Flexible GnRH antagonist protocol versus GnRH agonist long protocol in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome treated for IVF: a prospective randomised controlled trial (RCT). A lower ongoing pregnancy rate can be expected when GnRH agonist is used for triggering final oocyte maturation instead of HCG in patients undergoing IVF with GnRH antagonists. GnRH antagonist versus long GnRH agonist protocol in poor responders undergoing IVF: a randomized controlled trial. Comparison between flare up and down regulation effects of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists in an in vitro fertilization program. Comparison of multiple dose GnRH antagonist and minidose long agonist protocols in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: a randomized controlled trial. [Can the type of GnRH used during long in vitro fertilization protocols influence the pregnancy rate?]. Evaluation of two doses of recombinant luteinizing hormone supplementation in an unselected group of women undergoing follicular stimulation for in vitro fertilization. GnRH agonist protocol administration in the luteal phase in ICSI-ET cycles stimulated with the long GnRH agonist protocol: a randomized, controlled double blind study. IVF/ICSI outcomes between cycles with luteal estradiol (E2) pre-treatment before GnRH antagonist protocol and standard long GnRH agonist protocol: a prospective and randomized study. Cessation of gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue (GnRH-a) upon down-regulation versus conventional long GnRH-a protocol in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization.
Women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) are at risk of developing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) during ovarian stimulation. Use of GnRH antagonist in the general subfertile population is associated with lower incidence of OHSS than agonists and similar probability of live birth but it is unclear if this is true for patients with PCOS. Our aim was to compare the flexible GnRH antagonist and GnRH agonist long protocols in patients with PCOS undergoing IVF (primary end-point: ongoing pregnancy rate per patient randomized).
                In this randomised controlled trial (RCT), 220 patients with PCOS were randomly allocated in two groups: long GnRH agonist down-regulation protocol (n = 110) and flexible GnRH antagonist protocol (n = 110).
                No differences were observed in ongoing pregnancy rates [50.9 versus 47.3%, difference 3.6%, 95% confidence interval (CI): -9.6 to +16.8%] in the agonist and antagonist protocols, respectively. Incidence of OHSS Grade II was lower in the antagonist compared with agonist group (40.0 versus 60.0%, difference -20.0%, 95% CI: -7.1 to -32.9%, P < 0.01). Duration of stimulation (10 versus 12 days, difference 2 days, 95% CI: +1 to +2, P < 0.001) and total gonadotrophin required (1575 versus 1850 IU, difference -275 IU, 95% CI: -25 to -400, P < 0.05) were also lower in the antagonist compared with agonist protocol.
                The current RCT suggests that the flexible GnRH antagonist protocol is associated with a similar ongoing pregnancy rate, lower incidence of OHSS grade II, lower gonadotrophin requirement and shorter duration of stimulation, compared with GnRH agonist. The GnRH antagonist might be the treatment choice for patients with PCOS undergoing IVF. The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov. ID: NCT00417144. Eliciting an endogenous LH surge by GnRH-agonist for the induction of final oocyte maturation may be more physiological compared with the administration of HCG. However, the efficacy of this intervention in patients treated for IVF with GnRH antagonists remains to be assessed.
                106 patients were randomized to receive either 10 000 IU urinary HCG or 0.2 mg Triptorelin for triggering final oocyte maturation. Ovarian stimulation for IVF was performed with a fixed dose of 200 IU recombinant FSH and GnRH antagonist was started on stimulation day 6. Luteal phase was supported with micronized vaginal progesterone and oral estradiol. The study was monitored continuously for safety and stopping rules were established.
                No significant differences were present in the number of cumulus-oocyte complexes retrieved, in the proportion of metaphase II oocytes, in fertilization rates or in the number and quality of the embryos transferred between the two groups. However, a significantly lower probability of ongoing pregnancy in the GnRH agonist arm prompted discontinuation of the trial, according to the stopping rules established (odds ratio 0.11; 95% confidence interval 0.02-0.52).
                Lower probability of ongoing pregnancy can be expected when GnRH agonist is used for triggering final oocyte maturation instead of HCG in patients undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF with GnRH antagonists. This is the first published report of a prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing a fixed, multi-dose GnRH antagonist protocol with a long GnRH agonist protocol in poor responders undergoing IVF.
                Sixty-six poor responders were randomized into two groups: the study group received 0.25 mg of cetrorelix daily starting on day 6 of stimulation; the control group received 600 microg of buserelin acetate daily starting in the mid-luteal phase of the preceding cycle. Both groups were given a fixed dose of recombinant FSH (300 IU daily) for stimulation.
