Analysis of use of different rFSHs during IVF/ICSI-assisted conception in elderly population and effect of double trigger on clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the number of oocytes retrieved and clinical outcomes of ovulation induction in an older population treated with in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) (IVF/ICSI) using different rFSH options and the effectiveness of antagonist treatment to induce ovulation using gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRH-a) in combination with an human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) trigger. METHODS: A total of 132 fresh cycles were selected for this study, which were treated with IVF/ICSI in our hospital from March 2022 to December 2022. Observations were made according to different subgroups and the effects of different triggering methods on the number of oocytes obtained, embryo quality, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: The initial gonadotropin (Gn) dose, the number of oocytes, and the number of MII oocytes were higher in group A than in group B (p < .05), and the clinical pregnancy rate was 29.41% in group A. Group B had a clinical pregnancy rate of 27.5%. The double-trigger group was superior to the HCG-trigger group in terms of the number of 2PN, the number of viable embryos, and the number of high-quality embryos (p < .05). The use of a double-trigger regimen (OR = 0.667, 95%CI (0.375, 1.706), p = .024) was a protective factor for the clinical pregnancy rate, whereas AFC (OR = 0.925, 95%CI (0.867, 0.986), p = .017) was an independent factor for the clinical pregnancy rate. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a dual-trigger regimen of GnRH-a in combination with HCG using an appropriate antagonist improves pregnancy outcomes in fresh embryo transfer cycles in older patients.

The effectiveness of relugolix compared with leuprorelin for preoperative therapy before laparoscopic myomectomy in premenopausal women, diagnosed with uterine fibroids: protocol for a randomized controlled study (MyLacR study).

BACKGROUND: The oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist relugolix, which temporarily stops menstruation, is used to treat heavy menstrual bleeding, pelvic pressure, and low back pain in women with uterine fibroids. Treatment can also help women recover from low hemoglobin levels and possibly shrink the fibroids. However, evidence of preoperative use of relugolix before laparoscopic myomectomy is limited. Nevertheless, the treatment could reduce interoperative blood loss, decrease the risk of developing postoperative anemia, and shorten the operative time. Thus, we aim to test whether 12-week preoperative treatment with relugolix (40 mg orally, once daily) is similar to or not worse than leuprorelin (one injection every 4 weeks) to reduce intraoperative blood loss. METHODS: Efficacy and safety of preoperative administration of drugs will be studied in a multi-center, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, noninferiority trial enrolling premenopausal women ≥ 20 years of age, diagnosed with uterine fibroids and scheduled for laparoscopic myomectomy. Participants (n = 80) will be recruited in the clinical setting of participating institutions. The minimization method (predefined factors: presence or absence of fibroids ≥ 9 cm and the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics [FIGO] type 1-5 fibroids) with randomization is used in a 1:1 allocation. Relugolix is a 40-mg oral tablet taken once a day before a meal, for 12 weeks, up to the day before surgery. Leuprorelin is a 1.88 mg, or 3.75 mg subcutaneous injection, given in three 4-week intervals during patient visits before the surgery. For the primary outcome measure of intraoperative bleeding, the blood flow is collected from the body cavity, surgical sponges, and collection bag and measured in milliliters. Secondary outcome measures are hemoglobin levels, myoma size, other surgical outcomes, and quality-of-life questionnaire responses (Kupperman Konenki Shogai Index and Uterine Fibroid Symptoms-Quality of Life). DISCUSSION: Real-world evidence will be collected in a clinical setting to use pre-treatment with an oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist to reduce intraoperative bleeding in women who undergo laparoscopic myomectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: jRCTs031210564 was registered on 19 January 2022 in the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials ( https://jrct.niph.go.jp ).

Value of estrogen pretreatment in patients with diminished ovarian reserve and elevated FSH on a line antagonist regimen: a retrospective controlled study.

