The role of age and AMH on cumulative live birth rates over multiple frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: a study based on low prognosis patients of POSEIDON 3 and 4 groups.

BACKGROUND: Among the POSEIDON criteria, group 3 and group 4 have an expected low prognosis. For those patients with inadequate ovary reserve, embryo accumulated from consecutive oocyte retrieval cycles for multiple frozen-thawed embryo transfers (FET) has become more common. It is necessary to inform them of the pregnancy outcomes after single or multiple FET cycles before the treatment. However few studies about cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) for those with low prognosis have been reported. METHODS: This retrospective study included 4712 patients undergoing frozen embryo transfer cycles from July 2015 to August 2020. Patients were stratified as POSEIDON group 3, group 4, control 1 group (< 35 years) and control 2 group (≥ 35 years). The primary outcome is CLBRs up to six FET cycles and the secondary outcomes were LBRs per transfer cycle. Optimistic approach was used for the analysis of CLBRs and the depiction of cumulative incidence curves. RESULTS: Under optimistic model analyses, control 1 group exhibited the highest CLBR (93.98%, 95%CI 91.63-95.67%) within 6 FET cycles, followed by the CLBR from women in POSEIDON group 3(92.51%, 95%CI 77.1-97.55)was slightly lower than that in control 1 group. The CLBR of POSEIDON group 4(55% ,95%CI 39.34-70.66%)was the lowest and significantly lower than that of control 2 group(88.7%, 95%CI 80.68-96.72%). Further, patients in POSEIDON group 4 reached a CLBR plateau after 5 FET cycles. CONCLUSIONS: The patients of POSEIDON group 3 may not be considered as traditional "low prognosis" in clinical practice as extending the number of FET cycles up to 6 can archive considerably CLBR as control women. While for the POSEIDON group 4, a simple repeat of the FET cycle is not recommended after four failed FET cycles, some strategies such as PGT-A may be beneficial.

Maternal and neonatal complications after IVF/ICSI-fresh embryo transfer in low-prognosis women under the POSEIDON criteria: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Several studies on pregnancy complications of poor ovarian response (POR) patients did not draw a consistent conclusion. The POSEIDON criteria introduces the concept of "low prognosis" and divides POR patients into four groups based on age, AFC and AMH for individualized management. We analyzed low-prognosis population and patients with regular ovarian response, compared maternal and neonatal complications and discussed the relevant risk factors. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of females who achieved a singleton clinical pregnancy after IVF / ICSI-fresh embryo transfer in a single center from January 2014 to March 2019. Participants with low prognosis, as defined by the POSEIDON criteria, were enrolled in the study groups. The controls were defined as AFC ≥ five and number of retrieved oocytes > nine. Maternal and neonatal complications were compared among those groups. RESULTS: There were 2554 cycles in POSEIDON group 1, 971 in POSEIDON group 2, 141 in POSEIDON group 3, 142 in POSEIDON group 4, and 3820 in Control. Univariate analysis roughly showed that Groups 2 and 4 had an increased tendency of pregnancy complications. Multi-variable generalized estimating equations (GEE) analysis showed that the risks of GDM, total pregnancy loss, and first-trimester pregnancy loss in Groups 2 and 4 were significantly higher than in Control. The risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) in Groups 2 and 3 increased, and Group 4 had an increased tendency without statistical significance. After classification by age, GEE analysis showed no significant difference in risks of all complications among groups ≥ 35 years. In patients < 35 years, the risk of HDP in POSEIDON group 3 was significantly higher than in controls (< 35 years), and there was no significant increase in the risk of other complications. CONCLUSION: Compared to patients with regular ovarian response, low-prognosis population have increased tendency of maternal and neonatal complications. In low-prognosis patients, advanced age (≥ 35 years) might be the predominant risk factor for pregnancy complications. In those < 35 years, poor ovarian reserve could contribute to HDP.

Evaluative effectiveness of follicular output rate, ovarian sensitivity index, and ovarian response prediction index for the ovarian reserve and response of low-prognosis patients according to the POSEIDON criteria: a retrospective study.

The aim was to explore the implications of follicular output rate (FORT), ovarian sensitivity index (OSI), ovarian response prediction index (ORPI), and follicle-to-oocyte index (FOI) in low-prognosis patients defined by POSEIDON criteria. In total, 4030 fresh in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles from January 2013 to October 2021 were included in this retrospective cohort analysis and were categorized into four groups based on the POSEIDON criteria. The FORT between Groups 1 and 2 (0.61 ± 0.34 vs. 0.65 ± 0.35, P = 0.081) and Groups 3 and 4 (1.08 ± 0.82 vs. 1.09 ± 0.94, P = 0.899) were similar. The OSI in the order from the highest to the lowest were 3.01 ± 1.46 in Group 1, 2.28 ± 1.09 in Group 2, 1.54 ± 1.04 in Group 3, and 1.34 ± 0.96 in Group 4 (P < 0.001). The trend in the ORPI values was consistent with that in the OSI. FORT, OSI, ORPI, and FOI complemented each other and offered excellent effectiveness in reflecting ovarian reserve and response, but they were not good predictors of clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) from IVF.

