Comparison of Metformin and Simvastatin Administration in Women With Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Before Intra-Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection Cycle: A Prospective, Randomized, Clinical Trial Study

The efficacy and safety of metformin combined with simvastatin in the treatment of polycystic ovary syndrome: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Several previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluated the efficacy of metformin combined with simvastatin in the treatment of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), yet the results of the researches are not consistent. It is necessary to conduct a meta-analysis to explore the efficacy and safety of metformin combined with simvastatin in the treatment of PCOS, to provide evidence supports for the treatment of PCOS.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and Chinese biomedical literature databases online to identify the RCTs evaluating the efficacy of metformin combined with simvastatin in the treatment of PCOS. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated to evaluate the synthesized effects.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs with a total of 746 PCOS patients were included. The synthesized results indicated that the combined use of metformin and simvastatin are more beneficial to reduce the total cholesterol (SMD -2.66, 95% CI -3.65 to -1.66), triglycerides (SMD -1.25, 95% CI -2.02 to -0.49), low density lipoprotein (SMD -2.91, 95% CI -3.98 to -1.84), testosterone (SMD -0.64, 95% CI -1.13 to -0.15), fasting insulin (SMD -1.17, 95% CI -2.09 to -0.26) than metformin alone treatment in PCOS patients (all P < .001), and there was no significant difference in the high density lipoprotein (SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.56-0.46), luteinizing hormone (SMD -0.58, 95% CI -1.66 to -0.50), follicle stimulating hormone (SMD 0.41, 95% CI -0.78-1.59), prolactin (SMD -1.38, 95% CI -2.93-0.17), fasting blood sugar (SMD 0.23, 95% CI -0.52-0.97), and insulin sensitivity index (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.48-0.15) between experimental and control groups (all P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Metformin combined with simvastatin is superior to metformin alone in the treatment of PCOS patients with more advantages in improving the levels of sex hormones, blood lipids, and blood sugar. However, the safety of this therapy still needs to be further explored in clinical studies with high-quality and large samples.

Pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies for obese women with subfertility

