Efficacy and safety of ganirelix acetate versus leuprolide acetate in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation

Live birth rate of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist versus luteal phase gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist protocol in IVF/ICSI: a systematic review and meta-analysis

In vitro fertilization (IVF) and embryo transfer and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) have allowed millions of infertile couples to achieve pregnancy. As an essential part of IVF/ICSI enabling the retrieval of a high number of oocytes in one cycle, controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) treatment mainly composes of the standard long gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) protocol and the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol. However, the effectiveness of GnRH-ant protocol is still debated because of inconsistent conclusions and insufficient subgroup analyses. This systematic review and meta-analysis included a total of 52 studies, encompassing 5193 participants in the GnRH-ant group and 4757 in the GnRH-a group. The findings of this study revealed that the GnRH-ant protocol is comparable with the long GnRH-a protocol when considering live birth as the primary outcome, and it is a favourable protocol with evidence reducing the incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in women undergoing IVF/ICSI, especially in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Further research is needed to compare the subsequent cumulative live birth rate between the two protocols among the general and poor ovarian response patients since those patients have a lower clinical pregnancy rate, fewer oocytes retrieved or fewer high-grade embryos in the GnRH-ant protocol.

GnRH agonists and antagonists in therapy of symptomatic uterine fibroids - current roles and future perspectives

INTRODUCTION

Uterine fibroids are the most common noncancerous tumors in women of childbearing age. This review was developed to evaluate the current role of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists and antagonists in the therapy of symptomatic uterine fibroids.

AREAS COVERED

There is a great need for alternative methods for surgical treatment of uterine fibroids. Hormonal therapy remains the first-line treatment option for most patients. GnRH analogs (agonists and antagonists) modulate the pulsatile release of GnRH. This review summarizes the available literature concerning pharmacologic principles underlying the mechanism of action of GnRH and its analogs, as well as individual therapeutic applications to which these drugs have been applied.

EXPERT OPINION

In many cases, it is possible to try to treat uterine fibroids pharmacologically. Both groups of GnRH analogs are used in therapy, agonists instead as a preparation for surgery, and antagonists as a drug for long-term use. It is essential to develop this path further and look for at least long-term-release systems or new methods of administering these drugs. It is also important from the patient's perspective to search for possible drugs that may have an additive effect of decreasing side effects when combined with GnRH analogs.

Association between serum LH levels on hCG trigger day and live birth rate after fresh embryo transfer with GnRH antagonist regimen in different populations

Objective

To investigate whether serum LH levels on hCG trigger day are associated with live birth rate (LBR) after fresh embryo transfer with GnRH antagonist regimen in different populations.

Methods

This study was a retrospective study. A total of 3059 fresh embryo transfers were divided into three populations: predicted normal ovarian responders (NOR) (n=2049), patients with PCOS (n=533), and predicted poor ovarian responders (POR) (n=477). Each population was stratified into three groups based on LH levels: < 25th percentile, 25-75th percentile, and > 75th percentile. The primary outcome of the study was LBR, and secondary outcomes included implantation, clinical pregnancy, and early pregnancy loss rates. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to adjust for potential confounders.

Results

In NOR, compared to the reference group (>75th percentile), LBR was significantly lower in the < 25th percentile group (adjusted OR=0.662; 95%CI, 0.508-0.863) and 25-75th percentile group (adjusted OR=0.791; 95%CI, 0.633-0.988). In PCOS patients, LBR decreased significantly in the < 25th percentile group (41.4%) compared to the 25-75th percentile group (53.7%) and > 75th percentile group (56.1%). In addition, the LBR was lower in the < 25th percentile group (33.6%) compared with the 25-75th percentile group (43.4%) and the>75th percentile group (42.0%) in POR, but this was not statistically significant.

Conclusions

High serum LH levels are associated with increased LBR after fresh embryo transfer in GnRH antagonist cycles, which may be attributable to higher implantation rate. LH may be a predictor of whether to schedule fresh embryo transfer in IVF cycles for better clinical outcomes.

What is the optimal GnRH antagonist protocol for ovarian stimulation during ART treatment? A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several GnRH antagonist protocols are currently used during COS in the context of ART treatments; however, questions remain regarding whether these protocols are comparable in terms of efficacy and safety.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

A systematic review followed by a pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed. The systematic review and pairwise meta-analysis of direct comparative data according to the PRISMA guidelines evaluated the effectiveness of different GnRH antagonist protocols (fixed Day 5/6 versus flexible, ganirelix versus cetrorelix, with or without hormonal pretreatment) on the probability of live birth and ongoing pregnancy after COS during ART treatment. A frequentist network meta-analysis combining direct and indirect comparisons (using the long GnRH agonist protocol as the comparator) was also performed to enhance the precision of the estimates.

SEARCH METHODS

The systematic literature search was performed using Embase (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Trials (CENTRAL), SCOPUS and Web of Science (WOS), from inception until 23 November 2021. The search terms comprised three different MeSH terms that should be present in the identified studies: GnRH antagonist; assisted reproduction treatment; randomized controlled trial (RCT). Only studies published in English were included.

OUTCOMES

The search strategy resulted in 6738 individual publications, of which 102 were included in the systematic review (corresponding to 75 unique studies) and 73 were included in the meta-analysis. Most studies were of low quality. One study compared a flexible protocol with a fixed Day 5 protocol and the remaining RCTs with a fixed Day 6 protocol. There was a lack of data regarding live birth when comparing the flexible and fixed GnRH antagonist protocols or cetrorelix and ganirelix. No significant difference in live birth rate was observed between the different pretreatment regimens versus no pretreatment or between the different pretreatment protocols. A flexible GnRH antagonist protocol resulted in a significantly lower OPR compared with a fixed Day 5/6 protocol (relative risk (RR) 0.76, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.94, I2 = 0%; 6 RCTs; n = 907 participants; low certainty evidence). There were insufficient data for a comparison of cetrorelix and ganirelix for OPR. OCP pretreatment was associated with a lower OPR compared with no pretreatment intervention (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.92; I2 = 0%; 5 RCTs, n = 1318 participants; low certainty evidence). Furthermore, in the network meta-analysis, a fixed protocol with OCP resulted in a significantly lower OPR than a fixed protocol with no pretreatment (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.99; moderate quality evidence). The surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) scores suggested that the fixed protocol with no pretreatment is the antagonist protocol most likely (84%) to result in the highest OPR. There was insufficient evidence of a difference between fixed/flexible or OCP pretreatment/no pretreatment interventions regarding other outcomes, such as ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and miscarriage rates.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

Available evidence, mostly of low quality and certainty, suggests that different antagonist protocols should not be considered as equivalent for clinical decision-making. More trials are required to assess the comparative effectiveness of ganirelix versus cetrorelix, the effect of different pretreatment interventions (e.g. progestins or oestradiol) or the effect of different criteria for initiation of the antagonist in the flexible protocol. Furthermore, more studies are required examining the optimal GnRH antagonist protocol in women with high or low response to ovarian stimulation.

