Cycle cancellation and pregnancy after luteal estradiol priming in women defined as poor responders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

A multi-cycle approach via DuoStim is beneficial to treat couples indicated to PGT-M plus PGT-A. A propensity score matching-based case series

OBJECTIVE

To compare DuoStim versus a conventional approach in patients indicated to Preimplantation-Genetic-Testing for both monogenic conditions and aneuploidies (PGT-M + PGT-A).

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case-control study. In 5 years, 132 couples indicated to PGT-M + PGT-A who obtained ≤5 blastocysts after a first retrieval were suggested to undergo a second stimulation in the same ovarian cycle. Of them, 55 accepted, while 77 preferred the standard approach. Propensity-Score-Matching method was adopted to produce two matched groups of 41 patients per arm. The primary outcome was the cumulative-live-birth-rate (cLBR) per couple within 1 year from the first oocyte retrieval.

RESULTS

In the DuoStim arm, 100 % of the patients underwent two ovarian stimulations. In the conventional approach group, 85 % discontinued the treatment after a failed first cycle (N = 28/33, 95 %CI:69.1-93.4 %). After DuoStim, 16 couples had ≥ 1 healthy LB (1-year cLBR: 39 %, 95 %CI:25.7-54.3 %),19 % of them delivered 2 healthy babies after singleton pregnancies (N = 3/16, 95 %CI:6.6-43 %) and 68 % have surplus transferable blastocysts (N = 11/16, 95 %CI:44.4-85.8 %). In the control, 9 couples obtained a healthy LB (1-year cLBR: 22 %, 95 %CI:12.0-36.7 %), and only 1 havesurplus transferable blastocysts. Overall, couples opting for DuoStim obtained 3.9 ± 2.5 blastocysts of which 1.2 ± 1.3 transferable, while couples opting for the conventional approach obtained 2.3 ± 2.1 blastocysts of which 0.8 ± 1.0 transferable.

CONCLUSIONS

DuoStim may minimize treatment discontinuation and increase the probability to obtain transferable blastocysts in the studied population. Nevertheless, larger prospective studies are required. Also, the suitability of a threshold set at 5 blastocysts should be further validated.

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 ).

Effectiveness of oestrogen pretreatment in patients with expected poor ovarian response (POSEIDON groups 3 and 4) undergoing GnRH antagonist protocol: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Women characterised by diminished ovarian reserve are considered to have poor ovarian response (POR) according to Patient-Oriented Strategies Encompassing IndividualizeD Oocyte Number (POSEIDON) criteria. Patients in this population often have a poor prognosis for treatment with assisted reproductive technology. In previous studies, oestrogen pretreatment before ovarian stimulation has been shown to have a beneficial effect. However, recent studies presented conflicting conclusions. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of oestrogen pretreatment in patients with expected POR (POSEIDON groups 3 and 4) undergoing gonadotrophin releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A prospective superiority randomised parallel controlled trial will be conducted at a tertiary university-affiliated hospital. A total of 316 patients will be randomly divided into two groups at a ratio of 1:1. In the intervention group, oral oestrogen pretreatment will be administered from day 7 after ovulation until day 2 of the next menstrual cycle. Afterwards, a flexible GnRH-ant protocol will be initiated. The control group will receive no additional intervention beyond routine ovarian stimulation. The primary outcome is the number of oocytes retrieved. Secondary outcomes include the total number of retrieved metaphase II oocytes, average daily dose of gonadotropin, total gonadotropin dose and duration of ovarian stimulation, cycle cancellation rate, top quality embryos rate, blastocyst formation rate, embryo implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, early miscarriage rate and endometrial thickness on trigger day. All data will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat and per-protocol principles.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The ethical approval has been confirmed by the reproductive ethics committee of the affiliated hospital of Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (SDUTCM/2022.9.20). In addition, written informed consent will be obtained from all the participants before the study. The results will be disseminated via publications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2200064812.

Fertility With Early Reduction of Ovarian Reserve

Female infertility is defined as the failure to conceive after a year of frequent, unprotected sexual activity. Infertility affects 8-10% of females worldwide. There are many causes of infertility. One of them is diminished ovarian reserve (DOR). In this condition, the ovary loses its reproductive potential, which affects fertility. This condition may be caused due to injury, but it usually results from aging. DOR is one of the main reasons for infertility in women worldwide. A woman with DOR has fewer eggs in her ovaries than usual. The quality of the remaining eggs may not be bad. This condition impairs the development of existing eggs. Patients with DOR may be able to get pregnant if they are properly treated according to their profile. Their treatments are individually tailored according to their needs. These patients should be recommended a robust approach toward treatment and increasing fertility. The chances of pregnancy increase if the treatment is started early.

