Effects of norethindrone on gonadotropin and ovarian steroid secretion when used for cycle programming during in vitro fertilization

Long-term health risk of offspring born from assisted reproductive technologies

Since the world's first in vitro fertilization baby was born in 1978, there have been more than 8 million children conceived through assisted reproductive technologies (ART) worldwide, and a significant proportion of them have reached puberty or young adulthood. Many studies have found that ART increases the risk of adverse perinatal outcomes, including preterm birth, low birth weight, small size for gestational age, perinatal mortality, and congenital anomalies. However, data regarding the long-term outcomes of ART offspring are limited. According to the developmental origins of health and disease theory, adverse environments during early life stages may induce adaptive changes and subsequently result in an increased risk of diseases in later life. Increasing evidence also suggests that ART offspring are predisposed to an increased risk of non-communicable diseases, such as malignancies, asthma, obesity, metabolic syndrome, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and neurodevelopmental and psychiatric disorders. In this review, we summarize the risks for long-term health in ART offspring, discuss the underlying mechanisms, including underlying parental infertility, epigenetic alterations, non-physiological hormone levels, and placental dysfunction, and propose potential strategies to optimize the management of ART and health care of parents and children to eliminate the associated risks. Further ongoing follow-up and research are warranted to determine the effects of ART on the long-term health of ART offspring in later life.

The LH endocrine profile in gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue cycles

Research question: What does the evolution of serum luteinizing hormone (LH) levels look like throughout the follicular phase of cycles in which gonadotrophins and gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues in the context of ovarian stimulation for assisted reproduction technologies (ART) were used?Design: This was a retrospective, observational cohort study in a tertiary infertility clinic. 1303 patients aged between 18 and 43 years of age were included with a total of 2200 cycles for ART, using GnRH-analogues for pituitary down-regulation stimulated with human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) or recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (rec-FSH). Follicular evolution of LH during ovarian stimulation in different treatment protocols was modeled as repeated measures.Results: LH evolution showed a significant decrease in antagonist/hMG cycles of 0.17 IU/L per day (95% CI [-0.20, -0.12]) and 0.26 IU/L per day in rec-FSH cycles (95% CI [-0.29, -0.22]). This decrease was significantly stronger in rec-FSH cycles than in hMG cycles (estimated difference of 0.09 IU/L per day, 95% CI [0.04, 0.15]). Short agonist/hMG cycles showed a significant increase in LH of 0.04 IU/L per day (95% CI [0.01, 0.08]), while the increase of 0.01 IU/L per day in cycles with rec-FSH was not significant (95% CI [-0.08, 0.10]).Conclusion: Follicular evolution of LH during controlled ovarian stimulation differs between different GnRH analogue cycles. A statistically significant decrease in LH was shown in GnRH antagonist cycles being more pronounced with rec-FSH compared to hMG. This decrease in LH in antagonist cycles and the potential impact on estradiol levels and follicle growth needs further examination.

Oral contraceptive pill, progestogen or oestrogen pretreatment for ovarian stimulation protocols for women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques

BACKGROUND

Among subfertile women undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART), hormone pills given before ovarian stimulation may improve outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether pretreatment with the combined oral contraceptive pill (COCP) or with a progestogen or oestrogen alone in ovarian stimulation protocols affects outcomes in subfertile couples undergoing ART.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases from inception to January 2017: Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, The Cochrane Central Register Studies Online, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles and registers of ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of hormonal pretreatment in women undergoing ART.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary review outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy and pregnancy loss.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 RCTs (4701 women) of pretreatment with COCPs, progestogens or oestrogens versus no pretreatment or alternative pretreatments, in gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist or antagonist cycles. Overall, evidence quality ranged from very low to moderate. The main limitations were risk of bias and imprecision. Most studies did not describe their methods in adequate detail. Combined oral contraceptive pill versus no pretreatmentWith antagonist cycles in both groups the rate of live birth or ongoing pregnancy was lower in the pretreatment group (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.95; 6 RCTs; 1335 women; I² = 0%; moderate quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether the groups differed in rates of pregnancy loss (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.82 to 2.26; 5 RCTs; 868 women; I² = 0%; moderate quality evidence), multiple pregnancy (OR 2.21, 95% CI 0.53 to 9.26; 2 RCTs; 125 women; I² = 0%; low quality evidence), ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS; OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.40; 2 RCTs; 642 women; I² = 0%, low quality evidence), or ovarian cyst formation (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.08 to 2.75; 1 RCT; 64 women; very low quality evidence).In COCP plus antagonist cycles versus no pretreatment in agonist cycles, there was insufficient evidence to determine whether the groups differed in rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.25; 4 RCTs; 724 women; I² = 0%; moderate quality evidence), multiple pregnancy (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.19; 4 RCTs; 546 women; I² = 0%; moderate quality evidence), or OHSS (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.96; 2 RCTs; 290 women, I² = 0%), but there were fewer pregnancy losses in the pretreatment group (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.72; 5 RCTs; 780 women; I² = 0%; moderate quality evidence). There were no data suitable for analysis on ovarian cyst formation.One small study comparing COCP versus no pretreatment in agonist cycles showed no clear difference between the groups for any of the reported outcomes. Progestogen versus no pretreatmentAll studies used the same protocol (antagonist, agonist or gonadotrophins) in both groups. There was insufficient evidence to determine any differences in rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy (agonist: OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.69 to 2.65; 2 RCTs; 222 women; I² = 24%; low quality evidence; antagonist: OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.18 to 2.54; 1 RCT; 47 women; low quality evidence; gonadotrophins: OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.09 to 4.23; 1 RCT; 42 women; very low quality evidence), pregnancy loss (agonist: OR 2.26, 95% CI 0.67 to 7.55; 2 RCTs; 222 women; I² = 0%; low quality evidence; antagonist: OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.06 to 2.09; 1 RCT; 47 women; low quality evidence; gonadotrophins: OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.06 to 17.12; 1 RCT; 42 women; very low quality evidence) or multiple pregnancy (agonist: no data available; antagonist: OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.06 to 17.76; 1 RCT; 47 women; low quality evidence; gonadotrophins: no data available). Three studies, all using agonist cycles, reported ovarian cyst formation: rates were lower in the pretreatment group (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.32; 374 women; I² = 1%; moderate quality evidence). There were no data on OHSS. Oestrogen versus no pretreatmentIn antagonist or agonist cycles, there was insufficient evidence to determine whether the groups differed in rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy (antagonist versus antagonist: OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.17; 2 RCTs; 502 women; I² = 0%; low quality evidence; antagonist versus agonist: OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.50; 2 RCTs; 242 women; I² = 0%; very low quality evidence), pregnancy loss (antagonist versus antagonist: OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.47; 1 RCT; 49 women; very low quality evidence; antagonist versus agonist: OR 1.59, 95% CI 0.62 to 4.06; 1 RCT; 220 women; very low quality evidence), multiple pregnancy (antagonist versus antagonist: no data available; antagonist versus agonist: OR 2.24, 95% CI 0.09 to 53.59; 1 RCT; 22 women; very low quality evidence) or OHSS (antagonist versus antagonist: no data available; antagonist versus agonist: OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.25 to 9.42; 1 RCT; 220 women). Ovarian cyst formation was not reported. Head-to-head comparisonsCOCP was compared with progestogen (1 RCT, 44 women), and with oestrogen (2 RCTs, 146 women), and progestogen was compared with oestrogen (1 RCT, 48 women), with an antagonist cycle in both groups. COCP in an agonist cycle was compared with oestrogen in an antagonist cycle (1 RCT, 25 women). Data were scant but there was no clear evidence that any of the groups differed in rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy, pregnancy loss or other adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Among women undergoing ovarian stimulation in antagonist protocols, COCP pretreatment was associated with a lower rate of live birth or ongoing pregnancy than no pretreatment. There was insufficient evidence to determine whether rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy were influenced by pretreatment with progestogens or oestrogens, or by COCP pretreatment using other stimulation protocols. Findings on adverse events were inconclusive, except that progesterone pretreatment may reduce the risk of ovarian cysts in agonist cycles, and COCP in antagonist cycles may reduce the risk of pregnancy loss compared with no pretreatment in agonist cycles.