Efficacy and safety of newly developed ganirelix acetate in infertile women for assisted reproductive technology: a prospective, randomised, controlled study

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of Ganilever pre-filled syringe (PFS), a newly developed ganirelix acetate, for the inhibition of premature luteinising hormone (LH) surge in in vitro fertilisation (IVF). A prospective randomised controlled study was conducted (NCT03051087). A total of 236 women (Ganilever group: 114, Orgalutran group: 122) were finally analysed. The patients with LH of >10 mIU/mL on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) injection were 0 (0.0%) and 3 (2.5%) in the Ganilever and Orgalutran groups, respectively (p= .25). The number of retrieved oocytes from two groups did not show any significant difference (12.0 ± 6.4 vs. 11.8 ± 6.3, p= .73). Furthermore, the two groups did not show significant differences in the number of good-quality oocytes and embryo, and the rate of fertilisation. Similar safety profiles were also observed. In conclusion, Ganilever PFS showed comparable IVF outcomes and safety profile in IVF, as compared to the Orgalutran. Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? Premature LH surge during controlled ovarian stimulation results in the induction of luteinisation of the immature follicles. Thus, gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol was suggested as an option for suppression of premature LH surge. Currently, one of GnRH antagonists being widely used is ganirelix acetate (Orgalutran^®; Organon, Oss, The Netherlands). Ganilever pre-filled syringe (PFS) is a newly developed GnRH antagonist containing ganirelix acetate as an active ingredient.What do the results of this study add? Our study demonstrated that Ganilever PFS showed comparable IVF outcomes and patient safety profile in infertile women undergoing in IVF-ET, as compared to the Orgalutran.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? The results of our study will provide another available GnRH antagonist to be used in patients with IVF.

Prevention of Premature Ovulation by Administration of Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone Antagonist the day After Ovulation Triggering in Diminished Ovarian Reserve Patients

OBJECTIVE

 The aim of the present retrospective study was to investigate the effectiveness of single-dose gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist administration, the day after human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) triggering for final oocyte maturation, on the prevention of premature luteinization in patients with diminished ovarian reserve in in-vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. The secondary objective of the study was to search the effect of this protocol on pregnancy outcomes.

METHODS

 This is a retrospective study including 267 infertile patients who have single antral follicle seen with ultrasonography on the 2^nd or 3^rd day of the menstrual cycle before starting IVF treatment. We randomized patients into two groups. The case group comprised patients who had single-dose GnRH antagonist injection the day after hCG triggering formed, and the patients who had the standard treatment regime formed the control group. In both groups, the oocytes were collected 36 hours after hCG injection.

RESULTS

 The premature ovulation rate was significantly low in the case group compared with the control group (6.86 versus 20.6% per scheduled cycle) (p = 0.022). Also, the oocyte retrieval rate (93.14 versus 67.87% per scheduled cycle) (p = 0.013), the oocyte maturity rate (79.42 versus 47.87%) (p = 0.041), the fertilization rate (65.68 versus 34.54%) (p = 0.018), and the embryo transfer rate per scheduled cycle (44.11 versus 18.78%) (p = 0.003) were higher in the GnRH antagonist group than in the control group.

CONCLUSION

 The administration of GnRH antagonist the day after hCG trigger in IVF treatments of patients with diminished ovarian reserve enabled a significant decrease in the rate of premature ovulation but had no effect on live birth rate.

Does timing matter when initiating elagolix in a natural menstrual cycle?

Objective

To investigate the efficacy of elagolix when administered at different time points in a menstrual cycle.

Design

Clinical case series.

Setting

Academic reproductive endocrinology center.

Patients

Ovulatory women not desiring pregnancy.

Intervention(s)

Six doses of elagolix 200 mg were administered over 4 days, starting at 3 different points in a menstrual cycle: early follicular; late follicular; and midluteal. Serum follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), estradiol (E2), and progesterone (P) concentrations were measured at baseline, during elagolix administration, and 1 day after the last dose. Transvaginal ultrasounds were performed to monitor follicle sizes.

Main Outcome Measure(s)

Serum FSH, LH, E2, and P.

Result(s)

Twelve women, four per group, completed the study. Subjects were 23–42 years of age. Demographics and ovarian reserve parameters were similar among participants. Elagolix suppressed FSH, LH, E2, and P when administered in the early follicular and midluteal phases but had mixed results when administered in the late follicular phase. Two participants demonstrated suppression of all four hormones. One participant ovulated, indicated by an increase in P concentration and development of a corpus luteum. A second participant did not ovulate yet demonstrated an increase in E2 concentration with growth of a dominant follicle. There were no significant differences in median percent change of hormone concentrations across study groups.

Conclusion(s)

The results of this study suggest that elagolix can suppress the hypothalamic–pituitary–ovarian axis when initiated at different points in a menstrual cycle. Optimal dosing and treatment window for consistent hormone suppression have yet to be determined.

Clinical Registration Number

NCT04060992

Pregnancy outcomes following different protocols of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in couples undergoing intrauterine insemination

Clomiphene citrate (CC), letrozole and cetrorelix acetate are frequently used agents in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH). However, these three agents have not yet been compared to one another regarding their pregnancy outcomes. The present study was designed to retrospectively compare pregnancy outcomes among the three aforementioned agents. This study involved infertile couples with an infertility duration of at least 2 years, ages 18 to 42 years and who were referred to have their first intrauterine insemination (IUI) treatment cycle. All patients underwent COH with recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) plus CC (n = 118), letrozole (n = 81), or cetrorelix acetate (n = 62), followed by IUI. Using the one-way multivariate analysis of covariance to control female patients' ages, patients stimulated with cetrorelix acetate/rFSH or CC/rFSH had higher numbers of preovulatory follicles than women stimulated with letrozole/rFSH (P < .02), whereas women stimulated with cetrorelix acetate/rFSH had a thicker endometrium than women stimulated with CC/rFSH (P < .0005). Biochemical pregnancy rates were similar among the three protocols of COH. However, women stimulated with letrozole/rFSH showed clinical pregnancy rates higher than those stimulated with CC/rFSH (P = .003) or cetrorelix acetate/rFSH (P = .03) and subclinical abortion rates lower than those stimulated with CC/rFSH or cetrorelix acetate/rFSH (P = .009). Of the different protocols of COH, the odds of having a clinical pregnancy was 3.1 times greater for women stimulated with letrozole/rFSH than women stimulated with CC/rFSH (P = .004) and 2.8 times greater for women stimulated with letrozole/rFSH than women stimulated with cetrorelix acetate/rFSH (P = .03). Our observations show that increased numbers of preovulatory follicles or endometrium thickness do not necessarily improve pregnancy outcomes, because pregnancy outcomes are also subjected to the type of COH used agent. In this regard, letrozole produced fewer preovulatory follicles and did not significantly increase endometrium thickness, but significantly improved pregnancy outcomes in comparison to CC and cetrorelix acetate.

