Which luteal phase support is better for each IVF stimulation protocol to achieve the highest pregnancy rate? A superiority randomized clinical trial

Comparison of luteal support protocols in fresh IVF/ICSI cycles: a network meta-analysis

Despite the proven superiority of various luteal phase support protocols (LPS) over placebo in view of improved pregnancy rates in fresh cycles of IVF (in vitro fertilization) and ICSI (intracytoplasmic sperm injection) cycles, there is ongoing controversy over specific LPS protocol selection, dosage, and duration. The aim of the present study was to identify the optimal LPS under six core aspects of ART success, clinical pregnancy, live birth as primary outcomes and biochemical pregnancy, miscarriage, multiple pregnancy, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) events as secondary outcomes. Twelve databases, namely Embase (OVID), MEDLINE (R) (OVID), GlobalHealth (Archive), GlobalHealth, Health and Psychosocial Instruments, Maternity & Infant Care Database (MIDIRS), APA PsycTests, ClinicalTrials.gov, HMIC Health Management Information Consortium, CENTRAL, Web of Science, Scopus and two prospective registers, MedRxiv, Research Square were searched from inception to Aug.1st, 2023, (PROSPERO Registration: CRD42022358986). Only Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) were included. Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) model was employed for outcome analysis, presenting fixed effects, odds ratios (ORs) with 95% credibility intervals (CrIs). Vaginal Progesterone (VP) was considered the reference LPS given its' clinical relevance. Seventy-six RCTs, comparing 22 interventions, and including 26,536 participants were included in the present NMA. Overall CiNeMa risk of bias was deemed moderate, and network inconsistency per outcome was deemed low (Multiple pregnancy χ2: 0.11, OHSS χ2: 0.26), moderate (Clinical Pregnancy: χ2: 7.02, Live birth χ2: 10.95, Biochemical pregnancy: χ2: 6.60, Miscarriage: χ2: 11.305). Combinatorial regimens, with subcutaneous GnRH-a (SCGnRH-a) on a vaginal progesterone base and oral oestrogen (OE) appeared to overall improve clinical pregnancy events; VP + OE + SCGnRH-a [OR 1.57 (95% CrI 1.11 to 2.22)], VP + SCGnRH-a [OR 1.28 (95% CrI 1.05 to 1.55)] as well as live pregnancy events, VP + OE + SCGnRH-a [OR 8.81 (95% CrI 2.35 to 39.1)], VP + SCGnRH-a [OR 1.76 (95% CrI 1.45 to 2.15)]. Equally, the progesterone free LPS, intramuscular human chorionic gonadotrophin, [OR 9.67 (95% CrI 2.34, 73.2)] was also found to increase live birth events, however was also associated with an increased probability of ovarian hyperstimulation, [OR 1.64 (95% CrI 0.75, 3.71)]. The combination of intramuscular and vaginal progesterone was associated with higher multiple pregnancy events, [OR 7.09 (95% CrI 2.49, 31.)]. Of all LPS protocols, VP + SC GnRH-a was found to significantly reduce miscarriage events, OR 0.54 (95% CrI 0.37 to 0.80). Subgroup analysis according to ovarian stimulation (OS) protocol revealed that the optimal LPS across both long and short OS, taking into account increase in live birth and reduction in miscarriage as well as OHSS events, was VP + SCGnRH-a, with an OR 2.89 [95% CrI 1.08, 2.96] and OR 2.84 [95% CrI 1.35, 6.26] respectively. Overall, NMA data suggest that combinatorial treatments, with the addition of SCGnRH-a on a VP base result in improved clinical pregnancy and live birth events in both GnRH-agonist and antagonist ovarian stimulation protocols.

Endometriosis-related infertility: severe pain symptoms do not impact assisted reproductive technology outcomes

STUDY QUESTION

Do severe endometriosis-related painful symptoms impact ART live birth rates?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Severe pain symptoms are not associated with reduced ART live birth rates in endometriosis patients.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

ART is currently recognized as one of the main therapeutic options to manage endometriosis-related infertility. Presently, no data exist in the literature regarding the association between the core symptom of the disease, e.g. pain and ART reproductive outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Observational cohort study of 354 endometriosis patients, who underwent ART at a tertiary care university hospital, between October 2014 and October 2021. Diagnosis of endometriosis was based on published imaging criteria using transvaginal sonography and magnetic resonance imaging, and histologically confirmed in women who had a previous history of endometriosis surgery (n = 127, 35.9%).

