Split daily recombinant human LH dose in hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism: a nonrandomized controlled pilot study

Luteinizing hormone supplementation in women with hypogonadotropic hypogonadism seeking fertility care: Insights from a narrative review

The management of infertile women affected by hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (HH) or conditions mimicking it is particularly challenging. In the present narrative review, we aimed to synthesize the available evidence on the benefit (if any) of exogenous luteinizing hormone (LH) supplementation in this group of patients. Available data support LH supplementation in women with organic or functional HH. On the contrary, the benefit of exogenous LH on reproductive outcomes both in advanced maternal age patients and in cases of depletion of FSH and LH levels induced by GnRH analogues has not been demonstrated. unfortunately, the inhomogeneous study populations as well as the methodological heterogeneity between studies focused on women affected by conditions mimicking HH do not allow reliable conclusions to be drawn.

Recombinant luteinizing hormone supplementation in assisted reproductive technology: a review of literature

Background

Luteinizing hormone (LH) has the main role in ovarian function in both natural and artificial cycles. A normal LH concentration during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation is positively correlated to the number and quality of retrieved oocytes and resulting embryos.

Main body of the abstract

In this study, we reviewed whether rLH administration, adjunct to the ovarian stimulation regimen, could improve clinical outcomes. The literature review showed that rLH supplementation improves assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcomes among women with hypogonadotropic hypogonadism, and hyporesponsive women to follicle-stimulating hormone monotherapy. Besides, rLH supplementation has advantages for poor responder women 36–39 years of age. Even though the data suggested no priority regarding the LH source for improving ART outcome, women with different LH polymorphisms who did not respond similarly to ovarian stimulation may benefit from adjuvant rLH therapy.

Conclusion

rLH usage for improving ART outcome should be scrutinized via well-designed studies considering the subgroups of infertile women who benefit the most from rLH adjuvant therapy, the type of ovarian stimulation protocol to which rLH would be added, and also the exact dosage, as well as the proper timing (during or prior to a cycle).

Management of ovulation induction and intrauterine insemination in infertile patients with hypogonadotropic hypogonadism

AIM

To investigate the effectiveness of ovulation induction and intrauterine insemination (OI + IUI) in female patients with hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (HH), and to compare the outcomes of different stimulation protocols and cycle characteristics.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The outcomes of OI + IUI treatments in patients with HH diagnosed between 2010 and 2018 were retrospectively evaluated. Cycles using recombinant (rec) luteinizing hormone (LH) or human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) as LH sources were compared with each other. The cycle characteristics and pregnancy rates of the first cycles were compared with those of the second cycles in patients who underwent 2 or more cycles.

RESULTS

Of 104 patients diagnosed with World Health Organization type 1 anovulation, 99 were treated with hMG or rec LH + rec follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) in a total of 220 cycles. The mean age of the study patients was 27.8 ± 4.6 years (range, 19-39 years). Rec FSH + rec LH was given in 37 cycles, and hMG was used in 183 cycles. The hormone values were as follows: FSH, 1.4 ± 1.6 mIU/mL; LH, 0.7 ± 1.2 mIU/mL; oestradiol, 13 (15.8 ± 12.0) pg/mL; and anti-Müllerian hormone, 2.1 (2.6 ± 1.2) ng/mL. A dominant follicle was observed in 85.7% of the first cycles and in 86.2% of the second cycles. The treatment lasted 17.2 ± 5.0 and 15.5 ± 3.8 days until the human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration day in the first and second cycles, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). The cycle cancellation rate was 8.1% (n = 3) in cycles done using rec gonadotropins and 29% (n = 53) in patients stimulated with hMG, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). The pregnancy rates were 12.7% and 28.3% per cycle and per patient, respectively. The pregnancy rate in hCG-triggered patients (successful stimulation) was 17.1% per cycle in all patients.

CONCLUSION

OI with gonadotropins and IUI is a safe, efficient, and relatively cost-effective treatment option in patients with HH, yielding reasonable pregnancy rates per cycle and per patient. The use of rec FSH + rec LH facilitates cycle management but does not positively contribute to pregnancy rates and is more expensive than some other feasible options.