The effect of a transient premature luteinizing hormone surge without elevated serum progesterone on in vitro fertilization outcomes in a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist flexible protocol

During controlled ovarian stimulation, the LH rising before triggering can lead to follicular luteinizations. However, LH can be suppressed immediately and no progesterone elevation with GnRH antagonist. This study retrospectively compared fresh IVF/ICSI cycle outcomes in antagonist protocols between the group with and the group without a premature LH surge. Logistic regression models were fitted to reduce the relevant confounders. Compared between premature LH surge group and control group, the implantation rates were 12.9% (30/233) vs 25.0% (141/536), p = .000; clinical pregnancy rates were 21.0% (25/119) vs 41.6% (119/286), p = .000; live birth rates were17.6% (21/119) vs 29.7% (85/286), p = .012. After adjusting for age, BMI, bFSH, and infertility factors, the adverse effects were still as pronounced for the clinical pregnancy rate (OR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.24-0.66) and live birth rates (OR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.32-0.93. In a GnRH antagonist flexible protocol, a transient premature LH surge which can be suppressed immediately after the initiation of antagonist without elevated serum progesterone, will cause a detrimental effect on the development of the embryo and IVF/ICSI pregnancy outcomes in fresh embryo transfer cycles.

[Effects of cetrorelix versus ganirelix in gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles for preventing premature luteinizing hormone surges and on clinical outcomes of IVF-ET cycles]

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of cetrorelix and ganirelix in gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) cycles for preventing premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surges and on clinical outcomes of IVF-ET cycles.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 2572 GnRH-ant cycles of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer from January, 2013 to December, 2016, including 1368 cycles with cetrorelix treatment and 1204 cycles with ganirelix treatment. The baseline characteristics of the patients and the clinical outcomes of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

Compared with those receiving ganirelix treatment, the patients with cetrorelix treatment had a significantly younger age (33.10 vs 33.89 years, P < 0.001) and a lower body mass index (21.57 vs 21.84 kg/m², P=0.024). After adjustment for age and body mass index of the patients, no significant differences were found between the two groups in the levels of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), LH, estradiol (E₂), progesterone (P) levels either at the baseline or on the day of hCG triggering, or in the number of oocytes retrieved (P > 0.05). The two groups also had comparable percentages of patients with LH > 10 U/L on the day of hCG triggering (3.7% vs 3.2%) and similar spontaneous ovulation rate (0.6% vs 0.5%), clinical pregnancy rate (47.7% vs 45.9%) and live birth rate (37.5% vs 33.6%) following fresh embryo transfer (P > 0.05). The incidence of moderate to severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, however, was significantly higher in ganirelix group than in cetrorelix group (0.7% vs 0.1%, P=0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Cetrorelix and ganirelix can achieve comparable effects for preventing premature LH surges and can achieve similar clinical outcomes of GnRH-ant cycles, but ganirelix is associated with a significantly higher incidence of moderate to severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

GnRH antagonist versus long agonist protocols in IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis accounting for patient type

BACKGROUND

Most reviews of IVF ovarian stimulation protocols have insufficiently accounted for various patient populations, such as ovulatory women, women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) or women with poor ovarian response, and have included studies in which the agonist or antagonist was not the only variable between the compared study arms.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

The aim of the current study was to compare GnRH antagonist protocols versus standard long agonist protocols in couples undergoing IVF or ICSI, while accounting for various patient populations and treatment schedules.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Review Group specialized register of controlled trials and Pubmed and Embase databases were searched from inception until June 2016. Eligible trials were those that compared GnRH antagonist protocols and standard long GnRH agonist protocols in couples undergoing IVF or ICSI. The primary outcome was ongoing pregnancy rate. Secondary outcomes were: live birth rate, clinical pregnancy rate, number of oocytes retrieved and safety with regard to ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Separate comparisons were performed for the general IVF population, women with PCOS and women with poor ovarian response. Pre-planned subgroup analyses were performed for various antagonist treatment schedules.

OUTCOMES

We included 50 studies. Of these, 34 studies reported on general IVF patients, 10 studies reported on PCOS patients and 6 studies reported on poor responders. In general IVF patients, ongoing pregnancy rate was significantly lower in the antagonist group compared with the agonist group (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.96). In women with PCOS and in women with poor ovarian response, there was no evidence of a difference in ongoing pregnancy between the antagonist and agonist groups (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84-1.11 and RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.65-1.17, respectively). Subgroup analyses for various antagonist treatment schedules compared to the long protocol GnRH agonist showed a significantly lower ongoing pregnancy rate when the oral hormonal programming pill (OHP) pretreatment was combined with a flexible protocol (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59-0.91) while without OHP, the RR was 0.84, 95% CI 0.71-1.0. Subgroup analysis for the fixed antagonist schedule demonstrated no evidence of a significant difference with or without OHP (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.79-1.12 and RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.83-1.05, respectively). Antagonists resulted in significantly lower OHSS rates both in the general IVF patients and in women with PCOS (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.50-0.81 and RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.30-0.95, respectively). No data on OHSS was available from trials in poor responders.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

In a general IVF population, GnRH antagonists are associated with lower ongoing pregnancy rates when compared to long protocol agonists, but also with lower OHSS rates. Within this population, antagonist treatment prevents one case of OHSS in 40 patients but results in one less ongoing pregnancy out of every 28 women treated. Thus standard use of the long GnRH agonist treatment is perhaps still the approach of choice for prevention of premature luteinization. In couples with PCOS and poor responders, GnRH antagonists do not seem to compromise ongoing pregnancy rates and are associated with less OHSS and therefore could be considered as standard treatment.

Comparisons of GnRH antagonist protocol versus GnRH agonist long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed (1992-2016), Cochrane Library (1999-2016), Web of Science (1950-2016), Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM, 1979-2016), and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI, 1994-2016). Any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared GnRH-ant protocol and GnRH-a long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve were included, and data were extracted independently by two reviewers. The meta-analysis was performed by Revman 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine RCTs (6399 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. Stimulation days (mean difference (MD) [95% confidence interval (CI)] = -0.8 [-1.36, -0.23], P = 0.006), gonadotrophin (Gn) dosage (MD [95% CI] = -3.52 [-5.56, -1.48], P = 0.0007), estradiol (E2) level on the day of human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) administration (MD [95% CI] = -365.49 [-532.93, -198.05], P<0.0001), the number of oocytes retrieved (MD [95% CI] = -1.41 [-1.84, -0.99], P<0.00001), the embryos obtained (MD [95% CI] = -0.99 [-1.38, -0.59], P<0.00001), incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (OR [95% CI] = 0.69 [0.57, 0.83], P<0.0001) were statistically significantly lower in GnRH-ant protocol than GnRH-a long protocol. However, the clinical pregnancy rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.90 [0.80, 1.01], P = 0.08), ongoing pregnancy rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.88 [0.77, 1.00], P = 0.05), live birth rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.95 [0.74, 1.09], P = 0.27), miscarriage rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.98 [0.69, 1.40], P = 0.93), and cycle cancellation rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.86 [0.52, 1.44], P = 0.57) showed no significant differences between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

GnRH-ant protocol substantially decreased the incidence of OHSS without influencing the pregnancy rate and live birth rate compared to GnRH-a long protocol among patients with normal ovarian reserve.

