Crinone 8% (90 mg) given once daily for progesterone replacement therapy in donor egg cycles

Comparison of vaginal progesterone gel combined with oral dydrogesterone versus intramuscular progesterone for luteal support in hormone replacement therapy-frozen embryo transfer cycle

BACKGROUND

It remains under subject of debate regarding the optimal route of luteal support for hormone replacement therapy- frozen embryo transfer (HRT-FET) cycles. We compared efficacy of vaginal progesterone gel combined with oral dydrogesterone and intramuscular progesterone for HRT-FET lutein support.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study. After matching for propensity score of getting vaginal + oral treatment, a total of 208 FET cycles in the vaginal progesterone combined with oral dydrogesterone and 624 cycles in the intramuscular progesterone group were enrolled. Pregnancy outcomes and neonatal outcomes including chemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, implantation rate, spontaneous abortion rate, live birth rate, gestational weeks, pre-term delivery, birth weight, and congenital anomalies rate were compared.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed in patient characteristics such as age, duration of infertility, type of infertility, or hormone level after matching. Chemical pregnancy rate (68.3 % versus 70.5 %), clinical pregnancy rate (64.9 % versus 64.4 %), implantation rate (52.3 % versus 50.2 %), spontaneous abortion rate (21.5 % versus 18.4 %), and live birth rate (49.0 % versus 51.3 %) were similar in both group without statistically significant difference. No significant differences in neonatal outcomes were observed between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

We observed similar pregnancy outcomes in both vaginal progesterone gel combined with oral dydrogesterone and intramuscular progesterone protocol. Vaginal progesterone gel combined with oral dydrogesterone can be substituted for intramuscular progesterone given that vaginal plus oral use has good safety and is more convenient and may be associated with less side effect caused by intramuscular injection.

Intramuscular progesterone (Gestone) versus vaginal progesterone suppository (Cyclogest) for luteal phase support in cycles of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer: patient preference and drug efficacy

Background

The requirement for luteal phase support (LPS) in stimulated IVF cycles is well established, however drug choice, and route of administration and duration of use are not. This report evaluates patients’ preference and satisfaction by using either vaginal or intramuscular (IM) progesterone (P) supplementation for luteal phase support after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET).

Methods

It is a prospective cohort study done in a reproductive and infertility unit in a tertiary care hospital from March 2013 through February 2015 for four hundred and nine patients undergoing IVF-ET. Patients were allowed to choose either vaginal or IM P for LPS. Patient preference and satisfaction, as well as differences in clinical pregnancy rates between the two groups were assessed at one or two time points throughout the study.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in the patients’ characteristics and clinical outcomes between the two groups. There were 88 pregnancies (38.8%) among patients treated with vaginal p and 62 pregnancies (34%) among IM P patients. Average satisfaction score at the pregnancy test and ultrasound (U/S) visits was similar between both groups.

Conclusions

Patients’ satisfaction and pregnancy rates were similar between vaginal and IM P supplementation.

Pharmaceutical and clinical development of a novel progesterone formulation

Progesterone plays an essential role in reproductive events. Its use for luteal support in patients undergoing infertility treatment is an established practice. The different routes used to administer progesterone impact on its efficacy in luteal support: oral administration has been shown to be ineffective due to an extensive first-pass metabolism in the liver; vaginal application has a good efficacy but has drawbacks such as vaginal leakage, irritation, discomfort and uncertainty about the real dose adsorbed; finally, intramuscular administration ensures a precise dosage but can be extremely painful with, in some cases, formation of sterile abscesses. A new progesterone preparation is now available in several European and extra-European countries that combines the precise dosage of the injectable formulation with the comfort of a well-tolerated subcutaneous self-administration. The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of this new product are reviewed here, together with the clinical evidence obtained in two multicenter randomized clinical trials.

