The euploid blastocysts obtained after luteal phase stimulation show the same clinical, obstetric and perinatal outcomes as follicular phase stimulation-derived ones: a multicenter study.

STUDY QUESTION: Are the reproductive outcomes (clinical, obstetric and perinatal) different between follicular phase stimulation (FPS)- and luteal phase stimulation (LPS)-derived euploid blastocysts? SUMMARY ANSWER: No difference was observed between FPS- and LPS-derived euploid blastocysts after vitrified-warmed single embryo transfer (SET). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Technical improvements in IVF allow the implementation non-conventional controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocols for oncologic and poor prognosis patients. One of these protocols begins LPS 5 days after FPS is ended (DuoStim). Although, several studies have reported similar embryological outcomes (e.g. fertilization, blastulation, euploidy) between FPS- and LPS-derived cohort of oocytes, information on the reproductive (clinical, obstetric and perinatal) outcomes of LPS-derived blastocysts is limited to small and retrospective studies. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Multicenter study conducted between October 2015 and March 2019 including all vitrified-warmed euploid single blastocyst transfers after DuoStim. Only first transfers of good quality blastocysts (≥BB according to Gardner and Schoolcraft's classification) were included. If euploid blastocysts obtained after both FPS and LPS were available the embryo to transfer was chosen blindly. The primary outcome was the live birth rate (LBR) per vitrified-warmed single euploid blastocyst transfer in the two groups. To achieve 80% power (α = 0.05) to rule-out a 15% difference in the LBR, a total of 366 first transfers were required. Every other clinical, as well as obstetric and perinatal outcomes, were recorded. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Throughout the study period, 827 patients concluded a DuoStim cycle and among them, 339 did not identify any transferable blastocyst, 145 had an euploid blastocyst after FPS, 186 after LPS and 157 after both FPS and LPS. Fifty transfers of poor quality euploid blastocysts were excluded and 49 patients did not undergo an embryo transfer during the study period. Thus, 389 patients had a vitrified-warmed SET of a good quality euploid blastocyst (182 after FPS and 207 after LPS). For 126 cases (32%) where both FPS- and LPS-derived good quality blastocysts were available, the embryo transferred was chosen blindly with a 'True Random Number Generator' function where '0' stood for FPS-derived euploid blastocysts and '1' for LPS-derived ones (n = 70 and 56, respectively) on the website random.org. All embryos were obtained with the same ovarian stimulation protocol in FPS and LPS (GnRH antagonist protocol with fixed dose of rec-FSH plus rec-LH and GnRH-agonist trigger), culture conditions (continuous culture in a humidified atmosphere with 37°C, 6% CO2 and 5% O2) and laboratory protocols (ICSI, trophectoderm biopsy in Day 5-7 without assisted hatching in Day 3, vitrification and comprehensive chromosome testing). The women whose embryos were included had similar age (FPS: 38.5 ± 3.1 and LPS: 38.5 ± 3.2 years), prevalence of male factor, antral follicle count, basal hormonal characteristics, main cause of infertility and previous reproductive history (i.e. previous live births, miscarriages and implantation failures) whether the embryo came from FPS or LPS. All transfers were conducted after warming in an artificial cycle. The blastocysts transferred after FPS and LPS were similar in terms of day of full-development and morphological quality. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The positive pregnancy test rates for FPS- and LPS-derived euploid blastocysts were 57% and 62%, biochemical pregnancy loss rates were 10% and 8%, miscarriage rates were 15% and 14% and LBRs were 44% (n = 80/182, 95% CI 37-51%) and 49% (n = 102/207, 95% CI 42-56%; P = 0.3), respectively. The overall odds ratio for live birth (LPS vs FPS (reference)) adjusted for day of blastocyst development and quality, was 1.3, 95% CI 0.8-2.0, P = 0.2. Among patients with euploid blastocysts obtained following both FPS and LPS, the LBRs were also similar (53% (n = 37/70, 95% CI 41-65%) and 48% (n = 27/56, 95% CI 35-62%) respectively; P = 0.7). Gestational issues were experienced by 7.5% of pregnant women after FPS- and 10% of women following LPS-derived euploid single blastocyst transfer. Perinatal issues were reported in 5% and 0% of the FPS- and LPS-derived newborns, respectively. The gestational weeks and birthweight were similar in the two groups. A 5% pre-term delivery rate was reported in both groups. A low birthweight was registered in 2.5% and 5% of the newborns, while 4% and 7% showed high birthweight, in FPS- and LPS-derived euploid blastocyst, respectively. Encompassing the 81 FPS-derived newborns, a total of 9% were small and 11% large for gestational age. Among the 102 LPS-derived newborns, 8% were small and 6% large for gestational age. No significant difference was reported for all these comparisons. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The LPS-derived blastocysts were all obtained after FPS in a DuoStim protocol. Therefore, studies are required with LPS-only, late-FPS and random start approaches. The study is powered to assess differences in the LBR per embryo transfer, therefore obstetric and perinatal outcomes should be considered observational. Although prospective, the study was not registered. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study represents a further backing of the safety of non-conventional COS protocols. Therefore, LPS after FPS (DuoStim protocol) is confirmed a feasible and efficient approach also from clinical, obstetric and perinatal perspectives, targeted at patients who need to reach the transfer of an euploid blastocyst in the shortest timeframe possible due to reasons such as cancer, advanced maternal age and/or reduced ovarian reserve and poor ovarian response. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): None. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Definition of a clinical strategy to enhance the efficacy, efficiency and safety of egg donation cycles with imported vitrified oocytes.