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

The intensity of painful symptoms related to dysmenorrhea (DM), dyspareunia (DP), noncyclic chronic pelvic pain, gastrointestinal (GI) pain, or lower urinary tract pain was evaluated using a 10-point visual analog scale (VAS), before ART. Severe pain was defined as having a VAS of 7 or higher for at least one symptom. The main outcome measure was the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) per patient. We analyzed the impact of endometriosis-related painful symptoms on ART live births using univariable and multivariate analysis.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Three hundred and fifty-four endometriosis patients underwent 711 ART cycles. The mean age of the population was 33.8 ± 3.7 years, and the mean duration of infertility was 3.6 ± 2.1 years. The distribution of the endometriosis phenotypes was 3.1% superficial endometriosis, 8.2% ovarian endometrioma, and 88.7% deep infiltrating endometriosis. The mean VAS scores for DM, DP, and GI pain symptoms were 6.6 ± 2.7, 3.4 ± 3.1, and 3.1 ± 3.6, respectively. Two hundred and forty-two patients (68.4%) had severe pain symptoms. The CLBR per patient was 63.8% (226/354). Neither the mean VAS scores for the various painful symptoms nor the proportion of patients displaying severe pain differed significantly between patients who had a live birth and those who had not, based on univariate and multivariate analyses (P = 0.229). The only significant factors associated with negative ART live births were age >35 years (P < 0.001) and anti-Müllerian hormone levels <1.2 ng/ml (P < 0.001).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The diagnosis of endometriosis was based on imaging rather than surgery. This limitation is, however, inherent to the design of most studies on endometriosis patients reverting to ART first.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Rather than considering a single argument such as pain, the decision-making process for choosing between ART and surgery in infertile endometriosis patients should be based on a multitude of aspects, including the patient's choice, the associated infertility factors, the endometriosis phenotypes, and the efficiency of medical therapies in regard to pain symptoms, through an individualized approach guided by a multidisciplinary team of experts.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No funding; no conflict of interest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Live birth rate of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist versus luteal phase gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist protocol in IVF/ICSI: a systematic review and meta-analysis

In vitro fertilization (IVF) and embryo transfer and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) have allowed millions of infertile couples to achieve pregnancy. As an essential part of IVF/ICSI enabling the retrieval of a high number of oocytes in one cycle, controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) treatment mainly composes of the standard long gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) protocol and the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol. However, the effectiveness of GnRH-ant protocol is still debated because of inconsistent conclusions and insufficient subgroup analyses. This systematic review and meta-analysis included a total of 52 studies, encompassing 5193 participants in the GnRH-ant group and 4757 in the GnRH-a group. The findings of this study revealed that the GnRH-ant protocol is comparable with the long GnRH-a protocol when considering live birth as the primary outcome, and it is a favourable protocol with evidence reducing the incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in women undergoing IVF/ICSI, especially in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Further research is needed to compare the subsequent cumulative live birth rate between the two protocols among the general and poor ovarian response patients since those patients have a lower clinical pregnancy rate, fewer oocytes retrieved or fewer high-grade embryos in the GnRH-ant protocol.

Effects of different progesterone levels on reproductive outcomes in assisted reproductive technologies: from molecular basis to treatment strategies

PURPOSE

The aim of this narrative review is to offer an overview about the role of progesterone levels on pregnancy outcome in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs).

METHODS

A detailed computerized search of the literature was performed in the main electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science) to determine the importance of elevated progesterone levels at different stages of the cycle for pregnancy rates in the in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle. Our review also provides information on the differences between elevated progesterone levels and their interpretation in normal and in poorly responding women.

RESULTS

After careful evaluation, our search strategy yielded a total of 15 included articles, showing the possible factors that may have had an impact on the increased progesterone level before human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) injection and the different thresholds above which the pregnancy rate was lower. Furthermore, increased progesterone on cycle day 2 or 3 could serve as a marker for increased progesterone in the late follicular phase, which is associated with a lower pregnancy rate.

CONCLUSION

Despite the literature data that support the negative effect of elevated progesterone on fresh cycles, due to lack of randomized controlled trials, the value of measuring progesterone in daily practice is questionable. Available evidence supports the detrimental effect of elevated progesterone in different subgroups of women, although there is still the need for defining different thresholds and durations of high progesterone exposure. The need for various thresholds for different cohorts of women, the inter-assay variability is making this decision harder.

Single-Dose Versus Multiple-Dose GnRH Agonist for Luteal-Phase Support in Women Undergoing IVF/ICSI Cycles: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Although gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist has been introduced as a beneficial luteal phase support (LPS), the optimal strategy of GnRH agonist remains unclear. This network meta-analysis was therefore performed to determine the comparative efficacy and safety of multiple-dose versus single-dose GnRH agonist protocol for LPS in patients undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles.

METHODS

We searched relevant studies in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from their inception util to September 2021. Live birth, clinical pregnancy rate, multiple pregnancy rate, and clinical abortion rate was evaluated. Pairwise and network meta-analysis were conducted using RevMan and ADDIS based on random-effects model, respectively. Moreover, the prioritization of protocols based on ranking probabilities for different outcomes were performed.

RESULTS

Sixteen RCTs met our eligibility criteria. Pairwise meta-analysis showed that multiple-dose protocol of GnRH agonist was effective for increasing live birth rate (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.83, p=0.01) and clinical pregnancy rate (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.01 to 3.56, p=0.05) as well as decreasing clinical abortion rate (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.90, p=0.02). Meanwhile, single-dose protocol of GnRH agonist was effective for increasing clinical pregnancy rate (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.89, p=0.007) and multiple pregnancy rate (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.12 to 5.78, p=0.03). However, network meta-analysis only confirmed that multiple-dose protocol of GnRH agonist was the best efficacious strategy for live birth rate (OR 2.04, 95% CrI 1.19 to 3.93) and clinical pregnancy rate (OR 2.10, 95% CrI 1.26 to 3.54).

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of NMA, multiple-dose protocol may be the optimal strategy for patients undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles owing to its advantage in increasing live birth and clinical pregnancy rate. Moreover, single-dose protocol may be the optimal strategy for improving multiple pregnancy rate. However, with the limitations, more RCTs are required to confirm our findings.