Use of Follicle-Stimulating Hormone for the Treatment of Female Infertility – Current Concepts

Ovulatory dysfunction, which is common among women of reproductive age, often results in infertility. Over the last three decades, follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), in the form of either urinary human menopausal gonadotropin or highly purified urinary FSH (uFSH), has been the mainstay in the treatment of women with ovulatory dysfunction. However, these preparations have several disadvantages, including variable composition, contamination with urinary proteins, and the limited availability of human menopausal urine from which uFSH is extracted. Recombinant human FSH (rhFSH) demonstrates higher purity and specific activity, and is suitable for subcutaneous administration. Additionally, rhFSH has facilitated the development of additional FSH products such as FSH-carboxy terminal peptide that possess different pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties and may provide more options in the treatment of ovulatory dysfunction and infertility. This article reviews the mechanism of action of FSH in folliculogenesis and ovulation, the current use of FSH in women for the medical management of infertility, and the published clinical experience to date with different rhFSH preparations.

The state of "freeze-for-all" in human ARTs

The recent development of vitrification technologies and the good outcomes obtained in assisted reproduction technologies have supported new indications for freezing and segmentation of treatment. Beyond OHSS prevention and avoidance of embryo transfers in the setting of an adverse endocrinological profile or endometrial cavity, we have witnessed a trend to shift fresh embryo transfers to frozen embryo transfers in many programs. We critically review the available evidence and suggest that freeze-all is not "for all," but should be individualized.

Evaluation of results obtained with corifollitropin alfa after poor ovarian response in previous cycle using recombinant follicular stimulating hormone in the long-term protocol

Objective

This study evaluated the use of Corifollitropin alfa in patients with previous poor response to recombinant follicle stimulating hormone in long-term protocols using gonadotropin-releasing hormone.

Methods

Twenty-seven poor responders to previous treatment with the long term protocol using the recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (Group 1) were selected and then submitted to a second attempt using the same long term protocol with Corifollitropin alfa instead of the recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (Group 2).

Ovarian down-regulation was achieved using subcutaneous administration of Leuprolide Acetate. Ovarian stimulation was performed with recombinant follicle stimulating hormone until the administration of human chorionic gonadotropin, followed by follicular aspiration (Group 1). Group 2 was submitted to this same protocol using Corifollitropin alfa instead of recombinant follicle stimulating hormone.

Results

There were significant differences in the number of aspirated oocytes, percentage of mature oocytes, amount of injected oocytes and transferred embryos - with all of these parameters being increased in the Corifollitropin alfa group. In addition, the rates of pregnancy and ongoing pregnancy were also significantly higher in the Corifollitropin alfa group.

Conclusion

The present study demonstrated that the use of Corifollitropin alfa in the long-term protocol could be a highly effective alternative for patients with poor ovarian response, who were unsuccessful in a previous treatment with In Vitro Fertilization - Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection.

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology

BACKGROUND

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists can be used to prevent a luteinizing hormone (LH) surge during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) without the hypo-oestrogenic side-effects, flare-up, or long down-regulation period associated with agonists. The antagonists directly and rapidly inhibit gonadotrophin release within several hours through competitive binding to pituitary GnRH receptors. This property allows their use at any time during the follicular phase. Several different regimens have been described including multiple-dose fixed (0.25 mg daily from day six to seven of stimulation), multiple-dose flexible (0.25 mg daily when leading follicle is 14 to 15 mm), and single-dose (single administration of 3 mg on day 7 to 8 of stimulation) protocols, with or without the addition of an oral contraceptive pill. Further, women receiving antagonists have been shown to have a lower incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Assuming comparable clinical outcomes for the antagonist and agonist protocols, these benefits would justify a change from the standard long agonist protocol to antagonist regimens. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2001, and previously updated in 2006 and 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists compared with the standard long protocol of GnRH agonists for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in assisted conception cycles.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register (searched from inception to May 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, inception to 28 April 2015), Ovid MEDLINE (1966 to 28 April 2015), EMBASE (1980 to 28 April 2015), PsycINFO (1806 to 28 April 2015), CINAHL (to 28 April 2015) and trial registers to 28 April 2015, and handsearched bibliographies of relevant publications and reviews, and abstracts of major scientific meetings, for example the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). We contacted the authors of eligible studies for missing or unpublished data. The evidence is current to 28 April 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two review authors independently screened the relevant citations for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist protocols in women undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted the data. The primary review outcomes were live birth and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Other adverse effects (miscarriage and cycle cancellation) were secondary outcomes. We combined data to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I(2) statistic. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence for each comparison using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 73 RCTs, with 12,212 participants, comparing GnRH antagonist to long-course GnRH agonist protocols. The quality of the evidence was moderate: limitations were poor reporting of study methods.Live birthThere was no conclusive evidence of a difference in live birth rate between GnRH antagonist and long course GnRH agonist (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.23; 12 RCTs, n = 2303, I(2)= 27%, moderate quality evidence). The evidence suggested that if the chance of live birth following GnRH agonist is assumed to be 29%, the chance following GnRH antagonist would be between 25% and 33%.OHSSGnRH antagonist was associated with lower incidence of any grade of OHSS than GnRH agonist (OR 0.61, 95% C 0.51 to 0.72; 36 RCTs, n = 7944, I(2) = 31%, moderate quality evidence). The evidence suggested that if the risk of OHSS following GnRH agonist is assumed to be 11%, the risk following GnRH antagonist would be between 6% and 9%.Other adverse effectsThere was no evidence of a difference in miscarriage rate per woman randomised between GnRH antagonist group and GnRH agonist group (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.30; 33 RCTs, n = 7022, I(2) = 0%, moderate quality evidence).With respect to cycle cancellation, GnRH antagonist was associated with a lower incidence of cycle cancellation due to high risk of OHSS (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.69; 19 RCTs, n = 4256, I(2) = 0%). However cycle cancellation due to poor ovarian response was higher in women who received GnRH antagonist than those who were treated with GnRH agonist (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.65; 25 RCTs, n = 5230, I(2) = 68%; moderate quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate quality evidence that the use of GnRH antagonist compared with long-course GnRH agonist protocols is associated with a substantial reduction in OHSS without reducing the likelihood of achieving live birth.

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: pathophysiology, staging, prediction and prevention

OBJECTIVE

To identify, appraise and summarize the current evidence regarding the pathophysiology, staging, prediction and prevention of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).

