RESUMO
Artificial intelligence (AI) has been proposed as a potential tool to help address many of the existing problems related with empirical or subjective assessments of clinical and embryological decision points during the treatment of infertility. AI technologies are reviewed and potential areas of implementation of algorithms are discussed, highlighting the importance of following a proper path for the development and validation of algorithms, including regulatory requirements, and the need for ecosystems containing enough quality data to generate it. As evidenced by the consensus of a group of experts in fertility if properly developed, it is believed that AI algorithms may help practitioners from around the globe to standardize, automate, and improve IVF outcomes for the benefit of patients. Collaboration is required between AI developers and healthcare professionals to make this happen.
Assuntos
Inteligência Artificial , Fertilidade/genética , Reprodução/genética , Algoritmos , Ecossistema , Feminino , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Masculino , Projetos de PesquisaRESUMO
This monograph, written by the pioneers of IVF and reproductive medicine, celebrates the history, achievements, and medical advancements made over the last 40 years in this rapidly growing field.
Assuntos
Fertilização in vitro/história , Fertilização in vitro/tendências , Medicina Reprodutiva/história , Medicina Reprodutiva/tendências , Feminino , Fertilização in vitro/métodos , História do Século XX , História do Século XXI , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Masculino , Indução da Ovulação/história , Indução da Ovulação/métodos , Indução da Ovulação/tendências , Gravidez , Medicina Reprodutiva/métodosRESUMO
In the menstrual cycle, the mid-cycle surge of gonadotropins (both luteinising hormone [LH] and follicle-stimulating hormone [FSH]) signals the initiation of the periovulatory interval, during which the follicle augments progesterone production and begins to luteinise, ultimately leading to the rupture of the follicle wall and the release of an oocyte. The administration of gonadotropins in controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) leads to supraphysiological steroid concentrations of a very different profile compared with those seen during natural cycles. It has been suggested that these high steroid concentrations cause alterations in endometrial development, affecting oocyte viability in assisted reproductive technology. Furthermore, it has been proposed that elevated progesterone levels have a negative effect on the reproductive outcome of COS. This may arise from an asynchrony between embryo stage and endometrium status at the window of implantation. The regulation of progesterone production by the developing follicles during COS is a complicated interplay of hormonal systems involving the theca and granulosa cells, and the effect of the actions of both LH and FSH. The present paper reviews current knowledge of the regulation of progesterone in the human ovary during the follicular phase and highlights areas where knowledge remains limited. In this review, we provide in-depth information outlining the regulation and function of gonadotropins in the complicated area of steroidogenesis. Based on current evidence, it is not clear whether the high levels of progesterone produced during COS have detrimental effects on fertility.
Assuntos
Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Infertilidade Feminina/terapia , Modelos Biológicos , Ovário/efeitos dos fármacos , Indução da Ovulação/métodos , Progesterona/metabolismo , Animais , Feminino , Hormônio Foliculoestimulante Humano/efeitos adversos , Hormônio Foliculoestimulante Humano/genética , Hormônio Foliculoestimulante Humano/metabolismo , Hormônio Foliculoestimulante Humano/farmacologia , Humanos , Infertilidade Feminina/metabolismo , Hormônio Luteinizante/efeitos adversos , Hormônio Luteinizante/genética , Hormônio Luteinizante/metabolismo , Hormônio Luteinizante/farmacologia , Ovário/enzimologia , Ovário/metabolismo , Ovulação/efeitos dos fármacos , Ovulação/metabolismo , Indução da Ovulação/efeitos adversos , Progesterona/agonistas , Proteínas Recombinantes/efeitos adversos , Proteínas Recombinantes/metabolismo , Proteínas Recombinantes/farmacologiaRESUMO
Gonadotropins extracted from the urine of post-menopausal women have traditionally been used to stimulate folliculogenesis in the treatment of infertility and in assisted reproductive technology (ART). Products, such as human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG), consist not only of a mixture of the hormones, follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinising hormone (LH) and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), but also other biologically active contaminants, such as growth factors, binding proteins and prion proteins. The actual amount of molecular LH in hMG preparations varies considerably due to the purification process, thus hCG, mimicking LH action, is added to standardise the product. However, unlike LH, hCG plays a different role during the natural human menstrual cycle. It is secreted by the embryo and placenta, and its main role is to support implantation and pregnancy. More recently, recombinant gonadotropins (r-hFSH and r-hLH) have become available for ART therapies. Recombinant LH contains only LH molecules. In the field of reproduction there has been controversy in recent years over whether r-hLH or hCG should be used for ART. This review examines the existing evidence for molecular and functional differences between LH and hCG and assesses the clinical implications of hCG-supplemented urinary therapy compared with recombinant therapies used for ART.