Ovarian follicular waves during the menstrual cycle: physiologic insights into novel approaches for ovarian stimulation

Elucidation of multiple waves of antral ovarian follicular development during the menstrual cycle has challenged traditional concepts of female reproductive physiology and foundations of assisted reproductive therapies. Approximately two-thirds of women develop two follicle waves throughout an interovulatory interval and the remainder exhibit three waves of follicle development. Major and minor waves of follicle development have been observed. Major waves are those in which a dominant follicle develops; dominant follicles either regress or ovulate. In minor waves, physiologic selection of a dominant follicle is not manifest. Knowledge of waves of antral follicular development has led to the global adoption of novel ovarian stimulation strategies in which stimulation can be initiated at various times throughout the cycle. Random-start and luteal-phase ovarian stimulation regimens have had important clinical applications for women requiring urgent oocyte or embryo cryopreservation for fertility preservation prior to chemotherapy. Ovarian stimulation twice in the same cycle, referred to as double stimulation, may be used to optimize clinical outcomes in women with a poor ovarian response to stimulation as well as in those requiring fertility preservation before chemotherapy.

A 10-year follow-up on the practice of luteal phase support using worldwide web-based surveys

BACKGROUND

It has been demonstrated that luteal phase support (LPS) is crucial in filling the gap between the disappearance of exogenously administered hCG for ovulation triggering and the initiation of secretion of endogenous hCG from the implanting conceptus. LPS has a pivotal role of in establishing and maintaining in vitro fertilization (IVF) pregnancies. Over the last decade, a plethora of studies bringing new information on many aspects of LPS have been published. Due to lack of consent between researchers and a dearth of robust evidence-based guidelines, we wanted to make the leap from the bench to the bedside, what are the common LPS practices in fresh IVF cycles compared to current evidence and guidelines? How has expert opinion changed over 10 years in light of recent literature?

METHODS

Over a decade (2009-2019), we conducted 4 web-based surveys on a large IVF-specialist website on common LPS practices and controversies. The self-report, multiple-choice surveys quantified results by annual IVF cycles.

RESULTS

On average, 303 IVF units responded to each survey, representing, on average, 231,000 annual IVF cycles. Most respondents in 2019 initiated LPS on the day of, or the day after egg collection (48.7 % and 36.3 %, respectively). In 2018, 72 % of respondents administered LPS for 8-10 gestational weeks, while in 2019, 65 % continued LPS until 10-12 weeks. Vaginal progesterone is the predominant delivery route; its utilization rose from 64 % of cycles in 2009 to 74.1 % in 2019. Oral P use has remained negligible; a slight increase to 2.9 % in 2019 likely reflects dydrogesterone's introduction into practice. E2 and GnRH agonists are rarely used for LPS, as is hCG alone, limited by its associated risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).

CONCLUSIONS

Our Assisted reproductive technology (ART)-community survey series gave us insights into physician views on using progesterone for LPS. Despite extensive research and numerous publications, evidence quality and recommendation levels are surprisingly low for most topics. Clinical guidelines use mostly low-quality evidence. There is no single accepted LPS protocol. Our study highlights the gaps between science and practice and the need for further LPS research, with an emphasis on treatment individualization.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs: Mechanisms of action and clinical applications in female reproduction

Extra-hypothalamic GnRH and extra-pituitary GnRH receptors exist in multiple human reproductive tissues, including the ovary, endometrium and myometrium. Recently, new analogs (agonists and antagonists) and modes of GnRH have been developed for clinical application during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for assisted reproductive technology (ART). Additionally, the analogs and upstream regulators of GnRH suppress gonadotropin secretion and regulate the functions of the reproductive axis. GnRH signaling is primarily involved in the direct control of female reproduction. The cellular mechanisms and action of the GnRH/GnRH receptor system have been clinically applied for the treatment of reproductive disorders and have widely been introduced in ART. New GnRH analogs, such as long-acting GnRH analogs and oral nonpeptide GnRH antagonists, are being continuously developed for clinical application. The identification of the upstream regulators of GnRH, such as kisspeptin and neurokinin B, provides promising potential to develop these upstream regulator-related analogs to control the hypothalamus-pituitary-ovarian axis.

Effects of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) as luteal phase support in intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles: a randomized controlled trial

Background

This paper describes a blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) designed to evaluate the effect of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) administration on outcomes of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in subjects stimulated with the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol. A total of 268 women who underwent ICSI cycles with GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation protocol were included in the study. Patients were randomly assigned to the intervention (GnRH-a) and control groups. The intervention group received a single dose injection of triptorelin (0.1 mg) subcutaneously 6 days after oocyte retrieval while the control group received placebo. The rates of chemical and clinical pregnancy were defined as the primary outcome values.

Results

Two hundred forty participants accomplished the study, and their data were analyzed. No significant difference was detected between the chemical pregnancy rates of the intervention and control groups. However, the clinical pregnancy rate was significantly higher in the GnRH-a group than in the placebo group.

Conclusions

The findings of the present study suggest that the GnRH-a support in the luteal phase can result in a significant improvement of pregnancy rates in ICSI cycles following the ovarian stimulation with GnRH antagonist protocol.

