Comparisons of GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol in poor ovarian responders undergoing IVF

Comparison of long GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist protocol in poor responders

Objective:

To compare long GnRH agonist with GnRH antagonist protocol in poor responders.

Materials and Methods:

Medical charts of 531 poor responder women undergoing in-vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle at Zeynep Kamil Maternity and Children’s Hospital, IVF Center were retrospectively analysed. Those who received at least 300 IU/daily gonadotropin and had ≤3 oocytes retrieved were enrolled in the study. Poor responders were categorized into two groups as those who received long GnRH agonist or GnRH antagonist regimen.

Results:

Treatment duration and total gonadotropin dosage were significantly higher in women undergoing the long GnRH agonist regimen compared with the GnRH antagonist regimen (p<0.001 for both). Although the number of total and mature oocytes retrieved was similar between the groups, good quality embryos were found to be higher in the GnRH antagonist regimen. The day of embryo transfer and number of transferred embryos were similar in the groups. No statistically significant differences were detected in pregnancy (10.5% vs 14.1%), clinical pregnancy (7.7% vs 10.6%) and early pregnancy loss rates (27.2% vs 35%) between the groups.

Conclusion:

GnRH antagonist regimen may be preferable to long GnRH regimen as it could decrease the cost and treatment duration in poor responders.

What should be the protocol selection after failure of in-vitro fertilization at normoresponder patients: Agonist or antagonist?

Objective:

Evaluation of the impact of agonist or antagonist protocol selection on pregnancy outcomes after failure of in-vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment cycles which were down regulated with Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone (GnRH) agonist.

Materials and Methods:

This was a retrospective study. Two hundred and sixty nine patients who were treated with GnRH agonist protocol between years 2002-2012 at an IVF unit and underwent a second attempt following one year period after failure of IVF enrolled in the study. Age, basal FSH levels, antral follicle counts, duration of induction, the number of yielded oocytes, the number of transferred embryos and the transfer days, clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates were evaluated for each treatment cycle.

Results:

Normoresponder patients were separated into two groups according to the agonist or antagonist protocol selection at the second attempt and the results of two consequent IVF cycles were compared. There were no statistically significant difference between the groups for the dosage of administered gonadotropin, duration of induction, the count of yielded oocytes, the day and the number of transferred embryos (p>0.05). Furthermore the fertilization rate, clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates were similar in two groups.

Conclusion:

The selection of antagonist treatment is effective as agonist protocols at normoresponder patients after failure of IVF.

A randomized controlled trial of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist in Iranian infertile couples: oocyte gene expression

Background

The main objective of the present work was to compare the effects of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) and GnRH antagonist (GnRH-ant) on the gene expression profiles of oocytes obtained from Iranian infertile couples undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF).

Methods

Fifty infertile couples who underwent IVF between June 2012 and November 2013 at the Infertility Center of Tehran Women General Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, were included in this study. We included women that had undergone IVF treatment because of male factor, tubal factor, or unexplained infertility. The women randomly underwent controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with either the GnRH-a (n = 26) or the GnRH-ant (n = 24). We obtained 50 germinal vesicle (GV) oocytes donated by women in each group. After the sampling, pool of 50 GV oocytes for each group was separately analyzed by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR).

Result

The expression levels of Adenosine triphosphatase 6 (ATPase 6), Bone morphogenetic protein 15 (BMP15), and Neuronal apoptosis inhibitory protein (NAIP) genes were significantly upregulated in the GnRH-ant group compared to the GnRH-a group, with the fold change of 3.990 (SD ± 1.325), 6.274 (SD ± 1.542), and 2.156 (SD ± 1.443), respectively, (P < 0.001). Growth differentiation factor 9 (GDF9) mRNA did not have any expression in the GnRH-a group; however, GDF9 mRNA was expressed in the GnRH-ant group. Finally, it was found that the genes involved in the DNA repairing and cell cycle checkpoint did not have any expression in either group.

Conclusion

The present study showed, for the first time, the expression levels of genes involved in the cytoplasmic maturity (BMP15, GDF9), adenosine triphosphate production (ATPase 6), and antiapoptotic process (NAIP), in human GV oocytes were significantly higher in the GnRH-anta group than in the GnRH-a group in COS. Higher expression level of these genes when GnRH-ant protocol is applied, this protocol seems to be a more appropriate choice for women with poly cystic ovarian syndrome, because it can probably improve the expression of the aforementioned genes.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials: IRCT 2014031112307 N3.

