Effectiveness of GnRH antagonist in the management of subfertile couples undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination: a meta-analysis

Agents for ovarian stimulation for intrauterine insemination (IUI) in ovulatory women with infertility

BACKGROUND

Intrauterine insemination (IUI), combined with ovarian stimulation (OS), has been demonstrated to be an effective treatment for infertile couples. Several agents for ovarian stimulation, combined with IUI, have been proposed, but it is still not clear which agents for stimulation are the most effective. This is an update of the review, first published in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of agents for ovarian stimulation for intrauterine insemination in infertile ovulatory women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and two trial registers from their inception to November 2020. We performed reference checking and contacted study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included truly randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different agents for ovarian stimulation combined with IUI for infertile ovulatory women concerning couples with unexplained infertility. mild male factor infertility and minimal to mild endometriosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, we have included a total of 82 studies, involving 12,614 women. Due to the multitude of comparisons between different agents for ovarian stimulation, we highlight the seven most often reported here. Gonadotropins versus anti-oestrogens (13 studies) For live birth, the results of five studies were pooled and showed a probable improvement in the cumulative live birth rate for gonadotropins compared to anti-oestrogens (odds ratio (OR) 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 1.79; I² = 30%; 5 studies, 1924 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth following anti-oestrogens is assumed to be 22.8%, the chance following gonadotropins would be between 23.7% and 34.6%. The pooled effect of seven studies revealed that we are uncertain whether gonadotropins lead to a higher multiple pregnancy rate compared with anti-oestrogens (OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.60 to 4.17; I² = 58%; 7 studies, 2139 participants; low-certainty evidence). Aromatase inhibitors versus anti-oestrogens (8 studies) One study reported live birth rates for this comparison. We are uncertain whether aromatase inhibitors improve live birth rate compared with anti-oestrogens (OR 0.75, CI 95% 0.51 to 1.11; 1 study, 599 participants; low-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth following anti-oestrogens is 23.4%, the chance following aromatase inhibitors would be between 13.5% and 25.3%. The results of pooling four studies revealed that we are uncertain whether aromatase inhibitors compared with anti-oestrogens lead to a higher multiple pregnancy rate (OR 1.28, CI 95% 0.61 to 2.68; I² = 0%; 4 studies, 1000 participants; low-certainty evidence).  Gonadotropins with GnRH (gonadotropin-releasing hormone) agonist versus gonadotropins alone (4 studies) No data were available for live birth. The pooled effect of two studies  revealed that we are uncertain whether gonadotropins with GnRH agonist lead to a higher multiple pregnancy rate compared to gonadotropins alone (OR 2.53, 95% CI 0.82 to 7.86; I² = 0; 2 studies, 264 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  Gonadotropins with GnRH antagonist versus gonadotropins alone (14 studies) Three studies reported live birth rate per couple, and we are uncertain whether gonadotropins with GnRH antagonist improve live birth rate compared to gonadotropins (OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.52 to 4.39; I² = 81%; 3 studies, 419 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of a live birth following gonadotropins alone is 25.7%, the chance following gonadotropins combined with GnRH antagonist would be between 15.2% and 60.3%. We are also uncertain whether gonadotropins combined with GnRH antagonist lead to a higher multiple pregnancy rate compared with gonadotropins alone (OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.74 to 2.28; I² = 0%; 10 studies, 2095 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Gonadotropins with anti-oestrogens versus gonadotropins alone (2 studies) Neither of the studies reported data for live birth rate. We are uncertain whether gonadotropins combined with anti-oestrogens lead to a higher multiple pregnancy rate compared with gonadotropins alone, based on one study (OR 3.03, 95% CI 0.12 to 75.1; 1 study, 230 participants; low-certainty evidence). Aromatase inhibitors versus gonadotropins (6 studies) Two studies  revealed that aromatase inhibitors may decrease live birth rate compared with gonadotropins (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.71; I²=0%; 2 studies, 651 participants; low-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of a live birth following gonadotropins alone is 31.9%,  the chance of live birth following aromatase inhibitors would be between 13.7% and 25%. We are uncertain whether aromatase inhibitors compared with gonadotropins lead to a higher multiple pregnancy rate (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.06 to 8.17; I²=77%; 3 studies, 731 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  Aromatase inhibitors with gonadotropins versus anti-oestrogens with gonadotropins (8 studies) We are uncertain whether aromatase inhibitors combined with gonadotropins improve live birth rate compared with anti-oestrogens plus gonadotropins (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.3 8 to 2.54;  I² = 69%; 3 studies, 708 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of a live birth following anti-oestrogens plus gonadotropins is 13.8%, the chance following aromatase inhibitors plus gonadotropins would be between 5.7% and 28.9%. We are uncertain of the effect of aromatase inhibitors combined with gonadotropins compared to anti-oestrogens combined with gonadotropins on multiple pregnancy rate (OR 1.31, 95% CI 0.39 to 4.37;  I² = 0%; 5 studies, 901 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available results, gonadotropins probably improve cumulative live birth rate compared with anti-oestrogens (moderate-certainty evidence). Gonadotropins may also improve cumulative live birth rate when compared with aromatase inhibitors (low-certainty evidence). From the available data, there is no convincing evidence that aromatase inhibitors lead to higher live birth rates compared to anti-oestrogens. None of the agents compared lead to significantly higher multiple pregnancy rates. Based on low-certainty evidence, there does not seem to be a role for different combined therapies, nor for adding GnRH agonists or GnRH antagonists in IUI programs.