Assuntos
Gonadotropina Coriônica/farmacologia , Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Fármacos para a Fertilidade Feminina/farmacologia , Infertilidade Feminina/terapia , Hormônio Luteinizante/farmacologia , Técnicas de Reprodução Assistida , Animais , Gonadotropina Coriônica/efeitos adversos , Gonadotropina Coriônica/química , Gonadotropina Coriônica/genética , Contaminação de Medicamentos/prevenção & controle , Indústria Farmacêutica/tendências , Feminino , Fármacos para a Fertilidade Feminina/efeitos adversos , Fármacos para a Fertilidade Feminina/química , Humanos , Hormônio Luteinizante/efeitos adversos , Hormônio Luteinizante/química , Hormônio Luteinizante/genética , Proteínas Recombinantes/efeitos adversos , Proteínas Recombinantes/química , Proteínas Recombinantes/farmacologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Gonadotrophins are used routinely for follicular stimulation during ovarian induction and assisted reproduction techniques. Developments in recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone preparations and their injection devices have improved patient quality of life by enabling patients to self-administer treatment at home. The objective of this study was to investigate patient experiences of learning to use and overall satisfaction with the follitropin-alpha (Gonal-f) filled-by-mass (FbM) prefilled pen. METHODS: This questionnaire-based survey study was conducted in 23 fertility centres in Japan over a period of 14 months. Patients who were receiving fertility treatment with the follitropin-alpha (FbM) prefilled pen were asked to complete a questionnaire to assess their satisfaction, ease of learning and use, and injection site pain following treatment. RESULTS: A total of 663 women participated in the study. The majority of patients found the instructions for administering follitropin-alpha with the prefilled pen easy to understand (83.0%; n = 546/658) and patients found that a hands-on demonstration by a nurse or doctor was the most useful tool for learning to use the follitropin-alpha (FbM) prefilled pen (80.0%; n = 497/621). Forty-eight percent (n = 318) of patients in the study had previous experience with different types of fertility medications and the majority of these patients found the follitropin-alpha (FbM) prefilled pen easier to use (75.1%; n = 232/309) and less painful (89.0%; n = 347/390) than their previous medication. The majority (80.2%; n = 521/650) of patients reported overall satisfaction with the follitropin-alpha (FbM) prefilled pen. CONCLUSIONS: The follitropin-alpha (FbM) prefilled pen is an easy-to-use injection device according to this questionnaire-based survey. Patients who had experience of different types of fertility medication preferred the follitropin-alpha (FbM) prefilled pen to other injection devices.
Assuntos
Hormônio Foliculoestimulante Humano/administração & dosagem , Gonadotropinas/administração & dosagem , Satisfação do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Feminino , Humanos , Injeções/efeitos adversos , Injeções/instrumentação , Japão , Dor/etiologia , Preferência do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Proteínas Recombinantes/administração & dosagem , Técnicas de Reprodução Assistida/instrumentação , Autoadministração/instrumentaçãoRESUMO
Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is the most serious complication of controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) as part of assisted reproductive technologies (ART). While the safety and efficacy of ART is well established, physicians should always be aware of the risk of OHSS in patients undergoing COS, as it can be fatal. This article will briefly present the pathophysiology of OHSS, including the key role of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), to provide the foundation for an overview of current techniques for the prevention of OHSS. Risk factors and predictive factors for OHSS will be presented, as recognizing these risk factors and individualizing the COS protocol appropriately is the key to the primary prevention of OHSS, as the benefits and risks of each COS strategy vary among individuals. Individualized COS (iCOS) could effectively eradicate OHSS, and the identification of hormonal, functional and genetic markers of ovarian response will facilitate iCOS. However, if iCOS is not properly applied, various preventive measures can be instituted once COS has begun, including cancelling the cycle, coasting, individualizing the human chorionic gonadotropin trigger dose or using a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist (for those using a GnRH antagonist protocol), the use of intravenous fluids at the time of oocyte retrieval, and cryopreserving/vitrifying all embryos for subsequent transfer in an unstimulated cycle. Some of these techniques have been widely adopted, despite the scarcity of data from randomized clinical trials to support their use.