BACKGROUND: The key to enhancing the efficacy of antagonistic regimens in pregnancy is to better synchronize follicular growth during cycles of controlled ovarian stimulation (COS), especially in patients with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR). During in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) treatment, luteal phase estrogen pretreatment may enhance follicular development synchronization and yield of mature oocytes. However, the effect of estrogen pretreatment in DOR patients with elevated basal follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) levels has not been well studied. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of patients with elevated basal FSH levels and DOR (401 cycles) who underwent IVF/intracytoplasmic monosperm injection (ICSI)-assisted conception. Both groups were treated with a flexible gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist regimen and were further divided into two groups according to whether they received luteal estrogen pretreatment. There were 79 patients in the estrogen pretreatment group and 322 patients in the control group. On the second day of the menstrual cycle, gonadotropin (Gn) stimulation of the ovaries was initiated. The general characteristics, clinical, biological parameters and outcomes of the two groups were compared. RESULTS: The basic profiles of the two groups were similar (P > 0.05). More patients in the pretreatment group showed FSH rebound after gonadotropin (Gn) initiation, resulting in a significantly higher number of Gn days and total Gn than those in the control group (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the number of days of antagonist use, follicle output rate (FORT), number of metaphase II(MII)eggs obtained, number of Two pronuclei (2PN) fertilized, number of D3 quality embryos, blastocyst formation rate, fresh embryo clinical pregnancy rate, cumulative pregnancy rate, and non-transferable embryo rate between the two groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The use of luteal phase estrogen pretreatment in patients with elevated basal FSH combined with DOR resulted in high FSH levels after the release of negative feedback, which was detrimental to early follicular growth, did not increase the follicular output rate, may have increased the use and duration of controlled ovarian stimulation drugs, and did not increase the number of eggs gained or improve clinical outcomes.

Development and validation of a prediction model for suboptimal ovarian response in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) patients undergoing GnRH-antagonist protocol in IVF/ICSI cycles.

BACKGROUND: PCOS patients with unexpectedly low oocyte yield following conventional ovarian stimulation are referred to as suboptimal responders. However, identifying suboptimal responders presents a significant challenge within reproductive medicine and limited research exists on the occurrence of suboptimal response. This analysis aimed to develop a predictive model of suboptimal response during in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) treatments in PCOS patients. METHODS: This retrospective study involved a cohort of 313 PCOS patients undergoing their first IVF/ICSI cycle from 2019 to 2022. Univariate logistic regression analyses, least absolute shrinkage, selection operator regression analysis, and recursive feature elimination were employed to identify relevant characteristics and construct predictive models. Moreover, a nomogram was constructed based on the best model. Receiver operating characteristic curves, decision curve analysis (DCA), and calibration curves were used to evaluate the model. RESULTS: The predictors included in the model were age, Anti-Mullerian hormone, antral follicle count, and basal follicle-stimulating hormone. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.7702 (95% confidence interval 0.7157-0.8191). The AUC, along with the DCA curve and calibration curve, demonstrated a satisfactory level of congruence and discrimination ability. CONCLUSION: The nomogram effectively predicted the probability of suboptimal response in PCOS patients undergoing gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol during IVF/ICSI treatment.

Comparison of the pregnancy outcomes of progestin-primed vs. antagonist ovarian stimulation in patients with poor ovarian response: a retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) is an efficient controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) method. The study explored the pregnancy outcomes between PPOS and antagonist ovarian stimulation protocol (GnRH-ant) in infertile patients with poor ovarian response (POR). METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with POR who underwent COS at the Reproductive Medical Center of Shanxi Maternal and Child Health Hospital from January 2021 to April 2022. The cycles were grouped as the GnRH-ant group and the PPOS group. The primary outcome was the clinical pregnancy rate; the secondary outcomes included the biochemical pregnancy abortion rate and live birth rate. RESULTS: Frozen embryo transfer was used in all cycles in this study. The cycles were divided into the GnRH-ant (n = 236 cycles) and PPOS (n = 273 cycles) groups. Age, BMI, type of infertility, infertility duration, FSH, LH, PRL, E2, T, P, and the number of cycles in the hospital were similar between the two groups (all p > 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in the clinical pregnancy rate (primary outcome, 32.71% vs. 43.90%, p = 0.082), total Gn dose, total Gn days, ART mode (IVF or ICSI), AFC, MII follicles, 2PN embryos, fertility, cycle cancelation rate, biochemical pregnancy rate, abortion rate, or live birth rate between the two groups (all p > 0.05). The PPOS group exhibited a higher rate of high-quality embryos than the GnRH-ant group (50.12% vs. 42.90%, p = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: The PPOS protocol was comparable to the GnRH-ant protocol regarding induction parameters and cycle cancelation, biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, and abortion rates but might be associated with a higher proportion of high-quality embryos.