Decreased GDF9 and BMP15 in follicle fluid and granulosa cells and outcomes of IVF-ET among young patients with low prognosis.

PURPOSE: To analyze the level of growth differentiation factor 9 (GDF9) and bone morphogenetic protein 15 (BMP15) in follicle fluid (FF) and granulosa cells (GCs) derived from young patients with low prognosis for in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) treatment. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was carried out by enrolling 52 young patients with low prognosis according to the POSEIDON classification group 3 (low prognosis group) and 51 young patients with normal ovarian reserve (control group). The concentration of the GDF9 and BMP15 proteins in FF was determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The mRNA level of the GDF9 and BMP15 in the GCs was measured by quantitative real-time PCR. RESULTS: The concentration of GDF9 (1026.72 ± 159.12 pg/mL vs. 1298.06 ± 185.41 pg/mL) and BMP15 (685.23 ± 143.91 pg/mL vs. 794.37 ± 81.79 pg/mL) in FF and the mRNA level of GDF9 and BMP15 in the GCs and the live birth rate per treatment cycle started (30.77% vs. 50.98%) and oocytes retrieved (4.25 ± 1.91 vs.12.04 ± 4.24) were significantly lower, whereas the canceled cycle rate was significantly higher (9.62% vs. 0) in the low prognosis group compared with the control group (P < 0.05). The expression of GDF9 and BMP15 in the ovary was positively correlated with live birth (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The expression of GDF9 and BMP15 in the ovary was decreased in young patients with low prognosis accompanied by a poorer outcome of IVF-ET treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR1800016107 (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry), May 11, 2018. ( http://www.chictr.org.cn/edit.aspx?pid=27216&htm=4 ).

Blastocyst euploidy rates in low-prognosis patients according to the POSEIDON criteria: a retrospective analysis of 3016 embryos.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Do embryo euploidy rates differ in the four groups of women with low prognosis as stratified by the POSEIDON criteria? DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of low-prognosis patients who met the POSEIDON criteria and underwent preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A) from January 2013 to June 2020 at the Center for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong University, China. A total of 3016 blastocysts from 1269 PGT-A cycles were included in the study. The primary outcome was the euploidy rate of the blastocysts. For each group, regression analyses were performed to quantitatively describe the relationship between maternal age and embryo euploidy rate. RESULTS: The euploidy rate of embryos in women with poor ovarian response (POR) was 39.1% in total. There were 727, 1052, 275 and 962 blastocysts in groups 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively, with corresponding embryo euploidy rates of 57.2%, 34.9%, 52.4% and 26.2% (P < 0.001). Within each group, the euploidy rate decreased with age, especially in women aged 35 years or older (i.e. groups 2 and 4). CONCLUSIONS: Euploidy rates were more favourable in groups 1 and 3, of a young age, re-emphasizing that oocyte quality is the primary factor determining embryo euploidy rate. The study's findings demonstrated the reasonability of categorizing women with POR by the POSEIDON criteria depending on female age and ovarian reserve biomarkers. These results also provide information for women with POR in different subgroups so they can receive proper counselling on the possible prognosis.

Cumulative live birth rates for low-prognosis women over 5 years or 9 frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles.

BACKGROUND: For heterogeneous populations of low-prognosis women, it remains unclear as to how long individuals should continue undergoing ART when attempting to have a baby, as there have been insufficient studies to date tracking the cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) for these women over the entire course of their ART treatment, particularly over extended time periods. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 17,698 women at a tertiary care academic medical center who had begun undergoing IVI/ICSI cycles using a progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) approach between January 2013 and January 2019. Low-prognosis patients were stratified into four groups based upon POSEIDON criteria, with patients exhibiting normal or high ovarian reserves and response to stimulation (defined as AFC ≥5, > 9 oocytes retrieved) being included as controls (group 5). The CLBR within 5 years or 9 FET cycles from the ovum pick-up (OPU) day of the first cycle was the primary endpoint for this study, including all repetitive oocyte retrieval cycles and subsequent FET cycles. Optimistic and conservative approaches were used for the analysis of CLBRs and the depiction of cumulative incidence curves. RESULTS: Under both optimistic and conservative model analyses, normal and good responders exhibited the highest CLBR within 5 years or 9 FET cycles, followed by younger unexpected poor responders, younger expected poor responders, older unexpected poor responders, and older expected poor responders. Upward trends in CLBRs were evident across the five groups with the prolongation of time or an increase in FET cycle counts. Within the first 2 years or 3 FET cycles, the CLBRs rose rapidly, followed by more moderate increases over the following 2-3.5 years or 4-6 cycles, with expected poor responders exhibiting the most obvious improvements. All Patients reached a CLBR plateau after 3.5 years or 6 FET cycles. CONCLUSIONS: All low-prognosis women should undergo ART treatment for a minimum of 2 years or 3 FET cycles, and exhibit better outcomes when extending ART treatment to 3.5 years or 6 FET cycles (particularly for POSEIDON groups 3 and 4), but should consider ceasing further treatment thereafter due to a lack of apparent benefit.