Double or dual stimulation in poor ovarian responders: where do we stand?

Recent advances in our recognition of two to three follicular waves of development in a single menstrual cycle has challenged the dogmatic approach of ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization starting in the early follicular phase. First shown in veterinary medicine and thereafter in women, luteal phase stimulation–derived oocytes are at least as competent as those retrieved following follicular phase stimulation. Poor ovarian responders still remain a challenge for many decades simply because they do not respond to ovarian stimulation. Performing follicular phase stimulation and luteal phase stimulation in the same menstrual cycle, named as double stimulation/dual stimulation, clearly increases the number of oocytes, which is a robust surrogate marker of live birth rate in in vitro fertilization across all female ages. Of interest, apart from one study, the bulk of evidence reports significantly higher number of oocytes following luteal phase stimulation when compared with follicular phase stimulation; hence, performing double stimulation/dual stimulation doubles the number of oocytes leading to a marked decrease in patient drop-out rate which is one of the major factors limiting cumulative live birth rates in such poor prognosis patients. The limited data with double stimulation/dual stimulation-derived embryos is reassuring for obstetric and neonatal outcome. The mandatory requirement of freeze-all and lack of cost-effectiveness data are limitations of this novel approach. Double stimulation/dual stimulation is an effective strategy when the need to obtain oocytes is urgent, including patients with malignant diseases undergoing oocyte cryopreservation and patients of advanced maternal age or with reduced ovarian reserve.

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.

Cycle day 2 insulin-like growth factor-1 serum levels as a prognostic tool to predict controlled ovarian hyperstimulation outcomes in poor responders

OBJECTIVE

To study whether patients exhibiting poor ovarian response have abnormal levels of serum insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-1 on cycle day 2 when compared with age-matched normal and high responders.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

University-based practice.

PATIENT(S)

All women between the ages of 21 and 42 years who underwent in vitro fertilization treatment cycle without estrogen pretreatment at our institution between 2013 and 2015.

INTERVENTION(S)

Patients were separated into three groups: poor responders (≤4 oocytes retrieved/cycle cancellation), normal responders (8-12 oocytes), and high responders (≥18 oocytes). Subanalysis focused on the next cycle for poor responders adjacent to the nonpretreated index cycle, in which estrogen pretreatment was implemented.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Serum cycle day 2: IGF-1, insulin-like growth factor-binding protein (IGFBP)-3 levels, and IGF-1:IGFBP3 ratio, number of eggs retrieved, number of two pronuclei embryos, cumulative pregnancy rate, and live birth.

RESULT(S)

A total of 184 patients met the inclusion criteria. The poor responder group exhibited a more than twofold increase in the cycle day IGF-1 serum levels when compared with normal responders and a threefold increase when compared with the high responders. Cycle day 2 IGF-1 level >72 ng/mL in poor responders had 70% sensitivity and 78% specificity for a negative controlled ovarian hyperstimulation cycle outcome with an area under the curve of 0.83. Luteal estrogen pretreatment in the poor responder group was associated with a significant reduction in IGF-1 levels. Significantly, more retrieved and mature oocytes, as well as two pronuclei embryos, were achieved in the pretreated poor responder group when compared with the yield from their adjacent nonpretreated index cycles. Furthermore, cumulative rates were higher for intrauterine pregnancies, and lower for negative pregnancy outcome.

CONCLUSION(S)

Patients who respond poorly to controlled ovarian stimulation, despite normal cycle day 2 follicle-stimulating hormone levels, have significantly higher serum cycle day 2 IGF-1 levels when compared with age-matched normal and high responders. Cycle day 2 IGF-1 level >72 ng/mL in poor responders was predictive of a negative cycle outcome. Luteal estrogen pretreatment in the poor responder group was associated with a significant reduction in IGF-1 levels, improved response to stimulation, and higher cumulative rates for intrauterine pregnancies, and lower for negative pregnancy outcome.

Meta-analysis of GnRH-antagonists versus GnRH-agonists in poor responder protocols

PURPOSE

Considering the insufficient evidence supporting an ideal protocol for poor responder management in IVF/ICSI cycles, the aim of the current meta-analysis was to compare GnRH-antagonist versus GnRH-agonist protocols in poor responders, evaluating effectiveness and safety.

METHODS

Meta-analysis was conducted using Medcalc 16.8 version software. Standardized mean differences (SMD), odds ratios (OR), and the respective 95% confidence intervals (CI) were determined appropriately. The Cochran Q statistic and the I² test were used to assess studies' heterogeneity.