Assuntos
Síndrome de Hiperestimulação Ovariana/prevenção & controle , Indução da Ovulação/métodos , Gonadotropina Coriônica/administração & dosagem , Criopreservação , Agonistas de Dopamina/uso terapêutico , Feminino , Hormônio Liberador de Gonadotropina/agonistas , Humanos , Síndrome de Hiperestimulação Ovariana/tratamento farmacológico , Síndrome de Hiperestimulação Ovariana/etiologia , Indução da Ovulação/efeitos adversos , Gravidez , Taxa de Gravidez , Técnicas de Reprodução Assistida/efeitos adversos , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
Variability in the subfertile patient population excludes the possibility of a single approach to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) covering all the requirements of a patient. Modern technology has led to the development of new drugs, treatment options and quantitative methods that can identify single patient characteristics. These could potentially be used to match patients with the right treatment options to optimise efficacy, safety and tolerability during COS. Currently, age and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) level remain the most commonly used single patient characteristics in clinical practice. These variables only provide a basic prognosis for success and indications for standard COS treatment based on gross patient categorisation. In contrast, the anti-Müllerian hormone level appears to be an accurate predictor of ovarian reserve and response to COS, and could be used successfully to guide COS. The antral follicle count is a functional biomarker that could be useful in determining the dose of FSH necessary during stimulation and the success of treatment. Finally, in the future, genetic screening may allow an individual patient's response to stimulation during COS to be predicted based on genotype. Unfortunately, despite the predictive power of these measures, no single biomarker can stand alone as a guide to determine the best treatment option. In the future, hormonal, functional and genetic biomarkers will be used together to personalise COS.
Assuntos
Indução da Ovulação/métodos , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Hormônio Antimülleriano/sangue , Biomarcadores , Feminino , Hormônio Foliculoestimulante/análise , Hormônio Liberador de Gonadotropina/agonistas , Humanos , Infertilidade Feminina/etiologia , Folículo Ovariano/fisiologia , Polimorfismo Genético , Medicina de Precisão , Prognóstico , Receptores do FSH/genética , Técnicas de Reprodução AssistidaRESUMO
Controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with gonadotropins to produce multiple follicular development and high-quality oocytes is the cornerstone of assisted reproductive technology. Today, recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (r-hFSH) is widely used for COS. A long-acting r-hFSH and a combination of r-hFSH and recombinant human luteinizing hormone have recently become available. Formulations of purified urinary FSH with or without luteinizing hormone activity (provided by human chorionic gonadotropin) are also available. COS protocols can now be individualized to optimize efficacy and safety - defined as singleton pregnancies with a low incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. This is facilitated by an estimation of ovarian response using the antral follicle count and/or serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels; anti-Müllerian hormone is viewed as the most reliable single marker. However, an efficient management strategy for poor responders to COS is still required. Developments in biomarkers and other techniques for accurate identification of viable oocytes and embryos and optimal uterine receptivity are expected.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the last two decades, pregnancy rates for patients undergoing in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) have significantly increased. Some of the major advances responsible for this improvement were the introduction of controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for the induction of multiple follicle development, and the utilisation of mid-luteal gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists to achieve pituitary down-regulation and full control of the cycle. As a result, a combination of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist with high doses (150-450 IU/day) of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone has become the current standard approach for ovarian stimulation. However, given the heterogeneity of patients embarking on IVF, and the fact that many different drugs can be used alone or in different combinations (generating multiple potential protocols of controlled ovarian stimulation), we consider the need to identify special populations of patients and adapt treatment protocols accordingly, and to implement a more individualised approach to COS. DISCUSSION: Studies on mild, minimal and natural IVF cycles have yielded promising results, but have focused on fresh embryo transfers and included relatively young patient populations who generally have the potential for more favourable outcomes. The efficacy of these protocols in patients with a poorer prognosis remains to be tested. When comparing protocols for COS, it is important to think beyond current primary endpoints, and to consider the ideal quality and quantity of oocytes and embryos being produced per stimulated patient, in order to achieve a pregnancy. We should also focus on the cumulative pregnancy rate, which is based on outcomes from fresh and frozen embryos from the same cycle of stimulation. Individualised COS (iCOS) determined by the use of biomarkers to test ovarian reserve has the potential to optimise outcomes and reduce safety issues by adapting treatment protocols according to each patient's specific characteristics. As new objective endocrine, paracrine, functional and/or genetic biomarkers of response are developed, iCOS can be refined further still, and this will be a significant step towards a personalised approach for IVF. CONCLUSIONS: A variety of COS protocols have been adopted, with mixed success, but no single approach is appropriate for all patients within a given population. We suggest that treatment protocols should be adapted for individual patients through iCOS; this approach promises to be one of the first steps towards implementing personalised medicine in reproductive science.
