Luteal phase support using micronized vaginal progesterone as pessaries or capsules in artificial cycles: is there any difference?

RESEARCH QUESTION: Is there a difference between the proportion of patients with serum progesterone <8.8 ng/ml on the day of embryo transfer when micronized vaginal progesterone (MVP) for luteal phase support (LPS) is given as pessaries versus capsules? DESIGN: This retrospective, matched-cohort, single-centre study compared pessaries (Cyclogest) versus capsules (Utrogestan, Progeffik) for LPS in hormone replacement treatment-embryo transfer (HRT-ET) cycles. Patients under 50 years old with a triple-layer endometrial thickness of ≥6.5 mm underwent transfer of one or two blastocysts. Serum progesterone concentrations were measured on the day of transfer; patients with concentrations <8.8 ng/ml received a single 'rescue' dose of additional progesterone by subcutaneous injection. RESULTS: In total 2665 HRT-ET cycles were analysed; 663 (24.9%) used pessaries for LPS and 2002 (75.1%) used capsules. Mean serum progesterone concentrations with standard deviations on the day of embryo transfer were significantly higher in the group using MVP pessaries compared with those using capsules (14.5 ± 5.1 versus 13.0 ± 4.8 ng/ml; P = 0.000). The percentage of participants with suboptimal serum progesterone concentrations on the day of embryo transfer (<8.8 ng/ml) was significantly lower in the pessary group than the capsule group (10.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.9-12.6% versus 17.9%, 95% CI 16.2-19.6%; adjusted odds ratio 0.426, 95% CI 0.290-0.625; P = 0.000). No differences in pregnancy outcome were observed between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Using MVP pessaries rather than capsules for LPS resulted in significantly fewer patients having suboptimal serum progesterone concentrations on the day of embryo transfer. Consequently, almost 50% fewer patients in the pessary group needed rescue treatment.

