

The use of luteal phase or follicular phase protocols with progestins could rapidly develop in the context of oocyte donation and fertility preservation not related to oncology. Their place could develop even more in the general population of patients in IVF programs. The strategy of total freezing continues to develop, thanks to technical improvements, in particular vitrification and PGS on blastocysts, and thanks to studies showing improvements in embryo implantation when the transfer take place far removed from the hormonal changes caused by ovarian stimulation.