Dynamics of the development of multiple follicles during ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization using recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (Puregon) and various doses of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist ganirelix (Orgalutran/Antagon)

Increasing dominant follicular proportion was associated with adverse IVF/ICSI outcomes in low-prognosis women undergoing GnRH antagonist protocol: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to examine the correlation between different dominant follicle proportions (DFPs) and outcomes of in-vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) among patients classified under POSEIDON Groups 3 and 4, who underwent gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocols. Additionally, it sought to determine the optimal DFP threshold for trigger timing.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on patients classified under POSEIDON Groups 3 (n = 593) and 4 (n = 563) who underwent GnRH-ant protocols for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) between 2016 and 2022. These patients were categorized into two groups based on their DFPs, defined as the ratio of ≥ 18-mm dominant follicles to ≥ 12-mm follicles on the trigger day (DFP ≤ 40% and DFP ≥ 40%). Statistical analyses, including restricted cubic spline (RCS) and multivariate logistic regression, were employed to assess the relationship between DFP and IVF/ICSI outcomes.

RESULTS

Demographic characteristics of patients were similar across groups. In POSEIDON Groups 3 and 4, DFP > 40 was associated with a significant decrease in the number (No.) of oocytes retrieved, cleaved embryos, and available embryos. Moreover, following the GnRH-ant cycle, the clinical pregnancy and live birth rates in fresh embryo transfer (ET) were notably reduced in the DFP > 40 group compared with the DFP ≤ 40 group, whereas no significant differences were observed in the pregnancy outcomes of the first frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) between the groups. In POSEIDON Group 3, the cumulative clinical pregnancy rate (CCPR) and cumulative live birth rate (CLRB) were significantly higher in the DFP ≤ 40 subgroup than in the DFP > 40 subgroup, with a notable decrease in CLRB observed with increasing DFP levels. However, in POSEIDON Group 4, no significant differences in CCPR and CLRB were found between the groups. Logistic regression analysis identified age and the No. of oocytes retrieved as pivotal factors influencing CLRB in Group 4.

CONCLUSION

For patients in POSEIDON Group 3, maintaining a DFP ≤ 40 mm is crucial to achieve optimal laboratory and pregnancy outcomes by avoiding delayed triggering. However, for patients in POSEIDON Group 4, age remains a critical factor influencing CLRB regardless of DFP, although a higher No. of oocytes retrieved and available embryos with DFP ≤ 40 is beneficial.

Betulin, Synthesized by PpCYP716A1, Is a Key Endogenous Defensive Metabolite of Peach against Aphids

Wild pest-resistant germplasms employ secondary metabolites to withstand insect attacks. A close wild relative of the cultivated peach, Prunus davidiana, displays strong resistance to green peach aphids by utilizing metabolites to cope with aphid infestation; however, the underlying mechanism of aphid resistance remains mostly unknown. Here, metabolomic analysis was performed to explore the changes in metabolite levels in P. davidiana after aphid infestation. The data revealed that betulin is a key defensive metabolite in peaches that protects against aphids and possesses potent aphidicidal activity. Further toxicity tests demonstrated that betulin was toxic to pests but not to beneficial insects. Additionally, transcriptomic and phylogenetic analyses revealed that the cytochrome P450 gene PpCYP716A1 was responsible for betulin synthesis─this finding was confirmed by the heterologous expression of this gene. This study revealed a strategy whereby plants harness defense metabolites to develop resistance to pests. These findings may facilitate controlling such pests.

Impact of letrozole co-treatment during ovarian stimulation with gonadotrophins for IVF: a multicentre, randomized, double-blinded placebo-controlled trial

STUDY QUESTION

Does letrozole co-treatment during ovarian stimulation with gonadotrophins for IVF reduce the proportion of women with premature progesterone levels above 1.5 ng/ml at the time of triggering final oocyte maturation?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The proportion of women with premature progesterone above 1.5 ng/ml was not significantly affected by letrozole co-treatment.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

IVF creates multiple follicles with supraphysiological levels of sex steroids interrupting the endocrine milieu and affects the window of implantation. Letrozole is an effective aromatase inhibitor, normalizing serum oestradiol, thereby ameliorating some of the detrimental effects of IVF treatment.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A randomized, double-blinded placebo-controlled trial investigated letrozole intervention during stimulation for IVF with FSH. The trial was conducted at four fertility clinics at University Hospitals in Denmark from August 2016 to November 2018.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