STUDY QUESTION: Which is the most suitable clinical strategy in egg donation IVF cycles conducted with imported donated vitrified oocytes? SUMMARY ANSWER: The importation, and allocation, of at least eight vitrified eggs per couple during an egg donation cycle is associated with a high cumulative live birth delivery rate per cycle, as well as the confident adoption of a single blastocyst transfer strategy to minimize the risk of multiple pregnancies. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: IVF using donor eggs is commonly used worldwide to treat women who are unable to conceive with their own oocytes. In 2014, the Constitutional Court (n.162/2014) gave permission for gamete donation to be allowed for ART in Italy. Initially recommended as a therapeutic approach for premature ovarian insufficiency, the use of donated oocytes has become more and more common. In countries such as Italy, fresh oocyte donation is theoretically possible, but practically impossible due to the lack of donors. In fact, the Italian law does not allow reimbursement to the young women, who can only voluntarily donate their eggs. Therefore, Italian IVF centers have established several collaborations with international oocyte cryo-banks. The most popular workflow involves the importation of donated oocytes that have been vitrified. However, recent evidence has questioned the overall efficacy of such an approach. This is because detrimental effects arising from oocyte vitrification and warming might reduce the number of eggs available for insemination, with a consequential reduction in the achievable live birth rate per cycle. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This was a longitudinal cohort study, conducted between October 2015 and December 2018 at two private IVF centers. Overall, 273 couples were treated (mean maternal age: 42.5 ± 3.5 years, range: 31-50 years; mean donor age: 25.7 ± 4.2, 20-35 years) with oocytes purchased from three different Spanish egg banks. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We performed an overall analysis, as well as several sub-analyses clustering the data according to the year of treatment (2015-2016, 2017 or 2018), the number of warmed (6, 7, 8 or 9) and surviving oocytes (≤4, 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9) and the cycle strategy adopted (cleavage stage embryo transfer and vitrification, cleavage stage embryo transfer and blastocyst vitrification, blastocyst stage embryo transfer and vitrification). This study aimed to create a workflow to maximize IVF efficacy, efficiency, and safety, during egg donation cycles with imported vitrified oocytes. The primary outcome was the cumulative live birth delivery rate among completed cycles (i.e. cycles where at least a delivery of a live birth was achieved, or no embryo was produced/left to transfer). All cycles, along with their embryological, obstetric and neonatal outcomes, were registered and inspected. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The survival rate after warming was 86 ± 16%. When 6, 7, 8 and 9 oocytes were warmed, 94, 100, 72 and 70% of cycles were completed, resulting in 35, 44, 69 and 59% cumulative live birth delivery rates per completed cycle, respectively. When ≤4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 oocytes survived, 98, 94, 85, 84, 66 and 68% of cycles were completed, resulting in 16, 46, 50, 61, 76 and 60% cumulative live birth delivery rates per completed cycle, respectively. When correcting for donor age, and oocyte bank, in a multivariate logistic regression analysis, warming eight to nine oocytes resulted in an odds ratio (OR) of 2.5 (95% CI: 1.07-6.03, P = 0.03) for the cumulative live birth delivery rate per completed cycle with respect to six to seven oocytes. Similarly, when seven to nine oocytes survived warming, the OR was 2.7 (95% CI: 1.28-5.71, P < 0.01) with respect to ≤6 oocytes. When cleavage stage embryos were transferred, a single embryo transfer strategy was adopted in 17% of cases (N = 28/162); the live birth delivery rate per transfer was 26% (n = 43/162), but among the pregnancies to term, 28% involved twins (n = 12/43). Conversely, when blastocysts were transferred, a single embryo transfer strategy was adopted in 96% of cases (n = 224/234) with a 30% live birth delivery rate per transfer (N = 70/234), and the pregnancies to term were all singleton (n = 70/70). During the study period, 125 babies were born from 113 patients. When comparing the obstetric outcomes for the cleavage and blastocyst stage transfer strategies, the only significant difference was the prevalence of low birthweight: 34 versus 5%, respectively (P < 0.01). However, several significant differences were identified when comparing singleton with twin pregnancies; in fact, the latter resulted in a generally lower birthweight (mean ± SD: 3048 ± 566 g versus 2271 ± 247 g, P < 0.01), a significantly shorter gestation (38 ± 2 versus 36 ± 2 weeks, P < 0.01), solely Caesarean sections (72 versus 100%, P = 0.02), a higher prevalence of low birthweight (8 versus 86%, P < 0.01), small newborns for gestational age (24 versus 57%, P = 0.02) and preterm births (25 versus 86%, P < 0.01). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This retrospective study should now be confirmed across several IVF centers and with a greater sample size in order to improve the accuracy of the sub-analyses. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Single blastocyst transfer is the most suitable approach to achieve high success rates per procedure, thereby also limiting the obstetric complications that arise from twin pregnancies in oocyte donation programs. In this regard, the larger the cohort of imported donated vitrified oocytes, the more efficient the management of each cycle. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): None. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: None.