RESULTS

GnRH-agonists were shown to correlate with fewer cancelled IVF/ICSI cycles (p = 0.044, OR = 1.268 > 1, 95% CI 1.007, 1.598), a larger number of embryos transferred (p = 0.008, SMD = - 0.230, 95% CI - 0.400, - 0.0599), and more clinical pregnancies (p = 0.018, OR = 0.748 < 1, 95% CI 0.588, 0.952). However, GnRH-antagonists resulted in a significantly shorter duration of ovarian stimulation (p = 0.007, SMD = - 0.426. 95% CI - 0.736, - 0.115). The number of oocytes and mature oocytes retrieved in both protocols did not differ statistically (p = 0.216, SMD = - 0.130, 95% CI - 0.337, 0.0763 and p = 0.807, SMD = - 0.0203, 95% CI - 0.183, 0.142, respectively). Moreover, a high heterogeneity among studies was observed regarding duration of ovarian stimulation (I² = 90.6%), number of oocytes (I² = 82.83%)/mature oocytes retrieved (I² = 70.39%), and embryos transferred (I² = 72.83%).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the present meta-analysis, agonist protocols could be suggested as a first choice approach, in terms of effectiveness. Due to the high studies' heterogeneity, results should be considered with caution. Accordingly, larger cohort studies and meta-analyses like the present one will enhance the robustness of the emerging results to identify the ideal protocol for poor responders.

Using bioinformatics and metabolomics to identify altered granulosa cells in patients with diminished ovarian reserve

Background

During fertility treatment, diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) is a challenge that can seriously affect a patient's reproductive potential. However, the pathogenesis of DOR is still unclear and its treatment options are limited. This study aimed to explore DOR's molecular mechanisms.

Methods

We used R software to analyze the mRNA microarray dataset E-MTAB-391 downloaded from ArrayExpress, screen for differentially expressed genes (DEGs), and perform functional enrichment analyses. We also constructed the protein-protein interaction (PPI) and miRNA-mRNA networks. Ovarian granulosa cells (GCs) from women with DOR and the control group were collected to perform untargeted metabolomics analyses. Additionally, small molecule drugs were identified using the Connectivity Map database.

Results

We ultimately identified 138 DEGs. Our gene ontology (GO) analysis indicated that DEGs were mainly enriched in cytokine and steroid biosynthetic processes. According to the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG), the DEGs were mainly enriched in the AGE (advanced glycation end-product)-RAGE (receptor for AGE) signaling pathway in diabetic complications and steroid biosynthesis. In the PPI network, we determined that JUN, EGR1, HMGCR, ATF3, and SQLE were hub genes that may be involved in steroid biosynthesis and inflammation. miRNAs also played a role in DOR development by regulating target genes. We validated the differences in steroid metabolism across GCs using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). We selected 31 small molecules with potentially positive or negative influences on DOR development.

Conclusion

We found that steroidogenesis and inflammation played critical roles in DOR development, and our results provide promising insights for predicting and treating DOR.

DuoStim - a reproducible strategy to obtain more oocytes and competent embryos in a short time-frame aimed at fertility preservation and IVF purposes. A systematic review

Recent evidence suggests that follicular development occurs in a wave-like model during the ovarian cycle, where up to three cohorts of follicles are recruited to complete folliculogenesis. This understanding overtakes the previous dogma stating that follicles grow only during the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle. Therefore, in in vitro fertilization (IVF), novel protocols regarding ovarian stimulation have been theorized based on the use of gonadotrophins to prompt the growth of antral follicles at any stage of the menstrual cycle. These unconventional protocols for ovarian stimulation aim at a more efficient management of poor-prognosis patients, otherwise exposed to conflicting outcomes after conventional approaches. DuoStim appears among these unconventional stimulation protocols as one of the most promising. It combines two consecutive stimulations in the follicular and luteal phases of the same ovarian cycle, aimed at increasing the number of oocytes retrieved and embryos produced in the short time-frame. This protocol has been suggested for the treatment of all conditions requiring a maximal and urgent exploitation of the ovarian reserve, such as oncological patients and poor responders at an advanced maternal age. At present, data from independent studies have outlined the consistency and reproducibility of this approach, which might also reduce the drop-out between consecutive failed IVF cycles in poor-prognosis patients. However, the protocol must be standardized, and more robust studies and cost-benefit analyses are needed to highlight the true clinical pros and cons deriving from DuoStim implementation in IVF.

