Clinical outcomes in relation to the daily dose of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone for ovarian stimulation in in vitro fertilization in presumed normal responders younger than 39 years: a meta-analysis

Individualised gonadotropin dose selection using markers of ovarian reserve for women undergoing in vitro fertilisation plus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI)

BACKGROUND

During a stimulated cycle of in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI), women receive daily doses of gonadotropin follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) to induce multifollicular development in the ovaries. A normal response to stimulation (e.g. retrieval of 5 to 15 oocytes) is considered desirable. Generally, the number of eggs retrieved is associated with the dose of FSH. Both hyper-response and poor response are associated with an increased chance of cycle cancellation. In hyper-response, this is due to increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), while poor response cycles are cancelled because the quantity and quality of oocytes is expected to be low. Clinicians often individualise the FSH dose using patient characteristics predictive of ovarian response. Traditionally, this meant women's age, but increasingly, clinicians use various ovarian reserve tests (ORTs). These include basal FSH (bFSH), antral follicle count (AFC), and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH). It is unclear whether individualising FSH dose improves clinical outcomes. This review updates the 2018 version.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of individualised gonadotropin dose selection using markers of ovarian reserve in women undergoing IVF/ICSI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trial registers in February 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared (a) different doses of FSH in women with a defined ORT profile (i.e. predicted low, normal, or high responders based on AMH, AFC, and/or bFSH) or (b) an individualised dosing strategy (based on at least one ORT measure) versus uniform dosing or a different individualised dosing algorithm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Primary outcomes were live birth/ongoing pregnancy and severe OHSS.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 26 studies, involving 8520 women (6 new studies added to 20 studies included in the previous version). We treated RCTs with multiple comparisons as separate trials for the purpose of this review. Meta-analysis was limited due to clinical heterogeneity. Evidence certainty ranged from very low to low, with the main limitations being imprecision and risk of bias associated with lack of blinding. Direct dose comparisons according to predicted response in women Due to differences in dose comparisons, caution is required when interpreting the RCTs in predicted low responders. All evidence was low or very low certainty. Effect estimates were very imprecise, and increased FSH dosing may or may not have an impact on rates of live birth/ongoing pregnancy, OHSS, and clinical pregnancy. Similarly, in predicted normal responders (10 studies, 4 comparisons), higher doses may or may not impact the probability of live birth/ongoing pregnancy (e.g. 200 versus 100 international units (IU): odds ratio (OR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 1.36; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 522 women) or clinical pregnancy. Results were imprecise, and a small benefit or harm remains possible. There were too few events for the OHSS outcome to enable inferences. In predicted high responders, lower doses may or may not affect live birth/ongoing pregnancy (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.46; 1 study, 521 women), severe OHSS, and clinical pregnancy. It is also unclear whether lower doses reduce moderate or severe OHSS (Peto OR 2.31, 95% CI 0.80 to 6.67; 1 study, 521 participants). ORT-algorithm studies Eight trials compared an ORT-based algorithm to a non-ORT control group. It is unclear whether live birth/ongoing pregnancy and clinical pregnancy are increased using an ORT-based algorithm (live birth/ongoing pregnancy: OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.29; I2 = 30%; 7 studies, 4400 women; clinical pregnancy: OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.18; I2 = 18%; 7 studies, 4400 women; low-certainty evidence). However, ORT algorithms may reduce moderate or severe OHSS (Peto OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.84; I2 = 0%; 7 studies, 4400 women; low-certainty evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether the groups differed in rates of severe OHSS (Peto OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.28; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 2724 women; low-certainty evidence). Our findings suggest that if the chance of live birth with a standard starting dose is 25%, the chance with ORT-based dosing would be between 25% and 31%. If the chance of moderate or severe OHSS with a standard starting dose is 5%, the chance with ORT-based dosing would be between 2% and 5%. These results should be treated cautiously due to heterogeneity in the algorithms: some algorithms appear to be more effective than others.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find that tailoring the FSH dose in any particular ORT population (low, normal, high ORT) affected live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates, but we could not rule out differences, due to sample size limitations. Low-certainty evidence suggests that it is unclear if ORT-based individualisation leads to an increase in live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates compared to a policy of giving all women 150 IU. The confidence interval is consistent with an increase of up to around six percentage points with ORT-based dosing (e.g. from 25% to 31%) or a very small decrease (< 1%). A difference of this magnitude could be important to many women. It is unclear if this is driven by improved outcomes in a particular subgroup. Further, ORT algorithms reduced the incidence of OHSS compared to standard dosing of 150 IU. However, the size of the effect is also unclear. The included studies were heterogeneous in design, which limited the interpretation of pooled estimates. It is likely that different ORT algorithms differ in their effectiveness. Current evidence does not provide a clear justification for adjusting the dose of 150 IU in poor or normal responders, especially as increased dose is associated with greater total FSH dose and cost. It is unclear whether a decreased dose in predicted high responders reduces OHSS, although this would appear to be the most likely explanation for the results.

Verification of the utility of the gonadotropin starting dose calculator in progestin-primed ovarian stimulation: A comparison of empirical and calculated controlled ovarian stimulation

Purpose

To validate the effectiveness of a gonadotropin starting dose calculator for progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS), we conducted a study comparing the outcomes of oocyte retrieval between a group assigned gonadotropin doses via the calculator and a control group, where doses were determined by the clinician's empirical judgment.

Methods

Patients underwent controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) using the PPOS method, followed by oocyte retrieval. We assessed and compared the results of COS and oocyte retrieval in both groups. Additionally, we examined the concordance rate between the number of oocytes actually retrieved and the target number of oocytes in each group.

Results

The calculated group demonstrated a significantly higher number of preovulation follicles and a higher ovarian sensitivity index than the control group. Furthermore, the discrepancy between the target and actual number of oocytes retrieved was notably smaller in the calculated group. The concordance rate between the target and actual number of oocytes was significantly greater in the calculated group.

Conclusions

The gonadotropin starting dose calculator proved to be effective within the PPOS protocol, offering a reliable method for predicting the approximate number of oocytes to be retrieved, irrespective of the COS protocol employed.

Ovarian stimulation with excessive FSH doses causes cumulus cell and oocyte dysfunction in small ovarian reserve heifers

Excessive FSH doses during ovarian stimulation in the small ovarian reserve heifer (SORH) cause premature cumulus expansion and follicular hyperstimulation dysgenesis (FHD) in nearly all ovulatory-size follicles with predicted disruptions in cell-signaling pathways in cumulus cells and oocytes (before ovulatory hCG stimulation). These observations support the hypothesis that excessive FSH dysregulates cumulus cell function and oocyte maturation. To test this hypothesis, we determined whether excessive FSH-induced differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in cumulus cells identified in our previously published transcriptome analysis were altered independent of extreme phenotypic differences observed amongst ovulatory-size follicles, and assessed predicted roles of these DEGs in cumulus and oocyte biology. We also determined if excessive FSH alters cumulus cell morphology, and oocyte nuclear maturation before (premature) or after an ovulatory hCG stimulus or during IVM. Excessive FSH doses increased expression of 17 cumulus DEGs with known roles in cumulus cell and oocyte functions (responsiveness to gonadotrophins, survival, expansion, and oocyte maturation). Excessive FSH also induced premature cumulus expansion and oocyte maturation but inhibited cumulus expansion and oocyte maturation post-hCG and diminished the ability of oocytes with prematurely expanded cumulus cells to undergo IVF or nuclear maturation during IVM. Ovarian stimulation with excessive FSH is concluded to disrupt cumulus cell and oocyte functions by inducing premature cumulus expansion and dysregulating oocyte maturation without an ovulatory hCG stimulus yielding poor-quality cumulus-oocyte complexes that may be incorrectly judged morphologically as suitable for IVF during ART.

Corifolitropin-Alfa plus Five Days Letrozole Versus Daily Recombinant-FSH in Expected Normo-Responder Patients: A Retrospective Comparative Study

Background: In recent times, different novel GnRH-antagonist protocols with various combinations of gonadotropins and other molecules (e.g., aromatase inhibitors, selective estrogen receptor modulators) have been proposed for expected normal ovarian responders undergoing assisted reproductive treatments. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a novel ovarian stimulation protocol based on the combination of corifollitropin-alfa plus five days of letrozole in E-NOR women undergoing IVF as compared with a daily recombinant-FSH regimen. Methods: We conducted a retrospective-controlled study on 182 couples undergoing their first IVF attempt. In Group A (experimental), letrozole (2.5 mg daily) was administered from day 2 (up to day 6 of the cycle), followed by corifollitropin-alfa on day 3 and daily recombinant FSH from day 10. In Group B, recombinant FSH from day 2 were administered (150 IU-225 IU daily). Statistical analysis was completed using SPSS Statistics. The primary outcome was the total number of MII oocytes retrieved. Results: Group A showed similar results compared to Group B in terms of MII oocytes, live birth, implantation, and clinical pregnancy rates (p = ns). Nevertheless, the experimental group was associated with a trend towards a higher number of developing follicles, total oocytes, and embryos (p < 0.05) with lower estradiol and progesterone values at ovulation induction compared to Group B, resulting in an increased chance of performing a fresh embryo transfer (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The combination of CFα plus five days of letrozole was associated with a trend towards a higher number of developing follicles, total oocytes, and obtained embryos. Moreover, the experimental protocol resulted in lower estradiol and progesterone values at ovulation induction compared to daily rFSH, with an increased chance of performing a fresh embryo transfer (with no OHSS occurrence). Given the observational design of our study, further well-conducted RCTs are needed.

Follicle-stimulating hormone (and luteinizing hormone) in ovarian stimulation: Does the dose matter for cycle success?

In this review, we have summarized the evolution in our understanding of a relevance of gonadotropin dosing for cycle outcomes in women attempting to conceive through the utilization of the in vitro fertilization technology.

The gonadotropins starting dose calculator, which can be adjusted the target number of oocytes and stimulation duration days to achieve individualized controlled ovarian stimulation in Japanese patients

Purpose

To create a gonadotropin starting dose calculator for controlled ovarian stimulation, which can adjust the target number of oocytes and stimulation duration for each facility to achieve individualized controlled ovarian stimulation among the Japanese patients.

