Individualised gonadotropin dose selection using markers of ovarian reserve for women undergoing in vitro fertilisation plus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI)

Recombinant Human Follicle-Stimulating Hormone Alfa Dose Adjustment in US Clinical Practice: An Observational, Retrospective Analysis of a Real-World Electronic Medical Records Database

PURPOSE

To determine the pattern of dose adjustment of recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone alfa (r-hFSH-alfa) during ovarian stimulation (OS) for assisted reproductive technology (ART) in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This was an observational, retrospective analysis of data from an electronic de-identified medical records database including 39 clinics in the USA. Women undergoing OS for ART (initiated 2009-2016) with r-hFSH-alfa (Gonal-f^® or Gonal-f RFF Redi-ject^®) were included. Assessed outcomes were patients' baseline characteristics and dosing characteristics/cycle.

RESULTS

Of 33,962 ART cycles, 13,823 (40.7%) underwent dose adjustments: 23.4% with ≥1 dose increase, 25.4% with ≥1 dose decrease, and 8.1% with ≥1 increase and ≥1 decrease. Patients who received dose adjustments were younger (mean [SD] age 34.8 [4.58] years versus 35.9 [4.60] years, p<0.0001) and had lower BMI (25.1 [5.45] kg/m² versus 25.5 [5.45] kg/m², p<0.0001) than those who received a constant dose. The proportion of patients with non-normal ovarian reserve was 38.4% for those receiving dose adjustment versus 51.9% for those with a constant dose. The mean (SD) number of dose changes/cycle was 1.61 (0.92) for cycles with any dose adjustment, 1.72 (1.03) for cycles with ≥1 dose increase, 2.77 (1.00) for cycles with ≥1 dose increase and ≥1 decrease (n=2,755), and 1.88 (1.03) for cycles with ≥1 dose decrease.

CONCLUSIONS

Dose adjustment during OS is common in clinical practice in the USA and occurred more often in younger versus older patients, those with a high versus non-normal ovarian reserve or those with ovulation disorders/polycystic ovary syndrome versus other primary diagnoses of infertility.

The Frequency of Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome and Thromboembolism with Originator Recombinant Human Follitropin Alfa (GONAL-f) for Medically Assisted Reproduction: A Systematic Review

Background

Recombinant human follitropin alfa (r-hFSH) is used for ovarian stimulation as part of medically assisted reproduction. There is a risk for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) with r-hFSH treatment, and an increased risk for thromboembolic events in the presence of pregnancy with OHSS.

Objectives

To report the frequency of OHSS and thromboembolism with originator follitropin alfa (GONAL-f) based on the Global Safety Database of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany and a systematic review of published data.

Data Sources

Reports of OHSS and thromboembolism were obtained from the Global Safety Database of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany from 20 October 1995 to 19 October 2018. The systematic review was based on MEDLINE and Embase searches from inception to 19 October 2018.

Study Eligibility Criteria

Patients receiving GONAL-f for ovulation induction or ART, with a starting dose within the range included in the prescribing information and providing information on the occurrence of OHSS and/or thromboembolism.

Study Appraisal and Synthesis Matches

In the Global Safety Database of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany there were an estimated 16,525,975 treatment cycles since 20 October 1995; 1110 reported cases of OHSS and 80 reported cases of thromboembolic events (reporting rates 6.7 and 0.48 per 100,000 treatment cycles, respectively). The systematic review identified 45 studies (5186 patients exposed to GONAL-f; 5240 treatment cycles). There were 272 reports of OHSS (5190 [5.19%] per 100,000 treatment cycles), including 10 cases of severe OHSS (191 [0.19%] per 100,000 treatment cycles).

Limitations

There may be the potential for under-reporting of safety outcomes in the literature, and under-reporting is a well-known phenomenon in spontaneous reporting databases.

Conclusion and Implications of Key Findings

Our analyses demonstrate low rates of OHSS and thromboembolism with GONAL-f.

Electronic Supplementary Material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-020-01512-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Anti-Müllerian Hormone and Ovarian Reserve: Update on Assessing Ovarian Function

CONTEXT

Anti-müllerian hormone (AMH) is produced by granulosa cells of small, growing follicles in the ovary. Serum AMH levels strongly correlate with the number of growing follicles, and therefore AMH has received increasing attention as a marker for ovarian reserve. This review summarizes recent findings and limitations in the application of serum AMH in ovarian reserve assessment.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A PubMed search was conducted to find recent literature on the measurements and use of serum AMH as a marker for ovarian reserve.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Serum AMH levels are measured to assess the "functional ovarian reserve," a term that is preferred over "ovarian reserve," since AMH levels reflect the pool of growing follicles that potentially can ovulate. Serum AMH levels are used in individualized follicle-stimulating hormone dosing protocols and may predict the risk of poor response or ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome but has limited value in predicting ongoing pregnancy. Serum AMH levels are studied to predict natural or disease-related age of menopause. Studies show that the age-dependent decline rates of AMH vary among women. The generalized implementation of serum AMH measurement has also led to an increase in diagnostic assays, including automated assays. However, direct comparison of results remains problematic.

CONCLUSION

Serum AMH remains the preferred ovarian reserve marker. However, the lack of an international standard for AMH limits comparison between AMH assays. Furthermore, little is known about endogenous and exogenous factors that influence serum AMH levels, which limits proper interpretation of AMH values in a clinical setting.

IVF, from the past to the future: the inheritance of the Capri Workshop Group

Today IVF use is booming all over the world and has even started to play a role in demographic analyses. Prognosis-adjusted estimates suggest that up to two-thirds of couples could achieve a live birth. However, the scenario is less exciting in reality. Discontinuation during the cycles is common, and age and ovarian response continue to be crucial in modulating this rate of success. A growing interest is now given to the risk of abuses and in particular to overtreatment and to prescriptions of useless, if not harmful, expensive additional treatments ('add-ons'). A more rational, evidence-based and wise approach is needed. From a scientific perspective, several obscure aspects remain and warrant future investigations. Of particular interest are the neglected role of sperm selection, the potential adult implications of early embryo life in vitro and the issue of sustainability.

