Risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol: RCT including 1050 first IVF/ICSI cycles.

Is the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) similar in a short GnRH antagonist and long GnRH agonist protocol in first cycle IVF/ICSI patients less than 40 years of age?. There is an increased risk of severe OHSS in the long GnRH agonist group compared with the short GnRH antagonist protocol. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY?: In the most recent Cochrane review, the GnRH antagonist protocol was associated with a similar live birth rate (LBR), a similar on-going pregnancy rate (OPR), and a lower incidence of OHSS (odds ratio (OR) = 0.43 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33-0.57) compared with the traditional GnRH agonist protocol. Previous trials comparing the two protocols mainly included selected patient populations, a limited number of patients and the applied OHSS criteria differed, making direct comparisons difficult. In two recent large meta-analyses, no significant differences in LBR (OR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.72-1.02) or in the incidence of severe OHSS were reported, while others found a lower LBR (OR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.68-0.97) and a reduced risk of severe OHSS using the GnRH antagonist protocol (OR = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.40-0.88). Phase IV, dual-centre, open-label, RCT including 1050 women allocated to either short GnRH antagonist or long GnRH agonist protocol in a 1:1 ratio and enrolled over a 5-year period using a web-based concealed randomization code. This is a superiority study designed to detect a difference in severe OHSS, the primary outcome, between the two groups with a power of 80% and stratified for age, assisted reproductive technology (ART) clinic and planned fertilization procedure (IVF/ICSI). The secondary aims were to compare rates of mild and moderate OHSS, positive plasma (p)-hCG, on-going pregnancy and live birth between the two arms. None of the women had undergone previous ART treatment. All infertile women referred for their first IVF/ICSI at two public fertility clinics, less than 40 years of age and with no uterine malformations were asked to participate. A total of 1099 subjects were randomized, including women with poor ovarian reserve, polycystic ovary syndrome and irregular cycles. A total of 49 women withdrew their consent, thus 1050 subjects were allocated to the GnRH antagonist (n = 534) and agonist protocol (n = 516), respectively. In total 1023 women started recombinant human follitropin-β (rFSH) stimulation, 528 in the GnRH antagonist group and 495 in the GnRH agonist group. All subjects were given a fixed rFSH dose of 150 IU or 225 IU according to age ≤36 years or >36 years, with the option to adjust dose at stimulation day 6. Clinical OHSS parameters were collected at oocyte retrieval, and Days 3 and 14 post-transfer. On-going pregnancy was determined by transvaginal ultrasonography at gestational weeks 7-9. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis for reproductive outcomes, 1050 subjects were included. For the ITT analyses on OHSS 1023 subjects who started gonadotrophin stimulation were included. The incidence of severe OHSS [5.1% (27/528) versus 8.9% (44/495) (difference in proportion percentage point (Δpp) = -3.8pp; 95% CI: -7.1 to -0.4; P = 0.02)] and moderate OHSS [10.2% (54/528) versus 15.6% (77/495) (Δpp = -5.3pp; 95% CI: -9.6 to -1.0; P = 0.01) ] was significantly lower in the GnRH antagonist group compared with the agonist group, respectively. In the GnRH antagonist and agonist group, respectively, 4.7% (25/528) versus 8.5% (42/495) women were seen by a physician due to OHSS (P = 0.01), and 1.7% (9/528) versus 3.6% (18/495) were admitted to hospital due to OHSS (P = 0.06). No women had ascites-puncture in the GnRH antagonist group versus 2.0% (10/495) in the GnRH agonist group (P < 0.01). LBRs were 22.8% (122/534) versus 23.8% (123/516) (Δpp = -1.0pp; 95% CI: -6.3 to 4.3; P = 0.70) and OPRs were 24.9% (133/528) versus 26.2% (135/516) (Δpp = -1.3pp; 95% CI: -6.7 to 4.2; P = 0.64) per randomized subject in the GnRH antagonist versus agonist group, with a mean number of 1.1 versus 1.2 embryos transferred in the two groups. Pregnancy rates (PR) per randomized subject, per started gonadotrophin stimulation and per embryo transfer were all similar in the two groups. A possible limitation is the duration of the trial, with new methods, such as 'freeze all' and 'GnRH agonist triggering', being developed during the trial, the new methods were sought avoided, however a total number of 32 women had 'freeze all' and 'GnRH agonist triggering' was performed in three cases. Ultrasonic measurements were performed by different physicians and inter-observer bias may be present. Measures of anti-Mullerian hormone and antral follicle count, to estimate ovarian reserve and thus predict risk of OHSS, were not performed. Finally, the physicians were not blinded to GnRH treatment group after randomization. The short GnRH antagonist protocol should be the protocol of choice for patients undergoing their first ART cycle in females <40 years of age including both low and high responders when an age-dependent initially fixed gonadotrophin dose is used, as an increased risk of severe OHSS and the associated complications is seen in the long GnRH agonist group and as PRs and LBRs are similar in the two groups. Patients at risk of OHSS particularly benefit from the short GnRH antagonist treatment as GnRH agonist triggering can be used. An unrestricted research grant is funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA (MSD). The funders had no influence on the data collection, analyses or conclusions of the study. No conflict of interests to declare. EudraCT #: 2008-005452-24. ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT00756028. Trial registration date: 18 September 2008. Date of first patient's enrolment: 14 January 2009.