Methods

The patients received controlled ovarian stimulation using the gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol, and oocytes were retrieved. Using single regression analysis, we selected age, anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), and initial serum follicle-stimulating hormone as variables to predict the number of oocytes retrieved per gonadotropin dose (oocyte sensitivity index). Each variable was then analyzed using backward stepwise multiple regression.

Results

Age and AMH were selected as predictive variables from the backward stepwise multiple regression, and we developed a multiple regression equation. We decomposed the equation as the number of oocytes retrieved/(gonadotropin starting dose × stimulation duration days) and created a calculation formula to predict the gonadotropin starting dose from the target number of oocytes and stimulation duration days.

Conclusions

This is the first study to develop an individualized dosing algorithm for gonadotropins among Japanese patients. Our calculator will improve controlled ovarian stimulation performance and enable national standardization by allowing all physicians, regardless of their years of experience, to determine the appropriate starting dose of gonadotropins equally.

The serum follicle stimulating hormone-to-luteinizing hormone ratios can predict assisted reproductive technology outcomes in women undergoing gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist protocol

BACKGROUND

The basal follicle stimulating hormone (FSH)/luteinizing hormone (LH) ratio is a useful predictor of ovarian response. In this study, we investigated whether the FSH/LH ratios during the entire controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) can be used as effective predictors of outcomes in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment using the gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol.

METHODS

A total of 1,681 women undergoing their first GnRH-ant protocol were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study. A Poisson regression model was used to analyze the association between the FSH/LH ratios during COS and embryological outcomes. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to determine the optimal cutoff values for poor responders (≤ 5 oocytes) or poor reproductive potential (≤ 3 available embryos). A nomogram model was constructed to provide a tool for predicting the cycle outcomes of individual IVF treatments.

RESULTS

The FSH/LH ratios (at the basal day, stimulation day 6 (SD6) and trigger day) were significantly correlated with the embryological outcomes. The basal FSH/LH ratio was the most reliable predictor of poor responders with a cutoff value of 1.875 (area under the curve (AUC) = 72.3%, P < 0.05), or of poor reproductive potential with a cutoff value of 2.515 (AUC = 66.3%, P < 0.05). The SD6 FSH/LH ratio predicted poor reproductive potential with a cutoff value of 4.14 (AUC = 63.8%, P < 0.05). The trigger day FSH/LH ratio predicted poor responders with a cutoff value of 9.665 (AUC = 63.1%, P < 0.05). The basal FSH/LH ratio, combined with the SD6 and trigger day FSH/LH ratios, slightly increased these AUC values and improved the prediction sensitivity. The nomogram provides a reliable model with which to assess the risk of poor response or poor reproductive potential directly based on the combined indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

FSH/LH ratios are useful predictors of poor ovarian response or reproductive potential throughout the entire COS with the GnRH antagonist protocol. Our findings also provide insights into the potential for LH supplementation and regimen adjustment during COS to achieve improved outcomes.

Ovarian Stimulation in Assisted Reproductive Technology Cycles for Varied Patient Profiles: An Indian Perspective

Controlled ovarian stimulation has been an integral part of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment cycles. Availability of different gonadotropins for ovarian stimulation and gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues for prevention of premature rise of leutinising hormone during follicular phase offer an opportunity to utilise them for a successful outcome in women with different subsets of ovarian response. Further, use of GnRH agonist as an alternative for human chorionic gonadotropin improves safety of ovarian stimulation in hyper-responders. Mild ovarian stimulation protocols have emerged as an alternative to conventional protocols in the recent years. Individualisation plays an important role in improving safety of IVF in hyper-responders while efforts continue to improve efficacy in poor responders. Some of the follicular and peri-ovulatory phase interventions may be associated with negative impact on the luteal phase and segmentalisation of the treatment with frozen embryo transfer may be an effective strategy in such a clinical scenario. This narrative review looks at the available evidence on various aspects of ovarian stimulation strategies and their consequences. In addition, it provides a concise summary of the evidence that has emerged from India on various aspects of ovarian stimulation.

Reintroducing serum FSH measurement during ovarian stimulation for ART

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the impact of systemic FSH concentrations during ovarian stimulation for IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection on systemic progesterone concentrations in the late follicular phase?

DESIGN

Post-hoc analysis of a previously performed randomized controlled trial (RCT) performed between November 2017 and February 2020 in a tertiary IVF centre. The RCT included patients with infertility undergoing ovarian stimulation in a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol. The GnRH antagonist was administered at 08:00 h and recombinant FSH at 20:00 h. Ultrasound and blood tests were performed 3-5 h after the GnRH antagonist.

RESULTS

The subgroup analysis comprised 105 patients. Systemic FSH concentrations increased from Day 2/3 until initiation of GnRH antagonist and remained constant until the day of trigger (DoT). The total group was split according to the median FSH DoT concentration (12.95 IU/l; Group A <12.95 IU/l; Group B ≥12.95 IU/l). Significant differences, with the higher concentrations in Group B, were found for: systemic FSH concentration on Day 2/3 (P = 0.04), total gonadotrophin dosage (P = 0.03), progesterone on DoT (P = 0.001) and progesterone per follicle (P = 0.004). In the total group, systemic DoT FSH concentration was statistically significantly positively correlated with the DoT progesterone concentration and the ratio of progesterone per follicle (ρ = 0.37 and 0.38, respectively, both P < 0.001). No significant correlations were seen between the systemic DoT FSH concentration and the number of retrieved oocytes.

CONCLUSION

While ovarian response seems to be independent from the systemic FSH concentrations on the DoT, high concentrations of circulatory FSH augment the production of progesterone.

Idiopathic early ovarian aging: is there a relation with premenopausal accelerated biological aging in young women with diminished response to ART?

PURPOSE

To evaluate whether young women with idiopathic early ovarian aging, as defined by producing fewer oocytes than expected for a given age over multiple in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles, have changes in telomere length and epigenetic age indicating accelerated biological aging (i.e., increased risk of morbidity and mortality).

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted at two Danish public fertility clinics. A total of 55 young women (≤ 37 years) with at least two IVF cycles with ≤ 5 harvested oocytes despite sufficient stimulation with follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) were included in the early ovarian aging group. As controls, 52 young women (≤ 37 years) with normal ovarian function, defined by at least eight harvested oocytes, were included. Relative telomere length (rTL) and epigenetic age acceleration (AgeAccel) were measured in white blood cells as markers of premenopausal accelerated biological aging.

RESULTS

rTL was comparable with a mean of 0.46 (± SD 0.12) in the early ovarian aging group and 0.47 (0.14) in the normal ovarian aging group. The AgeAccel of the early ovarian aging group was, insignificantly, 0.5 years older, but this difference disappeared when adjusting for chronological age. Sub-analysis using Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) as selection criterion for the two groups did not change the results.

CONCLUSION

We did not find any indications of accelerated aging in whole blood from young women with idiopathic early ovarian aging. Further investigations in a similar cohort of premenopausal women or other tissues are needed to fully elucidate the potential relationship between premenopausal accelerated biological aging and early ovarian aging.

A randomised controlled trial to clinically validate follitropin delta in its individualised dosing regimen for ovarian stimulation in Asian IVF/ICSI patients

STUDY QUESTION

Is ovarian stimulation with follitropin delta in its individualised fixed-dose regimen at least as efficacious as follitropin alfa in a conventional dosing regimen in Asian population?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Ovarian stimulation with individualised follitropin delta dosing resulted in a non-inferior ongoing pregnancy rate, a significantly higher live birth rate and a significantly lower incidence of early ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and/or preventive interventions compared to conventional follitropin alfa dosing.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Previous randomised controlled trials conducted in Japan as well as in Europe, North- and South America have demonstrated that ovarian stimulation with the individualised follitropin delta dosing regimen based on serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level and body weight modulated the ovarian response and reduced the risk of OHSS without compromising pregnancy and live birth rates.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Randomised, controlled, multi-centre, assessor-blind trial conducted in 1009 Asian patients from mainland China, South Korea, Vietnam and Taiwan, undergoing their first IVF/ICSI cycle. Randomisation was stratified by age (<35, 35–37, 38–40 years). The primary endpoint was ongoing pregnancy rate assessed 10–11 weeks after embryo transfer in the fresh cycle (non-inferiority limit −10.0%; analysis adjusted for age stratum).

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

The follitropin delta treatment consisted of a fixed daily dose individualised according to each patient’s initial AMH level and body weight (AMH <15 pmol/l: 12 μg; AMH ≥15 pmol/l: 0.19 to 0.10 μg/kg; min-max 6–12 μg). The follitropin alfa dose was 150 IU/day for the first 5 days with subsequent potential dose adjustments according to individual response. A GnRH antagonist protocol was applied. OHSS was classified based on Golan’s system. Women with an ongoing pregnancy were followed until live birth and 4 weeks after.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The number of oocytes retrieved was significantly (P < 0.001) lower with individualised follitropin delta versus conventional follitropin alfa (10.0 ± 6.1 versus 12.4 ± 7.3). Nevertheless, compared to the conventional dosing approach, the individualised follitropin delta dosing regimen resulted in on average 2 more oocytes (9.6 ± 5.3 versus 7.6 ± 3.5) in potential low responders as indicated by AMH <15 pmol/l, and on average 3 fewer oocytes (10.1 ± 6.3 versus 13.8 ± 7.5) in potential high responders as indicated by AMH ≥15 pmol/l. Among women with AMH ≥15 pmol/l, excessive response occurred less frequently with individualised follitropin delta than with follitropin alfa (≥15 oocytes: 20.2% versus 39.1%; ≥20 oocytes: 6.7% versus 18.5%; both P < 0.001). The incidence of early OHSS and/or preventive interventions for early OHSS was significantly (P = 0.004) reduced from 9.6% with follitropin alfa to 5.0% with individualised follitropin delta. The total gonadotropin use was significantly (P < 0.001) reduced from an average of 109.9 ± 32.9 μg (1498 ± 448 IU) follitropin alfa to 77.5 ± 24.4 μg follitropin delta. Non-inferiority of follitropin delta in its individualised dosing regimen to conventional follitropin alfa was established with respect to the primary endpoint of ongoing pregnancy rate which was 31.3% with follitropin delta compared to 25.7% with follitropin alfa (estimated mean difference 5.4% [95% CI: −0.2%; 11.0%]). The live birth rate was significantly higher at 31.3% with individualised follitropin delta compared to 24.7% with follitropin alfa (estimated mean difference 6.4% [95% CI: 0.9%; 11.9%]; P = 0.023). The live birth rate for each stratum were as follows for follitropin delta and follitropin alfa, respectively; <35 years: 31.0% versus 25.0%, 35–37 years: 35.3% versus 26.7%, 38–40 years: 20.0% versus 14.3%.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The trial only covered the clinical outcome of one treatment cycle with fresh cleavage-stage embryo transfers.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The present trial shows that in addition to reducing the early OHSS risk, follitropin delta in its individualised fixed-dose regimen has the potential to improve the success rate in fresh cycles across all ages and with a lower gonadotropin consumption compared to conventional follitropin alfa dosing.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This study was funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals. J.Q., Y.Z., X.L., T.H., H.-Y.H. and S.-H.K. have received institutional (not personal) clinical trial fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals. M.G., B.M. and J.-C.A. are employees of Ferring Pharmaceuticals. J.-C.A. has pending and issued patent applications in the WO 2013/020996 and WO 2019/043143 patent families that comprise allowed and granted patent rights related to follitropin delta.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03296527 (clinicaltrials.gov).