                There were no significant differences in the cycle cancellation rates, duration of stimulation, consumption of gonadotrophins, and mean numbers of mature follicles, oocytes and embryos obtained. The implantation rates were similar, but the number of embryos transferred was significantly higher for the antagonist group (2.32 +/- 0.58 versus 1.50 +/- 0.83; P = 0.01). The pregnancy rates were also higher in the antagonist group, but the difference was not statistically significant.
                A fixed multi-dose GnRH antagonist protocol is feasible for patients who are poor responders on a long agonist protocol; however, our study failed to demonstrate an overall improvement in ovarian responsiveness. Clinical outcomes may be improved by developing more flexible antagonist regimens, an approach that requires further evaluation. Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) agonists are being increasingly used in ovulation stimulation protocols in IVF programs. The results of two methods of utilization of LH-RH agonists are compared. In the long protocol, gonadotropin stimulation was commenced only after a preliminary period of pituitary desensitization with LH-RH agonist. In the short protocol, exogenous gonadotropins were administered shortly after the start of LH-RH agonist therapy, benefiting from the gonadotropin flare up effect. One hundred eighty-six patients were equally divided between the two treatments. There was no difference in the ovarian response on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) or the number of mature oocytes recovered. The cleavage rate of mature oocytes was higher in the short protocol (70% versus 56% P less than 0.01). The ongoing pregnancy rate per treatment cycle was similar in both groups (18% in the long protocol and 16% in the short protocol). Analysis of the luteal phases revealed a trend for higher progesterone values in the long protocol although this was only significant on the 2nd day following oocyte retrieval. As the clinical results were similar, other factors should be taken into account when deciding therapy. These include patient convenience, cost, and side effects. Other schedules of ovulation stimulation with LH-RH agonists are discussed. To investigate the efficacy of gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH) in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization.
                Ninety-six patients with poor ovarian response in previous treatment cycles were prospectively randomized into two groups. Forty-four patients were stimulated with GnRH antagonist multidose protocol and 45 patients received a standard long agonist protocol. Ovarian response was evaluated by transvaginal ultrasound and hormonal parameters. Cycle characteristics and treatment outcomes were statistically compared between groups.
                There was significantly reduced duration of stimulation and consumption of gonadotrophins in the antagonist group when compared to the agonist group. The estradiol concentrations on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) injection, the number of oocytes retrieved, and the number of embryos transferred were similar for both groups. In the antagonist group, eight (18.1%) ongoing pregnancies were achieved and in the agonist group, ten (22.2%) clinical pregnancies were achieved but the difference was not statistically significant.
                The present study was not powered to detect clinically relevant differences between two protocols in outcomes such as pregnancy rate, with confidence. Luteal defect is common during IVF cycles using GnRH agonist. It could be interesting to make up for this problem by using short acting GnRH agonist (effective for 24 hours), more handy at the end of the stimulation. 160 patients included in a long IVF protocol at the Bordeaux CHRU FIV center have been randomized, from September 1993 to August 1994, for the analog's choice (long or short) at the beginning of the stimulation. The stimulation's parameters, the hormonal dosages and the pregnancy rate are independent of the galenic form used. In close, the use of long-acting GnRH analog (sympler to use) sems preferable. To evaluate the efficacy of two doses of recombinant (r)LH, 75 IU (recommended) or 37.5 IU, for follicular stimulation and outcomes in a randomized cohort of IVF patients.
                Randomized, prospective analysis.
                Private hospital incorporating an established IVF center.
                Women undergoing IVF who had a body mass index >18 or <35 and no abnormal karyotype, anovulation, oligomenorrhea, or any known endocrinopathy/illness.
                Pituitary desensitization was achieved with triptorelin (0.1 mg SC), and gonadotropin stimulation was performed with either rFSH alone (group A) or in combination with rLH in one of two doses: 37.5 IU (group B) or 75 IU (group C), daily.
                A range of endocrinologic, embryologic, clinical, and outcome parameters were evaluated.
                With rLH supplementation there was a significant increase in the incidence of implantation (9% for rFSH only [group A] vs. 11% and 16% with 37.5 IU rLH and 75.0 IU rLH [groups B and C], respectively) and clinical pregnancy (19% vs. 23% and 31%) (P<.01 and P<.04, respectively), whereas there was no difference in the multiple pregnancy rates. There was a significant (P<.001) increase in the total units of rFSH used in proportion to the amount of rLH supplementation (2,645 U vs. 3,475 U and 3,681 U) and in the level of peripheral E(2) on the day of hCG administration (1,049 pg/mL vs. 1,640 pg/mL and 1,226 pg/mL) (P<.001). There was no significant between difference in mean age, numbers of oocytes recovered, basal and downregulation hormone levels, or the incidence of fertilization in the absence or presence of rLH supplementation, but a higher incidence of grade 1 to 2 embryos was observed when rLH was supplemented.
