Cumulative Live Birth Rate and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone-Antagonist Protocol and Multiple Minimal Ovarian Stimulation in Poor Responders

Comparison of pregnancy outcomes in women with normal ovarian response to the gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist protocol using different trigger methods: a single-center retrospective cohort study based on propensity score matching

PURPOSE

To investigate whether gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) combined with human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) can improve pregnancy outcomes in patients with normal ovarian response (NOR).

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, data of 404 NOR patients undergoing fresh embryo transfer (ET) from 2018 to 2022 were studied. Patients were divided into HCG group and HCG plus GnRH-a group according to trigger methods. After confounding factors were controlled by propensity score matching, 67 cases were included in HCG group and HCG plus GnRH-a group, respectively, and pregnancy outcomes were assessed. Basal data, ovarian stimulation, embryological data and pregnancy outcomes were compared. The effect of trigger methods on pregnancy outcomes was analyzed by binary logistic regression.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant differences in embryological data, embryo implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate of ET, number of fresh embryos transferred and total number of embryos transferred after one cycle of oocyte retrieval. While, cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) was better in the dual-trigger group than in the HCG group. The binary logistic regression analysis indicated that the trigger methods had an independent influence on embryo implantation and cumulative live birth.

CONCLUSIONS

During IVF/ICSI, dual-trigger could potentially play a role in improving oocyte quality, ensuring embryo implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate of ET and cumulative live birth rate at the end of one ovum pick-up (OPU) cycle, and reducing the physical, temporal and financial negative consequences due to repeated OPU cycle.

Economic Evaluation of Medically Assisted Reproduction: A Methodological Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Medically assisted reproduction (MAR) is a challenging application area for health economic evaluations, entailing a broad range of costs and outcomes, stretching out long-term and accruing to several parties.

PURPOSE

To systematically review which costs and outcomes are included in published economic evaluations of MAR and to compare these with health technology assessment (HTA) prescriptions about which cost and outcomes should be considered for different evaluation objectives.

DATA SOURCES

HTA guidelines and systematic searches of PubMed Central, Embase, WOS CC, CINAHL, Cochrane (CENTRAL), HTA, and NHS EED.

STUDY SELECTION

All economic evaluations of MAR published from 2010 to 2022.

DATA EXTRACTION

A predetermined data collection form summarized study characteristics. Essential costs and outcomes of MAR were listed based on HTA and treatment guidelines for different evaluation objectives. For each study, included costs and outcomes were reviewed.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The review identified 93 cost-effectiveness estimates, of which 57% were expressed as cost-per-(healthy)-live-birth, 19% as cost-per-pregnancy, and 47% adopted a clinic perspective. Few adopted societal perspectives and only 2% used quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Broader evaluations omitted various relevant costs and outcomes related to MAR. There are several cost and outcome categories for which available HTA guidelines do not provide conclusive directions regarding inclusion or exclusion.

LIMITATIONS

Studies published before 2010 and of interventions not clearly labeled as MAR were excluded. We focus on methods rather than which MAR treatments are cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Economic evaluations of MAR typically calculate a short-term cost-per-live-birth from a clinic perspective. Broader analyses, using cost-per-QALY or BCRs from societal perspectives, considering the full scope of reproduction-related costs and outcomes, are scarce and often incomplete. We provide a summary of costs and outcomes for future research guidance and identify areas requiring HTA methodological development.

HIGHLIGHTS

The cost-effectiveness of MAR procedures can be exceptionally complex to estimate as there is a broad range of costs and outcomes involved, in principle stretching out over multiple generations and over many stakeholders.We list 21 key areas of costs and outcomes of MAR. Which of these needs to be accounted for alters for different evaluation objectives (determined by the type of economic evaluation, time horizon considered, and perspective).Published studies mostly investigate cost-effectiveness in the very short-term, from a clinic perspective, expressed as cost-per-live-birth. There is a lack of comprehensive economic evaluations that adopt a broader perspective with a longer time horizon. The broader the evaluation objective, the more relevant costs and outcomes were excluded.For several costs and outcomes, particularly those relevant for broader, societal evaluations of MAR, the inclusion or exclusion is theoretically ambiguous, and HTA guidelines do not offer sufficient guidance.