Toftager M ，Bogstad J ，Bryndorf T ，Løssl K ，Roskær J ，Holland T ，Prætorius L ，Zedeler A ，Nilas L ，Pinborg A ... -  《-》

Cumulative live birth rates after one ART cycle including all subsequent frozen-thaw cycles in 1050 women: secondary outcome of an RCT comparing GnRH-antagonist and GnRH-agonist protocols.

Are cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) similar in GnRH-antagonist and GnRH-agonist protocols for the first ART cycle including all subsequent frozen-thaw cycles from the same oocyte retrieval? The chances of at least one live birth following utilization of all fresh and frozen embryos after the first ART cycle are similar in GnRH-antagonist and GnRH-agonist protocols. Reproductive outcomes of ART treatment are traditionally reported as pregnancies per cycle or per embryo transfer. However, the primary concern is the overall chance of a live birth. After the first ART cycle with fresh embryo transfer, we found live birth rates (LBRs) of 22.8% and 23.8% (P = 0.70) for the GnRH-antagonist and GnRH-agonist protocols, respectively. But with CLBRs including both fresh and frozen embryos from the first oocyte retrieval, chances of at least one live birth increases. There are no previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CLBRs in GnRH-antagonist versus GnRH-agonist protocols. Previous studies on CLBR are either retrospective cohort studies including multiple fresh cycles or RCTs comparing single embryo transfer (SET) with double embryo transfer (DET). CLBR was a secondary outcome in a Phase IV, dual-center, open-label, RCT including 1050 women allocated to a short GnRH-antagonist or a long GnRH-agonist protocol in a 1:1 ratio over a 5-year period using a web-based concealed randomization code. The minimum follow-up time from the first IVF cycle was 2 years. The aim was to compare CLBR between the two groups following utilization of all fresh and frozen embryos from the first ART cycle. All women referred for their first ART cycle at two public fertility clinics, <40 years of age were approached. A total of 1050 subjects were allocated to treatment and 1023 women started standardized ART protocols with recombinant human follitropin-β (rFSH) stimulation. Day-2 SET was planned and additional embryos were frozen and used in subsequent frozen-thawed cycles. All pregnancies generated from oocyte retrieval during the first IVF cycle including fresh and frozen-thaw cycles were registered. Ongoing pregnancy was determined by ultrasonography at gestational week 7-9 and live birth was irrespective of the duration of gestation. CLBR was defined as at least one live birth per allocated woman after fresh and frozen cycles. Subjects were censored out after the first live birth. Cox proportional hazard model was used to evaluate the relative prognostic significance of female age, BMI, the number of retrieved oocytes and the diagnosis of infertility in relation to the CLBR. Baseline characteristics were similar and equal proportions of patients continued with frozen-thaw (frozen embryo transfer, FET) cycles after their fresh ART cycle in the GnRH-antagonist and GnRH-agonist arms. When combining all fresh and frozen-thaw embryo transfers from first oocyte retrieval with a minimum of 2-year follow-up, the CLBR was 34.1% (182/534) in the GnRH-antagonist group versus 31.2% (161/516) in the GnRH-agonist group (odds ratio (OR):1.14; 95% CI: 0.88-1.48, P = 0.32). Mean time to the first live birth was 11.0 months in the GnRH-antagonist group compared to 11.5 months in the GnRH-agonist group (P < 0.01). The total number of deliveries from all FET cycles where embryos were thawed were higher in the antagonist group 64/330 (19.4%) compared to the agonist group 43/355 (12.1%) ((OR): 1.74; 95% CI: 1.14-2.66, P = 0.01). The evaluation of prognostic factors showed that more retrieved oocytes were associated with a significantly higher CLBR in both treatment groups. For the subgroup of obese women (BMI >30 kg/m2), the CLBR was significantly higher in the GnRH-antagonist group (P = 0.02). The duration of the trial is a possible limitation with introduction of new methods as 'Freeze all' and 'GnRH-agonist triggering', but as these treatments were used in only few women, a systematic bias is not likely. Blastocyst culture of surplus embryos for freezing was introduced to both groups simultaneously, thereby minimizing the risk of bias. Furthermore, with a minimum of 2-year follow-up, a minority (<1%) still had cryopreserved embryos and no live birth at the end of the trial. The post hoc prognostic covariate analyses with multiple strata should be interpreted with caution. Finally, the physicians were not blinded to GnRH treatment group after randomization. With the improvement of embryo culture, freezing and thawing methods as well as a strategy of elective SET, CLBR until first live birth provides an all-inclusive success rate for ART. When comparing GnRH-antagonist and GnRH-agonist protocols, we find similar CLBRs, despite more oocytes being retrieved in the GnRH-agonist protocol. An unrestricted research grant is funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA (MSD). The funders had no influence on the data collection, analyses or conclusions of the study. No conflict of interests to declare. EudraCT #: 2008-005452-24. ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT00756028. 18 September 2008. 14 January 2009.

Toftager M ，Bogstad J ，Løssl K ，Prætorius L ，Zedeler A ，Bryndorf T ，Nilas L ，Pinborg A ... -  《-》

Individualized versus standard FSH dosing in women starting IVF/ICSI: an RCT. Part 2: The predicted hyper responder.

