Efficacy of Intrauterine infusion of granulocyte colony stimulating factor on patients with history of implantation failure: A randomized control trial

The value of G-CSF in women experienced at least one implantation failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

Despite the developments of in vitro fertilization (IVF) protocols, implantation failure remains a challenging problem, owing to the unbalance between the embryo, endometrium, and immune system interactions. Effective treatments are urgently required to improve successful implantation. Recently, many researchers have focused on granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to regulate immune response and embryo-endometrium cross-talk. However, previous studies have reported inconsistent findings on the efficacy of G-CSF therapy on implantation failure. The objective of this review was to further explore the effects of G-CSF according to administration dosage and timing among women who experienced at least one implantation failure.

Methods

We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials of G-CSF on implantation failure up to July 21, 2023. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and the heterogeneity of the studies with the I2 index was analyzed.

Results

We identified a total of 2031 studies and finally included 10 studies in the systematic review and meta-analysis. G-CSF administration improved the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), implantation rate (IR), biochemical pregnancy rate (BPR), and live birth rate (LBR) in women with at least one implantation failure. Subgroup analyses showed that G-CSF treatment could exert good advantages in improving CPR [OR=2.49, 95%CI (1.56, 3.98), I2 = 0%], IR [OR=2.82, 95%CI (1.29, 6.15)], BPR [OR=3.30, 95%CI (1.42, 7.67)] and LBR [OR=3.16, 95%CI (1.61, 6.22), I2 = 0%] compared with the blank control group. However, compared with placebo controls, G-CSF showed beneficial effects on CPR [OR=1.71, 95%CI (1.04, 2.84), I2 = 38%] and IR [OR=2.01, 95%CI (1.29, 3.15), I2 = 24%], but not on LBR. In addition, >150μg of G-CSF treatment increased CPR [OR=2.22, 95%CI (1.47, 3.35), I2 = 0%], IR [OR=2.67, 95%CI (1.47, 4.82), I2 = 0%] and BPR [OR=2.02, 95%CI (1.17, 3.47), I2 = 22%], while ≤150μg of G-CSF treatment improved miscarriage rate (MR) [OR=0.14, 95%CI (0.05, 0.38), I2 = 0%] and LBR [OR=2.65, 95%CI (1.56, 4.51), I2 = 0%]. Moreover, G-CSF administration on the day of embryo transfer (ET) could increase CPR [OR=2.81, 95%CI (1.37, 5.75), I2 = 0%], but not on the day of ovum pick-up (OPU) or human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) injection.

Conclusion

G-CSF has a beneficial effect on pregnancy outcomes to some extent among women who experienced at least one implantation failure, and the administration dosage and timing influence the effect size.Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42023447046.

The effectiveness of immunomodulatory therapies for patients with repeated implantation failure: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

This meta-analysis analyzed the clinical pregnancy outcomes of repeated implantation failure (RIF) patients treated with immunomodulatory therapies. Publications (published by August 16, 2021) were identified by searching the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The quality of the studies was evaluated with the Cochrane bias risk assessment tool, and a network meta-analysis was performed with Stata 14.0. The outcomes were clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), live birth rate (LBR), and implantation rate (IR). The results of our network meta-analysis of 16 RCTs (including 2,008 participants) show that PBMCs, PRP, and SC-GCSF can significantly improve the CPR compared with LMWH (PBMCs: OR 2.15; 95% CI 1.21-3.83; PRP: OR 2.38; 95% CI 1.08-5.24; SC-GCSF: OR 2.46; 95% CI 1.05-5.72). The LBR of PRP was significantly higher than those of IU-GCSF (OR 3.81; 95% CI 1.22-11.86), LMWH (OR 4.38; 95% CI 1.50-12.90), and intralipid (OR 3.85; 95% CI 1.03-14.29), and the LBR of PBMCs was also significantly better than that of LMWH (OR 2.35; 95% CI 1.14-4.85). Furthermore, PRP treatment significantly improved the IR compared with LMWH treatment (OR 2.81; 95% CI 1.07-7.4). The limited evidence from existing RCTs suggests that PBMCs and PRP are the best therapeutic options for RIF patients. However, owing to the quantity limitation, more top-quality research is required to obtain additional high-level evidence.