Crinone Gel for Luteal Phase Support in Frozen-Thawed Embryo Transfer Cycles: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial in the Chinese Population

To compare Crinone vaginal progesterone gel with intramuscularly injected progesterone for luteal phase support in progesterone-supplemented frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles, a randomized prospective study of patients qualified for FET was conducted between September 2010 and January 2013 at a hospital in Shanghai, China. From the day of transformation into secretory phase endometrium (day 0), Crinone vaginal gel (90 mg/d) was administered to patients in the Gel Group, while progesterone (40 mg/d) was injected intramuscularly in patients in the Inj Group (n = 750 per group). All patients received oral dydrogesterone (20 mg/d) and estradiol valerate (4–8 mg/d). Day 3 embryos with the highest pre-frozen scores were transferred to patients in the two groups and the clinical outcomes compared. This study comprised 1,500 cycles (750 in each group). Twenty-nine cycles in the Gel Group and 24 in the Inj Group were withdrawn. There were no significant differences between groups in age, endometrial thickness, endometrial preparation time or number of embryos transferred. No significant differences were observed between the Gel Group and Inj Group in the rates of live birth (32.6% vs. 31.7%, P = 0.71), clinical pregnancy (40.1% vs. 40.6%, P = 0.831), implantation (25.8% vs. 25.3%, P = 0.772), abortion (16.3% vs. 18.3%, P = 0.514) or ectopic pregnancy (2.8% vs. 4.4%, P = 0.288). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for the rates of live birth, clinical pregnancy, abortion and ectopic pregnancy (Gel Group relative to Inj Group) were 1.036 (0.829–1.295), 0.971 (0.785–1.200), 0.919 (0.595–1.420) and 0.649 (0.261–1.614), respectively. Our study revealed that using Crinone vaginal gel in FET cycles achieved similar pregnancy outcomes to intramuscular progesterone, indicating that vaginal gel is a viable alternative to intramuscular injection.

Progesterone and the luteal phase: a requisite to reproduction

Progesterone production from the corpus luteum is critical for natural reproduction. Progesterone supplementation seems to be an important aspect of any assisted reproductive technology treatment. Luteal phase deficiency in natural cycles is a plausible cause of infertility and pregnancy loss, though there is no adequate diagnostic test. This article describes the normal luteal phase of the menstrual cycle, investigates the controversy surrounding luteal phase deficiency, and presents the current literature for progesterone supplementation during assisted reproductive technologies.

Patients' administration preferences: progesterone vaginal insert (Endometrin®) compared to intramuscular progesterone for Luteal phase support

Background

Administration of exogenous progesterone for luteal phase support has become a standard of practice. Intramuscular (IM) injections of progesterone in oil (PIO) and vaginal administration of progesterone are the primary routes of administration. This report describes the administration preferences expressed by women with infertility that were given progesterone vaginal insert (PVI) or progesterone in oil injections (PIO) for luteal phase support during fresh IVF cycles.

Methods

A questionnaire to assess the tolerability, convenience, and ease of administration of PVI and PIO given for luteal phase support was completed by infertile women diagnosed with PCOS and planning to undergo IVF. The women participated in an open-label study of highly purified human menopausal gonadotropins (HP-hMG) compared with recombinant FSH (rFSH) given for stimulation of ovulation.

Results

Most women commented on the convenience and ease of administration of PVI, while a majority of women who administered IM PIO described experiencing pain. In addition, their partners often indicated that they had experienced at least some anxiety regarding the administration of PIO. The most distinguishing difference between PVI and PIO in this study was the overall patient preference for PVI. Despite the need to administer PVI either twice a day or three times a day, 82.6% of the patients in the PVI group found it “very” or “somewhat convenient” compared with 44.9% of women in the PIO group.

