Impact of pre-treatment in GnRH-antagonist cycles triggered with GnRH agonist on reproductive outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Pre-treatment (PT) therapies in IVF are known to be used as pre-stimulation modality to improve cycle outcomes. This study aims to assess whether PT in GnRH antagonist cycles triggered with GnRH-agonist impact oocyte maturation response.

METHODS

Data were retrospectively collected for patients who underwent GnRH antagonist cycle with agonist triggering with and without PT. The patients were allocated to groups according to their PT status. The primary outcome evaluated was suboptimal maturation response. Suboptimal maturation to trigger was defined as no oocyte upon retrieval when adequate response was expected.

RESULTS

The study population included 196 patients who underwent GnRH antagonist cycle with agonist triggering. The study group included 69 patients who received PT. The control group included 127 patients with no PT. In univariate analysis, the PT group significantly displayed suboptimal response compared to the controls (p = 0.008). All the patients in the study group with suboptimal response (with or without hCG re-triggering) were treated with GnRH-agonist as PT. Basal and pre-trigger LH values were significantly lower in the study group compared to controls (p < 0.001). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that PT with GnRH agonist was a significant predictor for suboptimal response.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-treatment, and particularly the use of GnRH-agonist as PT in antagonist cycles triggered with agonist, increases the risk of suboptimal response to GnRH-agonist trigger. This might be explained by prolonged pituitary suppression, which lasts beyond the PT cessation.

A reappraisal of ovarian stimulation strategies used in assisted reproductive technology

Ovarian stimulation is a fundamental step in assisted reproductive technology (ART) with the intention of inducing ovarian follicle development prior to timed intercourse or intra-uterine insemination and facilitating the retrieval of multiple oocytes during a single in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle. The basis of ovarian stimulation includes the administration of exogenous gonadotropins, with or without pre-treatment with oral hormonal therapy. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist or antagonist is given in addition to the gonadotropins to prevent a premature rise of endogenous luteinizing hormone that would in turn lead to premature ovulation. With the advancement in technology, various stimulation protocols have been devised to cater for different patient needs. However, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and its serious complications may occur following ovarian stimulation. It is also evident that suboptimal ovarian stimulation strategies may have a negative impact on oogenesis, embryo quality, endometrial receptivity, and reproductive outcomes over recent years. This review describes the various forms of pre-treatment for ovarian stimulation and stimulation protocols, and aims to provide clinicians with the latest available evidence.

IVF/ICSI Outcomes After a Freeze-All Strategy: an Observational Cohort Study

In order to inform patients undergoing ART regarding their chances for motherhood, it seems useful to describe "freeze all" outcomes according to the different potential indications. The goal of this study was to examine the impact of a "freeze-all approach" on the cumulative live birth rate (cLBR) according to the indication. It is a cohort study including women who had undergone ovarian stimulation (OS) using an antagonist protocol with GnRH agonist triggering between 09.2016 and 09.2018 followed by a freeze-all cycle of blastocyst embryos. The ART outcomes were compared between the two main indications of the freeze-all strategy which were in our cohort: risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and endometriosis. The ART outcomes were also described for the others indications (inadequate endometrium and/or premature progesterone elevation at trigger day, two or more previous ART failures, and autoimmune disease and/or a high risk of thromboembolic disease (AI and/or TE risk)). In total, 658 women were included. The cLBR in the total population was 37.7% (248/658). The cLBR was significantly higher in the "OHSS risk" group (133/281, 47.3%) than in the "endometriosis" group (69/190, 36.3%) (p = 0.017). No significant differences were noted regarding perinatal outcomes, except a significantly higher risk of placenta praevia (PP) observed in the "endometriosis" group (10.1%) (p = 0.002). The "freeze-all approach" yielded good results in terms of the cLBR and especially in case of OHSS risk. These data should be taken into account when informing patients about the ART strategy and their chances of motherhood.

The effect of late-follicular phase progesterone elevation on embryo ploidy and cumulative live birth rates

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does late-follicular phase progesterone elevation have a deleterious effect on embryo euploidy, blastocyst formation rate and cumulative live birth rates (CLBR)?