Double Stimulation in the Same Ovarian Cycle (DuoStim) to Maximize the Number of Oocytes Retrieved From Poor Prognosis Patients: A Multicenter Experience and SWOT Analysis.

A panel of experts known as the POSEIDON group has recently redefined the spectrum of poor responder patients and introduced the concept of suboptimal response. Since an ideal management for these patients is still missing, they highlighted the importance of tailoring the ovarian stimulation based on the chance of each woman to obtain an euploid blastocyst. Interestingly, a novel pattern of follicle recruitment has been defined: multiple waves may arise during a single ovarian cycle. This evidence opened important clinical implications for the treatment of poor responders. For instance, double stimulation in the follicular (FPS) and luteal phase (LPS) of the same ovarian cycle (DuoStim) is an intriguing option to perform two oocyte retrievals in the shortest possible time. Here, we reported our 2-year experience of DuoStim application in four private IVF centers. To date, 310 poor prognosis patients completed a DuoStim protocol and underwent IVF with blastocyst-stage preimplantation-genetic-testing. LPS resulted into a higher mean number of oocytes collected than FPS; however, their competence (i.e., fertilization, blastocyst, euploidy rates, and clinical outcomes after euploid single-embryo-transfer) was comparable. Importantly, the rate of patients obtaining at least one euploid blastocyst increased from 42.3% (n = 131/310) after FPS to 65.5% (n = 203/310) with the contribution of LPS. A summary of the putative advantages and disadvantages of DuoStim was reported here through a Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats analysis. The strengths of this approach make it very promising. However, more studies are needed in the future to limit its weaknesses, shed light on its putative threats, and realize its opportunities.