Higher live birth rate following transdermal testosterone pretreatment in poor responders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed aiming to identify good-quality randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating testosterone pretreatment in poor responders. Eight RCTs were analysed, evaluating 797 women. Transdermal testosterone gel was used in all studies, with a dose ranging from 10 to 12.5 mg/day for 10-56 days. The main outcome measure was achievement of pregnancy, expressed as clinical pregnancy or live birth. Testosterone pretreatment was associated with a significantly higher live birth (risk ratio [RR] 2.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-3.92) and clinical pregnancy rate (RR 2.25, 95% CI 1.54-3.30), as well as a significant increase in the number of cumulus-oocyte complexes retrieved. Significantly fewer days to complete ovarian stimulation, a lower total dose of gonadotrophins, a lower cancellation rate due to poor ovarian response and a thicker endometrium on the day of triggering of final oocyte maturation were observed. No significant differences were observed in oestradiol concentration, the numbers of follicles ≥17 mm, metaphase II oocytes, two-pronuclear oocytes and embryos transferred, and the proportion of patients with embryo transfer. The current study suggests that the probability of pregnancy is increased in poor responders pretreated with transdermal testosterone who are undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF.

Fresh or Frozen Embryo Transfer in The Antagonist In Vitro Fertilization Cycles: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant), widely adopted protocol, is more in line with the physiological processes, and induces a shorter and more cost-effective ovarian stimulation. In order to assess the success rate of embryo transferring (ET) in the antagonist in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles, we compared the fresh ET with the frozen ET outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, one hundred five cases of ET of the infertility clinic of the Besat hospital (Kurdistan, Iran) between March 2014 to March 2020 that were treated with antagonist cycle (both fresh and frozen) were analyzed. The difference between the two groups in baseline data and reproductive outcomes were evaluated using Independent sample t test, Mann-Whitney U test, Chi-squared test, and Fisher's exact test in SPSS software (version 22).

RESULTS

Out of 105 cases, 48 and 57 were in the fresh and frozen ET groups, respectively. The participants age was 35.75 ± 4.9 Y. In the fresh ET group, and 33.98 ± 5.1 Y in the frozen ET group. The percentage of chemical pregnancy was 12 (25%) in the fresh ET group and 15 (26.3%) in the frozen ET group (P=0.8); Clinical pregnancy rate was 11 (22.9%) in the fresh ET group and 11 (19.3%) in the frozen ET group (P=0.6); the rate of abortion in the fresh ET group was 3 (6.3%, P=0.2), and in the frozen ET group was 8 (14%, P=0.2); and the live birth rate was 9 (18.8%) in the fresh ET group, in comparison with 7 (12.3%) in the frozen ET group (P=0.3).

CONCLUSION

Not statistically significant, the percentage of chemical pregnancy and abortion were higher in the frozen ET group. The percentage of clinical pregnancy and live birth were higher in the fresh ET group.

Effects of Adjuvant Growth Hormone Therapy on Poor Ovarian Responders in Assisted Reproductive Technology

Objective:The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of adjuvant growth hormone (GH) therapy in antagonist protocol aiming to improve ovarian response and clinical outcomes of women with poor ovarian response. Methodology:This clinical trial was a single-center study, controlled with equal randomization, which was carried out in Avicenna Infertility Clinic, Tehran, Iran. Totally, 118 patients were randomly allocated to either the intervention or the control group. The intervention group received GH and gonadotropin in gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol (GH/GnRHant), while the control group received gonadotropin in GnRH antagonist protocol (GnRHant). Results:The results revealed that the number of days of gonadotropin administration significantly decreased (p-value = 0.040) in the GH/GnRHant group compared to the GnRHant group. Also, our study findings showed that a number of top-quality day 3 embryos and clinical pregnancy rate were higher in the GH/GnRHant group (p-value = 0.007) compared to the GnRHant group (p-value = 0.036). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of number of received gonadotropin ampoules, number of retrieved MI and MII oocytes, chemical pregnancy rate, ongoing pregnancy rate and live birth rate. Conclusion:These results suggest that adjuvant GH therapy in antagonist protocol in women with a history of poor ovarian response is effective to decrease the number of days of received gonadotropin ampoules and improve pregnancy rate.