The Conundrum of Poor Ovarian Response: From Diagnosis to Treatment

Despite recent striking advances in assisted reproductive technology (ART), poor ovarian response (POR) diagnosis and treatment is still considered challenging. Poor responders constitute a heterogeneous cohort with the common denominator of under-responding to controlled ovarian stimulation. Inevitably, respective success rates are significantly compromised. As POR pathophysiology entails the elusive factor of compromised ovarian function, both diagnosis and management fuel an ongoing heated debate depicted in the literature. From the criteria employed for diagnosis to the plethora of strategies and adjuvant therapies proposed, the conundrum of POR still puzzles the practitioner. What is more, novel treatment approaches from stem cell therapy and platelet-rich plasma intra-ovarian infusion to mitochondrial replacement therapy have emerged, albeit not claiming clinical routine status yet. The complex and time sensitive nature of this subgroup of infertile patients indicates the demand for a consensus on a horizontally accepted definition, diagnosis and subsequent effective treating strategy. This critical review analyzes the standing criteria employed in order to diagnose and aptly categorize POR patients, while it proceeds to critically evaluate current and novel strategies regarding their management. Discrepancies in diagnosis and respective implications are discussed, while the existing diversity in management options highlights the need for individualized management.

Endometrial injection of embryo culture supernatant for subfertile women in assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND

Despite substantial improvements in the success of assisted reproduction techniques (ART), live birth rates may remain consistently low, and practitioners may look for innovative treatments to improve the outcomes. The injection of embryo culture supernatant in the endometrial cavity can be undertaken at various time intervals before embryo transfer. It provides an altered endometrial environment through the secretion of factors considered to facilitate implantation. It is proposed that injection of the supernatant into the endometrial cavity prior to embryo transfer will stimulate the endometrium and provide better conditions for implantation to take place. An increased implantation rate would subsequently increase rates of clinical pregnancy and live birth, but current robust evidence on the efficacy of injected embryo culture supernatant is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of endometrial injection of embryo culture supernatant before embryo transfer in women undergoing ART.

SEARCH METHODS

Our search strategies were designed with the help of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Information Specialist. We sought to identify all published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) meeting inclusion criteria. Searches were performed on 2 December 2019. We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, trials registries and grey literature. We made further searches in the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) fertility assessment and treatment guidelines. We handsearched reference lists of relevant systematic reviews and RCTs, together with searches of PubMed and Google for any recent trials that have not yet been indexed in the major databases. We had no language or location restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs testing the use of endometrial injection of embryo culture supernatant before embryo transfer during an ART cycle, compared with the non-use of this intervention, the use of placebo or the use of any other similar drug.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data from studies and attempted to contact the authors where data were missing. We pooled studies using a fixed-effect model. Our primary outcomes were live birth/ongoing pregnancy and miscarriage. We performed statistical analysis using Review Manager 5. We assessed evidence quality using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We found five RCTs suitable for inclusion in the review (526 women analysed). We made two comparisons: embryo culture supernatant use versus standard care or no intervention; and embryo culture supernatant use versus culture medium. All studies were published as full-text articles. Data derived from the reports or through direct communication with investigators were available for the final meta-analysis performed. The GRADE evidence quality of studies ranged from very low-quality to moderate-quality. Factors reducing evidence quality included high risk of bias due to lack of blinding, unclear risk of publication bias and selective outcome reporting, serious inconsistency among study outcomes, and serious imprecision due to wide confidence intervals (CIs) and low numbers of events. Comparison 1. Endometrial injection of embryo culture supernatant before embryo transfer versus standard care or no intervention: One study reported live birth only and two reported the composite outcome live birth and ongoing pregnancy. We are uncertain whether endometrial injection of embryo culture supernatant before embryo transfer during an ART cycle improves live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates compared to no intervention (odds ratio (OR) 1.11, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.70; 3 RCTs; n = 340, I² = 84%; very low-quality evidence). Results suggest that if the chance of live birth/ongoing pregnancy following placebo or no treatment is assumed to be 42%, the chance following the endometrial injection of embryo culture supernatant before embryo transfer would vary between 22% and 81%. We are also uncertain whether the endometrial injection of embryo culture supernatant could decrease miscarriage rates, compared to no intervention (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.78, 4 RCTs, n = 430, I² = 58%, very low-quality evidence). Results suggest that if the chance of miscarriage following placebo or no treatment is assumed to be 9%, the chance following injection of embryo culture supernatant would vary between 3% and 30%. Concerning the secondary outcomes, we are uncertain whether the injection of embryo culture supernatant prior to embryo transfer could increase clinical pregnancy rates (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.61; 5 RCTs; n = 526, I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence), decrease ectopic pregnancy rates (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.24; n = 250; 2 RCTs; I² = 41%; very low-quality evidence), decrease multiple pregnancy rates (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.83; 2 RCTs; n = 150; I² = 63%; very low-quality evidence), or decrease preterm delivery rates (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.42; 1 RCT; n = 90; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence), compared to no intervention. Finally, there may have been little or no difference in foetal abnormality rates between the two groups (OR 3.10, 95% CI 0.12 to 79.23; 1 RCT; n = 60; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). Comparison 2. Endometrial injection of embryo culture supernatant versus endometrial injection of culture medium before embryo transfer We are uncertain whether the use of embryo culture supernatant improves clinical pregnancy rates, compared to the use of culture medium (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.48 to 2.46; n = 96; 1 RCT; very low-quality evidence). No study reported live birth/ongoing pregnancy, miscarriage, ectopic or multiple pregnancy, preterm delivery or foetal abnormalities.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain whether the addition of endometrial injection of embryo culture supernatant before embryo transfer as a routine method for the treatment of women undergoing ART can improve pregnancy outcomes. This conclusion is based on current available data from five RCTs, with evidence quality ranging from very low to moderate across studies. Further large well-designed RCTs reporting on live births and adverse clinical outcomes are still required to clarify the exact role of endometrial injection of embryo culture supernatant before embryo transfer.