Progestin primed ovarian stimulation using dydrogesterone from day 7 of the cycle onwards in oocyte donation cycles: a longitudinal study.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does a progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol with dydrogesterone from cycle day 7 yield similar outcomes compared with a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol in the same oocyte donors? DESIGN: This retrospective longitudinal study included 128 cycles from 64 oocyte donors. All oocyte donors had the same type of gonadotrophin and daily dose in both stimulation cycles. The primary outcome was the number of cumulus-oocyte complexes (COC) retrieved. RESULTS: The number of COC retrieved (mean ± SD 19.7 ± 10.8 versus 19.2 ± 8.3; P = 0.5) and the number of metaphase II oocytes (15.5 ± 8.4 versus 16.2 ± 7.0; P = 0.19) were similar for the PPOS and GnRH antagonist protocols, respectively. The duration of stimulation (10.5 ± 1.5 days versus 10.8 ± 1.5 days; P = 0.14) and consumption of gonadotrophins (2271.9 ± 429.7 IU versus 2321.5 ± 403.4 IU; P = 0.2) were also comparable, without any cases of premature ovulation. Nevertheless, there was a significant difference in the total cost of medication per cycle: €898.3 ± 169.9 for the PPOS protocol versus €1196.4 ± 207.5 (P < 0.001) for the GnRH antagonist protocol. CONCLUSION: The number of oocytes retrieved and number of metaphase II oocytes were comparable in both stimulation protocols, with the advantage of significant cost reduction in favour of the PPOS protocol compared with the GnRH antagonist protocol. No cases of premature ovulation were observed, even when progestin was started later in the stimulation.

Ovarian response and embryo ploidy following oral micronized progesterone-primed ovarian stimulation versus GnRH antagonist protocol. A prospective study with repeated ovarian stimulation cycles.

STUDY QUESTION: Is there any difference in ovarian response and embryo ploidy following progesterone-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) using micronized progesterone or GnRH antagonist protocol? SUMMARY ANSWER: Pituitary downregulation with micronized progesterone as PPOS results in higher number of oocytes retrieved and a comparable number of euploid blastocysts to a GnRH antagonist protocol. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Although the GnRH antagonist is considered by most the gold standard protocol for controlling the LH surge during ovarian stimulation (OS) for IVF/ICSI, PPOS protocols are being increasingly used in freeze-all protocols. Still, despite the promising results of PPOS protocols, an early randomized trial reported potentially lower live births in recipients of oocytes resulting following downregulation with medroxyprogesterone acetate as compared with a GnRH antagonist protocol. The scope of the current prospective study was to investigate whether PPOS with micronized progesterone results in an equivalent yield of euploid blastocysts to a GnRH antagonist protocol. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: In this prospective study, performed between September 2019 to January 2022, 44 women underwent two consecutive OS protocols within a period of 6 months in a GnRH antagonist protocol or in a PPOS protocol with oral micronized progesterone. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Overall, 44 women underwent two OS cycles with an identical fixed dose of rFSH (225 or 300 IU) in both cycles. Downregulation in the first cycles was performed with the use of a flexible GnRH antagonist protocol (0.25 mg per day as soon as one follicle of 14 mm) and consecutively, after a washout period of 1 month, control of LH surge was performed with 200 mg of oral micronized progesterone from stimulation Day 1. After the completion of both cycles, all generated blastocysts underwent genetic analysis for aneuploidy screening (preimplantation genetic testing for aneuplody, PGT-A). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Comparisons between protocols did not reveal differences between the duration of OS. The hormonal profile on the day of trigger revealed statistically significant differences between protocols in all the tested hormones except for FSH: with significantly higher serum E2 levels, more elevated LH levels and higher progesterone levels in PPOS cycles as compared with antagonist cycles, respectively. Compared with the GnRH antagonist protocol, the PPOS protocol resulted in a significantly higher number of oocytes (12.7 ± 8.09 versus 10.3 ± 5.84; difference between means [DBM] -2.4 [95% CI -4.1 to -0.73]), metaphase II (9.1 ± 6.12 versus 7.3 ± 4.15; DBM -1.8 [95% CI -3.1 to -0.43]), and 2 pronuclei (7.1 ± 4.99 versus 5.7 ± 3.35; DBM -1.5 [95% CI -2.6.1 to -0.32]), respectively. Nevertheless, no differences were observed regarding the mean number of blastocysts between the PPOS and GnRH antagonist protocols (2.9 ± 2.11 versus 2.8 ± 2.12; DBM -0.07 [95% CI -0.67 to 0.53]) and the mean number of biopsied blastocysts (2.9 ± 2.16 versus 2.9 ± 2.15; DBM -0.07 [95% CI -0.70 to 0.56]), respectively. Concerning the euploidy rates per biopsied embryo, a 29% [95% CI 21.8-38.1%] and a 35% [95% CI 26.6-43.9%] were noticed in the PPOS and antagonist groups, respectively. Finally, no difference was observed for the primary outcome, with a mean number of euploid embryos of 0.86 ± 0.90 versus 1.00 ± 1.12 for the comparison of PPOS versus GnRh antagonist. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study was powered to detect differences in the mean number of euploid embryos and not in terms of pregnancy outcomes. Additionally, per protocol, there was no randomization, the first cycle was always a GnRH antagonist cycle and the second a PPOS with 1 month of washout period in between. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: In case of a freeze-all protocol, clinicians may safely consider oral micronized progesterone to control the LH surge and patients could benefit from the advantages of a medication of oral administration, with a potentially higher number of oocytes retrieved at a lower cost, without any compromise in embryo ploidy rates. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research was supported by an unrestricted grant from Theramex. N.P.P. has received Research grants from Merck Serono, Organon, Ferring Pharmaceutical, Roche, Theramex, IBSA, Gedeon Richter, and Besins Healthcare; honoraria for lectures from: Merck Serono, Organon, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Besins International, Roche Diagnostics, IBSA, Theramex, and Gedeon Richter; consulting fees from Merck Serono, Organon, Besins Healthcare, and IBSA. M.d.M.V., F.M., and I.R. declared no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study was registered at Clinical Trials Gov. (NCT04108039).