A cohort of 129 women with expected normal ovarian reserve (anti-Müllerian hormone 8-32 nmol/l) completed an IVF cycle with fresh embryo transfer and received co-treatment with either 5 mg/day letrozole (n = 67) or placebo (n = 62), along with the FSH. Progesterone, oestradiol, FSH, LH and androgens were analysed in repeated serum samples collected from the start of the stimulation to the mid-luteal phase. In addition, the effect of letrozole on reproductive outcomes, total FSH consumption and adverse events were assessed.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The proportion of women with premature progesterone >1.5 ng/ml was similar (6% vs 0% (OR 0.0, 95% CI [0.0; 1.6], P = 0.12) in the letrozole versus placebo groups, respectively), whereas the proportion of women with mid-luteal progesterone >30 ng/ml was significantly increased in the letrozole group: (59% vs 31% (OR 3.3, 95% CI [1.4; 7.1], P = 0.005)). Letrozole versus placebo decreased oestradiol levels on the ovulation trigger day by 68% (95% CI [60%; 75%], P < 0.0001). Other hormonal profiles, measured as AUC, showed the following results. The increase in LH in the letrozole group versus placebo group was 38% (95% CI [21%; 58%], P < 0.0001) and 34% (95% CI [11%; 61%], P = 0.006) in the follicular and luteal phases, respectively. In the letrozole group versus placebo group, testosterone increased by 79% (95% CI [55%; 105%], P < 0.0001) and 49% (95% CI [30%; 72%], P < 0.0001) in the follicular and luteal phases, respectively. In the letrozole group versus placebo group, the increase in androstenedione was by 85% (95% CI [59%; 114%], P < 0.0001) and 69% (95% CI [48%; 94%], P < 0.0001) in the follicular and luteal phases, respectively. The ongoing pregnancy rate was similar between the letrozole and placebo groups (31% vs 39% (risk-difference of 8%, 95% CI [-25%; 11%], P = 0.55)). No serious adverse reactions were recorded in either group. The total duration of exogenous FSH stimulation was 1 day shorter in the intervention group, significantly reducing total FSH consumption (mean difference -100 IU, 95% CI [-192; -21], P = 0.03).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Late follicular progesterone samples were collected on the day before and day of ovulation triggering for patient logistic considerations, and the recently emerged knowledge about diurnal variation of progesterone was not taken into account. The study was powered to detect hormonal variations but not differences in pregnancy outcomes.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Although the use of letrozole has no effect on the primary outcome, the number of women with a premature increase in progesterone on the day of ovulation triggering, the increased progesterone in the mid-luteal phase due to letrozole may contribute to optimizing the luteal phase endocrinology. The effect of letrozole on increasing androgens and reducing FSH consumption may be used in poor responders. However, the effect of letrozole on implantation and ongoing pregnancy rates should be evaluated in a meta-analysis or larger randomized controlled trial (RCT).

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

Funding was received from EU Interreg for ReproUnion and Ferring Pharmaceuticals, and Roche Diagnostics contributed with assays. N.S.M. and A.P. have received grants from Ferring, Merck Serono, Anecova and Gedeon Richter, and/or personal fees from IBSA, Vivoplex, ArtPred and SPD, outside the submitted work. The remaining authors have no competing interests.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT02939898 and NCT02946684.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

15 August 2016.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT

22 August 2016.

The different impact of stimulation duration on oocyte maturation and pregnancy outcome in fresh cycles with GnRH antagonist protocol in poor responders and normal responders

OBJECTIVE

To study the impact of stimulation duration on intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) - embryo transfer (ET) outcome in poor and normal responders during controlled ovarian stimulation using gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study. There were 1481 women undergoing ICSI-ET cycles. Women with ovum pick-up number ≤3 were defined as poor responders (n = 235), and those with a number ≥4 were normal responders (n = 1246).

RESULTS

The mean stimulation duration was shorter in poor responders with pregnancy group as compared with normal responders with pregnancy group (7.8 ± 2.2 vs. 9.2 ± 1.6 days, p < 0.01). Poor responders with a shortest stimulation duration (≤6 days) appeared a higher live birth rate (≤6 days: 33.3%, 7-8 days: 20.0%, 9-10 days: 15.9%, and ≥11 days: 11.1%, p = 0.18). Normal responders with a shortest stimulation duration (≤6 days) appeared a lowest live birth rate (≤6 days: 28.6%, 7-8 days: 35.8%, 9-10 days: 33.6%, and ≥11 days: 29.3%, p = 0.61). Oocyte maturation rate was significantly lower at stimulation durations ≤6 days group (≤6 days: 67%, 7-8 days: 80%, 9-10 days: 85%, and ≥11 days: 87%, p = 0.02) in normal responders.

CONCLUSION

In ICSI-ET cycles, stimulation duration appears to have different impact on oocyte maturation, clinical pregnancy rates and live birth rates in both poor and normal responders.