Progesterone for preparation of the endometrium for frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer in vitro fertilization cycles: a prospective study on patients' opinions on a new subcutaneous formulation.

We aimed to evaluate patients' perspectives on a progesterone subcutaneous formulation for endometrial preparation for frozen-thawed blastocyst transfer. In this prospective study, women with at least one experience with vaginal progesterone, undergone endometrial preparation with oral estradiol valerate and daily subcutaneous progesterone administered from the fifth day before the transfer until the day of the beta-hCG test. Patients completed three questionnaires, at enrollment (Q1), for gathering information on the experience with vaginal treatment and expectations about the subcutaneous route and then at the time of the transfer (Q2) and eight days later (Q3). Main outcome measures were patients' opinions on comfort, ease of use, convenience, overall satisfaction, level of anxiety and pain associated with the administration of subcutaneous progesterone in comparison with their previous experience. Sixty-nine women completed the questionnaires. All vaginal versus subcutaneous comparisons were significantly in favor of the subcutaneous route. When comparing patients' expectations at Q1 with patients' opinions at Q2 and Q3, all evaluations, except for one, demonstrated that the patient's positive expectation was confirmed after 5 and 13 days of treatment. In conclusion, in women with previous experience with vaginal progesterone, the subcutaneous route was associated with significantly increased acceptance.

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy testing in women older than 44 years: a multicenter experience.

OBJECTIVE: To report laboratory and clinical outcomes in preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidies (PGD-A) cycles for women 44 to 47 years old. DESIGN: Multicenter, longitudinal, observational study. SETTING: In vitro fertilization (IVF) centers. PATIENT(S): One hundred and thirty-seven women aged 44.7 ± 0.7 years (range: 44.0-46.7) undergoing 150 PGD-A cycles during April 2013 to January 2016. INTERVENTION(S): Quantitative polymerase chain reaction-based PGD-A on trophectoderm biopsies and cryopreserved euploid single-embryo transfer (SET). MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURE(S): Primary outcome measure: delivery rate per cycle; secondary outcome measures: miscarriage rate, and the rate and reasons for cycle cancelation with subanalyses for female age and number of metaphase 2 oocytes retrieved. RESULT(S): In 102 (68.0%) of 150 cycles blastocyst development was obtained, but only 21 (14.0%) were euploid blastocysts. The overall euploidy rate was 11.8% (22 of 187). Twenty-one SET procedures were performed, resulting in 13 clinical pregnancies, of which 1 miscarried and 12 delivered. The delivery rate was 57.1% per transfer, 8.0% per cycle, and 8.8% per patient. The logistic regression analysis found that only female age (odds ratio 0.78) and number of metaphase 2 oocytes retrieved (odds ratio 1.25) statistically significantly correlated with the likelihood of delivery. The delivery rate per cycle was 10.6% (11 of 104) in patients aged 44.0 to 44.9 years and 2.6% in patients aged 45.0 to 45.9 years (n = 1 of 38). No euploid blastocysts were found for patients older than 45.0 years. CONCLUSION(S): Extensive counseling based on biological and clinical data should be provided to women older than 43 years who are requesting IVF because of their very low odds of success and high risk for embryonic aneuploidies. Nevertheless, the low miscarriage and good delivery rates reported in this study in women with good ovarian reserve aged 44 should encourage the use of PGD-A in this population.

Consistent and reproducible outcomes of blastocyst biopsy and aneuploidy screening across different biopsy practitioners: a multicentre study involving 2586 embryo biopsies.