Serum progesterone is lower in ovarian stimulation with highly purified HMG compared to recombinant FSH owing to a different regulation of follicular steroidogenesis: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Does ovarian stimulation with highly purified (hp)-HMG protect from elevated progesterone in the follicular phase compared to recombinant FSH (r-FSH) cycles through a different regulation of follicular steroidogenesis? SUMMARY ANSWER: hp-HMG enhanced the Δ4 pathway from pregnenolone to androstenodione leading to lower serum progesterone at the end of the cycle, while r-FSH promoted the conversion of pregnenolone to progesterone causing higher follicular phase progesterone levels. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Elevated progesterone in the follicular phase has been related to lower clinical outcome in fresh IVF cycles. Progesterone levels are positively correlated to ovarian response, and some studies have shown that when r-FSH alone is used for ovarian stimulation serum progesterone levels on the day of triggering are higher than when hp-HMG is given. Whether this is caused by a lower ovarian response in hp-HMG cycles or to a difference in follicular steroidogenesis in the two ovarian stimulation regimens has not been well characterized. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A randomized controlled trial including 112 oocyte donors undergoing ovarian stimulation with GnRH antagonists and 225 IU/day of r-FSH (n = 56) or hp-HMG (n = 56) was carried out in a university-affiliated private infertility clinic. Subjects were recruited between October 2016 and June 2018. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The women were aged 18-35 years with a regular menstrual cycle (25-35 days) and normal ovarian reserve (serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) = 10-30 pMol/l) undergoing ovarian stimulation for oocyte donation. FSH, LH, estradiol (E2), estrone, progesterone, pregnenolone, 17-OH-progesterone, androstenodione, dehidroepiandrostenodione, and testosterone were determined on stimulation Days 1, 4, 6, and 8 and on day of triggering in serum and in follicular fluid. Samples were frozen at -20°C until assay. Total exposures across the follicular phase were compared by polynomic extrapolation. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Subjects in both groups were comparable in terms of age, BMI, and AMH levels. Ovarian response was also similar: 17.5 ± 7.9 (mean ± SD) versus 16.5 ± 7.5 oocytes with r-FSH and hp-HMG, respectively (P = 0.49). Serum progesterone (ng/ml) on day of trigger was 0.46 ± 0.27 in the hp-HMG group versus 0.68 ± 0.50 in the r-FSH group (P = 0.010). Differences for progesterone were also significant on stimulation days 6 and 8. The pregnenolone: progesterone ratio was significantly increased in the r-FSH group from stimulation day 8 to the day of trigger (P = 0.019). Serum androstenodione (ng/ml) on day of trigger was 3.0 ± 1.4 in the hp-HMG group versus 2.4 ± 1.1 in the r-FSH group (P = 0.015). Differences in adrostenodione were also significant on stimulation Day 8. The pregnenolone:androstenodione ratio was significantly higher in the hp-HMG group (P = 0.012) on Days 6 and 8 and trigger. There were no other significant differences between groups. Follicular fluid E2, FSH, LH, dehidroepioandrostenodione, androstenodione, and testosterone were significantly higher in the hp-HMG than r-FSH group. No differences were observed for progesterone, estrone, 17-OH-progesterone, and pregnenolone in follicular fluid. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: All women included in the study were young, not infertile, and had a normal BMI and a good ovarian reserve. The findings might be different in other patient subpopulations. Hormone analyses with immunoassays are subject to intra-assay variations that may influence the results. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Stimulation with hp-HMG may prevent progesterone elevation at the end of the follicular phase because of a different follicular steroidogenesis pathway, regardless of ovarian response. This should be considered, particularly in patients at risk of having high progesterone levels at the end of the follicular phase when a fresh embryo transfer is planned. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Roche Diagnostics provided unrestricted funding for all serum and follicular fluid hormone determinations. J.L.R., M.M., and A.P. have nothing to declare. E.B. has received consulting fees from Ferring, Merck, Gedeon Richter, and Roche and has participated in a research cooperation with Gedeon-Richter. In addition, the author has participated in speakers' bureau and received fees from Ferring, Gedeon Richter, Merck, and Roche. P.A. has received consulting fees from MSD and has participated in speakers' bureau and received fees from Ferring. P.A. also declares travel/meeting support from MSD. E.L. has received consulting fees from Ferring and MSD. In addition, the author has participated in a research cooperation with Gedeon-Richter. Also, the author has participated in speakers' bureau and received fees from Ferring and IBSA, as well as travel/meeting support from IBSA and Gedeon Richter. E.B., P.A., and E.L. also own stocks in IVIRMA Valencia. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT: NCT02738580. TRIAL REGISTER DATE: 19 February 2016. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 03 October 2016.

Medroxyprogesterone acetate: an alternative to GnRH-antagonist in oocyte vitrification for social fertility preservation and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Can medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) be used as a pituitary suppressor instead of a gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist during ovarian stimulation in elective fertility preservation and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) cycles? DESIGN: A multicentre, retrospective, observational, cohort study conducted in 11 IVIRMA centres affiliated to private universities. Of a total of 1652 cycles of social fertility preservation, 267 patients were stimulated using a progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol (PPOS), and 1385 patients received a GnRH antagonist. In the PGT-A cycles, 5661 treatments were analysed: 635 patients received MPA and 5026 patients received GnRH antagonist. A further 66 fertility preservation and 1299 PGT-A cycles were cancelled. All cycles took place between June 2019 and December 2021. RESULTS: In the social fertility preservation cycles, the number of mature oocytes vitrified in MPA was similar to the number of those treated with an antagonist, a trend that was seen regardless of age (≤35 or >35 years). In the PGT-A cycles, no differences were found in number of metaphase II, two pronuclei, number of biopsied embryos (4.4 ± 3.1 versus 4.5 ± 3.1), rate of euploidy (57.9% versus 56.4%) or ongoing pregnancy rate (50.4% versus 47.1%, P = 0.119) between the group receiving MPA versus a GnRH antagonist, whereas the clinical miscarriage rate was higher in the antagonist group (10.4% versus 14.8%, P = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Administration of PPOS yields similar results to GnRH antagonists in oocytes retrieved, rate of euploid embryos and clinical outcome. Hence, PPOS can be recommended for ovarian stimulation in social fertility preservation and PGT-A cycles, as it allows greater patient comfort.

