A multi-centre international study of salivary hormone oestradiol and progesterone measurements in ART monitoring.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Ovarian stimulation during IVF cycles involves close monitoring of oestradiol, progesterone and ultrasound measurements of follicle growth. In contrast to blood draws, sampling saliva is less invasive. Here, a blind validation is presented of a novel saliva-based oestradiol and progesterone assay carried out in samples collected in independent IVF clinics. DESIGN: Concurrent serum and saliva samples were collected from 324 patients at six large independent IVF laboratories. Saliva samples were frozen and run blinded. A further 18 patients had samples collected more frequently around the time of HCG trigger. Saliva samples were analysed using an immunoassay developed with Salimetrics LLC. RESULTS: In total, 652 pairs of saliva and serum oestradiol were evaluated, with correlation coefficients ranging from 0.68 to 0.91. In the European clinics, a further 237 of saliva and serum progesterone samples were evaluated; however, the correlations were generally poorer, ranging from -0.02 to 0.22. In the patients collected more frequently, five out of 18 patients (27.8%) showed an immediate decrease in oestradiol after trigger. When progesterone samples were assessed after trigger, eight out of 18 (44.4%) showed a continued rise. CONCLUSIONS: Salivary oestradiol hormone testing correlates well to serum-based assessment, whereas progesterone values, around the time of trigger, are not consistent from patient to patient.

Types and frequency of non-conformances in an IVF laboratory.

STUDY QUESTION: How many non-conformances occur in an ART laboratory and how often do they occur? SUMMARY ANSWER: The limited data to date demonstrate that IVF laboratories have a very low non-conformance rate compared with reported non-conformances in other medical laboratories, especially when one considers the high-complexity of procedures performed. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: ART involves a series of very complex patient and laboratory procedures. Although it is assumed that strict measures control ART laboratories, there is very little published data on non-conformances. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: In accordance with the ISO 9001:2008 standard, Boston IVF has created an electronic database to record non-conformances in the IVF laboratory. We reviewed the non-conformances reported between March 2003 and December 2015. The non-conformances were categorized into four grades largely based upon their impact on the outcome or continuation of an IVF treatment cycle: None/Minimal (not measurably decreasing the likelihood of success), Moderate (a negative impact but not loss of a cycle), Significant (loss of a cycle or majority of gametes or embryos) and Major (infrequent errors that have an extreme impact on a patient or patients such as a confirmed pregnancy or birth involving misidentification of sperm, egg or embryo, or an extreme equipment or documentation failure that affects numerous patients). The category of problem or error associated with the Non-conformance Report was also noted. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHOD: Retrospective analysis of an electronic database registering non-conformances at a large IVF laboratory. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: During the study period, a total of 36 654 IVF treatment cycles (fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles) were conducted which involved a total of 181 899 individual laboratory procedures encompassing egg retrievals, sperm preparations, inseminations, embryo transfers, etc. When combining both moderate and significant non-conformances, 99.96% of procedures and 99.77% of cycles proceeded with no non-conformances. No Major grade non-conformances were reported. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: A comparison of non-conformances between IVF clinics is difficult because of different classifications. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Errors are inevitable and it is incumbent on all IVF centers to be honest and transparent, both within the organization and with patients when errors occur. Robust systems for identifying, documenting, analyzing and implementing improvements should be established and maintained. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No external funding was used for this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest.

Ovarian stimulation protocols for IVF: is more better than less?

Conventional ovarian stimulation protocols for IVF are designed to achieve maximum oocyte yields. Conventional protocols, however, are associated with patient discomfort, increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and higher costs. In recent years, mild stimulation protocols have risen in popularity. These protocols typically use lower doses (≤150 IU/day), shorter duration of exogenous gonadotrophins, or both, compared with conventional protocols, with the goal of limiting the number of retrieved oocytes to less than eight. The pregnancy rate per cycle (fresh embryo transfer only) is lower with mild stimulation compared with conventional stimulation; however, the cumulative pregnancy rate seems to be comparable between the approaches. Reports are conflicting on the effects of mild versus conventional stimulation on embryo quality. This article expands on a live debate held at the American Society for Reproductive Medicine 2015 Annual Meeting to compare the advantages and disadvantages of the 'more is better' (conventional protocol) versus 'less is best' (mild protocol) approaches to ovarian stimulation. Both protocols are associated with benefits and challenges, and physicians must consider the needs of the individual patient when determining the best treatment options. Further prospective studies comparing a variety of outcomes with conventional and mild stimulation are needed.

Pharmacokinetics and follicular dynamics of corifollitropin alfa versus recombinant FSH during ovarian stimulation for IVF.