Antral follicle count and anti-Müllerian hormone to classify low-prognosis women under the POSEIDON criteria: a classification agreement study of over 9000 patients.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the agreement between antral follicle count (AFC) and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels when used to patient classification according to the Patient-Oriented Strategies Encompassing IndividualizeD Oocyte Number (POSEIDON) criteria? SUMMARY ANSWER: Our study indicates a strong agreement between the AFC and the AMH levels in classifying POSEIDON patients; thus, either can be used for this purpose, although one in four women will have discordant values when both biomarkers are used. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: According to the POSEIDON criteria, both AFC and AMH may be used to classify low-prognosis patients. Proposed AFC and AMH thresholds of 5 and 1.2 ng/ml, respectively, have their basis in published literature; however, no study has yet determined the reproducibility of patient classification in comparing one biomarker with the other, nor have their thresholds ever been validated within this patient population. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A population-based cohort study involving 9484 consecutive patients treated in three fertility clinics in Brazil, Turkey and Vietnam between 2015 and 2017. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Participants were infertile women between 22 and 46 years old in their first in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycle of standard ovarian stimulation with exogenous gonadotropins whose baseline ovarian reserves had been assessed by both AFC and AMH. Details of pre- and post-treatment findings were input into a coded research file. Two indicators of interest were created to classify patients according to the POSEIDON criteria based upon AFC and AMH values. Patients who did not fit any of the four POSEIDON groups were classified as non-POSEIDON. AFC was determined in the early follicular phase using two-dimensional (2D) transvaginal ultrasonography, whereas AMH values were based on the modified Beckman Coulter generation II enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Agreement rates were computed between AFC and AMH to classify patients using Cohen's kappa statistics. Logistic regression analyzes were carried out to examine the association between ovarian markers and low (<4) and suboptimal (4-9) oocyte yield. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The degree of agreement in classifying patients according to POSEIDON groups was strong overall (kappa = 0.802; 95% CI: 0.792-0.811). A total of 73.8% of individuals were classified under the same group using both biomarkers. The disagreement rates were ∼26% and did not diverge when AFC or AMH was used as the primary biomarker criterion. Significant regression equations were found between ovarian markers and oocyte yield (P < 0.0001). For low oocyte yield, the optimal AFC and AMH cutoff values were 5 and 1.27 ng/ml with sensitivities of 0.61 and 0.66, specificities of 0.81 and 0.72, and AUC receiver operating characteristics of 0.791 and 0.751, respectively. For suboptimal oocyte yield respective AFC and AMH cutoffs were 12 and 2.97 ng/ml with sensitivities of 0.74 and 0.69, specificities of 0.76 and 0.66 and AUCs of 0.81 and 0.80. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Our study relied on 2D transvaginal sonography to quantify the AFC and manual Gen II assay for AMH determination and classification of patients. AMH data must be interpreted in an assay-specific manner. Treatment protocols varied across centers potentially affecting patient classification. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Three of four patients will be classified the same using either AFC or AMH values. Both biomarkers provide acceptable and equivalent accuracy in predicting oocyte yield further supporting their use and proposed thresholds in daily clinical practice for patient classification according to the POSEIDON criteria. However, the sensitivity of POSEIDON thresholds in predicting low oocyte yield is low. Clinicians should adopt the biomarker that may best reflect their clinical setting. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Unrestricted investigator-sponsored study grant (MS200059_0013) from Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany. The funder had no role in study design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish or manuscript preparation. S.C.E. declares receipt of unrestricted research grants from Merck and lecture fees from Merck and Med.E.A. H.Y. declares receipt of payment for lectures from Merck and Ferring. L.N.V. receives speaker fees and conferences from Merck, Merck Sharp and Dohme (MSD) and Ferring and research grants from MSD and Ferring. T.M.H. received speaker fees and conferences from Merck, MSD and Ferring. The remaining authors have nothing to disclose. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: not applicable.

