GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist in oocyte donation cycles: a prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND: The specific role of LH in folliculogenesis and oocyte maturation is unclear. GnRH antagonists, when administered in the late follicular phase, induce a sharp decrease in serum LH which may be detrimental for IVF outcome. This study was performed to evaluate whether the replacement of GnRH agonist (triptorelin) by a GnRH antagonist (ganirelix; NV Organon) in oocyte donation cycles has any impact on pregnancy and implantation rates. METHODS: A total of 148 donor IVF cycles was randomly assigned to use either a GnRH antagonist daily administered from the 8th day of stimulation (group I) or a GnRH agonist long protocol (group II) for the ovarian stimulation of their donors. The primary endpoints were the pregnancy and the implantation rates. RESULTS: The clinical pregnancy rate per transfer (39.72%, 29/73 versus 41.33%, 31/75) based on transvaginal scan findings at 7 weeks of gestation, the implantation rate (23.9 versus 25.4%) and the first trimester abortion rate (10.34 versus 12.90%) were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSION: In oocyte donation cycles the replacement of GnRH agonist by a GnRH antagonist appears to have no impact on the pregnancy and implantation rates when its administration starts on day 8 of stimulation.     

Embryo implantation and GnRH antagonists: GnRH antagonists do not activate the GnRH receptor

Recent suggestions that gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists activate the GnRH receptor are discussed. Most of the studies cited in support of this suggestion are in-vitro studies, testing supra-pharmacological doses of GnRH analogues in cancer cell lines, whereas GnRH antagonists, e.g. ganirelix or cetrorelix, do not affect the steroidogenesis of human granulosa cells in vitro. In patients treated with GnRH antagonists prior to IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), oocyte maturity and fertilization rates are equal to those achieved following a long protocol of GnRH agonists. Although there is a tendency towards a lower pregnancy rate (not statistically significant) in the initial trials using GnRH antagonist with either recombinant FSH or human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) for ovarian stimulation, this new treatment option of GnRH antagonists facilitates short and simple treatment and improves the convenience and safety for the patient. As with GnRH agonists in the past, the clinical outcome of GnRH antagonist treatment will improve with time as more clinical experience is gained (learning curve) and the treatment protocol is optimized. Moreover, a GnRH agonist instead of human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) may be used for triggering ovulation and will decrease the cancellation rate and minimize the risk for developing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).     

GnRH antagonist in assisted reproduction: a Cochrane review

BACKGROUND: In the present systematic review, we wished to compare the efficacy of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist and GnRH agonist administration for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in assisted conception. METHODS: Five randomized controlled trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In four studies, the multiple low-dose (0.25 mg) antagonist regimen was applied and, in one study, the single high-dose (3 mg) antagonist regimen was investigated. In all trials, reference treatment included a long protocol of GnRH agonist (buserelin, leuprorelin or triptorelin) starting in the mid-luteal phase of the preceding cycle. RESULTS: In comparison with the long protocol of GnRH agonist, the overall odds ratio for the prevention of premature LH surges was 1.76 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-4.16], which was not statistically significant. There were significantly fewer clinical pregnancies in those treated with GnRH antagonists (OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.63-0.99). There was no statistically significant reduction in incidence of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome between the two regimens (relative risk 0.51; OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.22-1.18). CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that the fixed GnRH antagonist protocol is a short and simple protocol with good clinical outcome, but the lower pregnancy rate compared with the GnRH agonist long protocol and the non-significant difference between both protocols regarding prevention of premature LH surge and prevention of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome necessitates counselling subfertile couples before recommending change from GnRH agonist to antagonist. The clinical outcome may be further improved by developing more flexible antagonist regimens, taking into account individual patient characteristics.     