Live birth rates following individualized dosing algorithm of follitropin delta in a long GnRH agonist protocol.

PURPOSE: To explore the efficacy and safety of individualized follitropin delta dosing, based on serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) concentration and bodyweight, in a long gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist protocol. METHODS: Clinical outcomes after one treatment cycle are reported in women with AMH: 5-35 pmol/L. Oocytes were inseminated by intracytoplasmic sperm injection, blastocyst transfer was on Day 5 and remaining blastocysts were cryopreserved. Data collection included live births and neonatal health follow-up for all fresh/frozen transfers performed within one year after treatment allocation. RESULTS: In total, 104 women started stimulation, of whom 101 had oocyte recovery and 92 had blastocyst transfer. The average daily dose of follitropin delta was 11.0 ± 1.6 µg and the duration of stimulation was 10.3 ± 1.6 days. The mean number of oocytes was 12.5 ± 6.4, the mean number of blastocysts was 5.1 ± 3.4, and 85% had at least one good-quality blastocyst. Following mostly single blastocyst transfer (95%), the ongoing pregnancy rate was 43%, the live-birth rate was 43%, and the cumulative live-birth rate was 58% per started stimulation. There were 6 cases of early OHSS (5.8%) graded as mild (n = 3) and moderate (n = 3) and 6 cases of late OHSS (5.8%) graded as moderate (n = 3) and severe (n = 3). CONCLUSION: In this first evaluation of the individualized follitropin delta dosing in a long GnRH agonist protocol, the cumulative live-birth rate was high. A randomized trial comparing follitropin delta in a long GnRH agonist protocol versus in a GnRH antagonist protocol should provide further insight into the efficacy and safety of this treatment option. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03564509; June 21, 2018.

Prediction of ovarian response using the automated Elecsys anti-Müllerian hormone assay in gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the capability of serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) measured using the automated Elecsys® AMH immunoassay to (Roche Diagnostics International Ltd) determine ovarian response after fertility treatment? DESIGN: Single-centre, retrospective, observational, cohort study including women undergoing ovarian stimulation. Serum AMH concentrations were determined using the Elecsys AMH immunoassay based on one blood sample drawn 6 months or less before treatment. Stimulation was conducted in accordance with a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol. Patients were divided into four ovarian response categories based on their oocyte yield: low (0-3), suboptimal (4-9), optimal (10-15) and high (>15). Areas under the curve were calculated for each ovarian response group. RESULTS: Overall, 1248 patients were enrolled. The AMH concentration had a strong positive correlation with oocyte yield (Spearman's rho = 0.74, P < 0.001). Areas under the curve (95% CI) for AMH predicting ovarian response were 0.85 (0.83 to 0.88) for low and 0.89 (0.87 to 0.91) for high response. Optimal serum AMH cut-offs for predicting a low and high response using the Elecsys AMH immunoassay were 6.4 pmol/l (0.89 ng/ml) and 14.2 pmol/l (1.99 ng/ml), respectively. Multivariable regression analysis showed that 47% (R2 = 0.470) of variation in ovarian response could be attributed to AMH alone, increasing to 50.9% (R2 = 0.509) with the addition of age, body weight, and total dose of gonadotrophin. CONCLUSION: Ovarian response and oocyte yield after stimulation in a GnRH antagonist cycle can be predicted with high accuracy using a single determination of serum AMH before ovarian stimulation.

