Efficacy and safety of follitropin alfa/lutropin alfa in ART: a randomized controlled trial in poor ovarian responders

The effects of flexible short protocol with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist on preventing premature ovulation in poor responders

PURPOSE

The proportion of patients with poor ovarian response (POR) is increasing, but effective treatment remains a challenge. To control the hidden peaks of luteinizing hormone (LH) and premature ovulation for poor responders, this study investigated the efficacy of flexible short protocol (FSP) with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) on trigger day.

METHODS

The 662 cycles of POR patients were retrospectively analyzed. The cohort was divided into control and intervention groups. The intervention group (group A) with 169 cycles received a GnRH-ant given on trigger day. The control (group B) with 493 cycles received only FSP. The clinical outcomes of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

Compared with group B, with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) on trigger day in group A the incidences of spontaneous premature ovulation decreased significantly (2.37% vs. 8.72%, P < 0.05). The number of fresh embryo-transfer cycles was 45 in group A and 117 in group B. There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes, including implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate and the cumulative live birth rate (12.0% vs. 9.34%; 22.22% vs. 21.93%; 17.78% vs. 14.91%; 20.51% vs. 20%, respectively; P > 0.05) between the two group.

CONCLUSION

FSP with GnRH-ant addition on trigger day had no effect on clinical outcomes, but could effectively inhibit the hidden peaks of luteinizing hormone (LH) and spontaneous premature ovulation in POR. Therefore, it is an advantageous option for POR women.

Comparison of the Administration of 150 or 75 IU of Recombinant LH in Agonist ICSI Cycles Stimulated with Recombinant FSH in Women Aged 35-39: A Comparative Study

Background

The purpose of the study was to assess whether the coadministration of 150 IU of recombinant LH instead of 75 IU in women aged 35-39 improves the results in agonist ICSI cycles stimulated with 300 IU of recombinant FSH.

Methods

In this study, two ovarian stimulation protocols coexisted which were identical except in the administered dose of recombinant LH, for which some patients received 150 IU (n=231) and some received 75 IU (n=216). Both groups received 300 IU of recombinant FSH. Gonadotropins were reimbursed by the National Health System. Statistical analysis was performed by Student's t test, χ2, and ANCOVA. Significance level was established at p=0.05.

Results

The number of retrieved oocytes was slightly higher in the 300/150 group (9.06±5.53 vs. 8.61±5.11), but the differences were not significant. Results were similar with the number of metaphase II oocytes (7.18±4.86 vs. 6.72±4.72) and the number of fertilized oocytes (4.64±3.2 vs. 4.23±2.72). The per-transfer clinical pregnancy rates exhibited close similarity between both groups (32.84% vs. 32.46%), as did the per-transfer live birth rates (29.90% vs. 30.37%) and the implantation rate. The rate of hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) as well as the rate of cancellation due to OHHS risk was similar in both groups. There was also no difference in the miscarriage rate. When results were expressed by per started cycle or by oocyte pick-up, the results remained very similar in both groups.

Conclusion

In women aged 35-39 undergoing ovarian stimulation with recombinant FSH in agonist cycles, the coadministration of 75 or 150 UI of recombinant LH did not influence pregnancy rates. However, a slight increase in the number of retrieved oocytes should not be disregarded.

Live Birth Rates in Women Under 38 Years Old with AMH Level < 1.2 ng/ml in the First In Vitro Fertilization + / - Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection: Retrospective Study and Arguments for Care

Many studies failed to show a predictive impact of AMH levels on the chances of pregnancy; however, acceptable pregnancy rates for young women with low AMH levels were observed in IVF + / - ICSI. The objectives of this retrospective study were to evaluate the clinical pregnancy and live birth rates in the first IVF + / - ICSI cycle in women under 38 years old with AMH level < 1.2 ng/ml and to determine the arguments for care. We classified the women into three groups: group A: AMH < 0.4 ng/ml (n: 86); group B: AMH: 0.4 to 0.8 ng/ml (n: 90); and group C: AMH > 0.8 to < 1.2 ng/ml (n: 92). We recorded data on the patients' characteristics, stimulation cycles, embryo cultures, and ongoing pregnancies. No difference was observed between the three groups for the number of embryos transferred, the clinical pregnancy, and the live birth rates (LBR) per embryo transfer (LBR/transfer: 24.1% in group A, 25.9% in group B, and 28.1% in group C). The young age of the women reassures about the oocyte quality, but a low level of AMH may raise concerns about a lower quantitative oocyte yield, leading to accelerated management of the couple in IVF + / - ICSI.

Role of N-acetylcysteine treatment in women with advanced age undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles: A prospective study

Objective

The main objective of this study was to explore the efficacy of a new antioxidant N-acetylcysteine (NAC) supplementation in reproductive outcomes of advanced age women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection-embryo transfer (IVF/ICSI-ET), and the effect on the expression of L-glutathione (GSH) in follicular fluid (FF) and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) copy number of granulosa cells.

Methods

The present prospective randomized controlled study was conducted in 200 patients with advanced age women undergoing GnRH antagonist protocol. The treatment group (group A) consisted of 100 women who received N-acetylcysteine treatment from the menstrual phase of the previous cycle for about 45 days using the GnRH antagonist protocol. The control group (group B) consisted of 100 women who received the same protocol without N-acetylcysteine. Total gonadotrophin dosage the number of oocyte received, high-quality blastocysts, and pregnancy outcomes were compared between two groups. Pregnancy outcomes included biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, embryo implantation rate, ectopic pregnancy rate, multiple pregnancy rate, and ongoing pregnancy rate. Follicular fluid (FF) was collected after oocytes were gathered. The GSH content in the FF was tested with enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The mtDNA copy number of the granulosa cells was measured using real-time PCR techniques.