Successive and cyclic oral contraceptive pill pretreatment improves IVF/ICSI outcomes of PCOS patients and ameliorates hyperandrogenism and antral follicle excess

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate different oral contraceptive pill (OCP) pretreatment associated differential in-vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) outcomes of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) patients and explore enhanced hormonal balance induced by the pretreatment.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 500 PCOS women and 565 normal ovulating counterparts undergoing IVF/ICSI. The PCOS patients were divided into three groups based on the OCP pretreatment regimens: non-OCP (without OCP pretreatment), unsuccessive OCP (the period of successive pretreatment ≤2 months) and successive OCP (the period of successive pretreatment ≥3 months) groups. Comprehensive hormonal and ultra-sonographic assessments were performed before/after IVF pretreatment. Confounding factors affecting pregnancy outcomes were analyzed with logistic regression.

RESULTS

PCOS patients with significant endocrine disorders had reduced implantation and pregnancy rates and increased miscarriage rate. Successive, not unsuccessive OCP pretreatment, significantly improved the implantation and pregnancy rates, and reduced the incidence of monotocous small-for-gestational age infants, which was accompanied by remarkably decreased hyperandrogenism and antral follicles.

CONCLUSION

PCOS is an independent risk factor for poor IVF outcome. Successive, not unsuccessive, OCP cyclical pretreatment could improve pregnancy outcome of PCOS patients, associated with reduction of hyperandrogenism and antral follicle excess.

Effects of progesterone and norethindrone on female fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas) steroidogenesis

As knowledge of contaminants capable of adversely modulating endocrine functions increases, attention is focused on the effects of synthetic progestins as environmental endocrine disrupters. In the present study, effects of exposure to a synthetic progestin (norethindrone, 168 ± 7.5 ng/L) and endogenous progestogen (progesterone, 34 ± 4.1 ng/L) on steroidogenesis in adult female fathead minnows were examined. In vivo exposure to either compound lowered expression (nonsignificant) of luteinizing hormone (LHβ) levels in the brain along with significantly down-regulating the beta isoform of membrane progesterone receptor (mPRβ) in ovary tissue. The correspondence between lowered LHβ levels in the brain and mPRβ in the ovary is suggestive of a possible functional association as positive correlations between LHβ and mPR levels have been demonstrated in other fish species. In vitro exposure of ovary tissue to progesterone resulted in significantly elevated progestogen (pregnenolone, 17α-hydroxyprogesterone, and 17α,20β-dihydroxypregnenone) and androgen (testosterone) production. Whereas in vitro exposure to norethindrone did not significantly impact steroid hormone production but showed decreased testosterone production relative to solvent control (however this was not significant). Overall, this study showed that exposure to a natural progestogen (progesterone) and synthetic progestin (norethindrone), was capable of modulating LHβ (in brain) and mPRβ expression (in ovary).

Oral contraceptive pill, progestogen or estrogen pre-treatment for ovarian stimulation protocols for women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques

BACKGROUND

For many subfertile women, assisted reproductive techniques (ART) is the only hope for a pregnancy and live birth. The combined oral contraceptive pill (OCP) given prior to the hormone therapy in an IVF cycle may result in better pregnancy outcomes of ART.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether pre-treatment with combined OCPs, progestogens or estrogens in ovarian stimulation protocols affects outcomes in subfertile couples undergoing ART.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO. Other electronic resources on the Internet, reference list of relevant articles were also searched as well as the ESHRE abstracts (2008). All these searches were conducted in November 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of pre-treatment with combined OCP, progestogen or estrogen in subfertile women undergoing IVF/ICSI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted the data and assessed risk of bias. We calculated Peto odds ratios for dichotomous data and weighted mean difference for continuous variables. Authors of trials were contacted in case of missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

No evidence of effect was found with regard to the number of live births when using a pre-treatment. However, the combined OCP in GnRH antagonist cycles, compared to no pre-treatment, is associated with fewer clinical pregnancies (Peto OR 0.69, P = 0.03) and more days and a higher amount of gonadotrophin therapy (respectively: MD 1.44, P < 0.00001; and MD 691.69, P < 0.00001). Also compared to placebo or no pre-treatment, a progestogen pre-treatment in GnRH agonist cycles, is associated with more clinical pregnancies (Peto OR 1.95, P = 0.007) and fewer ovarian cysts (Peto OR 0.21, P < 0.00001). At last, in estrogen pre-treated GnRH antagonist cycles, compared to no pre-treatment, more oocytes are retrieved (MD 2.01, P < 0.00001), but a higher amount of gonadotrophin therapy is needed (MD 207.08, P < 0.00001). For the other outcomes no evidence of effect was found or there were not enough studies available in the subgroup for pooling.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was evidence of improved pregnancy outcomes with progestogen pre-treatment and poorer pregnancy outcomes with a combined OCP pre-treatment. However, we conclude that major changes in ART protocols should not be made at this time, since the number of overall studies in the subgroups is small and reporting of the major outcomes is inadequate.