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

28 September 2017

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT

1 December 2017

SAY NO to mild ovarian stimulation for all poor responders: it is time to realize that not all poor responders are the same

Over the last 25 years, a vast body of literature has been published evaluating different treatment modalities for the management of poor ovarian responders. Despite the evidence that maximizing ovarian response can improve the chances of live born babies in poor responders, there are still voices suggesting that all poor responders are the same, irrespective of their age and their actual ovarian reserve. This has resulted in the suggestion of adopting a mild ovarian stimulation approach for all poor responders, based on the results of several trials which failed to identity differences when comparing mild and more intense stimulation in predicted poor responders. The current article analyzes in detail these studies and discusses the shortcomings in terms of type of population included, outcomes and settings performed, which may actually be responsible for the belief that only mild stimulation should be used. In the era of individualization in medicine, it must be realized that there are subgroups of predicted poor responders who will benefit from an individual rather than 'one fits all' mild stimulation approach and thus we should provide the same standard of treatment for all our poor responder patients.

Individualized ovarian stimulation in IVF/ICSI treatment: it is time to stop using high FSH doses in predicted low responders

In IVF/ICSI treatment, the FSH starting dose is often increased in predicted low responders from the belief that it improves the chance of having a baby by maximizing the number of retrieved oocytes. This intervention has been evaluated in several randomized controlled trials, and despite a slight increase in the number of oocytes—on average one to two more oocytes in the high versus standard dose group—no beneficial impact on the probability of a live birth has been demonstrated (risk difference, −0.02; 95% CI, −0.11 to 0.06). Still, many clinicians and researchers maintain a highly ingrained belief in ‘the more oocytes, the better’. This is mainly based on cross-sectional studies, where the positive correlation between the number of retrieved oocytes and the probability of a live birth is interpreted as a direct causal relation. If the latter would be present, indeed, maximizing the oocyte number would benefit our patients. The current paper argues that the use of high FSH doses may not actually improve the probability of a live birth for predicted low responders undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment and exemplifies the flaws of directly using cross-sectional data to guide FSH dosing in clinical practice. Also, difficulties in the de-implementation of the increased FSH dosing strategy are discussed, which include the prioritization of intermediate outcomes (such as cycle cancellations) and the potential biases in the interpretation of study findings (such as confirmation or rescue bias).

FSH dose is negatively correlated with number of oocytes retrieved: analysis of a data set with ~650,000 ART cycles that previously identified an inverse relationship between FSH dose and live birth rate

PURPOSE

To evaluate whether total FSH dose was negatively correlated with number of oocytes retrieved in a large data set where previously, a negative correlation between FSH dose and live birth rate was identified.

METHODS

Data from 650,637 fresh autologous in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles reported to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology between 2004 and 2012 were included. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine if the relationship between total FSH dose used during ART with number of oocytes retrieved was impacted by the patient's health prognosis, age, BMI, ovarian stimulation protocol, or infertility diagnosis.

RESULTS

The number of oocytes retrieved was negatively correlated with FSH dose (P < 0.0001). Regardless of patient prognosis, age, BMI, ovarian stimulation protocol, and infertility diagnosis, the highest number of oocytes retrieved was in the 1001-2000 IU FSH group, and was 36-51% lower in the > 5000 IU compared with the optimal, 1001-2000 IU, FSH groups. Overall, ~80% of patients received FSH doses outside of the optimal FSH dose. Moreover, 61% of good prognosis patients (excludes individuals likely prescribed higher FSH doses) received doses exceeding the optimal dose range.

CONCLUSION

The inverse relationship between FSH dose and the number of oocytes retrieved independent of patient age or health implies that excessive FSH doses during ART may be detrimental to oocyte retrieval.

How fixed versus variable gonadotropin dose during controlled ovarian stimulation could influence the management of infertility patients undergoing IVF treatment: a national Delphi consensus

AIM

Define how and when fixed starting gonadotropin doses can be used in current clinical ART practices in Italy.

METHODS

A Delphi conference consisting of three rounds was performed in order to define the ideal clinical conditions in which fixed-gonadotropin-dose during COS should be applied. During the conference, 19 statements about the current ART practice were provided to a panel of twenty-nine national experts. Median score was 5 (IQ:4-6) in all Delphi rounds.

RESULTS

Eleven statements (57.9%) were classified as shareable with high-degree of convergence, 2 (10.5%) as shareable with low convergence and 6 (31.6%) as un-shareable with high convergence. The panel reached high consensus regarding some statements: (i) fixed FSH-dose in normoresponders and poor-responder, (ii) importance of predicting ovarian response before COS, considering multiple markers to select the right stimulation protocol for each patient, (iii) importance of therapy simplification and standardization to improve efficiency during COS. Moreover, a low-convergence was reached about use of GnRH antagonist as first treatment line and drug storage at room temperature. However from these findings, the debate remains open regarding some other statements: (a) usefulness of Bologna-criteria to define poor-responders; (b) efficacy to change always stimulation protocol after a failure IVF; (c) utility of AMH-dosed with standardized automatic mode to define normo-responder patients; (d) usefulness to modify the dosage of 12.5 IU/die during COS to improve stimulation effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Controlled ovarian stimulation remains a challenging clinical step in Assisted Reproductive Technique, especially in some specific patient groups for which no clinical consensus is available. This study is the first attempt to describe the shared clinical opinion regarding the fixed versus variable gonadotropin dose in the real IVF practice.

What Does Unexpected Suboptimal Response During Ovarian Stimulation Suggest, an Overlooked Group?

Unlike poor ovarian response, despite being predicted to be normal responders based on their ovarian reserve markers, many patients respond suboptimally to ovarian stimulation. Although we can improve the number of retrieved oocytes by increasing the recombinant FSH dose and adding LH, the effect of suboptimal ovarian response on cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) and offspring safety is unclear. This study focuses on the unexpected suboptimal response during ovulation induction, and its causes and outcomes are analysed for the first time with a large amount of data used to compare the cumulative pregnancy rate (CPR), CLBR and offspring safety of patients with one complete ART cycle with all embryos used. Our analysis included 5218 patients treated with the GnRH agonist long protocol for their first IVF-embryo transfer (ET) cycles. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether the ovarian response was suboptimal. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized for sampling at up to 1:1 nearest-neighbour matching with caliper 0.05 to balance the baseline and improve comparability between the groups. Results showed that age, BMI and basal FSH were independent risk factors for slow response; the initial dosage of Gn, FSH on the first day of Gn, and LH on the first day of Gn were independent protective factors for suboptimal response. Suboptimal responders were also more likely to have irregular menses. Regarding the clinical pregnancy rate of the fresh IVF/ICSI-ET cycles, the adjusted results of the two groups were not significantly different. There was no difference in the CPR, CLBR, or offspring safety-related data, such as gestational age, preterm delivery rate, birthweight, birth-height and Apgar Scores between the two groups after PSM. Age-related changes in the number of oocytes retrieved from women aged 20-40 years old between the two groups were different, indicating that suboptimal response in elderly patients suggests a decline in ovarian reserve. Although we can now improve the outcomes of suboptimal responders, it increases the cost to the patients and the time to live birth, which requires further attention.

Negative impact of high doses of follicle-stimulating hormone during superovulation on the ovulatory follicle function in small ovarian reserve dairy heifers†

When women with small ovarian reserves are subjected to assisted reproductive technologies, high doses of gonadotropins are linked to high oocyte and embryo wastage and low live birth rates. We hypothesized that excessive follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) doses during superovulation are detrimental to ovulatory follicle function in individuals with a small ovarian reserve. To test this hypothesis, heifers with small ovarian reserves were injected twice daily for 4 days, beginning on Day 1 of the estrous cycle with 35, 70, 140, or 210 IU doses of Folltropin-V (FSH). Each heifer (n = 8) was superovulated using a Williams Latin Square Design. During each superovulation regimen, three prostaglandin F2α injections were given at 12-h interval, starting at the seventh FSH injection to regress the newly formed corpus luteum (CL). Human chorionic gonadotropin was injected 12 h after the last (8th) FSH injection to induce ovulation. Daily ultrasonography and blood sampling were used to determine the number and size of follicles and corpora lutea, uterine thickness, and circulating concentrations of estradiol, progesterone, and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH). The highest doses of FSH did not increase AMH, progesterone, number of ovulatory-size follicles, uterine thickness, or number of CL. However, estradiol production and ovulation rate were lower for heifers given high FSH doses compared to lower doses, indicating detrimental effects on ovulatory follicle function.

The Relationship Between Serum Delta FSH Level and Ovarian Response in IVF/ICSI Cycles

Background

When ovarian response to FSH stimulation for IVF/ICSI is unsatisfactory, the FSH dose is often adjusted in the treatment cycles, thereby assuming that hormone status and follicular development were insufficient for optimal stimulation.

