1
|
Blockeel C, Guivarc’h-Leveque A, Rongieres C, Swierkowski-Blanchard N, Porcu-Buisson G, Yazbeck C, Wyns C. From patient classification to optimized treatment in ART: the AMPLITUDE Delphi consensus. FRONTIERS IN REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH 2024; 6:1467322. [PMID: 39399814 PMCID: PMC11466932 DOI: 10.3389/frph.2024.1467322] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2024] [Accepted: 09/12/2024] [Indexed: 10/15/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction A Delphi consensus was performed to evaluate expert opinions on the management of key aspects of ovarian stimulation. Methods A Scientific Committee developed eleven statements for patient profiles corresponding to predicted ovarian responses (low, normal, and high) based on antral follicle count (AFC) and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH). The statements were distributed (online survey) to French and Belgian fertility specialists. Consensus was reached when ≥66.7% of participants agreed or disagreed. Results Among 52 respondents, a consensus agreement was reached for each patient profile for personalizing the initial dose of gonadotropin, taking age, weight, body mass index, nature of the cycle, and the decision to perform a fresh transfer or a freeze-all strategy into consideration. The respondents preferred a fresh transfer for low and normal responders and a freeze-all strategy in case of high risk of hyperstimulation, newly diagnosed uterine or tubal pathology and premature progesterone elevation. A consensus was reached for 10-15 oocytes as optimal oocyte target from the first round of voting. The panel agreed to increase the gonadotropin dose in case of insufficient response and preferred a GnRH antagonist protocol for a subsequent cycle in case of excessive response. Finally, a consensual answer was obtained for using LH/hCG activity in case of hypogonadotropic hypogonadism, advanced age, inadequate response during first stimulation and suspected FSH receptor polymorphism. Discussion The AMPLITUDE consensus supports the importance of optimizing the ovarian stimulation protocol for patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatment. Additional studies could complete these findings and guide fertility specialists in their daily practice to improve ovarian stimulation outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christophe Blockeel
- Brussels IVF, Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
| | | | - Catherine Rongieres
- Department of Reproductive Medicine, Strasbourg University Hospital, Strasbourg, France
| | - Nelly Swierkowski-Blanchard
- Reproductive Medicine Center, Intercommunal Hospital Center, Poissy, France
- RHuMA-TEAM, UMR-BREED, UFR-SVS, UVSQ, Montigny-Le-Bretonneux, France
| | - Géraldine Porcu-Buisson
- Department of Reproductive Medicine, Institut de Médecine de la Reproduction, Marseille, France
| | - Chadi Yazbeck
- Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine, Reprogynes Medical Institute, Paris, France
- Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine, Groupe Hospitalier Privé Ambroise Paré Hartmann, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France
| | - Christine Wyns
- Department of Gynecology-Andrology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Drakopoulos P, Khalaf Y, Esteves SC, Polyzos NP, Sunkara SK, Shapiro D, Rizk B, Ye H, Costello M, Koloda Y, Salle B, Lispi M, D'Hooghe T, La Marca A. Treatment algorithms for high responders: What we can learn from randomized controlled trials, real-world data and models. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2023; 86:102301. [PMID: 36646567 DOI: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2022.102301] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2022] [Accepted: 12/19/2022] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
A high ovarian response to conventional ovarian stimulation (OS) is characterized by an increased number of follicles and/or oocytes compared with a normal response (10-15 oocytes retrieved). According to current definitions, a high response can be diagnosed before oocyte pick-up when >18-20 follicles ≥11-12 mm are observed on the day of ovulation triggering; high response can be diagnosed after oocyte pick-up when >18-20 oocytes have been retrieved. Women with a high response are also at high risk of early ovarian hyper-stimulation syndrome (OHSS)/or late OHSS after fresh embryo transfers. Women at risk of high response can be diagnosed before stimulation based on several indices, including ovarian reserve markers (anti-Müllerian hormone [AMH] and antral follicle count [AFC], with cutoff values indicative of a high response in patients with PCOS of >3.4 ng/mL for AMH and >24 for AFC). Owing to the high proportion of high responders who are at the risk of developing OHSS (up to 30%), this educational article provides a framework for the identification and management of patients who fall into this category. The risk of high response can be greatly reduced through appropriate management, such as individualized choice of the gonadotropin starting dose, dose adjustment based on hormonal and ultrasound monitoring during OS, the choice of down-regulation protocol and ovulation trigger, and the choice between fresh or elective frozen embryo transfer. Appropriate management strategies still need to be defined for women who are predicted to have a high response and those who have an unexpected high response after starting treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Panagiotis Drakopoulos
- Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium; Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Alexandria, Alexandria, 21526, Egypt.