Desogestrel versus antagonist injections for LH suppression in oocyte donation cycles: a crossover study

To study whether ovarian response to corifollitropin among oocyte donors (OD) is different when oral desogestrel (DSG) is used to block the luteinizing hormone (LH) surge when compared to GnRH-antagonist use. This is a retrospective, cohort study at a private, university-based, IVF center including 35 OD. Patients underwent two stimulation cycles under corifollitropin alfa (CFT), one under an antagonist and another under DSG, between February 2015 and May 2017. In antagonist cycles, daily ganirelix was administered since a leading follicle reached 14 mm. In the DSG cycles, daily oral DSG was prescribed. The main outcome measure was oocytes retrieved. Compared to antagonist cycles, cycles under DSG received fewer injections (10.3 ± 2.8 vs. 5.0 ± 2.1, p < .001), nominally lower total supplementary gonadotropin dose (497.4 ± 338.9I U vs. 442.9 ± 332.8 IU, p=.45) with a lower total cost of medication (1018.6 ± 191.0€ vs. 813.8 ± 145.9€, p<.001). There were no differences in the total number of retrieved oocytes between groups (17.4 ± 7.5 vs. 18.6 ± 8.9, p=.34). In the corresponding oocyte recipients, clinical pregnancy rate was similar between groups: 52.0% vs. 58.6%, respectively (p=.78). ODs' stimulation's response under DSG is similar when compared to (17.4 ± 7.5 vs. 18.6 ± 8.9, p=.34) but associated with less injections and lower medication costs. The main advantage of this strategy is its simplicity, an aspect of utmost importance in the management of ODs.

Association between the proportion of dominant follicles and oocyte developmental competence

PURPOSE

To explore the optimal timing for hCG triggering by investigating the impact of different proportion of dominant follicles on the oocyte developmental competence.

METHODS

One hundred ninety-eight infertile women were divided into three groups according to the proportion of dominant follicles on hCG day: (1) low: <15% (n = 66); (2) middle: 15-27% (n = 66); (3) high: >27% (n = 66). The grouping criteria were the bottom and top tertiles of the proportion of dominant follicles.

RESULTS

The gonadotropin dosage, duration and maximum follicle diameter in the low proportion group were lower than those in the middle and high proportion groups. Oocyte maturation and the abnormal fertilization rate in the low proportion group were lower than those in the middle and high proportion groups. The normal fertilization rate did not differ among the three groups. The cleavage rate and number of transferable embryos in the low proportion group were significantly higher than those in the high proportion group. The high-quality embryo rate, implantation rate, and pregnancy rate in the low proportion group were significantly higher than those in the middle and high proportion groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A high proportion of dominant follicles are closely associated with impaired oocyte developmental competence and low pregnancy rate. These findings suggest that follicular overgrowth induced by delayed hCG triggering may undermine oocyte developmental competence and the proportion of dominant follicles may be a potential parameters for hCG triggering.

The role of GnRH antagonists in assisted reproduction

The different schemes of application of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists in ovarian stimulation protocols for assisted reproduction are reviewed. Starting from the initial schemes of single and/or multiple doses, the efficacy of GnRH antagonists in 'soft' protocols of ovarian stimulation has been evaluated in natural cycles, and the possibility of inducing the final oocyte maturation under antagonists either with native luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone or with GnRH agonists. The largest clinical studies carried out with cetrorelix or with ganirelix and published to date were analysed. Apart from the benefits of reducing the duration of the treatment, gonadotrophin requirements and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome incidence, there is still a serious debate on the potential deleterious effect of GnRH antagonists on implantation and pregnancy rates. More specific aspects such as cycle programming, application of GnRH antagonists in protocols for poor responders etc., were also reviewed in this survey.

Dengue virus enhances thrombomodulin and ICAM-1 expression through the macrophage migration inhibitory factor induction of the MAPK and PI3K signaling pathways

Dengue virus (DV) infections cause mild dengue fever (DF) or severe life-threatening dengue hemorrhagic fever (DHF). The mechanisms that cause hemorrhage in DV infections remain poorly understood. Thrombomodulin (TM) is a glycoprotein expressed on the surface of vascular endothelial cells that plays an important role in the thrombin-mediated activation of protein C. Prior studies have shown that the serum levels of soluble TM (sTM) and macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF) are significantly increased in DHF patients compared to levels in DF patients or normal controls. In this study, we investigated how MIF and sTM concentrations are enhanced in the plasma of DHF patients and the potential effect of MIF on coagulation through its influence on two factors: thrombomodulin (TM) and intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1) in endothelial cells and monocytes. Recombinant human macrophage migration inhibitory factor (rMIF) was used to treat monocytic THP-1 cells and endothelial HMEC-1 cells or primary HUVEC cells. The subsequent expression of TM and ICAM-1 was assessed by immunofluorescent staining and flow cytometry analysis. Additionally, the co-incubation of THP-1 cells with various cell signaling pathway inhibitors was used to determine the pathways through which MIF mediated its effect. The data provided evidence that severe DV infections induce MIF expression, which in turn stimulates monocytes or endothelial cells to express TM and ICAM-1 via the Erk, JNK MAPK and the PI3K signaling pathways, supporting the idea that MIF may play an important role as a regulator of coagulation.