Cumulative live birth rates in low-prognosis women

STUDY QUESTION

Do cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) over multiple IVF/ICSI cycles confirm the low prognosis in women stratified according to the POSEIDON criteria?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The CLBR of low-prognosis women is ~56% over 18 months of IVF/ICSI treatment and varies between the POSEIDON groups, which is primarily attributable to the impact of female age.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The POSEIDON group recently proposed a new stratification for low-prognosis women in IVF/ICSI treatment, with the aim to define more homogenous populations for clinical trials and stimulate a patient-tailored therapeutic approach. These new criteria combine qualitative and quantitative parameters to create four groups of low-prognosis women with supposedly similar biologic characteristics.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This study analyzed the data of a Dutch multicenter observational cohort study including 551 low-prognosis women, aged <44 years, who initiated IVF/ICSI treatment between 2011 and 2014 and were treated with a fixed FSH dose of 150 IU/day in the first treatment cycle.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Low-prognosis women were categorized into one of the POSEIDON groups based on their age (younger or older than 35 years), anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level (above or below 0.96 ng/ml), and the ovarian response (poor or suboptimal) in their first cycle of standard stimulation. The primary outcome was the CLBR over multiple complete IVF/ICSI cycles, including all subsequent fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfers, within 18 months of treatment. Cumulative incidence curves were obtained using an optimistic and a conservative analytic approach.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The CLBR of the low-prognosis women was on average ~56% over 18 months of IVF/ICSI treatment. Younger unexpected poor (n = 38) and suboptimal (n = 179) responders had a CLBR of ~65% and ~68%, respectively, and younger expected poor responders (n = 65) had a CLBR of ~59%. The CLBR of older unexpected poor (n = 41) and suboptimal responders (n = 102) was ~42% and ~54%, respectively, and of older expected poor responders (n = 126) ~39%. For comparison, the CLBR of younger (n = 164) and older (n = 78) normal responders with an adequate ovarian reserve was ~72% and ~58% over 18 months of treatment, respectively. No large differences were observed in the number of fresh treatment cycles between the POSEIDON groups, with an average of two fresh cycles per woman within 18 months of follow-up.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Small numbers in some (sub)groups reduced the precision of the estimates. However, our findings provide the first relevant indication of the CLBR of low-prognosis women in the POSEIDON groups. Small FSH dose adjustments between cycles were allowed, inducing therapeutic disparity. Yet, this is in accordance with current daily practice and increases the generalizability of our findings.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The CLBRs vary between the POSEIDON groups. This heterogeneity is primarily determined by a woman's age, reflecting the importance of oocyte quality. In younger women, current IVF/ICSI treatment reaches relatively high CLBR over multiple complete cycles, despite reduced quantitative parameters. In older women, the CLBR remains relatively low over multiple complete cycles, due to the co-occurring decline in quantitative and qualitative parameters. As no effective interventions exist to counteract this decline, clinical management currently relies on proper counselling.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No external funds were obtained for this study. J.A.L. is supported by a Research Fellowship grant and received an unrestricted personal grant from Merck BV. S.C.O., T.C.v.T., and H.L.T. received an unrestricted personal grant from Merck BV. C.B.L. received research grants from Merck, Ferring, and Guerbet. K.F. received unrestricted research grants from Merck Serono, Ferring, and GoodLife. She also received fees for lectures and consultancy from Ferring and GoodLife. A.H. declares that the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Medical Centre Groningen received an unrestricted research grant from Ferring Pharmaceuticals BV, the Netherlands. J.S.E.L. has received unrestricted research grants from Ferring, Zon-MW, and The Dutch Heart Association. He also received travel grants and consultancy fees from Danone, Euroscreen, Ferring, AnshLabs, and Titus Healthcare. B.W.J.M. is supported by an National Health and Medical Research Council Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548) and reports consultancy work for ObsEva, Merck, and Guerbet. He also received a research grant from Merck BV and travel support from Guerbet. F.J.M.B. received monetary compensation as a member of the external advisory board for Merck Serono (the Netherlands) and Ferring Pharmaceuticals BV (the Netherlands) for advisory work for Gedeon Richter (Belgium) and Roche Diagnostics on automated AMH assay development, and for a research cooperation with Ansh Labs (USA). All other authors have nothing to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Not applicable.

The impact of letrozole administration on oocyte morphology in breast cancer patients undergoing fertility preservation

Objective:

Patients submitted to oncological fertility preservation with letrozole and gonadotropins seem to present a higher rate of immature oocytes and lower fertilization rates in comparison to infertile patients submitted to IVF cycles with gonadotropins. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of letrozole on oocyte morphology in patients with breast cancer submitted to fertility preservation.

Methods:

Retrospective analysis performed at a public tertiary hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. The oocytes were retrieved from patients with breast cancer undergoing fertility preservation (n=69), and from infertile women undergoing in vitro fertilization (n=92). We evaluated 750 oocytes obtained from breast cancer patients submitted to ovarian stimulation with letrozole and gonadotropins, and 699 oocytes from patients without breast cancer submitted to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization with gonadotropins only due to male factor infertility. The mature oocytes retrieved were analyzed for the presence of refractile bodies, ooplasm color and regularity, central granulation degree, cortical granules, zona pellucida staining and regularity, perivitelline space, presence of vacuoles or abnormal smooth-surfaced endoplasmic reticle and oocyte retraction.

Results:

There was a higher incidence of alterations in oocyte morphology in the letrozole group when compared to the control group: increased perivitelline space (p=0.007), irregular zona pellucida (p<0.001), refractile bodies (p<0.001), dark ooplasm (p<0.001), granular ooplasm (p<0.001), irregular ooplasm (p<0.001) and dense central granulation (p<0.001).

Conclusion:

Letrozole is a risk factor for worse oocyte morphology. However, the clinical impact of ovarian stimulation protocol with combined use of gonadotropins and letrozole for fertility preservation remains unclear in this setting. These data underline the importance of establishing the predictive potential of morphological dimorphisms of human oocytes in IVF outcomes.

Serum microRNA profiling for the identification of predictive molecular markers of the response to controlled ovarian stimulation

Objective

To identify potential microRNA (miRNA) biomarkers of poor, normal and hyperresponse to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS).