| | - Yakoub Khalaf
- Reproductive Medicine and Surgery, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Sandro C Esteves
- ANDROFERT, Andrology and Human Reproduction Clinic, Campinas, Brazil; Faculty of Health, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Nikolaos P Polyzos
- Department of Reproductive Medicine, Dexeus University Hospital, 08028, Barcelona, Spain; Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Ghent (UZ Gent), 9000, Gent, Belgium
| | - Sesh K Sunkara
- Department of Women's Health, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, Great Maze Pond, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Botros Rizk
- Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of South Alabama, Mobile, AL, 36604, USA
| | - Hong Ye
- Chongqing Key Laboratory of Human Embryo Engineering, Chongqing, China; Chongqing Clinical Research Center for Reproductive Medicine, Chongqing, China; Reproductive and Genetic Institute, Chongqing Health Center for Women and Children, No. 64 Jin Tang Street, Yu Zhong District, Chongqing, 400013, China
| | - Michael Costello
- Division of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, School of Women's and Children's Health, UNSW and Royal Hospital for Women and Monash IVF, Sydney, Australia
| | - Yulia Koloda
- Center of Reproduction "Life Line", Moscow, Russia; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education, Moscow, Russia
| | - Bruno Salle
- Department of Reproductive Medicine, CHU Lyon, Hôpital Femme Mère Enfant, 59 Bd Pinel, 69500, Bron, France; Université Claude Bernard, Faculté de Médecine Lyon Sud, 165 Chemin Du Petit Revoyet, Oullins, France; INSERM Unité, 1208, 18 Avenue Doyen Lépine, Bron, France
| | - Monica Lispi
- Merck Healthcare KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany; PhD School of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Unit of Endocrinology, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Thomas D'Hooghe
- Merck Healthcare KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany; Department of Development and Regeneration, Laboratory of Endometrium, Endometriosis & Reproductive Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Yale University Medical School, New Haven, USA
| | - Antonio La Marca
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences for Mother, Child and Adult, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, and Clinica Eugin, Modena, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kuroda K, Katagiri Y, Ishihara O. Optimal individualization of patient-oriented ovarian stimulation in Japanese assisted reproductive technology clinics, a review for unique setting with advanced-age patients. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2022; 48:521-532. [PMID: 35026870 DOI: 10.1111/jog.15150] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2021] [Revised: 12/13/2021] [Accepted: 01/03/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Ovarian stimulation is a key issue in assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment. ART practice in Japan is unique with various types of ovarian stimulation protocols, which may contribute to lower pregnancy rates compared to other countries. This review aims to clarify optimal individualized ovarian stimulation for improving the pregnancy rate per one oocyte retrieval cycle in Japan. We performed a literature review to describe ovarian stimulation, classification of infertile women depending on ovarian reserve and response, and Japanese ART data and discussed optimal conventional and mild ovarian stimulation protocols in Japan. According to Japanese ART registry data, the live birth rate of 30-35-year-old women was 32%-37% per ET cycle; therefore, four to five embryos are calculatedly needed when aiming a cumulative live birth rate of ≥80%. Mild stimulation aimed at collecting 5-10 oocytes can be alternative choice as an optimal ovarian stimulation protocol in young women. In 40-year-old women, the live birth rate is 18.8%, resulting in eight or more embryos as necessary. Conventional stimulation must be required in women with advanced age. In poor responders, however, mild stimulation may be sufficient for maximumly extracting their ovarian function. In Japan, mild ovarian stimulation can be selected in patients with a good prognosis and poor responders; however, conventional ovarian stimulation is necessary for women in advanced age.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Keiji Kuroda
- Center for Reproductive Medicine and Implantation Research, Sugiyama Clinic Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan.,Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Juntendo University Faculty of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yukiko Katagiri
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Toho University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Osamu Ishihara
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Saitama Medical University, Saitama, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Imaging of complications following treatment with assisted reproductive technology: keep on your radar at each step. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2022; 47:328-340. [PMID: 34535828 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-021-03245-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2021] [Revised: 08/07/2021] [Accepted: 08/07/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
Since the advent of assisted reproductive technology (ART), the utilization of ART procedures has become increasingly popular among women seeking to establish pregnancy. Radiologists are therefore likely to encounter the various complications of ART therapy. The most common is ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome; others are multiple, ectopic, and heterotopic pregnancies. Ultrasonography is considered the initial modality to investigate ART complications, However, nonspecific symptoms might need the use of an additional imaging modality, such as computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging, as a problem-solving tool. This article briefly discusses the steps involved in assisted reproduction. Its aim is to help radiologists become familiarized with the multimodality imaging features of the spectrum of ART-related complications. Their key imaging features and differential considerations are emphasized. This will facilitate the provision of precise and timely diagnoses, and aid the avoidance of fatal consequences.