Association between the systemic immune-inflammation index and GnRH antagonist protocol IVF outcomes: a cohort study.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the relationship between the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) and IVF outcomes in women undergoing a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol? DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study analysed clinical data and blood samples collected before oocyte retrieval from participants undergoing IVF with the GnRH antagonist protocol. Logistic regression and generalized additive models were used to examine the association between SII quartiles and continuous SII values and IVF outcomes. RESULTS: Higher SII values correlated negatively with biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, live birth and implantation rates, and positively with early pregnancy loss, independent of age, body mass index, anti-Müllerian hormone and stimulation parameters. The most significant adverse outcomes were observed in the highest SII quartile. A non-linear relationship was identified between log-transformed SII and IVF outcomes, with an inflection point at an SII of approximately 6.72, indicating a threshold effect. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated SII is associated with poorer IVF outcomes in women after the GnRH antagonist protocol, suggesting its potential as a predictive marker in IVF treatments. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and explore the underlying mechanisms.

Optimal timing of GnRH antagonist initiation in IVF-ET: a retrospective cohort study on advanced maternal age women.

Background: Several studies have compared the effects of fixed and flexible gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocols during in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET). However, which GnRH-ant initiation strategy is better remains controversial. Moreover, no studies have assessed the optimal timing of GnRH-ant initiation in women of advanced maternal age (AMA). Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, a total of 472 infertile women aged ≥ 35 years old undergoing their first IVF cycle from August 2015 to September 2021 at a tertiary academic medical center were recruited, of whom 136 followed fixed GnRH-ant protocol and 336 followed flexible GnRH-ant protocol. The primary outcomes measured were the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) per IVF cycle and the time to live birth (TTLB) from the date of oocyte retrieval. Cox proportional models were used to calculate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of CLBR regarding GnRH-ant timing. Results: No significant difference in CLBR was found between the fixed and flexible GnRH-ant groups (27.9% vs 20.5%, p=0.105). The TTLB was also comparable between groups (10.56 vs 10.30 months, p=0.782). The Kaplan-Meier analysis for CLBR also showed comparable results between groups (P=0.351, HR=0.83; 95%CI: 0.56-1.23). After establishing a multiple Cox proportional hazard model, the fixed GnRH-ant group still had comparable CLBR with the flexible GnRH-ant group (HR=0.85; 95%CI: 0.53-1.38; P=0.518). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses also demonstrated similar results. Conclusion: GnRH-ant protocols can be tailored to the needs of AMA women, and timing of GnRH-ant initiation can be adjusted flexibly.

Oral medroxyprogesterone acetate for the use of ovulation suppression in in vitro fertilization: a cohort trial.