Administration effects of single-dose GnRH agonist for luteal support in females undertaking IVF/ICSI cycles: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The aim of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of the addition of single-dose gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) for luteal support on pregnancy outcomes in females partaking in in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles. In total, the studies were hand-searched from six electronic databases to compare the pregnancy outcomes between single-dose GnRHa administered as luteal phase support (GnRHa group) and regular luteal support (control group). In the GnRHa group, single-dose GnRH agonist were administered at 5/6 days after IVF/ICSI procedures. In the control group, single-dose GnRH agonist was not added during luteal phase support. Only randomized controlled trials were included. Sensitivity analysis was performed using Revman 5.3 software; the high heterogeneity identified in the present analysis was primarily caused by one study included. Following exclusion of this particular study, the meta-analysis results indicated significantly higher rates of ongoing pregnancy or live birth per transfer (P=0.002), clinical pregnancy per transfer (CPR; P=0.001) and multiple pregnancy per pregnancy (P=0.020) in the GnRHa group compared with those in the control group. Meta-analysis of a subgroup of trials with long-acting GnRH-a ovarian treatment protocols indicated that the rate of ongoing pregnancy or live birth (P=0.080), CPR (P=0.090) and multiple pregnancy per pregnancy (P=0.140) were not significantly different between the two groups. However, the results from trials that had used a multi-dose GnRH antagonist ovarian treatment protocol indicated a significantly higher ongoing pregnancy or live birth rate per transfer (P=0.010), CPR per transfer (P<0.0001) and multiple pregnancy rate per pregnancy (P=0.003) compared with those in the control group. The present results suggested that administration of single-dose GnRH agonist in the luteal phase may be an ideal choice for patients undergoing IVF/ICSI therapy.

Plasmatic estradiol concentration in the mid-luteal phase is a good prognostic factor for clinical and ongoing pregnancies, during stimulated cycles of in vitro fertilization

Objective

To evaluate the predictive efficiency of serum estradiol (E₂) concentration in the mid-luteal phase regarding chemical, clinical, and ongoing pregnancies, in patients subjected to IVF/ICSI with fresh embryo transfer.

Methods

One hundred and forty-three patients undergoing IVF/ICSI met all the inclusion criteria for the present study. Most of the patients used antagonists, final maturation was achieved with recombinant chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG), and embryo transfer took place on days 3 to 5, but mostly on day 4. The luteal phase was supplemented with estradiol valerate 6 mg/day and vaginal micronized progesterone 600 mg/day. There was no exclusion of patients in the embryo transfer group due to age or ovarian reserve. All patients with estradiol and chorionic gonadotrophin (βHCG) dosage on the day of transfer, day 7, were included. We assessed the following variables, initially regarding age: number of eggs collected, formed embryos, embryos transferred, day of transfer, transfer type, estradiol and chorionic gonadotropin. Next, we evaluated these elements at three different ranges of estradiol concentrations (<200 pg/ml, 200-500 pg/ml, and >500 pg/ml), comparing these parameters in pregnant (P) and non-pregnant (NP) patients.

Results

Data analysis by age group in P and NP patients showed significant differences in the mean values of the variables E₂ and βHCG, TD7. Mean serum estradiol levels in P and NP in the three age groups were: <35years, 835/417 p=0.0006, 35-39 years 833/434 p=0.0118, >39 years, 841/394 p=0.0012. There was also a significant difference in pregnancy rates in the group >500 pg/ml of estradiol concentration (63.4%, p=0.0096). The likelihood of chemical and clinical abortions for the estradiol ranges were: 38.46%, involving the two first ranges versus 15.15% for a concentration >500 pg/ml, p=0.0412 and 5.26% for a concentration >900 pg/ml, p=0.0105. The Pearson correlation coefficient for HCG and estradiol was r = 0.5108.

Conclusion

This study showed the prognostic value of E₂ in the mid-luteal phase (TD7) for chemical, clinical, and ongoing pregnancies, and its concentration suggested that there is a moderately positive correlation with βHCG levels.

The decline in serum estradiol on the second day after oocyte retrieval affects the outcome of IVF/ICSI-ET treatment in high ovarian responders

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the predictive value of the decline in serum estradiol on the second day after oocyte retrieval on the outcomes of in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection and embryo transfer (ICSI-ET) among high ovarian responders.

DESIGN

Retrospective single-center cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary-care, university-affiliated teaching hospital. Patients Women aged 20-45 years undergoing assisted reproduction treatment from June 2014 to December 2015.

INTERVENTIONS

A total of 980 cycles were included; 395 high responders (Group 1) and 256 normal responders (Group 3) underwent embryo transfer (ET) in fresh ET cycles. A total of 329 high ovarian responders who underwent cryopreservation of all embryos (Group 2) were recruited as controls. The cases were divided into the following five subgroups according to the rate of serum estradiol decline on the second day after oocyte retrieval: 50.00-59.99% (Subgroup A), 60.00-69.99% (Subgroup B), 70.00-79.99% (Subgroup C), 80.00-89.99% (Subgroup D) and ≥ 90.00% (Subgroup E). The clinical outcomes were analyzed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinical pregnancy rate, implantation rate.

RESULTS

In Group 1, the pregnancy rate decreased from 51.33 to 36.72% and the implantation rate decreased from 30.93 to 21.70% when the level of serum estradiol on the second day after oocyte retrieval decreased by more than 80%, which was a statistically significant decline (p < 0.05). The peak estradiol (E₂) value and implantation rate were also significantly different (p < 0.05). In Group 2, the decline of serum E₂ on the second day after oocyte retrieval had no significant effect on the clinical pregnancy rate or the implantation rate. The trend was similar in Group 3.

CONCLUSIONS

A decline in the E₂ level of > 80% after oocyte retrieval may play an important role in unsatisfactory IVF/ICSI-ET outcomes among high ovarian responders.