Collapse
|
5
|
Datta AK, Maheshwari A, Felix N, Campbell S, Nargund G. Mild versus conventional ovarian stimulation for IVF in poor, normal and hyper-responders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2021; 27:229-253. [PMID: 33146690 PMCID: PMC7902993 DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmaa035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2020] [Revised: 07/06/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Mild ovarian stimulation has emerged as an alternative to conventional IVF with the advantages of being more patient-friendly and less expensive. Inadequate data on pregnancy outcomes and concerns about the cycle cancellation rate (CCR) have prevented mild, or low-dose, IVF from gaining wide acceptance. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE To evaluate parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on IVF where comparisons were made between a mild (≤150 IU daily dose) and conventional stimulation in terms of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in patients described as poor, normal and non-polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) hyper-responders to IVF. SEARCH METHODS Searches with no language restrictions were performed using Medline, Embase, Cochrane central, Pre-Medicine from January 1990 until April 2020, using pre-specified search terms. References of included studies were hand-searched as well as advance access articles to key journals. Only parallel-group RCTs that used ≤150 IU daily dose of gonadotrophin as mild-dose IVF (MD-IVF) and compared with a higher conventional dose (CD-IVF) were included. Studies were grouped under poor, normal or hyper-responders as described by the authors in their inclusion criteria. Women with PCOS were excluded in the hyper-responder group. The risk of bias was assessed as per Cochrane Handbook for the included studies. The quality of evidence (QoE) was assessed according to the GRADE system. PRISMA guidance was followed for review methodology. OUTCOMES A total of 31 RCTs were included in the analysis: 15 in the poor, 14 in the normal and 2 in the hyper-responder group. Live birth rates (LBRs) per randomisation were similar following use of MD-IVF in poor (relative risk (RR) 0.91 (CI 0.68, 1.22)), normal (RR 0.88 (CI 0.69, 1.12)) and hyper-responders (RR 0.98 (CI 0.79, 1.22)) when compared to CD-IVF. QoE was moderate. Cumulative LBRs (5 RCTs, n = 2037) also were similar in all three patient types (RR 0.96 (CI 0.86 1.07) (moderate QoE). Risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome was significantly less with MD-IVF than CD-IVF in both normal (RR 0.22 (CI 0.10, 0.50)) and hyper-responders (RR 0.47 (CI 0.31, 0.72)), with moderate QoE. The CCRs were comparable in poor (RR 1.33 (CI 0.96, 1.85)) and hyper-responders (RR 1.31 (CI 0.98, 1.77)) but increased with MD-IVF among normal responders (RR 2.08 (CI 1.38, 3.14)); all low to very low QoE. Although fewer oocytes were retrieved and fewer embryos created with MD-IVF, the proportion of high-grade embryos was similar in all three population types (low QoE). Compared to CD-IVF, MD-IVF was associated with less gonadotrophin use and lower cost. WIDER IMPLICATIONS This updated review provides reassurance on using MD-IVF not only for the LBR per cycle but also for the cumulative LBR, with moderate QoE. With risks identified with 'freeze-all' strategies, it may be time to recommend mild-dose ovarian stimulation for IVF for all categories of women i.e. hyper, poor and normal responders to IVF.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Stuart Campbell
- St George’s University of London, London, UK
- Create Fertility, London, UK
| | - Geeta Nargund
- Create Fertility, London, UK
- St Georges University Hospitals NHS Trust London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Lunenfeld B, Bilger W, Longobardi S, Kirsten J, D'Hooghe T, Sunkara SK. Decision points for individualized hormonal stimulation with recombinant gonadotropins for treatment of women with infertility. Gynecol Endocrinol 2019; 35:1027-1036. [PMID: 31392906 DOI: 10.1080/09513590.2019.1650345] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
