Decision points for individualized hormonal stimulation with recombinant gonadotropins for treatment of women with infertility

It is essential that fertility treatment is individualized based on a thorough diagnostic work-up, with treatment tailored to the patients' requirements. This individualization should be kept in mind during the main decision points that occur before and during treatment. Treatment customization must include consideration of both the woman and her partner involved in the process together, including their collective treatment goals. Once treatment goals have been agreed and diagnostic evaluations performed, personalization based on patient characteristics, together with an understanding of treatment goals and patient preferences, enables the selection of appropriate treatments, protocols, products and their dosing. Following treatment initiation, monitoring and adaptation of product and dose can then ensure optimal outcomes. Currently, it is not possible to base treatment decisions on every characteristic of the patient and personalization is based on biomarkers that have been identified as the most relevant. However, in the future, the use of artificial intelligence coupled with continuous monitoring should enable greater individualization and improve outcomes. This review considers the current state-of-the-art related to decision points during individualized treatment of female infertility, before looking at future developments that might further assist in making individualized treatment decisions, including the use of computer-assisted decision making. ispartof: GYNECOLOGICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY vol:35 issue:12 pages:1027-1036 ispartof: location:England status: publishe

Treatment algorithms for high responders: What we can learn from randomized controlled trials, real-world data and models

A high ovarian response to conventional ovarian stimulation (OS) is characterized by an increased number of follicles and/or oocytes compared with a normal response (10-15 oocytes retrieved). Ac-cording to current definitions, a high response can be diagnosed before oocyte pick-up when >18-20 follicles >= 11-12 mm are observed on the day of ovulation triggering; high response can be diagnosed after oocyte pick-up when >18-20 oocytes have been retrieved. Women with a high response are also at high risk of early ovarian hyper-stimulation syndrome (OHSS)/or late OHSS after fresh embryo transfers. Women at risk of high response can be diagnosed before stimulation based on several indices, including ovarian reserve markers (anti-Mullerian hormone [AMH] and antral follicle count [AFC], with cutoff values indicative of a high response in patients with PCOS of >3.4 ng/mL for AMH and >24 for AFC). Owing to the high proportion of high responders who are at the risk of developing OHSS (up to 30%), this educational article provides a framework for the identification and management of patients who fall into this category. The risk of high response can be greatly reduced through appropriate management, such as individualized choice of the gonadotropin starting dose, dose adjustment based on hormonal and ultrasound monitoring during OS, the choice of down-regulation protocol and ovulation trigger, and the choice between fresh or elective frozen embryo transfer. Appropriate management strategies still need to be defined for women who are predicted to have a high response and those who have an unex-pected high response after starting treatment.(c) 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Personalized ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology : study design considerations to move from hype to added value for patients

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Protocol for developing a core outcome set for male infertility research:an international consensus development study