Luteal phase anovulatory follicles result in the production of competent oocytes: intra-patient paired case-control study comparing follicular versus luteal phase stimulations in the same ovarian cycle

STUDY QUESTION

Are the mean numbers of blastocysts obtained from sibling cohorts of oocytes recruited after follicular phase and luteal phase stimulations (FPS and LPS) in the same ovarian cycle similar?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The cohorts of oocytes obtained after LPS are larger than their paired-FPS-derived cohorts and show a comparable competence, thus resulting in a larger mean number of blastocysts.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Three theories of follicle recruitment have been postulated to date: (i) the ‘continuous recruitment’ theory, (ii) the ‘single recruitment episode’ theory and (iii) the ‘wave’ theory. Yet, a clear characterization of this crucial biological process for human reproduction is missing. Recent advances implemented in in vitro fertilization (IVF), such as blastocyst culture, aneuploidy testing and vitrification, have encouraged clinicians to maximize the exploitation of the ovarian reserve through tailored stimulation protocols, which is crucial especially for poor prognosis patients aiming to conceive after IVF. LPS has been already successfully adopted to treat poor prognosis or oncological patients through Duostim, LPS-only or random-start ovarian stimulation approaches. Nevertheless, little, and mainly retrospective, evidence has been produced to support the safety of LPS in general. Feasibility of the LPS approach would severely question the classic ‘single recruitment episode’ theory of follicular development.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This case-control study was conducted with paired follicular phase- and luteal phase-derived cohorts of oocytes collected after stimulations in the same ovarian cycle (DuoStim) at two private IVF clinics between October 2015 and December 2017.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

The study included 188 poor prognosis patients undergoing DuoStim with preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A). FPS and LPS were performed with the same daily dose of recombinant-gonadotrophins in an antagonist protocol. Blastocyst culture, trophectoderm biopsy, vitrification and frozen-warmed euploid single blastocyst transfers were performed. The primary outcome was the mean number of blastocysts obtained per oocyte retrieval from paired-FPS- and LPS-derived cohorts (required sample size = 165 patients; power = 90%). Mean blastulation and euploidy rates were monitored, along with the number of oocytes, euploid blastocysts and clinical outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Significantly fewer blastocysts were obtained after FPS than LPS (1.2 ± 1.1 vs. 1.6 ± 1.6, P < 0.01), due to fewer oocytes collected (3.6 ± 2.1 vs. 4.3 ± 2.8, P < 0.01) and a similar mean blastocyst rates per retrieval (33.1% ± 30.3% vs. 37.4% ± 30.8%, P = NS). The number of oocytes collected were correlated (R = 0.5, P < 0.01), while the blastocyst rates were uncorrelated among paired-FPS- and LPS-derived cohorts. Overall, a significantly lower chance of producing blastocyst(s) was reported after FPS than after LPS: 67.6% (n = 127/188, 95%CI: 60.3–74.1) vs. 77.1% (n = 145/188, 95%CI: 70.3–82.8; P = 0.05). The mean euploidy rates per retrieval were similar between FPS- and LPS-derived cohorts of oocytes (13.6% ± 22.8% vs. 16.3% ± 23.4%, P = NS). Therefore, on average fewer euploid blastocysts (0.5 ± 0.8 vs. 0.7 ± 1.0, P = 0.02) resulted from FPS. Similar ongoing-pregnancy/delivery rates were reported, to date, after FPS- and LPS-derived euploid single blastocyst transfers: 42.4% (n = 28/66, 95%CI: 30.5–55.2) vs. 53.8% (n = 35/65, 95%CI: 41.1–66.1; P = NS).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

More studies need to be conducted in the future to confirm the safety of LPS, especially in terms of ovarian and follicular environment, as well as the clinical, peri-natal and post-natal outcomes. Here, we showed preliminary data suggesting a similar ongoing implantation/delivery rate (>22 weeks) between FPS- and LPS-derived euploid blastocysts, that need to be extended in the future, to populations other than poor prognosis patients and using approaches other than DuoStim together with a constant monitoring of the related peri-natal and post-natal outcomes.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

These data, from a paired study design, highlight that LPS-derived oocytes are as competent as FPS-derived oocytes, thereby adding some evidence to support the use of LPS for poor prognosis and oncological patients and to question the ‘single recruitment episode’ theory of follicle recruitment. These findings also encourage additional studies of the basics of folliculogenesis, with direct clinical implications for the management of ovarian stimulation in IVF.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

None.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No external funds were used for this study and there are no conflicts of interest.

“When All Seems Lost”: The Ultralong Estrogen Priming (ULEP) Cycle Offers Good Pregnancy Outcomes in Poor Responder Patients

Background: Treating patients with a history of poor ovarian response (POR) presents many challenges for the clinician. Poor in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes are a common end result. The aim of this article is to provide a detailed description of an ultralong estrogen priming (ULEP) cycle in the treatment of patients with a history of POR and to compare the outcomes to matched controls which were treated with other IVF protocols.

