Live birth after in vitro maturation versus standard in vitro fertilisation for women with polycystic ovary syndrome: protocol for a non-inferiority randomised clinical trial

Tenascin C activates the toll‑like receptor 4/NF‑κB signaling pathway to promote the development of polycystic ovary syndrome

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a globally prevalent gynecological disorder among women of childbearing age. The present study aimed to investigate the role of tenascin C (TNC) in PCOS and its potential mechanisms. Fasting blood glucose and serum insulin, the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance and the serum hormone levels were determined in PCOS rats. In addition, H&E staining was used for assessing pathology. In addition, the effects of TNC on oxidative stress and inflammation response in PCOS rat and cell models was assessed. Furthermore, the roles of TNC on KGN cell proliferation and apoptosis were determined employing EdU assay and flow cytometry. TLR4/NF‑κB pathway‑related proteins were measured using western blotting, immunofluorescence and immunohistochemistry. It was found that the mRNA and protein expression was upregulated in PCOS rats and in KGN cells induced by dihydrotestosterone (DHT). Knockdown of TNC relieved the pathological characteristics and the endocrine abnormalities of PCOS rats. Knockdown of TNC inhibited ovarian cell apoptosis, oxidative stress and inflammation in PCOS rats. Knockdown of TNC reversed the DHT‑induced reduction in cell proliferation and increase in apoptosis in KGN cells. Furthermore, knockdown of TNC alleviated oxidative stress and inflammatory responses induced by DHT in KGN cells. Additionally, knockdown of TNC inhibited the toll‑like receptor 4 (TLR4)/NF‑κB signaling pathway in PCOS rats and DHT‑treated KGN cells. In conclusion, knockdown of TNC could ameliorate PCOS in both rats and a cell model by inhibiting cell apoptosis, oxidative stress and inflammation via the suppression of the TLR4/NF‑κB signaling pathway.

Outcomes of the Next In Vitro Fertilization Cycle in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome after a Failed In Vitro Maturation Attempt

BACKGROUND

In vitro maturation (IVM) is indicated in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) who have a very good ovarian response during in vitro fertilization (IVF) and are therefore at high risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). According to the latest practice committee document, IVM could be a major advance in assisted reproductive technology (ART) procedures (reduced cost and simplified treatment); nevertheless, retrospective studies of IVM versus IVF still demonstrate lower chances of a live birth with IVM. Could IVM prove to be an optimal first-line treatment approach? And limited information is available concerning the success of the subsequent IVF cycle after the failure of an IVM cycle. Does IVM treatment adversely affect the subsequent IVF cycle, and is this worth considering before performing the IVF cycle for women with PCOS?

METHODS

This prospective nested case-control study at the Peking University Reproductive Medicine center in China was performed between March 2018 and September 2020. Women aged 20-38 years with PCOS and infertility and who were scheduled for their first IVF attempt were eligible. A total of 351 women were randomly allocated to receive one cycle of unstimulated natural IVM (n = 175) or one cycle of standard IVF with a flexible GnRH antagonist protocol followed by hCG as an ovulation trigger (n = 176). This study involved 234 women (58 women with no blastocysts in the first IVM cycle and 158 women who underwent the first IVF cycle). Cumulative live birth rate at 12 months after oocyte retrieval and OHSS of a standard controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) IVF cycle were compared between 58 women in an IVF cycle following a failed IVM cycle and 158 women who underwent the first IVF cycle.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found in the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR), ongoing pregnancy rate, or clinical pregnancy rate at 12 months after oocyte retrieval between the two groups (56.9% vs. 58.9%, p = 0.795; 58.6% vs. 60.8%, p = 0.776; and 84.5% vs. 76.0%, p = 0.178). The incidence of moderate-to-severe OHSS was not significantly different between the groups (6.9% vs. 5.7%, p = 0.742). Additionally, there were no significant differences in the total gonadotropin dose, stimulation duration, number of retrieved oocytes, number of retrieved mature oocytes, or fertilization rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Even if the first IVM attempt failed in subfertile women with PCOS, comparable cumulative live birth rates were observed in the subsequent IVF cycle. IVM treatment does not adversely affect the subsequent IVF cycle.