Effects of oral contraceptive, synthetic progestogen or natural estrogen pre-treatments on the hormonal profile and the antral follicle cohort before GnRH antagonist protocol

BACKGROUND

Steroid pre-treatments may be useful to program GnRH antagonist IVF/ICSI cycles. This prospective study assessed hormonal and ultrasound data collected during the free period after the discontinuation of three different pre-treatments to provide information on the optimal time interval required before starting stimulation.

METHODS

Women were randomized to receive oral contraceptive pill (OCP) [ethinyl estradiol (E(2)) 30 microg + desogestrel 150 microg] (n = 21) or norethisterone 10 mg/day (n = 23) or 17-betaE(2) 4 mg/day (n = 25) or no pre-treatment (n = 24) for one cycle before IVF. Assessments were performed on post-treatment day (PD) 1, 3 and 5, or on spontaneous cycle day (CD) 1 and 3.

RESULTS

After OCP and progestogen administration, FSH and LH concentrations shifted from strongly suppressed PD1 levels to PD5 values similar to those observed on CD1. Meanwhile, follicle sizes remained small up to PD5. In contrast, estrogen pre-treatment poorly reduced FSH levels on PD1 compared with OCP or progestogen. Consequently, follicle size was more heterogeneous. FSH rebound was maximal on PD3, whereas LH levels were slightly increased up to PD5.

CONCLUSIONS

A 5-day free interval after OCP or progestogen offers the advantages of gonadotrophin recovery and homogeneous follicular cohort, whereas early FSH rebound occurring after estrogen pre-treatment argues for a short free period.

Patient scheduling for gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist protocols

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists offer an alternative approach to the management of superovulation in assisted conception. Although several large multicentre randomized trials have provided information concerning the safety and efficacy of GnRH antagonists, their introduction into clinical practice has identified several new problems and opportunities. In vitro fertilization (IVF) practitioners with many years of experience of the 'long protocol' of pituitary downregulation with GnRH agonists have had to manage unfamiliar problems associated with patient scheduling and IVF cycle management when introducing GnRH antagonists into practice. Antagonist cycles require greater flexibility on the part of the IVF unit, with a need for 6 (or even 7) day working patterns and altered monitoring schedules. This article addresses the possibility of using oral contraceptives as part of GnRH antagonist cycle programming, and examines the definition of a 'good' cycle when using the antagonist.

Simplification of the clinical phase of IVF and ICSI treatment in programmed cycles

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the success of a protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation allowing patient self-selection into groups for ovulation stimulation planned 8 weeks and more in advance following cycle synchronization, drug self-administration as well as a reduced number of folliculometries.

METHODS

A total of 714 patients received the same stimulation protocol. In 260 cases GnRH-a was applied daily and in 454 as depot. In all patients FSH-HP was self-administered subcutaneously for ovarian stimulation. In 316 patients IVF and in 398 patients ICSI was performed.

RESULTS

The delivery rate per started cycle was higher in patients receiving depot GnRH-a in the IVF and ICSI group (30.2 vs. 23.4) than in those receiving subcutaneous GnRH-a (20.2 vs. 22.1).

CONCLUSION

Programming of the IVF/ICSI cycle greatly simplifies treatment. A comparison of pregnancy rate and delivery rate per cycle between depot and subcutaneous daily application of GnRh-a did not confirm any statistically significant difference.

Progestogen therapy during pituitary desensitization with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist prevents functional ovarian cyst formation: a prospective, randomized study

OBJECTIVES

We sought to assess whether the use of norethindrone and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist therapy in the early follicular phase reduces the occurrence of functional ovarian cysts and shortens the duration of pituitary desensitization. We also assessed whether the use of norethindrone impairs implantation rates after in vitro fertilization treatment.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a prospective, randomized, single-blind study involving 117 patients who were randomized to receive norethindrone 24 hours before gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist therapy (n = 63, treatment group) or gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist alone (n = 54, control group) for pituitary desensitization.