Profound LH suppression after GnRH antagonist administration is associated with a significantly higher ongoing pregnancy rate in IVF

BACKGROUND: The significance of suppressed LH levels in GnRH antagonist cycles for IVF outcome is currently unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate prospectively the association between LH levels and ongoing pregnancy achievement after GnRH antagonist initiation in IVF cycles. METHODS: Ovarian stimulation with a fixed dose of 200 IU recombinant FSH and daily GnRH antagonist (ganirelix) 0.25 mg from day 6 of stimulation was initiated in 116 women. Patients were not pretreated with an oral contraceptive. Induction of final oocyte maturation was performed with HCG 10,000 IU as soon as three follicles of > or =17 mm were present in ultrasound, and was followed by oocyte pick-up, conventional IVF or ICSI, and embryo transfer. The luteal phase was supplemented with vaginal progesterone. RESULTS: A significant decrease of both ongoing pregnancy rate and implantation rate was present across groups of patients with increasing LH levels. The highest implantation rate and ongoing pregnancy rate was present in those patients with LH levels on day 8 of stimulation < or =0.5 IU/l. CONCLUSIONS: Profound suppression of LH on day 8 of stimulation is associated with a significantly higher chance of achieving an ongoing pregnancy. More studies are necessary to evaluate this phenomenon further.     

Use of a single bolus of GnRH agonist triptorelin to trigger ovulation after GnRH antagonist ganirelix treatment in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for assisted reproduction, with special reference to the prevention of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: preliminary report: short communication

A new treatment option for patients undergoing ovarian stimulation is the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol, with the possibility to trigger a mid-cycle LH surge using a single bolus of GnRH agonist, reducing the risk of developing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) in high responders and the chance of cycle cancellation. This report describes the use of 0.2 mg triptorelin (Decapeptyl) to trigger ovulation in eight patients who underwent controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with recombinant FSH (rFSH, Puregon) and concomitant treatment with the GnRH antagonist ganirelix (Orgalutran) for the prevention of premature LH surges. All patients were considered to have an increased risk for developing OHSS (at least 20 follicles > or =11 mm and/or serum oestradiol at least 3000 pg/ml). On the day of triggering the LH surge, the mean number of follicles > or =11 mm was 25.1 +/- 4.5 and the median serum oestradiol concentration was 3675 (range 2980-7670) pg/ml. After GnRH agonist injection, endogenous serum LH and FSH surges were observed with median peak values of 219 and 19 IU/l respectively, measured 4 h after injection. The mean number of oocytes obtained was 23.4 +/- 15.4, of which 83% were mature (metaphase II). None of the patients developed any signs or symptoms of OHSS. So far, four clinical pregnancies have been achieved from the embryos obtained during these cycles, including the first birth following this approach. It is concluded that GnRH agonist effectively triggers an endogenous LH surge for final oocyte maturation after ganirelix treatment in stimulated cycles. Our preliminary results suggest that this regimen may prove effective in triggering ovulation and could be said to prevent OHSS in high responders. The efficacy and safety of such new treatment regimen needs to be established in comparative randomized studies.     

A lower ongoing pregnancy rate can be expected when GnRH agonist is used for triggering final oocyte maturation instead of HCG in patients undergoing IVF with GnRH antagonists

BACKGROUND: Eliciting an endogenous LH surge by GnRH-agonist for the induction of final oocyte maturation may be more physiological compared with the administration of HCG. However, the efficacy of this intervention in patients treated for IVF with GnRH antagonists remains to be assessed. METHODS: 106 patients were randomized to receive either 10 000 IU urinary HCG or 0.2 mg Triptorelin for triggering final oocyte maturation. Ovarian stimulation for IVF was performed with a fixed dose of 200 IU recombinant FSH and GnRH antagonist was started on stimulation day 6. Luteal phase was supported with micronized vaginal progesterone and oral estradiol. The study was monitored continuously for safety and stopping rules were established. RESULTS: No significant differences were present in the number of cumulus-oocyte complexes retrieved, in the proportion of metaphase II oocytes, in fertilization rates or in the number and quality of the embryos transferred between the two groups. However, a significantly lower probability of ongoing pregnancy in the GnRH agonist arm prompted discontinuation of the trial, according to the stopping rules established (odds ratio 0.11; 95% confidence interval 0.02-0.52). CONCLUSIONS: Lower probability of ongoing pregnancy can be expected when GnRH agonist is used for triggering final oocyte maturation instead of HCG in patients undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF with GnRH antagonists.     