Methods

In the present study, we assessed 40 serum samples from patients undergoing COS. We used ten samples to standardize miRNAs detection in the serum. The remaining 30 samples were split into three groups depending on the patient's response to COS: poor response (PR group, n=10), normal response (NR group, n=10), and hyperresponse (HR group, n=10). Aberrantly expressed miRNAs were identified using a large-scale expression analysis platform. Gene set enrichment analysis was performed to assess the biological processes potentially modulated by the identified miRNAs.

Results

Twenty-two miRNAs were detected only in the PR or HR groups when compared with the NR group. From those, 11 presented poor dissociation curves and were excluded from further analysis. A bioinformatics analysis revealed that the selected 11 miRNAs target several genes involved in GnRH, estrogen and prolactin signaling, oocyte maturation, female pregnancy, and meiosis.

Conclusion

The large-scale analysis of miRNA expression identified distinct miRNA profiles for poor and hyperresponse to COS, which potentially modulate key processes for human assisted reproduction. All evidence suggests that the serum microRNA profiling may discriminate patients who will respond in an exacerbated manner from those who will respond insufficiently to COS. Further studies may validate these miRNAs, enabling the individualization of treatment and more successful outcomes.

ESHRE guideline: ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI†

STUDY QUESTION

What is the recommended management of ovarian stimulation, based on the best available evidence in the literature?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The guideline development group formulated 84 recommendations answering 18 key questions on ovarian stimulation.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI has been discussed briefly in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline on fertility problems, and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologist has published a statement on ovarian stimulation in assisted reproduction. There are, to our knowledge, no evidence-based guidelines dedicated to the process of ovarian stimulation.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

The guideline was developed according to the structured methodology for development of ESHRE guidelines. After formulation of key questions by a group of experts, literature searches and assessments were performed. Papers published up to 8 November 2018 and written in English were included. The critical outcomes for this guideline were efficacy in terms of cumulative live birth rate per started cycle or live birth rate per started cycle, as well as safety in terms of the rate of occurrence of moderate and/or severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

Based on the collected evidence, recommendations were formulated and discussed until consensus was reached within the guideline group. A stakeholder review was organized after finalization of the draft. The final version was approved by the guideline group and the ESHRE Executive Committee.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The guideline provides 84 recommendations: 7 recommendations on pre-stimulation management, 40 recommendations on LH suppression and gonadotrophin stimulation, 11 recommendations on monitoring during ovarian stimulation, 18 recommendations on triggering of final oocyte maturation and luteal support and 8 recommendations on the prevention of OHSS. These include 61 evidence-based recommendations-of which only 21 were formulated as strong recommendations-and 19 good practice points and 4 research-only recommendations. The guideline includes a strong recommendation for the use of either antral follicle count or anti-Müllerian hormone (instead of other ovarian reserve tests) to predict high and poor response to ovarian stimulation. The guideline also includes a strong recommendation for the use of the GnRH antagonist protocol over the GnRH agonist protocols in the general IVF/ICSI population, based on the comparable efficacy and higher safety. For predicted poor responders, GnRH antagonists and GnRH agonists are equally recommended. With regards to hormone pre-treatment and other adjuvant treatments (metformin, growth hormone (GH), testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone, aspirin and sildenafil), the guideline group concluded that none are recommended for increasing efficacy or safety.

LIMITATIONS REASON FOR CAUTION

Several newer interventions are not well studied yet. For most of these interventions, a recommendation against the intervention or a research-only recommendation was formulated based on insufficient evidence. Future studies may require these recommendations to be revised.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The guideline provides clinicians with clear advice on best practice in ovarian stimulation, based on the best evidence available. In addition, a list of research recommendations is provided to promote further studies in ovarian stimulation.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The guideline was developed and funded by ESHRE, covering expenses associated with the guideline meetings, with the literature searches and with the dissemination of the guideline. The guideline group members did not receive payment. F.B. reports research grant from Ferring and consulting fees from Merck, Ferring, Gedeon Richter and speaker's fees from Merck. N.P. reports research grants from Ferring, MSD, Roche Diagnositics, Theramex and Besins Healthcare; consulting fees from MSD, Ferring and IBSA; and speaker's fees from Ferring, MSD, Merck Serono, IBSA, Theramex, Besins Healthcare, Gedeon Richter and Roche Diagnostics. A.L.M reports research grants from Ferring, MSD, IBSA, Merck Serono, Gedeon Richter and TEVA and consulting fees from Roche, Beckman-Coulter. G.G. reports consulting fees from MSD, Ferring, Merck Serono, IBSA, Finox, Theramex, Gedeon-Richter, Glycotope, Abbott, Vitrolife, Biosilu, ReprodWissen, Obseva and PregLem and speaker's fees from MSD, Ferring, Merck Serono, IBSA, Finox, TEVA, Gedeon Richter, Glycotope, Abbott, Vitrolife and Biosilu. E.B. reports research grants from Gedeon Richter; consulting and speaker's fees from MSD, Ferring, Abbot, Gedeon Richter, Merck Serono, Roche Diagnostics and IBSA; and ownership interest from IVI-RMS Valencia. P.H. reports research grants from Gedeon Richter, Merck, IBSA and Ferring and speaker's fees from MSD, IBSA, Merck and Gedeon Richter. J.U. reports speaker's fees from IBSA and Ferring. N.M. reports research grants from MSD, Merck and IBSA; consulting fees from MSD, Merck, IBSA and Ferring and speaker's fees from MSD, Merck, IBSA, Gedeon Richter and Theramex. M.G. reports speaker's fees from Merck Serono, Ferring, Gedeon Richter and MSD. S.K.S. reports speaker's fees from Merck, MSD, Ferring and Pharmasure. E.K. reports speaker's fees from Merck Serono, Angellini Pharma and MSD. M.K. reports speaker's fees from Ferring. T.T. reports speaker's fees from Merck, MSD and MLD. The other authors report no conflicts of interest.

