Optimisation of GnRH antagonist use in ART

This thesis focuses on the optimisation of controlled ovarian stimulation for IVF using exogenous FSH and GnRH antagonist co-treatment, by studying the timing of the initiation of GnRH antagonist co-medication and the role of ovarian reserve markers in optimising ovarian response and reproductive outcome. In this thesis we describe the results of a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) which studied the effect of early (cycle day (CD) 2) versus late (CD 6) GnRH antagonist initiation on the stimulation phase endocrine profile as well as the impact on live birth rate per started cycle (LBR) and the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR). Early initiation of GnRH antagonist treatment resulted in a more stable endocrine profile, with more physiological levels of estradiol and LH during the follicular phase. However, live birth rates did not differ significantly between the two groups, although a non-significant trend towards a higher LBR and CLBR was observed in the late start group compared with the early start group. Thus, despite a more stable endocrine profile early initiation of GnRH antagonist does not appear to improve clinical outcomes of IVF compared with standard midfollicular initiation. Therefore the current late start GnRH antagonist protocol remains the best protocol at present and further adjustments in the timing of GnRH antagonist co-treatment are deemed useless. We further assessed the impact of elevated early follicular progesterone levels in GnRH antagonist co-treated cycles on ongoing pregnancy rate by using prospective data from the RCT in combination with a systematic review and meta-analysis. It was demonstrated that elevated early follicular progesterone levels have a negative impact on the chance of achieving a pregnancy. In view of the low incidence of elevated early follicular progesterone levels and the absence of an effective strategy, routine screening is, however, not recommended. It may be more useful to focus on the individualisation of GnRH antagonist co-treated cycles by using ovarian reserve tests such as AMH. This thesis further describes the clinical value of AMH and other patient characteristics for the prediction of high or low ovarian response in controlled ovarian stimulation using GnRH antagonist co-treatment. It was demonstrated that AMH had a better accuracy for the prediction of both high and low response as compared to age and BMI. Furthermore, AMH had a better accuracy for the prediction of high response than for low response and showed similar accuracy as reported in previous studies on GnRH agonists. Finally, it was demonstrated that although AMH was associated with pregnancy, its predictive accuracy was very modest even when assessing the cumulative pregnancy rate.Thus, AMH alone or in combination with age, is unlikely to alter clinical decisions based on the chance of an ongoing pregnancy or live birth after IVF treatment and should therefore preferably only be used for ovarian response prediction

Antimüllerian hormone: prediction of cumulative live birth in gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist treatment for in vitro fertilization

ObjectiveTo assess the accuracy of antimüllerian hormone (AMH) in predicting cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) within 1 year after treatment initiation in GnRH antagonist treatment cycles for in vitro fertilization (IVF).DesignObservational (retrospective) substudy as part of an ongoing prospective cohort study.SettingUniversity medical center.Patient(s)A total of 487 patients scheduled for IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).Intervention(s)Patients starting their first IVF/ICSI cycle with 150 or 225 IU recombinant FSH and GnRH antagonist cotreatment were included. Serum samples collected before the first IVF treatment were used to determine AMH. Treatment data after treatment initiation for a maximum of 1 year were recorded.Main Outcome Measure(s)Prediction of CLBR with the use of AMH.Result(s)The model for predicting CLBR within 1 year included age at first treatment, AMH, type of infertility, and previous assisted reproductive technology treatment leading to live birth. The accuracy in discriminating between women who did or did not achieve a live birth was only 59%. AMH had intermediate added value in the prediction of CLBR as demonstrated by the net reclassification improvement (total 29.8). A nomogram based on age and AMH was developed by which a subgroup of patients could be identified with the poorest pregnancy prospects.Conclusion(s)The predictive accuracy of AMH for 1-year CLBR in GnRH antagonist treatment cycles was limited and did not yield much additional value on top of age. Withholding treatment based on predictors such as age and AMH, or a combination, remains problematic.Clinical Trial Registration Numberwww.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02309073

Ovarian response prediction in GnRH antagonist treatment for IVF using anti-Müllerian hormone

