Progesterone-Mediated Inhibition of the GnRH Pulse Generator: Differential Sensitivity as a Function of Sleep Status

Exposure of antral follicles to medroxyprogesterone acetate during stimulation does not cause molecular perturbations in gonadotropin-responsiveness and steroidogenic function of granulosa cells in progestin-primed cycles

STUDY QUESTION

Does medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) exposure in progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) cycles cause molecular perturbations in the steroidogenic function and gonadotropin responsiveness of the granulosa cells?

SUMMARY ANSWER

PPOS cycles are identical to traditional GnRH antagonist cycles not only for clinical IVF characteristics but also for gonadotropin receptor expression, response to gonadotropins, and steroidogenic function at the molecular level.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

PPOS is increasingly used as an alternative to GnRH antagonists due to the inhibitory effect of progesterone on LH release by reducing GnRH pulsatility at the hypothalamic level. Although a growing body of evidence from clinical studies did not indicate significant differences between PPOS and antagonist protocols for IVF cycle characteristics and obstetrical outcomes, it is still unknown whether exposure of the antral follicle cohort to progesterone or its synthetic derivatives during ovarian stimulation causes any subtle molecular aberrations in terms of steroidogenesis and gonadotropin responsiveness. To address this issue, detailed comparative molecular analyses were conducted in the luteinized mural granulosa cells (GCs) obtained from normal responding IVF patients undergoing PPOS and antagonist cycles.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A clinical translational research study was conducted with IVF patients.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

This study included 55 normal responding IVF patients who underwent ovarian stimulation with either PPOS using MPA (5 mg twice daily) or GnRH antagonist cetrorelix acetate. Recombinant forms of FSH and hCG were used for ovarian stimulation and ovulation triggering, respectively. Luteinized mural GCs obtained during the oocyte retrieval procedure were used for the experiments. Cell culture, quantitative real-time PCR, immunoblotting, confocal time-lapse live cell imaging, and hormone assays were used.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Demographic and IVF cycle characteristics of the patients undergoing ovarian stimulation with PPOS and GnRH antagonist were similar, including ovarian response, mature oocyte yield, and fertilization rates. Molecular analyses revealed that the expression of the enzymes involved in sex-steroid synthesis (StAR, SCC, 3β-HSD, 17β-HSD, aromatase) and the uptake/storage/utilization of cholesterol (LDL receptor, Hormone-sensitive lipase, hydroxy-methyl glutaryl Co-enzyme-A reductase, and Sterol O-acyltransferase1) in the GCs of the PPOS cycles were comparable to those of the antagonist cycles. The expression of the receptors for gonadotropins, estrogen, and progesterone hormones was also similar. Basal and hCG-induced increases in 3β-HSD expression and progesterone production and basal and FSH-induced increases in aromatase expression and E2 output of the GCs from PPOS patients did not exhibit any meaningful differences when compared with GCs from antagonist cycles. Furthermore, basal and hCG-induced up-regulation in the LDL receptor expression and cholesterol uptake did not differ between the groups. Confocal imaging also revealed similar patterns of expression for the steroidogenic enzymes and their co-localization with mitochondria. Lastly, the expression of the other important genes regulating cumulus expansion, ovulation, and luteal function [Relaxin, ADAMTS-1, and epidermal growth factor (EGF)-like growth factor amphiregulin] in the GCs of the PPOS and antagonist cycles were similar.

LARGE SCALE DATA

N/A.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Caution should be exercised when interpreting our data which was derived from normally responding patients whose ovulation was triggered with hCG. It is unclear whether the molecular parameters assessed vary according to infertility etiologies, magnitude of ovarian response, mode of trigger, and any other underlying ovarian pathologies or systemic diseases. MPA was the progestin used for PPOS and whether these findings can be generalized to other progestins is unknown.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This study provides reassuring molecular evidence that exposure of antral follicle cohorts to MPA during the follicular growth phase does not have any detrimental effects on steroidogenic, ovulatory, and luteal functions when compared with GnRH antagonist cycles.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This study was funded by the School of Medicine, the Graduate School of Health Sciences of Koc University and Koç University Research Center for Translational Medicine (KUTTAM), and equally funded by the Republic of Turkey Ministry of Development Research Infrastructure Support Program. All authors declare no conflict of interest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Estradiol-dependent hypocretinergic/orexinergic behaviors throughout the estrous cycle