DISCLAIMER

This guideline represents the views of ESHRE, which were achieved after careful consideration of the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. In the absence of scientific evidence on certain aspects, a consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders has been obtained. Adherence to these clinical practice guidelines does not guarantee a successful or specific outcome, nor does it establish a standard of care. Clinical practice guidelines do not replace the need for application of clinical judgment to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type. ESHRE makes no warranty, express or implied, regarding the clinical practice guidelines and specifically excludes any warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular use or purpose. (Full disclaimer available at www.eshre.eu/guidelines.) †ESHRE Pages content is not externally peer reviewed. The manuscript has been approved by the Executive Committee of ESHRE.

The impact of age beyond ploidy: outcome data from 8175 euploid single embryo transfers

PURPOSE

The rate of embryonic aneuploidy increases with increasing female age and is the primary cause of lower pregnancy and live birth rates (LBR) in older reproductive age women. This retrospective cohort study evaluates single euploid embryo transfers to determine whether an age-related decline in reproductive efficiency persists.

METHODS

A total of 8175 non-donor single embryo transfers (SET) after pre-implantation testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) and cryopreservation were included. These were divided into five groups by patient age: < 35 years old (n = 3789 embryos transferred), 35-37 (n = 2200), 38-40 (n = 1624), 41-42 (n = 319), and > 42 (n = 243). Implantation rate (IR), clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), and LBR were calculated for each group as a percentage of embryos transferred and compared. CPR was also analyzed as a percentage of implanted pregnancies, and LBR as a percentage of clinical pregnancies, to determine when age has the greatest impact. These results were then adjusted for confounding variables via a multivariate logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Implantation rates negatively correlated with age. After adjusting for confounders, women 38 years or older had a significantly lower IR than those under 35 (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.73-0.99 for 38-40 years old; 0.69, 0.53-0.91 for 41-42, and 0.69, 0.51-0.94 for > 42). These differences are also apparent in CPR and LBR. The rates of progression to clinical pregnancy and live birth did not differ significantly by age group. Other factors observed to affect IR independently were anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), day of embryo transfer, and embryo morphology.

CONCLUSION

While selection of euploid embryos may be effective in overcoming a significant proportion of the age-related decline in reproductive efficiency, a decrease in IR, CPR, and LBR persists even when analyzing only euploid embryo transfers. The observed impact of aging is, therefore, independent of ploidy, as well as of other variables that affect reproductive efficiency. These results indicate that factors other than aneuploidy contribute to reproductive senescence.

Clinical Application of AMH Measurement in Assisted Reproduction

Anti-Müllerian hormone reflects the continuum of the functional ovarian reserve, and as such can predict ovarian response to gonadotropin stimulation and be used to individualize treatment pathways to improve efficacy and safety. However, consistent with other biomarkers and age-based prediction models it has limited ability to predict live birth and should not be used to refuse treatment, but rather to inform counselling and shared decision making. The use of absolute clinical thresholds to stratify patient phenotypes, assess discordance and individualize treatment protocols in non-validated algorithms combined with the lack of standardization of assays may result in inappropriate classification and sub-optimal clinical decision making. We propose that holistic baseline phenotyping, incorporating antral follicle count and other patient characteristics is critical. Treatment decisions driven by validated algorithms that use ovarian reserve biomarkers as continuous measures, reducing the risk of misclassification, are likely to improve overall outcomes for our patients.

Counseling young women with early breast cancer on fertility preservation

PURPOSE

Women with early-stage breast cancer may still have a future child wish, while chemotherapy may impair fertility. To pursue on fertility preservation shortly after breast cancer diagnosis is complex. This review holds a critical reflection on all topics that need to be counseled to give them the opportunity to make a well-informed decision before starting any oncological treatment.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review was performed on papers published in English language on breast cancer in young women, risk of chemotherapy-induced infertility, fertility preservation techniques, impact of possible mutation carriership, and future pregnancy outcome.

RESULTS

Below 40 years of age, the risk of permanent chemotherapy-induced ovarian function failure is approximately 20%, where taxanes do not significantly add to this risk. Overall, 23% of reported women who performed fertility preservation by cryopreserving oocytes or embryos returned for embryo transfer. Of these, 40% gave live birth. Both fertility preservation in women diagnosed with breast cancer and pregnancy after treatment seem safe with respect to breast cancer survival. Women who have a genetic predisposition for breast cancer like BRCA gene mutation should also be informed about the possibility of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Women with an early stage of breast cancer and a possible future child wish should be referred to an expertise center in breast cancer, fertility preservation, and genetics in this complex decision-making process, shortly after diagnosis.

Predictive Factors for Live Birth in Autologous in Vitro Fertilization Cycles in Women Aged 40 Years and Older

Background

The aim of the study was to determine predictive factors for live birth after in vitro fertilization with autologous oocytes in women ≥40 years of age.

Methods

Authors conducted a retrospective analysis of in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) cycles performed at the Department of Reproductive Medicine and Gynecologic Endocrinology, University Medical Centre Maribor, Slovenia between January 2006 and December 2015 in women aged 40 or more. The characteristics of patients and cycles were compared regarding live birth as the final outcome.

Results

A total of 1920 IVF/ICSI cycles with egg retrieval in women ≥40 years of age were performed leading to 1591 embryo transfers. The live birth rate per embryo transfer was 17.3% at 40, 11.6% at 41, 8.2% at 42, 7.9% at 43, 1.9% at 44 and 0.0% at ≥45 years of age. The multivariate logistic regression model showed that besides women’s age (OR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.55–0.78), the number of previous cycles (OR 0.88, 95% CI: 0.82–0.95), number of good quality embryos on day 2 (OR 1.19, 95% CI: 1.05-1.36), number of embryos transferred (OR 1.57, 95% CI: 1.19–2.07) and day 5 embryo transfer (OR 2.21, 95% CI: 1.37–3.55) were also independent prognostic factors for live birth.

Conclusions

The chance of in vitro fertilization success in women ≥40 years of age should not be estimated only on the woman’s age, but also on other predictive factors: number of previous cycles, number of good quality embryos on day 2, number of transferred embryos and blastocyst embry transfer.