Associations of FSHR and LHCGR gene variants with ovarian reserve and clinical pregnancy rates.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Are there any associations between the variants of FSHR c.2039 G>A (p. Ser680Asn, rs6166) and LHCGR c.935A>G (p. Asn312Ser, rs2293275) and ovarian reserve, ovarian response, clinical pregnancy rate and POSEIDON group? DESIGN: A total of 210 infertile women were enrolled in this prospective study. The gene variants were analysed by the Sanger method. The clinical parameters were analysed based on genotypes. RESULTS: The frequency of heterozygous and homozygous G allele for FSHR c.2039 G>A in the low prognosis group was significantly higher than that in other response groups (P = 0.034); there was no significant association between LHCGR c.935 A>G and ovarian response. Moreover, the serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) concentration, antral follicle count (AFC), oocytes retrieved, metaphase II (MII) oocytes and two-pronuclear (2PN) oocytes in patients with AG genotype for FSHR c.2039 G>A were significantly lower than those with AA genotype. The serum LH concentrations and clinical pregnancy rate of fresh embryo transfer in patients with GG genotype for LHCGR c.935 A>G were significantly higher than that of the AG genotype. In POSEIDON analysis, the low prognosis women with AA genotype for FSHR c.2039 G>A were more likely to appear in subgroup 1 (P = 0.038). CONCLUSION: The FSHR c.2039 G>A variant has a significant beneficial influence on ovarian reserve and ovarian response. The LHCGR c.935 A>G variant is associated with increased clinical pregnancy rate of fresh embryo transfer in infertile women. In addition, the low prognosis women with AA genotype for FSHR c.2039 G>A tend to show better ovarian reserve and prognosis.

Cumulative live birth rates in low-prognosis women.

STUDY QUESTION: Do cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) over multiple IVF/ICSI cycles confirm the low prognosis in women stratified according to the POSEIDON criteria? SUMMARY ANSWER: The CLBR of low-prognosis women is ~56% over 18 months of IVF/ICSI treatment and varies between the POSEIDON groups, which is primarily attributable to the impact of female age. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The POSEIDON group recently proposed a new stratification for low-prognosis women in IVF/ICSI treatment, with the aim to define more homogenous populations for clinical trials and stimulate a patient-tailored therapeutic approach. These new criteria combine qualitative and quantitative parameters to create four groups of low-prognosis women with supposedly similar biologic characteristics. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This study analyzed the data of a Dutch multicenter observational cohort study including 551 low-prognosis women, aged <44 years, who initiated IVF/ICSI treatment between 2011 and 2014 and were treated with a fixed FSH dose of 150 IU/day in the first treatment cycle. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Low-prognosis women were categorized into one of the POSEIDON groups based on their age (younger or older than 35 years), anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level (above or below 0.96 ng/ml), and the ovarian response (poor or suboptimal) in their first cycle of standard stimulation. The primary outcome was the CLBR over multiple complete IVF/ICSI cycles, including all subsequent fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfers, within 18 months of treatment. Cumulative incidence curves were obtained using an optimistic and a conservative analytic approach. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The CLBR of the low-prognosis women was on average ~56% over 18 months of IVF/ICSI treatment. Younger unexpected poor (n = 38) and suboptimal (n = 179) responders had a CLBR of ~65% and ~68%, respectively, and younger expected poor responders (n = 65) had a CLBR of ~59%. The CLBR of older unexpected poor (n = 41) and suboptimal responders (n = 102) was ~42% and ~54%, respectively, and of older expected poor responders (n = 126) ~39%. For comparison, the CLBR of younger (n = 164) and older (n = 78) normal responders with an adequate ovarian reserve was ~72% and ~58% over 18 months of treatment, respectively. No large differences were observed in the number of fresh treatment cycles between the POSEIDON groups, with an average of two fresh cycles per woman within 18 months of follow-up. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Small numbers in some (sub)groups reduced the precision of the estimates. However, our findings provide the first relevant indication of the CLBR of low-prognosis women in the POSEIDON groups. Small FSH dose adjustments between cycles were allowed, inducing therapeutic disparity. Yet, this is in accordance with current daily practice and increases the generalizability of our findings. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The CLBRs vary between the POSEIDON groups. This heterogeneity is primarily determined by a woman's age, reflecting the importance of oocyte quality. In younger women, current IVF/ICSI treatment reaches relatively high CLBR over multiple complete cycles, despite reduced quantitative parameters. In older women, the CLBR remains relatively low over multiple complete cycles, due to the co-occurring decline in quantitative and qualitative parameters. As no effective interventions exist to counteract this decline, clinical management currently relies on proper counselling. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No external funds were obtained for this study. J.A.L. is supported by a Research Fellowship grant and received an unrestricted personal grant from Merck BV. S.C.O., T.C.v.T., and H.L.T. received an unrestricted personal grant from Merck BV. C.B.L. received research grants from Merck, Ferring, and Guerbet. K.F. received unrestricted research grants from Merck Serono, Ferring, and GoodLife. She also received fees for lectures and consultancy from Ferring and GoodLife. A.H. declares that the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Medical Centre Groningen received an unrestricted research grant from Ferring Pharmaceuticals BV, the Netherlands. J.S.E.L. has received unrestricted research grants from Ferring, Zon-MW, and The Dutch Heart Association. He also received travel grants and consultancy fees from Danone, Euroscreen, Ferring, AnshLabs, and Titus Healthcare. B.W.J.M. is supported by an National Health and Medical Research Council Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548) and reports consultancy work for ObsEva, Merck, and Guerbet. He also received a research grant from Merck BV and travel support from Guerbet. F.J.M.B. received monetary compensation as a member of the external advisory board for Merck Serono (the Netherlands) and Ferring Pharmaceuticals BV (the Netherlands) for advisory work for Gedeon Richter (Belgium) and Roche Diagnostics on automated AMH assay development, and for a research cooperation with Ansh Labs (USA). All other authors have nothing to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.