METHODS

Two comprehensive systematic reviews were carried out: one examined methods of predicting either high ovarian response or OHSS and the other examined interventions aimed at reducing the occurrence of OHSS. Additionally, we describe the related pathophysiology and staging criteria.

RESULTS

Seven studies examining methods of predicting OHSS and eight more examining methods of predicting high ovarian response to controlled ovarian stimulation were included. Current evidence shows that the best methods of predicting high response are antral follicle count and anti-Müllerian hormone levels, and that a high ovarian response (examined by the number of large follicles, estradiol concentration or the number of retrieved oocytes) is the best method of predicting the occurrence of OHSS. Ninety-seven randomized controlled trials examining the effect of several interventions for reducing the occurrence of OHSS were included. There was high-quality evidence that replacing human chorionic gonadotropin by gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists or recombinant luteinizing hormone, and moderate-quality evidence that antagonist protocols, dopamine agonists and mild stimulation, reduce the occurrence of OHSS. The evidence for the effect of the other interventions was of low/very low quality. Additionally, we identified and described 12 different staging criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

There are useful predictive tools and several preventive interventions aimed at reducing the occurrence of OHSS. Acknowledging and understanding them are of crucial importance for planning the treatment of, and, ultimately, eliminating, OHSS while maintaining high pregnancy rates.

Gonadotrophins: The future

The role of the IVF clinician is to make the ART treatment safe, patient-friendly, cost effective and at the same time offer good and high quality treatment. IVF protocols are a burden for women and are one of the potential reasons why women don’t return for subsequent cycles. Frequent injections may increase stress and also result in high error rates. Simple short treatment regimen with optimal recovery of good quality oocytes results in development of good quality embryos followed by SET in treatment and cryopreservation cycles are a less burden and result in related lesser discontinuation, side effects, treatment cycles in time and are more cost-effective.

Development of FSH analogues with longer terminal t1/2 and slower absorption to peak serum levels will increase the efficiency, decrease the side effects and also is easy to administer. This makes it convenient for the patients increasing the compliance. A certain minimum LH concentration is necessary for adequate thecal cell function and subsequent oestradiol synthesis in the granulosa cells. Adjuvant r-HLH gives clinician's precise control over the dose of LH bioactivity administered to target the therapeutic window. New parenteral, transdermal, inhaled and oral fertility drugs and regimens are currently under research and development with the objective to further simplify treatment for ART.

Association between the proportion of dominant follicles and oocyte developmental competence

PURPOSE

To explore the optimal timing for hCG triggering by investigating the impact of different proportion of dominant follicles on the oocyte developmental competence.

METHODS

One hundred ninety-eight infertile women were divided into three groups according to the proportion of dominant follicles on hCG day: (1) low: <15% (n = 66); (2) middle: 15-27% (n = 66); (3) high: >27% (n = 66). The grouping criteria were the bottom and top tertiles of the proportion of dominant follicles.

RESULTS

The gonadotropin dosage, duration and maximum follicle diameter in the low proportion group were lower than those in the middle and high proportion groups. Oocyte maturation and the abnormal fertilization rate in the low proportion group were lower than those in the middle and high proportion groups. The normal fertilization rate did not differ among the three groups. The cleavage rate and number of transferable embryos in the low proportion group were significantly higher than those in the high proportion group. The high-quality embryo rate, implantation rate, and pregnancy rate in the low proportion group were significantly higher than those in the middle and high proportion groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A high proportion of dominant follicles are closely associated with impaired oocyte developmental competence and low pregnancy rate. These findings suggest that follicular overgrowth induced by delayed hCG triggering may undermine oocyte developmental competence and the proportion of dominant follicles may be a potential parameters for hCG triggering.

Comparisons of GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol in supposed normal ovarian responders undergoing IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of GnRH antagonist and GnRH agonist in supposed normal ovarian responders undergoing IVF.

METHODS

Data from 6 databases were retrieved for this study. The RCTs of GnRH agonist and GnRH antagonist use during IVF-EF therapy for patients with supposed normal ovarian response were included. A meta-analysis was performed with Revman 5.1software.

RESULTS

Twenty-three RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The number of stimulation days (mean difference (MD): -0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.04∼-0.27), Gn amount (MD: -2.92, 95% CI: -5.0∼-0.85), E2 values on the day of HCG (MD: -330.39, 95% CI: -510.51∼-150.26), Number of oocytes retrieved (MD: -1.33, 95% CI: -2.02∼-0.64), clinical pregnancy rate (odds ratio (OR): 0.87, 95% CI: 0.75-1.0), and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) incidence (OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.42∼0.82) were significantly lower in GnRH antagonist protocol than GnRH agonist protocol. However, the endometrial thickness on the day of HCG (MD: -0.04, 95% CI: -0.23∼0.14), the ongoing pregnancy rate (OR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.74∼1.03), live birth rate (OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.64∼1.24), miscarriage rate (OR: 1.17, 95% CI: 0.85∼1.61), and cycle cancellation rate (OR: 1.11, 95% CI: 0.90∼1.37) did not significantly differ between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

During IVF treatment for patients with supposed normal responses, the incidence of OHSS were significantly lower, whereas the ongoing pregnancy and live birth rates were similar in the GnRH antagonist compared with the standard long GnRH agonist protocols.

A nanoscale ridge/groove pattern arrayed surface enhances adipogenic differentiation of human supernumerary tooth-derived dental pulp stem cells in vitro

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to establish human dental pulp stem cells (hDPSCs) from supernumerary teeth and determine the effects of a 350-nm nano-patterned surface on adipogenic and osteogenic differentiation of hDPSCs.

DESIGN

Several surface markers were analysed by FACS to confirm the isolated cells as hDPSCs. To demonstrate the effects of a nano-patterned surface on the differentiation of hDPSCs, the cells were cultured on a nano-patterned surface with or without adipogenic or osteogenic induction factors. Cells were then stained with Oil red O or Alizarin red, and the lineage specific genes LPL and Runx-2 were analysed by real-time PCR at 3, 6 and 9 days after culture.

RESULTS

The hDPSCs on a nano-patterned surface showed a linear arrangement compared to irregular cells on a conventional surface. During adipogenic differentiation, more Oil red O stained cells were found in the nano-patterned group than in the conventional group. On the other hand, there was no significant difference in Alizarin red staining between the nano-pattern and conventional surface groups after induction of osteogenic differentiation. Gene expression analyses revealed significantly higher expression of LPL in the nano-patterned group than in the conventional group, whereas Runx-2 expression was higher in the conventional group than in the nano-patterned group.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that a nano-patterned surface may be able to enhance adipogenic differentiation of hDPSCs by altering their morphology and gene expression patterns, whereas the same surface may inhibit or suppress osteogenic differentiation of the cells.

Clinical impact of LH rises prior to and during ganirelix treatment started on day 5 or on day 6 of ovarian stimulation

BACKGROUND

We sought to evaluate the incidence and clinical impact of luteinizing hormone (LH) rises prior to and during gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist treatment started on day 5 or 6 of ovarian stimulation with recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH).