Assuntos
Hormônio Foliculoestimulante/farmacologia , Indução da Ovulação/métodos , Hormônio Antimülleriano/metabolismo , Biomarcadores/metabolismo , Clomifeno/uso terapêutico , Transferência Embrionária , Feminino , Hormônio Foliculoestimulante/metabolismo , Hormônio Liberador de Gonadotropina/agonistas , Humanos , Inibinas/metabolismo , Recuperação de Oócitos , Folículo Ovariano/citologia , Medicina de Precisão/métodos , Gravidez , Taxa de Gravidez , Proteínas Recombinantes/farmacologia , Técnicas de Reprodução AssistidaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Human menopausal gonadotrophins and recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone are the two main gonadotrophin products utilized for controlled ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technologies. In this meta-analysis, the number of oocytes was designated as the most relevant endpoint directly resulting from ovarian stimulation, and therefore where the drug effect may be estimated with the best sensitivity. METHODS: All published randomized controlled trials on ovarian stimulation comparing the two gonadotrophin products were evaluated. Internal validity was determined using Chalmers' validated scale. If trials did not meet the established quality criteria, a sensitivity analysis assessed the stability of the results. The comparison of continuous variables was conducted following the weighted mean difference and the standardized mean difference (Cohen's effect size) with the random model. Given the known relationship of baseline conditions on treatment endpoints, results were adjusted for age, body mass index and type of infertility. RESULTS: Sixteen studies involving 4040 patients were included. Treatment with human menopausal gonadotrophins resulted in fewer oocytes (-1.54; 95% CI: -2.53 to -0.56; P < 0.0001) compared to recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone. When adjusting for baseline conditions, the mean difference estimate was -2.10 (95% CI: -2.83 to -1.36; P < 0.001). A higher total dose of human menopausal gonadotrophin was necessary (mean difference, 235.46 IU [95% CI: 16.62 to 454.30; P = 0.03]; standardized mean difference, 0.33 [95% CI: 0.08 to 0.58; P = 0.01]). The pregnancy absolute risk difference (RD [hMG-r-hFSH]) for fresh transfers was 3% (P = 0.051), and the relative risk 1.10 (P = 0.06). When adjusted for baseline conditions, the relative risk was 1.04 (P = 0.49) and absolute difference was 0.01 (P = 0.34), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Because baseline conditions are predictive of outcome, meta-analytic results are more sensitive when these variables are considered. Using an endpoint closely associated with the stimulation period, sufficient sensitivity is achieved to compare gonadotrophin treatments. As the largest meta-analysis published to date on this subject, treatment with human menopausal gonadotrophins is characterized by fewer oocytes and a higher total dose. When considering only fresh transfers, pregnancy rates were similar.
Assuntos
Hormônio Foliculoestimulante Humano/farmacologia , Infertilidade/terapia , Menotropinas/administração & dosagem , Oócitos/citologia , Indução da Ovulação/métodos , Técnicas de Reprodução Assistida , Contagem de Células , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Feminino , Fármacos para a Fertilidade Feminina/administração & dosagem , Hormônio Foliculoestimulante Humano/administração & dosagem , Humanos , Menotropinas/isolamento & purificação , Ciclo Menstrual/efeitos dos fármacos , Ciclo Menstrual/fisiologia , Oócitos/efeitos dos fármacos , Gravidez , Proteínas Recombinantes/administração & dosagem , Proteínas Recombinantes/farmacologia , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues are used routinely to prevent a premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surge in women undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatments. In contrast to GnRH agonists, antagonists produce rapid and reversible suppression of LH with no initial flare effect. OBJECTIVE: To review the role of cetrorelix, the first GnRH antagonist approved for the prevention of premature LH surges during controlled ovarian stimulation in modern ART. METHOD: A review of published literature on cetrorelix. RESULTS: Both multiple- and single-dose cetrorelix protocols were shown to be at least as effective as long GnRH agonist regimens for pituitary suppression in Phase II/III clinical trials. Furthermore, cetrorelix co-treatment resulted in similar live birth rates but a shorter duration of gonadotropin stimulation, a lower total gonadotropin dose requirement and lower incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome compared with long agonist regimens. A single-dose cetrorelix protocol further decreased the number of injections required. Preliminary studies have also produced promising data on the use of cetrorelix in modified ART protocols, such as frozen embryo transfer and donor oocyte recipient cycles. CONCLUSION: Cetrorelix offers a potential therapeutic alternative to GnRH agonists during controlled ovarian stimulation and has become an integral part of modern, patient-friendly reproductive medicine.