Comparison of miscarriage rates in low prognosis patients according to the POSEIDON criteria.

OBJECTIVE: The POSEIDON criteria stratified patients with poor ovarian response into four subgroups with exclusive characteristics and assisted reproductive technology success rates. However, limited studies focused on miscarriage in the POSEIDON population. This study aimed to explore whether the miscarriage rate different among low prognosis patients according to POSEIDON criteria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study. All clinical pregnancies achieved after in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment between January 1998 and April 2021 were analyzed. The primary outcome was miscarriage, defined as the pregnancy loss before 20 weeks of gestation age. Miscarriage rate was estimated per clinical pregnancy and gestational sac. RESULTS: A total of 1222 clinical pregnancies from 1088 POSEIDON patients met the inclusion criteria. The miscarriage rates per clinical pregnancy in each POSEIDON subgroup were as follows: Group 1: 11.7 %, Group 2: 26.5 %, Group 3: 20.9 %, and Group 4: 37.5 %. The miscarriage rate per gestational sac showed a similar trend as the clinical miscarriage rate. Multivariate regression analysis showed that advanced maternal age is an independent factor for miscarriage (Group 2 vs. 1: OR 2.476; Group 4 vs. 3: OR 2.252). Patients with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) have higher miscarriage risks but without significance (Group 3 vs. 1: OR 1.322; Group 4 vs. 2: OR 1.202). CONCLUSION: Miscarriage rates differed among low prognosis patients according to the POSEIDON criteria. Age remains a determined risk for miscarriage. DOR might be a potential factor for miscarriage, but it didn't account for a significant impact in POSEIDON patients.

What is the optimal number of embryos to transfer for POSEIDON group 1 and group 2? A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The 2016 Patient-Oriented Strategy Encompassing IndividualizeD Oocyte Number (POSEIDON) criteria redefined the poor responders as low prognosis patients. The embryo transfer strategy for POSEIDON patients remained to be addressed. This study aimed to investigate the optimized number of embryos to transfer for unexpected low-prognosis patients (POSEIDON Group 1 and Group 2) with blastocyst transfer in their first frozen cycle. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 2970 patients who underwent frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) between January 2018 and December 2021. Patients from POSEIDON Group 1 (N = 219) and Group 2 (N = 135) who underwent blastocyst transfer in their first FET cycles were included and divided into the elective single embryo transfer (eSET) group and the double embryo transfer (DET) group. RESULTS: For POSEIDON Group 1, the live birth rate per embryo transfer of the DET group was slightly higher than the eSET group (52.17% vs 46.15%, OR 0.786, 95% CI 0.462-1.337, P = 0.374; adjusted OR (aOR) 0.622, 95% CI 0.340-1.140, P = 0.124), while a significant increase of 20.00% in the multiple birth rate was shown. For Group 2, higher live birth rates were observed in the DET group compared to the eSET group (38.46% vs 20.48%, OR 0.412, 95% CI 0.190-0.892, P = 0.024; aOR 0.358, 95% CI 0.155-0.828, P = 0.016). The difference in the multiple birth rate was 20.00% without statistical significance. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that age (OR 0.759, 95% CI .624-0.922, P = 0.006 and OR 0.751, 95% CI 0.605-0.932, P = 0.009) and the number of transferred embryos (OR 0.412, 95% CI 0.190-0.892, P = 0.024 and OR 0.367, 95% CI 0.161-0.840, P = 0.018) were significant variables for the live birth rate in POSEIDON Group 2. CONCLUSIONS: The findings in the present study showed that eSET was preferred in the first frozen cycle for POSEIDON Group 1 to avoid unnecessary risks. Double embryo transfer strategy could be considered to improve the success rate for POSEIDON Group 2 with caution. Further stratification by age is needed for a more scientific discussion about the embryo transfer strategy for POSEIDON patients.

Cumulative live birth rates and birth outcomes after IVF/ICSI treatment cycles in young POSEIDON patients: A real-world study.