Conclusions

The results of this comprehensive, prospective patient survey, along with findings from other similar reports, suggest that PVI provides an easy-to-use and convenient method for providing the necessary luteal phase support for IVF cycles without the pain and inconvenience of daily IM PIO. Moreover, ongoing pregnancy rates with the well-tolerated PVI were as good as the pregnancy rates with PIO.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT00805935

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1742-4755-11-78) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Progesterone replacement with vaginal gel versus i.m. injection: cycle and pregnancy outcomes in IVF patients receiving vitrified blastocysts

STUDY QUESTION

Does the type of luteal support affect pregnancy outcomes in recipients of vitrified blastocysts?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Luteal support with vaginal progesterone gel or i.m. progesterone (IMP) results in comparable implantation and pregnancy rates in IVF patients receiving vitrified blastocysts.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

In fresh IVF cycles, both IMP and vaginal progesterone have become the standard of care for luteal phase support. Due to conflicting data in replacement cycles, IMP is often considered to be the standard of care.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Retrospective analysis of 920 frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles between 1 January 2010 and 1 September 2012.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Patients from a large, private practice undergoing autologous and donor FET using IMP or vaginal progesterone gel for luteal support were included in the analysis. IMP was used for luteal support in 682 FET cycles and vaginal progesterone gel was used in 238 FET cycles. Standard clinical outcomes of positive serum hCG levels, implantation, clinical pregnancy, spontaneous abortion and live birth were reported.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The IMP and vaginal progesterone gel groups had similar patient demographics for all characteristics assessed. Implantation rates (46.4 versus 45.6%, P = 0.81), clinical pregnancy rates (61.7 versus 60.5%, P = 0.80) and live birth rates (49.1 versus 48.9%, P > 0.99) were not significantly different between IMP and vaginal progesterone gel, respectively.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

This study is limited by its retrospective design and by its lack of randomization to the type of luteal support. In addition, because no a priori expected rates of success could be provided for this retrospective investigation, it was not possible to estimate statistical power associated with the various outcomes presented.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

With the recent trends toward single embryo transfer (SET) and use of vitrified blastocysts in FET cycles, our data with ∼40% of cycles being SET and use of exclusively vitrified blastocysts are more relevant to current practices than previous studies.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

Support for data collection and analysis was provided by Actavis, Inc. D.S. has received honoraria for lectures and participation in Scientific Advisory Boards for Actavis, Inc. J.P. is an employee of Actavis, Inc. N.E. has received payment from Actavis, Inc., for her time for data collection. H.H. has received payment from Actavis, Inc., for statistical analyses. Z.P.N. has nothing to disclose.

Intramuscular progesterone versus 8% Crinone vaginal gel for luteal phase support for day 3 cryopreserved embryo transfer

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcomes after intramuscular progesterone (IMP) or 8% Crinone vaginal gel for luteal support for day 3 cryopreserved embryo transfer (CET).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study with multivariable analysis.

SETTING

Academic medical center.

PATIENT(S)

All autologous and donor egg in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection patients who had a day 3 CET from January 1, 2008, to April 30, 2011, with luteal support using 25-50 mg/d IMP or 8% Crinone twice daily, initiated 3 days before the CET.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Implantation rate, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rates per CET.

RESULT(S)

IMP (n = 440) and Crinone (n = 298) recipients were similar for all demographic characteristics and cycle parameters assessed. Although implantation rates did not differ significantly between the two groups (Crinone vs. IMP: 19.6% vs. 30.4%), women supplemented with Crinone had significantly lower rates of clinical pregnancy (36.9% vs. 51.1%) and live birth (24.4% vs. 39.1%) compared with those on IMP.

CONCLUSION(S)

We observed that day 3 CET cycles with 8% Crinone luteal support had a 44% and 49% lower odds of clinical pregnancy and live birth, respectively, compared with those with IMP support. Further studies are required to identify the optimal timing and dose of 8% Crinone vaginal gel for use in CET cycles.

Efficacy of micronised vaginal progesterone versus oral dydrogestrone in the treatment of irregular dysfunctional uterine bleeding: a pilot randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The vaginal route is more effective than the other drug delivery routes for some specific indications.

AIM

To compare the efficacy of a vaginal progesterone preparation with that of oral dydrogesterone.

METHODS

A total of 69 women with irregular dysfunctional uterine bleeding were randomly assigned into one of two groups: oral dydrogesterone group (n = 35) and vaginal progesterone group (n = 34). At the end of a three-month treatment period, the women were re-evaluated. The endometrial histology findings and menstrual cycle characteristics were used as primary outcome measures. Pearson chi-square and Fisher's exact test were used for data analysis.