Methods: In a retrospective study, 50 patients who meet the Bologna criteria for POR were treated with 50 ULEP cycles. The results of these cycles were compared to 50 matched controls, who were treated with other IVF protocols.

Results: Patients who underwent the ULEP cycles required 3.2 more days of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) and required an extra 579 IU of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH). The ongoing pregnancy rates per transfer were significantly greater in the ULEP group (35.1% vs. 9.1%, OR 5.4, 95% CI 1.4-21.2, p = 0.005) and per cycle started (26% vs. 6%, OR 5.5, 95% CI 1.5-20.8, p = 0.003).

Conclusions: Even though the ULEP cycle is long and demanding for the patients, the outcomes suggest that this treatment regime offers a viable alternative in patients with a history of POR.

Luteal phase stimulation versus follicular phase stimulation in poor ovarian responders: results of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In young women with poor ovarian response, luteal-phase ovarian stimulation (LPOS) is a potential method for collecting competent oocytes. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of LPOS compared with follicular phase ovarian stimulation (FPOS) in young women with poor ovarian response (POR).

METHODS

This single-center, prospective, randomized pilot study compared LPOS and FPOS in women with POR fulfilling Bologna criteria who underwent in vitro fertilization at the Instituto Bernabeu. The primary outcome was the number of metaphase II (MII) oocytes obtained by follicular puncture.

RESULTS

Sixty women were included in the study, with 27 women completing LPOS and 30 undergoing FPOS. There was no statistically significant difference in the number of MII oocytes obtained between the LPOS group and the FPOS group (2.1 ± 2.0 vs. 2.6 ± 2.2, p = 0.31). Length of stimulation was also similar in both groups (8.35 ± 2.8 vs. 8.15 ± 4.1 days, p = 0.69). Similarly, there was no significant difference in the follicle-stimulating hormone total dose, number of cumulus-oocyte complexes, survival rate, fertilization rate, or cancellation rate between groups. A significantly higher Ovarian Sensitivity Index was observed in the LPOS group versus the FPOS group (0.96 vs. 0.57, p = 0.037).

CONCLUSION

LPOS was comparable with FPOS in terms of efficacy and may improve ovarian responsiveness in young women with POR.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02625532; EudraCT identifier: 2015-003856-31.

Luteal phase after conventional stimulation in the same ovarian cycle might improve the management of poor responder patients fulfilling the Bologna criteria: a case series

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical contribution of luteal-phase stimulation (LPS) to follicular-phase stimulation (FPS) in a single ovarian cycle (DuoStim) for poor responder patients fulfilling the Bologna criteria.

DESIGN

Observational study (years 2015-2017) including women satisfying ≥2 of the following characteristics: maternal age ≥40 years and/or ≤3 oocytes retrieved after previous conventional stimulation and/or reduced ovarian reserve (i.e., antral follicle count <7 follicles or antimüllerian hormone <1.1 ng/mL). The LPS was started regardless of the outcome of the FPS.

SETTING

Private in vitro fertilization center.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 100 of 297 patients fulfilling the Bologna criteria chose to undergo DuoStim.

INTERVENTION(S)

The FPS and LPS with the same antagonist protocol and agonist trigger, intracytoplasmic sperm injection with ejaculated sperm, preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies, and vitrified-warmed euploid single blastocyst transfer.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The contribution of LPS to the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) per intention-to-treat (ITT).

RESULT(S)

Patients (100) underwent FPS (maternal age, 42.1 ± 1.4 y; previous in vitro fertilization cycles with ≤3 collected oocytes, 0.7 ± 0.9; antral follicle count, 3.8 ± 1.2 follicles; and antimüllerian hormone, 0.56 ± 0.3 ng/mL). Ninety-one patients completed DuoStim. All patients were included in the analysis. More oocytes were obtained after LPS with similar developmental and chromosomal competence as paired FPS-derived ones. The CLBR per ITT increased from 7% after FPS to 15% after DuoStim. Conversely, the CLBR per ITT among the 197 patients that chose a conventional controlled ovarian stimulation strategy was 8%, as only 17 patients who were not pregnant returned for a second stimulation after the first attempt (drop-out rate, 81%).

CONCLUSION(S)

The LPS-derived oocytes increased the CLBR per ITT in a single ovarian cycle in patients fulfilling the Bologna criteria. The DuoStim strategy is promising to manage this thorny population of patients, especially to avoid discontinuation after a first failed attempt.