The effect of human chorionic gonadotrophin contained in human menopausal gonadotropin on the clinical outcomes during progestin-primed ovarian stimulation

Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol has recently been demonstrated to be an novel regimen for preventing premature LH surges during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in combination with frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET). Our prospective controlled study was to explore the effect of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) contained in human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) on the clinical outcomes in normalovulatory women undergoing COH with PPOS. A total of 180 patients were allocated into three groups according to the gonadotropin (Gn) used: group A (human menopausal gonadotropin, hMG-A), group B (hMG-B) or group C (follicle stimulating hormone, FSH). The primary outcome measured was the number of oocytes retrieved. The number of oocytes retrieved in group A B C was 10.72±5.78 11.33±5.19and13.38±8.97, respectively, with no statistic significance (p>0.05). Other embryological indicators were also similar (p>0.05). The concentration of serum and urinary β-hCG on the trigger day in group A and B were not associated with embryo results (p>0.05). There was no significant differences in the clinical pregnancy rate (41.67% vs. 51.56% vs. 39.51%, p>0.05) and implantation rate (31.58%vs. 34.75%vs.25.33%) after FET among the three groups. Thus the clinical characteristics were not affected by the hCG contained in hMG in normalovulatory women treated with PPOS.

Profile of follitropin alpha/lutropin alpha combination for the stimulation of follicular development in women with severe luteinizing hormone and follicle-stimulating hormone deficiency

A severe gonadotropin deficiency together with chronic estradiol deficiency leading to amenorrhea characterizes patients suffering from hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. Administration of both follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH) to these patients has been shown to be essential in achieving successful stimulation of follicular development, ovulation, and rescue of fertility. In recent years, the availability of both recombinant FSH (rFSH) and recombinant LH (rLH) has provided a new therapeutic option for the stimulation of follicular growth in hypopituitary–hypogonadotropic women (World Health Organization Group I). In this article, we review the data reported in the literature to highlight the role and the efficacy of using recombinant gonadotropins, rFSH and rLH, in the treatment of women with severe LH/FSH deficiency. Although the studies on this issue are limited and the experiences available in the literature are few due to the small number of such patients, it is clearly evident that the recombinant gonadotropins rFSH and rLH are efficient in treating patients affected by hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. The results observed in the studies reported in this review suggest that recombinant gonadotropins are able to induce proper follicular growth, oocyte maturation, and eventually pregnancy in this group of women. Moreover, the clinical use of recombinant gonadotropins in this type of patients has given more insight into some endocrinological aspects of ovarian function that have not yet been fully understood.

Best practices for controlled ovarian stimulation in in vitro fertilization

As applications for IVF have expanded over the years, so too have approaches to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for IVF. With this expansion and improved knowledge of basic reproductive biology, there is increasing interest in how COS practice influences IVF outcomes, and whether or not specific treatment scenarios call for personalized approaches to COS. For the majority of women undergoing COS and their treating physicians, the goal is to achieve a healthy live birth through IVF in a fresh cycle. Opinions on how COS strategy best leads to this common goal varies among centers as many clinicians base COS strategy not on evidence obtained through prospective randomized trials, but rather through observational studies and experience. Overall, when it comes to COS most clinicians recognize the approach should not be "one size fits all," but rather a patient-centered approach that takes the existing evidence into consideration. We outline the existing evidence for best practices in COS for IVF, highlighting how these practices may be incorporated into a patient-centered approach.

Timing of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) hormone administration in IVF/ICSI protocols using GnRH agonist or antagonists: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of altering the timing of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration on the clinical outcome of in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) using gonadotropic hormone releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist or antagonist.

METHODS

We systematically searched six databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the effects of altering the timing of hCG administration on the clinical outcome of IVF and ICSI using GnRH agonist or antagonist were included. A meta-analysis was conducted following a quality evaluation performed with Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager (RevMan) 5.0.2.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs and a total of 1295 participants were included. Significant difference was observed regarding estradiol and progesterone levels on the day of hCG administration and oocyte retrieval between early hCG and late hCG administration group and in favor of the latter. The fertilization rate was not statistically different between early and 24-h late hCG groups, but it is significantly higher in the 48-h late hCG group. The pooled results showed no significant differences in the ongoing pregnancy rate per oocyte pick-up, the miscarriage rate and the live birth rate.

CONCLUSION

The prolongation of follicular phase by delaying hCG administration could increase estradiol, progesterone levels and oocyte retrieval, which will not influence ongoing pregnancy rate per oocyte pick-up, miscarriage rate and live birth rate. Postponing hCG may enable increased flexibility of cycle scheduling to avoid weekend procedures.