A comparative study on oxidative and antioxidative markers of serum and follicular fluid in GnRH agonist and antagonist cycles

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether concentrations of oxidative stress markers of follicular fluid and serum are different in GnRH agonist protocol from GnRH antagonist protocol.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

This was a cross-sectional study. Eighty-four women undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation with either GnRH agonist (n = 39) or GnRH antagonist protocols (n = 45) for IVF/ICSI treatment were assigned by a physician. Blood was obtained at the time of oocyte retrieval, and follicular fluid (FF) from the mature follicles of each ovary was centrifuged and frozen until analysis. Malondialdehyde (MDA), nitric oxide (NO), protein carbonyl (PC), hydroxyl proline (OH-P), sodium oxide dismutase (SOD), reduced glutathione (GSH), glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px), adenosine deaminase (ADA) and xanthine oxidase (XO) were assessed in the serum and follicular fluid of each participants.

RESULTS

The mean serum concentrations of GSH-Px, GSH and MDA were lower in the GnRH antagonist group compared to GnRH agonist group, but mean serum SOD was higher in the GnRH antagonist group. The mean follicular SOD, ADA and NO were higher in GnRH antagonist group than GnRH agonist group. The IVF/ICSI outcomes were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION(S)

GnRH antagonist protocol is associated with increased oxidative stress. The relation of GnRH analogues with oxidative stress and its implication in follicular growth needs to be addressed in further studies.

Follicular growth and oocyte maturation in GnRH agonist and antagonist protocols for in vitro fertilisation and embryo transfer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the response to treatment in a group of patients undergoing IVF and randomised to receive GnRH-antagonist or the GnRH-agonist. The endpoints were the pattern of follicular growth, the maturity of the oocytes collected, the embryo quality and the pregnancy outcome.

METHODS

A total of 136 patients undergoing IVF were included. Sixty-seven patients were allocated to the GnRH antagonist and 69 patients to the GnRH agonist. GnRH antagonist was administered when the leading follicle reached a diameter of 12-14 mm. GnRH agonist was administered in a long luteal protocol.

RESULTS

The mean numbers of oocytes retrieved and mature oocytes were significantly higher in the agonist than in the antagonist group (p < 0.02 and p < 0.01, respectively). Embryo quality, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rates, ongoing pregnancy rate and miscarriage rate were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Better follicular growth and oocyte maturation are achieved with GnRH agonist treatment. However, both regimens seem to have similar efficacy in terms of implantation and pregnancy rates. Further studies clarifying the effect of the GnRH antagonist on ovarian function are needed, as well as a clear definition of the best period of the follicular phase for the GnRH antagonist administration.

Hopes and facts about mild ovarian stimulation

Over the last two decades, easier and less expensive stimulation treatments have been largely replaced by more complex and more demanding protocols. Since the mid-nineties, long-term gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist stimulation protocols have been widely used. Such lengthy expensive regimens are not free from short- and long-term risks and complications. Mild stimulation protocols reduce the mean number of days of stimulation, the total amount of gonadotrophins used and the mean number of oocytes retrieved. The proportion of high quality and euploid embryos seems to be higher compared with conventional stimulation protocols and the pregnancy rate per embryo transfer is comparable. Moreover, the reduced costs, the better tolerability for patients and the less time needed to complete an IVF cycle make mild approaches clinically and cost-effective over a given period of time. However, further prospective randomized studies are needed to compare cumulative pregnancy rates between the two protocols. Natural cycle IVF, with minimal stimulation, has been recently proposed as an alternative to conventional stimulation protocols in normo- and poor responder patients. Although acceptable results have been reported, further large prospective randomized studies are needed to better evaluate the efficacy of these minimal regimens compared with conventional stimulation approaches.

Comparison of follicular fluid IGF-I, IGF-II, IGFBP-3, IGFBP-4 and PAPP-A concentrations and their ratios between GnRH agonist and GnRH antagonist protocols for controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF-embryo transfer patients

BACKGROUND

Insulin-like growth factors (IGF) and their binding proteins (IGFBP) play a major role in the autocrine and paracrine regulation of folliculogenesis. This is the first study that has compared follicular fluid (FF) IGF-I, IGF-II, IGFBP-3, IGFBP-4 and pregnancy-associated plasma protein (PAPP)-A concentrations, and their ratios, to investigate whether there was any difference in the intrafollicular microenvironment between the GnRH agonist (GnRHa) and antagonist (GnRHant) protocols for controlled ovarian stimulation (COS).

METHODS

A total of 68 IVF cycles were included in this study; two groups were studied: GnRHa long protocol group (n = 36) and the flexible GnRHant multiple-dose protocol group (n = 32). FF was obtained from dominant follicles during oocyte retrieval and stored at -70 degrees C until assayed. IGF-I, IGF-II and IGFBP-3 concentrations were measured by radioimmunoassay and IGFBP-4 and PAPP-A by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

RESULTS

The duration of COS was significantly longer, and total dose of gonadotrophins used, serum estradiol (E(2)) levels on hCG day and the number of oocytes retrieved were significantly higher in the GnRHa long protocol group. The concentrations of FF IGF-II and IGFBP-4 were significantly higher, and the ratio of IGF-I/IGFBP-4 was significantly lower in the GnRHa long protocol group. Serum E(2) levels per mature follicle were not different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data may indicate a difference of intrafollicular microenvironment between cycles using GnRHa long protocols and those using GnRHant protocols. However, the difference in microenvironment does not appear to result in a difference in clinical outcome.