Results

Total doses of Gn in the NAC treatment group were less than those in the control group (2385.50 ± 879.19 vs. 2527.63 ± 1170.33, P = 0.047). Compared with the control, the number of high-quality blastocysts in NAC treatment increased significantly (1.82 ± 2.12 vs. 1.43 ± 1.58, p = 0.014). Clinical pregnancy rates did not differ in both groups (all P > 0.05). At the same time, the GSH content in the FF differed significantly between the two groups (1.88 ± 1.23 vs. 1.07 ± 0.70, p = 0.001). There was no significant difference in the mtDNA copy number between the two groups (P = 0.157).

Conclusion

A combination of NAC and Gn treatment is capable of improving the ovarian response to superovulation drugs in assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) and also in aged populations. The addition of NAC during IVF can improve the quality of blastocysts in advanced age female subjects. However, more clinical trials are required to be designed to confirm this conclusion in future.

Ethics and dissemination

The experiment solicited approval from the Institutional ethics committee of the Affiliated Reproductive Hospital of Shandong University. All the participants provided written informed consent. This survey was conducted as per the Declaration of Helsinki and relevant amendments.

Trial registration number

www.chictr.org.cn, identifier ChiCTR2100048297.

Researching the Phenomenon of Poor Ovarian Responders and Management Strategies in IVF: A Narrative Review

This narrative review aims to summarize all the latest studies published between 2015-2021 concerning the management protocols adopted for poor ovarian response (POR) cases. Patients defined as "poor responders" show minimal response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation, although there is no standard definition for POR. Although infertility specialists are endeavoring to improve cycle outcomes in poor responders by adopting multiple management strategies, still the estimated risk of cycle cancellation is about 20%. All the studies performed during this study period were evaluated and their results were recorded. The latest published protocols to improve oocyte retrieval in poor responders include: anti-Mϋllerian hormone, clomiphene citrate, co-enzyme Q10, corifollitropin, dehydroepiandrosterone, double stimulation, Follicle Stimulation Hormone, Growth Hormone, Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists, letrozole, human chorionic gonadotropin, Luteinizing Hormone, progesterone and testosterone. CONCLUSION: Although many strategies have been suggested to manage POR, none has been proven superior to the others. Further large-scale randomized studies are needed to validate experimental techniques leading towards successful individualized treatment regimens.

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.

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.

Future Fertility of Patients With No Embryo Transfer in Their First IVF Cycle Attempts

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the future outcomes of patients undergoing their first IVF (in vitro fertilization) attempt with no oocyte retrieved, no normal zygotes formed, or no embryos available for transfer and to identify factors affecting the live birth rate.

METHODS

Patients who underwent no transplantable embryo in their first IVF cycles but carried out several consecutive cycles between January 2012 to December 2020 were retrospectively enrolled and divided into three groups:group A (no egg retrieval), group B (no normal zygotes formed), and group C (no embryos available to transfer). The patients were also divided into the live birth group and non-live birth group according to whether they got a live baby or not. The clinical data and the cumulative clinical outcomes of groups were compared.

RESULTS

496 patients met the inclusion criteria and enrolled, with 121 patients with no oocytes retrieved in group A, 138 patients with no normal zygotes formed in group B, and 237 patients with no embryos available to transfer in group C. The age [(34.75(5.82) vs 31.91(5.31), P<0.001; 34.75(5.82) vs 32.25(5.72), P<0.001)] and baseline FSH level [(13.04(8.82) vs 10.52(7.39), P=0.005; 13.04(8.82) vs 9.91(5.95), P<0.001)] of women in group A were significantly higher than those in groups B and C. The stable cumulative live birth rate/patient of three groups achieved 18.18% (after 5 cycles, group A), 28.98% (after 3 cycles, group B) and 20.25% (after 7 cycles, group C). Moreover, the multivariate regression analysis showed that female age and basic FSH were main factors affecting live birth outcome of patients with no embryo transfer in their first IVF cycle attempts.

CONCLUSIONS

The future clinical outcome may be better in women with no normal zygotes than those with no oocyte retrieved or no available embryo at their first IVF cycle attempts. The main factors influencing the live birth are age and ovarian reserve.

HORMONAL STATUS OF PATIENTS WITH A PREDICTED WEAK RESPONSE OF THE OVARIES TO GONADOTROPIN STIMULATION

OBJECTIVE

The aim: To assess the hormonal status of patients with weak ovarian response to stimulation with various gonadotropins.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Materials and methods: The hormonal examination recommended before infertility treatment with the use of assisted reproductive techniques consisted of determining basal serum concentrations of FSH, LH, estradiol (E2), AMH, thyroid hormone, prolactin on day 3 to 5 of the spontaneous menstrual cycle. The study was carried out by radioimmune and enzyme immunoassay methods. The concentration of serum STH and growth factors, such as IGF-I and IGFBP-3, was measured on day 2 to 3 of the spontaneous menstrual cycle and on the day of transvaginal puncture of follicles (TPV).

RESULTS

Results: During hormonal examination, signs of restricted ovarian reserve associated with a basal FSH increase to 10-15 IU were detected in 61 patients (43.6%). Signs of ovarian reserve reduction associated with a decrease in AMH to values less than 1 ng/ml were found in 110 women (78.5%). The STH concentration in and serum on the day of TPO in the main group was significantly higher than that in the comparison group, while the IGF BP-3 concentration in the main group was significantly lower than that in the comparison group.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions: In patients in the main group, stimulation of superovulation with urinary gonadotropins leads to an increase in serum STH concentration, a decrease in IGFBP-activity on the day of TPO compared to day 2 to 3 of menstrual cycle, while in patients in the second group, the concentration of these indicators remains unchanged.

Type and dose of gonadotropins in poor ovarian responders: does it matter?