Objective: The aim of this study was to describe the cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) of young women with or without low prognosis according to the POSEIDON criteria after IVF/ICSI cycles and to investigate whether the diagnosis of low prognosis increases the risk of abnormal birth outcomes. Design: Retrospective study. Setting: A single reproductive medicine center. Population: From January 2016 to October 2020, there were 17,893 patients (<35 years) involved. After screening, 4,105 women were included in POSEIDON group 1, 1,375 women were included in POSEIDON group 3, and 11,876 women were defined as non-POSEIDON. Interventions: Baseline serum AMH level was measured on the D2-D3 of menstrual cycle before IVF/ICSI treatment. Main outcome measures: Cumulative live birth rate (CLBR), birth outcomes. Results: After four stimulation cycles, the CLBRs in POSEIDON group 1, POSEIDON group 3, and non-POSEIDON group reached 67.9% (95% CI, 66.5%-69.3%), 51.9% (95% CI, 49.2%-54.5%), and 79.6% (95% CI, 78.9%-80.3%), respectively. There was no difference in gestational age, preterm delivery, cesarean delivery, and low birth weight infants between the three groups, but macrosomia was significantly higher in non-POSEIDON group, after adjusting for maternal age and BMI. Conclusions: The POSEIDON group shows lower CLBRs than the non-POSEIDON group in young women, while the risk of abnormal birth outcomes in the POSEIDON group will not increase.

Comparison of Cumulative Live Birth Rate (CLBR) According to Patient Oriented Strategies Encompassing Individualized Oocyte Number (POSEIDON) Stratification Among Low Prognosis Women Undergoing IVF-ICSI Cycles.

Background: The purpose of the current study was to evaluate patient-oriented strategies encompassing individualized oocyte number (POSEIDON) criteria, validate stratification of low prognosis women, and prognosticate their reproductive potential in terms of cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) in Indian women. Methods: Out of 4048 women who underwent IVF/ICSI, 3287 women met the criteria for final evaluation of CLBR. They criteria were divided into (a) group 1a as cases with <4 oocytes retrieved and 1b with 4-9 oocytes retrieved; (b) group 2a as cases with <4 oocytes retrieved and 2b with 4-9 oocytes retrieved; (c) group 3 (<35 years, AMH <1.2 ng/ml, AFC <5); and (d) group 4 (≥35 years, AMH <1.2 ng/ml, AFC <5). Non-POSEIDON group was sub-divided into normo-responders (10-20 oocytes) and hyper-responder (>20 oocytes). Results: Overall CLBR was two-fold lower in POSEIDON group as compared to non-POSEIDON group (p<0.001). For every one-year increase in the age, the odds of CLBR decreased by 4% (OR 0.96, CI 0.93-0.99) in POSEIDON group and by 5% (OR 0.95, CI 0.92-0.98) in non-POSEIDON group. For every unit increase in number of oocytes retrieved, the odds of CLBR increased by 1.22 times (OR1.22, CI 1.16-1.28) in POSEIDON group and by 1.08 times (OR 1.08, CI 1.05-1.11) in non-POSEIDON group. Among POSEIDON groups, the highest values in CLBR belonged to group 1b followed by 3, 2b, 4, 1a, and 2a. Conclusion: POSEIDON stratification of low-prognosis women undergoing IVF may be considered valid to prognosticate and counsel women undergoing IVF. Prospective studies will strengthen its validity among different ethnic populations.

Cumulative live birth rate in mild versus conventional stimulation in progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocols for individuals with low prognosis.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) of mild stimulation and conventional stimulation for the low-prognosis population undergoing PPOS protocols. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study. We included women with a low prognosis. All women underwent PPOS protocols, and the starting gonadotropin (Gn) dose was 150 IU or 300 IU. The primary outcome measure was CLBR. The secondary outcome measures were the number of oocytes retrieved, number of 2PN oocytes and number of available embryos. Results: In total, 171 women with mild stimulation and 1810 women with conventional stimulation met the criteria. In the PSM model, 171 mild stimulation cycles were matched with 513 conventional stimulation cycles. The gonadotropin dosage in the mild stimulation group was significantly lower than that in the conventional stimulation group (1878.6 ± 1065.7 vs. 2854.7 ± 821.0, P<0.001). The numbers of oocytes retrieved, 2PN oocytes, available embryos and high-quality embryos were also higher in the conventional stimulation group than in the mild stimulation group (P<0.05). There was no significant between-group difference in the cumulative clinical pregnancy rate (26.3% vs. 27.5%, P=0.77). The CLBR after mild stimulation was similar to that after conventional stimulation (21.1% vs. 22.0%, P=0.79). Conclusion: In our study, we found that the CLBRs of mild stimulation and conventional stimulation were similar, despite conventional stimulation resulting in significantly more oocytes and embryos. Thus, mild stimulation can be considered an option for women with a low prognosis in PPOS protocols.

Mild/moderate versus full stimulation.