METHODS

Pooled data from three trials with the GnRH antagonist ganirelix started on day 5 (n = 961) and from five trials with ganirelix started on day 6 (n = 1135) of ovarian stimulation with rFSH were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

The incidence of LH rises (LH ≥ 10.0 IU/L) prior to ganirelix treatment was 2.3% and 6.6% on ganirelix start days 5 and 6, respectively (P < 0.01). During ganirelix treatment this incidence was 1.2% and 2.3%, respectively (P = 0.06). Women with LH rise on day 5 or 6 had a higher ovarian response with more oocytes recovered, mean ± SD, 12.9 ± 8.5 versus no LH rise, 10.2 ± 6.4 (P < 0.01). In women with and without LH rise prior to ganirelix treatment the ongoing pregnancy rates were similar (26.0% vs 29.9%; odds ratio [OR], 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55-1.44). Women with LH rise during ganirelix treatment had a lower ovarian response with 7.5 ± 6.7 oocytes recovered versus no LH rise, 10.2 ± 6.4 (P = 0.02) and a tendancy for a lower chance of ongoing pregnancy (16.7% vs 29.9%; OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.21-1.26).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of early and late LH rises was low but may be further reduced by initiating ganirelix on stimulation day 5 rather than on day 6. In contrast to women with an early LH rise, women with a late LH rise may have a reduced chance of ongoing pregnancy.

Controlled ovarian stimulation using a long gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol: a proof of concept and feasibility study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

To evaluate the feasibility of a long protocol of controlled ovarian stimulation prior to in vitro fertilization (IVF) and embryo transfer with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist used for pituitary and ovarian suppression.

METHODS

Thirty patients undergoing IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection were randomized into two groups. The control group (n = 16) received a standard flexible GnRH antagonist protocol. Ovarian stimulation consisted of 225 IU/day of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone for 5 days, followed by 225 IU/day of human menopausal gonadotropin until human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration. The study group (n = 14) received 0.25 mg of GnRH antagonist daily for 7 days, thereafter, upon confirmation of pituitary and ovarian suppression, ovarian stimulation was commenced with the same protocol as used in the control group. Hormone and follicle dynamics, as well as laboratory characteristics and cycle outcome, were compared for both groups.

RESULTS

Both groups were comparable in baseline characteristics. Pituitary and ovarian suppression were effectively achieved in 12/14 patients in the study group. The duration of ovarian stimulation and gonadotropin consumption were similar in both groups, as was also the number and size of follicles on hCG day.

CONCLUSION

The results of our study confirm the feasibility of a long GnRH antagonist protocol. This regimen could become another option to optimize GnRH antagonist protocols, and should thus be further explored.

Safety aspects of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists in ovarian stimulation procedures: ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and health of children born

The safety of ovarian stimulation procedures or the procedure of assisted reproduction in general can be estimated by various parameters. Two of the most important are the health of children born after the procedure and the incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). The latter is important because it is the most severe, potentially life-threatening complication of any stimulation procedure. The use of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists in ovarian stimulation protocols has had no impact on the health of children born. This was proven in 227 children born after the use of cetrorelix and in 73 children born after the use of ganirelix. To analyse the incidence of OHSS and the impact of GnRH antagonists on clinical pregnancy rates compared with the long protocol, a meta-analysis was done. This showed a reduction of OHSS with the use of cetrorelix. Furthermore, when compared with the long protocol, clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates were not significantly reduced with the use of cetrorelix. Taken together, the use of GnRH antagonists are safe with regard to children's health. The incidence of OHSS does not increase with ganirelix, and a reduction can be expected with cetrorelix.

The role of GnRH antagonists in assisted reproduction

The different schemes of application of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists in ovarian stimulation protocols for assisted reproduction are reviewed. Starting from the initial schemes of single and/or multiple doses, the efficacy of GnRH antagonists in 'soft' protocols of ovarian stimulation has been evaluated in natural cycles, and the possibility of inducing the final oocyte maturation under antagonists either with native luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone or with GnRH agonists. The largest clinical studies carried out with cetrorelix or with ganirelix and published to date were analysed. Apart from the benefits of reducing the duration of the treatment, gonadotrophin requirements and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome incidence, there is still a serious debate on the potential deleterious effect of GnRH antagonists on implantation and pregnancy rates. More specific aspects such as cycle programming, application of GnRH antagonists in protocols for poor responders etc., were also reviewed in this survey.

GnRH antagonists: do they open new pathways to safer treatment in assisted reproductive techniques?

GnRH antagonists (GnRHnt) induce a rapid decrease in LH and FSH, preventing and interrupting LH surges. Their properties do not require a desensitization period and allow their use in the late follicular phase. GnRHnt could replace GnRH agonists (GnRHa) in ovarian stimulation without their side-effects and their long period of desensitivity. Both protocols using GnRHnt were associated with a smaller amount of gonadotrophin, a shorter stimulation period and a lower incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) with statistically comparable pregnancy rates. There is room for improvement of both protocols concerning the programming, the antagonist dose and the timing of antagonist administration. Luteal support should be maintained until the results of further studies. The perinatal outcome appears to be similar to that of other stimulation regimens. Triggering of ovulation can be facilitated by GnRHa for patients at risk of OHSS. Provided that pregnancy rates equivalent to those obtained with GnRHa are confirmed in larger series, GnRHnt will clearly represent a safer alternative to GnRHa protocols in IVF.

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.

GnRH analogues in the prevention of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

The GnRH analogue (agonist and antagonist GnRH) changed ovarian stimulation. On the one hand, it improved chances of pregnancy to obtain more oocytes and better embryos. This leads to an ovarian hyper-response, which can be complicated by the ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). On the other hand, the GnRH analogue can prevent the incidence of OHSS: GnRH antagonist protocols, GnRH agonist for triggering final oocyte maturation, either together or separately, coasting, and the GnRH analogue may prove useful for avoiding OHSS in high-risk patients. We review these topics in this article.

GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist in ovarian stimulation: an ongoing debate

The availability of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists for ovarian stimulation protocols has generated many meta-analyses comparing it to GnRH agonist long protocols. These meta-analyses have yielded conflicting results for pregnancy rate, with a tendency toward a better outcome for GnRH agonists. Recently, a Cochrane review seems to have settled the conflicts by demonstrating no evidence of statistically significant differences in the rates of live births or ongoing pregnancies when comparing GnRH agonist long protocols with GnRH antagonist protocols. This paper disputes the equivalence of these two protocols as discussed in the latest meta-analysis and argue that the GnRH agonist still has a demonstrable superiority over GnRH antagonist protocols. The availability of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist for ovarian stimulation protocols has generated many meta-analyses comparing it to GnRH agonist long protocols. These meta-analyses have yielded conflicting results for pregnancy rate, with a tendency towards a better outcome for GnRH agonists. Recently, a Cochrane review seems to have settled the conflicts by demonstrating no evidence of statistically significant differences in the rates of live births or ongoing pregnancies when comparing GnRH agonist long protocols with GnRH antagonist protocols. In this paper, we dispute the equivalence of these two protocols as discussed in the latest meta-analysis and argue that the GnRH agonist still has a demonstrable superiority over GnRH antagonist protocols.

