Emerging follicular activation strategies to treat women with poor ovarian response and primary ovarian insufficiency

Poor ovarian response classification systems in the clinical setting - time for an update?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Poor ovarian response (POR) remains a key challenge to the success of assisted reproductive technology. Here, we offer a comprehensive review of the two main classification systems for POR, discussing their promises and pitfalls, evaluating their performance, and exploring potential avenues for improving upon these definitions of POR.

RECENT FINDINGS

The Bologna criteria represented the first meaningful attempt to create a universal POR definition. Subsequently, the POSEIDON classification system was published to provide a more nuanced view of POR, classifying patients into four groups based on age and ovarian reserve markers. A recent study evaluated the likelihood of achieving at least one euploid embryo for transfer and found that, indeed, these classification systems are effective predictors of this outcome.While these criteria provide an effective counseling tool, several limitations - not considering underlying conditions, selecting somewhat arbitrary cutoffs, and evaluating the number of oocytes retrieved regardless of maturity - highlight the importance of improving upon these systems to create a more useful tool to more accurately predict ovarian response for clinical and research purposes.

SUMMARY

In the era of personalized medicine, it is time to reconsider whether diagnostic criteria for a continuous metric such as ovarian response should be based on meeting all-or-nothing thresholds for specific parameters.

Effect of intraovarian platelet-rich plasma injection on IVF outcomes in women with poor ovarian response: the PROVA randomized controlled trial

STUDY QUESTION

Does intraovarian platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection increase the number of mature oocytes obtained after controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) in young women with poor ovarian response (POR) undergoing IVF?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Intraovarian PRP injection procedure does not improve mature oocyte yield after COS in women less than 38 years old with an established IVF history of POR.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

POR is frequently encountered among the infertile population and the number of women seeking infertility treatment related to POR is increasing. Effective treatment options for this patient population to conceive with autologous oocytes are lacking. Case series and cohort studies suggest that intraovarian PRP injection may improve follicular recruitment in women with premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) and POR, yet robust randomized studies have not been performed to date to determine the clinical utility of this intervention.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This was a multi-center randomized controlled trial (RCT) conducted at university-affiliated reproductive centers in the USA and Turkey, between January 2020 and November 2022.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Patients who met inclusion criteria (<38 years old, two or more prior cycles with <3 oocytes retrieved; and without single gene disorders, prior ovarian surgery, endometriomas, BMI >35 kg/m2, or severe male factor infertility) were randomized to either the PRP or control group. Patients in both groups subsequently underwent COS, oocyte retrieval, ICSI, preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A), and single euploid embryo transfer. Number of metaphase II (MII) oocytes obtained was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included ovarian reserve tests (antral follicle count [AFC] and anti-Müllerian hormone [AMH]), blastocyst and euploid blastocyst yields, and sustained implantation. The study was powered to detect a difference of one mature oocyte obtained at oocyte retrieval.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

In total, 83 patients met inclusion criteria and were randomized to receive autologous intraovarian PRP injection (n = 41) or to no intervention (n = 42). No significant differences were observed in number of MII oocytes retrieved per cycle (2.8 ± 2.4 vs 3.1 ± 3.3 in PRP vs control, respectively; P = 0.9), blastocysts (1.0 ± 1.3 vs 1.3 ± 2.1, P = 0.8), or euploid blastocysts (0.8 ± 1.1 vs 0.9 ± 1.6; P = 0.5). Similarly, no differences were observed in the likelihood of obtaining at least one euploid blastocyst (45% vs 37%, P = 0.4; relative risk [RR], 95% CI = 0.9, 0.6-1.2) or the rate of sustained implantation (31% vs 29%, P = 0.9; RR 1.0, 0.7-1.3). Posttreatment AFC (7.9 ± 4.5 vs 6.8 ± 4.8, P = 0.3) and AMH (0.99 ± 0.98 vs 0.7 ± 0.6, P = 0.2) were also not different between the groups.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Results from this RCT may not be generalizable to other PRP preparations owing to heterogeneity and lack of standardization. The control groups did not undergo a sham ovarian injection, which would have been relevant had the results shown benefit of PRP injection. Only patients with POR were included in this study, and these results may not be generalizable to more severe diminution of ovarian reserve, as seen with POI.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The intraovarian PRP injection procedure does not improve mature oocyte yield or other parameters of IVF outcome in women less than 38 years old with an established IVF history of POR. The results from this study do not support the use of intraovarian PRP injection in this population.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

Departmental funds were used and no external funding was requested for this study. ES is a consultant for and receives grant funding from the Foundation for Embryonic Competence. All other authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinicaltrials.gov Registry Identifier: NCT04163640.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

15 November 2019.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT

24 February 2020.

Facilitation of Ovarian Response by Mechanical Force-Latest Insight on Fertility Improvement in Women with Poor Ovarian Response or Primary Ovarian Insufficiency