DESIGN

A multicentre retrospective cross-sectional study including infertile patients aged 18-40 years who underwent ovarian stimulation in a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A) followed by a freeze-all strategy and euploid embryo transfer between August 2017 and December 2019. The sample was stratified according to the progesterone concentrations on the day of trigger: normal (≤1.50 ng/ml) and high (>1.50 ng/ml). Moreover, sensitivity analyses were performed to determine whether different conclusions would have been drawn if different cut-offs had been adopted. The primary outcome was the embryo euploidy rate. Secondary outcomes were the blastocyst formation rate, the number of euploid blastocysts and CLBR.

RESULTS

Overall 1495 intracytoplasmic sperm injection PGT-A cycles were analysed. Late-follicular phase progesterone elevation was associated with significantly higher late-follicular oestradiol concentrations (2847.56 ± 1091.10 versus 2240.94 ± 996.37 pg/ml, P < 0.001) and significantly more oocytes retrieved (17.67 ± 8.86 versus 12.70 ± 7.00, P < 0.001). The number of euploid embryos was significantly higher in the progesterone elevation group (2.32 ± 1.74 versus 1.86 ± 1.42, P = 0.001), whereas the blastocyst formation rate (47.1% [43.7-50.5%] versus 51.0% [49.7-52.4%]), the embryo euploidy rate (48.3% [44.9-51.7%] versus 49.1% [47.7-50.6%], the live birth rate in the first frozen embryo transfer (34.1% versus 31.1%, P = 0.427) and CLBR (38.9% versus 37.0%, P = 0.637) were not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Euploidy rate and CLBR do not significantly differ among PGT-A cycles with and without late-follicular progesterone elevation in a freeze-all approach.

The effect of polymorphisms in FSHR and FSHB genes on ovarian response: a prospective multicenter multinational study in Europe and Asia

STUDY QUESTION

Does the presence of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the FSH receptor gene (FSHR) and/or FSH beta subunit-encoding gene (FSHB) influence ovarian response in predicted normal responders treated with rFSH?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The presence of FSHR SNPs (rs6165, rs6166, rs1394205) has a statistically significant impact in ovarian response, although this effect is of minimal clinical relevance in predicted normal responders treated with a fixed dose of 150 IU rFSH.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Ovarian reserve markers have been a breakthrough in response prediction following ovarian stimulation. However, a significant percentage of patients show a disproportionate lower ovarian response, as compared with their actual ovarian reserve. Studies on pharmacogenetics have demonstrated a relationship between FSHR or FSHB genotyping and drug response, suggesting a potential effect of individual genetic variability on ovarian stimulation. However, evidence from these studies is inconsistent, due to the inclusion of patients with variable ovarian reserve, use of different starting gonadotropin doses, and allowance for dose adjustments during treatment. This highlights the necessity of a well-controlled prospective study in a homogenous population treated with the same fixed protocol.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

We conducted a multicenter multinational prospective study, including 368 patients from Vietnam, Belgium, and Spain (168 from Europe and 200 from Asia), from November 2016 until June 2019. All patients underwent ovarian stimulation followed by oocyte retrieval in an antagonist protocol with a fixed daily dose of 150 IU rFSH until triggering. Blood sampling and DNA extraction was performed prior to oocyte retrieval, followed by genotyping of four SNPs from FSHR (rs6165, rs6166, rs1394205) and FSHB (rs10835638).