OBJECTIVE: To broadly assess the efficacy of medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) for ovulatory suppression during in vitro stimulation compared with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist cycles. DESIGN: Cohort trial. SETTING: A single academic-affiliated private fertility practice. PATIENTS: Patients of all diagnoses aged 18-44 years undergoing autologous in vitro fertilization (IVF) for fertility treatment between 2020 and 2023. INTERVENTIONS: Comparison of MPA vs. antagonist IVF stimulation cycles. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of premature ovulation, oocyte and embryo yield, embryo quality, pregnancy rates, and logistical benefits. RESULTS: Prospective data was collected on 418 patients who underwent MPA protocol ovarian stimulation (MPA group), which was compared with 419 historical control gonadotropin hormone-releasing hormone antagonist cycles (control group). Age was similar between groups (35.6 ± 4.6 vs. 35.7 ± 4.8 years; P = .75). There were no cases of premature ovulation in the MPA group compared with a total of five cases in the control group (0% vs. 1.2%; risk ratio [RR] = 0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01, 1.66). No differences were seen between number of oocytes retrieved (14.3 ± 10.2 vs. 14.3 ± 9.7; P = .83), blastocysts (4.9 ± 4.6 vs. 5.0 ± 4.6; P = .89), or euploid blastocysts (2.4 ± 2.6 vs. 2.2 ± 2.4; P = .18) in the MPA vs. control group respectively. Clinical pregnancy rate was similar between groups (70.4% vs. 64.2%; RR = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.72, 1.18). There was no difference in length of IVF stimulation or dose of stimulation medications. Patients in the MPA group saved an average of $491 ± $119 on medications, had an average of one less monitoring visit (4.4 ± 0.9 vs. 5.6 ± 1.1; P<.01), and 5.0 ± 1.2 less injections per cycle. When adjusting for age and ovarian reserve, protocol group (MPA vs. control) did not influence having an embryo available for transfer (76.6% vs. 73.4%; adjusted RR = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.94, 1.14). CONCLUSION: For ovulatory suppression during IVF cycles, MPA was effective at preventing ovulation while demonstrating similar cycle and reproductive outcomes, with the additional benefits of patient cost savings, increased convenience with decreased number of visits, and fewer injections.

Cycle outcomes of dual trigger (GnRH agonist+hCG) versus human chorionic gonadotropin trigger alone in POSEDION group 3-4 poor-responders and normo-responders: A prospective randomized study.

INTRODUCTION: Recently, dual trigger was proposed in an attempt to improve in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle outcomes in poor and normo-responder patients (PR and NR, respectively). The study's aim was to compare cycle outcomes of dual trigger versus human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) trigger in NRs and POSEIDON group 3/4 (PG 3/4) PRs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled trial included PG 3/4 PRs and NRs undergoing IVF using a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol. PRs and NRs were divided into two subgroups: (1) study groups in both arms received dual trigger and (2) control groups received only HCG. RESULTS: Two-hundred twenty-five women participated in the study. The mean patient age was significantly higher in the dual trigger group versus the HCG trigger group in PG 3/4 PRs. The number of retrieved oocytes and MII oocytes and the number of patients with good quality embryos were comparable between groups and live birth rates (LBR) per embryo transfer (ET) were significantly higher in the HCG group versus the dual trigger group in PG3/4 PRs (39.2% versus 19.2%; p = 0.026). NR dual trigger and HCG trigger groups were comparable in terms of patient age and LBR per ET did not significantly differ between these groups. The number of patients with good quality embryos was significantly higher in the dual trigger group versus the HCG group in NRs CONCLUSION: Dual trigger does not seem to add additional benefits in terms of live birth rates in PG3/4 PRs and NRs. Nonetheless, considering the age difference and lack of homogenity in the number and day of embryos transferred in PG 3/4 PRs, major conclusion that can be drawn from the study is that dual trigger is not systematically useful even in poor responders since the number of mature oocytes is comparable between groups. Larger scale studies are required for additional potential implications.

Adverse cardiovascular effect following gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist versus GnRH agonist for prostate cancer treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Androgen deprivation therapy is the mainstay of medical treatment for prostate cancer (Pca); however, it is associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular (CV) events and death. To date, CV death has been the leading noncancer cause of death in Pca patients. Both GnRH antagonists (an emerging class of drugs) and GnRH agonists (most frequently prescribed) are efficacious against Pca. However, the adverse effects, especially the adverse CV effect between them remain unclear. Methods: Through a literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library, all available studies comparing the safety of CV risk between GnRH antagonists and GnRH agonists in Pca patients were extracted. Comparisons of outcomes of interest between these two classes of drugs were calculated using the risk ratio (RR). Subgroup analyses were performed depending on the study design and preexisting CV disease at baseline. Results: Nine randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and five real-world observational studies comprising 62160 Pca patients were included in our meta-analysis. Patients receiving GnRH antagonists experienced fewer CV events (RR: 0.66, 95% CI:0.53-0.82, P<0.001), CV death (RR:0.4, 95% CI: 0.24-0.67, P<0.001) and myocardial infarctions (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.52-0.96, P=0.03). No difference was found in the incidence of stroke and heart failure. Moreover, GnRH antagonists were associated with fewer CV events in patients with preexisting CV disease but not in those without preexisting CV disease in the RCT series. Conclusion: GnRH antagonists appear to offer favorable safety in terms of adverse CV events and CV death compared with GnRH agonists among men diagnosed with Pca, especially those who had established CV disease at baseline. Systematic review registration: https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2023-2-0009/, identifier INPLASY202320009.

Safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of SHR7280, an oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor antagonist, in healthy men: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1 study.