The decline in fertility in aging women, especially those with poor ovarian response (POR) or primary ovarian insufficiency (POI), is a major concern for modern IVF centers. Fertility treatments have traditionally relied on gonadotropin- and steroid-hormone-based IVF practices, but these methods have limitations, especially for women with aging ovaries. Researchers have been motivated to explore alternative approaches. Ovarian aging is a complicated process, and the deterioration of oocytes, follicular cells, the extracellular matrix (ECM), and the stromal compartment can all contribute to declining fertility. Adjunct interventions that involve the use of hormones, steroids, and cofactors and gamete engineering are two major research areas aimed to improve fertility in aging women. Additionally, mechanical procedures including the In Vitro Activation (IVA) procedure, which combines pharmacological activators and fragmentation of ovarian strips, and the Whole Ovary Laparoscopic Incision (WOLI) procedure that solely relies on mechanical manipulation in vivo have shown promising results in improving follicle growth and fertility in women with POR and POI. Advances in the use of mechanical procedures have brought exciting opportunities to improve fertility outcomes in aging women with POR or POI. While the lack of a comprehensive understanding of the molecular mechanisms that lead to fertility decline in aging women remains a major challenge for further improvement of mechanical-manipulation-based approaches, recent progress has provided a better view of how these procedures promote folliculogenesis in the fibrotic and avascular aging ovaries. In this review, we first provide a brief overview of the potential mechanisms that contribute to ovarian aging in POI and POR patients, followed by a discussion of measures that aim to improve ovarian folliculogenesis in aging women. At last, we discuss the likely mechanisms that contribute to the outcomes of IVA and WOLI procedures and potential future directions.

Embryonic arrest: causes and implications

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Embryonic arrest is a key determinant of the number of euploid blastocysts obtained after IVF. Here, we review factors that are implicated in the developmental arrest of preimplantation embryos and their relevance for assisted reproduction outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Among the treatment options available to infertile women, IVF is the one associated with most favorable outcomes. The cumulative pregnancy rates in women undergoing IVF are determined by aneuploidy rate (age), ovarian response to stimulation (ovarian reserve), and the rate of embryo developmental arrest. Mutations in maternal effect genes, especially those encoding for subcortical maternal complex, have been implicated in human embryo developmental arrest. In addition, perturbation of biological processes, such as mitochondrial unfolded protein response and long noncoding RNA regulatory pathways, may play a role. However, how each of these factors contributes to embryos' arrest in different cohorts and age groups has not been determined.

SUMMARY

Arrest of human embryos during preimplantation development is a common occurrence and is partly responsible for the limited number of euploid blastocysts obtained in assisted reproduction cycles. Although genetic and metabolic causes have been implicated, the mechanisms responsible for human embryo developmental arrest remain poorly characterized.

Intraovarian condensed platelet cytokines for infertility and menopause-Mirage or miracle?

On a therapeutic landscape unchanged since the 1980's, oocyte donation with IVF still stands as the solitary medical answer to diminished reserve and premature ovarian insufficiency. In 2016, intraovarian platelet-rich plasma (PRP) crossed the horizon as a hopeful reply to these intertwined problems. The once remote mirage of platelet cytokine effects on gene regulation or telomere stabilization has been brought into sharper focus, with current work clarifying how PRP corrects oxidative stress, rectifies tissue hypoxia, downregulates apoptosis, and enhances cellular metabolism. Not yet ready for routine use, this innovative treatment has already offered at least one point of early consensus: How intraovarian PRP results should be classified-Patients are either responders or non-responders. From this it is intriguing that no published PRP protocol has ever reported a supranormal ovarian rebound or hyperstimulation effect. This might be explained by baseline age-related ovarian conditions prevalent among poor responders, but since dysregulated or malignant transformations are also missing in other tissue contexts following autologous PRP treatment, the contribution of some platelet product which intrinsically delimits regenerative action cannot be discounted. Here we summarize results with recent experimental and clinical platelet research, framing those most likely to help advance reproductive endocrinology practice.

The Trends and Hotspots in Premature Ovarian Insufficiency Therapy from 2000 to 2022

This study aims to map the knowledge structure and themes trends of primary ovarian insufficiency (POI) therapy to help researchers rapidly master the hotspots and prospects of POI therapy from the increasing number of publications. The literature search and bibliometric analyses were performed by using Web of Science Core Collection and VOSviewer. Annual publications from 2000 to 2022 continued to increase with some fluctuations. The most productive country, organization, and journal were the USA, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, and Human Reproduction, respectively. Harvard University was the organization with the highest citation. Fertility and Sterility and Nelson, L.M. were the most influential journal and author, respectively. Seven clusters separated by keywords association showed the extensive scope of POI therapy. The hotspots of POI therapy were hormone replacement therapy and fertility preservation, and the innovative treatment strategies including in vitro activation and mesenchymal stem cells had development potential. In addition, our result showed that the high-cited articles were published in journals with high impact factors. The paper provides a comprehensive overview of the development and hotspots of POI therapy, allowing researchers to recognize the current status and future directions of POI therapy.