Investigation on the ability of first trimester glycodelin and angiopoietin-2 to predict small-for-gestational age pregnancies at delivery

BACKGROUND

The aim was to investigate whether first trimester glycodelin and angiopoietin-2 can predict small-for-gestational age (SGA) at delivery, individually or in combination.

METHODS

In this case-control study we measured glycodelin and angiopoietin-2 on serum from 170 singleton pregnant women delivering SGA neonates and 985 singleton pregnant women delivering normal-weighted neonates. All values were converted to multiples of the medians (MoM).

RESULTS

Pregnant women delivering SGA neonates had lower first trimester glycodelin and angiopoietin-2 MoM values [median (interquartile range)] compared with pregnant women delivering normal-weighted neonates for glycodelin: 0.86 (0.58-1.24) vs. 1.03 (0.74-1.45), p<0.001, and for angiopoietin-2: 0.89 (0.69-1.19) vs. 1.01 (0.78-1.31), p<0.001. The prediction performances of the biomarkers showed that the areas under the curve (AUC) were 0.59 (glycodelin), 0.58 (angiopoietin-2), and 0.60 (glycodelin and angiopoietin-2).

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated that first trimester glycodelin and angiopoietin-2 were associated with SGA, but they were, individually and in combination, poor predictors of SGA at delivery. The AUCs were low which indicate low detection rates and high false positive rates.

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology

BACKGROUND

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists can be used to prevent a luteinizing hormone (LH) surge during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) without the hypo-oestrogenic side-effects, flare-up, or long down-regulation period associated with agonists. The antagonists directly and rapidly inhibit gonadotrophin release within several hours through competitive binding to pituitary GnRH receptors. This property allows their use at any time during the follicular phase. Several different regimens have been described including multiple-dose fixed (0.25 mg daily from day six to seven of stimulation), multiple-dose flexible (0.25 mg daily when leading follicle is 14 to 15 mm), and single-dose (single administration of 3 mg on day 7 to 8 of stimulation) protocols, with or without the addition of an oral contraceptive pill. Further, women receiving antagonists have been shown to have a lower incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Assuming comparable clinical outcomes for the antagonist and agonist protocols, these benefits would justify a change from the standard long agonist protocol to antagonist regimens. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2001, and previously updated in 2006 and 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists compared with the standard long protocol of GnRH agonists for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in assisted conception cycles.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register (searched from inception to May 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, inception to 28 April 2015), Ovid MEDLINE (1966 to 28 April 2015), EMBASE (1980 to 28 April 2015), PsycINFO (1806 to 28 April 2015), CINAHL (to 28 April 2015) and trial registers to 28 April 2015, and handsearched bibliographies of relevant publications and reviews, and abstracts of major scientific meetings, for example the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). We contacted the authors of eligible studies for missing or unpublished data. The evidence is current to 28 April 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two review authors independently screened the relevant citations for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist protocols in women undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted the data. The primary review outcomes were live birth and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Other adverse effects (miscarriage and cycle cancellation) were secondary outcomes. We combined data to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I(2) statistic. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence for each comparison using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 73 RCTs, with 12,212 participants, comparing GnRH antagonist to long-course GnRH agonist protocols. The quality of the evidence was moderate: limitations were poor reporting of study methods.Live birthThere was no conclusive evidence of a difference in live birth rate between GnRH antagonist and long course GnRH agonist (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.23; 12 RCTs, n = 2303, I(2)= 27%, moderate quality evidence). The evidence suggested that if the chance of live birth following GnRH agonist is assumed to be 29%, the chance following GnRH antagonist would be between 25% and 33%.OHSSGnRH antagonist was associated with lower incidence of any grade of OHSS than GnRH agonist (OR 0.61, 95% C 0.51 to 0.72; 36 RCTs, n = 7944, I(2) = 31%, moderate quality evidence). The evidence suggested that if the risk of OHSS following GnRH agonist is assumed to be 11%, the risk following GnRH antagonist would be between 6% and 9%.Other adverse effectsThere was no evidence of a difference in miscarriage rate per woman randomised between GnRH antagonist group and GnRH agonist group (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.30; 33 RCTs, n = 7022, I(2) = 0%, moderate quality evidence).With respect to cycle cancellation, GnRH antagonist was associated with a lower incidence of cycle cancellation due to high risk of OHSS (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.69; 19 RCTs, n = 4256, I(2) = 0%). However cycle cancellation due to poor ovarian response was higher in women who received GnRH antagonist than those who were treated with GnRH agonist (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.65; 25 RCTs, n = 5230, I(2) = 68%; moderate quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate quality evidence that the use of GnRH antagonist compared with long-course GnRH agonist protocols is associated with a substantial reduction in OHSS without reducing the likelihood of achieving live birth.

GnRH agonist during luteal phase in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To identify, evaluate and summarize the available evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of administering a gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist during the luteal phase in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the addition of a GnRH agonist during the luteal phase, compared with standard luteal-phase support. We searched seven electronic databases and hand-searched the reference lists of included studies and related reviews. Our primary outcome was live birth or ongoing pregnancy per randomized woman. Our secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy per randomized woman, miscarriage per clinical pregnancy, adverse perinatal outcome and congenital malformations.