Does a reduced FSH dose in women with a predicted hyper response, apparent from a high antral follicle count (AFC), who are scheduled for IVF/ICSI lead to a different outcome with respect to cumulative live birth rate and safety? Although in women with a predicted hyper response (AFC > 15) undergoing IVF/ICSI a reduced FSH dose (100 IU per day) results in similar cumulative live birth rates and a lower occurrence of any grade of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) as compared to a standard dose (150 IU/day), a higher first cycle cancellation rate and similar severe OHSS rate were observed. Excessive ovarian response to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for IVF/ICSI may result in increased rates of cycle cancellation, the occurrence of OHSS and suboptimal live birth rates. In women scheduled for IVF/ICSI, an ovarian reserve test (ORT) can be used to predict response to COS. No consensus has been reached on whether ORT-based FSH dosing improves effectiveness and safety in women with a predicted hyper response. Between May 2011 and May 2014, we performed an open-label, multicentre RCT in women with regular menstrual cycles and an AFC > 15. Women with polycystic ovary syndrome (Rotterdam criteria) were excluded. The primary outcome was ongoing pregnancy achieved within 18 months after randomization and resulting in a live birth. Secondary outcomes included the occurrence of OHSS and cost-effectiveness. Since this RCT was embedded in a cohort study assessing over 1500 women, we expected to randomize 300 predicted hyper responders. Women with an AFC > 15 were randomized to an FSH dose of 100 IU or 150 IU/day. In both groups, dose adjustment was allowed in subsequent cycles (maximum 25 IU in the reduced and 50 IU in the standard group) based on pre-specified criteria. Both effectiveness and cost-effectiveness were evaluated from an intention-to-treat perspective. We randomized 255 women to a daily FSH dose of 100 IU and 266 women to a daily FSH dose of 150 IU. The cumulative live birth rate was 66.3% (169/255) in the reduced versus 69.5% (185/266) in the standard group (relative risk (RR) 0.95 [95%CI, 0.85-1.07], P = 0.423). The occurrence of any grade of OHSS was lower after a lower FSH dose (5.2% versus 11.8%, RR 0.44 [95%CI, 0.28-0.71], P = 0.001), but the occurrence of severe OHSS did not differ (1.3% versus 1.1%, RR 1.25 [95%CI, 0.38-4.07], P = 0.728). As dose reduction was not less expensive (€4.622 versus €4.714, delta costs/woman €92 [95%CI, -479-325]), there was no dominant strategy in the economic analysis. Despite our training programme, the AFC might have suffered from inter-observer variation. Although strict cancellation criteria were provided, selective cancelling in the reduced dose group (for poor response in particular) cannot be excluded as observers were not blinded for the FSH dose and small dose adjustments were allowed in subsequent cycles. However, as first cycle live birth rates did not differ from the cumulative results, the open design probably did not mask a potential benefit for the reduced dosing group. As this RCT was embedded in a larger cohort study, the power in this study was unavoidably lower than it should be. Participants had a relatively low BMI from an international perspective, which may limit generalization of the findings. In women with a predicted hyper response scheduled for IVF/ICSI, a reduced FSH dose does not affect live birth rates. A lower FSH dose did reduce the incidence of mild and moderate OHSS, but had no impact on severe OHSS. Future research into ORT-based dosing in women with a predicted hyper response should compare various safety management strategies and should be powered on a clinically relevant safety outcome while assessing non-inferiority towards live birth rates. This trial was funded by The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMW, Project Number 171102020). SCO, TCvT and HLT received an unrestricted research grant from Merck Serono (the Netherlands). CBL receives grants from Merck, Ferring and Guerbet. BWJM is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548) and reports consultancy for OvsEva, Merck and Guerbet. FJMB receives monetary compensation as a member of the external advisory board for Ferring pharmaceutics BV and Merck Serono for consultancy work for Gedeon Richter (Belgium) and Roche Diagnostics (Switzerland) and for a research cooperation with Ansh Labs (USA). All other authors have nothing to declare. Registered at the ICMJE-recognized Dutch Trial Registry (www.trialregister.nl). Registration number: NTR2657. 20 December 2010. 12 May 2011.

Oudshoorn SC ，van Tilborg TC ，Eijkemans MJC ，Oosterhuis GJE ，Friederich J ，van Hooff MHA ，van Santbrink EJP ，Brinkhuis EA ，Smeenk JMJ ，Kwee J ，de Koning CH ，Groen H ，Lambalk CB ，Mol BWJ ，Broekmans FJM ，Torrance HL ，OPTIMIST study group ... -  《-》

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus HCG for oocyte triggering in antagonist-assisted reproductive technology.

Youssef MA ，Van der Veen F ，Al-Inany HG ，Mochtar MH ，Griesinger G ，Nagi Mohesen M ，Aboulfoutouh I ，van Wely M ... -  《Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews》

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.

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? 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). 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. 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 (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. 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). 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. 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. 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. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03809429; EudraCT Number 2017-002783-40. 7 April 2019. 2 May 2019.

Lobo R ，Soerdal T ，Ekerhovd E ，Cohlen B ，Porcu E ，Schenk M ，Shufaro Y ，Smeenk J ，Suerdieck MB ，Pinton P ，Pinborg A ，BEYOND Investigators ... -  《-》