A single injection of corifollitropin alfa can replace seven daily injections of recombinant FSH (rFSH) using a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in ovarian stimulation prior to IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. This double-blind randomized controlled trial assessed the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of 150 µg corifollitropin alfa versus daily 200 IU rFSH in 1509 patients. Comparative analyses were performed on serum concentrations of FSH immunoreactivity (pharmacokinetics), and the number and size of growing follicles, and inhibin B and oestradiol concentrations as biomarkers of ovarian response (pharmacodynamics). The rate of follicular development was similar in both treatment groups. By stimulation day 8, 33% of patients treated with corifollitropin alfa reached the criterion for human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) injection. The number of follicles ≥11 mm was slightly higher after corifollitropin alfa compared with daily rFSH at stimulation day 8 (difference, 1.2; 95% confidence interval (Cl) 0.5-1.8; P < 0.01) and on the day of HCG injection (difference, 2.1; 95% Cl 1.4-2.8; P < 0.01). The rise of inhibin B and oestradiol concentrations was similar in both treatment groups. Although the pharmacokinetics of corifollitropin alfa and rFSH are quite different their pharmacodynamic profiles at the dosages used are similar.

Validation study of the Access antimüllerian hormone assay for the prediction of poor ovarian response to controlled ovarian stimulation.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the antimüllerian hormone (AMH) level determined using the Access AMH assay for predicting poor ovarian response (POR) defined as ≤4 oocytes retrieved, including the validation of the predefined AMH cutoff of 0.93 ng/mL in both serum and plasma. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Fifteen private and academic fertility centers (14 in the United States and 1 in Canada). PATIENT(S): Women aged 21-45 years planning controlled ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Number of oocytes retrieved, categorized as POR and normal-to-high ovarian response (non-POR). The correlation of AMH level and antral follicle count. RESULT(S): Data were available for 472 participants who completed the study (74 with POR and 398 non-POR). The mean AMH serum level among those with POR was 0.99 ng/mL (median 0.76 ng/mL) compared with 2.83 ng/mL (median 2.36 ng/mL) among the normal-to-high responders. For confirmation of the 0.93 ng/mL AMH level cutoff as a predictor of POR, a receiver operating characteristic analysis gave an area under the curve of 0.852, with corresponding sensitivity and specificity of 63.5% and 89.2%, respectively. The associated positive predictive value was 52.2% and the negative predictive value was 92.9%. The AMH plasma values demonstrated a strong correlation with AMH serum values with an r value = 0.9980. The previously established AMH cutoff of 1.77 ng/mL for antral follicle count >15 resulted in a sensitivity of 83.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 77.7-88.5) and a specificity of 59.9% (95% CI 54.2-65.4). CONCLUSION(S): This study validated the previously established AMH cut-point for the prediction of POR. Because this cut-point may vary depending on the assay used, the specific AMH assay should be reported in the literature whenever possible.

Pharmacokinetics and follicular dynamics of corifollitropin alfa versus recombinant FSH during ovarian stimulation for IVF.

A single injection of corifollitropin alfa can replace seven daily injections of recombinant FSH (rFSH) using a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in ovarian stimulation prior to IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. This double-blind randomized controlled trial assessed the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of 150µg corifollitropin alfa versus daily 200IU rFSH in 1509 patients. Comparative analyses were performed on serum concentrations of FSH immunoreactivity (pharmacokinetics), and the number and size of growing follicles, and inhibin B and oestradiol concentrations as biomarkers of ovarian response (pharmacodynamics). The rate of follicular development was similar in both treatment groups. By stimulation day 8, 33% of patients treated with corifollitropin alfa reached the criterion for human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) injection. The number of follicles ⩾11mm was slightly higher after corifollitropin alfa compared with daily rFSH at stimulation day 8 (difference, 1.2; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.5-1.8; P<0.01) and on the day of HCG injection (difference, 2.1; 95% CI 1.4-2.8; P<0.01). The rise of inhibin B and oestradiol concentrations was similar in both treatment groups. Although the pharmacokinetics of corifollitropin alfa and rFSH are quite different their pharmacodynamic profiles at the dosages used are similar. A single injection of corifollitropin alfa can replace seven daily injections of recombinant FSH (rFSH) using a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in ovarian stimulation prior to IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. The objective of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of corifollitropin alfa versus daily rFSH. A total of 1509 patients were randomized in a double-blind, controlled trial to either a single injection of 150µg corifollitropin alfa or to daily injections of 200IU rFSH for the first 7 days of ovarian stimulation. Serum levels of FSH immunoreactivity were analysed (pharmacokinetic analysis), together with the number and size of growing follicles and serum inhibin B and oestradiol concentrations as biomarkers of the ovarian response (pharmacodynamic analysis). Serum FSH immunoreactivity levels were higher up to stimulation day 5 for corifollitropin alfa compared with the daily rFSH regimen but were similar from day 8 onwards, when patients started rFSH if the criteria for human chorionic gonadotrophin were not yet reached. Corifollitropin alfa treatment resulted in a similar growth rate of follicles though a slightly higher number of follicles were recruited compared with daily rFSH. It is concluded that the pharmacokinetics of corifollitropin alfa and rFSH are quite different but their induced pharmacodynamic effects at the dosages used are similar.