Infertile patients with a diminished ovarian reserve, also referred to as poor ovarian responders, constitute a substantial and increasing population of patients undergoing in vitro fertilization. The management of patients with poor ovarian response is still a controversial issue. Almost a century has passed since the introduction of the first gonadotropin. A broad collection of urinary and recombinant gonadotropins, including biosimilars, is commercially available now. Despite great advances in assisted reproductive technology, there remains uncertainty about the optimal treatment regimen for ovarian stimulation in poor ovarian responders. Although oocyte donation is the most successful and ultimate remedy for poor ovarian responders, most patients persist on using their own oocytes in several attempts, to achieve the desired pregnancy. The aim of this review is twofold: first, to provide an overview of the commercially available gonadotropins and summarize the available evidence supporting the use of one or another for ovarian stimulation in poor ovarian responders, and second, to address the controversies on the dosage of gonadotropins for this specific in vitro fertilization population.

Recombinant human luteinizing hormone co-treatment in ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology in women of advanced reproductive age: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Several studies suggest that luteinizing hormone (LH) could improve IVF outcome in women of advanced reproductive age by optimizing androgen production. In this review, we assessed the role of recombinant-human LH (r-hLH) and recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (r-hFSH) co-treatment in ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology in women of advanced reproductive age candidates for assisted reproduction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Using a preregistered protocol we systematically searched Medline/PubMed, Scopus and the ISI Web of Science databases to identify randomized controlled trials in which r-hFSH monotherapy protocols were compared with r-hFSH/r-hLH co-treatment in women ≥35 years undergoing fresh IVF cycles. We calculated the pooled odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous data and the weight mean difference (WMD) for continuous data with an associated 95% confidence interval (CI). The meta-analyses were conducted using the random-effect model. P values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Subgroup analyses of all primary and secondary outcomes were performed only in women aged 35-40 years.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were identified. In women aged between 35 and 40 years, r-hFSH/r-hLH co-treatment was associated with higher clinical pregnancy rates (OR 1.45, CI 95% 1.05-2.00, I² = 0%, P = 0.03) and implantation rates (OR 1.49, CI 95% 1.10-2.01, I² = 13%, P = 0.01) versus r-hFSH monotherapy. Fewer oocytes were retrieved in r-hFSH/r-hLH-treated patients than in r-hFSH-treated patients both in women aged ≥35 years (WMD -0.82 CI 95% -1.40 to - 0.24, I² = 88%, P = 0.005) and in those aged between 35 and 40 years (WMD -1.03, CI - 1.89 to - 0.17, I² = 0%, P = 0.02). The number of metaphase II oocytes, miscarriage rates and live birth rates did not differ between the two groups of women overall or in subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSION

Although more oocytes were retrieved in patients who underwent r-hFSH monotherapy, this meta-analysis suggests that r-hFSH/r-hLH co-treatment improves clinical pregnancy and implantation rates in women between 35 and 40 years of age undergoing ovarian stimulation for assisted reproduction technology. However, more RCTs using narrower age ranges in advanced age women are warranted to corroborate these findings.

The POSEIDON stratification - moving from poor ovarian response to low prognosis

Poor ovarian response remains one of the most challenging tasks for an IVF clinician. In this review, we aim to highlight the ongoing research for optimizing the prognosis in poor ovarian response patients. The newly introduced POSEIDON criteria argue that the first step is to move from a poor response to a poor prognosis concept, while improving identification and stratification of the different sub-types of poor prognosis patients prior to ovarian stimulation. The immediate marker of success is the ability of the ovarian stimulation to retrieve the number of oocytes needed to obtain at least one euploid blastocyst for transfer in each patient. This surrogate marker of success should not replace live birth as the most important outcome, but it should be approached as a useful tool for clinicians to evaluate their strategy for achieving live birth in the shortest timespan possible in the individual patient/ couple.

Future fertility of patients with zero oocytes yield in their first IVF cycle attempt

PURPOSE

We aim to estimate the future fertility of patient undergoing their first IVF cycle attempt with no oocyte retrieved, and to identify factors that might predict those who will conceive in subsequent IVF cycle attempt.

METHODS

A cohort retrospective study of all consecutive women attending our IVF unit, for their first IVF cycle attempt, between January 2013 to December 2019, who reached the ovum pick-up (OPU) stage with zero oocyte retrieved. Patients' characteristics and infertility-treatment-related variables in the first IVF cycle attempt were compared between those who conceived in a subsequent cycle and those who did not. Moreover, infertility-treatment-related variables during successful cycles resulting in pregnancy were compared to those without.

RESULTS

59 met the study inclusion criteria, yielding zero oocytes. During the follow-up period, 12 (20.3%) women conceived (one conceived twice), and 8 (14%) gave birth to a live infant. Cumulative live-birth rate per OPU and per patients were 4% and 14%, respectively. Clinical pregnancies were achieved after 3.61+1.4 cycle attempts (range: 1-6), with no live-births following the fifth IVF cycle attempt. No in-between group differences were observed in ovarian stimulation variables of their first IVF cycle attempt. Moreover, in those cycles resulting in pregnancy, patients achieved a significantly higher number of fertilized oocytes (2.15+1.5 vs 0.94+1.5, respectively; p<0.01) and a higher mean top-quality embryos (TQE) (1.76+0.9 vs 0.73+1.2, respectively; p<0.003).

CONCLUSION

Women yielding zero oocytes at their first IVF cycle attempt, may achieve 14% cumulative live-birth rate after 5 IVF cycle attempts. Moreover, those who conceived in subsequent IVF cycle attempts were those achieving 2 or more fertilized oocytes/TQE.

