Prospective follow-up of 838 fetuses conceived after ovarian stimulation with corifollitropin alfa: comparative and overall neonatal outcome

Corifollitropin Alfa for Controlled Ovarian Stimulation in Assisted Reproductive Technologies: State of the Art

Physical and emotional burdens during the journey of infertile people through assisted reproductive technologies are sufficient to justify the efforts in developing patient-friendly treatment strategies. Thus, shorter duration of ovarian stimulation protocols and the need for less injections may improve adherence, prevent mistakes, and reduce financial costs. Therefore, the sustained follicle-stimulating action of corifollitropin alfa may be the most differentiating pharmacokinetic characteristic among available gonadotropins. In this paper, we gather the evidence on its use, aiming to provide the information needed for considering it as a first choice when a patient-friendly strategy is desired.

Pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in fresh and frozen cycles using blastocysts derived from ovarian stimulation with follitropin delta

PURPOSE

To describe the pregnancy and neonatal outcomes using fresh and vitrified/warmed blastocysts obtained from ovarian stimulation with follitropin delta in controlled trials versus follitropin alfa.

METHODS

This investigation evaluated the outcome from 2719 fresh and frozen cycles performed in 1326 IVF/ICSI patients who could start up to three ovarian stimulations in the ESTHER-1 (NCT01956110) and ESTHER-2 (NCT01956123) trials, covering 1012 fresh cycles and 341 frozen cycles with follitropin delta and 1015 fresh cycles and 351 frozen cycles with follitropin alfa. Of the 1326 first cycle patients, 513 continued to cycle 2 and 188 to cycle 3, and 441 patients started frozen cycles after the fresh cycles. Pregnancy follow-up was continued until 4 weeks after birth.

RESULTS

The overall cumulative take-home baby rate after up to three stimulation cycles was 60.3% with follitropin delta and 60.7% with follitropin alfa (-0.2% [95% CI: -5.4%; 5.0%]), of which the relative contribution was 72.8% from fresh cycles and 27.2% from frozen cycles in each treatment group. Across the fresh cycles, the ongoing implantation rate was 32.1% for follitropin delta and 32.1% for follitropin alfa, while it was 27.6% and 27.8%, respectively, for the frozen cycles. Major congenital anomalies among the live-born neonates up until 4 weeks were reported at an incidence of 1.6% with follitropin delta and 1.8% with follitropin alfa (-0.2% [95% CI: -1.9%; 1.5%]).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on comparative trials, the pregnancy and neonatal outcomes from fresh and frozen cycles provide reassuring data on the efficacy and safety of follitropin delta.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01956110 registered on 8 October 2013; NCT01956123 registered on 8 October 2013.

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.

Long-acting FSH versus daily FSH for women undergoing assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND

Assisted reproduction techniques (ART), such as in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), can help subfertile couples to create a family. It is necessary to induce multiple follicles, which is achieved by follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) injections. Current treatment regimens prescribe daily injections of FSH (urinary FSH either with or without luteinizing hormone (LH) injections or recombinant FSH (rFSH)).Recombinant DNA technologies have produced a new recombinant molecule which is a long-acting FSH, named corifollitropin alfa (Elonva) or FSH-CTP. A single dose of long-acting FSH is able to keep the circulating FSH level above the threshold necessary to support multi-follicular growth for an entire week. The optimal dose of long-acting FSH is still being determined. A single injection of long-acting FSH can replace seven daily FSH injections during the first week of controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) and can make assisted reproduction more patient friendly.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of long-acting FSH versus daily FSH in terms of pregnancy and safety outcomes in women undergoing IVF or ICSI treatment cycles.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases, trial registers and websites from inception to June 2015: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialized Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, electronic trial registers for ongoing and registered trials, citation indexes, conference abstracts in the ISI Web of Knowledge, LILACS, Clinical Study Results (for clinical trial results of marketed pharmaceuticals), PubMed and OpenSIGLE. We also carried out handsearches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing long-acting FSH versus daily FSH in women who were part of a couple with subfertility and undertaking IVF or ICSI treatment cycles with a GnRH antagonist or agonist protocol.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, data extraction and assessment of risk of bias. We contacted trial authors in cases of missing data. We calculated risk ratios for each outcome, and our primary outcomes were live birth rate and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate. Our secondary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, multiple pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, any other adverse event (including ectopic pregnancy, congenital malformations, drug side effects and infection) and patient satisfaction with the treatment. Trials reported all outcomes, except patient satisfaction with the treatment.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six RCTs with a total of 3753 participants and we graded the quality of the included studies as moderate. All studies included women with an indication for COS as part of an IVF/ICSI cycle with age ranging from 18 to 41 years. A comparison of long-acting FSH versus daily FSH did not show evidence of difference in effect on overall live birth rate (Risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.07; 2363 participants, eight studies; I² statistic = 44%) or OHSS (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.37; 3753 participants, nine studies; I² statistic = 0%). We compared subgroups by dose of long-acting FSH. There was evidence of reduced live birth rate in women who received lower doses (60 to 120 μg) of long-acting FSH compared to daily FSH (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.93; 645 participants, three studies; I² statistic = 0%). There was no evidence a difference between the groups in live births in the medium dose (150 to 180 μg) subgroup (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.18; 1685 participants, four studies; I² statistic = 6%). There was no evidence of a difference between the groups in the clinical pregnancy rate (any dose), ongoing pregnancy rate (any dose), multiple pregnancy rate (any dose), miscarriage rate (low or medium dose), ectopic pregnancy rate (any dose), congenital malformation rate, congenital malformation rate; major or minor (low or medium dose).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of a medium dose (150 to 180 μg) of long-acting FSH is a safe treatment option and equally effective compared to daily FSH in women with unexplained subfertility. There was evidence of reduced live birth rate in women receiving a low dose (60 to 120 μg) of long-acting FSH compared to daily FSH. Further research is needed to determine whether long-acting FSH is safe and effective for use in hyper- or poor responders and in women with all causes of subfertility.