Economic evaluation of highly purified human menotropin or recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone for controlled ovarian stimulation in high-responder patients: analysis of the Menopur in Gonadotropin-releasing Hormone Antagonist Single Embryo Transfer-High Responder (MEGASET-HR) trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost of achieving a live birth after first transfer using highly purified human menotropin (HP-hMG) or recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) for controlled ovarian stimulation in predicted high-responder patients in the Menopur in Gonadotropin-releasing hormone Antagonist Single Embryo Transfer-High Responder (MEGASET-HR) trial. DESIGN: Cost minimization analysis of trial results. SETTING: Thirty-one fertility centers. PATIENTS: Six hundred and nineteen women with serum antimüllerian hormone ≥5 ng/mL. INTERVENTIONS: Controlled ovarian stimulation with HP-hMG or recombinant FSH in a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist assisted reproduction cycle where fresh transfer of a single blastocyst was performed unless ovarian response was excessive whereupon all embryos were cryopreserved and patients could undergo subsequent frozen blastocyst transfer within 6 months of randomization. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean cost of achieving live birth after first transfer (fresh or frozen). RESULTS: First-transfer efficacy, defined as live birth after first fresh or frozen transfer, was 54.5% for HP-hMG and 48.0% for recombinant FSH (difference 6.5%). Average cost to achieve a live birth after first transfer (fresh or frozen) was lower with HP-hMG compared with recombinant FSH. For fresh transfers, the cost was lower with HP-hMG compared with recombinant FSH. The average cost to achieve a live birth after first frozen transfer was also lower in patients treated with HP-hMG compared with recombinant FSH. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of predicted high-responders with HP-hMG was associated with lower cost to achieve a live birth after first transfer compared with recombinant FSH. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02554279.

Multicenter evaluation of the Access AMH antimüllerian hormone assay for the prediction of antral follicle count and poor ovarian response to controlled ovarian stimulation.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a new fully automated antimüllerian hormone (AMH) assay for prediction of poor ovarian response (POR) to ovarian stimulation defined as four or fewer oocytes retrieved. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Thirteen private and academic fertility centers in the United States. PATIENTS(S): A total of 178 women undergoing their first in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle eligible for the study were consented and enrolled, with data available from 160 women for prediction of POR and 164 women for AMH correlation with antral follicle count (AFC). INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Cutoff point for AMH that predicts POR. Correlation of AMH with AFC, and cutoff point for AMH that correlates with antral follicle count >15. RESULT(S): The mean AMH among the poor responders was 0.74 ng/mL, compared with 3.20 ng/mL for normal to high responders. The AMH cutoff at 90% specificity for predicting POR with the use of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.93 ng/mL, with an associated sensitivity of 74.1%. For prediction of POR, ROC analysis showed that AMH (area under the ROC curve [AUC] = 0.929) was significantly better than FSH (AUC = 0.615; P<.0001). AMH was positively correlated with AFC (Spearman rho = 0.756). The AMH at 90% sensitivity for AFC >15 was 1.75, with specificity of 59.1%. CONCLUSION(S): A fully automated AMH assay can be a useful biomarker for predicting POR in IVF cycles. Because AMH cutoff points vary depending on the assay used, future studies should continue to calibrate test results to clinically important outcomes.

How many oocytes are optimal to achieve multiple live births with one stimulation cycle? The one-and-done approach.

OBJECTIVE: To study how many infertility patients would complete an average-sized family (achieve ≥2 live births) after a single, complete in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. SETTING: University-affiliated private infertility practice. PATIENT(S): Women undergoing IVF. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The outcome of 1 or ≥2 live births after a single retrieval cycle, followed by use of all embryos in subsequent frozen cycles in relation to oocyte number. RESULT(S): The pregnancy rate was statistically significantly higher when ≥15 oocytes were retrieved (289 of 699, 41.3%) than <15 oocytes (518 of 1,419, 36.5%). When investigating the outcome of ≥2 live births and assuming that all remaining frozen embryos were used, we found that 498 of 2,226 (22.4%) patients would achieve ≥2 live births. We performed multivariate analysis, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the model was 0.802. When controlling for multiple factors we found that as the number of oocytes retrieved increased, the chance of at least two live births increased, with odds ratio 1.08 (8% live birth increase per additional oocyte). CONCLUSION(S): We demonstrate that one fresh cycle with high oocyte yield is an optimal way to plan IVF treatment. With modern cryopreservation methods, the concept of "one-and-done" could safely achieve ≥2 live births with just one stimulation cycle in almost a quarter of our patients.

In vitro fertilization outcomes: why doesn't anyone get it?

It is not only patients who frequently do not understand the implications of multiple pregnancies and IVF outcomes in general. Physicians, insurers, and governments must share the responsibility for failing to properly address both overall and multiple pregnancy rates after IVF.