Improving Reporting of Clinical Studies Using the POSEIDON Criteria: POSORT Guidelines

The POSEIDON (Patient-Oriented Strategies Encompassing IndividualizeD Oocyte Number) criteria were developed to help clinicians identify and classify low-prognosis patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) and provide guidance for possible therapeutic strategies to overcome infertility. Since its introduction, the number of published studies using the POSEIDON criteria has increased steadily. However, a critical analysis of existing evidence indicates inconsistent and incomplete reporting of critical outcomes. Therefore, we developed guidelines to help researchers improve the quality of reporting in studies applying the POSEIDON criteria. We also discuss the advantages of using the POSEIDON criteria in ART clinical studies and elaborate on possible study designs and critical endpoints. Our ultimate goal is to advance the knowledge concerning the clinical use of the POSEIDON criteria to patients, clinicians, and the infertility community.

Comparative Effectiveness of Mild or Conventional GnRH-Antagonist Protocols for Ovarian Stimulation in Poor Responders (Poseidon Group 4)

Background and Aims: A panel of experts (the Poseidon Group) introduced a new and more detailed stratification for poor ovarian responders in order to predict the prognosis of IVF outcome according to the sensitivity to FSH. However, various arguments about the management strategy of these patients still remain, including the convenience and the cost. Therefore, this study was conducted to compare the efficacy of mild and conventional GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation prescribed in patients classified in Poseidon Group 4.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 359 poor responder patients (Poseidon Group 4) treated with mild or conventional GnRH antagonist stimulation regimens from 8/2017 to 7/2019 at Tam Anh Hospital ART Center. The main outcomes were the index of Follicular Output Rate (FORT) or Follicle to Oocyte Index (FOI), the number of day-2 embryos and top-quality embryos obtained. The t-test and Mann–Whitney U test in SPSS v25.0 was used to analyze the continuous data and Chi-squared/Exact test was used for binary variables. Multiple linear regression analysis was done by using Stata versions 15.0 to measure association between primary endpoints with stimulation regimen controlled for covariates and possible confounding factors.

Results: In the overall group of poor responders, the conventional GnRH antagonist protocol performed better than the mild protocol. Subsequently, data were analyzed according to the AFC. In women with AFC &lt; 3, no significant differences were observed between the 2 regimens regarding FORT (p = 0.71), FOI (p = 0.12), the number of day-2-embryos (p = 0.052) and the number of top-quality embryos (p = 0.26). In contrast, in women with AFC ≥ 3, mild stimulation regimen resulted in significantly poorer outcome compared to the conventional GnRH antagonist regimen, regarding FORT (p &lt; 0.01), FOI (p &lt; 0.01), the number of day-2-embryos (p &lt; 0.01) and top-quality embryos (p = 0.01).

Conclusions: Considering poor responders classified in Poseidon Group 4, both ovarian stimulation regimens resulted in similar outcome for patients with a very low ovarian reserve (AFC &lt; 3). In contrast, the GnRH conventional antagonist protocol with maximum initial FSH dose (300–375 IU/day) and supplementary LH (75–150 IU/day) was more effective than the mild one for patients whose ovarian reserve was less reduced. The Clinical Trial was approved by the Ethnical Biomedical Research Committee Tam Anh General Hospital.

Influence of human chorionic gonadotrophin during ovarian stimulation: an overview

It is widely known that luteinising hormone (LH) and human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) are integral in the female reproductive lifecycle. Due to the common binding site and similarity in molecular structure, they were previously thought to have overlapping roles. However, with the development of both purified urinary-derived and recombinant gonadotrophins, the individual characteristics of these molecules have begun to be defined. There is evidence to suggest that LH and hCG preferentially activate different signalling cascades and display different receptor-binding kinetics. The data generated on the two molecules have led to an improved understanding of their distinct physiological functions, resulting in a debate among clinicians regarding the most beneficial use of LH- and hCG-containing products for ovarian stimulation (OS) in assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs). Over the past few decades, a number of trials have generated data supporting the use of hCG for OS in ART. Indeed, the data indicated that hCG plays an important role in folliculogenesis, leads to improved endometrial receptivity and is associated with a higher quality of embryos, while presenting a favourable safety profile. These observations support the increased use of hCG as a method to provide LH bioactivity during OS. This review summarises the molecular and functional differences between hCG and LH, and provides an overview of the clinical trial data surrounding the use of products for OS that contain LH bioactivity, examining their individual effect on outcomes such as endometrial receptivity, oocyte yield and embryo quality, as well as key pregnancy outcomes.

Update on the management of poor ovarian response in IVF: the shift from Bologna criteria to the Poseidon concept

Despite the considerate progress to which assisted reproduction technology (ART) has been subject since 1978, some issues remain unresolved. Notably, the clinical management of patients with a poor ovarian response is still a challenge in everyday practice, frustrating to both the patient and the fertility expert. Poor ovarian responders (PORs) embody 9–24% of patients undergoing ovarian stimulation, meaning that up to one in four patients conceals a poor reproductive prognosis. The last decade has witnessed the attempts of the medical community to standardize diagnosis of POR with the developing of the Bologna Criteria and the subsequent evolution of the low prognosis patient elaborated in the POSEIDON classification. The aim of this article is to summarize all evidence concerning etiology and management of poor ovarian response, including the most recent advances and future prospects in this regard.

The continuum of ovarian response leading to BIRTH, a real world study of ART in Spain

Background

The first biosimilar of recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (rFSH) launched in Europe was Bemfola® in 2014 following a clinical development programme demonstrating efficacy and safety to the satisfaction of the European Medicines Agency. Since then the increasing use of biosimilar rFSH has provided the opportunity to study both effectiveness across the whole population and the variation of rFSH use during routine clinical care in a real-world setting in Spain.