Effect of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist and antagonist on steroidogenesis of low responders undergoing in vitro fertilization

The aim of the study was to investigate the cause of the lower estradiol (E(2)) concentration in women treated with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist compared with those treated with agonist protocol in in vitro fertilization (IVF). Thirty patients who were known low responders were prospectively randomized into two equal groups for IVF treatment. Group 1 used GnRH agonist (flare-up) protocol and group 2 used antagonist protocol. The results showed that serum luteinizing hormone (LH) levels were significantly higher in the agonist group during the folliculogenesis stage. Despite this higher LH, serum E(2) levels were significantly higher in the agonist group on cycle day 2 only, not on day 5 or day 9. The significantly higher E(2) level in the agonist group reappeared on the day of administration of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG). The rate of folliculogenesis in the antagonist group was faster than in the agonist group; therefore their E(2) production should have been higher on hCG day. Furthermore, the rate of decline in E(2) after hCG administration was significantly higher in the antagonist group. These findings, along with the fact that both groups received exogenous LH (human menopausal gonadotropin) that should optimize steroidogenesis and make the difference in E(2) insignificant, enable us to conclude that GnRH antagonists have a suppressive effect on the production of E(2).

A prospective randomized study comparing gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists or gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists in couples with unexplained infertility and/or mild oligozoospermia

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of GnRH antagonist vs. GnRH agonist administration for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in assisted reproduction.

DESIGN

A prospective, randomized trial.

SETTING

Clinical research unit at a tertiary care medical center.

PATIENT(S)

Sixty-five patients with unexplained infertility or mild male subfertility undergoing COH for IUI.

INTERVENTION(S)

Twenty-nine women (group A) were randomized to receive 600 microg of busereline acetate per day starting in the midluteal phase of the cycle (long protocol), whereas 36 women (group B) were treated with 0.25 mg/d of the GnRH antagonist Cetrorelix starting from day 6 of the cycle. The starting dose of recombinant FSH was 150 IU in women of both groups. Insemination was performed 34 hours after hCG injection.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Clinical and successful ongoing pregnancy rate (PR), measurements of serum FSH, LH, E2, and P, number of recruited follicles, duration of stimulation period, and amount of gonadotropins used.

RESULT(S)

Women in group A required significantly more days of treatment (median: 12.0 vs. 9.0) and significantly more total units of recombinant FSH (median 1,800 vs. 1,550) as compared with the corresponding values of the antagonist group (group B). Serum FSH, LH, E2, and P were significantly higher on the antagonist group on days 2 and 6 of stimulation. However, these differences regress until the day of hCG administration.

CONCLUSION(S)

The GnRH antagonists have facilitated short and simple treatment, and are particularly attractive for administration in women undergoing COH, achieving comparable PR with the long protocol regimen.

The role of luteinizing hormone activity in controlled ovarian stimulation

The role of LH in the natural menstrual cycle is undisputed. The active participation of LH in both steroidogenesis and ovulation is well established, but its potential effect on oocyte maturation in the issue of assisted reproduction protocols remains a topic of debate. Although several studies have added to our understanding of the specific actions of androgens in human follicular development, some discrepancies persist regarding their role in oocyte atresia. Clinical situations, where LH is either decreased or absent (e.g. in women with hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism or LH-receptor gene mutations), provide important data supporting the necessity for a minimal amount of LH to evoke ovulation. Recent use of GnRH antagonists, which results in profound suppression of LH concentration, in combination with the pharmacological production of recombinant gonadotrophins, has attracted the attention of investigators. Identification of sub-fertilized women, in whom LH administration could be beneficial and should be indicated, is arousing ever more interest. Based on the available data in the literature, the aims of this review are to assess the role of both endogenous and exogenous LH activity in stimulated cycles, and to evaluate the effects of recombinant human LH supplementation on the ovarian hormonal milieu and on the main outcomes of controlled stimulated cycles.

GnRH antagonist in IVF poor-responder patients: results of a randomized trial

The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the efficacy of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH) in comparison with the standard long protocol in poor-responder patients. Sixty patients with poor ovarian response in previous treatment cycles were randomized into two groups: group A (n = 30) was stimulated with a standard long protocol, and group B (n = 30) received GnRH antagonist. Vaginal ultrasound was performed to evaluate ovarian response. There was a significantly reduced duration of ovarian stimulation (9.8 +/- 0.8 versus 14.6 +/- 1.2, P = 0.001) in group B in comparison with group A, and a reduced number of ampoules was used in group B (49.3 +/- 4.3 versus 72.6 +/- 6.8, P = 0.0001). In group B, the number of oocytes retrieved was significantly higher than in group A (5.6 +/- 1.6 versus 4.3 +/- 2.2, P = 0.02) and there was an increased number of follicles with a diameter >15 mm at human chorionic gonadotrophin administration in group B (P = 0.0001). Fewer cycles were cancelled with the use of an antagonist protocol. Five pregnancies (17% for embryo transfer) were obtained with GnRH antagonist protocol and two (7% for embryo transfer) with GnRH agonist protocol.