Comparison of human menopausal gonadotropin stimulation with and without clomiphene for in-vitro fertilisation in poor-responders

This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) with and without clomiphene citrate (CC) for ovarian stimulation and oocyte retrieval in poor-responders. A total of 66 cycles in 13 patients met the inclusion criteria of 20 cycles of hMG stimulation and 46 cycles of CC + hMG stimulation. Mean total hMG dose per patient was significantly lower during the stimulation cycle with CC + hMG than with hMG alone. Mean oestradiol level at oocyte retrieval and mean number of oocytes retrieved per patient showed no significant differences between the two cycles. Four of the 13 patients achieved pregnancy with the CC + hMG cycles. The absence of a significant difference in oestradiol level at oocyte retrieval or in the number of oocytes retrieved between the two cycles, despite a significantly lower total hMG dose during the CC + hMG stimulation cycles, suggests a greater benefit of CC + hMG stimulation for poor-responders.

Management of poor responders in IVF: is there anything new?

Despite the fact that in the last two decades an enormous number of papers on the topic of poor ovarian response have been published in the literature, so far it has been impossible to identify any efficient treatment to improve the ovarian response and the clinical outcome of this group of patients. The incidence of poor ovarian responders among infertile women has been estimated at 9–24% but according to recent reviews, it seems to have slightly increased. The limitation in quantifying the incidence of these patients among the infertile population is due to the difficulty of a clear definition in literature. A recent paper by the Bologna ESHRE working group on poor ovarian response has been the first real attempt to find a common definition. Current literature proposes new risk factors which could be the cause of a reduction in ovarian reserve, which also includes genetic factors. This represents the first necessary step towards finding applicable solutions for these patients. To date, there is a substantial lack of literature that identifies an ideal protocol for these patients. The use of the “Bologna criteria” and the introduction of long acting gonadotropin in clinical practice have given rise to new promising stimulation protocols for this group of patients.

Mini-dose GnRH-a long versus short protocol in patients ≥ 35 years old undergoing in vitro fertilization

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical result of mini-dose GnRH-a long protocol with short protocol in older patients undergoing IVF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective study. Four hundred and sixty-one women aged above 35-year-old in first cycle were assigned to two groups: GnRH-a short protocol (n=359); and mini-dose GnRH-a long protocol (n=102). Both groups were divided based on their age, into groups over and under 38 years old. Primary outcome include live birth rate per started cycle. Other clinical outcomes were good-quality embryo rate, clinical pregnancy rate.

RESULTS

Patients treated with mini-dose GnRH-a protocol and those treated with short protocol showed similar live birth rate. In the mini-dose long protocol group aged 35-38 years old, patients showed significantly thicker endometrium at the day of hCG administration, higher number of good embryos obtained and higher good-quality embryo rate (56.3% versus 46.5%) compared with short protocol. The implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate were higher versus short protocol group, but this result was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION(S)

Mini-dose GnRH-a long protocol for older women is at least as effective as short protocol, especially in patients aged 35-38 years, with a better good-quality embryo rate and higher number of good embryos obtained, therefore mini-dose GnRH-a long protocol can be considered as an alternative protocol for patients above 35 years age.

The rate of high ovarian response in women identified at risk by a high serum AMH level is influenced by the type of gonadotropin

The aim was to compare ovarian response and clinical outcome of potential high-responders after stimulation with highly purified menotropin (HP-hMG) or recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) for in vitro fertilisation/intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Retrospective analysis was performed on data collected in two randomized controlled trials, one conducted following a long GnRH agonist protocol and the other with an antagonist protocol. Potential high-responders (n = 155 and n = 188 in the agonist and antagonist protocol, respectively) were defined as having an initial anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) value >75th percentile (5.2 ng/ml). In both protocols, HP-hMG stimulation in women in the high AMH category was associated with a significantly lower occurrence of high response (≥15 oocytes retrieved) than rFSH stimulation; 33% versus 51% (p = 0.025) and 31% versus 49% (p = 0.015) in the long agonist and antagonist protocol, respectively. In the potential high-responder women, trends for improved live birth rate were observed with HP-hMG compared with rFSH (long agonist protocol: 33% versus 20%, p = 0.074; antagonist protocol: 34% versus 23%, p = 0.075; overall population: 34% versus 22%, p = 0.012). In conclusion, the type of gonadotropin used for ovarian stimulation influences high-response rates and potentially clinical outcome in women identified as potential high-responders.