RESULTS

The evidence from eight studies examining 2776 women showed a relative risk (RR) for live birth or ongoing pregnancy of 1.26 (95% CI, 1.04-1.53; I(2) = 58%). Sensitivity analysis when excluding the studies that did not report live birth and those at high risk of bias resulted in one study examining 181 women with an RR of 1.07 (95% CI, 0.73-1.58). Subgroup analysis separating the studies by single/multiple doses of GnRH agonists or by ovarian stimulation with GnRH agonist/antagonist was unable to explain the observed heterogeneity. The quality of the evidence was deemed to be very low: it was downgraded because of the limitation of the included studies, imprecision, inconsistency across the studies' results, and suspicion of publication bias. None of the included studies reported adverse perinatal outcomes or congenital malformations.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that adding GnRH agonist during the luteal phase improves the likelihood of ongoing pregnancy. However, this evidence is of very low quality and there is no evidence for adverse perinatal outcome and congenital malformations. We therefore believe that including this intervention in clinical practice would be premature.

May Underdiagnosed Nutrition Imbalances Be Responsible for a Portion of So-Called Unexplained Infertility? From Diagnosis to Potential Treatment Options

The aim of the study was to investigate whether women affected by unexplained infertility may have undiagnosed dietary imbalances which negatively affect fertility. Secondarily, we investigated whether varying degrees of nutritional abnormalities may benefit from different periconceptional dietary supplementations, evaluating the most effective intervention in improving pregnancy rate after in vitro fertilization (IVF). We conducted a survey on 2 cohorts of patients (group A: unexplained infertility and group B: healthy first trimester spontaneous pregnancies) with the scope of investigating and comparing their dietary status discriminating women without dietary abnormalities (cohort 1) from those with abnormalities exclusively in micronutrient intake (cohort 2) or combined abnormalities in both micronutrient and macronutrient intake and associated obesity (cohort 3). All women included in group A were offered the opportunity to receive a prescription for one of the 3 designated daily dietary supplementation schemes (subgroups A1, A2, and A3) which were to be implemented in the 3 months immediately prior to beginning IVF treatment. When compared with fertile women, patients having unexplained infertility showed significant abnormalities in dietary habits. These differences ranged from a minimal imbalance in micronutrient intake (potentially avoidable with dietary supplementation) to severe combined macronutrient and micronutrient imbalance frequently associated with obesity (partially amendable by inositol supplementation and frequently requiring long-term dietary reeducation before establishment of fertility). Nutritional investigation and treatment may explain and resolve a portion of cases of unexplained infertility, improving the outcome of IVF treatment and, with minimal imbalances, likely restore spontaneous fertility.

Progesterone administration for luteal phase deficiency in human reproduction: an old or new issue?

Luteal phase deficiency (LPD) is described as a condition of insufficient progesterone exposure to maintain a regular secretory endometrium and allow for normal embryo implantation and growth. Recently, scientific focus is turning to understand the physiology of implantation, in particular the several molecular markers of endometrial competence, through the recent transcriptomic approaches and microarray technology. In spite of the wide availability of clinical and instrumental methods for assessing endometrial competence, reproducible and reliable diagnostic tests for LPD are currently lacking, so no type-IA evidence has been proposed by the main scientific societies for assessing endometrial competence in infertile couples. Nevertheless, LPD is a very common condition that may occur during a series of clinical conditions, and during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) and hyperstimulation (COH) programs. In many cases, the correct approach to treat LPD is the identification and correction of any underlying condition while, in case of no underlying dysfunction, the treatment becomes empiric. To date, no direct data is available regarding the efficacy of luteal phase support for improving fertility in spontaneous cycles or in non-gonadotropin induced ovulatory cycles. On the contrary, in gonadotropin in vitro fertilization (IVF) and non-IVF cycles, LPD is always present and progesterone exerts a significant positive effect on reproductive outcomes. The scientific debate still remains open regarding progesterone administration protocols, specially on routes of administration, dose and timing and the potential association with other drugs, and further research is still needed.