Use of follicle-stimulating hormone for the treatment of female infertility - current concepts

Ovulatory dysfunction, which is common among women of reproductive age, often results in infertility. Over the last three decades, follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), in the form of either urinary human menopausal gonadotropin or highly purified urinary FSH (uFSH), has been the mainstay in the treatment of women with ovulatory dysfunction. However, these preparations have several disadvantages, including variable composition, contamination with urinary proteins, and the limited availability of human menopausal urine from which uFSH is extracted. Recombinant human FSH (rhFSH) demonstrates higher purity and specific activity, and is suitable for subcutaneous administration. Additionally, rhFSH has facilitated the development of additional FSH products such as FSH-carboxy terminal peptide that possess different pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties and may provide more options in the treatment of ovulatory dysfunction and infertility. This article reviews the mechanism of action of FSH in folliculogenesis and ovulation, the current use of FSH in women for the medical management of infertility, and the published clinical experience to date with different rhFSH preparations.

A randomized controlled trial of the GnRH antagonist ganirelix in Chinese normal responders: high efficacy and pregnancy rates

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists for controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) were only recently introduced into China. The efficacy and safety of the GnRH antagonist ganirelix was assessed in a multicenter, controlled, open-label study, in which Chinese women were randomized to either ganirelix (n = 113) or a long GnRH agonist protocol of triptorelin (n = 120). The primary end point was the amount of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) required to meet the human chorionic gonadotropin criterion (three follicles ≥17 mm). The amount of rFSH needed was significantly lower for ganirelix (1272 IU) vs. triptorelin (1416 IU; P< 0.001). Ongoing pregnancy rates per started cycle were 39.8% (ganirelix) and 39.2% (triptorelin). Although both treatments were well tolerated, cancellation due to risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) was less frequent with ganirelix (1.8%) than triptorelin (7.5%) (P = 0.06). Less rFSH was needed in the ganirelix protocol than the long GnRH agonist protocol, with fewer reported cases of OHSS and similar pregnancy rates.

The extrapituitary effects of GnRH antagonists and their potential clinical implications: a narrated review

Potential roles of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists on GnRH/GnRH receptor systems and their effects on the extrapituitary tissues are largely elusive. In this narrated review, we summarized the systemic effects of GnRH antagonists on ovary, endometrium, embryo implantation, placental development, fetal teratogenicity, reproductive tissue cancer cells, and heart while briefly reviewing the GnRH and GnRH receptor system. GnRH antagonists may have direct effects on ovarian granulosa cells. Data are conflicting regarding their effects on endometrial receptivity. The GnRH antagonists may potentially have detrimental effect on early placentation by decreasing the invasive ability of cytotrophoblasts if the exposure to them occurs during early pregnancy. The GnRH antagonists were not found to increase the rates of congenital malformations. Comparative clinical data are required to explore their systemic effects on various extrapituitary tissues such as on cardiac function in the long term as well as their potential use in other human cancers that express GnRH receptors.

Balancing selected medication costs with total number of daily injections: a preference analysis of GnRH-agonist and antagonist protocols by IVF patients

BACKGROUND

During in vitro fertilization (IVF), fertility patients are expected to self-administer many injections as part of this treatment. While newer medications have been developed to substantially reduce the number of these injections, such agents are typically much more expensive. Considering these differences in both cost and number of injections, this study compared patient preferences between GnRH-agonist and GnRH-antagonist based protocols in IVF.

METHODS

Data were collected by voluntary, anonymous questionnaire at first consultation appointment. Patient opinion concerning total number of s.c. injections as a function of non-reimbursed patient cost associated with GnRH-agonist [A] and GnRH-antagonist [B] protocols in IVF was studied.

RESULTS

Completed questionnaires (n = 71) revealed a mean +/- SD patient age of 34 +/- 4.1 yrs. Most (83.1%) had no prior IVF experience; 2.8% reported another medical condition requiring self-administration of subcutaneous medication(s). When out-of-pocket cost for [A] and [B] were identical, preference for [B] was registered by 50.7% patients. The tendency to favor protocol [B] was weaker among patients with a health occupation. Estimated patient costs for [A] and [B] were $259.82 +/- 11.75 and $654.55 +/- 106.34, respectively (p < 0.005). Measured patient preference for [B] diminished as the cost difference increased.

CONCLUSIONS

This investigation found consistently higher non-reimbursed direct medication costs for GnRH-antagonist IVF vs. GnRH-agonist IVF protocols. A conditional preference to minimize downregulation (using GnRH-antagonist) was noted among some, but not all, IVF patient sub-groups. Compared to IVF patients with a health occupation, the preference for GnRH-antagonist was weaker than for other patients. While reducing total number of injections by using GnRH-antagonist is a desirable goal, it appears this advantage is not perceived equally by all IVF patients and its utility is likely discounted heavily by patients when nonreimbursed medication costs reach a critical level.

Low-dose GnRH antagonist protocol is as effective as the long GnRH agonist protocol in unselected patients undergoing in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer

OBJECTIVE

The present retrospective and controlled comparative study was designed to evaluate the pregnancy rate achieved using a modified, fixed, multiple-dose 0.125mg gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol with the long GnRH agonist protocol as the control group.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and twenty unselected women between 30 and 40 years of age, in their first cycle of IVF/ICSI, with a baseline follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) <10 IU and an antral follicle count >3 were assigned into two groups: (1) the study group received 0.125mg of cetrorelix daily starting on Day 6 of stimulation; and (2) the control group received leuprolide daily starting in the mid-luteal phase of the preceding cycle. Both groups were given a flexible dose of recombinant FSH for stimulation. An ongoing pregnancy rate of more than 12 weeks was the primary outcome measure of the study.

RESULTS

Primary and secondary outcomes were comparable in both groups. A shorter duration of stimulation, a lower dosage of recombinant FSH consumption and a thinner endometrium on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin administration were all observed in the GnRH antagonist group.

CONCLUSION

A dosage of 0.125mg GnRH antagonist protocol was effective for these unselected patients during IVF/ET.

[Use of GnRH antagonist for in vitro fertilization]

BACKGROUND

For many patients, the typical treatment protocol for in vitro fertilization (IVF) is both physically and psychologically demanding. An alternative approach to use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH)-agonists traditionally used to prevent premature ovulation, is use of GnRH-antagonists. The aim of this article is to describe advantages and disadvantages of using GnRH-antagonists in IVF.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The paper is based on literature identified through a non-systematic search in PubMed, and more than ten years of clinical experience with use of GnRH antagonists in IVF.