STUDY QUESTION: What is the clinical value of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) for the prediction of high or low ovarian response in controlled ovarian stimulation for IVF using GnRH antagonist treatment?SUMMARY ANSWER: AMH as a single test has substantial accuracy for ovarian response prediction in GnRH antagonist treatment for IVF, with a higher accuracy for predicting a high response than for low response.WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The role of AMH and other patient characteristics in ovarian response prediction has been studied extensively in long GnRH agonist protocols; however, little information is available regarding the clinical value in GnRH antagonists.STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This is an observational (retrospective) substudy as part of an ongoing cohort study. A total of 487 patients scheduled for IVF/ICSI between 2006 and 2011 were included in the study.PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Patients with a regular cycle who underwent their first IVF/ICSI cycle with GnRH antagonist treatment while receiving a starting dose of 150 or 225 IU recombinant FSH were included in the study. Patients were divided into three subgroups according to the following ovarian response categories: high (>15 oocytes or cycle cancellation), normal (4-15 oocytes) and low (<4 oocytes or cycle cancellation). Serum samples collected prior to IVF treatment were used to determine serum AMH levels.MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: According to the predefined ovarian response categories, 58 patients were classified as high, 326 as normal and 101 as low responders, and the ongoing pregnancy rates did not differ among groups (19.0, 22.1 and 16.8%, respectively, P = 0.9). For the prediction of high response, AMH had an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.87. Both female age and BMI had lower accuracy (AUC 0.66 and 0.58, respectively). For low response prediction, again AMH had a better accuracy (AUC 0.79) than female age and BMI (AUC 0.59 and 0.56, respectively). In a multivariate model, including the factors age, AMH, BMI, smoking, type and duration of subfertility, only BMI added some predictive value to AMH for both high and low response prediction. Clinical test characteristics demonstrated that using a specificity of ?90%, the detection rate of AMH for high and low response, corresponding with a test cut-off of 4.5 and 0.8 µg/l, was ?60 and ?45%, respectively.LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The impact of the antral follicle count (AFC) on ovarian response prediction in GnRH antagonists was not assessed; however, previously studies demonstrated that for GnRH antagonists, AMH has a better accuracy than AFC.WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The current study demonstrates that AMH is an adequate predictor for both high and low response in GnRH antagonist cycles, showing a similar accuracy to GnRH agonists, as reported previously. The optimization and individualization of GnRH antagonist protocols may be improved by using an AMH-tailored approach.STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This study was funded by the Academic Institutional Resources of the Department of Reproductive Medicine of the UMC Utrecht. O.H., M.J.C.E, E.W.G.L and H.L.T. have nothing to declare. N.S.M. has received fees and/or grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order): Anecova, Ferring, Informa, Merck Serono and MSD. B.C.J.M.F. has received fees and/or grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order); Childhealth, CVON, Ferring, Ova-Science, PregLem, Roche and Watson laboratories. F.J.B. has received fees and/or grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order); Merck Serono and MSD.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: www.clinicaltrials.gov, Protocol ID 13-109

Ovarian response prediction in GnRH antagonist treatment for IVF using anti-Müllerian hormone