BACKGROUND

Clinicians primarily recommend weight loss for obese women seeking pregnancy. The effectiveness of interventions aimed at weight loss in obese women with subfertility is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies compared with each other, placebo, or no treatment for achieving weight loss in obese women with subfertility.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CGF Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and AMED from inception to 18 August 2020. We also checked reference lists and contacted experts in the field for additional relevant papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published and unpublished randomised controlled trials in which weight loss was the main goal of the intervention. Our primary effectiveness outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy and primary safety outcomes were miscarriage and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy, weight change, quality of life, and mental health outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors followed standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes 10 trials. Evidence was of very low to low quality: the main limitations were due to lack of studies and poor reporting of study methods. The main reasons for downgrading evidence were lack of details by which to judge risk of bias (randomisation and allocation concealment), lack of blinding, and imprecision. Non-pharmacological intervention versus no intervention or placebo Evidence is insufficient to determine whether a diet or lifestyle intervention compared to no intervention affects live birth (odds ratio (OR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.11; 918 women, 3 studies; I² = 78%; low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth following no intervention is assumed to be 43%, the chance following diet or lifestyle changes would be 33% to 46%. We are uncertain if lifestyle change compared with no intervention affects miscarriage rate (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.39; 917 women, 3 studies; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence). Evidence is insufficient to determine whether lifestyle change compared with no intervention affects clinical pregnancy (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.40; 917 women, 3 studies; I² = 73%; low-quality evidence). Lifestyle intervention resulted in a decrease in body mass index (BMI), but data were not pooled due to heterogeneity in effect (mean difference (MD) -3.70, 95% CI -4.10 to -3.30; 305 women, 1 study; low-quality evidence; and MD -1.80, 95% CI -2.67 to -0.93; 43 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). Non-pharmacological versus non-pharmacological intervention We are uncertain whether intensive weight loss interventions compared to standard care nutrition counselling affects live birth (OR 11.00, 95% CI 0.43 to 284; 11 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), clinical pregnancy (OR 11.00, 95% CI 0.43 to 284; 11 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), BMI (MD -3.00, 95% CI -5.37 to -0.63; 11 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), weight change (MD -9.00, 95% CI -15.50 to -2.50; 11 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), quality of life (MD 0.06, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.15; 11 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), or mental health (MD -7.00, 95% CI -13.92 to -0.08; 11 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). No study reported on adverse events . Pharmacological versus pharmacological intervention For metformin plus liraglutide compared to metformin we are uncertain of an effect on the adverse events nausea (OR 7.22, 95% CI 0.72 to 72.7; 28 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), diarrhoea (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.3; 28 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), and headache (OR 5.80, 95% CI 0.25 to 133; 28 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain if a combination of metformin plus liraglutide vs metformin affects BMI (MD 2.1, 95% CI -0.42 to 2.62; 28 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence) and total body fat (MD -0.50, 95% CI -4.65 to 3.65; 28 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). For metformin, clomiphene, and L-carnitine versus metformin, clomiphene, and placebo, we are uncertain of an effect on miscarriage (OR 3.58, 95% CI 0.73 to 17.55; 274 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence), clinical pregnancy (OR 5.56, 95% CI 2.57 to 12.02; 274 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence) or BMI (MD -0.3, 95% CI 1.17 to 0.57, 274 women, 1 study, very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain if dexfenfluramine versus placebo affects weight loss in kilograms (MD -0.10, 95% CI -2.77 to 2.57; 21 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). No study reported on live birth, quality of life, or mental health outcomes. Pharmacological intervention versus no intervention or placebo We are uncertain if metformin compared with placebo affects live birth (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.44 to 5.57; 65 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth following placebo is assumed to be 15%, the chance following metformin would be 7% to 50%. We are uncertain if metformin compared with placebo affects gastrointestinal adverse events (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.32 to 2.57; 65 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence) or miscarriage (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.04 to 5.80; 65 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence) or clinical pregnancy (OR 2.67, 95% CI 0.90 to 7.93; 96 women, 2 studies; I² = 48%; very low-quality evidence). We are also uncertain if diet combined with metformin versus diet and placebo affects BMI (MD -0.30, 95% CI -2.16 to 1.56; 143 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence) or waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) (MD 2.00, 95% CI -2.21 to 6.21; 143 women, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). Pharmacological versus non-pharmacological intervention No study undertook this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence is insufficient to support the use of pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies for obese women with subfertility. No data are available for the comparison of pharmacological versus non-pharmacological strategies. We are uncertain whether pharmacological or non-pharmacological strategies effect live birth, ongoing pregnancy, adverse events, clinical pregnancy, quality of life, or mental heath outcomes. However, for obese women with subfertility, a lifestyle intervention may reduce BMI. Future studies should compare a combination of pharmacological and lifestyle interventions for obese women with subfertility.

Potential Therapeutic Effect of Bee Pollen and Metformin Combination on Testosterone and Estradiol Levels, Apoptotic Markers and Total Antioxidant Capacity in A Rat Model of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

Background

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is associated with metabolic disorder as well as infertility. Many traditional remedies have been reported to show estrogenic and antioxidant potential. Bee pollen is a natural com- pound, reported as one such remedy. The present study aimed to investigate the effects of BP extract and metformin (MET) on estradiol (E2) and testosterone (T) levels, apoptotic markers, and total antioxidant capacity (TAC) inarat model of PCOS.

Materials and Methods

In this experimental study, 54 female Wistar (n=6/group) rats received 2 mg of estradiol valerate (EV) intramuscularly and 6 additional rats were considered the control without EV injection. The rats were treated with BP (50, 100, and 200 mg/kg), MET (300 mg/kg) and BP+MET (50 BP+300 MET, 100 BP+300 MET, and 200 BP+300 MET mg/kg). Serum levels of E2 and T were assessed by ELISA method. TAC of serum was also determined. The expressions of Bcl-2, Bax and Caspase-3 (Cas-3), and Sirt-1 genes were evaluated by real-time poly- merase chain reaction (PCR). Data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA.