Effectiveness of the antagonist/letrozole protocol for treating poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

In view of the conflicting data regarding the efficacy of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist/letrozole (A/L) protocol for treating poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI), this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness of the A/L protocol and the microdose GnRH agonist flare up (MF) protocol for such treatment. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched for studies comparing the A/L and MF protocols for treating poor responders undergoing IVF/ICSI. We retrieved reports of three trials with data for 688 cycles in women. The clinical pregnancy rate was significantly decreased with the A/L compared with MF protocol (RR 0.70; 95% CI: 0.57-0.86; p = 0.001), the duration of gonadotrophin stimulation was lower with the A/L than MF protocol (MD -1.25; 95% CI: -2.37 to -0.12; p = 0.03). Moreover, there was no significant difference in cycle cancellation rate, number of oocytes retrieved, and the total dose of gonadotrophin between the two protocols. In conclusions, the clinical pregnancy rate may be lower with the A/L than MF protocol for treating poor responsers undergoing IVF/ICSI, but large-scale randomised controlled trials are needed to assess the A/L protocol.

Management of infertility in women over 40

Women's fertility potential is declining with age because of multiples intrinsic and extrinsic factors such as life style, oxidative stress and/or endocrine disruptors and is affecting the ability of these women to conceive naturally. This declining fertility potential and the late age of motherhood is increasing significantly the number of patients consulting infertility specialists. Different strategies of investigation and management are proposed to patients over 40 in order to overcome their infertility and improve the live birth rate in these patients. Intra Uterine Insemination (IUI) in women over 40 is associated with a low rate of ongoing pregnancy and IUI should not therefore be offered always as the first line of treatment. When the predictive factors are positive IVF/ICSI seem to be good alternatives until 43 years of age. Customized ovarian stimulation and flexible laboratory methods such as in vitro maturation (IVM), preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), embryo vitrification and transfer after thawing in subsequent natural or artificial cycles can improve the success rate of ART in patients over 40. Meanwhile, oocyte and embryos donation remain good options for patient over 40 with a bad prognosis and can lead to successful ongoing pregnancies until 45 years of age. Ovarian tissue cryopreservation, oocyte vitrification at the germinal vesicle (GV) stage or metaphase II stage present a breakthrough for fertility preservation but the ideal age for starting fertility preservation is still debated as well as the minimum number of oocytes to be vitrified in order to optimize the chances of pregnancy when needed at an older age. This manuscript reports the results of our own experience from patients older than 40 in the light of the published data and discusses the different therapeutic alternatives which can be proposed to patients over 40 consulting ART centres.

Individualization of controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF using ovarian reserve markers: from theory to practice

BACKGROUND

The main objective of individualization of treatment in IVF is to offer every single woman the best treatment tailored to her own unique characteristics, thus maximizing the chances of pregnancy and eliminating the iatrogenic and avoidable risks resulting from ovarian stimulation. Personalization of treatment in IVF should be based on the prediction of ovarian response for every individual. The starting point is to identify if a woman is likely to have a normal, poor or a hyper response and choose the ideal treatment protocol tailored to this prediction. The objective of this review is to summarize the predictive ability of ovarian reserve markers, such as antral follicle count (AFC) and anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH), and the therapeutic strategies that have been proposed in IVF after this prediction.

METHODS

A systematic review of the existing literature was performed by searching Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane library and Web of Science for publications in the English language related to AFC, AMH and their incorporation into controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocols in IVF. Literature available to May 2013 was included.