Effectiveness, Flexibility and Safety of Switching IVF to IVM as a Rescue Strategy in Unexpected Poor Ovarian Response for PCOS Infertility Patients

BACKGROUND

According to the latest practice committee document, in vitro maturation (IVM) is a simple and safe procedure, especially in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Does switching from in vitro fertilization (IVF) to IVM (IVF/M) help as a rescue infertility treatment for PCOS patients with an unexpected poor ovarian response (UPOR) tendency?

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 531 women with PCOS who had undergone 588 natural IVM cycles or had switched to IVF/M cycles from 2008 to 2017. Natural IVM was performed in 377 cycles, and switching IVF/M was performed in 211 cycles. The primary outcome measure was the cumulative live birth rates (cLBRs), and the secondary outcomes included laboratory and clinical outcomes, maternal safety, and obstetric and perinatal complications.

RESULTS

No significant difference was found in the cLBRs between the natural IVM and switching IVF/M groups (23.6% vs. 17.4%, p = 0.05). Meanwhile, the natural IVM group had a higher cumulative clinical pregnancy rate (36.0% vs. 26.0%, p = 0.01), and a decrease in the number of oocytes was obtained in the switching IVF/M group (13.5 vs. 12.0, p < 0.01). The number of good quality embryos in the natural IVM group was 2.2 ± 2.5, and 2.1 ± 2.3 (p = 0.64) in the switching IVF/M group. No statistically significant differences were observed in the number of 2 pronuclear (2PN) and available embryos. Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) did not occur in the switching IVF/M and natural IVM groups, indicating a highly favorable outcome.

CONCLUSION

In PCOS infertile women with UPOR, timely switching IVF/M is a viable option that markedly reduces the canceled cycle, results in reasonable oocyte retrieval, and leads to live births.

Live birth after letrozole as an adjunct to follicle-stimulating hormone versus follicle-stimulating hormone alone for ovarian stimulation in in vitro fertilisation cycles-study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

In vitro fertilisation (IVF) is an effective infertility treatment but the live birth rate remains unsatisfactory. Ovarian stimulation by follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) is routinely used in IVF and the resulting high serum estradiol levels may impair oocyte/embryo quality and endometrial receptivity. Letrozole, an aromatase inhibitor, can reduce serum estradiol levels following ovarian stimulation. We aim to test the hypothesis that co-treatment with letrozole reduces supraphysiological serum estradiol levels and improves endometrial receptivity, leading to a higher live birth rate of IVF. We are conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate whether letrozole as an adjunct to FSH in IVF is superior to FSH alone in the live birth rate of fresh embryo transfer.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is an open-label randomised controlled superiority trial being performed in two assisted reproduction centres in China. Infertile women who have antral follicle count (AFC) before ovarian stimulation or on day 5 of ovarian stimulation ≥15 are randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive either letrozole and FSH or FSH alone in a GnRH antagonist protocol. Recruited women follow the standard operating procedures of the two centres. The primary outcome is the live birth rate of the fresh embryo transfer. Stimulation parameters, maternal side effects and obstetric and perinatal complications are secondary outcomes. The planned sample size is 900, i.e. 450 per group.

DISCUSSION

The present study is the first multicentre randomised study to compare the live birth rate of the fresh embryo transfer following ovarian stimulation by letrozole and FSH versus FSH alone in women with anticipated high ovarian responses.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02912988 . Registered on September 23, 2016. This trial protocol is version 2.0.