BACKGROUND: Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists are a promising therapeutic approach for treating hormone-dependent prostate cancer. Currently, the mainstream GnRH antagonists are polypeptide agents administered through subcutaneous injection. In this study, we evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics (PD) of SHR7280, an oral small molecule GnRH antagonist, in healthy men. METHODS: This phase 1 trial was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, and dose-ascending study. Eligible healthy men were randomized in a 4:1 ratio to receive either oral SHR7280 tablets or placebo twice daily (BID) for 14 consecutive days. The SHR7280 dose was initiated at 100 mg BID and then sequentially increased to 200, 350, 500, 600, 800, and 1000 mg BID. Safety, PK, and PD parameters were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 70 subjects were enrolled and received the assigned drug, including 56 with SHR7280 and 14 with placebo. SHR7280 was well-tolerated. The incidence of adverse events (AEs, 76.8% vs 85.7%) and treatment-related AEs (75.0% vs 85.7%), as well as the severity of AEs (moderate AEs, 1.8% vs 7.1%) were similar between the SHR7280 group and placebo group. SHR7280 was rapidly absorbed in a dose-dependent manner, with a median Tmax of each dose group ranging from 0.8 to 1.0 h on day 14 and a mean t1/2 ranging from 2.8 to 3.4 h. The PD results demonstrated that SHR7280 exhibited a rapid and dose-proportional suppression of hormones, including LH, FSH, and testosterone, with maximum suppression achieved at doses of 800 and 1000 mg BID. CONCLUSIONS: SHR7280 showed an acceptable safety profile, as well as favorable PK and PD profiles within a dose range of 100 to 1000 mg BID. This study proposes a rationale for further investigation of SHR7280 as a potential androgen deprivation therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials.gov NCT04554043; registered September 18, 2020.

Analysis of euploidy rates in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy cycles with progestin-primed versus GnRH agonist/antagonist protocol.

BACKGROUND: Progestins can suppress endogenous luteinising hormone (LH) secretion from the pituitary gland and have shown similar efficacy in terms of collecting competent oocytes and embryos; however, some inconsistencies have been proposed regarding the quality of embryos collected with the use of progestins. This study aimed to evaluate euploidy rates and pregnancy outcomes in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) cycles using the progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol versus the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist/antagonist protocol. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 608 PGT-A cycles: 146 women in the PPOS group, 160 women in the GnRH agonist group, and 302 women in the GnRH antagonist group. This study was performed at the in vitro fertilisation (IVF) centre of Shanghai First Maternity and Infant Hospital between January 2019 and December 2021. Additionally, 267 corresponding first frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles were analysed to assess pregnancy outcomes. RESULTS: The euploid blastocyst rate per injected metaphase II(MII) oocytes (14.60% vs. 14.09% vs. 13.94%) was comparable among the three groups (p > 0.05). No significant differences were observed among the three groups regarding pregnancy outcomes, including biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, implantation, miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, and live birth rates per transfer in the first FET cycles (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The PPOS protocol had no negative effect on euploid blastocyst formation, and the pregnancy outcomes in FET cycles using the PPOS protocol were similar to those of the GnRH agonist and antagonist protocols. Trial registration This trial was retrospectively registered.

Single or repeated immunization against GnRH fails to completely abolish spermatogenesis in dwarf bucks (Capra hircus).

In both captive wildlife and production animals is important to develop strategies for population control. Immunization against GnRH is an easy and inexpensive immunocastration method that reduces the concentration of testosterone and decreases sperm quality. However, its effectiveness depends on the species and repetition of the treatment. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of a single treatment (initial immunization plus a booster with Improvac) vs repeated treatment (six doses of Improvac) to inhibit testicular function and maintain the contraceptive status during long periods in bucks. Three Dwarf bucks (Capra hircus) received two doses of Improvac, the first on Week 0, and the booster 4 weeks later (single immunization, group SI) while three Dwarf bucks received one dose of Improvac every 6 months during 3 consecutive years (repeated immunization, group RI). The other three Dwarf bucks remained untreated (control bucks, group CON). Bucks from RI had a greater decrease in scrotal circumference, testosterone concentration, male odor intensity, and sperm quality than SI bucks. However, there were no differences between SI and CON bucks in any of the variables studied. Overall, repeated treatment of Improvac decreased the testicular function of Dwarf bucks, although did not produce complete infertility. However, the repetition of the treatment produced more intensive negative effects, indicating that the strength of the effects of Improvac is rapidly lost in bucks.

Analysis of relative factors and prediction model for optimal ovarian response with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol.