                After pituitary desensitization, there was an increase in the incidence of implantation, clinical pregnancy, and delivery rates in patients stimulated with rFSH supplemented with rLH. GnRH agonist administration in the luteal phase was reported to beneficially affect the clinical outcome of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) and embryo transfer (ET) cycles. This double blind, randomized, placebo controlled trial evaluates whether a single dose GnRH agonist administered 6 days after ICSI increases ongoing pregnancy rates following ET in cycles stimulated with the long GnRH agonist protocol.
                Five hundred and seventy women undergoing ET following controlled ovarian stimulation with a long GnRH agonist protocol were included. In addition to routine luteal phase support with progesterone, women were randomized to receive a single 0.1 mg dose of triptorelin or placebo 6 days after ICSI. Randomization was done on the day of ET according to a computer generated randomization table. Ongoing pregnancy rate beyond 20th week of gestation was the primary outcome measure. The trial was powered to detect a 12% absolute increase from an assumed 38% ongoing pregnancy rate in the placebo group, with an alpha error level of 0.05 and a beta error level of 0.2.
                There were 89 (31.2%) ongoing pregnancies in the GnRH agonist group, and 84 (29.5%) in the control group (absolute difference +1.7%, 95% confidence interval -5.8% to +9.2%). Implantation, clinical pregnancy and multiple pregnancy rates were likewise similar in the GnRH agonist and placebo groups.
                Single 0.1 mg triptorelin administration 6 days after ICSI following ovarian stimulation with the long GnRH agonist protocol does not seem to result in an increase >or=12% in ongoing pregnancy rates. To study if luteal E(2) pre-treatment before GnRH antagonist protocol improves IVF/ICSI outcomes compared with standard long GnRH agonist protocol.
                A prospective, randomized and controlled study.
                ART center of a state public hospital
                Two hundred twenty infertile women underwent IVF/ICSI treatments.
                Participants received oral Estradiol Valerate 4 mg/day preceding the IVF cycle from day 21 until day 2 of next cycle before GnRH antagonist protocol (E(2) pre-treatment group n=109) or received standard long GnRH agonist protocol as control group (n=111).
                Number of oocytes collected, MII oocytes, fertilization, implantation, live birth and early pregnancy rate, and hormone profiles.
                E(2) pre-treatment exerted a significant suppressive effect on FSH but not LH secretion compared with basal FSH and LH levels. In E(2) pre-treatment group serum LH level was significantly higher during COH and serum P was also significantly higher on the day of HCG injection compared with control group. Five patients from E(2) pre-treatment group had elevated LH at all time (>or= 10 IU/L) and also a concomitantly high P (>1 ng/mL). Two of the five women achieved pregnancy but had early pregnancy loss. Overall, IVF/ICSI outcomes such as implantation, clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were similar between E(2) pre-treatment and control groups.
                Luteal E(2) pre-treatment before GnRH antagonist protocol significantly increases serum LH level and incidence rate of premature LH but no significant effect is observed on implantation, clinical pregnancy, live birth and early pregnancy loss rates compared with long GnRH agonist protocol. However, more studies in large numbers of cycles are needed to confirm that increased serum LH level by E(2) pre-treatment during COH has no negative effect on the IVF/ICSI outcomes. To determine whether a controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) regimen that involves GnRH agonist (GnRH-a) discontinuation before administration of gonadotropins would benefit poor responders.
                A prospective, randomized controlled trial.
                Hospital-based IVF Unit.
                Sixty-three patients with previous poor response to COH and/or high basal FSH level (> or =9 mIU/mL) undergoing 78 IVF-ET cycles.
                In both groups, administration of GnRH-a was started in the midluteal phase. Whereas in the study group (40 cycles), it ended before administration of gonadotropins, in controls (38 cycles) GnRH-a treatment was continued throughout the follicular phase.
                Ovarian stimulation patterns and IVF outcome.
                A significantly higher cancellation rate was noted in the study group than in the controls (22.5% versus 5%, respectively). The new and control regimens resulted in similar stimulation characteristics and clinical pregnancy rates (11% versus 10.3%, respectively). In 13 patients with a basal FSH level that was not persistently high, the new regimen resulted in a significantly higher number of retrieved oocytes compared with the standard protocol (7.6+/-1.03 versus 4.0+/-0.68, respectively).
                Whereas for most low responders, the new COH regimen offers no further advantage, future prospective studies may demonstrate whether it can confer a benefit for a subset of patients with a basal FSH level that is not persistently high.
There was no evidence of a statistical difference in pregnancy outcomes when rLH was used. Nevertheless, further large RCTs should be undertaken in long GnRH agonist down regulation protocols, since all pooled pregnancy estimates, although not statistically different probably due to the small numbers, point towards a beneficial effect of co-treatment with rLH, in particular with respect to pregnancy-loss and poor-responders.