RESULTS

The search generated 305 citations of which 41 and 25 studies, respectively, reporting the ability of AMH and AFC to predict response to COS were included in this review. The literature review demonstrated that AFC and AMH, the most sensitive markers of ovarian reserve identified to date, are ideal in planning personalized COS protocols. These sensitive markers permit prediction of the whole spectrum of ovarian response with reliable accuracy and clinicians may use either of the two markers as they can be considered interchangeable. Following the categorization of expected ovarian response to stimulation clinicians can adopt tailored therapeutic strategies for each patient. Current scientific trend suggests the elective use of the GnRH antagonist based regimen for hyper-responders, and probably also poor responders, as likely to be beneficial. The selection of the appropriate and individualized gonadotrophin dose is also of paramount importance for effective COS and subsequent IVF outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Personalized IVF offers several benefits; it enables clinicians to give women more accurate information on their prognosis thus facilitating counselling especially in cases of extremes of ovarian response. The deployment of therapeutic strategies based on selective use of GnRH analogues and the fine tuning of the gonadotrophin dose on the basis of potential ovarian response in every single woman can allow for a safer and more effective IVF practice.

The effectiveness of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist in poor ovarian responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist in poor ovarian responders undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF).

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING

Affiliated hospital with a medical university.

PATIENT(S)

None.

INTERVENTION(S)

Electronic search.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Clinical pregnancy rate, number of oocytes retrieved, cycle cancellation rate.

RESULT(S)

A total of 12 published studies (1,332 cases) were included. Both the stimulation period (mean difference [MD], -0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.68 to -0.17) and the gonadotropin dosage (MD, -5.41; 95% CI, -7.51 to -3.31) were statistically significantly lower in the GnRH antagonist protocol than in the long GnRH agonist protocol. Both the endometrial thickness (MD -0.45; 95% CI, -0.76 to -0.13) and estrogen (E2) level on the day of hCG administration (MD, -1,299.15; 95% CI, -1,716.34 to -881.95) were statistically significantly lower in the GnRH antagonist protocol than the GnRH agonist protocol. Fewer oocytes were retrieved for the GnRH antagonist protocol than the long GnRH agonist protocol (MD, -0.34; 95% CI, -0.54 to -0.13) or the short GnRH agonist protocol (MD, -0.54; 95% CI, -0.9, 8 to -0.10). The cycle cancellation and clinical pregnancy rates were not statistically significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION(S)

Compared with GnRH agonist protocols, the GnRH antagonist protocol is associated with fewer oocytes retrieved, lower E2 levels, and thinner endometrium whereas the clinical pregnancy and cycle cancellation rates are similar.

Optimal usage of the GnRH antagonists: a review of the literature

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists, which became commercially available from 1999, have been used for the prevention of premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surges in controlled ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. This review focuses on the recent literature on the use of GnRH antagonists and provides guidelines for optimal use in light of increasing evidence showing that GnRH antagonists are safe and effective, allowing flexibility of treatment in a wide range of patient populations. This includes patients undergoing first-line controlled ovarian stimulation, poor responders, and women diagnosed with polycystic ovary syndrome. The GnRH antagonist offers a viable alternative to the long agonists, providing a shorter duration of treatment with fewer injections and with no adverse effects on assisted reproductive technology outcome. This results in a significantly lower amount of gonadotropins required, which is likely to lead to improved patient compliance.

A comparative study on oxidative and antioxidative markers of serum and follicular fluid in GnRH agonist and antagonist cycles

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether concentrations of oxidative stress markers of follicular fluid and serum are different in GnRH agonist protocol from GnRH antagonist protocol.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

This was a cross-sectional study. Eighty-four women undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation with either GnRH agonist (n = 39) or GnRH antagonist protocols (n = 45) for IVF/ICSI treatment were assigned by a physician. Blood was obtained at the time of oocyte retrieval, and follicular fluid (FF) from the mature follicles of each ovary was centrifuged and frozen until analysis. Malondialdehyde (MDA), nitric oxide (NO), protein carbonyl (PC), hydroxyl proline (OH-P), sodium oxide dismutase (SOD), reduced glutathione (GSH), glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px), adenosine deaminase (ADA) and xanthine oxidase (XO) were assessed in the serum and follicular fluid of each participants.

RESULTS

The mean serum concentrations of GSH-Px, GSH and MDA were lower in the GnRH antagonist group compared to GnRH agonist group, but mean serum SOD was higher in the GnRH antagonist group. The mean follicular SOD, ADA and NO were higher in GnRH antagonist group than GnRH agonist group. The IVF/ICSI outcomes were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION(S)

GnRH antagonist protocol is associated with increased oxidative stress. The relation of GnRH analogues with oxidative stress and its implication in follicular growth needs to be addressed in further studies.