Objective: To explore the relative factors for best ovarian response in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology with the gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol and to establish a nomogram prediction model of ovarian response. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis of the clinical data of 1,944 patients who received assisted reproductive treatment in the Center for Reproductive Medicine of Fujian Maternity and Child Health Hospital from April 1, 2018, to June 30, 2020. According to the number of oocytes obtained, there were 659 cases in the low ovarian response group (no more than five oocytes were retrieved), 920 cases in the normal ovarian response group (the number of retrieved oocytes was >5 but ≤18), and 365 cases in the high ovarian response group (>18 oocytes retrieved). Independent factors affecting ovarian responsiveness were screened by logistic regression, which were the model entry variables, and a nomogram prediction model was established based on the regression coefficients. Results: There were statistically significant differences in age, anti-Mullerian hormone, antral follicle count, the diagnosis of endometriosis, decreased ovarian reserve, polycystic ovary syndrome, basal follicle-stimulating hormone and basal luteinizing hormone among the three groups (P < 0.001). Multifactorial stepwise regression analysis showed that female age (0.95 [0.92-0.97], P = 0.000), decreased ovarian reserve (0.27 [0.19-0.38]), P = 0.000), endometriosis (0.81 [0.56-0.86], P = 0.000), antral follicle count (1.09 [1.06-1.12], P = 0.000), basal follicle-stimulating hormone (0.90 [0.85-0.96], P = 0.001), Anti-Mullerian hormone (1.19 [1.13-1.26], P= 0.000) and luteinizing hormone on trigger day (0.73 [0.66-0.80], P= 0.000), were independent factors for the occurrence of different ovarian responses during ovarian hyperstimulation. The predictive model of ovarian responsiveness was constructed based on the above factors, and the model was verified with 589 patients' data from July 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020, at this center. The predicted ovarian response (number of eggs obtained) of a total of 450 patients was consistent with the actual results, with a coincidence degree of 76.4%, and the consistency index of the model is 0.77. Conclusion: The nomogram model was successfully developed to effectively, intuitively, and visually predict the ovary reactivity in the gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol and provide guidance for clinical practice.

[Association of gene expression in ovarian granulosa cells with embryonic development potential among patients with polycystic ovary syndrome].

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of gene expression with development potential of early embryos derived from patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). METHODS: Three pairs of infertile patients with respectively matched age, body mass index, ovarian reserve and treatment with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists were selected. Patients with fewer embryos were assigned as the case group (n = 3), whilst the remainders were assigned as the control group (n = 3). Ovarian granulosa cells from patients were collected for the extraction of total RNA and subjected to RNA sequencing. The results were subjected to differential gene expression and functional enrichment analyses. RESULTS: Compared with the control group, 76 genes were up-regulated and 110 genes were down-regulated in the case group. The level of estradiol (E2) was significantly higher in the control group on the trigger day with the injection of human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG). Compared with the control group, the KRT7 gene was most significantly up-regulated, whilst the CCNYL2 gene was most significantly down-regulated in the case group. Gene ontology (GO) entries enrichment has found those associated with chromosome segregation, cell cycle regulation, and fatty acid metabolism to be significantly enriched. The genes participating in the regulation of cell assembly, differentiation, negative regulation of cell cycle, negative regulation of development, extracellular regulated protein kinases (ERK), ERK1 and ERK2 signaling pathways to be significantly down-regulated. KEGG enrichment analysis of cell signaling pathways revealed that steroid hormone biosynthesis-related genes were enriched. CONCLUSION: Among patients treated with GnRH antagonists, the significant difference in the number of oocytes fertilized in vitro and the number of available embryos are associated with the difference in the expression of genes of ovarian granulosa cells.

Effect of serum progesterone levels on hCG trigger day on pregnancy outcomes in GnRH antagonist cycles.

Objective: The present study analyzed the effect of hCG trigger day progesterone (P) levels on the live birth rate (LBR) in the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol. Materials and methods: This study was a single-center retrospective study. In vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles performed from January 2017 to December 2020 were included in the analysis. This study included people with a normal ovarian response to fresh embryo transfer of GnRH antagonist protocols. All cycles were divided into 2 groups by P level on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) trigger, P<1.0 ng/ml and P≥1.0 ng/ml. The primary outcome measure was LBR. Result: A total of 867 cycles with P<1.0 ng/ml and 362 cycles with P≥1.0 ng/ml were included in the analysis. The clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) was higher in the P<1.0 ng/ml group than the P≥1.0 ng/ml group (44.9% vs. 37.6%, P=0.02). The early spontaneous abortion rate was comparable between the groups (14.4% vs. 14.7%, P=0.93). For live birth, the rate for the P<1.0 ng/ml group was 35.3%, which was significantly higher than the 29.0% in the P≥1.0 ng/ml group (P=0.03). After binary logistic regression analysis, the P level on the hCG trigger day (adjusted odds ratio=0.74, 95% CI=0.55-0.99, P=0.04) was an independent risk factor for LBR. For the P level on the hCG trigger day, the LBR was lower in the P≥1.0 ng/ml group compared to the P<1.0 ng/ml group. Conclusion: For normal ovarian response patients using the GnRH antagonist protocol, serum P≥1.0 ng/ml on the hCG trigger day resulted in a lower LBR than the P<1.0 ng/ml group. When P≥1.0 ng/ml, whole embryo freezing may be considered.