RESULTS

Findings from 54 eligible women were evaluated. There was no statistically significant difference in both menstrual recordings and endometrial histology results between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaginal micronised progesterone could be an alternative to oral preparations in the treatment of dysfunctional uterine bleeding. This needs to be further evaluated in adequately controlled randomised trials against other effective treatments.

Single and multidose pharmacokinetic study of a vaginal micronized progesterone insert (Endometrin) compared with vaginal gel in healthy reproductive-aged female subjects

OBJECTIVE

To determine pharmacokinetic profiles of two times a day and three times a day dosage regimens of Endometrin, a micronized progesterone vaginal insert for luteal support in assisted reproductive technology, compared with a gel.

DESIGN

A single-center, randomized, open-label, single-day, and multiple-day (5 days) parallel design pharmacokinetic study.

SETTING

University clinical research unit.

PATIENT(S)

Three groups of six healthy subjects, ages 18 to 40 years.

INTERVENTION(S)

Endometrin vaginal inserts two times a day or three times a day, or gel daily.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Pharmacokinetic profiles.

RESULT(S)

Progesterone serum concentrations increased rapidly following administration of Endometrin vaginal insert, producing higher peak concentrations (Cmax) and clearing faster than gel. On the single day of dosing, mean Cmax was 17.0+/-2.7 ng/mL in the two times a day group, 19.8+/-2.9 ng/mL in the three times a day group, and 6.82+/-1.69 ng/mL in the gel group. Endometrin treatments reached steady state within the first 2 days (24-36 hours), much more rapidly than the gel, which had not reached steady state by 5 days. At 5 days, the Endometrin treatments produced sustained progesterone concentrations exceeding 10 mg/mL across 24 hours.

CONCLUSIONS

Endometrin vaginal inserts reached higher Cmax, produced greater systemic exposure (area under the curve 0-24), achieved steady state more rapidly, and cleared more rapidly after termination of therapy than the comparator.

Vaginal gel versus intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase supplementation: a prospective randomized trial

The aim of this randomized study was to compare the efficacy of intramuscular progesterone (IMP) and progesterone in vaginal gel (VGP) at two different doses for luteal support in IVF. A total of 412 patients, aged between 28 and 37 years, were randomized into three groups. The day after oocyte retrieval each patient began supplementation with one of the following: IMP 50 mg daily (150 patients), VGP 90 mg once daily (143 patients), or VPG 90 mg twice daily (148 patients). No significant difference was found between the three groups in any of the endpoints. The rate of positive beta-human chorionic gonadotrophin per transfer was 38.4% with IMP, 35.0% with VPG once daily and 43.1% with VPG twice daily. Clinical pregnancy rate per transfer and implantation rate were 32.6% and 19.6% with IMP, 26.3% and 16.4% with one dose of VGP, and 37.2% and 21.1% with two doses of VGP. Live birth rate per transfer was 26.1%, 23.4% and 29.9%, respectively. Progesterone vaginal gel can be successfully used as an alternative to intramuscular progesterone for luteal support in IVF. One daily dose appears sufficient to induce clinical pregnancies and live births at a rate comparable to intramuscular supplementation.

Efficacy and tolerability of vaginal progesterone capsules (Utrogest™ 200) compared with progesterone gel (Crinone™ 8%) for luteal phase support during assisted reproduction

OBJECTIVE

To demonstrate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of capsules containing 200 mg of P (Utrogest 200) or Crinone 8% gel for luteal phase and early pregnancy support during assisted reproduction techniques (ART).

DESIGN

Prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled, open, parallel-group Phase III trial.

SETTING

Seventeen German IVF centers.

PATIENT(S)

Four hundred thirty women who underwent their first IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycle were randomized after successful transfer of two or three embryos from July 1999 through September 2001.