Ovarian Follicular Growth through Intermittent Vaginal Gonadotropin Administration in Diminished Ovarian Reserve Women

It is a challenge to obtain enough oocytes during in vitro fertilization (IVF) in women who have a poor ovarian response (POR) in achieving conception. We have adopted the characteristics of the first uterine pass effect, which we pioneered in employing the vaginal administration of gonadotropins in women receiving IVF treatments. In our previous study employing vaginal administration, faster absorption and slower elimination of gonadotropins were demonstrated, and, female subjects presented proper ovarian follicle growth and pregnancy rates. In this study, during 2016–2020, 300 to 675 IU of gonadotropins were administered vaginally every three days in 266 POR women for their controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH). The injections were performed with needles angled at 15–30° towards the middle-upper portions of the bilateral vaginal wall, with an injection depth of 1–2 mm. For the COH results, these women, on average, received 3.0 ± 0.9 vaginal injections and a total dose of 1318.4 ± 634.4 IU gonadotropins, resulting in 2.2 ± 1.9 mature oocytes and 1.0 ± 1.2 good embryos. Among these embryos, 0.9 ± 1.0 were transferred to reach a clinical pregnancy rate of 18.1% and a live birth rate of 16.7%. In conclusion, the intermittent vaginal administration of gonadotropins proved to be effective in POR women for their IVF treatments.

Poor ovarian response and the possible role of natural and modified natural cycles

About 20% of women undergoing in vitro fertilization struggle with poor ovarian response, indicating a poor prognosis related to low response following ovarian stimulation. Indeed, poor ovarian response, that is associated with both high cancelation rates and low live birth rates, still represents one of the most important therapeutic challenges in in vitro fertilization. In this context, natural cycle/modified natural cycle–in vitro fertilization, as a ‘milder’ approach, could be a reasonable alternative to high-dose/conventional ovarian stimulation in poor ovarian responders, with the aim to retrieve a single oocyte with better characteristics that may result in a single top-quality embryo, transferred to a more receptive endometrium. Moreover, modified natural cycle–in vitro fertilization may be cost-effective because of the reduced gonadotropin consumption. Several studies have been published during the last 20 years reporting conflicting results regarding the use of natural cycle/modified natural cycle–in vitro fertilization in women with poor ovarian response; however, while most of the studies concluded that mild stimulation regimens, including natural cycle/modified natural cycle–in vitro fertilization, have low, but acceptable success rates in this difficult group of patients, others did not replicate these findings. The aim of this narrative review is to appraise the current evidence regarding the use of natural cycle/modified natural cycle–in vitro fertilization in poor ovarian responders.

Ovarian Folliculogenesis and Uterine Endometrial Receptivity after Intermittent Vaginal Injection of Recombinant Human Follicle-Stimulating Hormone in Infertile Women Receiving In Vitro Fertilization and in Immature Female Rats

The uterine first-pass effect occurs when drugs are delivered vaginally. However, the effect of vaginally administered recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (rhFSH) on ovarian folliculogenesis and endometrial receptivity is not well established. We aimed to compare the efficacy of rhFSH administered vaginally and abdominally in clinical in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment, pharmacokinetic study, and animal study. In IVF treatment, the number of oocytes retrieved, endometrial thickness and uterine artery blood perfusion were not different between women who received the rhFSH either vaginally or abdominally. For serum pharmacokinetic parameters, significantly lower Tmax, clearance, and higher AUC and T_1/2_elimination of rhFSH were observed in women who received rhFSH vaginally, but urine parameters were not different. Immature female rats that received daily abdominal or vaginal injections (1 IU twice daily for 4 days) or intermittent vaginal injections (4 IU every other day for two doses) of rhFSH had more total follicles than the control group. In addition, the serum progesterone and progesterone receptors in the local endometrium were significantly higher in the groups treated with intermittent abdominal or vaginal injection of rhFSH, compared with those who recieved daily injection. In summary, vaginal administration of rhFSH may provide an alternative treatment regimen in women receiving IVF.