RESULTS

The incidence of functional ovarian cyst formation after 1 week of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist therapy was significantly lower in the treatment group compared with the control group. Furthermore, the duration of pituitary suppression was significantly shorter in the treatment group than in the control group. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in the follicular response and embryo quality. Adjusted for age, the implantation rate (22% vs 9%, P =.02) and clinical pregnancy rate (34% vs 18%, P =.04) were significantly higher in the treatment group than in the control group.

CONCLUSION

A combination of norethindrone and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist therapy is therefore more effective in achieving prompt pituitary suppression and should be considered for routine use during in vitro fertilization cycles.

The addition of norethindrone acetate to leuprolide acetate for ovarian suppression has no adverse effect on ovarian stimulation

PURPOSE

Our goal was to determine if the addition of norethindrone acetate (NETA) to leuprolide acetate (LA) has an adverse effect on controlled ovarian stimulation (COH) during in vitro fertilization (IVF).

METHODS

Forty-one consecutive patients undergoing COH and IVF were divided into two groups and evaluated. Group 1 consisted of 18 patients who did not become pregnant following two cycles (one of each protocol). Group 2 consisted of 23 patients who became clinically pregnant following one cycle from either protocol. The standard protocol consisted of LA (1 mg) injected subcutaneously from the first day of menses until day 8 or when ovarian suppression was evident, at which time the dose was halved and COH was initiated. The study protocol was identical except 10 mg of NETA was given orally with LA for the first 8 days. Ovarian stimulation was similar in each protocol.

RESULTS

No adverse effect on ovarian stimulation was evident on the addition of NETA to LA. No differences were noted in days of stimulation, peak estradiol (E2) level attained, peak E2-to-oocyte ratio, dosage of exogenous gonadotropins, number of aspirated oocytes, fertilization rate, or oocyte and preembryo quality.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of NETA does not attenuate COH in women undergoing IVF.

Maturational asynchrony between oocyte cumulus-coronal morphology and nuclear maturity in gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist stimulations

OBJECTIVE

To determine oocyte meiotic maturity and asynchrony between cumulus-coronal morphology and nuclear maturity after gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) and norethindrone-programmed stimulations.

DESIGN

Oocyte meiotic maturity was evaluated at follicular aspiration in 4,961 oocytes after GnRH-a/follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH)/human menopausal gonadotropin stimulations (hMG) for in vitro fertilization patients and 299 oocytes after norethindrone-programmed clomiphene citrate (CC)/hMG in oocyte donors. Maturational asynchrony between the oocyte's cumulus-coronal morphology and nuclear maturity was evaluated in 2,336 oocytes.

SETTING

In vitro fertilization program at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics; academic tertiary care center.

INTERVENTIONS

After evaluating oocyte cumulus-coronal maturity, cumulus masses were spread to determine oocyte nuclear maturity.

RESULTS

Fourteen percent, 17%, 50%, 17%, and 2% of oocytes were prophase I, metaphase I, metaphase II, postmature metaphase II, and atretic, respectively. Asynchrony was noted in 28% of prophase I, 71% of metaphase I, 11% of metaphase II, 45% of postmature metaphase II, 32% of atretic, and 28% of all oocytes. Significant differences were not found between GnRH-a and norethindrone-programmed stimulations in asynchrony between cumulus-coronal morphology and nuclear maturity or percentage of prophase I, metaphase I, metaphase II, postmature metaphase II, or atretic oocytes. Sixty-seven percent of oocytes possessed a polar body at retrieval. The rate of fertilization was significantly higher for metaphase II oocytes than postmature metaphase II and metaphase I oocytes > prophase I oocytes. Parthenogenetic activation tended to be highest for postmature metaphase II oocytes. Embryo cleavage was significantly higher for postmature metaphase II, metaphase II, and metaphase I oocytes than for prophase I oocytes.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first report of asynchrony between cumulus-coronal morphology and nuclear maturity at follicular aspiration in GnRH-a and norethindrone-programmed stimulations. Asynchrony was observed in 28% of oocytes. A higher percentage of oocytes possessed a polar body at egg retrieval with these stimulation regimens compared with rates reported previously for FSH, FSH/hMG, and CC/hMG stimulations.