Prediction, assessment, and management of suboptimal GnRH agonist trigger: a systematic review

Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The use of progestins as pituitary suppressors has increased progressively, along with more detailed indications for their use, thereby consolidating an alternative approach to the personalization of ovarian stimulation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Based on the ability of progesterone to inhibit ovulation, progestins have been used in ovarian stimulation (OS) follicular protocols to prevent a luteinizing hormone surge in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF), as an alternative to gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogue administration. This review explores the different types of progestogen protocols and their efficacy depending on the type of population or reproductive procedure in which they are administered and in comparison with that of GnRH analogues. Their effect on oocytes and embryos and their safety and cost-effectiveness are also analyzed.

SUMMARY

Progestins have proven their effectiveness as a gonadotropin adjuvant in terms of ovarian response, reproductive outcome, and safety. In addition, they offer the convenience of oral administration and a lower cost than GnRH analogues. Whereas oocytes or embryos should be vitrified as it displaces the receptive period with the consequent asynchrony between embryo and endometrium. The evidence endorses progestins as a more friendly approach to OS, especially when frozen-thawed embryo transfer is planned.

GnRH agonist trigger in poor prognosis patients undergoing a multicycle approach through DuoStim or consecutive stimulations: a SWOT analysis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Identify the most recent and significant evidence regarding the ovulation trigger within the framework of a multicycle approach through DuoStim, providing valuable insights for improving treatment strategies in patients with a poor prognosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

The trigger method plays a pivotal role in optimizing in-vitro fertilization (IVF) stimulation, influencing oocyte retrieval and maturation rates, as well as follicle recruitment in consecutive ovarian stimulations such as double stimulation. Decision-making involves multiple factors and, while guidelines exist for conventional stimulation, specific recommendations for the multicycle approach are not well established.

SUMMARY

The different methods for inducing oocyte maturation underscore the need for personalization of IVF protocols. The GnRH agonist trigger induces rapid luteolysis and establishes favorable hormonal conditions that do not adversely affect the recruitment of consecutive follicular waves in the context of DuoStim. It serves as a valid alternative to hCG in freeze-all cycles. This strategy might enhance the safety and flexibility of ovarian stimulations with no impact on oocyte competence and IVF efficacy.

Risk factors for poor oocyte yield and oocyte immaturity after GnRH agonist triggering

STUDY QUESTION

What are the potential risk factors for poor oocyte recuperation rate (ORR) and oocyte immaturity after GnRH agonist (GnRHa) ovulation triggering?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Lower ovarian reserve and LH levels after GnRHa triggering are risk factors of poor ORR. Higher BMI and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels are risk factors of poor oocyte maturation rate (OMR).

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The use of GnRHa to trigger ovulation is increasing. However, some patients may have a suboptimal response after GnRHa triggering. This suboptimal response can refer to any negative endpoint, such as suboptimal oocyte recovery, oocyte immaturity, or empty follicle syndrome. For some authors, a suboptimal response to GnRHa triggering refers to a suboptimal LH and/or progesterone level following triggering. Several studies have investigated a combination of demographic, clinical, and endocrine characteristics at different stages of the treatment process that may affect the efficacy of the GnRHa trigger and thus be involved in a poor endocrine response or efficiency but no consensus exists.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Bicentric retrospective cohort study between 2015 and 2021 (N = 1747).

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

All patients aged 18-43 years who underwent controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and ovulation triggering by GnRHa alone (triptorelin 0.2 mg) for ICSI or oocyte cryopreservation were included. The ORR was defined as the ratio of the total number of retrieved oocytes to the number of follicles >12 mm on the day of triggering. The OMR was defined as the ratio of the number of mature oocytes to the number of retrieved oocytes. A logistic regression model with a backward selection method was used for the analysis of risk factors. Odds ratios (OR) are displayed with their two-sided 95% confidence interval.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

In the multivariate analysis, initial antral follicular count and LH level 12-h post-triggering were negatively associated with poor ORR (i.e. below the 10th percentile) (OR: 0.61 [95% CI: 0.42-0.88]; P = 0.008 and OR: 0.86 [95% CI: 0.76-0.97]; P = 0.02, respectively). A nonlinear relationship was found between LH level 12-h post-triggering and poor ORR, but no LH threshold was found. A total of 25.3% of patients suffered from oocyte immaturity (i.e. OMR < 75%). In the multivariate analysis, BMI and AMH levels were negatively associated with an OMR < 75% (OR: 4.34 [95% CI: 1.96-9.6]; P < 0.001 and OR: 1.22 [95% CI: 1.03-1.12]; P = 0.015, respectively). Antigonadotrophic pretreatment decreased the risk of OMR < 75% compared to no pretreatment (OR: 0.72 [95% CI: 0.57-0.91]; P = 0.02).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Our study is limited by its retrospective design and by the exclusion of patients who had hCG retriggers. However, this occurred in only six cycles. We were also not able to collect information on the duration of pretreatment and the duration of wash out period.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

In clinical practice, to avoid poor ORR, GnRHa trigger alone should not be considered in patients with higher BMI and/or low ovarian reserve, balanced by the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. In the case of a low 12-h post-triggering LH level, practicians must be aware of the risk of poor ORR, and hCG retriggering could be considered.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

None.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Comparison of pregnancy outcomes in women with normal ovarian response to the gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist protocol using different trigger methods: a single-center retrospective cohort study based on propensity score matching

PURPOSE

To investigate whether gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) combined with human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) can improve pregnancy outcomes in patients with normal ovarian response (NOR).