Methods

This is a real-world study of 1222 women treated in 26 assisted reproduction treatment centres throughout Spain providing experience of the use of a biosimilar recombinant follicle stimulating hormone in four distinct populations. The four populations studied were poor responders, suboptimal responders, normal responders and oocyte donors. The primary endpoint was the total number of oocytes retrieved. Secondary endpoints included number of days of rFSH stimulation, total dose of rFSH administered, number of MII oocytes, number of fertilized oocytes, quality of embryos, number of embryos transferred, implantation rates, clinical pregnancy rates following embryo transfer, number of multiple pregnancies and number of serious adverse reactions, including moderate-to-severe OHSS.

Results

Differences were seen across the populations both in the characteristics of the women and ART outcomes suggestive of a continuum of fertility prognosis. In the poor responders, suboptimal responders, normal responders and oocyte donor populations the mean age in years was 39.9 (±SD 3.4), 38.4 (±SD 2.9), 34.4 (±SD 3.3) and 26 (±SD 4.6) respectively and number of oocytes retrieved was 4.1 (±SD 2.7), 8.6 (±SD 6.0), 12.2 (±SD 7.2) and 19.5 (±SD 9.5) respectively. The proportion of embryos graded as best quality was 18.5%, 33.0% and 43.8%, and graded as worst quality was 20.4%, 5.8% and 5.8% for poor responders, suboptimal responders and normal responders respectively. In a similar pattern, for poor responders, suboptimal responders and normal responders the implantation rates were 16.0%, (8/50), 22.4% (49/219), 30.6% (97/317) respectively and clinical pregnancy rates were 23.2% (10/43), 30.4% (59/194) and 37.0% (114/308) respectively. Adverse events were reported in only 7 of 1222 women (0.6%).

Conclusions

Overall the results were consistent with the national ART results reported for Spain, hence this study provides reassurance of the clinical effectiveness of a biosimilar rFSH used in a real world setting.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier - NCT02941341.

Novel Physiology and Definition of Poor Ovarian Response; Clinical Recommendations

Poor ovarian response (POR) to controlled ovarian stimulation (OS) presents a major challenge in assisted reproduction. The Bologna criteria represented the first serious attempt to set clear criteria for the definition of POR. However, the Bologna criteria were questioned because of the persistent heterogeneity among POR patients and the inability to provide management strategies. Based on these facts, a more recent classification, the POSEIDON (Patient-Oriented Strategies Encompassing IndividualizeD Oocyte Number) classification, was developed to provide a homogeneous and refined definition of POR that significantly reduces the heterogeneity of the Bologna criteria definition of POR and helps in the clinical handling and counseling of patients. In this review, we discuss the impact of the POSEIDON classification on the clinical management of patients with POR.

Stop GnRH-Agonist Combined With Multiple-Dose GnRH-Antagonist Protocol for Patients With "Genuine" Poor Response Undergoing Controlled Ovarian Hyperstimulation for IVF

Objective: To examine whether the Stop GnRH-agonist combined with multiple-dose GnRH-antagonist protocol may improve conventional IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycle in poor ovarian response (POR) patients. Design: Cohort historical, proof of concept study. Setting: Tertiary, University affiliated Medical Center. Patient(s): Thirty POR patients, defined according to the Bologna criteria, who underwent a subsequent Stop GnRH-agonist combined with multiple-dose GnRH-antagonist controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) protocol, within 3 months of the previous failed conventional IVF/ICSI cycle, were included. For the purposes of this study, we eliminated a bias in this selection by including only "genuine" poor responder patients, defined as those who yielded up to 3 oocytes following COH with a minimal gonadotropin daily dose of 300 IU. Main Outcome Measure(s): Number of oocytes retrieved, number of top-quality embryos, COH variables. Result(s): The Stop GnRH-agonist combined with multiple-dose GnRH-antagonist COH protocol revealed significantly higher numbers of follicles >13 mm on the day of hCG administration, higher numbers of oocytes retrieved, and top-quality embryos (TQE) with an acceptable clinical pregnancy rate (16.6%). Moreover, as expected, patients undergoing the Stop GnRH-agonist combined with multiple-dose GnRH-antagonist COH protocol required significantly higher doses and a longer duration of gonadotropins stimulation. Conclusion(s): The combined Stop GnRH-ag/GnRH-ant COH protocol is a valuable tool in the armamentarium for treating "genuine" poor ovarian responders. Further, large prospective studies are needed to elucidate its role in POR and to characterize the appropriate patients subgroup (before initiating ovarian stimulation) that may benefit from the combined Stop GnRH-ag/GnRH-ant COH protocol.

Management Strategies for POSEIDON Group 2

Although individualization of ovarian stimulation aims at maximal efficacy and safety in assisted reproductive treatments, in its current form it is far from ideal in achieving the desired success in women with a low prognosis. This could be due a failure to identify such women who are likely to have a low prognosis with currently used prognostic characteristics. Introduction of the patient-oriented strategies encompassing individualized oocyte number (POSEIDON) concept reinforces recognizing such low prognosis groups and stratifying in accordance with important prognostic factors. The POSEIDON concept provides a practical approach to the management of these women and is a useful tool for both counseling and clinical management. In this commentary, we focus on likely management strategies for POSEIDON group 2 criteria.