Targeting the androgen receptor signaling pathway in advanced prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: This article summarizes current androgen receptor (AR)-directed therapies that have received regulatory approval for the treatment of advanced prostate adenocarcinoma (herein referred to as prostate cancer, PC). SUMMARY: PC is an androgen-dependent malignancy in which ligands including testosterone and dihydrotestosterone bind to AR, initiating androgen-AR complex translocation to the nucleus followed by AR-mediated transcription of target genes. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), including gonadotropin hormone-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists with or without AR antagonists (antiandrogens), GnRH antagonists, or bilateral orchiectomy, forms the backbone of treatment for patients with metastatic castration-naive PC and/or castration-resistant PC (CRPC). ADT is also an option for high-risk, early-stage PC after prostatectomy and/or radiation. While ADT is often very effective as initial therapy, resistance ultimately develops despite suppression of gonadal and/or adrenal androgens, leading to CRPC, which is characterized by mechanisms such as reactivation of the AR signaling pathway, AR gene overexpression, and mutations in the ligand-binding domain of AR that lead to disease progression, resulting in increased symptom burden and ultimately death. However, disease in patients with CRPC is still dependent on androgen signaling, and these patients continue on ADT to maintain a castrate level of serum testosterone. Novel hormonal therapies including agents that target AR directly (eg, AR antagonists) are often added to ADT in this setting. Targeting the AR signaling pathway led to the development of second-generation AR antagonists, examples of which include enzalutamide, apalutamide, and darolutamide. These agents do not exhibit partial agonism, possess a higher affinity for AR, and are postulated to improve survival outcomes relative to their first-generation counterparts for patients with CRPC. Lastly, the emergence of ADT, including second-generation AR antagonists, has led to the development of supportive care for treatment-related adverse effects. CONCLUSION: Major advances have been made in targeting the AR signaling pathway in patients with advanced PC. Further studies are warranted to identify the optimal sequencing of therapies to maximize treatment benefit. Mitigation of treatment-related adverse effects presents new opportunities to advance clinical pharmacy practice.

GnRH antagonist weakens endometrial stromal cells growth ability by decreasing c-kit receptor expression.

BACKGROUND: Several surveys have reported that patients treated with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol showed a significantly lower rate of implantation and clinical pregnancy compared to GnRH agonist (GnRH-a) protocol during in vitro fertilization-fresh embryo transfer. Subsequent studies imputed this poor outcome to the negative effects of GnRH-ant on endometrial receptive. However, the mechanisms were not fully understood. METHODS: The clinical data of 2815 patients undergoing fresh embryo transfer in our center were analyzed. Human endometrial stromal cells (ESCs) from healthy women undergoing elective pregnancy termination of a normal pregnancy at 8-10 weeks gestation were treated with GnRH-analogs or imatinib (c-kit receptor inhibitor). CCK8 and Flow cytometry were used to investigated the growth ability of ESCs. Immunofluorescence staining and western blot was used to detected the target proteins. RESULTS: The clinical data showed that the endometrial thickness on HCG Day were significantly lower in GnRH-ant group. Although no difference of embryo quality in these two groups, GnRH-ant group showed remarkably decreased rate of HCG positive, embryo implantation and pregnancy. Moreover, GnRH-ant significantly reduced the proliferation and induced the apoptosis of ESCs. Furthermore, the expression and activation of c-kit receptor, which played pivotal roles during embryo implantation, were observably decreased by GnRH-ant. Inhibiting the activation of c-kit by imatinib remarkably suppressed the proliferation and promoted the apoptosis of ESCs. Additionally, the phosphorylation of AKT and expression of Cyclin D1, which were closely related with cellular growth, were distinctly lessened after treating with imatinib. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, our study showed that GnRH-ant weakened the activization of c-kit receptor by decreasing its expression, causing the impaired growth ability of ESCs. Our findings provided a new insight into the effects of GnRH-ant on endometrium.