Individualized luteal phase support normalizes live birth rate in women with low progesterone levels on the day of embryo transfer in artificial endometrial preparation cycles.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the impact on live birth rates (LBRs) of the individualized luteal phase support (termed iLPS) in patients with low serum progesterone (P) levels compared with patients without iLPS. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study, December 1, 2018, to May 30, 2019. SETTING: Private medical center. PATIENT(S): A total of 2,275 patients checked for serum P on the day of blastocyst transfer were analyzed. During the study period, 1,299 patients showed serum P levels of ≥9.2 ng/mL, whereas 550 showed serum P levels of <9.2 ng/mL and received iLPS. Additionally, a historical group of 426 patients with serum P levels of <9.2 ng/mL but no iLPS were used for comparison. Eligible patients were aged ≤50 years with adequate endometrium morphology after receiving estrogens. Luteal phase support was provided with micronized vaginal P (MVP) to all women. Patients with personalized initiation of exogenous P according to the endometrial receptivity assay test, polyps, fibroids distorting the cavity, or hydrosalpinx were not included in the analysis. INTERVENTION(S): As routine practice since December 2018, patients with low serum P levels received an iLPS with a daily injection of 25 mg of subcutaneous P from the day of embryo transfer (ET) in addition to standard LPS (400 mg of MVP twice a day). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Live birth rate. RESULT(S): The LBR was 44.9% in the iLPS cases vs. 45.0% in patients with normal serum P levels (crude odds ratio [OR], 1.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-1.22). By regression analysis, low serum P levels did not affect the LBR after adjusting for possible confounders (age, oocyte origin, fresh vs. frozen, day of ET, embryo quality, number of embryos transferred) (adjusted OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.79-1.25). Similarly, no differences were observed in other pregnancy outcomes between groups. The LBR was significantly higher in the group of patients who received additional subcutaneous P (iLPS) compared with the historical group with low serum P levels and no iLPS (44.9% vs. 37.3%; OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.06-1.78). In the overall population, patients showing P levels of <9.2 ng/mL on the day of ET were slightly younger and had higher body mass index and lower estradiol and P levels during the proliferative phase compared with patients with P levels of ≥9.2 ng/mL. No differences were observed with regard to the time in between the last dose of MVP and the serum P determination. After a multivariable logistic regression analysis, only body mass index and estradiol levels in the proliferative phase reminded statistically significant. Significant differences in the LBR were observed between patients with serum P levels of <9.2 ng/mL without iLPS and patients with serum P levels of ≥9.2 ng/mL when using either own or donated oocytes. CONCLUSION(S): Individualized LPS for patients with low serum P levels produces LBRs similar to those of patients with adequate serum P levels.

Early detection of pregnancy after IVF and embryo transfer with hyperglycosylated HCG versus Elecsys HCG+ß assay.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Is measurement of hyperglycosylated HCG (hHCG) superior to beta-HCG (HCG+ß) for early pregnancy detection after IVF and embryo transfer? DESIGN: Blood samples were collected on day 4 (+1), 7 (+1) and 11 (+2) after embryo transfer from women aged 18-45 years undergoing first or second fresh or frozen IVF embryo transfer cycles. Biochemical pregnancy was assessed on-site by HCG determination on day 11; clinical pregnancy was assessed by ultrasound on day 21 (+4/-3). Serum hHCG (immunochemiluminometric assay) and HCG+ß (Elecsys® HCG+ß assay) concentrations were measured. Performance of hHCG and HCG+ß for predicting pregnancy was evaluated and cut-offs selected. RESULTS: In total, 155 women were enrolled and underwent IVF and embryo transfer. Area under the curve (AUC) (95% CI) on day 4 was not significantly different for hHCG (AUC 0.88; 95% CI 0.83 to 0.94) and HCG+ß (AUC 0.90; 95% CI 0.84 to 0.95), as was predictive performance on day 7 and 11, with higher AUC estimates compared with day 4. Applying cut-offs derived according to Youden's index on day 4 (hHCG, 100 pg/ml; HCG+ß, 1.30 mIU/ml), both biomarkers demonstrated high negative predictive values for ruling out pregnancy (hHCG, 83.8%; HCG+ß, 82.8%) and high positive predictive values for ruling in pregnancy (hHCG, 89.0%; HCG+ß, 84.9%) on day 21. Diagnostic performance improved from day 4 to day 11. CONCLUSIONS: Predictive performance for early pregnancy post-IVF embryo transfer of day-5 blastocysts was not significantly different for hHCG and HCG+ß; hHCG superiority over HCG+ß was not shown.