Ovarian stimulation modalities in poor responders

In a group of IVF/ICSI cycles, despite the appropriate ovarian stimulation, the number of oocytes collected is below the expected value. This condition is defined as poor ovarian response (POR) to stimulation. POR brings the risk of cycle cancellation with an estimated rate of 20%. Infertility experts are trying to improve cycle outcomes of POR cases with multiple modifications. This review article will present the latest modifications on the management of POR. The studies performed for improving cycle outcome in POR cases were evaluated and their notable results were presented. The first intervention among infertility specialists is to make a standard definition for POR. The BOLOGNA criteria and the subsequent POSEIDON group definitions are the latest updates in POR management. GnRH antagonists, estradiol priming, double stimulation, letrozole administration, DHEA, and herbal therapy supplementations are the recent modifications done to improve oocyte retrieval and subsequent embryo transfer for POR cases. This review article presents the encouraging methods applied for POR cases to improve cycle outcome.

Comparison of GnRH agonist versus luteal estradiol GnRH antagonist protocol using transdermal testosterone in poor responders

Objective:

Transdermal testosterone has been used in different doses and in different stimulation protocols in poor responders. The aim of the present study is to compare the luteal estradiol/GnRH antagonists protocol versus long GnRH agonists in poor responder patients according to the Bologna criteria, in which transdermal testosterone has been used prior to the stimulation with gonadotropins.

Methods:

In this retrospective analysis, a total of 141 poor responder patients according to the Bologna criteria were recruited. All patients were treated with transdermal testosterone preceding ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins during 5 days. In 53 patients we used the conventional antagonist protocol (Group 1). In 88 patients (GrH pituitary suppression was achieved by leuprolide acetate according to the conventional long protocol (Group 2). We analyzed the ovarian stimulation parameters and IVF outcomes.

Results:

Comparing groups 1 and 2, there were no significant differences between cancellation rates and number of oocytes retrieved. However the total gonadotropin dose used and the mean length of stimulation were significantly lower in group 1 when compared to group 2. There were no significant differences in pregnancy outcomes; however, there was a slight increase in the implantation rate in group 1 vis-a-vis group 2, although statistical significance was not achieved.

Conclusion:

TT in poor responder patients can be effective both with the conventional agonist's long protocol and with the conventional antagonist's protocol. However, short regimes with previous estradiol antagonists in the luteal phase facilitate ovarian stimulation by shortening the days of treatment and the consumption of gonadotropins

Double Stimulation in the Same Ovarian Cycle (DuoStim) to Maximize the Number of Oocytes Retrieved From Poor Prognosis Patients: A Multicenter Experience and SWOT Analysis

A panel of experts known as the POSEIDON group has recently redefined the spectrum of poor responder patients and introduced the concept of suboptimal response. Since an ideal management for these patients is still missing, they highlighted the importance of tailoring the ovarian stimulation based on the chance of each woman to obtain an euploid blastocyst. Interestingly, a novel pattern of follicle recruitment has been defined: multiple waves may arise during a single ovarian cycle. This evidence opened important clinical implications for the treatment of poor responders. For instance, double stimulation in the follicular (FPS) and luteal phase (LPS) of the same ovarian cycle (DuoStim) is an intriguing option to perform two oocyte retrievals in the shortest possible time. Here, we reported our 2-year experience of DuoStim application in four private IVF centers. To date, 310 poor prognosis patients completed a DuoStim protocol and underwent IVF with blastocyst-stage preimplantation-genetic-testing. LPS resulted into a higher mean number of oocytes collected than FPS; however, their competence (i.e., fertilization, blastocyst, euploidy rates, and clinical outcomes after euploid single-embryo-transfer) was comparable. Importantly, the rate of patients obtaining at least one euploid blastocyst increased from 42.3% (n = 131/310) after FPS to 65.5% (n = 203/310) with the contribution of LPS. A summary of the putative advantages and disadvantages of DuoStim was reported here through a Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats analysis. The strengths of this approach make it very promising. However, more studies are needed in the future to limit its weaknesses, shed light on its putative threats, and realize its opportunities.

Fertility with early reduction of ovarian reserve: the last straw that breaks the Camel's back

Diminished fertility and poor ovarian response pose a conundrum to the experts in the field of reproductive medicine. There is limited knowledge about the risk factors of diminished ovarian reserve other than the iatrogenic ones. One of the leading causes of infertility in women today is diminished ovarian reserve (DOR). DOR is characterized by a low number of eggs in a woman's ovaries and/or with poor quality of the remaining eggs, which boils down to impaired development of the existing eggs, even with assisted reproductive techniques. A good number of such women with low ovarian reserve may conceive with their own eggs, if they are given individualized treatment that is tailored for their profile. Such patients should be counseled appropriately for an aggressive approach towards achieving fertility. The sooner the treatment is started, the better the chances of pregnancy.