Treatment with the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist ganirelix in women undergoing ovarian stimulation with recombinant follicle stimulating hormone is effective, safe and convenient: results of a controlled, randomized, multicentre trial. The European Orgalutran Study Group

A multicentre, open-label, randomized study of the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist ganirelix (Orgalutran((R))/Antagon((TM))) was performed in women undergoing ovarian stimulation with recombinant FSH (rFSH: Puregon((R))). The study was designed as a non-inferiority study using a long protocol of buserelin (intranasal) and rFSH as a reference treatment. A total of 730 subjects was randomized in a treatment ratio of 2:1 (ganirelix:buserelin) using an interactive voice response system which stratified for age, type of infertility and planned fertilization procedure [IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)]. The median duration of GnRH analogue treatment was 5 days in the ganirelix group and 26 days in the buserelin group, whereas the median total rFSH dose was 1500 IU and 1800 IU respectively. In addition, in the ganirelix group the mean duration of stimulation was 1 day shorter. During ganirelix treatment the incidence of LH rises (LH >/=10 IU/l) was 2.8% versus 1.3% during rFSH stimulation in the buserelin group. On the day of triggering ovulation by human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG), the mean number of follicles >/=11 mm diameter was 10.7 and 11.8, and the median serum oestradiol concentrations were 1190 pg/ml and 1700 pg/ml in the ganirelix and buserelin groups respectively. The mean number of oocytes per retrieval was 9.1 and 10.4 respectively, whereas the mean number of good quality embryos was 3.3 and 3.5 respectively. The fertilization rate was equal in both groups (62.1%), and the same mean number of embryos (2.2) was replaced. The mean implantation rates were 15.7% and 21.8%, and the ongoing pregnancy rates per attempt were 20.3% and 25.7% in the ganirelix and buserelin groups respectively. Evaluation of all safety data indicated that the ganirelix regimen was safe and well tolerated. The overall incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome was 2.4% in the ganirelix group and 5.9% in the reference group. The results of this study support a safe, short and convenient treatment regimen of ganirelix, resulting in a good clinical outcome for patients undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF or ICSI.     

GnRH antagonist versus long GnRH agonist protocol in poor responders undergoing IVF: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND. This is the first published report of a prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing a fixed, multi-dose GnRH antagonist protocol with a long GnRH agonist protocol in poor responders undergoing IVF. METHODS. Sixty-six poor responders were randomized into two groups: the study group received 0.25 mg of cetrorelix daily starting on day 6 of stimulation; the control group received 600 microg of buserelin acetate daily starting in the mid-luteal phase of the preceding cycle. Both groups were given a fixed dose of recombinant FSH (300 IU daily) for stimulation. RESULTS. There were no significant differences in the cycle cancellation rates, duration of stimulation, consumption of gonadotrophins, and mean numbers of mature follicles, oocytes and embryos obtained. The implantation rates were similar, but the number of embryos transferred was significantly higher for the antagonist group (2.32 +/- 0.58 versus 1.50 +/- 0.83; P = 0.01). The pregnancy rates were also higher in the antagonist group, but the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION. A fixed multi-dose GnRH antagonist protocol is feasible for patients who are poor responders on a long agonist protocol; however, our study failed to demonstrate an overall improvement in ovarian responsiveness. Clinical outcomes may be improved by developing more flexible antagonist regimens, an approach that requires further evaluation.     

GnRH antagonists followed by a decline in serum estradiol results in adverse outcomes in donor oocyte cycles

BACKGROUND: The aim of this retrospective study was to assess clinical outcomes using GnRH antagonists in oocyte donation cycles. METHODS: Between July 2000 and June 2001, 40 recipient cycles generated from donor oocytes were evaluated. Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) was started on cycle day 2 using recombinant gonadotrophins (225 IU daily). GnRH antagonist was started on cycle day 6 of COH. All recipients were synchronized to donors using GnRH agonist followed by estrogen and progesterone supplementation. Main outcome measures were days of stimulation (DOS), number of ampoules used, peak serum estradiol, number of oocytes, fertilization rate, embryo score, clinical on-going pregnancy rate and implantation rate. RESULTS: Thirty-seven donor cycles (93%) underwent oocyte retrieval, resulting in 36 embryo transfers. Fourteen cycles (35%) had decreased serum estradiol after initiation of GnRH antagonist. No differences were seen in numbers of FSH ampoules, DOS, peak serum estradiol, number of retrieved oocytes, fertilization rate and embryo quality. However, clinical pregnancy rate per initiated cycle [14% (2/14) versus 54% (14/26)], ongoing pregnancy rate per initiated cycle [7% (1/14) versus 46% (12/26)] and implantation rate (4 versus 24%) were all significantly less (P <0.05) following a decrease in serum estradiol after initiation of GnRH antagonist. No clinical predictor, including donor age, basal day 2 FSH or estradiol, ovarian morphology or serum estradiol prior to GnRH antagonist, was predictive of a decline in serum estradiol following GnRH antagonist. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate an adverse effect on clinical outcome in cycles, resulting in a decline in serum estradiol after GnRH antagonist administration. This effect was unpredictable and provided a simplified protocol for oocyte donation cycles; nonetheless, further study is needed to clarify the adverse effects of GnRH antagonists in oocyte donation cycles.     

Comparison between a GnRH antagonist and a GnRH agonist flare-up protocol in oocyte donors: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Little information is available on the outcome of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) using GnRH antagonist in oocyte donation cycles especially in comparison with the short GnRH agonist protocol. This study was aimed at comparing the two stimulation protocols in oocyte donation (OD) cycles. METHODS: A total of 113 donors randomly received COH using either GnRH antagonist or GnRH agonist. The primary endpoint was the mean number of mature oocytes retrieved per started donor cycle. Secondary endpoints were the mean number of cumulus-oocyte-complexes (COCs) retrieved, the mean proportion of mature oocytes, pregnancy and implantation rates in recipients. RESULTS: Oocytes were distributed to 166 recipients. The mean number (+/- SD) of COC (11.6 +/- 5.8 versus 12.1 +/- 6.7), mature oocytes (8.4 +/- 4.4 versus 8.9 +/- 5.3) and the proportion of mature oocytes (70.8 versus 75.7%) retrieved per started donor cycle were similar in the antagonist and agonist groups, respectively. The implantation rate (26.1 versus 30.1%), clinical (40.2 versus 45.6%) and ongoing pregnancy rate per recipient cycle (32.2 versus 37.9%) were comparable in antagonist and agonist protocols, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Similar mean number of mature oocytes and comparable pregnancy rates are achieved after OD in which donors received COH using GnRH antagonist or short GnRH agonist protocols.     

Successful treatment of empty follicle syndrome by triggering endogenous LH surge using GnRH agonist in an antagonist down-regulated IVF cycle

To date, empty follicle syndrome (EFS) has only been reported in GnRH agonist down-regulated IVF cycles. Some cases have been successfully treated by changing the batch, or by repeating the dose of hCG. A case of EFS was observed in both GnRH antagonist and GnRH agonist down-regulated IVF cycles when final oocyte maturation was triggered using urinary hCG (u-hCG). Failure to retrieve oocytes occurred, despite administration of a further dose of u-hCG from a different batch and a delayed repeated oocyte recovery performed in the second GnRH agonist down-regulated cycle. A successful oocyte recovery cycle was achieved after triggering of an endogenous gonadotrophin surge using GnRH agonist in an antagonist down-regulated cycle. Nine oocytes were readily retrieved from 10 follicles, at 36 h after GnRH agonist administration, and eight of these fertilized normally. Two good quality embryos were used for fresh transfer and four were cryopreserved for future use. EFS can occur in GnRH antagonist down-regulated IVF cycles, and can be successfully treated by triggering a natural gonadotrophin surge using GnRH agonist in the absence of any response to previous treatment methods. This represents a novel therapeutic modality for this uncommon but frustrating condition.     

Is there a difference in the function of granulosa-luteal cells in patients undergoing in-vitro fertilization either with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist or gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist?

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) regulates gonadotrophin release. It has been shown that GnRH may have a direct effect on the ovary, as the addition of GnRH to granulosa cell cultures inhibits the production of progesterone and oestradiol. Specific GnRH receptors have been found to be present in rat and human granulosa cells. Desensitization of the pituitary by GnRH agonist has become common in in-vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment, usually by a long protocol of 2-3 weeks. With the introduction of GnRH antagonists, which produce an immediate blockage of the GnRH receptors, a much shorter exposure is needed of 3-6 days. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a GnRH agonist (buserelin) and a GnRH antagonist (cetrorelix) on the function of granulosa cells cultured in vitro from IVF patients. Women were treated by IVF randomized either to have buserelin nasal spray from the luteal phase in the previous cycle or cetrorelix from day 6 of the cycle. Both groups had ovarian stimulation with human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) 150 IU daily, i.e. HCG was administered when the follicles were larger than 17 mm, and aspirated 36 h later. Granulosa cells, separated and washed from large follicles containing ova, were pooled. After 48 h of pre-incubation, the granulosa cells were cultured for 4 days in medium with either added testosterone or cAMP with or without HCG, with change of medium after 2 days. The progesterone and oestradiol concentrations in the culture medium were measured by immunological assay, and cellular protein was measured by microprotein assay. The results showed that granulosa cells from women treated with GnRH antagonist (cetrorelix) responded earlier to the in-vitro hormone stimulation in terms of progesterone accumulation than women treated with the GnRH agonist (buserelin). This may have been due to difference in time of exposure to the analogue. The results may indicate that the luteal function is less impaired in GnRH antagonist treatment than in GnRH agonist treatment.     

Serum inhibin A, VEGF and TNFalpha levels after triggering oocyte maturation with GnRH agonist compared with HCG in women with polycystic ovaries undergoing IVF treatment: a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine the serum levels of inhibin A, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha), estradiol (E2) and progesterone levels after triggering of final oocyte maturation with GnRH agonist compared with HCG in patients with polycystic ovaries (PCO) and to investigate the relationship between these markers and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with PCO, undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with FSH and GnRH antagonist for IVF-embryo transfer treatment, were randomized for triggering of final oocyte maturation with GnRH agonist (GnRH agonist group, n = 15) or HCG (HCG group, n = 13). Blood samples were obtained on the day of randomization and thereafter every 2-7 days. Serum levels of inhibin A, VEGF, TNFalpha, E2 and progesterone, the incidence of OHSS, ovarian size and pelvic fluid accumulation were evaluated. RESULTS: Serum inhibin A, E2 and progesterone levels were significantly lower in the GnRH agonist group compared with the HCG group, particularly on the day of embryo transfer (P < 0.0001). Serum VEGF and TNFalpha levels were similar between the two groups. Four patients in the HCG group developed severe OHSS, whereas no patient had any symptoms or signs of OHSS in the GnRH-agonist group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PCO treated with FSH/GnRH antagonist, final oocyte maturation with GnRH agonist instead of HCG reduces significantly inhibin A, E2 and progesterone levels during the luteal phase. This phenomenon reflects the inhibition of the corpus luteum function and may explain, at least in part, the mechanism of OHSS prevention in high-risk patients. Our results do not support a crucial role for VEGF or TNFalpha in OHSS.     

Ovarian stimulation with GnRH agonist, but not GnRH antagonist, partially restores the expression of endometrial integrin beta3 and leukaemia-inhibitory factor and improves uterine receptivity in mice

BACKGROUND: The impact of different ovarian stimulation (OS) protocols on endometrial receptivity remains controversial. In this study, the effects of different OS on the expression of endometrial integrin beta3 subunit and leukaemia-inhibitory factor (LIF) during the implantation window and the implantation rate in mice were investigated. METHODS: Three OS protocols were used, involving either pregnant mare's serum gonadotrophin (PMSG) alone, PMSG plus GnRH agonist or PMSG plus GnRH antagonist. Uterus samples were collected at 48 h after OS or ovulation and were detected with immunohistochemistry, Western blot and RT-PCR analyses. Normal embryos at gestation day 4 were transferred into the uteri of mice in the control and OS groups. RESULTS: All OS groups showed a significant decrease in the expression of both the endometrial integrin beta3 subunit and LIF during the implantation window and the implantation rate. Among the three OS groups, GnRH agonist-treated mice showed a higher endometrial integrin beta3 subunit and LIF expression and a higher implantation rate. No significant difference was found in the measured indices between the GnRH antagonist and PMSG groups. CONCLUSIONS: OS may inhibit the expression of endometrial integrin beta3 subunit and LIF and impair endometrial receptivity in mice. OS with GnRH agonist, but not GnRH antagonist, may partially restore the endometrial physiological secretion and improve uterine receptivity.     

GnRH agonist (buserelin) or hCG for ovulation induction in GnRH antagonist IVF/ICSI cycles: a prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine the efficacy of ovarian hyperstimulation protocols employing a GnRH antagonist to prevent a premature LH rise allowing final oocyte maturation and ovulation to be induced by a single bolus of either a GnRH agonist or hCG. METHODS: A total of 122 normogonadotrophic patients following a flexible antagonist protocol was stimulated with recombinant human FSH and prospectively randomized (sealed envelopes) to ovulation induction with a single bolus of either 0.5 mg buserelin s.c. (n = 55) or 10,000 IU of hCG (n = 67). A maximum of two embryos was transferred. Luteal support consisted of micronized progesterone vaginally, 90 mg a day, and estradiol, 4 mg a day per os. RESULTS: Ovulation was induced with GnRH agonist in 55 patients and hCG in 67 patients. Significantly more metaphase II (MII) oocytes were retrieved in the GnRH agonist group (P < 0.02). Significantly higher levels of LH and FSH (P < 0.001) and significantly lower levels of progesterone and estradiol (P < 0.001) were seen in the GnRH agonist group during the luteal phase. The implantation rate, 33/97 versus 3/89 (P < 0.001), clinical pregnancy rate, 36 versus 6% (P = 0.002), and rate of early pregnancy loss, 4% versus 79% (P = 0.005), were significantly in favour of hCG. CONCLUSIONS: Ovulation induction with a GnRH agonist resulted in significantly more MII oocytes. However, a significantly lower implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate in addition to a significantly higher rate of early pregnancy loss was seen in the GnRH agonist group, most probably due to a luteal phase deficiency.     

Comparison of GnRH agonists and antagonists in assisted reproduction cycles of patients at high risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

BACKGROUND: During IVF or ICSI cycles, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is a major problem. The aim of this prospective, multicentre, comparative study (using historical controls) was to assess the efficacy of a GnRH antagonist protocol in preventing OHSS in selected patients who had experienced OHSS or had been at risk of OHSS in their previous IVF/ICSI attempt. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients underwent a new cycle where the same gonadotrophin protocol was used [same dose of recombinant FSH (rFSH)] but a different protocol was used for pituitary desensitization: cetrorelix 0.25 mg multiple-dose antagonist instead of GnRH agonist long protocol. Cetrorelix 0.25 mg was administered daily, starting when the leading follicle reached a diameter of 14 mm. In other words, rFSH was administered in the new cycle according to the dosage and the step-up or step-down modalities used during the previous cycle, independently of ultrasound findings and serum estradiol (E(2)) levels. Eighty-seven patients entered the study. Out of the 87 cycles involving GnRH agonists, 49 (56.3%) were cancelled and out of the 87 involving GnRH antagonists 28 (32.2%) were cancelled [McNemar's test; 95% confidence interval (CI) -35.8% to -11.2%; P < 0.001]. After GnRH agonist cycles, we recorded 24 cases of OHSS (18 moderate and six severe; 27.6%), whereas after the GnRH antagonist cycles there were 10 cases of OHSS (nine moderate and one severe; 11.5%) (95% CI-26.4% to -5.7%; P = 0.006). There was a statistically significant reduction in the total number of follicles with a diameter >10 mm (Wilcoxon's test; Z = 6.1; P < 0.001) and of E(2) levels on the day of HCG administration (2538 versus 4322.4 pg/ml; P < 0.001) in the GnRH antagonist cycles versus GnRH agonist cycles. Twenty-nine patients had an embryo transfer in the first cycle (76.3% of oocyte retrievals) and 57 in the cycle using GnRH antagonist (96.6%). This 20.3% difference was also significant (Z-test; 95% CI 6.8-36.0%; P = 0.003). After the antagonist cycles, 18 pregnancies (20.7 per initiated cycle; 31.6% per embryo transfer) were obtained. CONCLUSIONS: Although this study presents some limitations owing to the use of historical controls, our data show a favourable effect of GnRH antagonists in reducing the incidence of OHSS and the number of assisted fertilization cycles cancelled because of the risk of OHSS in high responder patients. As a consequence, GnRH antagonist plus gonadotrophin administration could also increase the percentage of oocyte retrievals and embryo transfers in this high risk group of patients.     

Alternate day and daily administration of GnRH antagonist may prevent premature luteinization to a similar extent during FSH treatment

BACKGROUND: This randomized controlled trial was designed toevaluate whether a GnRH antagonist given every other day couldprevent premature luteinization in women undergoing IVF/ICSItreatment. METHODS: A total of 73 women receiving ovulationstimulation IVF cycles with recombinant FSH were allocated randomlyon cycle day 7 to GnRH antagonist ganirelix in multiple doses(0.25 mg each), either daily (n = 37 women, group 1) or everyother day (n = 36 women, group 2) until the day of HCG administration.RESULTS: Serum FSH, LH, estradiol and progesterone values showedsimilar trends in the two groups. During FSH stimulation, 13(35%) of the women in group 1 had premature LH rises (10 IU/l)of which eight (22%) were after the start of antagonist administration.In group 2 there were 14 (39%) LH rises during FSH stimulationof which 10 (28%) were after the start of antagonist administration.Luteinization (serum progesterone >2 ng/ml) occurred in onlyone woman in each group overall (3%). A significantly smallertotal dose of the antagonist was used in group 2 than in group1 (P < 0.001). The study did not have power to evaluate differencesin total dose of FSH, number of oocytes recovered and clinicalpregnancy rate, all of which appeared similar in the two groups.CONCLUSIONS: Whether alternate day is as effective as dailyadministration of ganirelix in preventing premature luteinizationshould be addressed in a non-inferiority trial powered to evaluatelive birth rate.     

A randomized, double-blind, multicentre clinical trial comparing starting doses of 150 and 200 IU of recombinant FSH in women treated with the GnRH antagonist ganirelix for assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND: Studies with the GnRH antagonist ganirelix in assistedreproduction have indicated that compared with traditional GnRHagonist downregulation protocols, slightly fewer oocytes areretrieved. In this study it was investigated whether an increasein the starting dose of recombinant FSH (rFSH) could compensatefor this loss. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, multicentreclinical trial comparing a starting dose of 150 and 200 IUof rFSH (follitropin ), in women undergoing treatment with theGnRH antagonist ganirelix. RESULTS: In total, 257 women weretreated with rFSH, of whom 131 received 150 IU and 126women 200 IU. Overall, 10.3 oocytes were retrieved in the150 IU group and 11.9 in the 200 IU group (P = 0.051).This difference became significant when women with cycle cancellationbefore HCG administration were excluded. Nearly 500 IUof additional rFSH was given in the high-dose group (2014 versus1541 IU). In the low-dose group, 4.6 high-quality embryoswere obtained compared with 4.5 in the high-dose group. Vitalpregnancy rates were similar (31 and 25% in the 150 and 200 IU-treatedwomen, respectively). Serum concentrations of FSH, estradioland progesterone were significantly higher in the high-dosegroup at day 6 of rFSH treatment and on the day of HCG administration.In the high-dose group, serum LH concentrations were higherat day 6 of rFSH treatment but lower at the day of HCG administration.CONCLUSION: By increasing the starting dose from 150 to 200 IUof rFSH, slightly more oocytes can be retrieved in GnRH antagonistprotocols for assisted reproduction. However, because this didnot translate into a higher number of high quality embryos,the clinical relevance of such a dose increase may be questioned.     

Beneficial effect of luteal-phase GnRH agonist administration on embryo implantation after ICSI in both GnRH agonist- and antagonist-treated ovarian stimulation cycles

BACKGROUND: GnRH agonist was recently suggested as a novel luteal-phase support that may act at different levels, including the pituitary gonadotrophs, the endometrium and the embryo itself. This prospective randomized study evaluates the effect of GnRH agonist administered in the luteal phase on ICSI outcomes in both GnRH agonist- and GnRH antagonist-treated ovarian stimulation protocols. METHODS: Six hundred women about to undergo ovarian stimulation for ICSI (300 using a long GnRH agonist protocol and 300 using a GnRH antagonist protocol) were enrolled in this study. Patients treated with each of these two protocols were randomly assigned to receive a single injection of GnRH agonist or placebo 6 days after ICSI. Implantation and live birth rates were the primary outcomes. RESULTS: Administration of 0.1 mg of GnRH agonist triptorelin on day 6 after ICSI led to a significant improvement of implantation and live birth rates after ICSI as compared with placebo. In GnRH antagonist-treated ovarian stimulation cycles, luteal-phase GnRH agonist also increased ongoing pregnancy rate. Moreover, luteal-phase GnRH agonist administration increased luteal-phase serum HCG, estradiol and progesterone concentrations in both ovarian stimulation regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Luteal-phase GnRH agonist administration enhances ICSI clinical outcomes after GnRH agonist- and GnRH antagonist-treated ovarian stimulation cycles, possibly by a combination of effects on the embryo and the corpus luteum.     

GnRH agonist for triggering final oocyte maturation in the GnRH antagonist ovarian hyperstimulation protocol: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Triggering final oocyte maturation with GnRH agonist during ovarian stimulation is feasible when inhibition of premature LH surge is performed with GnRH antagonists, and we aimed to systematically collate evidence on the clinical efficacy of GnRH agonist triggering in patients undergoing assisted reproduction in GnRH antagonist protocols. Twenty-three publications were identified by a comprehensive literature search that included PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. Three publications out of 23 fulfilled the inclusion criteria for meta-analysis, which were (i) prospective, randomized controlled study design; (ii) stimulation with gonadotropins for induction of multifollicular development; (iii) suppression of endogenous LH by a GnRH antagonist; (iv) triggering of final oocyte maturation with GnRH agonist; (v) control group randomized to receive HCG for final oocyte maturation and (vi) any means of luteal phase support other than HCG. The participants were normoovulatory women undergoing IVF. The outcomes assessed were clinical pregnancy per randomized patient; number of oocytes retrieved; proportion of metaphase II oocytes; fertilization rate; embryo quality score; first trimester abortion rate; ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) incidence. Results are presented as combined standardized differences of the mean and combined odds ratios, as appropriate, with 95% confidence intervals. No significant difference was found for the number of oocytes retrieved (-0.94, -0.33-0.14), proportion of metaphase II oocytes (-0.03, -0.58-0.52), fertilization rate (0.15, -0.09-0.38) or embryo quality score (0.05, -0.18-0.29). No OHSS occurred in two of the studies, whereas in one study OHSS incidence was not reported. Thus from the available data, no conclusion can be drawn as regards OHSS incidence after GnRH agonist triggering. In comparison to HCG, GnRH agonist administration is associated with a significantly reduced likelihood of achieving a clinical pregnancy (0.21, 0.05-0.84; P = 0.03). The odds of first trimester pregnancy loss is increased after GnRH agonist triggering; however, the confidence interval crosses unity (11.51, 0.95-138.98; P = 0.05). In conclusion, the use of GnRH agonist to trigger final oocyte maturation in IVF, where inhibition of premature LH surge is achieved with GnRH antagonists, yields a number of oocytes capable to undergo fertilization and subsequent embryonic cleavage, which is comparable to that achieved with HCG. However, the likelihood of an ongoing clinical pregnancy after GnRH agonist triggering is significantly lower as compared to standard HCG treatment.