A short narrative review of the feasibility of adopting mild ovarian stimulation for IVF as the current standard of care

INTRODUCTION

Mild ovarian stimulation has been conceived, proposed and implemented in clinical practice as a safer and cheaper alternative to conventional strategies of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in preparation for in vitro fertilization (IVF). Our aim was to summarize the key evidence on this topic and explore its possible role as the standard treatment option for women undergoing IVF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A short narrative review of the existing literature, with emphasis on mild ovarian stimulation clinical and cost effectiveness, as well as treatment limitations.

RESULTS

Numerous studies highlight mild ovarian stimulation's favorable characteristics with respect to oocyte/embryo quality, reduced patient risk, and ease of intervention. There is, however, a need for high-quality laboratory environment. Limitations regarding poor responders, older women, or those seeking ovarian stimulation for non-infertility indications should also be considered. Finally, outcomes on the cumulative success rates and the cost effectiveness of mild ovarian stimulation remain inconclusive.

CONCLUSION

Mild ovarian stimulation protocols for IVF should currently be implemented only in carefully selected populations. Further research is needed to clarify the remaining controversies in this IVF approach.

Ovarian stimulation protocols in assisted reproductive technology: an update

Controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with gonadotropins to produce multiple follicular development and high-quality oocytes is the cornerstone of assisted reproductive technology. Today, recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (r-hFSH) is widely used for COS. A long-acting r-hFSH and a combination of r-hFSH and recombinant human luteinizing hormone have recently become available. Formulations of purified urinary FSH with or without luteinizing hormone activity (provided by human chorionic gonadotropin) are also available. COS protocols can now be individualized to optimize efficacy and safety - defined as singleton pregnancies with a low incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. This is facilitated by an estimation of ovarian response using the antral follicle count and/or serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels; anti-Müllerian hormone is viewed as the most reliable single marker. However, an efficient management strategy for poor responders to COS is still required. Developments in biomarkers and other techniques for accurate identification of viable oocytes and embryos and optimal uterine receptivity are expected.

GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist in assisted reproduction cycles: oocyte morphology

BACKGROUND

The selection of developmentally competent human gametes may increase the efficiency of assisted reproduction. Spermatozoa and oocytes are usually assessed according to morphological criteria. Oocyte morphology can be affected by the age, genetic characteristics, and factors related to controlled ovarian stimulation. However, there is a lack of evidence in the literature concerning the effect of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues, either agonists or antagonists, on oocyte morphology. The aim of this randomized study was to investigate whether the prevalence of oocyte dysmorphism is influenced by the type of pituitary suppression used in ovarian stimulation.

METHODS

A total of 64 patients in the first intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycle were prospectively randomized to receive treatment with either a GnRH agonist with a long-term protocol (n: 32) or a GnRH antagonist with a multi-dose protocol (n: 32). Before being subjected to ICSI, the oocytes at metaphase II from both groups were morphologically analyzed under an inverted light microscope at 400x magnification. The oocytes were classified as follows: normal or with cytoplasmic dysmorphism, extracytoplasmic dysmorphism, or both. The number of dysmorphic oocytes per total number of oocytes was analyzed.

RESULTS

Out of a total of 681 oocytes, 189 (27.8%) were morphologically normal, 220 (32.3%) showed cytoplasmic dysmorphism, 124 (18.2%) showed extracytoplasmic alterations, and 148 (21.7%) exhibited both types of dysmorphism. No significant difference in oocyte dysmorphism was observed between the agonist- and antagonist-treated groups (P>0.05). Analysis for each dysmorphism revealed that the most common conditions were alterations in polar body shape (31.3%) and the presence of diffuse cytoplasmic granulations (22.8%), refractile bodies (18.5%) and central cytoplasmic granulations (13.6%). There was no significant difference among individual oocyte dysmorphisms in the agonist- and antagonist-treated groups (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our randomized data indicate that in terms of the quality of oocyte morphology, there is no difference between the antagonist multi-dose protocol and the long-term agonist protocol. If a GnRH analogue used for pituitary suppression in IVF cycles influences the prevalence of oocyte dysmorphisms, there does not appear to be a difference between the use of an agonist as opposed to an antagonist.