INTERVENTION(S)

Patients vaginally applied capsules containing 200 mg of P (Utrogest 200) three times per day or containing Crinone 8% gel twice per day. Therapy was started in the evening of the ET day and continued up to 10 weeks in pregnant women. If the pregnancy test proved to be negative, application was stopped.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Ongoing pregnancy rate at the end of the study (12th week of gestation). Secondary outcomes were rate of implantation and abortion, number and reasons of withdrawals, as well as adverse events, assessment of tolerability, and acceptance.

RESULT(S)

There were no relevant differences in demographic and other characteristics between the two groups. Ongoing pregnancy rates were 25.2% in the Utrogest 200 group and 22.2% in the Crinone 8% group when patients were analyzed who normally completed the trial. In the Utrogest 200 vs. the Crinone 8% group, the implantation rate (14.7% vs. 11.9%) and abortion rate (18.2% vs. 19.1%) were not statistically different. The rate of withdrawals at the individual visits also did not differ between treatment groups. Tolerability of both drugs was good, and very few study drug-related adverse events were observed in both groups.

CONCLUSION(S)

The luteal phase support in ART cycles with Utrogest 200 capsules (three times per day) or Crinone 8% gel (two times per day) by the vaginal route resulted in similar outcomes with respect to implantation, ongoing pregnancy, and abortion rates. The two recommended regimens of P supplementation in ART proved to be equivalent and safe.

What is the ‘ideal’ duration of progesterone supplementation before the transfer of cryopreserved–thawed embryos in estrogen/progesterone replacement protocols?

Different studies dealing with the start of progesterone supplementation in assisted reproduction treatment cycles have shown that the problem apparently is the correct timing. We therefore would like to discuss the data on: (i) the start of progesterone replacement in oocyte donation programmes; (ii) the start of progesterone replacement in frozen-thawed hormone-supplemented cycles; (ii) the problem of too early a rise of progesterone in fresh IVF cycles as a model of too early an administration of progesterone; and (iv) the benefit of high progesterone levels on the day of embryo transfer in fresh IVF cycles. From the data reviewed in this paper it seems to be appropriate to start progesterone administration before transfer in oocyte donation programmes as well as transfer of cryopreserved/thawed cells as soon as the endometrium is developed sufficiently (> or =8 mm, trilaminar pattern), and to perform the embryo transfer not before day 3-4 of progesterone treatment, i.e. embryo development on day 2-3. Studies dealing with the influence of too early a rise of progesterone in fresh IVF cycles have shown different results. In fact high progesterone levels seem to reflect a high response but not a lower probability of conception. Furthermore, high progesterone levels on the day of embryo transfer in fresh IVF cycles could lower myometrial contractility and therefore increase implantation rates. Since the experience from oocyte donation programes shows the benefit of a longer preparation time using progesterone, and high progesterone levels seem to have a benefit during embryo transfer, this would suggest extending progesterone administration before transfer. However, we have to find the optimal individual transfer protocol after mock cycles, for example with pinopode detection or other methods applicable in routine IVF programmes. We need more studies to be sure whether reproductive outcome after transfer of cryopreserved-thawed cells in estrogen/progesterone supplement cycles is influenced by the duration of progesterone pretreatment. If this is so, we must look for practicable methods to modify the protocols according to the individual patient, the embryonic developmental stage during transfer and other variables.

Luteal support with vaginal micronized progesterone gel in assisted reproduction

The purpose of this study was to review the rationale for vaginal progesterone treatment as luteal support in IVF, and the clinical experience with vaginal micronized progesterone gel. It was found that luteal support with exogenous progesterone significantly improves implantation and pregnancy rates after IVF. Vaginal administration offers a number of potential advantages over intramuscular injection in terms of tolerability and convenience. The clinical experience with Crinone 8%, a vaginal gel containing 90 mg micronized progesterone in a polycarbophil base, indicates that the use of this preparation is associated with pregnancy rates comparable with those achieved after intramuscular administration of progesterone. Moreover, in studies in which patient preferences have been assessed, significantly higher preferences for vaginal micronized progesterone gel have been reported, compared with intramuscular administration or vaginal suppositories. In conclusion, the vaginal micronized progesterone gel used in this study provided effective and well-tolerated luteal support in women undergoing IVF.