Mild stimulation (MS) consists in prescribing gonadotropin at the minimum amount alone or in combination with other compounds. This strategy has gained popularity in assisted reproduction for the reduced costs, better patient compliance, and reduced risk of hyperstimulation syndrome. Some investigators proposed MS even in women with low prognosis. The Poseidon group proposed new criteria to identify these patients categorizing them into 4 different groups, each one characterized by a specific segment of prognosis. The use of MS in women with low prognosis involves risks that cannot be overlooked. The most crucial concerns are the increased rate of cycle cancellation and the reduced number of eggs collected. Notably, the number of eggs collected still represents the most accurate predictor of live birth and cumulative live birth rate. Despite promising preliminary data, recent evidence has confirmed that MS does not improve gamete quality. Hence, considering that no robust strategy was identified so far to improve oocyte quality, the only reasonable strategy to improve the chance of live birth in women with low prognosis is to collect the necessary number of oocytes to maximize the probability to obtain at least 1 good-quality embryo. In this sense, conventional protocols offer better results when compared with the mild approach. Given the difficulty in collecting enough oocytes in a single round of stimulation, accumulation strategy could represent a valuable approach especially in women with advanced reproductive age and reduced ovarian reserve.

Comparison of the Cumulative Live Birth Rates of Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation and Flexible GnRH Antagonist Protocols in Patients With Low Prognosis.

Objective: To compare the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) of the progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol with that of the flexible GnRH antagonist protocol in patients with poor prognosis diagnosed per the POSEIDON criteria. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study. Low-prognosis women who underwent IVF/ICSI at the Reproductive Center of Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University between January 2016 and January 2019 were included according to the POSEIDON criteria. The CLBR was the primary outcome of interest. The secondary outcome measures were the numbers of oocytes retrieved, 2PN embryos, available embryos and time to live birth. Results: A total of 1329 women met the POSEIDON criteria for analysis. For POSEIDON group 1, the dosage of gonadotropin (Gn) was higher in the PPOS group than in the GnRH antagonist group (2757.3 ± 863.1 vs 2419.2 ± 853.1, P=0.01). The CLBR of the PPOS protocols was 54.4%, which was similar to the rate of 53.8% in the GnRH antagonist group. For POSEIDON group 2, the number of available embryos was higher in the PPOS group (2.0 ± 1.7 vs 1.6 ± 1.4, P=0.02) than in the GnRH antagonist group. However, the CLBRs of the two groups were similar (18.1% vs 24.3%, P=0.09). For POSEIDON groups 3 and 4, there were no statistically significant differences in the number of oocytes retrieved, 2PN, available embryos or CLBR between the two protocols. After adjustments for confounding factors, the CLBR remained consistent with the unadjusted rates. In the POSEIDON group 1 population, the GnRH antagonist protocols had a shorter time to live birth (P=0.04). Conclusion: For low-prognosis patients diagnosed per the POSEIDON criteria, the CLBR of PPOS protocols is comparable to that of GnRH antagonist protocols. In the POSEIDON group 1 population, the GnRH antagonist protocols resulted in a shorter time to live birth.

POSEIDON classification and the proposed treatment options for groups 1 and 2: time to revisit? A retrospective analysis of 1425 ART cycles.

STUDY QUESTION: Do live birth outcomes differ when Patient-Oriented Strategy Encompassing IndividualizeD Oocyte Number (POSEIDON) stratified groups are compared with women with good prognosis (non-POSEIDON group) undergoing ART? SUMMARY ANSWER: The current study showed no significant difference in the live birth rates (LBRs) per embryo transfer between POSEIDON groups 1 and 2 when compared with women in the non-POSEIDON group undergoing ART. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Recently, there has been a lot of focus on the POSEIDON classification for low prognosis women undergoing ART and various management options have been advocated. For POSEIDON groups 1 and 2, low starting dose and gonadotrophin receptor polymorphism have been suggested as possible reasons for a hyporesponse, and increasing the starting gonadotrophin dose, the addition of recombinant LH and dual stimulation have been suggested as treatment options. Most of these treatment options are hypothetical in nature and need validation. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: In the current cohort study, a total of 1425 cycles were analyzed retrospectively following a single cycle fresh embryo transfer. The study period was from January 2013 to June 2018. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS: Women undergoing ART at a tertiary level infertility clinic were included. Clinical and treatment-related details were obtained from the hospital's electronic medical records. The ART outcomes in a non-POSEIDON group (women with an adequate ovarian reserve and/or optimal ovarian response i.e. >9 oocytes retrieved in the previous ART cycle) and a low prognosis group stratified by POSEIDON criteria were compared. We also examined the effectiveness of the modifications made in the current ART treatment protocols among women with an adequate ovarian reserve who had a history of poor/suboptimal response (POSEIDON 1 and 2). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: There was no statistically significant difference in the LBR per embryo transfer in POSEIDON group 1 (32/109, 29%) and group 2 (17/58, 29%) when compared with the non-POSEIDON group (340/1041, 33%) (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.69; 95% CI 0.37-1.27 and aOR 0.93, 95% CI 0.43-1.97, respectively), while significantly lower LBR were observed in POSEIDON groups 3 (17/97, 17.5%) and 4 (12/120, 10%) (aOR 0.49; 95% CI 0.28-0.89 and aOR 0.38, 95% CI 0.19-0.74, respectively). The gonadotrophin dose alone was increased in one-quarter of the cycles and in another 27% the dose was increased along with the protocol change among POSEIDON group 1. In POSEIDON group 2, a change in the dose alone and in combination with protocol change was performed in 5 and 41% of cycles, respectively. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: A limitation of our study is the retrospective nature of the study with an inherent risk of unknown confounders influencing the outcomes. Other limitations are the lack of cumulative live birth data and the relatively small sample within POSEIDON group 2, which could lead to a type II error. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The current study showed no significant difference in the LBR between the POSEIDON groups 1 and 2 when compared with the non-POSEIDON group of women, while groups 3 and 4 had significantly lower LBR. The simple gonadotrophin/protocol changes in groups 1 and 2 resulted in LBRs comparable to women with good prognosis. These findings call for revisiting the proposed treatment strategies for POSEIDON groups 1 and 2. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: No funding was obtained. There are no competing interests to declare.