The therapeutic effect of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) on potential biochemical pregnancy in patients with unexplained repeated transplantation failure (RIF): a case series and literature review

BACKGROUND

Biochemical pregnancy is a type of embryo transfer failure, patients with unexplained repeated implantation failure (RIF) also have higher biochemical pregnancy rate. Our study intends to evaluate the effect of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with unexplained RIF with low hCG levels in early pregnancy.

METHODS

Unexplained RIF patients with low hCG levels after embryo transfer were allocated. G-CSF were administrated from the ninth days after embryo transfer. Clinical pregnancy, miscarriage and live birth rates were evaluated.

RESULTS

The clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were 52.5% and 30%.

CONCLUSION

G-CSF is an effective treatment for potential biochemical pregnancy in unexplained RIF patients.

What is the impact of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in subcutaneous injection or intrauterine infusion and during both the fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles on recurrent implantation failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis?

BACKGROUND

Among recurrent implantation failure (RIF) patients, the rate of successful implantation remains relatively low due to the complex etiology of the condition, including maternal, embryo and immune factors. Effective treatments are urgently needed to improve the outcomes of embryo transfer for RIF patients. In recent years, many researchers have focused on immunotherapy using granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to regulate the immune environment. However, the study of the G-CSF for RIF patients has reached conflicting conclusions. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to further explore the effects of G-CSF according to embryo transfer cycle (fresh or frozen) and administration route (subcutaneous injection or intrauterine infusion) among RIF patients.

METHOD

The PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched for literature published from the initial to October 2020. The meta-analysis, random-effects model and heterogeneity of the studies with I² index were analyzed. Stata 15 was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 684 studies were obtained through the databases mentioned above. Nine RCTs included 976 RIF patients were enrolled in this meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis indicated that G-CSF improved the clinical pregnancy rate for both the fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles (fresh RR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.27-2.37, I² = 0.0%, n = 410; frozen RR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.14-1.81, I² = 0.0.%, n = 366), and for both subcutaneous injection and intrauterine infusion (subcutaneous RR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.33-2.23, I² = 0.0%, n = 497; intrauterine RR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.09-1.78, I² = 0.0%, n = 479), but the biochemical pregnancy rate of the RIF group was also higher than that of the control group (RR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.28-2.68; I² = 20.1%, n = 469). There were no significant differences in the miscarriage rate (RR: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.25-5.21: I² = 63.2%, n = 472) and live birth rate (RR: 1.43, 95% CI: 0.86-2.36; I² = 52.5%; n = 372) when a random-effects model was employed.

CONCLUSION

The administration of G-CSF via either subcutaneous injection or intrauterine infusion and during both the fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles for RIF patients can improve the clinical pregnancy rate. However, whether G-CSF is effective in improving livebirth rates of RIF patients is still uncertain, continued research on the utilization and effectiveness of G-CSF is recommended before G-CSF can be considered mainstream treatment for RIF patients.

Efficacy of therapies and interventions for repeated embryo implantation failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effect of the different therapeutic options for repeated embryo implantation failure (RIF) on a subsequent IVF cycle outcome. Twenty-two RCTs and nineteen observational studies were included. Pooling of results showed a beneficial effect of intrauterine PBMC infusion on both CPR (RR 2.18; 95% CI 1.58-3.00; p < 0.00001; OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.22-3.36; p = 0.006) and LBR (RR 2.41; 95% CI 1.40-4.16; p = 0.002; OR 3.73; 95% CI 1.13-12.29; p = 0.03), of subcutaneous G-CSF administration on CPR (RR 2.29; 95% CI 1.58-3.31; p < 0.0001) and of intrauterine PRP infusion on CPR (RR 2.45; 95% CI 1.55-3.86; p = 0.0001). Observational studies also demonstrated a positive effect of IVIG and intrauterine hCG infusion on both CPR and LBR and of atosiban on CPR. Studies investigating intrauterine G-CSF infusion, LMWH, intravenous intralipid, hysteroscopy, blastocyst-stage ET, ZIFT, PGT-A and AH failed to observe an impact on IVF outcome. The quality of the evidence that emerged from RCTs focused on intrauterine PBMC infusion and subcutaneous G-CSF administration was moderate. For all other therapies/interventions it varied from low to very low. In conclusion, intrauterine PBMC infusion and subcutaneous G-CSF administration are the most promising therapeutic options for RIF. However, further well conducted RCTs are necessary before their introduction into clinical practice.

