A Phase III randomized controlled trial of oral dydrogesterone versus intravaginal progesterone gel for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization (Lotus II): results from the Chinese mainland subpopulation

Comparison of luteal support protocols in fresh IVF/ICSI cycles: a network meta-analysis

Despite the proven superiority of various luteal phase support protocols (LPS) over placebo in view of improved pregnancy rates in fresh cycles of IVF (in vitro fertilization) and ICSI (intracytoplasmic sperm injection) cycles, there is ongoing controversy over specific LPS protocol selection, dosage, and duration. The aim of the present study was to identify the optimal LPS under six core aspects of ART success, clinical pregnancy, live birth as primary outcomes and biochemical pregnancy, miscarriage, multiple pregnancy, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) events as secondary outcomes. Twelve databases, namely Embase (OVID), MEDLINE (R) (OVID), GlobalHealth (Archive), GlobalHealth, Health and Psychosocial Instruments, Maternity & Infant Care Database (MIDIRS), APA PsycTests, ClinicalTrials.gov, HMIC Health Management Information Consortium, CENTRAL, Web of Science, Scopus and two prospective registers, MedRxiv, Research Square were searched from inception to Aug.1st, 2023, (PROSPERO Registration: CRD42022358986). Only Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) were included. Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) model was employed for outcome analysis, presenting fixed effects, odds ratios (ORs) with 95% credibility intervals (CrIs). Vaginal Progesterone (VP) was considered the reference LPS given its' clinical relevance. Seventy-six RCTs, comparing 22 interventions, and including 26,536 participants were included in the present NMA. Overall CiNeMa risk of bias was deemed moderate, and network inconsistency per outcome was deemed low (Multiple pregnancy χ2: 0.11, OHSS χ2: 0.26), moderate (Clinical Pregnancy: χ2: 7.02, Live birth χ2: 10.95, Biochemical pregnancy: χ2: 6.60, Miscarriage: χ2: 11.305). Combinatorial regimens, with subcutaneous GnRH-a (SCGnRH-a) on a vaginal progesterone base and oral oestrogen (OE) appeared to overall improve clinical pregnancy events; VP + OE + SCGnRH-a [OR 1.57 (95% CrI 1.11 to 2.22)], VP + SCGnRH-a [OR 1.28 (95% CrI 1.05 to 1.55)] as well as live pregnancy events, VP + OE + SCGnRH-a [OR 8.81 (95% CrI 2.35 to 39.1)], VP + SCGnRH-a [OR 1.76 (95% CrI 1.45 to 2.15)]. Equally, the progesterone free LPS, intramuscular human chorionic gonadotrophin, [OR 9.67 (95% CrI 2.34, 73.2)] was also found to increase live birth events, however was also associated with an increased probability of ovarian hyperstimulation, [OR 1.64 (95% CrI 0.75, 3.71)]. The combination of intramuscular and vaginal progesterone was associated with higher multiple pregnancy events, [OR 7.09 (95% CrI 2.49, 31.)]. Of all LPS protocols, VP + SC GnRH-a was found to significantly reduce miscarriage events, OR 0.54 (95% CrI 0.37 to 0.80). Subgroup analysis according to ovarian stimulation (OS) protocol revealed that the optimal LPS across both long and short OS, taking into account increase in live birth and reduction in miscarriage as well as OHSS events, was VP + SCGnRH-a, with an OR 2.89 [95% CrI 1.08, 2.96] and OR 2.84 [95% CrI 1.35, 6.26] respectively. Overall, NMA data suggest that combinatorial treatments, with the addition of SCGnRH-a on a VP base result in improved clinical pregnancy and live birth events in both GnRH-agonist and antagonist ovarian stimulation protocols.

Prevention of Pregnancy Loss: Combining Progestogen Treatment and Psychological Support

Pregnancy loss can be defined as a loss before either 20 or 24 weeks of gestation (based on the first day of the last menstrual period) or the loss of an embryo or fetus less than 400 g in weight if the gestation age is unknown. Approximately 23 million pregnancy losses occur worldwide every year, equating to 15-20% of all clinically recognized pregnancies. A pregnancy loss is usually associated with physical consequences, such as early pregnancy bleeding ranging in severity from spotting to hemorrhage. However, it can also be associated with profound psychological distress, which can be felt by both partners and may include feelings of denial, shock, anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and suicide. Progesterone plays a key part in the maintenance of a pregnancy, and progesterone supplementation has been assessed as a preventative measure in patients at increased risk of experiencing a pregnancy loss. The primary objective of this piece is to assess the evidence for various progestogen formulations in the treatment of threatened and recurrent pregnancy loss, postulating that an optimal treatment plan would preferably include a validated psychological support tool as an adjunct to appropriate pharmacological treatment.