A Multicenter Phase IV Study to Investigate the Immunogenicity of Recombinant Human Follicle-Stimulating Hormone and Its Impact on Clinical Outcomes in Females Undergoing Controlled Ovarian Stimulation

CONTEXT

Therapeutic proteins can cause immune responses, which may have clinical implications.

AIMS

The aim of the study was to assess the immunogenicity of recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (r-hFSH), when used for controlled ovarian stimulation (COS).

SETTINGS AND DESIGN

Prospective, multicenter study conducted at reproductive medicine clinics in India and Vietnam.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 285 women, aged 20-40 years, undergoing 354 COS cycles for either intrauterine insemination (IUI) or in vitro fertilization (IVF) were studied. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of development of anti-drug antibodies (ADA) and their neutralization potential. Other outcome measures were follicle development, dose and duration of r-hFSH, positive serum pregnancy test, clinical pregnancy, cycle cancellation, and adverse events (AEs).

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED

A sample size of 250 was planned. Descriptive statistics are presented.

RESULTS

Four patients tested positive for ADA after r-hFSH administration at different time points; all of them tested negative, subsequently. None were found to have neutralization potential. The mean dose and duration of r-hFSH were 816 IU and 8.1 days in IUI and 2183 IU and 9.5 days in IVF, respectively. The serum and clinical pregnancy rates were 12.4% and 11.6% in IUI and 32.7% and 29.9% in IVF cycles, respectively. Seven AEs were reported, including two cases of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome; two AEs were judged to be serious.

CONCLUSIONS

The tested r-hFSH has very low immunogenic potential and did not lead to the development of neutralizing antibodies. The overall efficacy and safety of the drug were in-line with existing literature data, and no specific clinical impact of immunogenicity could be identified.

[Impact of luteal phase support by human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) in intrauterine inseminations]

OBJECTIVES

The objective of our study is to evaluate the impact of luteal phase support by hCG in intrauterine inseminations preceded by ovarian gonadotropin stimulation.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted at the CHU of Nice between March 1, 2016 and October 31, 2017. During this period, 300 intrauterine inseminations were included in data analysis. Ovarian stimulation was performed by gonadotropins and a GnRH antagonist was added, if needed. Following a modification of standard operative procedure in the department, patients who performed an intrauterine insemination from December 1, 2016 received luteal phase support with two injections of hCG 1500 IU, performed at three days of interval. Pregnancy and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome were the primary and secondary study endpoints, respectively.

RESULTS

Out of 300 inseminations included in the analysis, 144 were performed with luteal phase support and 156 without support. No statistically significant difference in pregnancy rate was observed between these two groups (19.4% of pregnancy in the luteal phase support group and 15.38% in the group without luteal phase support, P=0.353). No ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome occurred over the course of the study.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows a slight improvement of pregnancy rate in the group subjected to luteal phase support by hCG after intrauterine insemination, but the benefit was not significant. A randomised prospective study based on a large cohort could help to assess the effect of luteal phase support during intrauterine inseminations.