Objectives

To evaluate whether serum delta FSH levels between D6 of gonadotrophin use and basal serum FSH or between D6 of gonadotrophin use and D1 of gonadotrophin use predict ovarian response in IVF/ICSI cycles.

Method

The participants of this retrospective study were chosen from the Reproductive Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University between August 2015 and December 2017 (n = 3,109), and during the COS, each participant was given a fixed dose of rFSH in the first 6 days. Delta FSH1: The difference of serum FSH between D6 of gonadotrophin use and basal serum FSH. Delta FSH2: The difference of serum FSH between D6 of gonadotrophin use and D1 of gonadotrophin use. Logistic regression was used to analyze the association between delta FSH1 level and delta FSH2 level and ovarian response. Besides, we also use the tertile statistics to divide the groups.

Results

Part I: Delta FSH1 levels (mean: 1.41 ± 3.46) in normal responders were higher than delta FSH1 levels (mean: 1.07 ± 23.89) in hyper responders (P = 0.0248). The tertile of delta FSH1 is dif ≤ 0, 0 < dif ≤ 2.25 and dif > 2.25. Compared with the hyper responder, the delta FSH1 (0 < dif ≤ 2.25 and dif > 2.25) in the normal responder has a higher ratio and is statistically significant. Part II: Delta FSH2 levels (mean: 4.90 ± 2.84) in normal responders were similar with delta FSH2 levels (mean: 4.74 ± 2.09) in hyper responders (P = 0.103). The tertile of delta FSH1 is dif ≤ 3.91, 3.91 < dif ≤ 5.69 and dif > 5.69. Compared with the hyper responders, the delta FSH2 (3.91 < dif ≤ 5.69 and dif > 5.69) in the normal responders has a higher ratio and is statistically significant.

Conclusions

There is a weak relationship between ovarian response and serum delta FSH levels.

Mild versus conventional ovarian stimulation for IVF in poor, normal and hyper-responders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Mild ovarian stimulation has emerged as an alternative to conventional IVF with the advantages of being more patient-friendly and less expensive. Inadequate data on pregnancy outcomes and concerns about the cycle cancellation rate (CCR) have prevented mild, or low-dose, IVF from gaining wide acceptance.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

To evaluate parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on IVF where comparisons were made between a mild (≤150 IU daily dose) and conventional stimulation in terms of clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness in patients described as poor, normal and non-polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) hyper-responders to IVF.

SEARCH METHODS

Searches with no language restrictions were performed using Medline, Embase, Cochrane central, Pre-Medicine from January 1990 until April 2020, using pre-specified search terms. References of included studies were hand-searched as well as advance access articles to key journals. Only parallel-group RCTs that used ≤150 IU daily dose of gonadotrophin as mild-dose IVF (MD-IVF) and compared with a higher conventional dose (CD-IVF) were included. Studies were grouped under poor, normal or hyper-responders as described by the authors in their inclusion criteria. Women with PCOS were excluded in the hyper-responder group. The risk of bias was assessed as per Cochrane Handbook for the included studies. The quality of evidence (QoE) was assessed according to the GRADE system. PRISMA guidance was followed for review methodology.

OUTCOMES

A total of 31 RCTs were included in the analysis: 15 in the poor, 14 in the normal and 2 in the hyper-responder group. Live birth rates (LBRs) per randomisation were similar following use of MD-IVF in poor (relative risk (RR) 0.91 (CI 0.68, 1.22)), normal (RR 0.88 (CI 0.69, 1.12)) and hyper-responders (RR 0.98 (CI 0.79, 1.22)) when compared to CD-IVF. QoE was moderate. Cumulative LBRs (5 RCTs, n = 2037) also were similar in all three patient types (RR 0.96 (CI 0.86 1.07) (moderate QoE). Risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome was significantly less with MD-IVF than CD-IVF in both normal (RR 0.22 (CI 0.10, 0.50)) and hyper-responders (RR 0.47 (CI 0.31, 0.72)), with moderate QoE. The CCRs were comparable in poor (RR 1.33 (CI 0.96, 1.85)) and hyper-responders (RR 1.31 (CI 0.98, 1.77)) but increased with MD-IVF among normal responders (RR 2.08 (CI 1.38, 3.14)); all low to very low QoE. Although fewer oocytes were retrieved and fewer embryos created with MD-IVF, the proportion of high-grade embryos was similar in all three population types (low QoE). Compared to CD-IVF, MD-IVF was associated with less gonadotrophin use and lower cost.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

This updated review provides reassurance on using MD-IVF not only for the LBR per cycle but also for the cumulative LBR, with moderate QoE. With risks identified with ‘freeze-all’ strategies, it may be time to recommend mild-dose ovarian stimulation for IVF for all categories of women i.e. hyper, poor and normal responders to IVF.

Comparison of Low Cost Versus Conventional Assisted Reproductive Technology Treatment: A Prospective Micro Costing Study

Objective: Among multiple barriers for infertility treatment, the major deterrent appears to be the high cost of assisted reproductive technology (ART). Low-cost ART employing mild stimulation protocols among other cost cutting measures has been advocated in resource limited settings. In the current study, we compared the actual cost incurred for conventional and low-cost ART treatment.

Study Design: Prospective micro-costing study at a university-level infertility unit, including women undergoing conventional and low-cost ART. The data collection for micro-costing was done primarily through direct observation of the resources utilized and time involved on a prospective basis. Only direct medical cost involved in ART treatment was calculated. The outcome measures included the cost per cycle and cost per clinical pregnancy.

Results: The average cost per couple per initiated cycle for the conventional ART was almost 50% higher as compared to low-cost ART ($1,433 vs. $739). The cost per clinical pregnancy per initiated cycle for conventional ART was lower compared to low-cost ART ($4248 vs. $4960). In a limited number of patients, the clinical pregnancy rate per embryo transfer was 40% (2/5 patients) in the conventional cycle as compared to 17% (1/6) in the low-cost ART cycle.

Conclusion: Using mild stimulation protocol in the low-cost ART program resulted in reduction in actual cost per cycle to almost half, but the cost per clinical pregnancy was higher compared to conventional ART.

ESHRE guideline: ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI†

STUDY QUESTION

What is the recommended management of ovarian stimulation, based on the best available evidence in the literature?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The guideline development group formulated 84 recommendations answering 18 key questions on ovarian stimulation.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI has been discussed briefly in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline on fertility problems, and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologist has published a statement on ovarian stimulation in assisted reproduction. There are, to our knowledge, no evidence-based guidelines dedicated to the process of ovarian stimulation.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

The guideline was developed according to the structured methodology for development of ESHRE guidelines. After formulation of key questions by a group of experts, literature searches and assessments were performed. Papers published up to 8 November 2018 and written in English were included. The critical outcomes for this guideline were efficacy in terms of cumulative live birth rate per started cycle or live birth rate per started cycle, as well as safety in terms of the rate of occurrence of moderate and/or severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Based on the collected evidence, recommendations were formulated and discussed until consensus was reached within the guideline group. A stakeholder review was organized after finalization of the draft. The final version was approved by the guideline group and the ESHRE Executive Committee.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The guideline provides 84 recommendations: 7 recommendations on pre-stimulation management, 40 recommendations on LH suppression and gonadotrophin stimulation, 11 recommendations on monitoring during ovarian stimulation, 18 recommendations on triggering of final oocyte maturation and luteal support and 8 recommendations on the prevention of OHSS. These include 61 evidence-based recommendations—of which only 21 were formulated as strong recommendations—and 19 good practice points and 4 research-only recommendations. The guideline includes a strong recommendation for the use of either antral follicle count or anti-Müllerian hormone (instead of other ovarian reserve tests) to predict high and poor response to ovarian stimulation. The guideline also includes a strong recommendation for the use of the GnRH antagonist protocol over the GnRH agonist protocols in the general IVF/ICSI population, based on the comparable efficacy and higher safety. For predicted poor responders, GnRH antagonists and GnRH agonists are equally recommended. With regards to hormone pre-treatment and other adjuvant treatments (metformin, growth hormone (GH), testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone, aspirin and sildenafil), the guideline group concluded that none are recommended for increasing efficacy or safety.

LIMITATIONS, REASON FOR CAUTION

Several newer interventions are not well studied yet. For most of these interventions, a recommendation against the intervention or a research-only recommendation was formulated based on insufficient evidence. Future studies may require these recommendations to be revised.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The guideline provides clinicians with clear advice on best practice in ovarian stimulation, based on the best evidence available. In addition, a list of research recommendations is provided to promote further studies in ovarian stimulation.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The guideline was developed and funded by ESHRE, covering expenses associated with the guideline meetings, with the literature searches and with the dissemination of the guideline. The guideline group members did not receive payment. F.B. reports research grant from Ferring and consulting fees from Merck, Ferring, Gedeon Richter and speaker’s fees from Merck. N.P. reports research grants from Ferring, MSD, Roche Diagnositics, Theramex and Besins Healthcare; consulting fees from MSD, Ferring and IBSA; and speaker’s fees from Ferring, MSD, Merck Serono, IBSA, Theramex, Besins Healthcare, Gedeon Richter and Roche Diagnostics. A.L.M reports research grants from Ferring, MSD, IBSA, Merck Serono, Gedeon Richter and TEVA and consulting fees from Roche, Beckman-Coulter. G.G. reports consulting fees from MSD, Ferring, Merck Serono, IBSA, Finox, Theramex, Gedeon-Richter, Glycotope, Abbott, Vitrolife, Biosilu, ReprodWissen, Obseva and PregLem and speaker’s fees from MSD, Ferring, Merck Serono, IBSA, Finox, TEVA, Gedeon Richter, Glycotope, Abbott, Vitrolife and Biosilu. E.B. reports research grants from Gedeon Richter; consulting and speaker’s fees from MSD, Ferring, Abbot, Gedeon Richter, Merck Serono, Roche Diagnostics and IBSA; and ownership interest from IVI-RMS Valencia. P.H. reports research grants from Gedeon Richter, Merck, IBSA and Ferring and speaker’s fees from MSD, IBSA, Merck and Gedeon Richter. J.U. reports speaker’s fees from IBSA and Ferring. N.M. reports research grants from MSD, Merck and IBSA; consulting fees from MSD, Merck, IBSA and Ferring and speaker’s fees from MSD, Merck, IBSA, Gedeon Richter and Theramex. M.G. reports speaker’s fees from Merck Serono, Ferring, Gedeon Richter and MSD. S.K.S. reports speaker’s fees from Merck, MSD, Ferring and Pharmasure. E.K. reports speaker’s fees from Merck Serono, Angellini Pharma and MSD. M.K. reports speaker’s fees from Ferring. T.T. reports speaker’s fees from Merck, MSD and MLD. The other authors report no conflicts of interest.