A randomised control trial on oral dydrogesterone versus micronized vaginal progesterone pessary for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization cycles

This study aimed to evaluate the pregnancy rates, adverse reactions, and medication costs of two luteal phase support regimens: oral dydrogesterone and micronized vaginal progesterone (MVP) pessary in in vitro fertilization cycles. A randomized open-label trial with participants randomly assigned to either 400 mg MVP twice daily or 10 mg dydrogesterone three times daily. The primary endpoints were pregnancy rates, and the secondary endpoints included tolerance, miscarriage rates, and medication cost. Per-protocol principle analysis was performed. The baseline characteristics of the 162 participants were similar. Dydrogesterone had statistically similar (p>0.05) positive pregnancy test rates fifteen days post embryo transfer (35.8% vs. 32.7%), clinical pregnancy rates at the gestational age of 6 weeks (32.1% vs. 28.8%), ongoing pregnancy rates (26.4% vs. 23.1%) and miscarriage rates at 14 weeks of gestation (9.2% vs. 9.4%) and safety profile to MVP. Dydrogesterone was better tolerated as vaginal itching was significantly more prevalent in the MVP arm (p=0.008). Dydrogesterone is significantly less expensive than MVP pessary. Oral dydrogesterone and MVP pessary had similar pregnancy rates and adverse effects. Dydrogesterone appears more user-friendly and less expensive in cases of luteal-phase support in in vitro fertilization cycles.

Dydrogesterone after 60 years: a glance at the safety profile

OBJECTIVE

To provide an evidence-based safety and tolerability overview of dydrogesterone under various progesterone-deficient conditions as a commemoration of its role in managing women's reproductive health over the past 60 years.

METHODS

To identify relevant publications, we used a semi-systematic approach, which included performing a structured search through the PubMed and Cochrane central databases as well as an unstructured search for publications published in English from 2010 onward with human clinical data.

RESULTS

A total of 32 relevant clinical studies were identified. Results were reported in the context of overall adverse events (AEs) and segregated according to various progesterone-deficient conditions. AEs concerning breasts (breast cancer risk), the endometrium (endometrial cancer risk), venous thromboembolism risk, and cardiovascular risk were found to be minimal when dydrogesterone was used as part of a menopausal hormone therapy regimen lasting ≤260 weeks. Vagina-related AEs, such as bleeding, discharge, irritation, and difficult coitus, occurred less frequently with dydrogesterone when used as luteal phase support in the context of assisted reproductive techniques (ARTs). However, other common AEs, such as headache, dizziness, abdominal pain, flatulence, and nausea, occurred more frequently with dydrogesterone. No maternal complications or congenital anomalies could be linked to dydrogesterone usage during ARTs or during early pregnancy to prevent recurrent miscarriages. Studies on dydrogesterone in endometriosis and premenstrual syndrome remain scarce.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-approval, dydrogesterone has displayed a favorable safety and tolerability profile during its 60-year use, which is reassuring, considering its important role in managing women's reproductive health.

Luteal-phase support in assisted reproductive technology: An ongoing challenge

It has been shown that in controlled ovarian hyper stimulation cycles, defective luteal phase is common. There are many protocols for improving pregnancy outcomes in women undergoing fresh and frozen in vitro fertilization cycles. These approaches include progesterone supplements, human chorionic gonadotropin, estradiol, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist, and recombinant luteinizing hormone. The main challenge is luteal-phase support (LPS) in cycles with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist triggering. There is still controversy about the optimal component and time for starting LPS in assisted reproductive technology cycles. This review aims to summarize the various protocols suggested for LPS in in vitro fertilization cycles.

Comparison of vaginal progesterone gel combined with oral dydrogesterone versus intramuscular progesterone for luteal support in hormone replacement therapy-frozen embryo transfer cycle

BACKGROUND

It remains under subject of debate regarding the optimal route of luteal support for hormone replacement therapy- frozen embryo transfer (HRT-FET) cycles. We compared efficacy of vaginal progesterone gel combined with oral dydrogesterone and intramuscular progesterone for HRT-FET lutein support.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study. After matching for propensity score of getting vaginal + oral treatment, a total of 208 FET cycles in the vaginal progesterone combined with oral dydrogesterone and 624 cycles in the intramuscular progesterone group were enrolled. Pregnancy outcomes and neonatal outcomes including chemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, implantation rate, spontaneous abortion rate, live birth rate, gestational weeks, pre-term delivery, birth weight, and congenital anomalies rate were compared.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed in patient characteristics such as age, duration of infertility, type of infertility, or hormone level after matching. Chemical pregnancy rate (68.3 % versus 70.5 %), clinical pregnancy rate (64.9 % versus 64.4 %), implantation rate (52.3 % versus 50.2 %), spontaneous abortion rate (21.5 % versus 18.4 %), and live birth rate (49.0 % versus 51.3 %) were similar in both group without statistically significant difference. No significant differences in neonatal outcomes were observed between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

We observed similar pregnancy outcomes in both vaginal progesterone gel combined with oral dydrogesterone and intramuscular progesterone protocol. Vaginal progesterone gel combined with oral dydrogesterone can be substituted for intramuscular progesterone given that vaginal plus oral use has good safety and is more convenient and may be associated with less side effect caused by intramuscular injection.