The Development of Gonadotropins for Clinical Use in the Treatment of Infertility

The first commercially available gonadotropin product was a human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) extract, followed by animal pituitary gonadotropin extracts. These extracts were effective, leading to the introduction of the two-step protocol, which involved ovarian stimulation using animal gonadotropins followed by ovulation triggering using hCG. However, ovarian response to animal gonadotropins was maintained for only a short period of time due to immune recognition. This prompted the development of human pituitary gonadotropins; however, supply problems, the risk for Creutzfeld-Jakob disease, and the advent of recombinant technology eventually led to the withdrawal of human pituitary gonadotropin from the market. Urinary human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) preparations were also produced, with subsequent improvements in purification techniques enabling development of products with standardized proportions of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH) activity. In 1962 the first reported pregnancy following ovulation stimulation with hMG and ovulation induction with hCG was described, and this product was later established as part of the standard protocol for ART. Improvements in immunopurification techniques enabled the removal of LH from hMG preparations; however, unidentified urinary protein contaminants remained a problem. Subsequently, monoclonal FSH antibodies were used to produce a highly purified FSH preparation containing <0.1 IU of LH activity and <5% unidentified urinary proteins, enabling the formulation of smaller injection volumes that could be administered subcutaneously rather than intramuscularly. Ongoing issues with gonadotropins derived from urine donations, including batch-to-batch variability and a finite donor supply, were overcome by the development of recombinant gonadotropin products. The first recombinant human FSH molecules received marketing approvals in 1995 (follitropin alfa) and 1996 (follitropin beta). These had superior purity and a more homogenous glycosylation pattern compared with urinary or pituitary FSH. Subsequently recombinant versions of LH and hCG have been developed, and biosimilar versions of follitropin alfa have received marketing authorization. More recent developments include a recombinant FSH produced using a human cell line, and a long-acting FSH preparation. These state of the art products are administered subcutaneously via pen injection devices.

Comparison of recombinant and urinary follicle-stimulating hormones over 2000 gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles: a retrospective study

The objective of this paper was to compare the effect of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) and urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (uFSH) on pregnancy rates and live birth rates with the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol in China. This retrospective study was conducted from January 2014 through August 2017. Patients treated with uFSH had significantly higher levels of luteinizing hormone (3.79 mIU/ml vs. 3.09 mIU/ml) and progesterone (0.93 ng/ml vs. 1.16 ng/ml) on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) administration, and they also had higher pregnancy rates (24.19% vs. 22.86%). There was no significant difference in the rate of live births. In the logistic regression results of the rFSH group, the pregnancy rate was positively correlated with the level of luteinizing hormone, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.09 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.00–1.18; P = 0.048). In the uFSH group, the pregnancy rate was negatively correlated with the progesterone level on the day of HCG administration, with an OR of 0.47 (95% CI: 0.27–0.77; P = 0.004). Our research concluded that uFSH performed better than rFSH in terms of pregnancy rates when it was associated with the GnRH antagonist protocol. Meanwhile, no significant differences in the rate of live births were observed between the two groups.

Prediction of the lower serum anti-Müllerian hormone threshold for ovarian stimulation prior to in-vitro fertilization using the Elecsys® AMH assay: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

In assisted reproductive technology, prediction of treatment failure remains a great challenge. The development of more sensitive assays for measuring anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) has allowed for the possibility to investigate if a lower threshold of AMH can be established predicting very limited or no response to maximal ovarian stimulation.

METHODS

A prospective observational multicenter study of 107 women, < 40 years of age with regular menstrual cycle and serum AMH levels ≤ 12 pmol/L, treated with 300 IU/day of HP-hMG in a GnRH-antagonist protocol. AMH was measured before treatment start using the Elecsys® AMH assay by Roche Diagnostics. The ability of AMH to predict follicular development and ovarian response was assessed by receiver operating characteristics (ROC). Furthermore, the relationship between AMH at start of stimulation and cycle outcome was investigated using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Five out of 107 cycles (4.7%) were cancelled due to lack of follicular development and 60/107 (56%) women did not reach the classical hCG criteria for ovulation induction (≥ 3 follicles of ≥17 mm). An AMH threshold of 4 pmol/L predicted failure to reach the classical hCG criteria with 89% specificity and 53% sensitivity and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.76 (95% CI 0.66-0.85). AMH predicted cycle cancellation due to lack of follicular development, using a cut-off value of 1.5 pmol/L, with a specificity of 96% and sensitivity of 80% (AUC = 0.92, 95% CI 0.79-1.00). A single-unit increase in AMH was associated with a 29% decrease in odds of failure to reach the classical hCG criteria (OR 0.71 95% CI 0.59-0.85, p < 0.01). The lowest AMH value compatible with a live birth was 1.3 pmol/L.

CONCLUSIONS

Among women with a limited ovarian reserve, pre-treatment serum AMH levels significantly predicted failure to reach the classical hCG triggering criteria and predicted lack of follicular development using a new sensitive assay, but AMH was not suitable for withholding fertility treatment, as even very low levels were associated with live births.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not relevant.

Ovarian Reserve Markers to Identify Poor Responders in the Context of Poseidon Classification

It is well-known that poor ovarian reserve is a cause of infertility, poor response to gonadotrophin stimulation and poor success rate after in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. Some years ago a consensus was elaborated on precise criteria which can lead to a correct identification of poor responders (the Bologna criteria). More recently, the POSEIDON group has proposed a new stratified classification of patients with low prognosis, also with the aim of providing clinical indications for the management of these patients. A literature search was carried out for studies that investigated the ability of ovarian reserve markers, in particular AMH and AFC, to predict poor ovarian response in IVF cycles; secondly, studies regarding the Bologna criteria and their prognostic value were analyzed and available literature on POSEIDON classification was reported. The most recent markers of ovarian reserve (serum AMH and ultrasound AFC) have shown to provide a direct and accurate measurement of ovarian follicle pool. These markers have generally shown comparable predictive power for ovarian response and a number of retrieved oocytes in IVF cycles. "Abnormal ovarian reserve test" is a very important parameter both in the Bologna criteria and in the POSEIDON classification. Several studies have already been published about the reproductive outcome of patients defined as poor responders according to the ESHRE Bologna criteria: all of them agree on the poor IVF outcome and low pregnancy rate of these patients. Instead, being the POSEIDON classification of very recent publication, the efficacy of the POSEIDON approach in improving management and outcomes of POR patients has yet to be tested and validated with future prospective clinical trials. Prediction of poor response may help clinicians choose the stimulation protocol with the aim of gaining patient compliance and cost reduction, and many efforts have been made by researchers in this sense, including the formulation of the Bologna criteria and of the POSEIDON classification, in which the ovarian reserve markers (AMH and AFC) play a fundamental role.