Disclaimer

This guideline represents the views of ESHRE, which were achieved after careful consideration of the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. In the absence of scientific evidence on certain aspects, a consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders has been obtained.

Adherence to these clinical practice guidelines does not guarantee a successful or specific outcome, nor does it establish a standard of care. Clinical practice guidelines do not replace the need for application of clinical judgment to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type.

ESHRE makes no warranty, express or implied, regarding the clinical practice guidelines and specifically excludes any warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular use or purpose. (Full disclaimer available atwww.eshre.eu/guidelines.)

^†ESHRE Pages content is not externally peer reviewed. The manuscript has been approved by the Executive Committee of ESHRE.

Performance of prognostic modelling of high and low ovarian response to ovarian stimulation for IVF

STUDY QUESTION

What is the performance of previously established regression models in predicting low and high ovarian response to 150 μg corifollitropin alfa/GnRH-antagonist ovarian stimulation in an independent dataset?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The outcome of ovarian stimulation with 150 μg corifollitropin alfa in a fixed, multiple dose GnRH-antagonist protocol can be validly predicted using logistic regression models with AMH being of paramount importance.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Predictors of ovarian response have been identified in FSH/GnRH agonist protocols as well as ovarian stimulation with corifollitropin alfa/GnRH-antagonist. Multivariable response models have been established already, however, external validation of model performance has so far been lacking.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Data from a prospective, multi-centre (n = 5), multi-national, investigator-initiated, observational cohort study were analysed. Infertile women (n = 211), body weight >60 kg, were undergoing ovarian stimulation with 150 μg corifollitropin alfa in a GnRH-antagonist multiple dose protocol for transvaginal oocyte retrieval for IVF. Demographic, sonographic and endocrine parameters were prospectively assessed on cycle Day 2 or 3 of spontaneous menstruation before ovarian stimulation. Main outcomes were low (<6 oocytes) and high (>18 oocytes) ovarian response.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Firstly, previously established prediction models for low ovarian response (LOR) and high ovarian response (HOR) were tested using the original parameters. Secondly, re-estimated parameters generated from the present data were tested on the established models. Thirdly, for the development of new predictive models of both LOR and HOR, several logistic regression models were estimated. Resulting prediction models were compared by means of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and bias-corrected Akaike's Information Criterion (AICc) to identify the most reasonable model for each scenario.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The previously established prediction models for low and high response performed remarkably well on this dataset (low response AUC 0.8879 (95% CI: 0.8185-0.9573) and high response AUC 0.8909 (95% CI: 0.8251-0.9568)). A newly developed simplified model for LOR with log-transformed AMH values and only age as another covariate showed an AUC of 0.8920 (95% CI: 0.8237-0.9603) with the lowest AICc of all models compared. For predicting HOR, we suggest a simplified model using AMH, FSH and AFC (AUC of 0.8976, 95% CI: 0.8206-0.9746).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

All analyses were done on data from women with a body weight >60 kg. The newly developed simplified models may suffer from overfitting and need to be tested in further independent data sets.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Patient selection for ovarian stimulation with corifollitropin alfa should utilize established response prediction models. The clinical impact of this needs to be evaluated in future studies.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The study was funded by university funds. M.O.S., T.L. and I.R.K. have nothing to declare. G.G. has received personal fees and non-financial support from MSD, Ferring, Merck-Serono, Finox, TEVA, IBSA, Glycotope, Abbott, Marckryl Pharma, VitroLife, NMC Healthcare, ReprodWissen, ZIVA and BioSilu.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Not applicable.

Clinical performance of a specific granulocyte colony stimulating factor ELISA to determine its concentration in follicular fluid as a predictor of implantation success during in vitro fertilization

This study aimed to demonstrate the clinical performance of an ultra-sensitive follicular fluid (FF) granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) immunoassay to confirm previous work, indicating a correlation between FF G-CSF concentration and live birth potential of the corresponding embryo after in vitro fertilization. This study was a noninterventional, prospective, diagnostic clinical multicentric study conducted between August 2012 and January 2014 with 396 single embryo transfers (SETs) from 278 subjects. During oocyte retrieval, FF was individually collected. Embryo morphology and implantation success were evaluated. The implantation success rate in the high G-CSF group (32.3%) was higher than the overall rate (27.5%). Similarly, for embryos with optimal morphology, implantation success rates were highest among those in the high G-CSF concentration category (34.5%) compared with low (19.6%) and intermediate (29.8%) G-CSF concentration categories. Significant differences in mean G-CSF concentrations were observed between the study sites. To minimize bias, analyses were repeated using data from the center with the largest number of SETs. In alignment with the overall analysis, this center demonstrated a 43% greater probability of implantation for optimal embryos with high G-CSF compared to the general implantation rate among optimal embryos and a 327% increase compared with the implantation rate of optimal embryos with low G-CSF.

Is there an association between oocyte number and embryo quality? A systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis determined the association between aspirated after ovarian stimulation and top/good quality embryos obtained in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL and Web of Science were searched for English-language publications on top/good-quality embryos at cleavage (day 2/3) and/or blastocyst (day 5/6) developmental stages, up to 18 November 2017. Twenty-eight studies (three prospective and 25 retrospective) reporting data on 291,752 assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles were considered eligible. We confirmed a strong positive association between oocytes retrieved and top/good-quality day 2/3 embryos (weighted correlation coefficient [r_w] = 0.791), day 5/6 embryos (r_w = 0.901), metaphase II oocytes (r_w = 0.988), oocytes exhibiting two pronuclei (r_w = 0.987) and euploid embryos (r_w = 0.851); P < 0.001 for all correlations (evaluated in subsets of the 17 studies). Data from 5657 cycles showed that the group with the most oocytes aspirated had the most top/good-quality day 2/3 embryos (pooled standardized mean differences (high [>15] versus low [<4] 1.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-2.77, P < 0.0001; high versus medium [4-15] 1.15, 95% CI 0.74-1.55, P < 0.0001; medium versus low 1.41, 95% CI 0.79-2.03, P < 0.0001). Individual participant meta-analysis would enable accurate determination of these associations and other outcomes.

Do female age and body weight modify the effect of individualized FSH dosing in IVF/ICSI treatment? A secondary analysis of the OPTIMIST trial

INTRODUCTION

The OPTIMIST trial revealed that for women starting in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment, no substantial differences exist in first cycle and cumulative live birth rates between an antral follicle count (AFC)-based individualized follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) dose and a standard dose. Female age and body weight have been suggested to cause heterogeneity in the effect of FSH dose individualization. The objective of the current study is to evaluate whether these patient characteristics modify the effect of AFC-based individualized FSH dosing in IVF/ICSI treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A secondary data-analysis of the OPTIMIST trial. Women initiating IVF/ICSI treatment were classified as predicted poor (AFC 0-7), suboptimal (AFC 8-10) or hyper responders (AFC >15), and randomly allocated to a standard FSH dose (150 IU/d) or an individualized FSH dose (450, 225 or 100 IU/d for predicted poor, suboptimal and hyper responders, respectively). In each predicted response category, logistic regression models with interaction terms were used to evaluate the presence of effect modification. The first cycle was analyzed, and the primary outcomes were first complete cycle live birth rate (including fresh plus frozen-thawed embryo transfers) and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) risks.

RESULTS

No effect modification was revealed in the predicted poor (n = 234) and suboptimal (n = 277) responders. In the predicted hyper responders (n = 521), the effect of the individualized FSH dose on the first cycle live birth rate was modified by female age (P = 0.02) and the effect on OHSS risks was modified by body weight (P = 0.02). A dose reduction from 150 to 100 IU/d generally decreased the OHSS risks in predicted hyper responders, but also reduced the chance of a live birth in young women, and had no beneficial impact on OHSS risks in women with a relatively low body weight.

CONCLUSIONS

In women with a predicted hyper response undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment, female age and body weight seem to modify the effect of FSH dose individualization. Although a reduced FSH starting dose generally decreases the OHSS risks, it may also reduce the chance of a live birth, specifically for young women. Future studies could consider these findings when investigating the optimal approach to reduce OHSS risks while maintaining the probability of a live birth for predicted hyper responders in IVF/ICSI treatment.

Study of clinical experience with different approaches to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a focus on safety and efficacy

OBJECTIVES

Current retrospective cohort study analyses clinical database records of 4792 assisted reproduction procedures to assess the significance of target effectiveness endpoints from a safety perspective.

METHODS

Stimulation protocols with urinary, recombinant or combination of both types gonadotrophin preparations are compared according to the following primary endpoints: incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), cycle cancellation, follicle count, induced estradiol values, clinical pregnancy achieved and cycles reached embryo transfer/freezing. We have investigated the incidence of cases evaluated as 'risky for OHSS' by secondary efficacy endpoints (exogenous gonadotrophin exposure, luteinising hormone and progesterone values, oocyte yield, eggs with normal maturation). The following statistical methods were applied: descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis test, Pearson chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, binary logistic regression.