Serum Progesterone Profile Across the Mid and Late Luteal Phase in Artificial Cycles Is Associated With Pregnancy Outcome.

Introduction: Recent studies have shown that low serum progesterone levels on the day of embryo transfer (ET) are associated with poorer pregnancy outcome in hormonal replacement therapy cycles. It is of interest to know if serum progesterone levels during late luteal phase (following days after ET) are also related with the chances of ongoing pregnancy. Objective: To evaluate the luteal phase endocrine profile through measurements of serum progesterone and estradiol on days ET+4, ET+7 and ET+11, to test their predictive value in relation to pregnancy outcome. Setting: Private infertility center, Valencia, Spain. Materials and Methods: Prospective cohort study performed between June 2017 and August 2018. Eligible patients were aged between 18-42 years, with a normal uterus, and being transferred 1-2 good quality blastocysts in a frozen ET cycle after an artificial endometrial preparation with estradiol valerate and vaginal micronized progesterone (400 mg/12 hours). Results: A total of 127 patients were included. Mean age = 38.0 ± 3.9 years; BMI = 23.6 ± 3.6 kg/m2; endometrial thickness = 9.1 ± 1.6mm. Overall ongoing pregnancy rate = 47.2% (95%CI:38.3-56.3). Significantly higher levels of serum progesterone were observed on ET+4 (13.6 ± 6.0 vs. 11.1 ± 4.6ng/ml, p = 0.03) and ET+11 (15.7 ± 1.2 vs. 10.3 ± 0.6ng/ml, respectively; p = 0.000) in ongoing pregnancies versus negative ß-hCG (ß-human chorionic gonadotrophin) cases. On ET+7, ongoing pregnancies also had higher serum progesterone levels (14.2 ± 0.9 vs. 11.7 ± 0.8ng/ml, but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.07). Serum estradiol levels were not related with pregnancy outcome at any moment of the luteal phase (p > 0.05). On days ET+4, +7 and +11, the ROC analysis showed that serum progesterone levels were predictive of ongoing pregnancy, and Pearson's coefficient showed a significant association (p<0.05) of serum ß-hCG levels with serum progesterone. Conclusions: In hormonal replacement therapy cycles, serum progesterone levels across luteal phase days are associated with pregnancy outcome. Ongoing pregnancies were associated with a higher exposure to progesterone in comparison with pregnancy losses or negative ß-hCG. Therefore, serum progesterone might be playing an important role not only during implantation, but also in pregnancy maintenance. It remains unknown if the variability in serum progesterone levels among patients, after receiving the exact same progesterone dose for luteal phase support, is the cause or just a consequence of pregnancy results.

Elevated serum progesterone does not impact euploidy rates in PGT-A patients.

PURPOSE: Some women undergoing stimulated cycles have elevated serum progesterone (P) on the day of ovulation trigger, but its effect on embryo quality is unclear. We analyze embryo quality among patients with high and low serum P undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A). METHODS: This retrospective study included 1597 patients divided into two groups by serum P values: < 1.5 ng/mL or ≥ 1.5 ng/mL. A gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol was established for each patient. Serum P levels were measured on the day of triggering. Propensity score matching and Poisson regression were done. Age, body mass index, and ovarian sensitivity index were also compared. RESULTS: Elevated serum P was not significantly associated with euploid embryo rate or other embryo-quality variables evaluated in our study. Age was the only variable associated with euploidy rate (per MII oocyte, P < 0.001; per biopsied embryo, P = 0.008), embryo biopsy rate (P < 0.001), absolute number of euploid embryos (P = 0.008), and top-quality embryo rate (P = 0.008). Categorical variables decreased in value for every year of increased age in patients with high serum P. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated serum P did not affect the number of euploid and good-quality embryos for transfer in GnRH antagonist intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. Contrary to the clear influence of premature P elevation on endometrial receptivity based on literature, our results may help to tip the balance towards the absence of a negative effect of P elevation on embryo competence. More studies are needed to fully understand the effect of P elevation on reproductive outcomes.