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Eligible were predicted normal responder women <38 years old undergoing their first or second ovarian stimulation cycle. Laboratory staff and clinicians were blinded to the clinical results and genotyping, respectively. The prevalence of hypo-responders, the number of oocytes retrieved, the follicular output rate (FORT), and the follicle to oocyte index (FOI) were compared between different FSHR and FSHB SNPs genotypes.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The prevalence of derived allele homozygous SNPs in the FSHR was rs6166 (genotype G/G) 15.8%, rs6165 (genotype G/G) 34.8%, and rs1394205 (genotype A/A) 14.1%, with significant differences between Caucasian and Asian women (P < 0.001). FSHB variant rs10835638 (c.-211 G>T) was very rare (0.5%). Genetic model analysis revealed that the presence of the G allele in FSHR variant rs6166 resulted in less oocytes retrieved when compared to the AA genotype (13.54 ± 0.46 vs 14.81 ± 0.61, estimated mean difference (EMD) -1.47 (95% CI -2.82 to -0.11)). In FSHR variant rs1394205, a significantly lower number of oocytes was retrieved in patients with an A allele when compared to G/G (13.33 ± 0.41 vs 15.06 ± 0.68, EMD -1.69 (95% CI -3.06 to -0.31)). A significantly higher prevalence of hypo-responders was found in patients with the genotype A/G for FSHR variant rs6166 (55.9%, n = 57) when compared to A/A (28.4%, n = 29), ORadj 1.87 (95% CI 1.08-3.24). No significant differences were found regarding the FORT across the genotypes for FSHR variants rs6166, rs6165, or rs1394205. Regarding the FOI, the presence of the G allele for FSHR variant rs6166 resulted in a lower FOI when compared to the A/A genotype, EMD -13.47 (95% CI -22.69 to -4.24). Regarding FSHR variant rs6165, a lower FOI was reported for genotype A/G (79.75 ± 3.35) when compared to genotype A/A (92.08 ± 6.23), EMD -13.81 (95% CI -25.41 to -2.21).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The study was performed in relatively young women with normal ovarian reserve to eliminate biases related to age-related fertility decline; thus, caution is needed when extrapolating results to older populations. In addition, no analysis was performed for FSHB variant rs10835638 due to the very low prevalence of the genotype T/T (n = 2).

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Based on our results, genotyping FSHR SNPs rs6165, rs6166, rs1394205, and FSHB SNP rs10835638 prior to initiating an ovarian stimulation with rFSH in predicted normal responders should not be recommended, taking into account the minimal clinical impact of such information in this population. Future research may focus on other populations and other genes related to folliculogenesis or steroidogenesis.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This study was supported by an unrestricted grant by Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD). N.P.P. reports grants and/or personal fees from MSD, Merck Serono, Roche Diagnostics, Ferring International, Besins Healthcare, Gedeon Richter, Theramex, and Institut Biochimique SA (IBSA). N.L.V. and M.T.H. report consultancy and conference fees from Merck, Ferring, and MSD, outside the submitted work. P.D. has received honoraria for lecturing and/or research grants from MSD, Ferring International, and Merck. D.S. reports grants and/or personal fees from MSD, Ferring International, Merck Serono, Cook, and Gedeon Richter. A.R.N., B.A.M., C.S., J.M., L.H.L., P.Q.M.M., H.T., and S.G. report no conflict of interests.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03007043.

Early pregnancy loss in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome after IVM versus standard ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI

STUDY QUESTION

Is the incidence of early pregnancy loss (EPL) in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) higher after IVM of oocytes than after ovarian stimulation (OS) for IVF/ICSI?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Women with PCOS who are pregnant after fresh embryo transfer have a higher probability of EPL following IVM, but after frozen embryo transfer (FET), no significant difference in the incidence of EPL was observed following IVM compared to OS.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

There is conflicting evidence in the current literature with regard to the risk of EPL after IVM of oocytes when compared with OS. Because of the limited sample size in previous studies, the use of different IVM systems and the possible bias introduced by patient characteristics and treatment type, firm conclusions cannot be drawn.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This was a retrospective cohort study evaluating 800 women, with a diagnosis of infertility and PCOS as defined by Rotterdam criteria, who had a first positive pregnancy test after fresh or FET following IVM or OS between January 2010 and December 2017 in a tertiary care academic medical centre.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Pregnancies after non-hCG triggered IVM following a short course of highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin were compared with those after conventional OS. The primary outcome was EPL, defined as a spontaneous pregnancy loss before 10 weeks of gestation.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