Abstract STUDY QUESTION We aim to develop, disseminate and implement a minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, for future male infertility research. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Research into male infertility can be challenging to design, conduct and report. Evidence from randomized trials can be difficult to interpret and of limited ability to inform clinical practice for numerous reasons. These may include complex issues, such as variation in outcome measures and outcome reporting bias, as well as failure to consider the perspectives of men and their partners with lived experience of fertility problems. Previously, the Core Outcome Measure for Infertility Trials (COMMIT) initiative, an international consortium of researchers, healthcare professionals and people with fertility problems, has developed a core outcome set for general infertility research. Now, a bespoke core outcome set for male infertility is required to address the unique challenges pertinent to male infertility research. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION Stakeholders, including healthcare professionals, allied healthcare professionals, scientists, researchers and people with fertility problems, will be invited to participate. Formal consensus science methods will be used, including the modified Delphi method, modified Nominal Group Technique and the National Institutes of Health’s consensus development conference. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS An international steering group, including the relevant stakeholders outlined above, has been established to guide the development of this core outcome set. Possible core outcomes will be identified by undertaking a systematic review of randomized controlled trials evaluating potential treatments for male factor infertility. These outcomes will be entered into a modified Delphi method. Repeated reflection and re-scoring should promote convergence towards consensus outcomes, which will be prioritized during a consensus development meeting to identify a final core outcome set. We will establish standardized definitions and recommend high-quality measurement instruments for individual core outcomes. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This work has been supported by the Urology Foundation small project award, 2021. C.L.R.B. is the recipient of a BMGF grant and received consultancy fees from Exscentia and Exceed sperm testing, paid to the University of Dundee and speaking fees or honoraria paid personally by Ferring, Copper Surgical and RBMO. S.B. received royalties from Cambridge University Press, Speaker honoraria for Obstetrical and Gynaecological Society of Singapore, Merk SMART Masterclass and Merk FERRING Forum, paid to the University of Aberdeen. Payment for leadership roles within NHS Grampian, previously paid to self, now paid to University of Aberdeen. An Honorarium is received as Editor in Chief of Human Reproduction Open. M.L.E. is an advisor to the companies Hannah and Ro. B.W.M. received an investigator grant from the NHMRC, No: GNT1176437 is a paid consultant for ObsEva and has received research funding from Ferring and Merck. R.R.H. received royalties from Elsevier for a book, consultancy fees from Glyciome, and presentation fees from GryNumber Health and Aytu Bioscience. Aytu Bioscience also funded MiOXYS systems and sensors. Attendance at Fertility 2020 and Roadshow South Africa by Ralf Henkel was funded by LogixX Pharma Ltd. R.R.H. is also Editor in Chief of Andrologia and has been an employee of LogixX Pharma Ltd. since 2020. M.S.K. is an associate editor with Human Reproduction Open. K.Mc.E. received an honoraria for lectures from Bayer and Pharmasure in 2019 and payment for an ESHRE grant review in 2019. His attendance at ESHRE 2019 and AUA 2019 was sponsored by Pharmasure and Bayer, respectively. The remaining authors declare no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative registration No: 1586. Available at www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1586. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE N/A. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT N/A

A three-arm randomised controlled trial comparing Gonadotrophin Releasing Hormone (GnRH) agonist long regimen <it>versus </it>GnRH agonist short regimen <it>versus </it>GnRH antagonist regimen in women with a history of poor ovarian response undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment: Poor responders intervention trial (PRINT)

Abstract Background Poor response to ovarian stimulation with exogenous gonadotrophins occurs in 9–24% of women undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment, which represents an estimated 4000–10,000 women per year in the UK. Poor responders often have their treatment cycle cancelled because of expected poor outcome. One treatment strategy that may influence outcome is the choice of pituitary suppression regimen prior to the initiation of ovarian stimulation. The three commonly used pituitary suppression regimens in IVF treatment are: (1) the GnRH agonist long regimen, (2) the GnRH agonist short regimen and (3) the GnRH antagonist regimen. A systematic review of randomised controlled trials of these pituitary suppression regimens has shown the evidence to be either inconclusive or inconsistent. We therefore designed a three arm randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of these regimens in women who had poor ovarian response in a previous IVF treatment cycle. Methods/design Consenting, eligible women will be randomised to one of the three regimens using an internet-based trial management programme that ensures allocation concealment and employs block randomisation and minimisation for prognostic variables. The primary outcome is the number of oocytes retrieved. Other outcomes include total dose of follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) used for ovarian stimulation, mature oocytes retrieved, embryos available for transfer, implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate. The sample size for this trial has been estimated as 102 participants with 34 participants in each of the three arms. Appropriate interim analysis will be conducted by a Data Monitoring and Ethics Committee (DMEC), and the final analysis will be by intention to treat. Trial registration ISRCTN27044628</p

Time as an outcome measure in fertility-related clinical studies: long-awaited

Time taken to achieve a live birth is an important consideration that is central to managing patient expectations during infertility treatment. However, time-related endpoints are not reported as standard in the majority of fertility-related clinical studies and there is no internationally recognized consensus definition for such endpoints. There is, therefore, a need for meaningful discussions around the selection of appropriate time-related treatment outcome measures for studies evaluating fertility treatments that will be relevant to diverse stakeholders (e.g. patients, healthcare professionals, clinical scientists, authorities and industry). Here, we provide a proposal for the evaluation of time-related outcome measures in fertility-related clinical studies, alongside associated definitions.status: publishe

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.status: publishe