STUDY QUESTION What is the clinical value of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) for the prediction of high or low ovarian response in controlled ovarian stimulation for IVF using GnRH antagonist treatment? SUMMARY ANSWER AMH as a single test has substantial accuracy for ovarian response prediction in GnRH antagonist treatment for IVF, with a higher accuracy for predicting a high response than for low response. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY The role of AMH and other patient characteristics in ovarian response prediction has been studied extensively in long GnRH agonist protocols; however, little information is available regarding the clinical value in GnRH antagonists. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This is an observational (retrospective) substudy as part of an ongoing cohort study. A total of 487 patients scheduled for IVF/ICSI between 2006 and 2011 were included in the study. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Patients with a regular cycle who underwent their first IVF/ICSI cycle with GnRH antagonist treatment while receiving a starting dose of 150 or 225 IU recombinant FSH were included in the study. Patients were divided into three subgroups according to the following ovarian response categories: high (>15 oocytes or cycle cancellation), normal (4-15 oocytes) and low (<4 oocytes or cycle cancellation). Serum samples collected prior to IVF treatment were used to determine serum AMH levels. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE According to the predefined ovarian response categories, 58 patients were classified as high, 326 as normal and 101 as low responders, and the ongoing pregnancy rates did not differ among groups (19.0, 22.1 and 16.8%, respectively, P = 0.9). For the prediction of high response, AMH had an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.87. Both female age and BMI had lower accuracy (AUC 0.66 and 0.58, respectively). For low response prediction, again AMH had a better accuracy (AUC 0.79) than female age and BMI (AUC 0.59 and 0.56, respectively). In a multivariate model, including the factors age, AMH, BMI, smoking, type and duration of subfertility, only BMI added some predictive value to AMH for both high and low response prediction. Clinical test characteristics demonstrated that using a specificity of ∼90%, the detection rate of AMH for high and low response, corresponding with a test cut-off of 4.5 and 0.8 μg/l, was ∼60 and ∼45%, respectively. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION The impact of the antral follicle count (AFC) on ovarian response prediction in GnRH antagonists was not assessed; however, previously studies demonstrated that for GnRH antagonists, AMH has a better accuracy than AFC. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The current study demonstrates that AMH is an adequate predictor for both high and low response in GnRH antagonist cycles, showing a similar accuracy to GnRH agonists, as reported previously. The optimization and individualization of GnRH antagonist protocols may be improved by using an AMH-tailored approach. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This study was funded by the Academic Institutional Resources of the Department of Reproductive Medicine of the UMC Utrecht. O.H., M.J.C.E, E.W.G.L and H.L.T. have nothing to declare. N.S.M. has received fees and/or grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order): Anecova, Ferring, Informa, Merck Serono and MSD. B.C.J.M.F. has received fees and/or grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order); Childhealth, CVON, Ferring, Ova-Science, PregLem, Roche and Watson laboratories. F.J.B. has received fees and/or grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order); Merck Serono and MSD. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER www.clinicaltrials.gov, Protocol ID 13-109

Does initiation of GnRH antagonists on cycle day 2 result in a more favourable follicular phase endocrine profile compared to initiation on cycle day 6

Cervix cance

Elevated early follicular progesterone levels and IVF outcomes: a prospective intervention study and meta-analysis

Cervix cance

Simultaneous initiation of GnRH antagonist co-treatment and recFSH for ovarian hyperstimulation in IVF does not affect clinical outcome: a randomized controlled trial

Cervix cance

Elevated early follicular progesterone levels and in vitro fertilization outcomes: a prospective intervention study and meta-analysis

Item does not contain fulltextOBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of elevated early follicular progesterone (P) levels in gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist cycles on clinical outcome using prospective data in combination with a systematic review and meta-analysis. DESIGN: Nested study within a multicenter randomized controlled trial and a systematic review and meta-analysis. SETTING: Reproductive medicine center in an university hospital. PATIENT(S): 158 in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF-ICSI) patients. INTERVENTION(S): Recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) (150-225 IU) administered daily from cycle day 2 onward; GnRH antagonist treatment randomly started on cycle day 2 or 6; assignment into two groups according to P level on cycle day 2: normal or elevated (>4.77 nmol/L or >1.5 ng/mL, respectively). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR) per started cycle. RESULT(S): The incidence of elevated P was 13.3%. A non-statistically-significant difference in OPR was present between the normal and elevated P groups (27.0% vs. 19.0%). No differential impact of early or late GnRH antagonist initiation on the effect of elevated or normal P on OPR was observed. A systematic search of Medline and EMBASE from 1972-2013 was performed to identify studies analyzing elevated early P levels in GnRH antagonists. The meta-analysis (n=1,052) demonstrated that elevated P levels statistically significantly decreased the OPR with 15% (95% CI -23, -7 %). Heterogeneity across the studies, presumably based on varying protocols, may have modulated the effect of elevated P. CONCLUSION(S): From the present meta-analysis it appears that early elevated P levels are associated with a lower OPR in GnRH antagonists. The incidence of such a condition, however, is low. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00866034

Elevated early follicular progesterone levels and in vitro fertilization outcomes: a prospective intervention study and meta-analysis