RESULTS

Only 16 cases (0.42%) of moderate and delayed OHSS were established. Three hundred and seven (8.6%) stimulation cycles have been cancelled, principally among urinary protocols. Although the clinical pregnancy rate does not differ significantly in compared groups, punctured follicle count, oocyte yield and progesterone level were higher for recombinant preparations, followed by combined and urinary protocols. Follicle count, mean estradiol and luteinising hormone levels are within the 'safe window' for all investigated groups, associated with minimised risk of stimulation cancellation. The mean follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) dose was highest in urinary protocols at the same duration of stimulation compared with recombinant products. The younger age, bigger follicle count, oocytes yield, mature oocytes count, percentage of fertilised oocytes, more embryos transferred and the later day of embryo transfer are critical for both assisted reproduction techniques (ART) success rate and the safety profile of sterility treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Safety surveillance of ART exceeds the incidence of OHSS. Suboptimal effectiveness of stimulation protocols may also jeopardise the well-being of ART patients. Gonadotrophin exposure, induced values of sex hormones, and quantity and quality of extracted oocytes should be considered to minimise any unintended suffering of treated couples.

Individualization of FSH Doses in Assisted Reproduction: Facts and Fiction

The art of ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI treatment using exogenous FSH should be balanced against the relative contribution of other steps of the ART process such as the IVF-lab-phase and the Embryo-Transfer. The aim of ovarian stimulation is to obtain a certain number of oocytes, that will enable the best probability of achieving a live birth. It has been suggested that more oocytes will create a better prospect for pregnancy, but studies on the question whether the retrieval of a few oocytes less or more will make the difference are not clearly supportive for this mantra. Personalization strategies have been the subject of many studies over the past 20 years. Creating the optimal response in a patient in terms of live birth prognosis as well as OHSS risks may be based on information from the Ovarian Reserve testing using the Antral Follicle Count or Anti-Mullerian Hormone, the patient's bodyweight, the ovarian response in a previous cycle, and the dosage level of FSH. Taken together, steering the ovarian response into a supposed optimal range may appear difficult as the interrelation for each of these factors with the egg number is weak. Using OR testing for choosing FSH dosage, compared to a standard normal dosage of 150 IU, has been studied in several trials. Dosage individualization, in general, does not appear to improve the prospects for live birth, but the reduction in OHSS risk may be substantial. This implies that the use of high dosages of FSH in predicted LOW responders lacks any cost-benefit for the patient and may be abandoned, while in predicted HIGH responders, reduction of the usual dosage level of 150 IU may create better safety, provided that in case of an unexpected LOW response cancelation of the cycle is refrained from. In view of recent developments in using GnRH agonist triggering of final oocyte maturation, the trend could be that with the Antagonist co-medication system and a standard dosage of 150 IU of FSH, prior ovarian reserve testing may become futile, as safety can be managed well in actual HIGH responders by replacing the high dose hCG trigger.

A retrospective analysis of the follicle-stimulating hormone starting dose in expected normal responders undergoing their first in vitro fertilization cycle: proposed dose versus empiric dose

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Individualized versus standard FSH dosing in women starting IVF/ICSI: an RCT. Part 2: The predicted hyper responder

STUDY QUESTION

Does a reduced FSH dose in women with a predicted hyper response, apparent from a high antral follicle count (AFC), who are scheduled for IVF/ICSI lead to a different outcome with respect to cumulative live birth rate and safety?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Although in women with a predicted hyper response (AFC > 15) undergoing IVF/ICSI a reduced FSH dose (100 IU per day) results in similar cumulative live birth rates and a lower occurrence of any grade of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) as compared to a standard dose (150 IU/day), a higher first cycle cancellation rate and similar severe OHSS rate were observed.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Excessive ovarian response to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for IVF/ICSI may result in increased rates of cycle cancellation, the occurrence of OHSS and suboptimal live birth rates. In women scheduled for IVF/ICSI, an ovarian reserve test (ORT) can be used to predict response to COS. No consensus has been reached on whether ORT-based FSH dosing improves effectiveness and safety in women with a predicted hyper response.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE, DURATION

Between May 2011 and May 2014, we performed an open-label, multicentre RCT in women with regular menstrual cycles and an AFC > 15. Women with polycystic ovary syndrome (Rotterdam criteria) were excluded. The primary outcome was ongoing pregnancy achieved within 18 months after randomization and resulting in a live birth. Secondary outcomes included the occurrence of OHSS and cost-effectiveness. Since this RCT was embedded in a cohort study assessing over 1500 women, we expected to randomize 300 predicted hyper responders.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Women with an AFC > 15 were randomized to an FSH dose of 100 IU or 150 IU/day. In both groups, dose adjustment was allowed in subsequent cycles (maximum 25 IU in the reduced and 50 IU in the standard group) based on pre-specified criteria. Both effectiveness and cost-effectiveness were evaluated from an intention-to-treat perspective.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

We randomized 255 women to a daily FSH dose of 100 IU and 266 women to a daily FSH dose of 150 IU. The cumulative live birth rate was 66.3% (169/255) in the reduced versus 69.5% (185/266) in the standard group (relative risk (RR) 0.95 [95%CI, 0.85-1.07], P = 0.423). The occurrence of any grade of OHSS was lower after a lower FSH dose (5.2% versus 11.8%, RR 0.44 [95%CI, 0.28-0.71], P = 0.001), but the occurrence of severe OHSS did not differ (1.3% versus 1.1%, RR 1.25 [95%CI, 0.38-4.07], P = 0.728). As dose reduction was not less expensive (€4.622 versus €4.714, delta costs/woman €92 [95%CI, -479-325]), there was no dominant strategy in the economic analysis.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Despite our training programme, the AFC might have suffered from inter-observer variation. Although strict cancellation criteria were provided, selective cancelling in the reduced dose group (for poor response in particular) cannot be excluded as observers were not blinded for the FSH dose and small dose adjustments were allowed in subsequent cycles. However, as first cycle live birth rates did not differ from the cumulative results, the open design probably did not mask a potential benefit for the reduced dosing group. As this RCT was embedded in a larger cohort study, the power in this study was unavoidably lower than it should be. Participants had a relatively low BMI from an international perspective, which may limit generalization of the findings.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

In women with a predicted hyper response scheduled for IVF/ICSI, a reduced FSH dose does not affect live birth rates. A lower FSH dose did reduce the incidence of mild and moderate OHSS, but had no impact on severe OHSS. Future research into ORT-based dosing in women with a predicted hyper response should compare various safety management strategies and should be powered on a clinically relevant safety outcome while assessing non-inferiority towards live birth rates.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This trial was funded by The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMW, Project Number 171102020). SCO, TCvT and HLT received an unrestricted research grant from Merck Serono (the Netherlands). CBL receives grants from Merck, Ferring and Guerbet. BWJM is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548) and reports consultancy for OvsEva, Merck and Guerbet. FJMB receives monetary compensation as a member of the external advisory board for Ferring pharmaceutics BV and Merck Serono for consultancy work for Gedeon Richter (Belgium) and Roche Diagnostics (Switzerland) and for a research cooperation with Ansh Labs (USA). All other authors have nothing to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Registered at the ICMJE-recognized Dutch Trial Registry (www.trialregister.nl). Registration number: NTR2657.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

20 December 2010.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT

12 May 2011.

Comparative economic study of the use of corifollitropin alfa and daily rFSH for controlled ovarian stimulation in older patients: Cost-minimization analysis based on the PURSUE study

This study presents an economic assessment of controlled ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technology procedures in Spain, comparing the use of corifollitropin alfa and various forms of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) in women of advanced maternal age. A cost-minimization analysis (CMA) was performed to assess the cost per cycle of controlled controlled ovarian stimulation, including only direct costs associated with the stimulation phase. The CMA was based on the population characteristics, the protocol, and the results obtained from the PURSUE study, taking into account 9 days of controlled controlled ovarian stimulation and 300 IU rFSH/day. The primary analysis included pharmacological costs alone. Different scenarios were evaluated including various doses and possible additional days (0-5) for rFSH. For the alternative analyses, the total costs (direct pharmacological costs, costs of visits and follow-up tests, and any additional pharmacological costs) were considered in both the private and public sectors. Treatment with corifollitropin alfa resulted in a lower pharmacological cost compared with rFSH (€757.25 and €950.30, respectively), creating a saving of approximately -20%. The results of the scenario analyses showed that corifollitropin alfa reduced the pharmacological cost of controlled ovarian stimulation in comparison with daily administration of doses ≥ 250 IU rFSH (considering same daily dose for all days), regardless of the additional days required (7-12 days) (average -€223; range -€488 to -€44). In conclusion, in addition to the efficacy shown in the PURSUE study, the use of corifollitropin alfa results in a decrease in the direct costs associated with controlled ovarian stimulation in older women in Spain.

Characterization of a suboptimal IVF population and clinical outcome after two IVF cycles

The number of oocytes retrieved in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles is an independent factor influencing pregnancy rate (PR), and optimal number of oocytes would be between 10 and 15. This has led to the hypothesis that the identification of a suboptimal group of responders beforehand (4-9 oocytes retrieved) would allow physicians to optimize their PR. A retrospective observational study counting on 735 women doing an IVF treatment in our center was performed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze the relationship between anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) and antral follicle count (AFC), within suboptimal and optimal responders. We also analyzed the outcome of those patients with an estimated high probability of having an optimal response and the second cycles of those who did not get pregnant in the first cycle to observe the main significant traits that made them change from one group of responders to the other. Main results are that suboptimal responders account for almost half of our patients. Ovarian reserve markers (AMH and AFC) are significantly different in optimal and suboptimal responders, even when adjusted by age. There is a significant difference in the cumulative PR between both groups. Interestingly, 18.9% shifted from suboptimal to optimal response, and 36.9% from optimal to suboptimal.