The POSEIDON stratification - moving from poor ovarian response to low prognosis.

Poor ovarian response remains one of the most challenging tasks for an IVF clinician. In this review, we aim to highlight the ongoing research for optimizing the prognosis in poor ovarian response patients. The newly introduced POSEIDON criteria argue that the first step is to move from a poor response to a poor prognosis concept, while improving identification and stratification of the different sub-types of poor prognosis patients prior to ovarian stimulation. The immediate marker of success is the ability of the ovarian stimulation to retrieve the number of oocytes needed to obtain at least one euploid blastocyst for transfer in each patient. This surrogate marker of success should not replace live birth as the most important outcome, but it should be approached as a useful tool for clinicians to evaluate their strategy for achieving live birth in the shortest timespan possible in the individual patient/ couple.

The Role of Traditional Chinese Formula Ding-Kun Pill (DKP) in Expected Poor Ovarian Response Women (POSEIDON Group 4) Undergoing In Vitro Fertilization-Embryo Transfer: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

Objective: The primary objective of the study was to assess traditional Chinese formula DKP supplementation in terms of efficacy and safety on reproductive outcomes of expected poor ovarian responder (POR, POSEIDON Group 4) undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET). Design Setting and Participants: Women eligible for IVF-ET were invited to participate in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, superiority trial at academic fertility centers of ten public hospitals in Chinese Mainland. A total of 462 patients (35-44 years) equally divided between DKP and placebo groups with antral follicle count (AFC) <5 or anti-müllerian hormone (AMH) <1.2 ng/ml were randomized. Interventions: All participants were given DKP or 7 g placebo twice daily on the previous menstrual cycle day 5 until oocyte retrieval, which took approximately 5 to 6 weeks. Main Outcome Measure: The primary outcome was the ongoing pregnancy defined as more than 20 gestational weeks of an intrauterine living fetus confirmed by pelvic ultrasonography. Results: Demographic characteristics were equally distributed between the study populations. Intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis revealed that ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR) was not significantly different between DKP and placebo groups [26.4% (61/231) versus 24.2% (56/231); relative risk (RR) 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.49, P = 0.593]. No significant differences between groups were observed for the secondary outcomes. The additional per protocol (PP) analysis was in line with ITT results: OPR in DKP group was 27.2% (61/224) versus 24.1% (55/228) in placebo group [RR 1.13, 95%CI (0.82 to 1.55), P = 0.449]. After subgroup analysis the findings concluded that POR population of 35-37 years had a significantly higher OPR after 5-6 weeks of oral DKP (41.8%, 33/79) versus placebo (25.4%, 18/71) [RR 1.65, 95% CI (1.02 to 2.65), P = 0.034, P for interaction = 0.028]. Conclusion: This well-designed randomized controlled trial (RCT) offers new high-quality evidence to supplement existing retrospective literature concerning DKP performance in expected PORs. DKP could be recommended as a safe and natural remedy for expected PORs (aged 35-37 years) who fulfill the POSEIDON group 4 criteria. However, additional interventional clinical studies are undoubtedly required to be conducted in the future to validate this hypothesis. Clinical Trial Registration: www.chictr.org.cn, identifier ChiCTR1900026614.

Improving Reporting of Clinical Studies Using the POSEIDON Criteria: POSORT Guidelines.

The POSEIDON (Patient-Oriented Strategies Encompassing IndividualizeD Oocyte Number) criteria were developed to help clinicians identify and classify low-prognosis patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) and provide guidance for possible therapeutic strategies to overcome infertility. Since its introduction, the number of published studies using the POSEIDON criteria has increased steadily. However, a critical analysis of existing evidence indicates inconsistent and incomplete reporting of critical outcomes. Therefore, we developed guidelines to help researchers improve the quality of reporting in studies applying the POSEIDON criteria. We also discuss the advantages of using the POSEIDON criteria in ART clinical studies and elaborate on possible study designs and critical endpoints. Our ultimate goal is to advance the knowledge concerning the clinical use of the POSEIDON criteria to patients, clinicians, and the infertility community.