RATIONALE

The female menstrual or estrous cycle and its associated fluctuations in circulating estradiol (E2), progesterone, and other gonadal hormones alter orexin or hypocretin peptide production and receptor activity. Depending on the estrous cycle phase, the transcription of prepro-orexin mRNA, post-translational modification of orexin peptide, and abundance of orexin receptors change in a brain region-specific manner. The most dramatic changes occur in the hypothalamus, which is considered the starting point of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis as well as the hub of orexin-producing neurons. Thus, hypothalamus-regulated behaviors, including arousal, feeding, reward processing, and the stress response depend on coordinated efforts between E2, progesterone, and the orexin system. Given the rise of orexin therapeutics for various neuropsychiatric conditions including insomnia and affective disorders, it is important to delineate the behavioral outcomes of this drug class in both sexes, as well as within different time points of the female reproductive cycle.

OBJECTIVES

Summarize how the menstrual or estrous cycle affects orexin system functionality in animal models in order to predict how orexin pharmacotherapies exert varying degrees of behavioral effects across the dynamic hormonal milieu.

The role of gonadotropin-releasing hormone neurons in polycystic ovary syndrome

Given the critical central role of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) neurons in fertility, it is not surprising that the GnRH neural network is implicated in the pathology of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), the most common cause of anovulatory infertility. Although many symptoms of PCOS relate most proximately to ovarian dysfunction, the central reproductive neuroendocrine system ultimately drives ovarian function through its regulation of anterior pituitary gonadotropin release. The typical cyclical changes in frequency of GnRH release are often absent in women with PCOS, resulting in a persistent high-frequency drive promoting gonadotropin changes (i.e., relatively high luteinizing hormone and relatively low follicle-stimulating hormone concentrations) that contribute to ovarian hyperandrogenemia and ovulatory dysfunction. However, the specific mechanisms underpinning GnRH neuron dysfunction in PCOS remain unclear. Here, we summarize several preclinical and clinical studies that explore the causes of aberrant GnRH secretion in PCOS and the role of disordered GnRH secretion in PCOS pathophysiology.

Acute progesterone feedback on gonadotropin secretion is not demonstrably altered in estradiol-pretreated women with polycystic ovary syndrome

Women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) demonstrate gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) pulse generator resistance to suppression with 7 days of progesterone and estradiol administration. It remains unknown whether such women demonstrate impairments in acute progesterone negative feedback on LH pulse frequency or progesterone positive feedback on gonadotropin release. This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study designed to test the hypothesis that acute, progesterone-related suppression of LH pulse frequency and progesterone-related augmentation of gonadotropin release are impaired in PCOS. Twelve normally cycling women and 12 women with PCOS completed study. Volunteers were pretreated with transdermal estradiol (0.2 mg/day) for 3 days and then underwent a frequent blood sampling study (20:00-20:00 h), during which they received micronized progesterone (100 mg) or placebo at 06:00 h. In a second study admission, volunteers received the intervention they did not receive during the first admission, but the protocol was otherwise identical. The primary outcome measures were LH secretory characteristics and circulating gonadotropin concentrations. Exogenous progesterone did not reduce LH pulse frequency in either group. Mean LH, pulsatile LH secretion, LH pulse mass, and mean FSH increased more with progesterone compared to placebo in both groups. Although trends toward less pronounced changes in LH pulse mass and pulsatile LH secretion were observed in the PCOS group, these differences were not statistically significant. In summary, exogenous progesterone did not suppress LH pulse frequency within 12 hours in estradiol-pretreated women, and the positive feedback effect of progesterone on gonadotropin release was not demonstrably impaired in PCOS. NEW & NOTEWORTHY: This study indicated that exogenous progesterone does not reduce LH pulse frequency within 12 h in women with PCOS, but progesterone acutely increased gonadotropin in these women. This study suggested that progesterone-related augmentation of gonadotropin release may be impaired in PCOS compared to normally cycling women, but this finding was not statistically significant.