Individualised gonadotropin dose selection using markers of ovarian reserve for women undergoing in vitro fertilisation plus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI)

BACKGROUND

During a cycle of in vitro fertilisation plus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI), women receive daily doses of gonadotropin follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) to induce multifollicular development in the ovaries. Generally, the dose of FSH is associated with the number of eggs retrieved. A normal response to stimulation is often considered desirable, for example the retrieval of 5 to 15 oocytes. Both poor and hyper-response are associated with increased chance of cycle cancellation. Hyper-response is also associated with increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Clinicians often individualise the FSH dose using patient characteristics predictive of ovarian response such as age. More recently, clinicians have begun using ovarian reserve tests (ORTs) to predict ovarian response based on the measurement of various biomarkers, including basal FSH (bFSH), antral follicle count (AFC), and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH). It is unclear whether individualising FSH dose based on these markers improves clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of individualised gonadotropin dose selection using markers of ovarian reserve in women undergoing IVF/ICSI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, DARE, ISI Web of Knowledge, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organisation International Trials Registry Platform search portal from inception to 27th July 2017. We checked the reference lists of relevant reviews and included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included trials that compared different doses of FSH in women with a defined ORT profile (i.e. predicted low, normal or high responders based on AMH, AFC, and/or bFSH) and trials that compared an individualised dosing strategy (based on at least one ORT measure) versus uniform dosing or a different individualised dosing algorithm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Primary outcomes were live birth/ongoing pregnancy and severe OHSS. Secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy, moderate or severe OHSS, multiple pregnancy, oocyte yield, cycle cancellations, and total dose and duration of FSH administration.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 trials (N = 6088); however, we treated those trials with multiple comparisons as separate trials for the purpose of this review. Meta-analysis was limited due to clinical heterogeneity. Evidence quality ranged from very low to moderate. The main limitations were imprecision and risk of bias associated with lack of blinding.Direct dose comparisons in women according to predicted responseAll evidence was low or very low quality.Due to differences in dose comparisons, caution is warranted in interpreting the findings of five small trials assessing predicted low responders. The effect estimates were very imprecise, and increased FSH dosing may or may not have an impact on rates of live birth/ongoing pregnancy, OHSS, and clinical pregnancy.Similarly, in predicted normal responders (nine studies, three comparisons), higher doses may or may not impact the probability of live birth/ongoing pregnancy (e.g. 200 versus 100 international units: OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.36; N = 522; 2 studies; I2 = 0%) or clinical pregnancy. Results were imprecise, and a small benefit or harm remains possible. There were too few events for the outcome of OHSS to enable any inferences.In predicted high responders, lower doses may or may not have an impact on rates of live birth/ongoing pregnancy (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.46; N = 521; 1 study), OHSS, and clinical pregnancy. However, lower doses probably reduce the likelihood of moderate or severe OHSS (Peto OR 2.31, 95% CI 0.80 to 6.67; N = 521; 1 study).ORT-algorithm studiesFour trials compared an ORT-based algorithm to a non-ORT control group. Rates of live birth/ongoing pregnancy and clinical pregnancy did not appear to differ by more than a few percentage points (respectively: OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.23; N = 2823, 4 studies; I2 = 34%; OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.13, 4 studies, I2=0%, moderate-quality evidence). However, ORT algorithms probably reduce the likelihood of moderate or severe OHSS (Peto OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.00; N = 2823; 4 studies; I2 = 0%, low quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether the groups differed in rates of severe OHSS (Peto OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.99; N = 1494; 3 studies; I2 = 0%, low quality evidence). Our findings suggest that if the chance of live birth with a standard dose is 26%, the chance with ORT-based dosing would be between 24% and 30%. If the chance of moderate or severe OHSS with a standard dose is 2.5%, the chance with ORT-based dosing would be between 0.8% and 2.5%. These results should be treated cautiously due to heterogeneity in the study designs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find that tailoring the FSH dose in any particular ORT population (low, normal, high ORT), influenced rates of live birth/ongoing pregnancy but we could not rule out differences, due to sample size limitations. In predicted high responders, lower doses of FSH seemed to reduce the overall incidence of moderate and severe OHSS. Moderate-quality evidence suggests that ORT-based individualisation produces similar live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates to a policy of giving all women 150 IU. However, in all cases the confidence intervals are consistent with an increase or decrease in the rate of around five percentage points with ORT-based dosing (e.g. from 25% to 20% or 30%). Although small, a difference of this magnitude could be important to many women. Further, ORT algorithms reduced the incidence of OHSS compared to standard dosing of 150 IU, probably by facilitating dose reductions in women with a predicted high response. However, the size of the effect is unclear. The included studies were heterogeneous in design, which limited the interpretation of pooled estimates, and many of the included studies had a serious risk of bias.Current evidence does not provide a clear justification for adjusting the standard dose of 150 IU in the case of poor or normal responders, especially as increased dose is generally associated with greater total FSH dose and therefore greater cost. However, a decreased dose in predicted high responders may reduce OHSS.

The Effect of Dose Adjustments in a Subsequent Cycle of Women With Suboptimal Response Following Conventional Ovarian Stimulation

Several infertile patients, who may even represent around 40% of the infertile cohort, may respond "suboptimally" (4-9 oocytes retrieved) following IVF, despite being predicted as normal responders. The aim of our longitudinal study was to evaluate the ovarian response of suboptimal responders in terms of the number of oocytes retrieved, following their second IVF cycle, evaluating exclusively patients who had the same stimulation protocol and used the same or higher initial dose of the same type of gonadotropin compared to their previous failed IVF attempt. Overall, our analysis included 160 patients treated with a fixed antagonist protocol in their second cycle with the same [53 (33.1%)] or higher [107 (66.9%)] starting dose of rFSH. The number of oocytes retrieved was significantly higher in the second IVF cycle [6 (5-8) vs. 9 (6-12), p < 0.001]. According to our results, a dose increment of rFSH remained the only significant predictor of the number of oocytes retrieved in the subsequent IVF cycle (coefficient 0.02, p-value = 0.007) after conducting GEE multivariate regression, while adjusting for relevant confounders. A regression coefficient of 0.02 for the starting dose implies that an increase of 50 IU of the initial rFSH dose would lead to 1 more oocyte.

How much variation in oocyte yield after controlled ovarian stimulation can be explained? A multilevel modelling study

STUDY QUESTION

How much variation in oocyte yield after controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) can be accounted for by known patient and treatment characteristics?

SUMMARY ANSWER

There is substantial variation in the COS responses of similar women and in repeated COS episodes undertaken by the same woman, which cannot be accounted for at present.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN

The goal of individualized COS is to safely collect enough oocytes to maximize the chance of success in an ART cycle. Personalization of treatment rests on the ability to reduce variation in response through modifiable factors.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Multilevel modelling of a routine ART database covering the period 1 October 2008–8 August 2012 was employed to estimate the amount of variation in COS response and the extent to which this could be explained by immutable patient characteristics and by manipulable treatment variables. A total of 1851 treatment cycles undertaken by 1430 patients were included. The study was not subject to attrition, as cancelled cycles were included in the analysis.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Women aged 21–43 years undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF (possibly with ICSI) using their own eggs at a tertiary care centre.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Substantial unexplained variation in COS response (oocyte yield): was observed (3.4-fold (95% CI: 3.12 to 3.61)). Only a relatively small amount of this variation (around 19%) can be explained by modifiable factors. A significant, previously undescribed predictor of response was the practitioner performing oocyte retrieval, with 1.5-fold variation between surgeons with the highest and lowest yields.

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

Although a large number of covariables were adjusted for in the analysis, including those that were used for dosing and determination of the stimulation regimen, this study is subject to confounding due to unmeasured variables and measurement error.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The present study suggests that there are limits to the extent that COS response can be predicted on the basis of known factors, or controlled by manipulation of treatment factors. Moreover, modifiable variation in response appears to be partially attributable to differences between surgeons performing oocyte retrieval. Consequently, consistent prevention of ineffective or unsafe responses to COS is not likely to be possible at present. Our results highlight the importance of blinding surgeons in RCTs. The data also suggest that there is likely to be limited scope for personalized treatment unless additional predictors of ovarian response can be identified.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

J.W. is funded by a Doctoral Research Fellowship from the National Institute for Health Research (DRF-2014-07-050) supervised by S.A.R. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health. J.W. is a statistical editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. S.A.R. is a statistical editor for Human Reproduction. J.W. also declares that publishing peer-reviewed articles benefits his career. A.L.M. has received consultation fees from MSD, Merck Serono, Ferring, TEVA, Roche, Beckman Coulter.

Mild stimulation for in vitro fertilization

It has been proven that the use of high gonadotropin dose does not necessarily improve the final outcome of IVF. Mild ovarian stimulation is based on the principle of optimal utilization of competent oocytes/embryos and endometrial receptivity. There is growing evidence that the pregnancy or live birth rates with mild-stimulation protocols are comparable to those with conventional IVF; the cumulative pregnancy outcome has been shown to be no different, despite having fewer numbers of oocytes or embryos available with milder ovarian stimulation. Although equally effective, mild-stimulation IVF is associated with a greater safety profile, in terms of the incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and venous thromboembolism. It is also found to be better tolerated by patients and less expensive. Emerging research evidence may lead to widespread acceptance of mild IVF, by both patients and IVF providers, and make IVF more accessible to women and couples worldwide.

BRCA1 mutation carriers have a lower number of mature oocytes after ovarian stimulation for IVF/PGD

Purpose

The aim of this study was to determine whether BRCA1/2 mutation carriers produce fewer mature oocytes after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF) with preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), in comparison to a PGD control group.

Methods

A retrospective, international, multicenter cohort study was performed on data of first PGD cycles performed between January 2006 and September 2015. Data were extracted from medical files. The study was performed in one PGD center and three affiliated IVF centers in the Netherlands and one PGD center in Belgium. Exposed couples underwent PGD because of a pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation, controls for other monogenic conditions. Only couples treated in a long gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist-suppressive protocol, stimulated with at least 150 IU follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), were included. Women suspected to have a diminished ovarian reserve status due to chemotherapy, auto-immune disorders, or genetic conditions (other than BRCA1/2 mutations) were excluded. A total of 106 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers underwent PGD in this period, of which 43 (20 BRCA1 and 23 BRCA2 mutation carriers) met the inclusion criteria. They were compared to 174 controls selected by frequency matching.

Results

Thirty-eight BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (18 BRCA1 and 20 BRCA2 mutation carriers) and 154 controls proceeded to oocyte pickup. The median number of mature oocytes was 7.0 (interquartile range (IQR) 4.0–9.0) in the BRCA group as a whole, 6.5 (IQR 4.0–8.0) in BRCA1 mutation carriers, 7.5 (IQR 5.5–9.0) in BRCA2 mutation carriers, and 8.0 (IQR 6.0–11.0) in controls. Multiple linear regression analysis with the number of mature oocytes as a dependent variable and adjustment for treatment center, female age, female body mass index (BMI), type of gonadotropin used, and the total dose of gonadotropins administered revealed a significantly lower yield of mature oocytes in the BRCA group as compared to controls (p = 0.04). This finding could be fully accounted for by the BRCA1 subgroup (BRCA1 mutation carriers versus controls p = 0.02, BRCA2 mutation carriers versus controls p = 0.50).

