The value of human growth hormone as an adjuvant for ovarian stimulation in a human in vitro fertilization program

Different ovarian stimulation protocols for women with diminished ovarian reserve

PURPOSE

To review the available treatments for women with significantly diminished ovarian reserve and assess the efficacy of different ovarian stimulation protocols.

METHODS

Literature research performed among studies that have been published in the Pubmed, in the Scopus Search Machine and in Cohrane database of systematic reviews.

RESULTS

A lack of clear, uniform definition of the poor responders and a lack of large-scale randomized studies make data interpretation very difficult for precise conclusions. Optimistic data have been presented by the use of high doses of gonadotropins, flare up Gn RH-a protocol (standard or microdose), stop protocols, luteal onset of Gn RH-a and the short protocol. Natural cycle or a modified natural cycle seems to be an appropriate strategy. Low dose hCG in the first days of ovarian stimulation has promising results. Molecular biology tools (mutations, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)) have been also considered to assist the management of this group of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The ideal stimulation for these patients with diminished ovarian reserve remains a great challenge for the clinician, within the limits of our pharmaceutical quiver.

Improvement of delivery and live birth rates after ICSI in women aged >40 years by ovarian co-stimulation with growth hormone

BACKGROUND

Growth hormone (GH) is required for ovarian follicular development, and its administration during ovarian stimulation improves pregnancy rate in cow and sheep. Data on the use of exogenous GH in human assisted reproduction treatment are inconsistent. This prospective randomized study evaluates the usefulness of GH administration in women of >40 years undergoing ovarian stimulation for assisted reproduction treatment.

METHODS

One hundred women of >40 years undergoing assisted reproduction treatment were randomized between a GH treatment group and a placebo group. Assisted reproduction treatment outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

In patients of the GH treatment group, a similar number of oocytes, embryos and pregnancies was achieved as compared with the placebo group. However, the patients treated with GH suffered fewer pregnancy losses, resulting in higher delivery and live birth rates. These patients also showed higher peak serum estradiol concentration and higher concentrations of GH and estradiol in pre-ovulatory follicular fluid as compared with the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of GH during ovarian stimulation alleviates age-related decrease in assisted reproduction treatment efficiency. This effect appears to be mainly due to an improvement of oocyte developmental potential, but GH action on the uterus cannot be excluded.

Enhancing the fertility of poor responders by treatment with estrogen rebound combined with a short protocol

Aim:  To assess the efficacy of estrogen rebound (ER) plus flare-up by gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) in poor responders who failed to become pregnant prior to a long protocol treatment. Methods:  The patients comprised of thirty-one infertile patients with oocyte retrieval levels of less than five, who had undergone several long protocol treatment cycles. The efficacy of treatment with the ER plus flare-up from GnRH-a was compared with the prior long protocol treatment. The main outcome measures are: confirmation of ER, maximal serum E₂ levels prior to human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration, follicular development, dose, and duration of gonadotrophins in a clinical setting. Results:  The ER was confirmed by estrogen levels; FSH increased with ER plus flare-up from GnRH-a. Although the 31 patients included in the study had undergone frequent prior treatment cycles, including the long protocol, the pregnancy rate per embryo transfer following ER plus flare-up by GnRH-a was 37.5% (nine of 24). The number of follicles, number of oocytes retrieved, and the E₂ level was higher than those found in prior treatment cycles. Conclusion:  Exogenous estrogen administration with Premarin^R plus flare-up by GnRH-a may represent an alternative and effective protocol for poor responder patients who had previously undergone several prior long protocol treatments. (Reprod Med Biol 2003; 2: 127-131).

Poor responders: does the protocol make a difference?

An inadequate response to gonadotropins during in-vitro fertilization treatment may result in cycle cancellation, fewer embryos available for transfer and decreased pregnancy rates. For these reasons, numerous strategies to improve ovarian stimulation in poor responders have been proposed. These include variations in the type, dose and timing of gonadotropins, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists and gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists. Unfortunately, despite optimism generated by studies using retrospective controls, epidemiologically sound trials have been scarce. Indeed, of the three prospective randomized trials performed in poor responders to date no compelling advantage for one stimulation protocol over another has been established. Although this lack of improvement may reflect inadequate sample sizes, an alternative explanation is simply that the protocol, after a certain point, does not make a difference. Aside from oocyte donation, greater hope for poor responders may rest in aneuploidy screening, in-vitro oocyte maturation and cytoplasm/nuclear transfer.

Evaluating strategies for improving ovarian response of the poor responder undergoing assisted reproductive techniques

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of various controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) regimens in the prior poor-responder patient preparing for assisted reproductive techniques.

DESIGN

English-language literature review.

PATIENT(S)

Candidates for assisted reproductive techniques who had been defined as having a prior suboptimal response to standard COH regimens.

INTERVENTION(S)

A variety of regimes are reviewed, including increased gonadotropin doses, change of gonadotropins, adjunctive growth hormone (GH), luteal phase (long) GnRH agonist (GnRH-a) initiation, early follicular phase (flare) GnRH-a initiation, low-dose luteal phase (ultrashort) GnRH-a initiation, progestin pretreatment, and microdose flare GnRH-a initiation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Maximal serum E(2) levels, follicular development, dose, and duration of gonadotropin therapy, cycle cancellation rates, oocytes retrieved, embryos transferred, and clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates.

RESULT(S)

A lack of uniformity in definition of the poor responder and of prospective randomized trials make data interpretation somewhat difficult. Of the varied strategies proposed, those that seem to be more uniformly beneficial are microdose GnRH-a flare and late luteal phase initiation of a short course of low-dose GnRH-a discontinued before COH.

CONCLUSION(S)

No single regimen will benefit all poor responders. General acceptance of uniform definitions and performance of large-scale prospective randomized trials are critical. Development of a reliable precycle screen will allow effective differentiation among normal responders, poor responders, and those who will not conceive with their own oocytes.