Minimal ovarian stimulation is an alternative to conventional protocols for older women according to Poseidon's stratification: a retrospective multicenter cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether minimal ovarian stimulation (mOS) is as effective as conventional ovarian stimulation (cOS) for older women belonging to different groups according to the Poseidon criteria. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Observational retrospective multicentre cohort including women from Poseidon's groups 2 and 4 that underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF). We performed a mixed-effects logistic regression model, adding as a random effect the patients and the stimulation cycle considering the dependence of data. Survival curves were employed as a measure of the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR). The primary outcomes were live birth rate per embryo transfer and CLBR per consecutive embryo transfer and oocyte consumed until a live birth was achieved. RESULTS: A total of 2002 patients underwent 3056 embryo transfers (mOS = 497 and cOS = 2559). The live birth rates per embryo transfer in mOS and cOS showed no significant difference in both Poseidon's groups. Likewise, the logistic regression showed similar live birth rates between the two protocols in Poseidon's groups 2 (OR 1.165, 95% CI 0.77-1.77; p = 0.710) and 4 (OR 1.264 95% CI 0.59-2.70; p = 0.387). However, the survival curves showed higher CLBR per oocyte in women that received mOS (Poseidon group 2: p < 0.001 and Poseidon group 4: p = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: Minimal ovarian stimulation is a good alternative to COS as a first-line treatment for patients belonging to Poseidon's groups 2 and 4. The number of oocytes needed to achieve a live birth seems inferior in mOS strategy than cOS.

Medroxyprogesterone acetate is a useful alternative to a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist in oocyte donation: a randomized, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare ovarian response and reproductive outcomes in oocyte donors undergoing pituitary suppression with medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) versus those undergoing conventional treatment with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist. DESIGN: A prospective, randomized, controlled trial of cycles was conducted from October 2017 to June 2019 to evaluate ovarian response in terms of the number of oocytes. The reproductive outcomes of the recipients were retrospectively analyzed later. SETTING: A university-affiliated private in vitro fertilization center. PATIENT(S): We randomly divided 318 donors into 2 groups in a 1:1 ratio. The oocytes obtained were assigned to 364 recipients. One hundred sixty-one donors were treated with a daily dose of 10 mg of MPA administered orally from the beginning of ovarian stimulation (OS), and 156 were treated with a GnRH antagonist (initiated once the leading follicle reached a diameter of 13 mm). Transvaginal ultrasound was performed, and serum estradiol, luteinizing hormone, and progesterone levels were recorded during monitoring. The following additional parameters were analyzed: endocrine profile (in follicular fluid), number of metaphase II oocytes, and pregnancy outcome. INTERVENTION(S): The donors included in the study group were stimulated using recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone and MPA at 10 mg/day, simultaneously begun on cycle day 2 or 3. Ovulation was induced using a GnRH agonist when dominant follicles matured. A short protocol with ganirelix at 0.25 mg/day was used for the control group. Oocytes were assigned to the recipients, followed by routine in vitro fertilization procedures in which 1 embryo was usually transferred. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The primary outcome measure was the numbers of oocytes and metaphase II oocytes retrieved. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of premature luteinizing hormone surge, serum and follicular fluid hormone profiles, and clinical pregnancy outcomes in the recipient group. RESULT(S): The number of oocytes retrieved was 21.4 ± 11.7 in the MPA group and 21.2 ± 9.2 in the antagonist group (mean difference 0.14; 95% confidence interval -2.233, 2.517). The total dose of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone, duration of OS, and endocrine profiles of the serum and follicular fluids were comparable in the 2 groups. No early ovulation was observed in either group. No statistically significant differences with respect to implantation rate (68.1% in the MPA group vs. 62% in the antagonist group), clinical pregnancy rate (64.5% in the MPA group vs. 57.8 in the antagonist group), ongoing pregnancy rate (55.4% in the MPA group vs. 48.5% in the antagonist group), live birth rate (55.1% in the MPA group vs. 48.5% in the antagonist group), or cumulative live birth rate (73.8% in the MPA group vs. 70.7% in the antagonist group) were observed between the groups. CONCLUSION(S): The administration of MPA resulted in oocyte retrieval rates, endocrine profiles, viable embryo numbers, and pregnancy outcomes similar to those achieved with the GnRH antagonist. Therefore, MPA can be recommended for OS in oocyte donation because it permits a more patient-friendly approach. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03300960.