RESULTS

To maintain a similar pregnancy rate as that with GnRH-agonists, one can use GnRH-antagonists at an earlier time-point during stimulation of the ovaries and a lower dose of follicle stimulating hormone (FSH). A less intensive stimulation implies a lower risk of complications and side effects and a shorter treatment period before egg collection (from four-five weeks to less than two weeks). The main disadvantage of the GnRH-antagonist protocol is that ovarian stimulation cannot be programmed to the same extent as that with use of a GnRH-agonist.

INTERPRETATION

Stimulation with a GnRH-antagonist instead of a GnRH-agonist in IVF, is less physically and psychologically demanding for the patients and maintains the same birth rate.

The role of corifollitropin alfa in controlled ovarian stimulation for IVF in combination with GnRH antagonist

Corifollitropin alfa is a synthetic recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) molecule containing a hybrid beta subunit, which provides a plasma half-life of ∼65 hours while maintaining its pharmocodynamic activity. A single injection of corifollitropin alfa can replace daily FSH injections for the first week of ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. Stimulation can be continued with daily FSH injections if the need arises. To date, more than 2500 anticipated normoresponder women have participated in clinical trials with corifollitropin alfa. It is noteworthy that one-third of women did not require additional gonadotropin injections and reached human chorionic gonadotropin criterion on day 8. The optimal corifollitropin dose has been calculated to be 100 μg for women with a body weight ≤60 kg and 150 μg for women with a body weight >60 kg, respectively. Combination of corifollitropin with daily gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist injections starting on stimulation day 5 seems to yield similar or significantly higher numbers of oocytes and good quality embryos, as well as similar ongoing pregnancy rates compared with women stimulated with daily rFSH injections. Stimulation characteristics, embryology, and clinical outcomes seem consistent with repeated corifollitropin-stimulated assisted reproductive technologies cycles. Multiple pregnancy or ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome rates with corifollitropin were not increased over daily FSH regimen. The corifollitropin alfa molecule does not seem to be immunogenic and does not induce neutralizing antibody formation. Drug hypersensitivity and injection-site reactions are not increased. Incidence and nature of adverse events and serious adverse events are similar to daily FSH injections. Current trials do not provide information regarding use of corifollitropin alfa in anticipated hyper- and poor responders to gonadotropin stimulation. Although corifollitropin alfa is unlikely to be teratogenic, at the moment data on congenital malformations is missing.

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

BACKGROUND

In view of the discrepancies about the GnRH antagonist (GnRH-ant) ovarian stimulation protocols having some potential advantages compared with the GnRH agonist (GnRH-a) protocols in poor ovarian responders IVF/ICSI, a meta-analysis of the published data was performed to compare the efficacy of GnRH-ant versus GnRH-a protocols for ovarian stimulation in IVF poor response patients.

METHODS

We searched for all published articles indexed in MEDLINE (1950-2010), EMBASE (1974-2010) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI, 1994-2010). Any randomized controlled study that compared the GnRH-ant with GnRH-a in ovarian stimulation protocols for poor responders undergoing IVF/ICSI was included, and data were extracted independently by two reviewers. The searches yielded 64 articles, from which 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. We performed this meta-analysis involving 566 IVF patients in a GnRH-ant protocol group and 561 patients in a GnRH-a protocol group with Review Manager 4.2 software. Odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to evaluate dichotomous and continuous data, respectively.

RESULTS

Fourteen eligible studies were included in this meta-analysis. GnRH-ant protocols resulted in a statistically significantly lower duration of stimulation compared with GnRH-a protocols (P = 0.04; WMD: -1.88, 95% CI: -3.64, -0.12), but there was no significant difference in the number of oocytes retrieved (P = 0.51; WMD: -0.17, 95% CI -0.69, 0.34) or the number of mature oocytes retrieved (P = 0.99; WMD: -0.01, 95% CI: -1.14, 1.12). Moreover, no significant difference was found in the cycle cancellation rate (CCR, P = 0.67; OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.71-1.42) or clinical pregnancy rate (CPR, P = 0.16; OR: 1.23, 95% CI: 0.92, 1.66).

CONCLUSIONS

Clear advantage was gained in duration of stimulation with GnRH-ant in poor ovarian responders undergoing IVF, although there was no statistical difference in the number of oocytes retrieved, the number of mature oocytes retrieved, the CCR and CPR between GnRH-ant and GnRH-a protocols. These results may be helpful to our clinical practice. However, further controlled randomized prospective studies with larger sample sizes are needed.

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology

BACKGROUND

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists can be used to prevent a luteinizing hormone (LH) surge during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) without the hypo-estrogenic side-effects, flare-up, or long down-regulation period associated with agonists. The antagonists directly and rapidly inhibit gonadotropin release within several hours through competitive binding to pituitary GnRH receptors. This property allows their use at any time during the follicular phase. Several different regimes have been described including multiple-dose fixed (0.25 mg daily from day six to seven of stimulation), multiple-dose flexible (0.25 mg daily when leading follicle is 14 to 15 mm), and single-dose (single administration of 3 mg on day 7 to 8 of stimulation) protocols, with or without the addition of an oral contraceptive pill. Further, women receiving antagonists have been shown to have a lower incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Assuming comparable clinical outcomes for the antagonist and agonist protocols, these benefits would justify a change from the standard long agonist protocol to antagonist regimens. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2001, and previously updated in 2006.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists with the standard long protocol of GnRH agonists for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in assisted conception cycle

SEARCH STRATEGY

We performed electronic searches of major databases, for example Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE (from 1987 to April 2010); and handsearched bibliographies of relevant publications and reviews, and abstracts of major scientific meetings, for example the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). A date limited search of Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL from April 2010 to April 2011 was run. Eighteen studies have been entered into the Classification pending references section of this update. These studies will be appraised for inclusion or exclusion in the next update of this review, due April 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two review authors independently screened the relevant citations for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different agonist versus antagonist protocols in women undergoing IVF or ICSI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial risk of bias and extracted data. If relevant data were missing or unclear, the authors were contacted for clarification.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-five RCTs (n = 7511) comparing the antagonist to the long agonist protocols fulfilled the inclusion criteria. There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference in rates of live-births (9 RCTs; odds ratio (OR) 0.86, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.08) or ongoing pregnancy (28 RCTs; OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.00). There was a statistically significant lower incidence of OHSS in the GnRH antagonist group (29 RCTs; OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.57).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of antagonist compared with long GnRH agonist protocols was associated with a large reduction in OHSS and there was no evidence of a difference in live-birth rates.

In vitro fertilization outcomes in patients experiencing a premature rise in luteinizing hormone during a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycle

Patients undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and pituitary suppression with a GnRH antagonist who experienced a transient premature rise in LH were compared with those who did not have an early surge. Those experiencing a premature LH surge had equivalent clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates per ET.