Management Strategies for POSEIDON Groups 3 and 4

In the POSEIDON classification, patients belonging to groups 3 and 4 share the same common feature of a poor ovarian reserve which independently of age renders them at high risk of a poor reproductive outcome. Overall, POSEIDON groups 1-4 constitute approximately 47% of patients attending assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment. With the increasing delay in childbearing, POSEIDON group 4 seems to increase in numbers now in some centers constituting more than 50% of the total POSEIDON population, whereas group 3 patients constitute approximately 10%. Both POSEIDON groups 3 and 4 patients require special attention as regards pre-treatment strategy, ovarian stimulation, adjuvant treatment, and ovulation trigger strategy in order to optimize the probability of having at least one euploid blastocyst for transfer. Although more evidence is needed, recent advances seem to have increased the reproductive outcomes in the poor prognosis patient. The key to success is individualization in all steps of ART treatment. Herein, we review the recent evidence for the management of POSEIDON groups 3 and 4.

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.

Cumulative Live Birth Rates Following Stimulation With Corifollitropin Alfa Compared With hp-hMG in a GnRH Antagonist Protocol in Poor Ovarian Responders

Background: Bologna criteria poor ovarian responders have a very low prognosis. Although, it has been proposed that LH supplementation could be beneficial in women with previous hypo-response to FSH. There are no studies comparing the cumulative live birth rates (LBRs) between corifollitropin alfa (CFA) and highly purified human menopausal gonadotrophin (hp-hMG). Objective: To compare cumulative LBRs in Bologna poor ovarian responders undergoing ovarian stimulation with CFA followed by hp-hMG vs. hp-hMG alone in a GnRH antagonist protocol. Design: This is a retrospective cohort study. We included in total 917 poor responders fulfilling the Bologna criteria for poor ovarian response (POR) at a university-affiliated tertiary center from January 2011 until March 2017. Patients were administered either fixed daily doses of 300-450 IU of hp-hMG (group A) or a single dose of 150 μg of CFA followed by daily injections of ≥300 IU of hp-hMG from Day 8 of stimulation until the day of ovulation trigger (group B), in a fixed GnRH antagonist protocol. Results: LBRs after fresh embryo transfer (ET) were similar in group A 71/510 (14%) and B 42/407 (10%). Cumulative LBR per cycle was significantly higher in group A (16.9%) compared to group B (11.8%); (P = 0.03). However, logistic regression analysis showed no association between the type of gonadotropin administered and cumulative LBR. Only age was significantly associated with cumulative LBR (OR = 0.93, P = 0.007). Conclusion: Cumulative LBRs are similar in Bologna poor responders stimulated with CFA followed by hp-hMG compared to hp-hMG monotreatment in an antagonist protocol.

Delayed Start Protocol with Gonadotropin-releasing Hormone Antagonist in Poor Responders Undergoing In Vitro Fertilization: A Randomized, Double-blinded, Clinical Trial

Objectives

We sought to determine the effects of the delayed start protocol with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF).

Methods

This randomized clinical trial was conducted during a 15-month period from April 2014 to July 2015 in clinics in Shiraz, Iran. A total of 42 poor responders with primary infertility were randomly assigned to the controlled ovarian stimulation group utilizing the delayed start protocol (n = 21) or the traditional group (n = 21) using GnRH antagonist, Cetrotide. The primary endpoint was the number of patients undergoing oocyte pick-up, implantation, and the rate of pregnancy.

Results

The baseline characteristics of the two study groups were comparable including age, infertility duration, and body mass index. The number of follicles measuring > 13 mm in diameter (p = 0.057), retrieved oocytes (p = 0.564), mature metaphase II oocytes (p = 0.366), embryos (p = 0.709), and transferred embryos (p = 0.060) were comparable between the two groups. The number of patients undergoing oocyte pick-up (p = 0.311), the rates of implantation (p = 0.407), and pregnancy (p = 0.596) were also comparable between the two groups.

Conclusions

The delayed start protocol was not associated with better conception results or cycle outcomes in poor responders with primary infertility undergoing IVF cycles.

Transparent collaboration between industry and academia can serve unmet patient need and contribute to reproductive public health

The pharmaceutical and device industry has greatly contributed to diagnostic and therapeutic approaches in reproductive medicine in a very highly regulated environment, ensuring that development and manufacturing follow the highest standards. In spite of these achievements, collaboration between industry and physicians/academia is often presented in a negative context. However, today more than ever, partnership between industry and academia is needed to shorten the timeline between innovation and application, and to achieve faster access to better diagnostics, drugs and devices for the benefit of patients and society, based on complementary knowledge, skills and expertise. Such partnerships can include joined preclinical/clinical and post-marketing research and development, joint intellectual property, and joint revenue. In Europe, the transparency of this collaboration between pharmaceutical industry and medical doctors has been made possible by the Compliance and Disclosure Policy published by the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA), which represents the major pharmaceutical companies operating in Europe, and includes as members some but not all companies active in infertility and women's health. Under the EFPIA Disclosure Code of conduct, companies need to disclose transfers of value including amounts, activity type and the names of the recipient Health Care Professionals and Organizations. EFPIA member companies have also implemented very strict internal quality control processes and procedures in the design, statistical analysis, reporting, publication and communication of clinical research, according to Good Clinical Practice and other regulations, and are regularly inspected by competent authorities such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or European Medicines Agency (EMA) for all trials used in marketing authorization applications. The risk of scientific bias exists not only in the pharmaceutical industry but also in the academic world. When academics believe in a hypothesis, they may build their case by emphasizing the arguments supporting their case, and either refute, refuse, oppose or ignore arguments that challenge their assumptions. A possible solution to reduce this bias is international consensus on study design, data collection, statistical analysis and reporting of outcomes, especially in the area of personalized reproductive medicine, e.g. to demonstrate superiority or non-inferiority of personalized ovarian stimulation using biomarkers. Equally important is that declarations of interest are reported transparently and completely in scientific abstracts and publications, and that ghost authorship is replaced by proactive and clear co-authorship for experts from industry where such co-authorship is required based on the prevailing ICMJE criteria. In that context, however, reviewers should stop believing that publications by industry authors only, or by mixed groups of co-authors from industry and academia, are more prone to bias than papers from academic groups only. Instead, the scientific quality of the work should be the only relevant criterion for acceptance of papers or abstracts, regardless of the environment where the work was done. In the end, neutrality does not exist and different beliefs and biases exist within and between healthcare professionals and organizations and pharmaceutical industries. The challenge is to be transparent about this reality at all times, and to behave in an informed, balanced and ethical way as medical and scientific experts, taking into account compliance and legal regulations of both industry and academic employers, in the best interest of patients and society.