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist protocols for pituitary suppression in assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) are commonly used in assisted reproduction technology (ART) cycles to prevent a luteinising hormone surge during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) prior to planned oocyte retrieval, thus optimising the chances of live birth.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of the different GnRHa protocols as adjuncts to COH in women undergoing ART cycles.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases from inception to April 2015: the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library (2015, Issue 3), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and registries of ongoing trials. Reference lists of relevant articles were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any two protocols of GnRHa used in in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles in subfertile women.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted the data. The primary outcome measure was number of live births or ongoing pregnancies per woman/couple randomised. Secondary outcome measures were number of clinical pregnancies, number of oocytes retrieved, dose of gonadotrophins used, adverse effects (pregnancy losses, ovarian hyperstimulation, cycle cancellation, and premature luteinising hormone (LH) surges), and cost and acceptability of the regimens. We combined data to calculate odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous variables and mean differences (MD) for continuous variables, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed statistical heterogeneity using the I² statistic. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence for the main comparisons using 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation' (GRADE) methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 37 RCTs (3872 women), one ongoing trial, and one trial awaiting classification. These trials made nine different comparisons between protocols. Twenty of the RCTs compared long protocols and short protocols. Only 19/37 RCTs reported live birth or ongoing pregnancy.There was no conclusive evidence of a difference between a long protocol and a short protocol in live birth and ongoing pregnancy rates (OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.81; 12 RCTs, n = 976 women, I² = 15%, low quality evidence). Our findings suggest that in a population in which 14% of women achieve live birth or ongoing pregnancy using a short protocol, between 13% and 23% will achieve live birth or ongoing pregnancy using a long protocol. There was evidence of an increase in clinical pregnancy rates (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.92; 20 RCTs, n = 1643 women, I² = 27%, moderate quality evidence) associated with the use of a long protocol.There was no evidence of a difference between the groups in terms of live birth and ongoing pregnancy rates when the following GnRHa protocols were compared: long versus ultrashort protocol (OR 1.78, 95% CI 0.72 to 4.36; one RCT, n = 150 women, low quality evidence), long luteal versus long follicular phase protocol (OR 1.89, 95% CI 0.87 to 4.10; one RCT, n = 223 women, low quality evidence), when GnRHa was stopped versus when it was continued (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.33; three RCTs, n = 290 women, I² = 0%, low quality evidence), when the dose of GnRHa was reduced versus when the same dose was continued (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.52; four RCTs, n = 407 women, I² = 0%, low quality evidence), when GnRHa was discontinued versus continued after human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) administration in the long protocol (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.64; one RCT, n = 181 women, low quality evidence), and when administration of GnRHa lasted for two versus three weeks before stimulation (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.68; one RCT, n = 85 women, low quality evidence). Our primary outcomes were not reported for any other comparisons.Regarding adverse events, there were insufficient data to enable us to reach any conclusions except about the cycle cancellation rate. There was no conclusive evidence of a difference in cycle cancellation rate (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.55; 11 RCTs, n = 1026 women, I² = 42%, low quality evidence) when a long protocol was compared with a short protocol. This suggests that in a population in which 9% of women would have their cycles cancelled using a short protocol, between 5.5% and 14% will have cancelled cycles when using a long protocol.The quality of the evidence ranged from moderate to low. The main limitations in the evidence were failure to report live birth or ongoing pregnancy, poor reporting of methods in the primary studies, and imprecise findings due to lack of data. Only 10 of the 37 included studies were conducted within the last 10 years.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When long GnRHa protocols and short GnRHa protocols were compared, we found no conclusive evidence of a difference in live birth and ongoing pregnancy rates, but there was moderate quality evidence of higher clinical pregnancy rates in the long protocol group. None of the other analyses showed any evidence of a difference in birth or pregnancy outcomes between the protocols compared. There was insufficient evidence to make any conclusions regarding adverse effects.

Acute immunomodulatory changes during controlled ovarian stimulation: evidence from the first trial investigating the short-term effects of estradiol on biomarkers and B cells involved in autoimmunity

PURPOSE

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the in vivo immunomodulatory effects of an acute short-term estradiol (E(2)) increase on serum levels of B cell-activating factor (BAFF), immunoglobulins (Ig), anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA), and the peripheral B cell phenotype.

METHODS

We conducted, at the Infertility Center of the University of Padua, a prospective case-control study on a cohort of infertile normo-responder women (group-A, 63 patients) undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) compared with an age-matched cohort of normo-ovulatory healthy women (group-B, 39 patients). Three serial blood sample assays were conducted in both groups, at T0, hypothalamic suppression; T1, ovulation induction; and T2, βhCG test in group A, and at T0, 2nd day; T1, 14th day; and T2, 21st day of cycle in group B, and serum levels of E(2) and BAFF, BAFF/E(2) ratio, circulating IgM, IgG, and IgA, ANA titer, and peripheral B cell phenotype were measured. We compared group-A versus group-B in terms of absolute and E(2) normalized values of BAFF at baseline (T0) to verify for possible differences between healthy and infertile women, at T1 to verify for possible differences occurring after spontaneous ovulation versus COS, and at T2 to evaluate differences in serum BAFF levels between pregnant versus non-pregnant patients (considering only group-A) and between non-pregnant women after spontaneous versus COS cycles (group-B versus group-A). In group-A, we also evaluated IgM, IgG, IgA levels, ANA titer, and peripheral B cell phenotype at T0 versus T1 versus T2.

RESULTS

With the exception of E(2) levels at T1 (as expected), no significant differences were found between the two groups for all outcome measures. In group-A, BAFF at T0 positively correlated with IgM levels; marginal zone CD19+/CD27+/IgD+ memory B cell compartment tended to be expanded at T1 when compared with T0.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite several mechanistic and clinical studies supporting a stimulatory role of E(2) on autoimmunity, the acute increase of E(2) during COS for infertility treatment does not seem to have a major impact on the immune system.

Pretreatment with oral contraceptive pills to identify poor responders that may benefit from rLH supplementation during GnRH-antagonist treatment for IVF: A pilot perspective study proposal