Is the occurrence of the empty follicle syndrome a predictor that a subsequent stimulated cycle will be an unfavourable one?

Several hypotheses have been advanced to explain empty follicle syndrome (EFS) but it remains a controversial topic. This paper reports experience with three IVF cycles in which no oocytes were collected. In all cases, an additional IVF cycle was performed. The ovarian stimulation protocol, ultrasound and hormonal surveillance methods, human chorionic gonadotrophin timing and oocyte retrieval technique were similar in all patients. The assessment of additional cycles demonstrated a poor response in terms of oocyte quality, since the number of mature oocytes was low despite the high number of oocytes collected. Thus, the data suggest that in these patients, EFS should be considered as a borderline form of poor response to ovarian stimulation. If this is confirmed, EFS should be a recurrent event and an empty cycle could be a good predictor that a subsequent stimulated cycle will be an unfavourable.

Accelerated endometrial maturation in the luteal phase of cycles utilizing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: impact of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists versus antagonists

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the endometrium obtained during the luteal phase of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) cycles utilizing gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists, and to compare these findings with those obtained in cycles utilizing a GnRH agonist and with artificial cycles among recipients.

DESIGN

Prospective evaluation of oocyte donors.

SETTING

University-based in vitro fertilization (IVF) center.

PATIENT(S)

Fifteen oocyte donors undergoing standard COH were enrolled in 1 of 3 COH groups, and 40 recipients of oocyte donation were used as a control group.

INTERVENTION(S)

Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and endometrial biopsy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Histological dating of endometrial biopsies, serum estradiol (E(2)) and progesterone levels.

RESULT(S)

On the day of oocyte retrieval, endometrial maturation was advanced by an average of 5.8 +/- 0.4 days in the antagonist group and 5.9 +/- 0.7 days in the agonist group. This advancement persisted on day 7 postoocyte retrieval. Serum progesterone levels were elevated before human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration, but remained similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION(S)

Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation is associated with elevated progesterone levels in the late follicular phase and accelerated endometrial maturation in the subsequent luteal phase. No significant differences exist between preretrieval serial serum progesterone levels and luteal phase endometrial histology between cycles utilizing GnRH agonists or antagonists.

Endometrial HOXA10 expression after controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and resultant high levels of E(2) on endometrial HOXA10 expression (a marker of endometrial receptivity).

DESIGN

Prospective study.

SETTING

University academic medical center.

PATIENT(S)

Twenty-five women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with recombinant FSH and 30 fertile controls.

INTERVENTION(S)

Endometrium was obtained by Pipelle endometrial biopsy on cycle days 21-25. In addition, Ishikawa cells (a well-differentiated endometrial adenocarcinoma cell line) were treated with either E(2), recombinant FSH, GnRH agonist, or GnRH antagonist. RNA was extracted and analyzed by quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

HOXA10 expression.

RESULT(S)

Endometrial HOXA10 expression in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) with recombinant FSH was not different from that in fertile controls. Estradiol increased HOXA10 expression in Ishikawa cells in a dose-dependent manner from 10(-9) to 10(-7) M. Neither recombinant FSH, GnRH agonist, nor GnRH antagonist altered HOXA10 expression in these cells.

CONCLUSION(S)

Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation did not inhibit endometrial HOXA10 expression in vivo. In addition, in vitro endometrial cell HOXA10 expression was not altered by either recombinant FSH, GnRH agonist, or GnRH antagonist. COH is unlikely to adversely impact endometrial receptivity.

Clinical outcome of using ganirelix acetate versus a 4-day follicular phase leuprolide acetate protocol in unselected women undergoing in vitro fertilization

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical outcome of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in unselected patients undergoing IVF using multidose ganirelix acetate versus 4 days of administration of leuprolide acetate.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

A fertility and IVF center.

PATIENT(S)

Two hundred forty-seven women who underwent COH-IVF between April 1, 1999, and January 30, 2001.

INTERVENTION(S)

Pituitary suppression according to a 4-day follicular phase leuprolide acetate protocol (236 women) or a multidose ganirelix acetate regimen (133 women).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Amount of gonadotropin used, days of stimulation, cancellation rate, number of oocytes retrieved, implantation rate, and clinical pregnancy rate.

RESULT(S)

Compared with leuprolide acetate recipients, ganirelix recipients required significantly less gonadotropin and the mean day of hCG administration was 4 days earlier. Among women younger than 35 years of age, the implantation rate (15% vs. 6%) and the clinical pregnancy rate per initiated and transferred cycle (27% vs. 12% and 32% vs. 15%, respectively) were significantly higher in the ganirelix group than the leuprolide acetate group.