Antral follicle responsiveness assessed by follicular output RaTe(FORT) correlates with follicles diameter

BACKGROUND

The antral follicle count is a marker of ovarian reserve. Follicular Output RaTe (FORT) evaluates the proportion of follicles responsive to exogenous follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) during controlled ovarian stimulation. Our objective was to evaluate whether the diameter (AFC6: ≤ 6 mm or AFC > 6: > 6 mm) of the follicular cohort could be a predictor for ovarian responsiveness, assessed by FORT, in a prospective cohort with 92 women with IVF indication, regular cycles and no abnormality in both ovaries.

RESULTS

The mean age (±SD) of the women was 36.03 years (± 3.87 years), the median FORT was 43.30%. We found correlation between the FORT and AFC6 (r = - 0.237, P 0.023) but not between the FORT and AFC > 6 (r = - 0.055, P 0.602).

CONCLUSIONS

The inverse correlation between FORT and AFC6 suggests that those follicles were less responsive to the exogenous FSH.

A randomized controlled trial of AMH-based individualized FSH dosing in a GnRH antagonist protocol for IVF

STUDY QUESTION

Does an individualized serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) based FSH dosing algorithm used in a GnRH antagonist protocol increase the proportion of patients with an intended number of oocytes (5–14) retrieved compared with a standard regimen?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The AMH-based individualized algorithm did not increase the proportion of patients with an intended oocyte retrieval.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Individualizing treatment for ovarian stimulation by serum AMH or antral follicle count can theoretically improve the ratio between benefits and risks. Current data suggest that there may be a reduced risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), but without improved pregnancy or live birth rates. Only two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have examined the potential of AMH-based algorithms to optimize the FSH dosing in ovarian stimulation.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A dual-center open-label investigator-driven RCT was conducted between January 2013 and November 2016. Eligibility was assessed in 269 women and 221 were randomized 2:1 between individualized and standard dosing groups. Women with pretreatment serum AMH > 24 pmol/L had 100 IU/day of recombinant FSH (rFSH); AMH 12–24 pmol/L had 150 IU/day of rFSH, and AMH < 12 pmol/L had maximal stimulation with corifollitropin 100 or 150 mg depending on bodyweight ±60 kg. The standard group had 150 IU/day of rFSH irrespective of pretreatment AMH. All patients followed the GnRH-antagonist protocol.

The sample size calculation assumed that individualized dosing by AMH would reduce the proportion of unintended oocyte yield (outside the 5–14 range) by 50%, from 35 to 17.5%. In a 2:1 randomization this required 216 patients: 144 in the individualized and 72 patients in the standard group (80% power, 5% significance).

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

All women had a presumed ovulatory normal menstrual cycle, were aged 25–38 years, weighed < 75 kg, had pretreatment AMH 4–40 pmol/L, did their first IVF or ICSI cycle and had two ovaries accessible to oocyte retrieval. Recruitment was conducted from both participating sites. Women were excluded if diagnosed with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome, endometriosis grade III/IV, hydrosalpings on ultrasound, recurrent miscarriages (≥3), FSH > 12 IU/L or major medical disorders.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

After randomization 149 women were allocated to the individualized group and 72 to the standard group. The primary outcome of women with an intended (5–14) number of oocytes retrieved was similar in the individualized (n = 105) versus the standard (n = 55) rFSH treatment group (72% [95% CI 64–79%] versus 78% [95% CI 67–86%], respectively, P = 0.68, between group standardized mean difference (SMD) −6%, 95% CI: −19–8%). In the high AMH stratum of the individualized group, significantly more women (n = 13) had an unintended low number of oocytes (<5) retrieved (38% [95% CI: 23–55%]) compared with the standard group (6% [95% CI 0.3–24%], P = 0.029, between group SMD 32%, 95% CI: 9–56%). Conversely, in the low pretreatment AMH stratum, individualized dosing using corifollitropin reduced the proportion of unintended low responders to 24% (95% CI: 12–40%) compared with 47% (95% CI: 26–69%) in the standard group, P = 0.10, between group SMD −23% (95% CI: −54–8%). OHSS was diagnosed in four women (two in each study arm), and all cases were mild. Daily luteal phase questionnaire reporting showed similar wellbeing in terms of abdominal distention, abdominal pain, dyspnea and occurrence of bleeding between groups. The cumulative live birth rate per started cycle was similar (32 and 35%) comparing the individualized with the standard group.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

This study was powered for showing differences only in the distribution of oocyte retrieval when comparing individualized and standard groups, therefore additional results should be viewed with caution. In addition, there was a change of AMH assay halfway through the study period and the possibility that corifollitropin being introduced to a subgroup of the intervention has introduced confounding cannot be ruled out.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF FINDINGS

In the expected high responder AMH stratum, 100 IU/day is an insufficient rFSH dose in a high proportion of patients. Further research might explore the 125 IU/day dose for the high AMH segment.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

None for the submitted work. ICMJE declared personal interests for two of the authors.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EUDRACT registration number: 2012-004969-40.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

27 November 2012.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLLMENT

10 January 2013.

Ovarian Reserve Markers to Identify Poor Responders in the Context of Poseidon Classification

It is well-known that poor ovarian reserve is a cause of infertility, poor response to gonadotrophin stimulation and poor success rate after in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. Some years ago a consensus was elaborated on precise criteria which can lead to a correct identification of poor responders (the Bologna criteria). More recently, the POSEIDON group has proposed a new stratified classification of patients with low prognosis, also with the aim of providing clinical indications for the management of these patients. A literature search was carried out for studies that investigated the ability of ovarian reserve markers, in particular AMH and AFC, to predict poor ovarian response in IVF cycles; secondly, studies regarding the Bologna criteria and their prognostic value were analyzed and available literature on POSEIDON classification was reported. The most recent markers of ovarian reserve (serum AMH and ultrasound AFC) have shown to provide a direct and accurate measurement of ovarian follicle pool. These markers have generally shown comparable predictive power for ovarian response and a number of retrieved oocytes in IVF cycles. "Abnormal ovarian reserve test" is a very important parameter both in the Bologna criteria and in the POSEIDON classification. Several studies have already been published about the reproductive outcome of patients defined as poor responders according to the ESHRE Bologna criteria: all of them agree on the poor IVF outcome and low pregnancy rate of these patients. Instead, being the POSEIDON classification of very recent publication, the efficacy of the POSEIDON approach in improving management and outcomes of POR patients has yet to be tested and validated with future prospective clinical trials. Prediction of poor response may help clinicians choose the stimulation protocol with the aim of gaining patient compliance and cost reduction, and many efforts have been made by researchers in this sense, including the formulation of the Bologna criteria and of the POSEIDON classification, in which the ovarian reserve markers (AMH and AFC) play a fundamental role.