Luteal phase support

Assisted reproductive techniques have become a routine treatment for infertility. The extended use of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues in assisted reproductive techniques has made luteal phase support mandatory, as it has been clearly demonstrated that they alter luteal LH pulsatility. For luteal support, HCG administration, though effective, has a high risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Progesterone continues to be the gold standard for supplementation. Vaginal progesterone represents a highly effective alternative to painful intramuscular injections. The vaginal route is mainly characterized by direct delivery of the progesterone to the endometrium, thus producing high levels at the target tissue and a very low incidence of side effects.

Luteal phase support using either Crinone 8% or Utrogest: results of a prospective, randomized study

The Crinone 8% preparation makes it possible to administer natural progesterone (90 mg) vaginally once daily for luteal phase support (LPS). Until now, no prospective, randomized studies have directly compared this new preparation with widely used Utrogest capsules, which were originally designed for oral administration but are used routinely as a vaginal preparation. A prospective, randomized study investigated 126 patients undergoing cycles of in vitro fertilization (IVF) and IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Patients received either Crinone 8% (n = 73) vaginally once daily or two Utrogest capsules (n=53) vaginally three times daily (600 mg). Clinical pregnancy rates were comparable (28.8 versus 18.9%), as were clinical abortion rates until 12 weeks of gestation (14.3 versus 10.0%) and clinical ongoing pregnancy rates (24.7 versus 17.0%) in the Crinone 8% and Utrogest groups, respectively. Forty-seven non-pregnant patients were randomly selected to answer questions regarding comfort during LPS. Crinone 8% had a clear advantage over Utrogest as it resulted in less vaginal discharge (P < 0.01) and fewer application difficulties (P<0.05). Twenty patients familiar with the alternative preparation from a previous cycle also noted that Crinone 8% was easier to apply (P < 0.01) and less time consuming (P < 0.05) to use than Utrogest.

Luteal phase support

OBJECTIVE

To develop a consensus regarding the need for luteal phase support during assisted reproductive technology (ART), and to establish the optimal compound and route of administration for this purpose.

DESIGN

Review of the published literature on luteal phase support.

PATIENT(S)

Women undergoing assisted reproductive technologies.

INTERVENTION(S)

Progesterone was administered orally, vaginally, or by intramuscular (i.m.) injection to supplement the luteal phase after assisted reproductive technology (ART).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Pregnancy following ART. RESULT(S); Gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH)-agonist protocols necessitate the use of luteal phase support. Progesterone and human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) have both been used for this purpose, with comparable outcomes. Progesterone is the product of choice, however, as it is associated with a lower incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Its use is indicated up to the serum pregnancy test. Oral, i.m., and vaginal progesterone preparations are available. Intramuscular and vaginal preparations lead to comparable rates of implantation and clinical pregnancy, despite higher serum progesterone levels after i.m. injection. Oral formulations are inferior products for luteal support. Although widely used, i.m. progesterone is uncomfortable and inconvenient for patients. By contrast, the vaginal progesterone gel (Crinone 8%) is more convenient and easier to use.

CONCLUSION(S)

Progesterone support of the luteal phase in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles is indicated, though support beyond the serum pregnancy test may not be needed. The pregnancy rates after vaginal and i.m. progesterone support are comparable, despite higher serum levels after i.m. injection. Patients prefer the vaginal progesterone gel.

Uterorelaxing effects of vaginal progesterone: comparison of two methodologies for assessing uterine contraction frequency on ultrasound scans

OBJECTIVE

To assess the changes in uterine contractility induced by increasing doses of P administered to estrogenized women and to compare two methodologies for assessing uterine contraction frequency from ultrasound scans.

DESIGN

Prospective double-blind parallel study.

SETTING

Academic tertiary center.

PATIENT(S)

Infertile women aged 21-39 years with premature ovarian failure.