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, data of 404 NOR patients undergoing fresh embryo transfer (ET) from 2018 to 2022 were studied. Patients were divided into HCG group and HCG plus GnRH-a group according to trigger methods. After confounding factors were controlled by propensity score matching, 67 cases were included in HCG group and HCG plus GnRH-a group, respectively, and pregnancy outcomes were assessed. Basal data, ovarian stimulation, embryological data and pregnancy outcomes were compared. The effect of trigger methods on pregnancy outcomes was analyzed by binary logistic regression.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant differences in embryological data, embryo implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate of ET, number of fresh embryos transferred and total number of embryos transferred after one cycle of oocyte retrieval. While, cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) was better in the dual-trigger group than in the HCG group. The binary logistic regression analysis indicated that the trigger methods had an independent influence on embryo implantation and cumulative live birth.

CONCLUSIONS

During IVF/ICSI, dual-trigger could potentially play a role in improving oocyte quality, ensuring embryo implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate of ET and cumulative live birth rate at the end of one ovum pick-up (OPU) cycle, and reducing the physical, temporal and financial negative consequences due to repeated OPU cycle.

Follicular challenge test to predict suboptimal response to gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist trigger in elective oocyte cryopreservation cycles

This prospective study aimed to test the ability of follicular GnRH agonist challenge test (FACT) to predict suboptimal response to GnRH agonist trigger, assessed by LH levels post ovulation trigger in non-medical oocyte cryopreservation program. The study included 91 women that underwent non-medical fertility preservation. On day two to menstrual cycle, blood tests were drawn (basal Estradiol, basal FSH, basal LH, Progesterone) and ultrasound (US) was performed. On that evening, the women were instructed to inject 0.2 mg GnRH agonist (FACT) and arrive for repeated blood workup 10-12 h later in the next morning, followed by a flexible antagonist protocol. LH levels on the morning after ovulation trigger were compared to FACT LH levels. The results demonstrated that LH levels following agonist ovulation trigger below 15IU/L occurred in 1.09% of cycles and were predicted by FACT, r = 0.57, p < 0.001. ROC analysis demonstrated that FACT LH > 42.70 IU/L would predict LH post trigger of more than 30 IU/L with 75% sensitivity and 70% specificity, AUC = 0.81. LH levels post trigger also displayed significant positive correlation to basal FSH (r = 0.35, p = 0.002) and basal LH (r = 0.54, p < 0.001). LH levels post ovulation trigger were not associated with total oocytes number or maturity rate. The strongest correlation to the number of frozen oocytes was progesterone levels post agonist trigger (r = 0.746, p < 0.001). We concluded that suboptimal response to agonist trigger, as assessed by post trigger LH levels was a rare event. FACT could serve as an adjunct pre-trigger, intracycle tool to predict adequate LH levels elevation after agonist ovulation trigger. Future studies should focus on optimization of agonist trigger efficacy assessment and prediction, especially in high responders.

Factors associated with the efficacy of mature oocyte production after dual-trigger controlled ovarian stimulation using a GnRH antagonist protocol

BACKGROUND

The number of mature oocytes retrieved plays a significant role in determining embryo development and pregnancy outcomes of in vitro fertilization (IVF). However, studies investigating factors predictive of the efficacy of mature oocyte production (EMOP) after dual-trigger controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) are rare. This study aims to identify key predictors of EMOP during dual-trigger COS with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol for IVF.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 359 first-time IVF patients undergoing dual-trigger COS with a GnRH antagonist protocol. EMOP was defined as the ratio of metaphase II (MII) oocyte count to antral follicle count (AFC). Based on EMOP results, patients were divided into two groups: group A (EMOP <70%; n = 232) and group B (EMOP ≥70%; n = 127).

RESULTS

Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that day-2 follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), stimulation duration, and total oocyte count were the most significant predictors of EMOP ( p < 0.05; odds ratios: 1.637, 3.400, and 1.530, respectively). Receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated that total oocyte count <9.5 (area under the curve [AUC], 0.782; sensitivity, 76.2%; specificity, 69.2%; p < 0.001) and stimulation duration <9.5 days (AUC, 0.725; sensitivity, 63.5%; specificity, 66.7%; p < 0.001) significantly predicted EMOP <70%. Stimulation duration combined with total oocyte count exhibited the highest power in predicting EMOP <70% (AUC, 0.767; sensitivity, 92.3%; specificity, 42.4%).

CONCLUSION

Stimulation duration combined with total oocyte count was identified as the most important factor associated with the EMOP during dual-trigger COS in IVF using a GnRH antagonist protocol.