In total, 329 patients with a positive pregnancy test after IVM and 471 patients with a positive pregnancy test after OS were included. Women who were pregnant after IVM were younger (28.6 ± 3.4 years vs 29.3 ± 3.6 years, P = 0.005) and had higher serum anti-Mullerian hormone levels (11.5 ± 8.1 ng/ml vs 7.2 ± 4.1 ng/ml, P < 0.001) compared to those who were pregnant after OS. The distribution of PCOS phenotypes was significantly different among women in the IVM group compared to those in the OS group and women who were pregnant after OS had previously suffered EPL more often (28% vs 17.6%, P = 0.003). EPL was significantly higher after fresh embryo transfer following IVM compared to OS (57/122 (46.7%) vs 53/305 (17.4%), P < 0.001), while the results were comparable after FET (63/207 (30.4%) vs 60/166 (36.1%), respectively, P = 0.24). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis evaluating fresh embryo transfer cycles, IVM was the only independent factor (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 4.24, 95% CI 2.44-7.37, P < 0.001)) significantly associated with increased odds of EPL. On the other hand, when the same model was applied to FET cycles, the type of treatment (IVM vs OS) was not significantly associated with EPL (aOR 0.73, 95% CI 0.43-1.25, P = 0.25).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The current data are limited by the retrospective nature of the study and the potential of bias due to unmeasured confounders.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The increased risk of EPL after fresh embryo transfer following IVM may point towards inadequate endometrial development in IVM cycles. Adopting a freeze-all strategy after IVM seems more appropriate. Future studies are needed to ascertain the underlying cause of this observation.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The Clinical IVM research has been supported by research grants from Cook Medical and Besins Healthcare. All authors declared no conflict of interest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Meta-analysis of the embryo freezing transfer interval

BACKGROUND

The decision of whether frozen embryo transfer (FET) should be performed in the cycle immediately after OPU or at least one cycle later is controversial. FET could improve pregnancy rates in IVF; however, how much time is needed for the endometrium to return to optimal receptivity after ovarian stimulation is not known.

METHODS

Electronic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify studies providing data on the influence of the interval between embryo freezing (or OPU) and FET in FET cycles published between January 1, 2007, and February 1, 2020.

MAIN FINDINGS

Data analyzed indicated that in the immediate FET cycles, there was a trend to an increased biochemical pregnancy rate (RR = 1.08; CI = 1.00-1.18), whereas the clinical pregnancy rate was somewhat higher, but without reaching statistical significance (RR = 1.07; CI = 0.99-1.15). The live birth rate was similar in the two groups (RR = 1.05; CI = 0.95-1.15), as was the implantation rate (RR = 0.98; CI = 0.83-1.16). Stratifying by embryo stage or FET type (freeze-all or FET after failed fresh transfer) showed no differences.

CONCLUSION

Systematically delaying FET does not offer benefits to IVF outcomes. In addition, immediate transfer is associated with a nonsignificant trend to better clinical pregnancy rate and it also avoids the psychological effects of prolonging the stress on prospective parents.

Ovarian stimulation for oocyte donation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Since its introduction in the 1980s, oocyte donation (OD) has been largely integrated into ART. Lately, both demand and the indications for OD have increased greatly. Oocyte donors are healthy and potentially fertile women undergoing voluntarily ovarian stimulation (OS). Selection of the optimal type of stimulation is of paramount importance in order to achieve the most favourable outcomes for the oocyte recipients, but most importantly for the safety of the oocyte donors.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

This is the first systematic review (SR) with the objective to summarize the current evidence on OS in oocyte donors. The scope of this SR was to evaluate the OD programme by assessing four different aspects: how to assess the ovarian response prior to stimulation; how to plan the OS (gonadotrophins; LH suppression; ovulation trigger; when to start OS); how to control for the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and other complications; and the differences between the use of fresh versus vitrified donated oocytes.