Comparison of the standard GnRH antagonist protocol and the luteal phase estradiol/GnRH antagonist priming protocol in poor ovarian responders

BACKGROUND/AIM

The aim of the study was to compare the luteal estradiol patch/GnRH antagonists priming protocol (LPP) with the standard GnRH antagonist protocol in poor ovarian responders (PORs) in terms of the outcomes of in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

IVF outcomes of 265 cycles in 265 patients (106 in the LPP group, 159 in the standard GnRH antagonist group) were evaluated retrospectively.

RESULTS

Mean length of stimulation (11.4 ± 2.7 vs. 10.0 ± 2.7 days; P < 0.05) and the total gonadotropin dose (3403 ± 1060 vs. 2984 ± 1112) used were significantly greater in the LPP group than in the standard GnRH antagonist protocol group. The mean number of oocytes retrieved (3.5 ± 2.6 vs. 3.7 ± 2.8), the number of mature oocytes (2.8 ± 2.2 vs. 2.6 ± 2.2), fertilization rates (65% vs. 62%), the number of embryos transferred (1.6 ± 0.6 vs. 1.7 ± 0.6), and implantation rates (16% vs. 13%) were similar. The cancellation rate did not significantly differ between the groups (9.4% vs. 13.2%). There were no significant differences in the clinical pregnancy (11.3% vs. 13.2%) or live birth rates per patient (3.8% vs. 9.4%) and clinical pregnancy (18.8% vs. 22.6%) or live birth rates per embryo transfer (6.3% vs. 12.9%) between the groups.

CONCLUSION

LPP does not improve IVF outcomes when compared with the standard GnRH antagonist protocol in PORs.

[Poor responders: How could we improve our results?]

OBJECTIVES

Finding an efficient treatment for poor responders still poses a tremendous challenge for assisted reproductive technology. In 2011, an international consensus has been reached in Bologna on how to standardize the definition of poor ovarian response (POR) in a simple and reproducible manner. This article provides an objective assessment of the different treatment options currently available.

METHODS

A search of the database PUBMED was carried out for studies published in English between October 2000 and April 2016.

RESULTS

There is no ideal protocol to manage poor responders even though the antagonist protocol seems to have an advantage of clinicians. This is thanks to better patient tolerance and reduced total dose of gonadotrophin as well as shorter time of stimulation. It seems that there is no benefit in increasing the gonadotrophin daily doses over 300IU nor using any specific type of gonadotrophin. Today, there is insufficient evidence to recommend any additional treatment for poor responders. Only dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) seems to increase embryonic quality and pregnancy rate, however further exploration and complementary prospective studies are necessary.

CONCLUSION

New treatment strategies such as "oocyte banking" or double stimulation during the same cycle, could provide new prospects in poor responders management.

Maximum basal FSH predicts reproductive outcome better than cycle-specific basal FSH levels: waiting for a "better" month conveys limited retrieval benefits

BACKGROUND

Elevated follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) is associated with poor vaginal oocyte retrieval (VOR) outcomes and cycle cancellations but intercycle variability in basal FSH reportedly does not predict ovarian response.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of basal FSH (n = 15573 cycles) in couples (n = 9132) who initiated IVF cycle(s) with basal estradiol (E2) <100 pg/mL between 2002 and 2014 to reevaluate this hypothesis. The most recent (current) FSH, maximum FSH (Max FSH) and prior cycle maximum basal FSH (PMax FSH) were computed for each cycle. Metaphase II (MII) oocyte counts were modeled by age, stimulation type, prior peak E2 level, prior MII count, Max FSH, PMax FSH and current FSH. Antral follicle counts, pregnancy, clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were modeled as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Max FSH level distinguished completed cycles from cancelled cycles better than PMax FSH or current FSH (AUC of 0.72, 0.71 and 0.61, respectively, p < 0.001). Fewer MIIs were retrieved (5.7 ± 3.8) in cycles with Max FSH >13 mIU/mL (n = 1475) than those with ≤13 mIU/mL (n = 11978) (11.6 ± 7.1) (p < 0.001). Max FSH was a better predictor of MII count than PMax FSH or current FSH after controlling for age, stimulation type, prior peak E2 level and prior MII count. Additional MIIs were retrieved on average in cycles with PMax FSH >13 mIU/mL (n = 1930) whose current FSH was ≤13 mIU/ml rather than >13 mIU/ml (p < 0.01) after controlling for age, cycle number and stimulation type. However, no improvement in pregnancy or live birth rate was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Max FSH is the best FSH-based predictor of ovarian reserve. Retrieval benefits from waiting for a "better" month appear to exist but are limited.