Adolescent Development of Biological Rhythms in Female Rats: Estradiol Dependence and Effects of Combined Contraceptives

Adolescence is a period of continuous development, including the maturation of endogenous rhythms across systems and timescales. Although, these dynamic changes are well-recognized, their continuous structure and hormonal dependence have not been systematically characterized. Given the well-established link between core body temperature (CBT) and reproductive hormones in adults, we hypothesized that high-resolution CBT can be applied to passively monitor pubertal development and disruption with high fidelity. To examine this possibility, we used signal processing to investigate the trajectory of CBT rhythms at the within-day (ultradian), daily (circadian), and ovulatory timescales, their dependence on estradiol (E2), and the effects of hormonal contraceptives. Puberty onset was marked by a rise in fecal estradiol (fE2), followed by an elevation in CBT and circadian power. This time period marked the commencement of 4-day rhythmicity in fE2, CBT, and ultradian power marking the onset of the estrous cycle. The rise in circadian amplitude was accelerated by E2 treatment, indicating a role for this hormone in rhythmic development. Contraceptive administration in later adolescence reduced CBT and circadian power and resulted in disruption to 4-day cycles that persisted after discontinuation. Our data reveal with precise temporal resolution how biological rhythms change across adolescence and demonstrate a role for E2 in the emergence and preservation of multiscale rhythmicity. These findings also demonstrate how hormones delivered exogenously in a non-rhythmic pattern can disrupt rhythmic development. These data lay the groundwork for a future in which temperature metrics provide an inexpensive, convenient method for monitoring pubertal maturation and support the development of hormone therapies that better mimic and support human chronobiology.

Sleep and Puberty

In the 1970's, Boyar and colleagues made the seminal observation that during the early stages of puberty, there is a sleep-specific augmentation of pulsatile luteinizing hormone (LH) secretion. Building on this tantalizing association between sleep and the re-awakening of the neuro-reproductive axis, a number of investigators have since mapped the dynamic relationship between sleep and reproductive hormones across the pubertal transition. In this review, we focus on the complex, reciprocal relationship between sleep and reproductive hormones during adolescence as well as the potential effects of melatonin and orexin on gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) activity in children with chronic insomnia and narcolepsy, respectively. Given the important interaction between the reproductive and somatotropic axes during puberty, we end with a discussion of sleep and growth hormone (GH) secretion in children.

Pathological pulses in PCOS

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a highly prevalent endocrine disorder associated with hyperandrogenism and anovulation. Although a spectrum disorder, many women with PCOS exhibit elevated luteinizing hormone (LH) pulse frequency and an elevated LH to follicle stimulating hormone ratio. This aberrant pattern of gonadotrophin signalling drives many of the downstream ovarian features of PCOS, including increased androgen synthesis, and indicates neuroendocrine impairments upstream. Decreased responsiveness to gonadal steroid hormone negative feedback in PCOS patients points toward dysfunction within the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) neuronal network in the brain. Excessive androgen exposure during development or over pubertal onset can recapitulate the neuroendocrine pathology of PCOS in pre-clinical models, and these models have been fundamental in beginning to pick apart the specific central mechanisms involved. This mini-review will briefly describe the pathology of PCOS associated with high frequency GnRH/LH pulses and then highlight what is currently known, and yet to be discovered, about the central mechanisms involved.

The Relationship Between Progesterone, Sleep, and LH and FSH Secretory Dynamics in Early Postmenarchal Girls

CONTEXT

During puberty, LH pulse frequency increases during sleep; in women, LH pulse frequency slows during sleep in the early/middle follicular phase (FP) of the menstrual cycle. The origin and significance of this developmental transition are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relationship between progesterone (P4) exposure, sleep-related slowing of LH pulses in the FP, and the intercycle FSH rise, which promotes folliculogenesis, in early postmenarchal girls.

METHODS

23 girls (gynecologic age 0.4 to 3.5 years) underwent hormone measurements and pelvic ultrasounds during two consecutive cycles and one frequent blood sampling study with concurrent polysomnography during the FP.