Assuntos
Hormônio Liberador de Gonadotropina/análogos & derivados , Antagonistas de Hormônios/uso terapêutico , Indução da Ovulação/métodos , Ensaios Clínicos Fase II como Assunto , Ensaios Clínicos Fase III como Assunto , Esquema de Medicação , Feminino , Hormônio Liberador de Gonadotropina/administração & dosagem , Hormônio Liberador de Gonadotropina/efeitos adversos , Hormônio Liberador de Gonadotropina/uso terapêutico , Antagonistas de Hormônios/administração & dosagem , Antagonistas de Hormônios/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Hormônio Luteinizante/efeitos dos fármacos , Hormônio Luteinizante/metabolismo , Gravidez , Resultado da Gravidez , Técnicas de Reprodução AssistidaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: It has been recommended by the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Reproductive Medicine that options to preserve fertility be presented at the outset of treatment for cancer. This recommendation may have arisen, in part, to the increasing survival of patients with cancer and the realization that certain forms of cancer treatment can lead to infertility. One option for these patients, particularly those with ethical or religious objections to freezing embryos is oocyte cryopreservation. However universal acceptance of these procedures has yet to be established, most likely due to a poor history of success and concerns that there has yet to be a comprehensive approach to evaluating these techniques. In light of this, a registry of patients undergoing oocyte cryopreservation, called the HOPE registry, is being implemented. DISCUSSION: The intent of the HOPE Registry is to enroll approximately 400 women of reproductive age who will undergo thawing/warming of oocytes and subsequent transfer. Data from the patients enrolled will be collected via a uniform, standardized form and will document important parameters such as demographics, laboratory procedures and outcomes, including following the outcomes of babies born for one year after birth. The results of the registry will be published on a yearly basis. SUMMARY: A patient registry has been established in order to systematically document the techniques and outcomes of oocyte cryopreservation procedures. The results will be published in order to provide a widely accessible resource that will allow patients who are considering these procedures validated information in order to make informed decisions as to how their treatment will proceed.
Assuntos
Criopreservação/normas , Infertilidade Feminina/terapia , Oócitos/citologia , Sistema de Registros , Técnicas de Reprodução Assistida/normas , Feminino , Humanos , Estados UnidosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of premature luteinization in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) with exogenous gonadotropin/GnRH antagonist (GnRH-a); to compare clinical outcomes in patients with and without premature luteinization. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: IVF clinic. PATIENT(S): Thirty-five treatment cycles in 30 patients with PCOS. INTERVENTION(S): Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with gonadotropin/GnRH-a protocol. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Premature luteinization defined as a P concentration of >/=1.3 ng/mL on the day of hCG administration; number of oocytes and two pronuclei (2PN) embryos; implantation and clinical pregnancy rates (PR). RESULT(S): The incidence of premature luteinization was 28%. Compared with those without premature luteinization, patients with premature luteinization had a higher number of oocytes retrieved (24.1 +/- 13.3 vs. 12.0 +/- 5.9) and greater number of mature oocytes (19.7 +/- 11.7 vs. 9.5 +/- 4.5), respectively. The number of good quality embryos and embryos transferred was not significantly different between groups. Although implantation rates (56% vs. 40%) and clinical PRs (36% vs. 30%) were higher in patients without premature luteinization, the differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION(S): The patients with PCOS with premature luteinization had a higher number of oocytes retrieved and mature oocytes, and similar clinical PRs as patients with PCOS without premature luteinization.