Individualization of FSH Doses in Assisted Reproduction: Facts and Fiction

The art of ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI treatment using exogenous FSH should be balanced against the relative contribution of other steps of the ART process such as the IVF-lab-phase and the Embryo-Transfer. The aim of ovarian stimulation is to obtain a certain number of oocytes, that will enable the best probability of achieving a live birth. It has been suggested that more oocytes will create a better prospect for pregnancy, but studies on the question whether the retrieval of a few oocytes less or more will make the difference are not clearly supportive for this mantra. Personalization strategies have been the subject of many studies over the past 20 years. Creating the optimal response in a patient in terms of live birth prognosis as well as OHSS risks may be based on information from the Ovarian Reserve testing using the Antral Follicle Count or Anti-Mullerian Hormone, the patient's bodyweight, the ovarian response in a previous cycle, and the dosage level of FSH. Taken together, steering the ovarian response into a supposed optimal range may appear difficult as the interrelation for each of these factors with the egg number is weak. Using OR testing for choosing FSH dosage, compared to a standard normal dosage of 150 IU, has been studied in several trials. Dosage individualization, in general, does not appear to improve the prospects for live birth, but the reduction in OHSS risk may be substantial. This implies that the use of high dosages of FSH in predicted LOW responders lacks any cost-benefit for the patient and may be abandoned, while in predicted HIGH responders, reduction of the usual dosage level of 150 IU may create better safety, provided that in case of an unexpected LOW response cancelation of the cycle is refrained from. In view of recent developments in using GnRH agonist triggering of final oocyte maturation, the trend could be that with the Antagonist co-medication system and a standard dosage of 150 IU of FSH, prior ovarian reserve testing may become futile, as safety can be managed well in actual HIGH responders by replacing the high dose hCG trigger.

FSH Requirements for Follicle Growth During Controlled Ovarian Stimulation

Introduction: Ovarian follicle growth is a key step in the success of assisted reproductive treatment, but limited data exists to directly relate follicle growth to recombinant FSH (rFSH) dose. In this study, we aim to evaluate FSH requirements for follicular growth during controlled ovarian stimulation. Method: Single center retrospective cohort study of 1,034 IVF cycles conducted between January 2012-January 2016 at Hammersmith Hospital IVF unit, London, UK. Median follicle size after 5 days of stimulation with rFSH and the proportion of antral follicles recruited were analyzed in women treated with rFSH alone to induce follicular growth during IVF treatment. Results: Starting rFSH dose adjusted for body weight (iU/kg) predicted serum FSH level after 5 days of rFSH (r ² = 0.352, p < 0.0001), median follicle size after 5 days of rFSH, and the proportion of antral follicles recruited by the end of stimulation. Day 5 median follicle size predicted median follicle size on subsequent ultrasound scans (r ² = 0.58-0.62; p < 0.0001), and hence time to oocyte maturation trigger (r ² = 0.22, P < 0.0001). Insufficient rFSH starting dose that required >5% dose-increase was associated with increased variability in follicle size on the day of oocyte maturation trigger, and negatively impacted the number of mature oocytes retrieved. Conclusion: Weight-adjusted rFSH dose correlates with follicular growth during ovarian stimulation. Early recruitment of follicles using a sufficient dose of rFSH from the start of stimulation was associated with reduced variability in follicle size at time of oocyte maturation trigger and an increased number of mature oocytes retrieved.

Are we choosing the correct FSH starting dose during controlled ovarian stimulation for intrauterine insemination cycles? Potential application of a nomogram based on woman's age and markers of ovarian reserve

PURPOSE

To evaluate the potential application of a nomogram based on woman's age and ovarian reserve markers as a tool to optimize the follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) starting dose in intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis enrolling 179 infertile women undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation (COS), followed by IUI. Each woman received an FSH starting dose according to clinical decision. After collecting data about COS and IUI procedures, we calculated the FSH starting dose according to the nomogram. The main outcomes measured were women's baseline characteristics, COS, and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

The FSH starting dose calculated by the nomogram was significantly lower than the one actually prescribed (p < 0.001), in only 14.8% of the cycles nomogram calculated a higher starting dose. When gonadotropin dose was decreased during COS, and similarly in case of hyper-response (more than two follicles ≥ 16 mm retrieved), the FSH starting dose calculated by the nomogram would have been lower in most of the cases (81.8% and 48.8%, respectively). Conversely, when gonadotropin dose was increased during COS and in case of low ovarian response (no follicle ≥ 16 mm retrieved), the FSH starting dose calculated by the nomogram would have been lower in most of the cases (64.7% and 100%, respectively); in these groups median anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level was 5.62 ng/mL.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of this nomogram in IUI cycles would lead to a more tailored FSH starting dose and improved cost-effectiveness, although in PCOS women, particularly the ones with high AMH, it does not seem adequate.

Assisted reproductive technology: an overview of Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND

As many as one in six couples will encounter problems with fertility, defined as failure to achieve a clinical pregnancy after regular intercourse for 12 months. Increasingly, couples are turning to assisted reproductive technology (ART) for help with conceiving and ultimately giving birth to a healthy live baby of their own. Fertility treatments are complex, and each ART cycle consists of several steps. If one of these steps is incorrectly applied, the stakes are high as conception may not occur. With this in mind, it is important that each step of the ART cycle is supported by good evidence from well-designed studies.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews on procedures and treatment options available to couples with subfertility undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) procedures.