Conclusions

Ovarian response to stimulation, expressed as the number of mature oocytes, was reduced in BRCA1 but not in BRCA2 mutation carriers. Although oocyte yield was in correspondence to a normal response in all subgroups, this finding points to a possible negative influence of the BRCA1 gene on ovarian reserve.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10815-017-1014-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The cutoff values of serum AMH levels and starting recFSH doses for the individualization of IVF treatment strategies

OBJECTIVE

The main purpose of our study is to categorize starting doses of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (recFSH) based on various cutoff values of anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) and to determine the effectiveness of serum AMH levels in the prediction of poor ovarian response.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective data analysis was conducted at IVF center. A total of 323 patients were included. All patients were divided into four groups according to the patients' serum AMH concentrations: Group 1 (AMH < 1 ng/ml; 450 IU/day n = 157); Group 2 (AMH 1-2 ng/ml; 375 IU/day, n = 55); Group 3 (AMH 2-3 ng/ml; 225 IU/day, n = 48); and Group 4 (AMH > 3 ng/ml; 150 IU/day, n = 63). Collected data included age, total gonadotropin dosage, duration of stimulations, the total number of oocytes retrieved, ovarian response, cancelation rate, and cPRs.

RESULTS

As serum AMH levels increased, there were significant decreases in the starting recFSH dose and total gonadotropin dosage, and a significant increase in the total number of oocytes retrieved. There was a significant trend toward increasing cycle cancelation rates and decreasing cPRs with decreasing serum AMH levels. Although there were no significant differences with regard to the proportion of cycles with hypo-response between all groups. A result of ≤0.83 was considered the cutoff value of AMH to predict a hypo-response to ovarian stimulation.

CONCLUSIONS

AMH is a useful marker in selecting the starting dose of recFSH and prediction of poor ovarian response. Our protocol may allow clinicians to modulate the starting dose of recFSH according to these cutoff values for serum AMH levels.

Ovarian stimulation protocols for IVF: is more better than less?

Conventional ovarian stimulation protocols for IVF are designed to achieve maximum oocyte yields. Conventional protocols, however, are associated with patient discomfort, increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and higher costs. In recent years, mild stimulation protocols have risen in popularity. These protocols typically use lower doses (≤150 IU/day), shorter duration of exogenous gonadotrophins, or both, compared with conventional protocols, with the goal of limiting the number of retrieved oocytes to less than eight. The pregnancy rate per cycle (fresh embryo transfer only) is lower with mild stimulation compared with conventional stimulation; however, the cumulative pregnancy rate seems to be comparable between the approaches. Reports are conflicting on the effects of mild versus conventional stimulation on embryo quality. This article expands on a live debate held at the American Society for Reproductive Medicine 2015 Annual Meeting to compare the advantages and disadvantages of the 'more is better' (conventional protocol) versus 'less is best' (mild protocol) approaches to ovarian stimulation. Both protocols are associated with benefits and challenges, and physicians must consider the needs of the individual patient when determining the best treatment options. Further prospective studies comparing a variety of outcomes with conventional and mild stimulation are needed.

An upper limit of gonadotropin dose in patients undergoing ART should be advocated

AIM

As no upper limit of the daily dose of gonadotropins (DD GN) used for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) has been established, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of using different DD GN in terms of live-birth achievement.

METHODS

Data of patients treated at a single university medical center during the same period was analyzed retrospectively. Four groups were analyzed according to the DD GN administered: group I ("high dose"):  >225- ≤ 375 IU; Group II ("Very high dose"): 376-450 IU; group III ("extremely high dose"): 451-600 IU. Normo-responders treated with DD GN ≤250 IU served as control (C). Variables included were DD GN, total GN dose/cycle, age, FSH, BMI, gravidity, parity, cycle number, IVF/ICSI, infertility diagnosis treatment protocol and outcome parameters.

RESULTS

The analysis of 1394 treatment cycles of 943 patients indicated that DD and total dose of GN correlated negatively with the number of oocytes, implantation, clinical pregnancy and live-birth rate (25.9%, 14.6%, 11.4% and 4.7% in groups C, I, II and III, respectively) The logistic regression analysis indicated that the adjusted odds ratios for LBR correlated inversely with the DD administered - independently from age, baseline FSH, BMI and previous failed cycles.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing the daily dose of GN to doses higher than 450 IU or a total dose of 3000 IU/cycle is at least questionable if not harmful.

Corifollitropin alfa versus recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone: an individual patient data meta-analysis

A meta-analysis was conducted of individual patient data (n = 3292) from three randomized controlled trials of corifollitropin alfa versus rFSH: Engage (150 µg corifollitropin alfa n = 756; 200 IU rFSH n = 750), Ensure (100 µg corifollitropin alfa n = 268; 150 IU rFSH n = 128), and Pursue (150 µg corifollitropin alfa n = 694; 300 IU rFSH n = 696). Women with regular menstrual cycles aged 18-36 and body weight >60 kg (Engage) or ≤60 kg (Ensure), or women aged 35-42 years and body weight ≥50 kg (Pursue), received a single injection (100 µg or 150 µg) of corifollitropin alfa (based on body weight and age) or daily rFSH. The difference (corifollitropin alfa minus rFSH) in the number of oocytes retrieved was +1.0 (95% CI: 0.5-1.5); vital pregnancy rate: -2.2% (95% CI: -5.3%-0.9%); ongoing pregnancy rate: -1.7% (95% CI: -4.7%-1.4%); and live birth rate: -2.0% (95% CI: -5.0%-1.1%). The odds ratio for overall OHSS was 1.15 (95% CI: 0.82-1.61), and for moderate-to-severe OHSS: 1.29 (95% CI: 0.81-2.05). A single dose of corifollitropin alfa for the first 7 days of ovarian stimulation is a generally well-tolerated and similarly effective treatment compared with daily rFSH.

Follicular and endocrine dose responses according to anti-Müllerian hormone levels in IVF patients treated with a novel human recombinant FSH (FE 999049)

OBJECTIVE

To study the association between serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels and follicular development and endocrine responses induced by increasing doses (5·2-12·1 μg/day) of a novel recombinant human FSH (rhFSH, FE 999049) in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in a GnRH antagonist protocol.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial with stratified randomization according to AMH (lower stratum: 5·0-14·9 pmol/l; higher stratum: 15·0-44·9 pmol/l).

PATIENTS

Infertile women of good prognosis (n = 265).

MEASUREMENTS

Follicular development and endocrine parameters during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with rhFSH.

RESULTS

Serum FSH levels increased with increasing rhFSH doses and steady-state levels for each dose were similar in both AMH strata. In the whole study population, significant (P < 0·001) positive dose responses were observed for the number of follicles ≥ 12 mm, and serum levels of oestradiol, inhibin B, inhibin A and progesterone at end of stimulation. In comparison with the higher AMH stratum, patients in the lower AMH stratum had significantly different slopes of the dose-response curves for these hormones, and no clear dose-related increase was observed for the number of follicles in these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Dose-response relationships between rhFSH and follicular development and endocrine parameters are significantly different for IVF/ICSI patients with lower and higher serum AMH levels at start of COS.

Anti-Mullerian hormone as a predictor of ovarian reserve in ART protocols: the hidden role of thyroid autoimmunity

BACKGROUND

Protocols of controlled ovarian hyper-stimulation (COH) require, as a crucial step, the identification of reliable predictors of ovarian reserve. Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) is one of the most reliable predictors of ovarian reserve but other factors including autoimmune thyroid diseases (ATD) have been associated with reduced fertility and poor COH outcome. Aim of the present study was to evaluate the relationship between ATD and AMH, and their role on the outcome of COH.

METHODS

The study group included 288 sub-fertile euthyroid women aged less than 40 years attending a single center for Reproductive Medicine. Among them, 55 were ATD-positive and 233 ATD-negative. The serum levels of AMH, FSH, LH, estradiol (E2), and TSH were measured before COH. The ratio between serum E2 concentration on the day of oocytes pick-up and the total dose of administered recombinant FSH (r-FSH) (E2/r-FSH ratio) was calculated.

RESULTS

The serum levels of AMH were significantly related to E2/r-FSH ratio, total dose of r-FSH and number of M II oocytes, both in ATD-positive and ATD-negative women. Within the low stratum of AMH levels, the presence of ATD did not further affect the outcome of COH. When the serum levels of AMH were in the high stratum, the presence of ATD significantly affected the E2/rFSH ratio, the total dose of r-FSH and the number of M II oocytes.

CONCLUSIONS

The probability of a poor response to COH is high, and independent from ATD, in women with low AMH serum levels. In women with a good ovarian reserve, as assessed by high AMH serum levels, the presence of ATD impairs the outcome of COH.

Gonadotropin dose is negatively correlated with live birth rate: analysis of more than 650,000 assisted reproductive technology cycles

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the correlation between total gonadotropin dose and live birth rate.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 658,519 fresh autologous cycles of in vitro fertilization (IVF) reported to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology from 2004 to 2012.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Logistic regression models were fitted to live birth rates with the use of categorized values for total FSH dose and number of oocytes retrieved as the primary predictor variables. To reduce the effect of the most significant confounders that may lead physicians to prescribe higher doses of FSH, additional analyses were performed limited to good-prognosis patients (<35 years of age, body mass index <30 kg/m(2), and no diagnosis of diminished ovarian reserve, endometriosis, or ovulatory disorder) and including duration of gonadotropin treatment.

RESULT(S)

Live birth rate significantly decreased with increasing FSH dose, regardless of the number of oocytes retrieved. The statistically significant decrease in live birth rate with increasing FSH dose remained in patients with good prognosis, and regardless of female age, except for women aged ≥ 35 years with 1-5 oocytes retrieved.

CONCLUSION(S)

This analysis suggests that physicians may wish to avoid prescribing a high dose of FSH. However, the results of this study do not justify the use of minimal-stimulation or natural-cycle IVF.