Assuntos
Fertilização in vitro , Hormônio Liberador de Gonadotropina/antagonistas & inibidores , Ovário/efeitos dos fármacos , Síndrome do Ovário Policístico/fisiopatologia , Progesterona/sangue , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Ovário/fisiologia , Gravidez , Taxa de Gravidez , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
The Human Oocyte Preservation Experience (HOPE) Registry is an initiative of EMD Serono which aims to systematically track the outcomes of oocyte cryopreservation cycles and validate the efficacy and safety of techniques to freeze and thaw oocytes. Beginning in November 2008 (ASRM, San Francisco, CA), the registry will be performed as a national Phase IV observational 5-year study (including 3 years of enrolment and 2 years follow-up of babies born) in the USA and will enrol approximately 400 women of reproductive age who have thawed frozen oocytes for subsequent use through in-vitro fertilization (IVF) and embryo transfer (ET). Data relating to controlled ovarian stimulation protocols, freezing and thawing of oocytes, culture and transfer of resulting embryos, implantation rates, pregnancy outcomes and information on child health and development after birth and at 12 months will be recorded. It is anticipated that the HOPE Registry will provide answers to various unresolved questions from healthcare providers and their patients who use oocyte cryopreservation to preserve fertility, such as oocyte cryopreservation and thawing techniques and other factors associated with successful cycle outcomes.
Assuntos
Criopreservação/métodos , Oócitos/fisiologia , Transferência Embrionária , Feminino , Fertilização in vitro , Humanos , Oócitos/citologia , Oócitos/metabolismo , Indução da Ovulação , Gravidez , Sistema de Registros , Técnicas de Reprodução Assistida/tendências , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados UnidosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The current study was designed to determine if follitropin alfa (recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone; r-hFSH) and lutropin alfa (recombinant human luteinizing hormone; r-hLH) biopotencies were unchanged by reconstituting in sterile water for injection and mixing prior to injection. METHODS: The biopotencies of r-hFSH and r-hLH were determined following injection of female Sprague-Dawley rats with a mixture of follitropin alfa revised formulation female (RFF) and lutropin alfa (1:1, r-hFSH:r-hLH). Biopotencies of follitropin alfa RFF and lutropin alfa were measured using ovarian weight and ascorbic acid depletion assays, respectively, and compared with a reference standard. Stock mixtures of follitropin alfa RFF and lutropin alfa (1:1) were prepared within 1 h prior to each respective assay's injection and stored at 6 +/- 2 degrees C. Separate low dose (follitropin alfa RFF 1.5 IU/rat, lutropin alfa 2 IU/rat) and high dose (follitropin alfa RFF 3 IU/rat, lutropin alfa 8 IU/rat) treatments were prepared from stock mixtures or individual solutions by diluting with 0.22% bovine serum albumin saline solution and injected within 1 h of preparation. The main outcome measures were ovarian weight and ovarian ascorbic acid depletion. RESULTS: FSH bioactivities were similar (p > 0.10) between the individual follitropin alfa RFF test solution (84.2 IU) and follitropin alfa RFF/lutropin alfa (87.6 IU) mixtures prepared within 1 h of injection and stored at 6 +/- 2 degrees C. LH bioactivities were similar (p > 0.10) between lutropin alfa (94.7 IU) test solution and lutropin alfa/follitropin alfa RFF (85.3 IU) mixtures prepared within 1 h of injection and stored at 6 +/- 2 degrees C for not more than 1 h prior to injection. CONCLUSION: Mixing follitropin alfa RFF and lutropin alfa did not alter the bioactivity of either FSH or LH.
Assuntos
Hormônio Foliculoestimulante/farmacologia , Subunidade alfa de Hormônios Glicoproteicos/farmacologia , Hormônio Luteinizante/farmacologia , Animais , Ácido Ascórbico/metabolismo , Combinação de Medicamentos , Feminino , Hormônio Foliculoestimulante/metabolismo , Subunidade alfa de Hormônios Glicoproteicos/metabolismo , Injeções , Hormônio Luteinizante/metabolismo , Tamanho do Órgão/efeitos dos fármacos , Ovário/anatomia & histologia , Ovário/efeitos dos fármacos , Plásticos , Ratos , Ratos Sprague-Dawley , SeringasRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate developmental potential of fast cleaving day 3 embryos. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: Academic reproductive center. PATIENT(S): Three thousand five hundred twenty-nine embryos. INTERVENTION(S): Day 3 embryos were classified according to cell number: slow cleaving: