Risk factors for poor oocyte yield and oocyte immaturity after GnRH agonist triggering.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the potential risk factors for poor oocyte recuperation rate (ORR) and oocyte immaturity after GnRH agonist (GnRHa) ovulation triggering? SUMMARY ANSWER: Lower ovarian reserve and LH levels after GnRHa triggering are risk factors of poor ORR. Higher BMI and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels are risk factors of poor oocyte maturation rate (OMR). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The use of GnRHa to trigger ovulation is increasing. However, some patients may have a suboptimal response after GnRHa triggering. This suboptimal response can refer to any negative endpoint, such as suboptimal oocyte recovery, oocyte immaturity, or empty follicle syndrome. For some authors, a suboptimal response to GnRHa triggering refers to a suboptimal LH and/or progesterone level following triggering. Several studies have investigated a combination of demographic, clinical, and endocrine characteristics at different stages of the treatment process that may affect the efficacy of the GnRHa trigger and thus be involved in a poor endocrine response or efficiency but no consensus exists. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Bicentric retrospective cohort study between 2015 and 2021 (N = 1747). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: All patients aged 18-43 years who underwent controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and ovulation triggering by GnRHa alone (triptorelin 0.2 mg) for ICSI or oocyte cryopreservation were included. The ORR was defined as the ratio of the total number of retrieved oocytes to the number of follicles >12 mm on the day of triggering. The OMR was defined as the ratio of the number of mature oocytes to the number of retrieved oocytes. A logistic regression model with a backward selection method was used for the analysis of risk factors. Odds ratios (OR) are displayed with their two-sided 95% confidence interval. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In the multivariate analysis, initial antral follicular count and LH level 12-h post-triggering were negatively associated with poor ORR (i.e. below the 10th percentile) (OR: 0.61 [95% CI: 0.42-0.88]; P = 0.008 and OR: 0.86 [95% CI: 0.76-0.97]; P = 0.02, respectively). A nonlinear relationship was found between LH level 12-h post-triggering and poor ORR, but no LH threshold was found. A total of 25.3% of patients suffered from oocyte immaturity (i.e. OMR < 75%). In the multivariate analysis, BMI and AMH levels were negatively associated with an OMR < 75% (OR: 4.34 [95% CI: 1.96-9.6]; P < 0.001 and OR: 1.22 [95% CI: 1.03-1.12]; P = 0.015, respectively). Antigonadotrophic pretreatment decreased the risk of OMR < 75% compared to no pretreatment (OR: 0.72 [95% CI: 0.57-0.91]; P = 0.02). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Our study is limited by its retrospective design and by the exclusion of patients who had hCG retriggers. However, this occurred in only six cycles. We were also not able to collect information on the duration of pretreatment and the duration of wash out period. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: In clinical practice, to avoid poor ORR, GnRHa trigger alone should not be considered in patients with higher BMI and/or low ovarian reserve, balanced by the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. In the case of a low 12-h post-triggering LH level, practicians must be aware of the risk of poor ORR, and hCG retriggering could be considered. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): None. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

BEYOND: a randomized controlled trial comparing efficacy and safety of individualized follitropin delta dosing in a GnRH agonist versus antagonist protocol during the first ovarian stimulation cycle.