Item does not contain fulltextOBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of elevated early follicular progesterone (P) levels in gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist cycles on clinical outcome using prospective data in combination with a systematic review and meta-analysis. DESIGN: Nested study within a multicenter randomized controlled trial and a systematic review and meta-analysis. SETTING: Reproductive medicine center in an university hospital. PATIENT(S): 158 in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF-ICSI) patients. INTERVENTION(S): Recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) (150-225 IU) administered daily from cycle day 2 onward; GnRH antagonist treatment randomly started on cycle day 2 or 6; assignment into two groups according to P level on cycle day 2: normal or elevated (>4.77 nmol/L or >1.5 ng/mL, respectively). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR) per started cycle. RESULT(S): The incidence of elevated P was 13.3%. A non-statistically-significant difference in OPR was present between the normal and elevated P groups (27.0% vs. 19.0%). No differential impact of early or late GnRH antagonist initiation on the effect of elevated or normal P on OPR was observed. A systematic search of Medline and EMBASE from 1972-2013 was performed to identify studies analyzing elevated early P levels in GnRH antagonists. The meta-analysis (n=1,052) demonstrated that elevated P levels statistically significantly decreased the OPR with 15% (95% CI -23, -7 %). Heterogeneity across the studies, presumably based on varying protocols, may have modulated the effect of elevated P. CONCLUSION(S): From the present meta-analysis it appears that early elevated P levels are associated with a lower OPR in GnRH antagonists. The incidence of such a condition, however, is low. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00866034

Comparison of early versus late initiation of GnRH antagonist co-treatment for controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF: a randomized controlled trial

study question: what is the impact of initiating GnRH antagonist co-treatment for in vitro fertilization (IVF) on cycle day (CD) 2 compared with CD 6 on live birth rate (LBR) per started cycle and on the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR)?Summary answer: early initiation of GnRH antagonist does not appear to improve clinical outcomes of IVF compared with midfollicular initiation.What is known already: during ovarian stimulation for IVF, GnRH antagonist co-treatment is usually administered from the midfollicular phase onwards. Earlier initiation may improve the follicular phase hormonal milieu and therefore overall clinical outcomes.Study design, size, duration: this open-label, multicentre randomized controlled trial was conducted between September 2009 and July 2011. A web-based program was used for randomization and 617 IVF-intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) patients were included.Participants/materials, setting, methods: recombinant FSH (150–225 IU) was administered daily from CD 2 onwards in both groups. The study group (CD2; n = 308) started GnRH antagonist co-treatment on CD 2, whereas the control group (CD6; n = 309) started on CD 6.Main results and the role of chance: there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between the two groups. A non-significant trend towards a higher LBR per started cycle and CLBR was observed in the CD6 group compared with the CD2 group (LBR: 24.0 versus 21.5%, P = 0.5; CLBR: 29.9 versus 26.7%, P = 0.6).Limitations, reasons for caution: the study was terminated prematurely because no significant difference was observed in clinical outcomes after 617 inclusions. A much larger study population would be needed to detect a small significant difference in favour of either study arm, which raises the question of whether this would be relevant for clinical practice.Wider implications of the findings: the present study shows that the additional treatment burden and costs of starting GnRH antagonist on CD 2 instead of on CD 6 are not justified, as early initiation of GnRH antagonist does not improve LBRs.Study funding/competing interests: this study was partially supported by a grant from Merck Serono. O.H., M.J.C.E, A.V., P.A.D., R.E.B., G.J.E.O., C.A.G.H., G.C.D.M., H.J.V., P.F.M.H. and A.B. have nothing to declare. F.J.B. has received fees and grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order): Ferring, Gedeon Richter, Merck Serono, MSD and Roche. B.J.C. has received fees and grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order): Ferring, Merck Serono and MSD. C.B.L has received fees and grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order): Auxogen, Ferring, Merck Serono and MSD. B.C.J.M.F. has received fees and grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order): Andromed, Ardana, Ferring, Genovum, Merck Serono, MSD, Organon, Pantharei Bioscience, PregLem, Schering, Schering Plough, Serono and Wyeth. J.S.E.L. has received fees and grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order): Ferring, Gennovum, MSD, Merck Serono, Organon, Schering Plough and Serono. N.S.M. has received fees and grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order): Anecova, Ferring, Merck Serono, MSD, Organon and Seron