Impact of low serum progesterone levels on the day of embryo transfer on pregnancy outcome: a prospective cohort study in artificial cycles with vaginal progesterone.

STUDY QUESTION: Is there a serum progesterone (P) threshold on the day of embryo transfer (ET) in artificial endometrium preparation cycles below which the chances of ongoing pregnancy are reduced? SUMMARY ANSWER: Serum P levels <8.8 ng/ml on the day of ET lower ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR) in both own or donated oocyte cycles. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: We previously found that serum P levels <9.2 ng/ml on the day of ET significantly decrease OPR in a sample of 211 oocyte donation recipients. Here, we assessed whether these results are applicable to all infertile patients under an artificial endometrial preparation cycle, regardless of the oocyte origin. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This prospective cohort study was performed between September 2017 and November 2018 and enrolled 1205 patients scheduled for ET after an artificial endometrial preparation cycle with estradiol valerate and micronized vaginal P (MVP, 400 mg twice daily). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Patients ≤50 years old with a triple-layer endometrium ≥6.5 mm underwent transfer of one or two blastocysts. A total of 1150 patients treated with own oocytes without preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A) (n = 184), own oocytes with PGT-A (n = 308) or donated oocytes (n = 658) were analyzed. The primary endpoint was the OPR beyond pregnancy week 12 based on serum P levels measured immediately before ET. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Women with serum P levels <8.8 ng/ml (30th percentile) had a significantly lower OPR (36.6% vs 54.4%) and live birth rate (35.5% vs 52.0%) than the rest of the patients. Multivariate logistic regression showed that serum P < 8.8 ng/ml was an independent factor influencing OPR in the overall population and in the three treatment groups. A significant negative correlation was observed between serum P levels and BMI, weight and time between the last P dose and blood tests and a positive correlation was found with age, height and number of days on HRT. Multivariate logistic regression showed that only body weight was an independent factor for presenting serum P levels <8.8 ng/ml. Obstetrical and perinatal outcomes did not differ in patients with ongoing pregnancy regardless of serum P levels being above/below 8.8 ng/ml. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Only women with MVP were included. Extrapolation to other P administration forms needs to be validated. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study identified the threshold of serum P as 8.8 ng/ml on the day of ET for artificial endometrial preparation cycles necessary to optimize outcomes, in cycles with own or donated oocytes. One-third of patients receiving MVP show inadequate levels of serum P that, in turn, impact the success of the ART cycle. Monitoring P levels in the mid-luteal phase is recommended when using MVP to adjust the doses according to the needs of the patient. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): None. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03272412.

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.

Second-generation preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy in assisted reproduction: a SWOT analysis.

Second-generation preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A 2.0) in patients with an unfavourable reproductive and IVF prognosis is becoming common practice, with the aim of improving reproductive outcomes. However, there is still no clear evidence on the possible advantages and drawbacks with regard to this procedure. In this discussion paper, based on a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis, the different aspects of this strategy are evaluated. Current evidence suggests that PGT-A 2.0 should not at present have an indiscriminate application, but it might be indicated in cases in which the risk of aneuploidy is increased.