STUDY QUESTION: How does a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist versus a GnRH antagonist protocol affect ovarian response when using an individualized fixed daily dose of follitropin delta for ovarian stimulation? SUMMARY ANSWER: The BEYOND trial data demonstrate thatindividualized fixed-dose follitropin delta is effective when used in a GnRH agonist protocol, compared with a GnRH antagonist protocol, in women with anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) ≤35 pmol/l and no increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The efficacy and safety of an individualized fixed daily dose of follitropin delta (based on body weight and AMH) have been established in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using a GnRH antagonist protocol. Preliminary study data indicate that individualized follitropin delta is also efficacious in a GnRH agonist protocol (RAINBOW trial, NCT03564509). There are no prospective comparative data using individualized follitropin delta for ovarian stimulation in a GnRH agonist versus a GnRH antagonist protocol. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This is the first randomized, controlled, open-label, multi-centre trial exploring efficacy and safety of individualized follitropin delta dosing in a GnRH agonist versus a GnRH antagonist protocol in participants undergoing their first ovarian stimulation cycle for IVF/ICSI. A total of 437 participants were randomized centrally and stratified by centre and age. The primary endpoint was the number of oocytes retrieved. Secondary endpoints included ongoing pregnancy rates, adverse drug reactions (including OHSS), live births, and neonatal outcomes. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Participants (18-40 years; AMH ≤35 pmol/l) were enrolled at specialist reproductive health clinics in Austria, Denmark, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, and Switzerland. The mean number of oocytes retrieved was compared between the GnRH agonist and antagonist protocols using a negative binomial regression model with age and AMH at screening as factors. Analyses were based on all randomized subjects, using a multiple imputation method for randomized subjects withdrawing before the start of stimulation. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Of the 437 randomized subjects, 221 were randomized to the GnRH agonist, and 216 were randomized to the GnRH antagonist protocol. The participants had a mean age of 32.3 ± 4.3 years and a mean serum AMH of 16.6 ± 7.8 pmol/l. A total of 202 and 204 participants started ovarian stimulation with follitropin delta in the GnRH agonist and antagonist groups, respectively. The mean number of oocytes retrieved was statistically significantly higher in the agonist group (11.1 ± 5.9) versus the antagonist group (9.6 ± 5.5), with an estimated mean difference of 1.31 oocytes (95% CI: 0.22; 2.40, P = 0.0185). The difference in number of oocytes retrieved was influenced by the patients' age and ovarian reserve, with a greater difference observed in patients aged <35 years and in patients with high ovarian reserve (AMH >15 pmol/l). Both the GnRH agonist and antagonist groups had a similar proportion of cycle cancellations (2.0% [4/202] versus 3.4% [7/204]) and fresh blastocyst transfer cancellations (13.4% [27/202] versus 14.7% [30/204]). The estimated ongoing pregnancy rate per started cycle was numerically higher in the GnRH agonist group (36.9% versus 29.1%; difference: 7.74% [95% CI: -1.49; 16.97, P = 0.1002]). The most commonly reported adverse events (≥1% in either group; headache, OHSS, nausea, pelvic pain, or discomfort and abdominal pain) were similar in both groups. The incidence of early moderate/severe OHSS was low (1.5% for the agonist group versus 2.5% for antagonist groups). Estimated live birth rates per started cycle were 35.8% and 28.7% in the GnRH agonist and antagonist groups, respectively (treatment difference 7.15%; 95% CI: -2.02; 16.31; P = 0.1265). The two treatment groups were comparable with respect to neonatal health data for singletons and twins and for incidence of congenital malformations (2.7% and 3.3% for the GnRH agonist versus antagonist groups, respectively). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: All participants had AMH ≤35 pmol/l and were ≤40 years old. Clinicians should remain cautious when using a GnRH agonist protocol in patients with AMH >35 pmol/l (i.e. those with an increased OHSS risk). The incidence of OHSS in the GnRH antagonist group may have been lower if a GnRH agonist trigger had been allowed. Outcomes of transfers with cryopreserved blastocysts were not followed up, therefore the cumulative live birth rates and neonatal outcomes after cryotransfer are unknown. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: In women with AMH ≤35 pmol/l, an individualized fixed daily dose of follitropin delta resulted in a significantly higher number of oocytes retrieved when used in a GnRH agonist protocol compared with a GnRH antagonist protocol, with no additional safety signals observed and no additional risk of OHSS. Live birth rates following ovarian stimulation with individualized follitropin delta were not statistically different between the GnRH protocols; however, the trial was not powered to assess this endpoint. There were no safety concerns with respect to neonatal health after ovarian stimulation with follitropin delta in either protocol. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The trial was funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals. EE, EP, and MS have no competing interests. AP has received research support from Ferring, and Gedeon Richter, and honoraria or consultation fees from Preglem, Novo Nordisk, Ferring, Gedeon Richter, Cryos, Merck A/S. BC has received consulting fees from Ferring and Merck, and his department received fees from Ferring to cover the costs of patient enrolment. MBS has received support to attend meetings and/or travel from Ferring, and was a board member for FertiPROTEKT e.V. until 2023. JS has received honoraria or consultation fees from Ferring and Merck, and support for attending meetings and/or travel from Ferring, Merck, and GoodLife. TS has received support/travel expenses from Ferring for attending a congress meeting, and participated in an advisory board for Merck. YS has received grants/research support from Ferring and support to attend a professional society congress meeting from Merck. RL and PP are employees of Ferring Pharmaceuticals. PP is a BOD member of PharmaBiome and owns stocks of Takeda Pharmaceuticals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03809429; EudraCT Number 2017-002783-40. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 7 April 2019. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 2 May 2019.

GnRH agonist pretreatment for frozen embryo transfer among women with polycystic ovary syndrome: a narrow systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Frozen embryo transfer (FET) is usually recommended for women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) undergoing In vitro fertilization (IVF). While there is no consensus as to the optimal protocol of endometrial preparation for FET. The effect of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) pretreatment for FET among women with PCOS remains controversial. PURPOSE: We intend to explore whether GnRH-a pretreatment could improve clinical outcomes for women with PCOS undergoing FET. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched up to May 16, 2024. Eligible studies involved patients with PCOS undergoing FET and receiving GnRH-a pretreatment for endometrial preparation, with artificial cycle (AC) as the control therapy. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in Chinese and English were included. Data extraction was performed independently by two authors. Effect was quantified using odd ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random-effect models with the Mantel-Hansel (M-H) method in Revman software. Quality of outcomes was evaluated using the GRADEpro system. Primary outcomes contained the clinical pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, and live birth rate. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of preterm labor and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). RESULTS: Ninety-seven records were initially retrieved, with 21 duplicates and 65 articles excluded after title and abstract screening. Seven studies were excluded due to retrospective design, leaving three RCTs with 709 participants. Among them, 353 received GnRH-a pretreatment as the intervention group and 356 received AC as the control group. No significant differences were observed in the clinical pregnancy rate (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.56, P = 0.66), miscarriage rate (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.90, P = 0.52), live birth rate (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.25, P = 0.46), and the risk of preterm labor (OR 1.45, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.65, P = 0.23) and GDM (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.48, P = 0.39) between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, GnRH-a pretreatment does not confer any advantages and appears unnecessary for women with PCOS undergoing FET. Additional RCTs should focus on maternal complications and the health of offspring.

Investigation of luteal HCG supplementation in GnRH-agonist-triggered fresh embryo transfer cycles: a randomized controlled trial.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does splitting the human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) support in IVF cycles triggered by a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist result in a better progesterone profile? DESIGN: Randomized controlled three-arm study, performed at the Fertility Clinic, Odense University Hospital, Denmark. Patients with 12-25 follicles ≥12 mm were randomized into three groups: Group 1 - ovulation triggered with 6500 IU HCG; Group 2 - ovulation triggered with 0.5 mg GnRH agonist, followed by 1500 IU HCG on the day of oocyte retrieval (OCR); and Group 3 - ovulation triggered with 0.5 mg GnRH agonist, followed by 1000 IU HCG on the day of OCR and 500 IU HCG on OCR + 5. All groups received 180 mg vaginal progesterone. Progesterone concentrations were analysed in eight blood samples from each patient. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients completed the study. Baseline and laboratory data were comparable. Progesterone concentration peaked on OCR + 4 in Groups 1 and 2, and peaked on OCR + 6 in Group 3. On OCR + 6, the progesterone concentration in Group 2 was significantly lower compared with Groups 1 and 3 (P = 0.003 and P < 0.001, respectively). On OCR + 8, the progesterone concentration in Group 3 was significantly higher compared with the other groups (both P<0.001). Progesterone concentrations were significantly higher in Group 3 from OCR + 6 until OCR + 14 compared with the other groups (all P ≤ 0.003). Four patients developed ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in Group 3. CONCLUSION: Sequential HCG support after a GnRH agonist trigger provides a better progesterone concentration in the luteal phase.

Health-related quality of life of patients with prostate cancer initiating GnRH agonist therapy: the PRISME study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the evolution of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) over 6 months of GnRH agonist (GnRHa) therapy among age groups for patients with prostate cancer (PCa). PATIENTS AND METHODS: PRISME (NCT03516110) was a non-interventional, prospective study conducted in France in patients aged ≥60 years with PCa initiating GnRHa therapy within routine care. HRQoL was evaluated at baseline and after 6 months using the EORTC quality of life in ELDerly cancer patients 14 items (QLQ-ELD14) questionnaire. Cognitive status was assessed using the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE). Analyses of covariance compared the evolution of the change from baseline of the QLQ-ELD14 scores among age groups. RESULTS: 814 patients were enrolled (245, 60-70 years; 314, 70-75 years; 252, ≥75 years). Slight or no changes were observed in each QLQ-ELD14 dimension between baseline and 6 months, overall and by age. In the primary effectiveness analysis, there was no difference among age groups in the change from baseline in QLQ-ELD14 scores. Baseline cognitive status was lower in the oldest age group, but there were no changes in all age groups. As expected, sexual function declined in all age groups. CONCLUSION: GnRHa therapy influence on HRQoL, cognition and sexuality appeared independent of age.

Prostate cancer that has spread to other parts of the body is called "advanced prostate cancer." Hormone therapy is a common treatment for high risk localized and advanced prostate cancer. It works by lowering hormone levels, causing prostate cancers to grow more slowly or shrink. But, side effects from this kind of treatment can affect a patient's quality of life. Common side effects of hormone therapy include a loss of sex drive, erectile dysfunction, bone weakening, hot flushes, or mood disorders. Most patients with prostate cancer are over the age of 60 years, but elderly patients are often excluded from clinical trials, meaning that we lack data about them. This study assessed if there was a link between age and health-related quality of life in men with advanced prostate cancer treated with hormone therapy. The study included 814 men with advanced prostate cancer who were over 60 years old and had started a type of hormone therapy called gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) therapy. The results showed that health-related quality of life was similar after 6 months of hormone therapy, in the overall group of patients and in the different age groups (60­70, 70­75, and over 75 years of age). Cognitive impairment occurred about twice as often in patients aged over 75 years than among younger patients, before initiation of hormone therapy. Cognitive impairment was likely caused by ageing and was not associated with hormone therapy treatment. Sexual function decreased in all age groups, particularly in patients aged 60­70 years. This study did not reveal any major impact of hormone therapy on health-related quality of life in older men with advanced prostate cancer, after a 6-month period and the use of routine questionnaires.

LH supplementation in IVF: human nature, politics, and elephants in the room.

Luteinizing hormone (LH) is present throughout the natural follicular phase. However, the debate is still not settled on whether LH is needed during ovarian stimulation in IVF. This commentary looks at the evolution of this debate, mentioning three elephants in the room that were ignored by the Pharma industry, professional organizations, and clinicians alike: 1. The different endocrinology between the long agonist and the antagonist protocols. 2. The fixed dose of the two most widely commercially available antagonist preparations, namely cetrorelix and ganirelix. 3. The fact that most research in this area uses population-based criteria, ignoring endocrine parameters. Individual genetics of the LH receptor gene may also serve to individualize LH needs during stimulation; however, the jury is still out regarding this approach. CONCLUSIONS: Individual endocrine and genetics parameters may shed meaningful light on the question of LH supplemental during ovarian stimulation.

Severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome following sole gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist trigger: a case series and literature review.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to report three cases of early severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) in patients undergoing a GnRH antagonist protocol triggered with GnRH agonist (GnRH-a), leading to hospitalization and the need for peritoneal drainage. Additionally, a review of the existing literature on this topic is provided. DESIGN: This is a retrospective case series and a literature review. SETTING: This study was conducted at obstetrics and gynecology department of tertiary academic referral hospitals, Israel. PARTICIPANTS: This study included three patients presented with severe OHSS symptoms, including abdominal distension, ascites, and hemoconcentration. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main focus of the treatment was to address the symptoms and prevent any further complications. The outcome was the complete recovery of the patients. RESULTS: The presented cases detail instances of severe OHSS following oocyte retrieval, utilizing GnRH-a for triggering. Case 1 involved a 33-year-old patient with a history of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), Case 2 featured a 22-year-old patient with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), and Case 3 included a 41-year-old patient with a history of depressive disorder. All patients receiving supportive care, including infusions and medications, exhibited gradual improvement during hospitalization, with complete resolution observed during the 20-day post-hospitalization check-up. CONCLUSIONS: These three cases highlight the occurrence of severe early OHSS following a GnRH antagonist protocol triggered with GnRH-a in the absence of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration for trigger or luteal-phase support. Clinicians must be aware that a GnRH-a trigger followed by a freeze-all approach does not guarantee the complete elimination of OHSS in all patients.

Effect of GnRH agonist trigger with or without low-dose hCG on reproductive outcomes for PCOS women with freeze-all strategy: a propensity score matching study.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the effect of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) trigger alone versus dual trigger comprising GnRHa and low-dose human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) on reproductive outcomes in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) who received the freeze-all strategy. METHODS: A total of 615 cycles were included in this retrospective cohort study. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to control potential confounding factors between GnRHa-trigger group (0.2 mg GnRHa) and dual-trigger group (0.2 mg GnRHa plus 1000/2000 IU hCG) in a 1:1 ratio. Multivariate logistic regression was applied to estimate the association between trigger methods and reproductive outcomes. RESULTS: After PSM, patients with dual trigger (n = 176) had more oocytes retrieved, mature oocytes, and 2PN embryos compared to that with GnRHa trigger alone. However, the oocytes maturation rate, normal fertilization rate, and frozen embryos between the two groups were not statistically different. The incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (14.8% vs. 2.8%, P < 0.001) and moderate/severe OHSS (11.4% vs. 1.7%, P < 0.001) were significantly higher in dual-trigger group than in GnRHa-alone group. Logistic regression analysis showed the adjusted odds ratio of dual trigger was 5.971 (95% confidence interval 2.201-16.198, P < 0.001) for OHSS. The pregnancy and single neonatal outcomes were comparable between the two groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: For PCOS women with freeze-all strategy, GnRHa trigger alone decreased the risk of OHSS without damaging oocyte maturation and achieved satisfactory pregnancy outcomes.

GnRH antagonist monotherapy versus a GnRH agonist plus bicalutamide for advanced hormone-sensitive prostate cancer; KYUCOG-1401.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness and safety of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist monotherapy to combined androgen blockade (CAB) with a GnRH agonist and bicalutamide in patients with advanced hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC). METHODS: The study was conducted as KYUCOG-1401 trial (UMIN000014243) and enrolled 200 patients who were randomly assigned to either group A (GnRH antagonist monotherapy followed by the addition of bicalutamide) or group B (CAB by a GnRH agonist and bicalutamide). The primary endpoint was PSA progression-free survival. The secondary endpoints were the time to CAB treatment failure, radiographic progression-free survival, overall survival, changes in serum parameters, including PSA, hormones, and bone and lipid metabolic markers, and adverse events. RESULTS: PSA progression-free survival was significantly longer in group B (hazard ratio [HR], 95% confidence interval [CI]; 1.40, 1.01-1.95, p = 0.041). The time to CAB treatment failure was slightly longer in group A (HR, 95% CI; 0.80, 0.59-1.08, p = 0.146). No significant differences were observed in radiographic progression-free survival or overall survival. The percentage of patients with serum testosterone that did not reach the castration level was higher at 60 weeks (p = 0.046) in group A. No significant differences were noted in the serum levels of bone metabolic or lipid markers between the two groups. An injection site reaction was more frequent in group A. CONCLUSIONS: The present results support the potential of CAB using a GnRH agonist and bicalutamide as a more effective treatment for advanced HSPC than GnRH antagonist monotherapy.

Comparison of goserelin and leuprorelin for ovarian protection during chemotherapy in young patients with breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Although different gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists may have different effects, their effect of ovarian protection during chemotherapy for breast cancer has not been compared. This study aimed to compare the effects of goserelin and leuprorelin for ovarian protection during chemotherapy in young patients with breast cancer. METHODS: This prospective study analyzed 193 patients with breast cancer aged ≤ 40 years who had regular menstruation and serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels ≥ 1 ng/mL before treatment. Patients received either goserelin or leuprorelin for ovarian protection during doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy. Resumption of menstruation and changes in serum levels of AMH were compared between the two groups at 12 months after completion of chemotherapy. RESULTS: The mean age and the pretreatment serum AMH level were 33.2 years and 4.4 ng/mL in goserelin group and 34.2 years and 4.0 ng/mL in leuprorelin group. The proportion of patients who resumed menstruation was not different between the goserelin (94.4%) and leuprorelin (95.3%) groups at 12 months after chemotherapy completion. Serum AMH levels decreased significantly in both the goserelin (from 4.4 to 1.2 ng/mL) and leuprorelin (from 4.0 to 1.2 ng/mL) groups, with no statistical significance. In addition, no difference was found in the proportion of patients with serum AMH levels ≥ 1 ng/mL between the goserelin (49.5%) and leuprorelin (44.2%) groups at 12 months after chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Goserelin and leuprorelin were comparable in terms of ovarian protection during doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy in young patients with breast cancer.

A mouse model mimicking gender-affirming treatment with pubertal suppression followed by testosterone in transmasculine youth.

STUDY QUESTION: Can mice serve as a translational model to examine the reproductive consequences of pubertal suppression with GnRH agonist (GnRHa) followed by testosterone (T) administration, a typical therapy in peripubertal transmasculine youth? SUMMARY ANSWER: An implanted depot with 3.6 mg of GnRHa followed by T enanthate at 0.45 mg weekly can be used in peripubertal female mice for investigating the impact of gender-affirming hormone therapy in transmasculine youth. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: There is limited knowledge available in transgender medicine to provide evidence-based fertility care, with the current guidelines being based on the assumption of fertility loss. We recently successfully developed a mouse model to investigate the reproductive consequences of T therapy given to transgender men. On the other hand, to our knowledge, there is no mouse model to assess the reproductive outcomes in peripubertal transmasculine youth. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A total of 80 C57BL/6N female mice were used in this study, with n = 7 mice in each experimental group. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We first assessed the effectiveness of GnRHa in arresting pubertal development in the female mice. In this experiment, 26-day-old female mice were subcutaneously implanted with a GnRHa (3.6 mg) depot. Controls underwent a sham surgery. Animals were euthanized at 3, 9, 21 and 28 days after the day of surgery. In the second experiment, we induced a transmasculine youth mouse model. C57BL/6N female mice were subcutaneously implanted with a 3.6 mg GnRHa depot on postnatal day 26 for 21 days and this was followed by weekly injections of 0.45 mg T enanthate for 6 weeks. The control for the GnRH treatment was sham surgery and the control for T treatment was sesame oil vehicle injections. Animals were sacrificed 0.5 weeks after the last injection. The data collected included the day of the vaginal opening and first estrus, daily vaginal cytology, weekly and terminal reproductive hormones levels, body/organ weights, ovarian follicular distribution and corpora lutea (CL) counts. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: GnRHa implanted animals remained in persistent diestrus and had reduced levels of FSH (P = 0.0013), LH (P = 0.0082) and estradiol (P = 0.0155), decreased uterine (P < 0.0001) and ovarian weights (P = 0.0002), and a lack of CL at 21 days after GnRHa implantation. T-only and GnRHa+T-treated animals were acyclic throughout the treatment period, had sustained elevated levels of T, suppressed LH levels (P < 0.0001), and an absence of CL compared to controls (P < 0.0001). Paired ovarian weights were reduced in the T-only and GnRHa+T groups compared with the control and GnRHa-only groups. LARGE SCALE DATA: N/A. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Although it is an appropriate tool to provide relevant findings, precaution is needed to extrapolate mouse model results to mirror human reproductive physiology. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: To our knowledge, this study describes the first mouse model mimicking gender-affirming hormone therapy in peripubertal transmasculine youth. This model provides a tool for researchers studying the effects of GnRHa-T therapy on other aspects of reproduction, other organ systems and transgenerational effects. The model is supported by GnRHa suppressing puberty and maintaining acyclicity during T treatment, lower LH levels and absence of CL. The results also suggest GnRHa+T therapy in peripubertal female mice does not affect ovarian reserve, since the number of primordial follicles was not affected by treatment. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was supported by the Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research grants KL2 TR 002241 and UL1 TR 002240 (C.D.C.); National Institutes of Health grants F30-HD100163 and T32-HD079342 (H.M.K.); University of Michigan Office of Research funding U058227 (A.S.); American Society for Reproductive Medicine/Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility grant (M.B.M.); and National Institutes of Health R01-HD098233 (M.B.M.). The University of Virginia Center for Research in Reproduction Ligand Assay and Analysis Core Facility was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver NICHD/NIH grants P50-HD028934 and R24-HD102061. The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of ovarian function preservation with GnRH agonist during chemotherapy in premenopausal women with early breast cancer.

STUDY QUESTION: Is it economically worthwhile to use GnRH agonist (GnRHa) to prevent menopausal symptoms (MS) and protect fertility in premenopausal women with breast cancer (BC) during chemotherapy from the US perspective? SUMMARY ANSWER: It is cost-effective to administer GnRHa during chemotherapy in order to forefend MS in premenopausal patients with BC when the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold is $50 000.00 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), and to preserve fertility in young patients with BC who undergo oocyte cryopreservation (OC), or no OC, when the WTP thresholds per live birth are $71 333.33 and $61 920.00, respectively. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Chemotherapy often results in premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) in premenopausal survivors of BC, causing MS and infertility. Administering GnRHa during chemotherapy has been recommended for ovarian function preservation by international guidelines. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Two decision-analytic models were developed, respectively, for preventing MS and protecting fertility over a 5-year period, which compared the cost-effectiveness of two strategies: adding GnRHa during chemotherapy (GnRHa plus Chemo) or chemotherapy alone (Chemo). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The participants were early premenopausal women with BC aged 18-49 years who were undergoing chemotherapy. Two decision tree models were constructed: one for MS prevention and one for fertility protection from the US perspective. All data were obtained from published literature and official websites. The models' primary outcomes included QALYs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). The robustness of the models was tested by sensitivity analyses. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In the MS model, GnRHa plus Chemo resulted in an ICER of $17 900.85 per QALY compared with Chemo, which was greater than the WTP threshold of $50 000.00 per QALY; therefore, GnRHa plus Chemo was a cost-effective strategy for premenopausal women with BC in the USA. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) results showed an 81.76% probability of cost-effectiveness in the strategy. In the fertility model, adding GnRHa for patients undergoing OC and those who were unable to undergo OC resulted in ICERs of $67 933.50 and $60 209.00 per live birth in the USA, respectively. PSA indicated that GnRHa plus Chemo was more likely to be cost-effective over Chemo when the WTP for an additional live birth exceed $71 333.33 in Context I (adding GnRHa to preserve fertility in young patients with BC after OC) and $61 920.00 in Context II (adding GnRHa to preserve fertility in young patients with BC who cannot accept OC). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The indirect costs, such as disease-related mental impairment and non-medical costs (e.g. transportation cost) were not included. All data were derived from previously published literature and databases, which might yield some differences from the real world. In addition, the POI-induced MS with a lower prevalence and the specific strategy of chemotherapy were not considered in the MS model, and the 5-year time horizon for having a child might not be suitable for all patients in the fertility model. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: When considering the economic burden of cancer survivors, the results of this study provide an evidence-based reference for clinical decision-making, showing that it is worthwhile to employ GnRHa during chemotherapy to prevent MS and preserve fertility. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Fujian Province [2021J02038]; and the Startup Fund for Scientific Research, Fujian Medical University [2021QH1059]. All authors declare no conflict of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

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.

The Cardiovascular Risks Associated with Aromatase Inhibitors, Tamoxifen, and GnRH Agonists in Women with Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cardiovascular disease accounts for up to 10% of all-cause mortality in women with a diagnosis of breast cancer, and the causes for this are multifaceted. Many women at risk of or with a diagnosis of breast cancer are on endocrine-modulating therapies. It is therefore important to understand the effect of hormone therapies on cardiovascular outcomes in breast cancer patients to mitigate against any adverse effects and to identify those most at risk so that they can be proactively managed. Here we discuss the pathophysiology of these agents, their effect on the cardiovascular system, and the latest evidence on their cardiovascular risks association. RECENT FINDINGS: Tamoxifen appears to be cardioprotective during treatment but not over the longer term, while the effect of AIs on cardiovascular outcomes remains controversial. Heart failure outcomes remain understudied, and the cardiovascular effects of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists (GNRHa) in women need further research, especially since data from men with prostate cancer have indicated an increased risk of cardiac events in GNRHa users. There remains a need for a greater understanding of the effects of hormone therapies on cardiovascular outcomes in breast cancer patients. Further areas of research in this area include developing evidence to better define the optimal preventive and screening methods for cardiovascular effects and the risk factors for patients on hormonal therapies.

Treatment safety of ART cycles with extremely high oestradiol concentrations using GnRH agonist trigger.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Are IVF treatments with extremely high peak oestradiol levels and gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist trigger associated with higher complication rates? DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study including patients from two large medical centres treated between 2019 and 2021. A study group with extremely high peak oestradiol levels (≥20,000 pmol/l on the day of ovarian stimulation, or ≥15,000 pmol/l on the previous day) and a control group with normal range oestradiol levels (3000-12000 pmol/l) that received GnRH agonist triggering. Patients were surveyed about complaints and medical care related to ovum retrieval and medical files were reviewed. Major complication rates and the need for medical assistance were compared. RESULTS: Several differences between the study and control group were observed because of the study design: mean age was 33.01 ± 5.14 versus 34.57 ± 4.52 (P < 0.001), mean peak oestradiol levels was 26645.34 ± 8592.57 pmol/l versus 7229.75 ± 2329.20 pmol/l (P < 0.001), and mean number of oocytes were 27.55 ± 13.46 versus 11.67 ± 5.76 (P < 0.001) for the study and control group, respectively. Major complications and hospitalization rates were similar between the study and control groups (three [1.25%] versus one [0.48%]; P = 0.62 and three [1.25%] versus two [0.96%]; P = 1.0, respectively). Thirty-six patients (15.1%) in the study group and 11 (5.3%) in the control group sought medical care after retrieval, mostly due to abdominal pain, without the need for further workup or hospitalization (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Extremely high oestradiol levels were not associated with thromboembolic events, higher major complication or hospitalization rates, and therefore may be considered safe. Nevertheless, patients may be informed of possible higher rates of discomfort, mostly abdominal pain. Larger studies are warranted to confirm our results.

The effect of adenomyosis types on clinical outcomes of IVF embryo transfer after ultra-long GnRH agonist protocol.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the effect of adenomyosis types on IVF and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) after ultra-long gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist protocol? DESIGN: Patients who underwent the first cycle of IVF-ET with ultra-long GnRH agonist protocol were included in this retrospective cohort study. They were divided into three groups: (A) 428 patients with diffuse adenomyosis; (B) 718 patients with focal adenomyosis; and (C) 519 patients with tubal infertility. Reproduction outcomes were analysed. RESULTS: Logistic regression analysis revealed that, compared with focal adenomyosis and tubal infertility, diffuse adenomyosis was negatively associated with clinical pregnancy and live birth (clinical pregnancy: A versus B: OR 0.708, 95% CI 0.539 to 0.931, P = 0.013; A versus C: OR 0.663, 95% CI 0.489 to 0.899, P = 0.008; live birth: A versus B: OR 0.530, 95% CI 0.385 to 0.730, P < 0.001; A versus C: OR 0.441, 95% CI 0.313 to 0.623, P < 0.001), but positively associated with miscarriage (A versus B: OR 1.727, 95% CI 1.056 to 2.825, P = 0.029; A versus C: OR 2.549, 95% CI 1.278 to 5.082, P = 0.008). Compared with patients with tubal infertility, focal adenomyosis was also a risk factor for miscarriage (B versus C: OR 1.825, 95% CI 1.112 to 2.995, P = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with patients with focal adenomyosis or tubal infertility, the reproduction outcomes of IVF-ET in patients with diffuse adenomyosis seems to be worse.

Time-sensitive assessment of luteal phase progesterone after HCG ovulation triggering: another brick off the wall?

In recent years, there has been growing interest in understanding the dynamics of progesterone levels during the luteal phase after HCG-triggered ovulation. Recent studies have provided data showing a deviation from the natural ovulatory cycle, with peak progesterone concentrations occurring earlier and declining steadily thereafter, demonstrating that a fall in progesterone concentration early in the luteal phase was associated with lower rates of ongoing pregnancy. These findings highlight the importance of changes in progesterone concentration, rather than absolute concentrations, in determining optimal endometrial conditions. The disadvantages of HCG triggering, including the lack of a natural FSH surge and asynchronization between embryo age and endometrium receptivity, can be addressed by using gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) triggering. GnRHa triggering induces both LH and FSH surges, ensures appropriate progesterone concentrations and offers flexibility in manipulating the luteal phase. Transitioning to GnRHa triggering could improve infertility treatment.