Transcriptome analysis of porcine endometrium after LPS-induced inflammation: effects of the PPAR-gamma ligands in vitro†

Female fertility depends greatly on the capacity of the uterus to recognize and eliminate microbial infections, a major reason of inflammation in the endometrium in many species. This study aimed to determine the in vitro effect of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ) ligands on the transcriptome genes expression and alternative splicing in the porcine endometrium in the mid-luteal phase of the estrous cycle during LPS-stimulated inflammation using RNA-seq technology. The endometrial slices were incubated in vitro in the presence of LPS and PPARγ agonists-PGJ2 or pioglitazone and antagonist-T0070907. We identified 222, 3, 4, and 62 differentially expressed genes after LPS, PGJ2, pioglitazone, or T0070907 treatment, respectively. In addition, we detected differentially alternative spliced events: after treatment with LPS-78, PGJ2-60, pioglitazone-52, or T0070907-134. These results should become a basis for further studies explaining the mechanism of PPARγ action in the reproductive system in pigs.

The role of immunotherapy in in vitro fertilization: a guideline

Adjuvant immunotherapy treatments in in vitro fertilization (IVF) aim to improve the outcome of assisted reproductive technology (ART) in both the general ART population as well as subgroups such as patients with recurrent miscarriage or implantation failure. The purpose of this guideline is to evaluate the role of immunomodulating therapy in ART. Unfortunately, many of the evaluated therapies lack robust evidence from well-designed adequately powered randomized controlled trials to support their use. Immunotherapies reviewed in the present document are either not associated with improved live-birth outcome in IVF or have been insufficiently studied to make definitive recommendations.

Granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor administration for subfertile women undergoing assisted reproduction

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor in women undergoing ART.

Therapeutic role of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for infertile women under in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) treatment: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this meta-analysis is to explore the beneficial role of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) on infertile women under artificial reproduction technology treatment.

METHOD

Medline, Embase and ISI Web of Science databases were searched to identify relevant randomized control trials. Studies before July, 2017 were included for primary screening. Meta-analysis of the total and subgroup patients was conducted, and relative risks (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated by a fixed-effect model if no heterogeneity (evaluated as I2 statistic) existed. Otherwise, a random-effects model was adopted. Subgroup analysis was performed by administrating route or clinical indication. Egger test and influence analysis were conducted to evaluate the publication bias and study power, respectively.

RESULTS

The final selection enrolled 10 RCTs, involving 1016 IVF-ET cycles (521 distributed to the G-CSF group and 495 to the control). Compared with control group, G-CSF administration could significantly improve clinical pregnancy rate (CPR, RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.53-2.33), while it had no beneficial effect on embryo implantation rate (IR, RR 1.84, 95% CI 0.84-4.03). The subgroup analysis by administration route showed that both uterine infusion and subcutaneous injection can produce a substantial increase in CPR, with the pooled RRs (95% CI) 1.46 (1.04-2.05) and 2.23 (1.68-2.95), respectively. Nevertheless, most of included RCTs dealt with the RIF subjects, and the pooled analysis of this data showed a higher PR and IR in G-CSF group as compared to that in the control, with the RRs (95% CI) 2.07 (1.64-2.61) and 1.52 (1.08-2.14), respectively. Egger regression test did not demonstrate any significance for the publication bias.

CONCLUSION

G-CSF administration has a beneficial role on the clinical outcome after embryo transfer by both routes of local infusion and systematic administration, especially for the cases with RIF. Further RCTs are needed to investigate the role of G-CSF in thin endometrium patients.