Comparison of the Administration of 150 or 75 IU of Recombinant LH in Agonist ICSI Cycles Stimulated with Recombinant FSH in Women Aged 35-39: A Comparative Study.

Background: The purpose of the study was to assess whether the coadministration of 150 IU of recombinant LH instead of 75 IU in women aged 35-39 improves the results in agonist ICSI cycles stimulated with 300 IU of recombinant FSH. Methods: In this study, two ovarian stimulation protocols coexisted which were identical except in the administered dose of recombinant LH, for which some patients received 150 IU (n=231) and some received 75 IU (n=216). Both groups received 300 IU of recombinant FSH. Gonadotropins were reimbursed by the National Health System. Statistical analysis was performed by Student's t test, χ2, and ANCOVA. Significance level was established at p=0.05. Results: The number of retrieved oocytes was slightly higher in the 300/150 group (9.06±5.53 vs. 8.61±5.11), but the differences were not significant. Results were similar with the number of metaphase II oocytes (7.18±4.86 vs. 6.72±4.72) and the number of fertilized oocytes (4.64±3.2 vs. 4.23±2.72). The per-transfer clinical pregnancy rates exhibited close similarity between both groups (32.84% vs. 32.46%), as did the per-transfer live birth rates (29.90% vs. 30.37%) and the implantation rate. The rate of hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) as well as the rate of cancellation due to OHHS risk was similar in both groups. There was also no difference in the miscarriage rate. When results were expressed by per started cycle or by oocyte pick-up, the results remained very similar in both groups. Conclusion: In women aged 35-39 undergoing ovarian stimulation with recombinant FSH in agonist cycles, the coadministration of 75 or 150 UI of recombinant LH did not influence pregnancy rates. However, a slight increase in the number of retrieved oocytes should not be disregarded.

The lipidome of endometrial fluid differs between implantative and non-implantative IVF cycles.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the most relevant changes in the lipidome of endometrial fluid aspirate (EFA) in non-implantative cycles. DESIGN: Lipidomics in a prospective cohort study. SETTINGS: Reproductive unit of a university hospital. PATIENTS: Twenty-nine women undergoing an IVF cycle. Fifteen achieved pregnancy and 14 did not. INTERVENTION: Endometrial fluid aspiration immediately before performing embryo transfer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical pregnancy rate and lipidomic profiles obtained on an ultra-high performance liquid chromatography coupled to time-of-flight mass spectrometry (UHPLC-ToF-MS)-based analytical platform. RESULTS: The comparative analysis of the lipidomic patterns of endometrial fluid in implantative and non-implantative IVF cycles revealed eight altered metabolites: seven glycerophospholipids and an omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acid. Then, women with a non-implantative cycle were accurately classified with a support vector machine algorithm including these eight lipid metabolites. The diagnostic performances of the algorithm showed an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 0.893 ± 0.07, 85.7%, 80.0%, and 82.8%, respectively. CONCLUSION: A predictive lipidomic signature linked to the implantative status of the endometrial fluid has been found.

Differential proteomic analysis of endometrial fluid suggests increased inflammation and impaired glucose metabolism in non-implantative IVF cycles and pinpoints PYGB as a putative implantation marker.

STUDY QUESTION: Is there any difference in the protein composition of the endometrial fluid aspirate (EFA) obtained the day of embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles achieving and not achieving pregnancy? SUMMARY ANSWER: Comparative analysis identified a differential protein expression pattern in 'implantative' and 'non-implantative' IVF cycles. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: EFA allows non-invasive characterization of the endometrium, and may contain important information on its receptivity when performing (IVF) cycles. Endometrial side of implantation has usually been studied with endometrial biopsy in an IVF cycle prior to embryo transfer, focusing on 'receptive/non-receptive' endometria and with low-throughput proteomic techniques. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We have compared the protein expression patterns in EFA from a total of 110 women undergoing IVF, corresponding to 50 implantative and 60 non-implantative IVF cycles. Discovery (38 patients) and Validation (42 patients) sample cohorts were analyzed using a high-throughput differential proteomic approach. Then, the differential expression of glycogen phosphorylase B (PYGB) was validated by western blotting in an additional cohort (30 patients). The study period was 18 months. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The population under study consisted of 110 women aged 18-40 years old, undergoing their first or second IVF/ intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycle, with normal uterus and endometrium, and 1-2 good quality embryos, and embryo transfer being performed on Day 3. Endometrial fluid aspiration was performed immediately before the embryo transfer. Samples (80) were initially distributed in two independent cohorts and analyzed by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. The first cohort was used for the discovery and the second for the validation of the results. Filter-aided sample preparation was used for the in-solution tryptic digestion of the proteins present in the samples, followed by label-free mass spectrometry analysis. In order to unravel the molecular features of receptivity, the lists of differential proteins were thoroughly analyzed using different bioinformatic tools, including GSEA, IPA and GO analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A false discovery rate-based correction of the t-test P-values was carried out in order to strengthen the reliability of the results. Functional analyses denoted the deregulation of important processes governing receptivity, such as antimicrobial response, cell-cell interaction, immune response and inflammatory signaling, among others. Overall eight proteins were commonly deregulated in both studied datasets and brain form glycogen phosphorylase (PYGB) was selected for confirmatory analysis. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Our results were obtained from patients with normal uterus and endometrium and with good quality embryos, who had fresh Day-3 embryo transfer, in stimulated cycles. Therefore, our observations may not be applicable to poor prognosis cases or non-stimulated cycles. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This work provides insights into the molecular features of implantative IVF cycles using non-invasive methods. It reveals that EFA may reflect an increased inflammatory state in non-implantative endometrium. Additionally, it proposes PYGB as a potential biomarker for endometrial receptivity or implantation success. This knowledge opens a new avenue for developing embryo transfer strategies, through the improvement of embryo culture media or modifying endometrial fluid composition to increase pregnancy rates. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was partially funded by a Grant for Fertility Innovation (GFI, 2011) from Merck (Darmstadt, Germany). Authors declare no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.

Proteomic pattern of implantative human endometrial fluid in in vitro fertilization cycles.

PURPOSE: To assess whether there are proteins in endometrial fluid aspirate (EFA) that predict implantation. METHODS: The population under study consisted of 285 women undergoing embryo transfer (ET). Endometrial fluid aspiration was performed immediately before ET. Results of proteomic analysis of EFA were compared between 33 cases who achieved pregnancy and 33 who did not. Samples were analysed by 2D electrophoresis and mass spectrometry. Blood samples were studied by ELISA Pregnancy rates and maternal complications were compared to those in women refusing aspiration. RESULTS: We found 23 proteins differentially expressed in the EFA in conception cycles: 4 up-regulated proteins and 19 down-regulated (FC = 0.31 0.78) (among others, arginase-1, actin B, PARK-7, cofilin-1, stathmin, annexin-2 and CAPZB). Among the five studied proteins that were differentially expressed in EFA, none was differentially expressed in serum. The aspiration procedure had no impact on pregnancy rate. No maternal complications were reported. CONCLUSIONS: We found a very different protein profile in implantative cycles, the majority of proteins being down-regulated. This probably reflects a different endometrial functional status, more favourable to implantation. EFA proteomic analysis could be a useful tool in the planning ET strategies.