CONCLUSION(S)

Compared with a 4-day leuprolide acetate protocol, COH-IVF using a multidose ganirelix acetate protocol reduces treatment duration and amount of gonadotropin used. In younger women, the latter protocol is associated with significantly better pregnancy and implantation rates.

First live birth after ovarian stimulation using a chimeric long-acting human recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) agonist (recFSH-CTP) for in vitro fertilization

OBJECTIVE

To report the first pregnancy and live birth after ovarian stimulation using a chimeric long-acting human recombinant FSH agonist (recFSH-CTP) for IVF.

DESIGN

Case report.

SETTING

Tertiary fertility center.

PATIENT(S)

A 32-year-old woman with a 7-year history of primary infertility.

INTERVENTION(S)

Ovarian stimulation with a single SC injection of 180 microg recFSH-CTP on cycle day 3, followed by daily injections of 150 IU recFSH from cycle day 10 onward, combined with daily GnRH antagonist 0.25 mg SC to prevent a premature LH rise. Final oocyte maturation was induced by 10,000 IU hCG.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

First ongoing pregnancy obtained with recFSH-CTP.

RESULT(S)

Twelve oocytes were retrieved. Ten oocytes were fertilized in vitro by intracytoplasmic sperm injection, and from these 10 oocytes, two embryos were subsequently transferred after 3 days of culture. A pregnancy test 2 weeks after ET was positive, and ultrasound investigation revealed an intact, intrauterine, singleton pregnancy after 12 weeks.

CONCLUSION(S)

The first pregnancy and live birth was achieved after ovarian stimulation using recFSH-CTP for IVF.

Does the Addition of Luteinizing Hormone in Ovarian Stimulation Protocols Improve the Outcome?

Ovarian stimulation is an integral part of assisted reproductive technologies (ART). Under physiologic conditions, both follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH) activity is necessary to guarantee follicle growth and maturation. This can be shown in patients with hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism, who have no endogenous FSH or LH activity. The use of FSH alone in these patients does not result in sufficient follicle growth and oocyte quality. Approximately 75IU of LH activity per day is necessary to guarantee optimal success. The use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists in normogonadotrophic patients may result in suppression of LH levels below a certain threshold, resulting in suboptimal outcomes. The question under discussion in this article is the threshold level of LH below which exogenous LH activity should be added to provide optimal ovarian response. Different studies indicate that the endogenous LH level should be 0.5-1.5IU in long-term protocol situations. Patients treated in ultra-long GnRH agonist protocols, as well as older patients, patients with a low response to gonadotropin treatment, and patients treated with a GnRH antagonist protocol may benefit from exogenous LH activity. There are three ways of adding LH activity in ovarian stimulation cycles. Nowadays, lutropin alfa (recombinant LH) may be the optimal choice since it has no chorionic gonadotropin activity and allows individual dosage titration. Every menotropin preparation currently on the market contains some chorionic gonadotropin activity. However, more data are necessary before evidence-based recommendations regarding LH supplementation in ovarian stimulation protocols can be given.

GnRH antagonists in the treatment of infertility

GnRH analogues were introduced into clinical practice more than 20 years ago. The recent development of new GnRH antagonists (GnRHant) has revolutionized the treatment protocols of infertility. Ovarian stimulation has become easier, safer and more convenient for patients. This review presents data on the physiological background of GnRH and its analogues--agonists as well as antagonists--and highlights the different aspects of the clinical use of these substances. Two protocols, the single dose and multiple dose protocol are available and lead to comparable results. Data from prospective, randomized trials as well as meta-analyses suggest, that a more tailored, individualized approach concerning the day of administration of GnRHant may lead to more favorable results with regard to ovarian response, implantation and pregnancy rates. Possible negative effects of GnRHant, mainly based on in vitro models are discussed. The outcome of children born after GnRHant use has shown, that this medication is safe. On the whole, the use of GnRHant is advantageous as compared to the traditional way of ovarian stimulation, i.e., the GnRH agonist long protocol. However, especially the effectiveness of these compounds will have to be clarified in the near future by carefully designed prospective, randomized studies.

Is luteinizing hormone needed for optimal ovulation induction?

The role of luteinizing hormone in the natural menstrual cycle is not disputed. There are, however, a variety of opinions regarding the potential role of exogenous luteinizing hormone in ovulation induction and whether it is actually needed. The recent introduction into clinical practice of recombinant gonadotropins has been paralleled by recent advances in the knowledge of the endocrine and paracrine mechanisms that regulate human folliculogenesis. On this basis, this review analyses whether or not all patients need luteinizing hormone for follicular growth stimulation. In addition, new opportunities for improved treatment are considered as a result of the availability of recombinant human luteinizing hormone both in patients with ovulatory disorders and those undergoing multiple follicular development for assisted reproduction.