RESULTS

Subjects demonstrated one of four patterns during cycle 1 that represent a continuum of P4 exposure: ovulatory cycles with normal or short luteal phase lengths or anovulatory cycles ± follicle luteinization. Peak serum P4 and urine pregnanediol (Pd) in cycle 1 were inversely correlated with LH pulse frequency during sleep in the FP of cycle 2 (r = -0.5; P = 0.02 for both). The intercycle FSH rise and folliculogenesis in cycle 2 were maintained after anovulatory cycles without P4 or Pd exposure or nocturnal slowing of LH pulse frequency in the FP.

CONCLUSIONS

During late puberty, rising P4 levels from follicle luteinization and ovulation may promote a slower LH pulse frequency during sleep in the FP. However, a normal FSH rise and follicle growth can occur in the absence of P4-associated slowing. These studies therefore suggest that an immature LH secretory pattern during sleep is unlikely to contribute to menstrual irregularity in the early postmenarchal years.

Estimating testosterone concentrations in adolescent girls: Comparison of two direct immunoassays to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry

CONTEXT

The appropriate role of direct total testosterone (T) immunoassays in reproductive research is controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the concordance between two direct immunoassays and a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) assay for total T in adolescent girls with measured concentrations < 50 ng/dl.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis.

SETTING

Academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

Adolescent girls (age 8.4-18.1 years) participating in clinical research protocols.

INTERVENTION

Paired blood samples were obtained for total T by LC-MS/MS (n = 66; Mayo Clinic Laboratory) and by direct immunoassay (Center for Research in Reproduction)-either radioimmunoassay (RIA; n = 31) or chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA; n = 35). At the time of assay, laboratories were unaware that results would be compared.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Measurement agreement between immunoassay and LC-MS/MS.

RESULTS

Measured T concentrations (LC-MS/MS) were <7 to 44 ng/dl. The average difference between RIA and LC-MS/MS was 0.84 [-0.89, 2.56] ng/dl (mean [95% confidence interval]). RIA correlated very strongly with LC-MS/MS (r = 0.899; p < 0.0001); and both Deming regression and Bland-Altman analysis suggested no bias. The average difference between chemiluminescence and LC-MS/MS was 1.39 [-0.83, 3.60] ng/dl. CLIA correlated strongly with LC-MS/MS (r = 0.806; p < 0.0001). While Bland-Altman analysis suggested no systematic bias, Deming regression analysis suggested that, as measured values increased, values obtained by CLIA tended to be progressively, albeit only modestly, higher than those obtained by LC-MS/MS.

CONCLUSIONS

These data support the use of rigorously-performed and carefully-validated direct T immunoassays in high-quality endocrine research in peripubertal adolescent girls.

Progesterone administration does not acutely alter LH pulse secretion in the mid-follicular phase in women

It remains unclear how rapidly progesterone suppresses luteinizing hormone (LH) pulse frequency in women. Previous studies suggested that progesterone markedly increases LH pulse amplitude but does not slow LH pulse frequency within 10 h in estradiol‐pretreated women studied during the late follicular phase. However, this experimental paradigm may be a model of preovulatory physiology, and progesterone may have different effects at other times of the cycle. We studied regularly cycling, nonobese women without hyperandrogenism to assess the acute effect of progesterone during the midfollicular phase and in the absence of estradiol pretreatment. The study involved two admissions in separate cycles (cycle days 5–9). For each admission, either oral micronized progesterone (100 mg) or placebo was administered at 0900 h in a randomized, double‐blind fashion. Frequent blood sampling was performed between 0900 and 1900 h to define 10‐h LH pulsatility. Treatment crossover (placebo exchanged for progesterone and vice versa) occurred in a subsequent cycle. After an interim futility analysis, the study was halted after 7 women completed study. Mean progesterone concentrations after placebo and progesterone administration were 0.5 ± 0.1 (mean ± SD) and 6.7 ± 1.6 ng/mL, respectively. Compared to placebo, progesterone was not associated with a significant difference in 10‐h LH pulse frequency (0.79 ± 0.35 vs. 0.77 ± 0.28 pulses/h, P = 1.0) or amplitude (3.6 ± 2.8 vs. 4.3 ± 2.8 IU/L, P = 0.30). This study suggests that LH pulse frequency is not rapidly influenced by progesterone administration during the midfollicular phase.