Conventional versus minimal ovarian stimulation: an intra-patient comparison of ovarian response in poor-responder women according to Bologna Criteria.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Is minimal ovarian stimulation (MOS) as effective as conventional ovarian stimulation (COS) in ovarian response and embryo quality in the same 46 poor-responder patients according to the Bologna criteria? DESIGN: An intra-patient comparison of patients undergoing both protocols. Ovaries were stimulated with either a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol and a combination of recombinant FSH and highly purified human menotrophin (HP-HMG) daily (COS), or with the use of clomiphene citrate 50 mg daily and 150 IU of HP-HMG or recombinant FSH every other day from simulation day 4 (MOS). RESULTS: After MOS, significantly more good-quality embryos (1.0 ± 1.2 versus 0.3 ± 0.6) (P = 0.002), oocytes (3.2 ± 1.9 versus 2.0 ± 1.8) (P = 0.002), and mature (metaphase II) oocytes (2.6 ± 1.7 versus 1.6 ± 1.7) (P = 0.001) were obtained. In COS cycles, a significantly higher total gonadotrophin dose was needed per good-quality embryo (+2194 IU; 95% CI 618 to 3170). CONCLUSIONS: In poor responder patients, MOS is a good alternative when COS has failed, or even as a first-line treatment. It offered a significantly greater number of good-quality embryos as well as a higher number of oocytes, using significantly lower doses of gonadotrophins per oocyte and embryo obtained.

Premature progesterone elevation: targets and rescue strategies.

Progesterone elevation during the late follicular phase of ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization negatively impacts the assisted reproductive technology-outcome. The evidence available supports an advanced endometrial maturation and a direct negative effect on its receptivity. On the other hand, some retrospective analysis suggests an impairment of oocyte and embryo quality. Recent publications confirm that enhanced follicle-stimulating hormone-stimulation towards the end of the follicular phase of ovarian stimulation is the main course of progesterone elevation. A key element in preventing this event is the individualization of ovarian stimulation according to the patient's ovarian reserve and the adaption of the stimulation dosage during late follicular phase according to the patient's response. Additional measures as corticosteroid administration, avoidance of prolonged stimulation and cycle segmentation with freeze-all-policy can be discussed.

A Higher Ovarian Response after Stimulation for IVF Is Related to a Higher Number of Euploid Embryos.

This study has analysed the relationship between ovarian response and the number of euploid embryos. This is a post hoc analysis of a subset of data generated during a prospective cohort study previously published. Forty-six oocyte donors were subjected to ovarian stimulation with 150 IU of rFSH and 75 IU of hp-hMG in a GnRH agonist long protocol. Preimplantation genetic screening was performed in all viable embryos. We observed a positive relationship between ovarian response and the number of euploid embryos. When ovarian response was above the median (≥17 oocytes), the mean number of euploid embryos per donor was 5.0 ± 2.4, while when <17 oocytes were obtained the mean number of euploid embryos was 2.7 ± 1.4 (p = 0.000). Aneuploidy rate did not increase with ovarian response or gonadotropin doses. Also, the number of euploid embryos was inversely related to the amount of gonadotropins needed per oocyte obtained (ovarian sensitivity index). These results suggest that the number of euploid embryos available for embryo transfer increases as the number of oocytes obtained does. Considering the total number of euploid embryos seems more relevant than the aneuploidy rate.

High progesterone levels in women with high ovarian response do not affect clinical outcomes: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The potentially detrimental role of progesterone during the follicular phase has been a matter of controversy for several years; however, few studies have analyzed the effects of combined raised estradiol and progesterone levels on pregnancy outcomes. The aim of the present study was to determine the influence of high progesterone levels on clinical outcomes in the context of high ovarian response. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study that included 2850 women classified as high responders. The women were subdivided into six groups depending on their progesterone concentration on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration: <0.5 ng/ml (1.81 ng/ml (>p90). Ovarian response was classified as high when>=20 oocytes were retrieved or when estradiol was >=3000 pg/ml. Clinical outcomes of each subgroup were analyzed. We also examined data from frozen-thawed embryo transfers. Results were analyzed with Student's t- test to compare continuous variables and chi-squared test to compare proportions. A p-value of< =0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The progesterone concentration increased with ovarian response, and elevated progesterone did not show a significant clinical impact on implantation rate and pregnancy rates. These data provide evidence that progesterone levels higher than 1.8 ng/ml do not have detrimental effect on oocyte quality or endometrial receptivity. CONCLUSIONS: These data allow us to conclude that high progesterone levels correlate significantly with high estradiol levels and that in high responder women; progesterone levels do not show a significant clinical impact on results.