METHODS

Published Cochrane systematic reviews of couples undergoing ART procedures (in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection) were eligible for inclusion in the overview. We also identified Cochrane reviews in preparation, for future inclusion.The primary outcome of the overview was live birth or the composite outcome live birth or ongoing pregnancy, as reported by the included reviews. Our secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, miscarriage, and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. We excluded studies of intrauterine insemination and ovulation induction.We undertook selection of systematic reviews, data extraction, and quality assessment in duplicate. We assessed review quality by using the AMSTAR tool. We organised reviews by their relevance to specific stages in the ART cycle. We summarised their findings in the text and reported data for each outcome in 'Additional tables'.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 68 systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Library up to May 2018. All were of high quality. These reviews identified 38 interventions that were effective (n = 23) or promising (n = 15), and they identified 19 interventions that were ineffective (n = 2) or possibly ineffective (n = 17). For 15 interventions, review authors were unable to draw conclusions owing to lack of evidence.We identified an additional 11 protocols and four titles for future inclusion in this overview.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This overview provides the most up-to-date evidence on ART cycles from systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials. Fertility treatments are costly, and the stakes are high. Using the best available evidence to optimise outcomes is best practice. Evidence from this overview could be used to develop clinical practice guidelines and protocols that can be applied in daily clinical practice to improve live birth rates and reduce rates of multiple pregnancy, cycle cancellation, and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

Individualised gonadotropin dose selection using markers of ovarian reserve for women undergoing in vitro fertilisation plus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI)

BACKGROUND

During a cycle of in vitro fertilisation plus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI), women receive daily doses of gonadotropin follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) to induce multifollicular development in the ovaries. Generally, the dose of FSH is associated with the number of eggs retrieved. A normal response to stimulation is often considered desirable, for example the retrieval of 5 to 15 oocytes. Both poor and hyper-response are associated with increased chance of cycle cancellation. Hyper-response is also associated with increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Clinicians often individualise the FSH dose using patient characteristics predictive of ovarian response such as age. More recently, clinicians have begun using ovarian reserve tests (ORTs) to predict ovarian response based on the measurement of various biomarkers, including basal FSH (bFSH), antral follicle count (AFC), and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH). It is unclear whether individualising FSH dose based on these markers improves clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of individualised gonadotropin dose selection using markers of ovarian reserve in women undergoing IVF/ICSI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, DARE, ISI Web of Knowledge, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organisation International Trials Registry Platform search portal from inception to 27th July 2017. We checked the reference lists of relevant reviews and included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included trials that compared different doses of FSH in women with a defined ORT profile (i.e. predicted low, normal or high responders based on AMH, AFC, and/or bFSH) and trials that compared an individualised dosing strategy (based on at least one ORT measure) versus uniform dosing or a different individualised dosing algorithm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Primary outcomes were live birth/ongoing pregnancy and severe OHSS. Secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy, moderate or severe OHSS, multiple pregnancy, oocyte yield, cycle cancellations, and total dose and duration of FSH administration.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 trials (N = 6088); however, we treated those trials with multiple comparisons as separate trials for the purpose of this review. Meta-analysis was limited due to clinical heterogeneity. Evidence quality ranged from very low to moderate. The main limitations were imprecision and risk of bias associated with lack of blinding.Direct dose comparisons in women according to predicted responseAll evidence was low or very low quality.Due to differences in dose comparisons, caution is warranted in interpreting the findings of five small trials assessing predicted low responders. The effect estimates were very imprecise, and increased FSH dosing may or may not have an impact on rates of live birth/ongoing pregnancy, OHSS, and clinical pregnancy.Similarly, in predicted normal responders (nine studies, three comparisons), higher doses may or may not impact the probability of live birth/ongoing pregnancy (e.g. 200 versus 100 international units: OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.36; N = 522; 2 studies; I2 = 0%) or clinical pregnancy. Results were imprecise, and a small benefit or harm remains possible. There were too few events for the outcome of OHSS to enable any inferences.In predicted high responders, lower doses may or may not have an impact on rates of live birth/ongoing pregnancy (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.46; N = 521; 1 study), OHSS, and clinical pregnancy. However, lower doses probably reduce the likelihood of moderate or severe OHSS (Peto OR 2.31, 95% CI 0.80 to 6.67; N = 521; 1 study).ORT-algorithm studiesFour trials compared an ORT-based algorithm to a non-ORT control group. Rates of live birth/ongoing pregnancy and clinical pregnancy did not appear to differ by more than a few percentage points (respectively: OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.23; N = 2823, 4 studies; I2 = 34%; OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.13, 4 studies, I2=0%, moderate-quality evidence). However, ORT algorithms probably reduce the likelihood of moderate or severe OHSS (Peto OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.00; N = 2823; 4 studies; I2 = 0%, low quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether the groups differed in rates of severe OHSS (Peto OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.99; N = 1494; 3 studies; I2 = 0%, low quality evidence). Our findings suggest that if the chance of live birth with a standard dose is 26%, the chance with ORT-based dosing would be between 24% and 30%. If the chance of moderate or severe OHSS with a standard dose is 2.5%, the chance with ORT-based dosing would be between 0.8% and 2.5%. These results should be treated cautiously due to heterogeneity in the study designs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find that tailoring the FSH dose in any particular ORT population (low, normal, high ORT), influenced rates of live birth/ongoing pregnancy but we could not rule out differences, due to sample size limitations. In predicted high responders, lower doses of FSH seemed to reduce the overall incidence of moderate and severe OHSS. Moderate-quality evidence suggests that ORT-based individualisation produces similar live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates to a policy of giving all women 150 IU. However, in all cases the confidence intervals are consistent with an increase or decrease in the rate of around five percentage points with ORT-based dosing (e.g. from 25% to 20% or 30%). Although small, a difference of this magnitude could be important to many women. Further, ORT algorithms reduced the incidence of OHSS compared to standard dosing of 150 IU, probably by facilitating dose reductions in women with a predicted high response. However, the size of the effect is unclear. The included studies were heterogeneous in design, which limited the interpretation of pooled estimates, and many of the included studies had a serious risk of bias.Current evidence does not provide a clear justification for adjusting the standard dose of 150 IU in the case of poor or normal responders, especially as increased dose is generally associated with greater total FSH dose and therefore greater cost. However, a decreased dose in predicted high responders may reduce OHSS.