Patient scheduling for gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist protocols

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists offer an alternative approach to the management of superovulation in assisted conception. Although several large multicentre randomized trials have provided information concerning the safety and efficacy of GnRH antagonists, their introduction into clinical practice has identified several new problems and opportunities. In vitro fertilization (IVF) practitioners with many years of experience of the 'long protocol' of pituitary downregulation with GnRH agonists have had to manage unfamiliar problems associated with patient scheduling and IVF cycle management when introducing GnRH antagonists into practice. Antagonist cycles require greater flexibility on the part of the IVF unit, with a need for 6 (or even 7) day working patterns and altered monitoring schedules. This article addresses the possibility of using oral contraceptives as part of GnRH antagonist cycle programming, and examines the definition of a 'good' cycle when using the antagonist.

Monitoring during gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist protocols

The results of the four large industry sponsored multicentre clinical trials comparing gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists and agonists in controlled cycles of assisted reproduction are reviewed from the perspective of implications for monitoring ovarian responses. The simplicity and consistency of antagonist-controlled cycles in normal women indicate that patients in assisted reproduction programmes should undergo fewer assessments and will receive shorter treatment cycles. However, the two-stage pattern of follicular recruitment in antagonist-controlled cycles leads to follicles of different size profiles at the end of the follicular phase compared with those obtained in agonist-controlled cycles (one recruitment process only). Increasing the dose of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) may increase oocyte yield, but does not obviate the difference between the two types of cycle. This difference has implications for the criteria used to determine timing of administration of the luteinization signal before oocyte retrieval.

Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Antagonists

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists are now widely used in protocols of patients with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation to treat infertility. By competitively binding to the pituitary GnRH receptor, they lead to a rapid suppression of gonadotropins and consecutively sex hormones. In the past, GnRH agonists have been exclusively used for these patients, with the disadvantage of an initial rise of gonadotropins--the flare-up effect. Several trials comparing the agonistic and antagonistic analogs of GnRH found no significant differences in oocyte quality, fertilization and pregnancy rates. Slightly lower implantation and pregnancy rates, and estradiol levels, in patients treated with GnRH antagonists has raised concern about eventual extrapituitary adverse effects. However, no convincing evidence has yet been found for any detrimental ovarian effects of GnRH antagonists. The lower rate of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, a potentially severe disadvantage of infertility treatment, is a positive feature of GnRH antagonists. The key point is that GnRH antagonists have been proven to be as effective and safe as GnRH agonists. This broadens the spectrum of indications for GnRH antagonists to sex hormone-dependent disorders like endometriosis, uterine fibroids, and gynecological cancers such as breast and ovarian cancer.

Gonadotropin-releasing-hormone-receptor antagonists

Pulsatile gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) stimulates the pituitary secretion of both luteinising hormone (LH) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and thus controls the hormonal and reproductive function of the gonads. Blockade of GnRH effects may be wanted for a variety of reasons-eg, to prevent untimely luteinisation during assisted reproduction or in the treatment of sex-hormone-dependent disorders. Selective blockade of LH/FSH secretion and subsequent chemical castration have previously been achieved by desensitising the pituitary to continuously administered GnRH or by giving long-acting GnRH agonists. Only recently have GnRH-receptor antagonists, that immediately block GnRH's effects, been developed for clinical use with acceptable pharmacokinetic, safety, and commercial profiles. In assisted reproduction, these compounds seem to be as effective as established therapy but with shorter treatment times, less use of gonadotropic hormones, improved patient acceptance, and fewer follicles and oocytes. All current indications for GnRH-agonist desensitisation may prove to be indications for a GnRH antagonist, including endometriosis, leiomyoma, and breast cancer in women, benign prostatic hypertrophy and prostatic carcinoma in men, and central precocious puberty in children. However, the best clinical evidence so far has been in assisted reproduction and prostate cancer.

Use of third generation gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists in in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer: a review

Before gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) became available, approximately 20% of stimulated cycles within an in vitro fertilization (IVF) program were cancelled due to premature LH surges. By using the GnRHa to prevent LH surges via gonadotrope GnRH receptor down-regulation and desensitization, this percentage decreased to about 2%, and concomitantly, the IVF and pregnancy rates per cycle initiated were increased. Several treatment schedules currently are in use, including the so-called "long protocol," in which the GnRHa is begun in the luteal phase and down-regulation occurs before the start of the gonadotropin-stimulation treatment phase. This is generally the most effective regimen and is presently the most frequently used protocol. However, it has some disadvantages, such as hypoestrogenic side effects and an increase in the number of ampules of FSH or hMG required for adequate stimulation. There is a new generation of GnRH antagonists now clinically available, that has been able to minimize the potential side effects and provide reliable antagonism at the GnRH receptor. These agents seem better suited than GnRHa for assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles inasmuch as they can prevent LH surges without requiring complete gonadotropin suppression. We have reviewed the current literature concerning their use in IVF cycles.