Comparison of recombinant and urinary follicle-stimulating hormones over 2000 gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles: a retrospective study

The objective of this paper was to compare the effect of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) and urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (uFSH) on pregnancy rates and live birth rates with the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol in China. This retrospective study was conducted from January 2014 through August 2017. Patients treated with uFSH had significantly higher levels of luteinizing hormone (3.79 mIU/ml vs. 3.09 mIU/ml) and progesterone (0.93 ng/ml vs. 1.16 ng/ml) on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) administration, and they also had higher pregnancy rates (24.19% vs. 22.86%). There was no significant difference in the rate of live births. In the logistic regression results of the rFSH group, the pregnancy rate was positively correlated with the level of luteinizing hormone, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.09 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.00-1.18; P = 0.048). In the uFSH group, the pregnancy rate was negatively correlated with the progesterone level on the day of HCG administration, with an OR of 0.47 (95% CI: 0.27-0.77; P = 0.004). Our research concluded that uFSH performed better than rFSH in terms of pregnancy rates when it was associated with the GnRH antagonist protocol. Meanwhile, no significant differences in the rate of live births were observed between the two groups.

Comparison of Two Regimens of Gonadotropin-releasing Hormone Antagonists in Clomiphene-gonadotropin Induced Controlled Ovulation and Intrauterine Insemination Cycles: Randomized Controlled Study

Context:

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists in fixed or flexible regimens are used for prevention of premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surge, however, data comparing these regimens in stimulated intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles are lacking.

Aims:

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of GnRH antagonists in fixed and flexible regimens on the rate of premature luteinization (PL) and ovulation rate in sequential clomiphene-gonadotropin controlled ovulation–IUI cycles.

Settings and Design:

This study was conducted at tertiary care center; this was randomized controlled study.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 45 infertile women randomized into three groups of 15 each received clomiphene citrate + human menopausal gonadotrophin. GnRH antagonist was added according to fixed (n = 15) and flexible (n = 15) protocol. No antagonist in control group (n = 15). PL was defined as LH level ≥10 mIU/ml and progesterone level ≥1.0 ng/ml.

Statistical Analysis:

Mean values compared using the Student's t-test or one-way analysis of variance. Categorical variables distribution tested using either Pearson's Chi-square or Fisher's exact test as appropriate.

Results:

Of a total of 45 women, 58% (n = 26) presented with primary and 42% (n = 19) secondary infertility with mean age of 30.8 ± 3.43 years and BMI 26.57 ± 3.22 kg/m². Fixed regimen (3.7%) showed most reduction in PL compared to flexible (15.38%, P = 0.33) or control (36.67%, P = 0.004). On human chorionic gonadotropin day, mean LH (P = 0.002) and progesterone (P = 0.079) levels in fixed, flexible, and control groups were as follows: 5.04 ± 5.47 mIU/ml, 3.95 ± 4.16 mIU/ml, 9.57 ± 7.91 mIU/ml, and 0.409 ± 0.320 ng/ml, 0.579 ± 0.727 ng/ml, and 1.033 ± 1.022 ng/ml, respectively. Ovulation (P = 0.813) and pregnancy rates (P = 0.99) were 88.9%, 84.6%, and 90% and 22.2%, 19.23%, and 10% in fixed, flexible, and control groups, respectively.

Conclusions:

Addition of antagonist in any regimen appears to lower PL rates and improve pregnancy rates in controlled ovarian stimulation and IUI cycles.

The curious case of premature luteinization

PURPOSE

Premature luteinization (PL) affects 12.3-46.7% of fresh in vitro fertilization cycles, and there is accumulating evidence confirming its negative effect on success rates. However, despite its clinical significance, PL is poorly understood and defined. This narrative review aims to provide a fresh look at the phenomenon of PL by summarizing the existing evidence and re-evaluating fundamental issues.

METHODS

A thorough electronic search was conducted covering the period from 1978 until January 2018 in PubMed, Embase, and Medline databases, and references of relevant studies were cross-checked. Meeting proceedings of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine were also hand searched.

RESULTS

In the curious case of PL, one should go back to the beginning and re-consider every step of the way. The pathogenesis, definition, measurement methods, clinical implications, and management strategies are discussed in detail, highlighting controversies and offering "food for thought" for future directions.

CONCLUSIONS

Authors need to speak the same language when studying PL in order to facilitate comparisons. The terminology, progesterone cut-off, measurement methods and days of measurement should be standardized and globally accepted; otherwise, there can be no scientific dialog. Future research should focus on specific patient profiles that may require a tailored approach. Progesterone measurements throughout the follicular phase possibly depict the progesterone exposure better than an isolated measurement on the day of hCG. Adequately powered randomized controlled trials should confirm which the best prevention and management plan of PL is, before introducing any strategy into clinical practice.