Defining Low Prognosis Patients Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technology: POSEIDON Criteria-The Why

Women with impaired ovarian reserve or poor ovarian response (POR) to exogenous gonadotropin stimulation present a challenge for reproductive specialists. The primary reasons relate to the still limited knowledge about the POR pathophysiology and the lack of practical solutions for the management of these conditions. Indeed, clinical trials using the current standards to define POR failed to show evidence in favor of a particular treatment modality. Furthermore, critical factors for reproductive success, such as the age-dependent embryo aneuploidy rates and the intrinsic ovarian resistance to gonadotropin stimulation, are not taken into consideration by the current POR criteria. As a result, the accepted definitions for POR have been criticized for their inadequacy concerning the proper patient characterization and for not providing clinicians a guide for therapeutic management. A novel system to classify infertility patients with "expected" or "unexpected" inappropriate ovarian response to exogenous gonadotropins-the POSEIDON criteria-was developed to provide a more nuanced picture of POR and to guide physicians in the management of such patients. The new standards are provoking as they challenge the current terminology of POR in favor of the newly defined concept of "low prognosis." This article provides readers a critical appraisal of the existing criteria that standardize the definition of POR and explains the primary reasons for the development of the POSEIDON criteria.

Retrospective analysis of treatments with recombinant FSH and recombinant LH versus human menopausal gonadotropin in women with reduced ovarian reserve

PURPOSES

The aim of this study is to determine whether a clinical advantage is gained with use of LH in combination with FSH or as a component of human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) to achieve optimal ovarian stimulation.

METHODS

In this study, we compared retrospectively two regimens, r-FSH/r-LH and hMG, for the treatment of women with reduced ovarian reserve, identified as subjects with antral follicle count (AFC) < 11 and AMH ≤ 1.1 ng/ml.

RESULTS

Overall, the clinical pregnancy per started cycle was higher in the r-FSH/r-LH group (12.5 vs. 8.1%, P < 0.02), while implantation (11.1 vs. 9.5%) and miscarriage rates (29.9 vs. 35.9%) were comparable. Data were further analysed performing separate comparisons in subpopulations with different ranges of AFC, i.e. < 4, 4-6 and 7-10. Major differences between the two regimens were observed in women with AFC < 4. In this subpopulation, not only was the clinical pregnancies per started cycle higher in the r-FSH/r-LH group (10.2 vs. 1.5%, P < 0.01), but also implantation was significantly higher (13.0 vs. 2.8%, P < 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

A r-FSH/r-LH regimen appears to be beneficial for the treatment of women with extremely poor ovarian reserve. It should be considered however that, being retrospective, this study is affected by obvious limitations, such as post-treatment patient selection criteria and absence of randomisation.

Efficacy of Follicle-Stimulating Hormone (FSH) Alone, FSH + Luteinizing Hormone, Human Menopausal Gonadotropin or FSH + Human Chorionic Gonadotropin on Assisted Reproductive Technology Outcomes in the "Personalized" Medicine Era: A Meta-analysis

SETTING

Luteinizing hormone (LH) and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) act on the same receptor, activating different signal transduction pathways. The role of LH or hCG addition to follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) as well as menopausal gonadotropins (human menopausal gonadotropin; hMG) in controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) is debated.

OBJECTIVE

To compare FSH + LH, or FSH + hCG or hMG vs. FSH alone on COS outcomes.

DESIGN

A meta-analysis according to PRISMA statement and Cochrane Collaboration was performed, including prospective, controlled clinical trials published until July 2016, enrolling women treated with FSH alone or combined with other gonadotropins. Trials enrolling women with polycystic ovarian syndrome were excluded (PROSPERO registration no. CRD42016048404).

RESULTS

Considering 70 studies, the administration of FSH alone resulted in higher number of oocytes retrieved than FSH + LH or hMG. The MII oocytes number did not change when FSH alone was compared to FSH + LH, FSH + hCG, or hMG. Embryo number and implantation rate were higher when hMG was used instead of FSH alone. Pregnancy rate was significantly higher in FSH + LH-treated group vs. others. Only 12 studies reported live birth rate, not providing protocol-dependent differences. Patients' stratification by GnRH agonist/antagonist identified patient subgroups benefiting from specific drug combinations.

CONCLUSION

In COS, FSH alone results in higher oocyte number. HMG improves the collection of mature oocytes, embryos, and increases implantation rate. On the other hand, LH addition leads to higher pregnancy rate. This study supports the concept of a different clinical action of gonadotropins in COS, reflecting previous in vitro data.