SEARCH METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in May 2020, according to PRISMA guidelines in the databases PubMed and Embase, using a string that combined synonyms for oocytes, donation, banking, freezing, complications and reproductive outcomes. Studies reporting on the safety and/or efficacy of OS in oocyte donors were identified. The quality of the included studies was assessed using ROBINS-I and ROB2. Meta-analysis was performed where appropriate. Data were combined to calculate mean differences (MD) for continuous variables and odd ratios (OR) for binary data with their corresponding 95% CIs. Heterogeneity between the included studies was assessed using I2 and tau statistics.

OUTCOMES

In total, 57 manuscripts were selected for the review, out of 191 citations identified. Antral follicle count and anti-Müllerian hormone levels correlate with ovarian response to OS in OD but have limited value to discriminate donors who are likely to show either impaired or excessive response. Five randomized controlled trials compared different type of gonadotrophins as part of OS in oocyte donors; owing to high heterogeneity, meta-analysis was precluded. When comparing different types of LH control, namely GnRH antagonist versus agonist, the studies showed no differences in ovarian response. Use of progesterone primed ovarian stimulation protocols has been evaluated in seven studies: the evidence has shown little or no difference, compared to GnRH antagonist protocols, in mean number of retrieved oocytes (MD 0.23, [95% CI 0.58-1.05], n = 2147; 6 studies; I2 = 13%, P = 0.33) and in clinical pregnancy rates among recipients (OR 0.87 [95% CI 0.60-1.26], n = 2260, I2 = 72%, P < 0.01). There is insufficient evidence on long-term safety for babies born. GnRH agonist triggering is the gold standard and should be used in all oocyte donors, given the excellent oocyte retrieval rates, the practical elimination of OHSS and no differences in pregnancy rates in recipients (four studies, OR 0.86, 95%CI 0.58-1.26; I2 = 0%). OS in OD is a safe procedure with a low rate of hospitalization after oocyte retrieval. The use of a levonorgestrel intrauterine device or a progestin contraceptive pill during OS does not impact the number of oocytes retrieved or the clinical pregnancy rate in recipients. Ultrasound monitoring seems enough for an adequate follow up of the stimulation cycle in OD. Use of fresh versus vitrified donated oocytes yielded similar pregnancy outcomes.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

This update will be helpful in the clinical management of OS in OD based on the most recent knowledge and recommendations, and possibly in the management of women under 35 years undergoing oocyte vitrification for social freezing, owing to the population similarities. More clinical research is needed on OS protocols that are specifically designed for OD, especially in term of the long-term safety for newborns, effective contraception during OS, and treatment satisfaction.

Optimal Candidates to Do Fresh Embryo Transfer in Those Using Oral Contraceptive Pretreatment in IVF Cycles

Objective

Concern regarding the adverse impact of pretreatment of oral contraceptives (OC) prior to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF) on pregnancy outcome has been debated. We investigated factors that may be associated with live birth rate (LBR) in fresh embryo transfer cycles after OC pretreatment.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted at the Reproductive Center of Ren Ji Hospital, Shanghai, China. 814 women aged 20–35 years undergoing their first autologous IVF cycle and fresh embryo transfer after OC pretreatment were included. Long gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist (a) or GnRH antagonist (ant) protocol was used for ovarian stimulation. Predictive factors for LBR were identified using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Results

Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that using GnRH-ant protocol for ovarian stimulation was associated with significantly lower LBR (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52–0.93), while endometrial thickness on day of hCG trigger was associated with increased LBR (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06–1.27). Despite comparable patients’ age, duration of infertility, BMI and basal FSH between GnRH-a and GnRH-ant groups, those using GnRH-ant resulted in significantly lower LBR compared to the GnRH-a group (37.4 vs. 48.5%, p = 0.002). Using ROC analysis and a cut-off endometrial thickness of < and ≥ 9.5 mm, those < 9.5 mm using GnRH-ant resulted in significantly lower LBR (28.5 vs. 43.4%, p = 0.004), while no differences were noted with an endometrial thickness ≥9.5 mm (49.6 vs. 51.1%, p = 0.78).

Conclusions

Live birth was significantly impacted in OC pre-treated GnRH-ant cycles with an endometrial thickness of <9.5 mm on day of hCG trigger. Cryopreservation of all embryos in these cycles should be considered.