Pituitary block with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist during intrauterine insemination cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated the usefulness of pituitary block with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists during intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles, with conflicting results.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs was to evaluate the effectiveness of GnRH antagonist administration as an intervention to improve the success of IUI cycles.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Sciencedirect) and clinical registers were searched from their inception until October 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of infertile women undergoing one or more IUI stimulated cycles with GnRH antagonists compared with a control group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The primary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy/live birth rate (OPR/LBR) and clinical pregnancy rate (CPR). Pooled results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) or mean differences with 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Sources of heterogeneity were investigated through sensitivity and subgroups analysis. The body of evidence was rated using GRADE methodology. Publication bias was assessed with funnel plot, Begg's and Egger's tests.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen RCTs were included (3253 IUI cycles, 2345 participants). No differences in OPR/LBR (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.82-1.57, P = 0.44) and CPR (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.97-1.69, P = 0.08) were found. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses did not provide statistical changes in pooled results. The body of evidence was rated as low (GRADE 2/4). No publication bias was detected.

CONCLUSION

Pituitary block with GnRH antagonists does not improve OPR/LBR and CPR in women undergoing IUI cycles.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Pituitary block with GnRH antagonists does not improve the success of IUI cycles.

Risk of pelvic inflammatory disease after intrauterine insemination: a systematic review

The aim of this study was to ascertain the incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) after intrauterine insemination (IUI). A systematic review was conducted using three different approaches: a search of IUI registries; a search of published meta-analyses; and a search of prospective randomized trials. Search terms were 'IUI', 'complications', 'infection' and 'PID'. Two IUI registers were identified that met the inclusion criteria, totalling 365,874 cycles, with 57 PID cases being reported. The post-IUI PID rate was 0.16/1000 (95% CI 0.2 to 0.3/1000). The frequency was higher in husband sperm cycles (0.21/1000) (28/135,839) than in donor sperm cycles (0.03/1000) (1/33,712) (P < 0.05; OR 6.95). Nineteen meta-analyses were retrieved, which included 156 trials, totalling 43,048 cycles, with no PID case being reported. Seventeen prospective clinical trials published between 2013 and 2014 were identified, totalling 4968 cycles; no PID case was reported. The reported rate of post-IUI clinical PID is low (0.16/1000), about 40% higher than reported in the general population of women during their reproductive life. No antibiotic prophylaxis should be recommended unless there is an associated risk factor.

Evaluation of Role of GnRH Antagonist in Intrauterine Insemination (IUI) Cycles with Mild Ovarian Hyperstimulation (MOH): A Prospective Randomised Study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the role of GnRH antagonist in prevention of premature LH surge and increasing pregnancy rates in IUI cycle with mild ovarian hyperstimulation (MOH).

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective parallel, randomised controlled study.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Couples diagnosed with unexplained, male factor subfertility and with one or both tubes patent were randomised to receive either a GnRH antagonist (study group) or no intervention (control group). All women were treated with clomiphene citrate (D3-D7) followed by HMG. A GnRH antagonist was added when one or more follicles of 16 mm diameter or more were visualised in the study group. When at least one follicle reached a size of ≥18 mm, ovulation was induced by hCG injection. A single IUI was performed 36 h later. The primary outcome was premature LH surge and pregnancy rate. The secondary outcomes were the amount of gonadotropins used, duration of use of GnRH antagonist and incidence and severity of OHSS.

RESULTS

A total of seventy patients attending the infertility clinic in the outpatient department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, of a tertiary care centre, were recruited in the study which was carried out from August 2011 to March 2013. The study group included 34 women and 36 in the control arm. The incidence of premature LH surge was significantly lower in the antagonist group as compared to the control group 2.9 vs. 13.9 %, with a p value of <0.001. The clinical pregnancy rates were similar in both the groups 8.8 vs. 11.1 %, p value being 1.000. The amount of gonadotropins used in GnRH antagonist group was lower than in control group but not statistically significant. Duration of GnRH antagonist was 1.85 ± 0.61 days in the study group.

CONCLUSION

The delayed administration of GnRH antagonists in MOH with IUI cycles when follicle size is ≥16 mm is beneficial in terms of preventing the occurrence of premature LH surge but with no improvement in pregnancy rates.