Results

In the untreated PCOS group E2 and T levels (P<0.01), and Bcl-2 (P=0.007) expression were increased, but TAC (P=0.002) and expression of Bax (P=0.001), Cas-3 and Sirt1 (P<0.01) were decreased significantly. The levels of E2 and T, as well as the expressions of Bcl-2 were decreased in all treated groups compared to the untreated PCOS group (P<0.01). On the other hand, TAC and expression of Bax, Cas-3 and Sirt1 were increased in the BP- and MET-treated groups (P<0.05).

Conclusion

BP and MET synergistically improved serum E2, T and TAC levels, and expression of apoptotic genes.

Metformin treatment before and during IVF or ICSI in women with polycystic ovary syndrome

BACKGROUND

The use of insulin-sensitising agents, such as metformin, in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) who are undergoing ovulation induction or in vitro fertilisation (IVF) cycles has been widely studied. Metformin reduces hyperinsulinaemia and suppresses the excessive ovarian production of androgens. It is suggested that as a consequence metformin could improve assisted reproductive techniques (ART) outcomes, such as ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), pregnancy, and live birth rates.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of metformin as a co-treatment during IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in achieving pregnancy or live birth in women with PCOS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online (CRSO), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, LILACS, the trial registries for ongoing trials, and reference lists of articles (from inception to 13 February 2020).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing metformin treatment with placebo or no treatment in women with PCOS who underwent IVF or ICSI treatment.

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

women of reproductive age with anovulation due to PCOS with or without co-existing infertility factors. Types of interventions: metformin administered before and during IVF or ICSI treatment.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

live birth rate, incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected the studies, extracted the data according to the protocol, and assessed study quality. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

This updated review includes 13 RCTs involving a total of 1132 women with PCOS undergoing IVF/ICSI treatments. We stratified the analysis by type of ovarian stimulation protocol used (long gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-agonist) or short gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-antagonist)) to determine whether the type of stimulation used influenced the outcomes. We did not perform meta-analysis on the overall (both ovarian stimulation protocols combined) data for the outcomes of live birth and clinical pregnancy rates per woman because of substantial heterogeneity. In the long protocol GnRH-agonist subgroup, the pooled evidence showed that we are uncertain of the effect of metformin on live birth rate per woman when compared with placebo/no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.79; 6 RCTs; 651 women; I2 = 47%; low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance for live birth following placebo/no treatment is 28%, the chance following metformin would be between 27% and 51%. Only one study used short protocol GnRH-antagonist and reported live birth rate. Metformin may reduce live birth rate compared with placebo/no treatment (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.79; 1 RCT; 153 women; low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance for live birth following placebo/no treatment is 43%, the chance following metformin would be between 13% and 34% (short GnRH-antagonist protocol). We found that metformin may reduce the incidence of OHSS (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.72; 11 RCTs; 1091 women; I2 = 38%; low-quality evidence). This suggests that for a woman with a 20% risk of OHSS without metformin, the corresponding risk using metformin would be between 6% and 14%. Using long protocol GnRH-agonist stimulation, metformin may increase clinical pregnancy rate per woman compared with placebo/no treatment (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.63; 10 RCTs; 915 women; I2 = 13%; low-quality evidence). Using short protocol GnRH-antagonist, we are uncertain of the effect of metformin on clinical pregnancy rate per woman compared with placebo/no treatment (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.21 to 9.14; 2 RCTs; 177 women; I2 = 87%; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of metformin on miscarriage rate per woman when compared with placebo/no treatment (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.32; 8 RCTs; 821 women; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). Metformin may result in an increase in side effects compared with placebo/no treatment (RR 3.35, 95% CI 2.34 to 4.79; 8 RCTs; 748 women; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). The overall quality of evidence ranged from very low to low. The main limitations were inconsistency, risk of bias, and imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This updated review on metformin versus placebo/no treatment before or during IVF/ICSI treatment in women with PCOS found no conclusive evidence that metformin improves live birth rates. In a long GnRH-agonist protocol, we are uncertain whether metformin improves live birth rates, but metformin may increase the clinical pregnancy rate. In a short GnRH-antagonist protocol, metformin may reduce live birth rates, although we are uncertain about the effect of metformin on clinical pregnancy rate. Metformin may reduce the incidence of OHSS but may result in a higher incidence of side effects. We are uncertain of the effect of metformin on miscarriage rate per woman.