STUDY QUESTION: Is blastocyst biopsy and quantitative real-time PCR based comprehensive chromosome screening a consistent and reproducible approach across different biopsy practitioners? SUMMARY ANSWER: The blastocyst biopsy approach provides highly consistent and reproducible laboratory and clinical outcomes across multiple practitioners from different IVF centres when all of the embryologists received identical training and use similar equipment. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Recently there has been a trend towards trophectoderm (TE) biopsy in preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)/preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) programmes. However, there is still a lack of knowledge about the reproducibility that can be obtained from multiple biopsy practitioners in different IVF centres in relation also to blastocysts of different morphology. Although it has been demonstrated that biopsy at the blastocyst stage has no impact on embryo viability, it remains a possibility that less experienced individual biopsy practitioners or laboratories performing TE biopsy may affect certain outcomes. We investigated whether TE biopsy practitioners can have an impact on the quality of the genetic test and the subsequent clinical outcomes. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This longitudinal cohort study, between April 2013 and December 2014, involved 2586 consecutive blastocyst biopsies performed at three different IVF centres and the analysis of 494 single frozen euploid embryo transfer cycles (FEET). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Seven biopsy practitioners performed the blastocyst biopsies in the study period and quantitative PCR was used for comprehensive chromosome screening (CCS). The same practitioner performed both the biopsy and tubing procedures for each blastocyst they biopsied. To investigate the quality of the biopsied samples, the diagnostic rate, sample-specific concurrence and the cell number retrieved in the biopsy were evaluated for each biopsy operator. Clinical outcomes following FEET cycles were stratified by biopsy operator and compared. Cellularity of the biopsy sample was also correlated with clinical outcomes. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The seven practitioners performed 2586 biopsies, five in centre IVF-1 and one in each of the other two IVF centres (IVF-2 and IVF-3). Overall, 2437 out of 2586 (94.2%) blastocyst biopsies resulted in a conclusive diagnosis, 119 (4.6%) showed a nonconcurrent result and 30 (1.2%) failed to amplify, suggesting the absence of TE cells in the test tube or presence of degenerated/lysed cells only. Among the samples producing a conclusive diagnosis, a mean concurrence value of 0.253 (95% CI = 0.250-0.257) was observed. Logistic regression analysis adjusted for confounding factors showed no differences in the diagnosis rate and in the concurrence of the genetic analysis between different biopsy practitioners. An overall mean number of 7.32 cells (95% CI = 6.82-7.81; range 2-15) were predicted from all biopsies. Higher cellularity was significantly associated with a better quality of the CCS diagnosis (P < 0.01) and with the conclusive diagnosis rate, with nonconcurrent samples showing significantly lower numbers of cells (2.1; 95% CI=1.5-2.7) compared with samples resulting in a conclusive diagnosis (mean cells number 7.5; 95% CI = 7.1-7.9, P < 0.01). However, no differences were recorded between different biopsy practitioners regarding cellularity of the biopsy. Finally, logistic analysis showed no impact of the biopsy practitioners on the observed ongoing rates of implantation, biochemical pregnancy loss and miscarriage after the FEET cycles. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: These data come from a restricted set of laboratories where all of the embryologists received identical training and use identical equipment. A single TE biopsy method and CCS technology was used and these data particularly apply to PGS programmes using blastocyst biopsy without zona opening at the cleavage stage and using qPCR-based CCS. To make firm conclusions on the potential impact of biopsy on biochemical pregnancy loss and miscarriages according to practitioner and biopsy cellularity, a larger sample size is needed. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: We reported a very high consistency and reproducibility of the blastocyst biopsy approach coupled with qPCR-based CSS for both genetic and clinical outcomes across different practitioners working in different IVF centres when appropriate training is provided and when the same laboratory setting is used. These data are important considering the trend towards the use of blastocyst biopsy worldwide for PGD/PGS applications. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: None.