Controlled ovarian stimulation, using a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol, is a potential treatment option for women with a low response to other fertility treatments as it appears to be at least as effective as GnRH agonists (long protocol). However, previous studies have indicated that the administration of GnRH antagonist may cause an excessive reduction in endogenous luteinizing hormone (LH) levels. The use of recombinant LH (rLH) supplementation during ovarian stimulation is controversial. The present article proposes a future study focused on women aged ≥40 years old, with the aim of identifying patients who are poor responders to GnRH-antagonist treatment that may benefit from rLH supplementation. We hypothesize that patients with suppressed hypothalamic-pituitary-axis activity may benefit from rLH supplementation, as GnRH-antagonist administration has the potential to induce a marked reduction in LH levels in such patients compared with that in patients that exhibit a regular recovery following the administration of oral contraceptive pills (OCPs). Furthermore, patients with hyper-responsive hypothalamic-pituitary-axis activity may be affected by ‘low-gonadotropin-responsiveness’, similar to that observed in patients with any mutation in the follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) receptor, who are known to benefit from rLH supplementation. The proposed pilot study would include 120 women who are predicted to be poor responders to GnRH-antagonist treatment. All subjects will be allocated at random (using 2:1 computerized randomization) into two study groups: Group A (OCP-treated) and group B (control). For all patients, the serum values of FSH, LH and 17β estradiol (E2) will be detected on day 3 of the menstrual cycle preceding OCP treatment (baseline) and at day 4 following OCP treatment. The Δ-variation from baseline levels for all markers, the FSH/LH ratio and the E2/FSH ratio will be determined. Δ-variation from the baseline of the FSH and LH values will be used to further categorize group A patients into subgroups A1–4, based on respective quartile numbers (Q1–4). Patients admitted to each of the four subgroups A1–4, based on their FSH quartile, will be selected at random to receive rLH supplementation (ratio, 1:1) during ovarian stimulation. If the resulting data are able to identify women that may benefit from rLH supplementation during ovarian stimulation, a large part of inconclusive evidence regarding rLH supplementation will be clarified. If patients supplemented with rLH (according to abnormal recovery of hypothalamic-pituitary-axis activity after OCP treatment) exhibit an improved ovarian response during in vitro fertilization (IVF) and subsequent pregnancy rate, the pre-IVF OCP test could be adopted as a useful tool for improving the success rate of assisted reproductive technologies in poorly-responding patients.

Recombinant LH supplementation during IVF cycles with a GnRH-antagonist in estimated poor responders: A cross-matched pilot investigation of the optimal daily dose and timing

Although it is widely accepted that patients, who are considered poor responders to in vitro fertilization (IVF) benefit from recombinant luteinizing hormone (rLH) supplementation during an in vitro fertilization cycle, particularly when gonadotropin‑releasing hormone (GnRH)‑antagonist (ant) treatment is used the optimal administration timing and daily dose of rLH remains to be elucidated. The aim of the present study was to investigate the optimal timing of rLH‑supplementation to improve ovarian response, embryo quality, endometrial thickness and pregnancy rate in infertile, estimated poor responders to IVF, undergoing GnRH‑ant treatment. In addition, the present study aimed to evaluate the optimal daily dose to achieve the same outcomes. A prospective‑randomized‑cross‑matched investigation was performed on 40 patients undergoing a GnRH‑ant‑treatment‑cycle The patients were randomly assigned to either group A (rLH‑75 IU/day) or group B (rLH‑150 IU/day) and further randomized into subgroup A1/B1, in which rLH was administered at recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (rFSH) administration, and subgroup A2/B2, in which rLH was administered at GnRH‑ant administration. Patients who did not become pregnant during the first cycle (35 patients), were treated a second time, cross‑matched for groups and subgroups. Improved ovarian response, embryo quality and pregnancy rate were achieved by administering rLH at 150 IU/day, starting from GnRH‑ant administration, independently from the total rLH dose administered. Improved endometrial thickness at oocyte retrieval day was achieved by administering rLH at 150 IU from the start of rFSH administration. These data led to the hypothesis that ovarian responses are affected by the timing of administration more than the total‑dose of rLH. The optimal window to administer rLH appears to be the mid‑to‑late follicular phase, despite the fact that rLH‑supplementation in the early‑follicular phase appeared to increase endometrial thickness and to enhance its morphology. Standardization of the optimal daily dose and supplementation timing of rLH may resolve the debate regarding its efficacy in increasing the number of pregnancies and neonatal survival rates.

Menstrual cycle length: a surrogate measure of reproductive health capable of improving the accuracy of biochemical/sonographical ovarian reserve test in estimating the reproductive chances of women referred to ART

BACKGROUND

Aim of the study was to investigate whether menstrual cycle length may be considered as a surrogate measure of reproductive health, improving the accuracy of biochemical/sonographical ovarian reserve test in estimating the reproductive chances of women referred to ART.

METHODS

A retrospective-observational-study in Padua' public tertiary level Centre was conducted. A total of 455 normo-ovulatory infertile women scheduled for their first fresh non-donor IVF/ICSI treatment. The mean menstrual cycle length (MCL) during the preceding 6 months was calculated by physicians on the basis of information contained in our electronic database (first day of menstrual cycle collected every month by telephonic communication by single patients). We evaluated the relations between MCL, ovarian response to stimulation protocol, oocytes fertilization ratio, ovarian sensitivity index (OSI) and pregnancy rate in different cohorts of patients according to the class of age and the estimated ovarian reserve.

RESULTS

In women younger than 35 years, MCL over 31 days may be associated with an increased risk of OHSS and with a good OSI. In women older than 35 years, and particularly than 40 years, MCL shortening may be considered as a marker of ovarian aging and may be associated with poor ovarian response, low OSI and reduced fertilization rate. When AMH serum value is lower than 1.1 ng/ml in patients older than 40 years, MCL may help Clinicians discriminate real from expected poor responders. Considering the pool of normoresponders, MCL was not correlated with pregnancy rate while a positive association was found with patients' age.

CONCLUSIONS

MCL diary is more predictive than chronological age in estimating ovarian biological age and response to COH and it is more predictive than AMH in discriminating expected from real poor responders. In women older than 35 years MCL shortening may be considered as a marker of ovarian aging while chronological age remains most accurate parameter in predicting pregnancy.