It is essential that fertility treatment is individualized based on a thorough diagnostic work-up, with treatment tailored to the patients' requirements. This individualization should be kept in mind during the main decision points that occur before and during treatment. Treatment customization must include consideration of both the woman and her partner involved in the process together, including their collective treatment goals. Once treatment goals have been agreed and diagnostic evaluations performed, personalization based on patient characteristics, together with an understanding of treatment goals and patient preferences, enables the selection of appropriate treatments, protocols, products and their dosing. Following treatment initiation, monitoring and adaptation of product and dose can then ensure optimal outcomes. Currently, it is not possible to base treatment decisions on every characteristic of the patient and personalization is based on biomarkers that have been identified as the most relevant. However, in the future, the use of artificial intelligence coupled with continuous monitoring should enable greater individualization and improve outcomes. This review considers the current state-of-the-art related to decision points during individualized treatment of female infertility, before looking at future developments that might further assist in making individualized treatment decisions, including the use of computer-assisted decision making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bruno Lunenfeld
- Faculty of Life Sciences, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel
| | - Wilma Bilger
- Medical Affairs Fertility, Endocrinology & General Medicine, Merck Serono GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany
| | | | - Jan Kirsten
- Business Franchise Fertility, Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany
| | - Thomas D'Hooghe
- Global Medical Affairs Fertility, Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany
- Department of Development and Regeneration, Organ Systems, Group Biomedical Sciences, KU Leuven (University of Leuven), Leuven, Belgium
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Sesh K Sunkara
- Assisted Conception Unit, King's College London, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Gat I, AlKudmani B, Wong K, Zohni K, Weizman NF, Librach C, Sharma P. Significant correlation between anti-müllerian hormone and embryo euploidy in a subpopulation of infertile patients. Reprod Biomed Online 2017; 35:602-608. [PMID: 28826601 DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.06.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/16/2016] [Revised: 06/24/2017] [Accepted: 06/27/2017] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) is a standard marker of ovarian reserve. Correlation between AMH and egg euploidy is controversial. We evaluated the association between AMH and blastocyst euploidy rate examined by pre-implantation genetic screening (PGS). This retrospective study was conducted at the CReATe Fertility Centre. We included single IVF cycles of 216 infertile couples, which resulted in 911 blastocysts subjected to array comparative genomic hybridization and evaluated IVF outcome after embryo transfer. The average age and median AMH of female patients were 37.2 (SD = 3.8) and 20 pmol/l, respectively, and the average euploidy rate was 38.3%. Using multivariate regression controlling for age, antral follicle count, body mass index and parity, there was a significant association between serum AMH and proportion of euploid embryos (P = 0.02), due to the dominant ≤36 age group in which significant correlation between AMH and euploidy rate (P = 0.02) was demonstrated. Clinical outcome was similar, including biochemical, clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates as well as pregnancy loss. This study shows a correlation between AMH and aneuploidy rate, specifically among infertile patients younger than 37 years old. Study limitations are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Itai Gat
- CReATe Fertility Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Gynecology, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Pinchas Borenstein Talpiot Medical Leadership Program, Sheba Medical Centre, Tel Hashomer, Israel; Sackler Medical School, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
| | - Basheer AlKudmani
- CReATe Fertility Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Gynecology, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Karen Wong
- CReATe Fertility Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Khaled Zohni
- CReATe Fertility Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Gynecology, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Noga Fuchs Weizman
- CReATe Fertility Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Gynecology, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Clifford Librach
- CReATe Fertility Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Gynecology, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Prati Sharma
- CReATe Fertility Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Gynecology, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|