A reappraisal of ovarian stimulation strategies used in assisted reproductive technology

Ovarian stimulation is a fundamental step in assisted reproductive technology (ART) with the intention of inducing ovarian follicle development prior to timed intercourse or intra-uterine insemination and facilitating the retrieval of multiple oocytes during a single in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle. The basis of ovarian stimulation includes the administration of exogenous gonadotropins, with or without pre-treatment with oral hormonal therapy. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist or antagonist is given in addition to the gonadotropins to prevent a premature rise of endogenous luteinizing hormone that would in turn lead to premature ovulation. With the advancement in technology, various stimulation protocols have been devised to cater for different patient needs. However, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and its serious complications may occur following ovarian stimulation. It is also evident that suboptimal ovarian stimulation strategies may have a negative impact on oogenesis, embryo quality, endometrial receptivity, and reproductive outcomes over recent years. This review describes the various forms of pre-treatment for ovarian stimulation and stimulation protocols, and aims to provide clinicians with the latest available evidence.

The value of LH maximum level in predicting optimal oocyte yield following GnRH agonist trigger

Background

Risk factors associated with a suboptimal response to Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists include a high or low body mass index (BMI), prolonged use of oral contraceptive pills, and low luteinizing hormone (LH) levels on either the start or trigger days of controlled ovarian stimulation (COS). However, this approach may increase the need for a dual trigger and may also result in a higher incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) in hyper-responders. We aimed to investigate whether the maximum LH level during stimulation can serve as a predictive factor for achieving an optimal oocyte yield using the GnRH agonist trigger alone.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed all antagonist protocols or progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocols triggered with GnRH agonist only between May 2012 and December 2022. Subjects were divided into three groups, depending on basal LH level and LH maximum level. The freeze-all strategy was implemented in all cycles: Group 1, consistently low LH levels throughout COS; Group 2, low basal LH level with high LH max level during COS; Group 3, consistently high LH levels throughout COS. The primary outcome was the oocyte yield rate. The secondary outcome includes the number of collected oocytes, suboptimal response to GnRH agonist trigger, oocyte maturity rate, fertilized rate, clinical pregnancy rate, ongoing pregnancy rate, and live birth rate. The pregnancy outcomes were calculated for the first FET cycle.

Results

Following confounder adjustment, multivariable regression analysis showed that Group 1 (cycles with consistently low LH levels throughout COS) remains an independent predictor of suboptimal response (OR: 6.99; 95% CI 1.035-47.274). Group 1 (b = -12.72; 95% CI -20.9 to -4.55) and BMI (b = -0.25; 95% CI -0.5 to -0.004) were negatively associated with oocyte yield rate. Patients with low basal LH but high LH max levels had similar clinical outcomes compared to those with high LH max levels through COS.

Conclusions

The maximum LH level during COS may serve as an indicator of LH reserve and could be a more reliable predictor of achieving an optimal oocyte yield when compared to relying solely on the basal LH level. In the case of hyper-responders where trigger agents (agonist-only or dual trigger) are being considered, we propose a novel strategy that incorporates the maximum LH level, rather than just the basal or trigger-day LH level, as a reference for assessing LH reserve. This approach aims to minimize the risk of obtaining suboptimal oocyte yield and improve overall treatment outcomes.

Low LH level does not indicate poor IVF cycle outcomes with GnRh-a single trigger: a retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) cycle outcomes between patients with low and normal serum luteinizing hormone (LH) levels on the day after a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) single trigger. We further investigated the efficacy of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) retrigger on IVF cycle outcomes in patients with low LH levels after GnRH-a single trigger.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 957 infertile patients (tubal factor, ovulation disorders, male sperm factor, or unexplained infertility) who were treated with IVF/ICSI at the Chengdu Xinan Gynecology Hospital from July 2017 to December 2020. Patients received sufficient GnRH-a single trigger were divided into two groups based on the serum LH levels on the next day of trigger: normal serum LH levels (≥ 10 mIU/mL) group (control group, n = 906) and low LH levels (< 10 mIU/mL) group (experimental group, n = 51). And the efficacy of hCG retrigger on IVF/ICSI cycle outcomes in 10 patients with low LH levels after GnRH-a single trigger.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in IVF/ICSI cycle outcomes, including egg yield, two pronuclei fertilization rate, excellent embryo rate, or live birth rate of frozen-thawed embryos between patients with low and normal LH levels after GnRH-a trigger. It showed significantly higher risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in the group of low LH levels [ 0.7%(1/137) vs. 8.5%(4/47), P = 0.016] compared with the group of normal LH levels who received GnRH-a single trigger. The hCG retrigger had no obvious efficacy on cycle outcomes in patients with low LH levels, including oocytes retrieved, fertilization rate, embryo conditions, and live birth rate of frozen-thawed cycles.

CONCLUSION

The IVF/ICSI cycle outcomes of patients with low LH levels on the day after GnRH-a administration were similar to those of patients with normal LH levels. Blood LH test might not be required on the day following the trigger. The hCG retrigger did not have any effect on the cycle outcomes, suggesting that immediate retriggering with hCG was unnecessary.