Androgen Deprivation Therapy and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in Patients With Prostate Cancer Based on Existence of Cardiovascular Risk.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists regarding the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) associated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with prostate cancer. We sought to evaluate the association between gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists versus GnRH antagonist and the risk of CVD in patients with prostate cancer with or without prior CVD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using administrative databases from Quebec, Canada, we identified first-time GnRH agonists and antagonist (degarelix) users between January 2012 and June 2016. Follow-up ended at the earliest of the following: first CVD event (myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, ischemic heart disease [IHD], arrhythmia, and heart failure [HF]); switch of GnRH group; death; or December 31, 2016. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on the propensity score was used to control for potential confounding. IPTW-Cox proportional hazards model accounting for competing risks was used to evaluate the association of interest. RESULTS: Among 10,785 patients identified, 10,201 and 584 were on GnRH agonists and antagonist, respectively. Median age was 75 years (interquartile range, 69-81 years) for both groups. A total of 4,152 (40.7%) men in the GnRH agonists group and 281 (48.1%) men in the GnRH antagonist group had CVD in the 3-year period prior to ADT initiation. Risk of HF was decreased in the antagonist group compared with the GnRH agonist group among patients with prior CVD (hazard ratio [HR], 0.46; 95% CI, 0.26-0.79). Risk of IHD was decreased in the antagonist group in patients without prior CVD (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.11-0.65). Use of antagonist was associated with an increased risk of arrhythmia among patients with no prior CVD (HR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.63-3.36). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with GnRH agonists, the GnRH antagonist was found to be associated with a decreased risk of HF, specifically among patients with prior CVD. Among those with no prior CVD, the GnRH antagonist was associated with a decreased risk of IHD but an increased risk of arrhythmia.

Additional single dose GnRH agonist during luteal phase support may improve live birth rate in GnRHa-HRT frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycle: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: GnRH agonist (GnRHa) has been reported to have direct effects and functional roles in the endometrium and embryos. Several meta-analyses have shown that GnRHa administration in the luteal phase improved the live birth rate or pregnancy rate in both fresh and frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles. The aim of this study was to investigate whether luteal GnRHa administration could also improve in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes in patients undergoing hormone replacement therapy (HRT) cycles with GnRHa suppression. METHODS: The retrospective cohort study included a total of 350 patients undergoing GnRHa-HRT FET cycles. The study group included 179 patients receiving an additional single dose of GnRHa in the luteal phase following embryo transfer. A total of 171 patients in the control group did not receive luteal GnRHa. The baseline and cycle characteristics and reproductive outcomes were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Baseline and cycle characteristics were similar between the two groups, except lower AMH levels were found in the luteal GnRHa group than in the control group. The luteal GnRHa group had a significantly higher ongoing pregnancy rate and live birth rate than the control group. The multivariate analysis revealed that luteal GnRHa administration was positively associated with ongoing pregnancy (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.20-3.47, P = 0.008) and live birth (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.20-3.45, P = 0.009). When the subgroup of patients with recurrent implantation failure was analyzed, the multivariate analysis also showed that luteal GnRHa administration had beneficial effects on ongoing pregnancy (OR 4.55, 95% CI 1.69-12.30, P = 0.003) and live birth (OR 4.30, 95% CI 1.59-11.65, P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that the addition of one luteal dose of GnRHa may improve the live birth rate in patients undergoing the GnRHa-HRT protocol.

Application value of Early-Follicular Phase Long-Acting Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonist Long Protocol in patients with resistant ovary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Resistant ovarian syndrome(ROS) is a rare disease. It is difficult to diagnose and treat. Most of the literature reports on assisted pregnancy treatment for ROS patients are individual case reports. In this paper, the ovulation stimulation protocol and assisted pregnancy process of ROS infertile patients in our reproductive center were summarized and analyzed to provide information and support for the clinical treatment of ROS patients. METHODS: From January 2017 to March 2022, assisted reproductive technology treatments and clinical characteristics parameters of six patients with ROS were retrospectively reviewed. Based on controlled ovarian stimulation protocols, these stimulation cycles were separated into four groups: Early-Follicular Phase Long-Acting Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonist Long Protocol (EFLL) group (n = 6), Progestin Primed Ovarian Stimulation(PPOS) protocol group (n = 5), mild-stimulation protocol group (n = 2), and Natural cycle protocol group (n = 3). RESULTS: A total of 16 cycles of ovulation stimulation were carried out in 6 patients with ROS. A total of 19 oocytes were retrieved, as well as 13 MII oocytes, 11 two pronuclear(2PN) fertilized embryos, and 8 excellent embryos. The oocytes acquisition rate was 50% and the fertilization rate of 2PN was 57.9%, and the excellent embryo rate was 72.7%. The EFLL protocol obtained 17 oocytes, 12 MII oocytes, 11 2PN fertilized embryos, and 8 excellent embryos; the mild-stimulation protocol obtained 1 oocyte; the Natural cycle protocol obtained 1 oocyte, and oocytes were not matured after in vitro maturation (IVM); the PPOS protocol obtained no oocytes. Compared with three other protocols, The fertilization rate of 2PN (64.7%) and excellent embryo rate (72.7%) in the EFLL protocol were higher than those of other protocols(0%). Two fresh cycle embryo transfers resulted in live births, while two frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles resulted in one live birth and one clinical pregnancy using the EFLL protocol. CONCLUSION: Although the current study is based on a small sample of participants, the findings suggest that the EFLL protocol can be employed for ovarian stimulation and may result in a live birth in ROS patients.