INTERVENTION(S)

P support set to duplicate the luteal phase was provided every 2 days by application of 1.125 g of Crinone 4% and 8% or 2.25 g of Crinone 8%, containing 45, 90, and 180 mg of P per application, respectively.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Changes in uterine contraction frequency following exposure to three doses of vaginal P on ultrasound scans analyzed by visualizing accelerated image sequences and using a previously described three-dimensional (3D)-derived approach.

RESULT(S)

A decrease in uterine contraction frequency reached statistical significance on the third day of exposure to P without differences between the three dose groups. The two methods for measuring uterine contraction frequency on ultrasound scans were equivalent.

CONCLUSION(S)

At all three doses studied, the vaginal P gel Crinone administered to estrogenized women induced a profound decrease in uterine contraction frequency that duplicated the changes in contractility described in the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle. Analyzing uterine contraction frequency on accelerated image sequences is as effective as our more complex approach based on identifying contractions on time mode graphs electronically reconstructed using 3D-software.

Evaluation of an optimal luteal phase support protocol in IVF

SUBJECT

Luteal phase support has been shown in the past to be an essential part of ovarian stimulation protocols, especially the long protocol. It could be shown that hCG is as effective as is progesterone for luteal phase support but hCG is accompanied by a higher rate of complications.

METHODS

Progesterone can be administered in several routes. The oral, intramuscular (i.m.) and vaginal routes have been chosen frequently in the past. The oral route is ineffective, since progesterone has a low oral bioavailability (<10%), and a high rate of metabolites, which may result in side effects such as somnolence etc. Intramuscular administration provides very high serum levels of progesterone and this route is effective with regard to pregnancy rates. Injection of progesterone, however, is painful and cannot be done by the patient herself. The vaginal route is also effective, progesterone can be administered by the patient herself and progesterone is delivered directly to the uterus, where high levels are achieved (first uterine pass effect).

RESULTS

Several studies could show, in the past, that the vaginal administration of progesterone is effective also with regard to the downregulation of uterine contractions. Crinone 8% Vaginal Gel is especially designed for vaginal use with a special applicator and has to be administered once daily in the morning. It adheres to the vaginal epithelium, and leakage of the gel is substantially reduced as compared to other drugs like capsules or suppositories.

CONCLUSIONS

Since progesterone is as effective as hCG for luteal phase support but provides a higher safety with regard to ovarian hyperstimulation syndromes, and vaginal progesterone is as effective as intramuscular progesterone, vaginal progesterone should be the standard choice for luteal phase support. Crinone 8% seems to be the most comfortable way of vaginal administration of progesterone for luteal phase support in IVF cycles.

Experience with progesterone gel for luteal support in a highly successful IVF programme

Efficacy of luteal support from single daily administration of Crinone((R)) 8% (progesterone gel) was tested in 43 women in an IVF programme with historical pregnancy rates >50%. Results were compared with those achieved in 46 women concurrently undergoing IVF and receiving 50 mg i.m. progesterone, and with historical data. Pregnancy rates (PR) were evaluated approximately 2 weeks after undergoing IVF by human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) measurement (total PR), by ultrasound 2-4 weeks later (clinical PR), and by counting births. Prior experience with other progesterone formulations was compared with that of Crinone 8%. Demographic and IVF characteristics were comparable for both concurrently treated groups. Total PR, clinical PR and live birth rates were similar for the Crinone and the concurrent i.m. progesterone groups: 31 (72.1%) versus 34 (73.9%); 26 (60.5%) versus 28 (60.9%), and 23 (53.5%) versus 23 (50%) respectively. Clinical PR and live birth rates were also similar to the last data reported to the Society for Assisted Reproduction Therapy. Overall acceptability of Crinone 8% was excellent. Among subjects with prior i.m. injection experience, most patients (69.2%) agreed that the gel was easier to use, less painful (76.9%) and less time-consuming (61.5%) than i.m. injections. In conclusion, Crinone 8% offers an appreciable improvement, as it provides an effective luteal support option that avoids painful i.m. injections.