Delayed Start Versus Conventional GnRH Antagonist Protocol in Poor Responders Pretreated With Estradiol in Luteal Phase: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the new delayed start protocol against the conventional gonadotropin (Gn)-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in poor responders (PORs).

STUDY DESIGN

A total of 160 women with poor response to previous in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle were randomized either to start Gn then Cetrotide 0.25 subcutaneously (sc) added when leading follicle (DF) reach >12 mm or Cetrotide 0.25 mg sc started first from day 2 to day 8 then Gn therapy was added and Cetrotide restarted when DF reach >12 mm.

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant difference between conventional and delayed start protocols regarding the needed dose of Gn for stimulation (4368 ± 643 and 3798 ± 515), level of estradiol (E2; 778 ± 371 and 1076 ± 453), and endometrial thickness at human chorionic gonadotropin triggering (8.6 ± 1.8 and 9.8 ± 1.9), the number of DF (3.4 ± 1.5 and 4.9 ± 2.1), the number of retrieved follicles (2.4 ± 2.1 and 4.3 ± 2.5), and successful embryo transfer (13 vs 16), respectively (P < .05). There was a highly statistically significant difference between the 2 study groups regarding the number of oocytes fertilized (1.2 ± 2.0 vs 3.3 ± 1.4), metaphase II oocytes (0.9 ± 1.0 vs 2.7 + 1.6), and grade I embryos (0.7 ± 0.9 vs 2.1 + 1.1; P < .001). The chemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, and abortion rate showed a statistically significant difference between the 2 study groups (P value .003 and .006, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Delayed start protocol significantly improved clinical pregnancy rate and IVF cycle parameters in PORs.

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.

Estrogen or anti-estrogen for Bologna poor responders?

The current study aims to compare cycle outcomes of two ovarian stimulation protocols in poor responders according to the Bologna criteria; luteal estrogen priming (LE) or letrozole (LZ) co-treatment in antagonist protocol. Following retrospective chart review of a single center, 162 cycles were found eligible for the comparison of two ovarian stimulation protocols. After interpreting data, significantly higher serum estradiol levels, longer duration of cycle, higher number of fertilized oocytes and good quality embryos were detected in patients who received LE. Despite any statistical significance, higher clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR) per embryo transfer (ET) were detected with LE protocol compared with LZ (12.3% versus 18.2% and 9.6% versus 12.7%, respectively). Younger patients (<40 years) revealed higher CPR and OPR per started cycle compared with older patients (≥40 years) where only OPR was statistically significant. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that basal antral follicle count, peak serum estradiol levels and number of fertilized oocytes were independent variables significantly associated with clinical pregnancies (p < 0.05). In the current analysis, LE or LZ protocols revealed comparable but quite low pregnancy rates in poor responders according to the Bologna criteria. Younger patients were more likely to achieve pregnancy compared to older patients with both protocols.

Comparison of human menopausal gonadotropin stimulation with and without clomiphene for in-vitro fertilisation in poor-responders

This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) with and without clomiphene citrate (CC) for ovarian stimulation and oocyte retrieval in poor-responders. A total of 66 cycles in 13 patients met the inclusion criteria of 20 cycles of hMG stimulation and 46 cycles of CC + hMG stimulation. Mean total hMG dose per patient was significantly lower during the stimulation cycle with CC + hMG than with hMG alone. Mean oestradiol level at oocyte retrieval and mean number of oocytes retrieved per patient showed no significant differences between the two cycles. Four of the 13 patients achieved pregnancy with the CC + hMG cycles. The absence of a significant difference in oestradiol level at oocyte retrieval or in the number of oocytes retrieved between the two cycles, despite a significantly lower total hMG dose during the CC + hMG stimulation cycles, suggests a greater benefit of CC + hMG stimulation for poor-responders.

Management of poor responders in IVF: is there anything new?

Despite the fact that in the last two decades an enormous number of papers on the topic of poor ovarian response have been published in the literature, so far it has been impossible to identify any efficient treatment to improve the ovarian response and the clinical outcome of this group of patients. The incidence of poor ovarian responders among infertile women has been estimated at 9–24% but according to recent reviews, it seems to have slightly increased. The limitation in quantifying the incidence of these patients among the infertile population is due to the difficulty of a clear definition in literature. A recent paper by the Bologna ESHRE working group on poor ovarian response has been the first real attempt to find a common definition. Current literature proposes new risk factors which could be the cause of a reduction in ovarian reserve, which also includes genetic factors. This represents the first necessary step towards finding applicable solutions for these patients. To date, there is a substantial lack of literature that identifies an ideal protocol for these patients. The use of the “Bologna criteria” and the introduction of long acting gonadotropin in clinical practice have given rise to new promising stimulation protocols for this group of patients.