In vitro maturation without gonadotropins versus in vitro fertilization with hyperstimulation in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial

STUDY QUESTION

Does in vitro maturation (IVM) result in non-inferior cumulative live birth rates compared to those after standard in vitro fertilization (IVF) in infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

One cycle of IVM, without any stimulation, was inferior to one cycle of standard IVF in women with PCOS in terms of 6-month cumulative live birth rates, when choosing single vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

IVM is an emerging alternative treatment for women with PCOS who need assisted reproductive technology. Since a minimal or even zero dose of gonadotropins are required in the IVM procedure, the occurrence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is eliminated. Only one clinical trial comparing the pregnancy outcome between IVM with FSH priming and IVF has been reported. However, it is still unknown whether IVM treatment without any stimulation can offer a similar live birth outcome in women with PCOS as compared to that in women receiving the standard IVF procedure with ovarian stimulation.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This single-centre, open-label randomized controlled non-inferiority trial in an academic infertility centre in China was performed between March 2018 and July 2019.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Women aged 20-38 years with PCOS and infertility scheduled for their first IVF attempt were eligible. In total, 351 women were randomly allocated to receive one cycle of unstimulated IVM (n = 175) or one cycle of standard IVF with a flexible GnRH antagonist protocol and hCG as ovulatory trigger (n = 176). A freeze-all and single blastocyst transfer strategy was used in both groups. The primary outcome was ongoing pregnancy (leading to live birth) within 6 months after randomization. A non-inferiority margin of 15% was considered.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The IVM procedure without additional gonadotropin resulted in a lower ongoing pregnancy (leading to live birth) within 6 months after randomization compared to standard IVF treatment (22.3% vs. 50.6%; rate difference -28.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -37.9% to -18.7%). Moderate-severe OHSS did not occur in the IVM group, while in the IVF group, ten women (5.7%) had moderate OHSS and one woman (0.6%) had severe OHSS. There was no statistically significant difference in the occurrence of obstetric and perinatal complications.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The trial was conducted using an IVM protocol without additional stimulation in a single centre, which may limit its generalizability. In addition, a GnRH agonist trigger rather than hCG for IVF stimulation in women with PCOS would be more consistent with current clinical practice.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Although IVM is considered to be a convenient, inexpensive and safe alternative to IVF for women with PCOS, our results indicated that one cycle of IVM without any stimulation was inferior to one cycle of standard IVF in terms of the cumulative live birth rate. The inferiority of IVM without ovarian stimulation could be mainly due to the limitations in the developmental potential of embryos. Further IVM development should be tested and validated in a freeze-only and blastocyst transfer setting. Further RCTs are needed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of other IVM protocols or multiple cycles of IVM compared to IVF.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This study was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2016YFC1000201 and 2018YFC1002104) and the National Science Foundation of China (81730038). B.W.M. is supported by a NHMRC Investigator grant (GNT1176437). All other authors declare no competing interests.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03463772.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

29 January 2018.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT

16 March 2018.

Live births after in vitro maturation of oocytes in women who had suffered adnexal torsion and unilateral oophorectomy following conventional ovarian stimulation

PURPOSE

To report the first successful application of in vitro maturation (IVM) of oocytes resulting in live births in two anovulatory women who had suffered oophorectomy following ovarian torsion after stimulation with gonadotropins.

METHODS

Data abstraction was performed from medical records of two subfertile women with excessive functional ovarian reserve. Both women had previously received gonadotropins for ovulation induction or ovarian stimulation, resulting in ovarian torsion. They were offered IVM of oocytes retrieved from antral follicles after mild ovarian stimulation, insemination of mature oocytes using ICSI, and embryo transfer. Outcome measures were the incidence of complications and live birth after fertility treatment.

RESULTS

Transvaginal retrieval of cumulus-oocyte complexes from a unique ovary was conducted. One patient had a singleton live birth after vitrified-warmed embryo transfer in the second IVM cycle. The other patient had a singleton live birth after transfer of a fresh blastocyst in her first IVM cycle.

CONCLUSIONS

Although approaches have been developed to prevent ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and to increase the safety profile of fertility treatment in predicted high responders, women with an excessive functional ovarian reserve may have a non-negligible risk of ovarian torsion. For these patients, IVM should be considered as a safer alternative approach.