Efficacy and safety of follitropin alfa/lutropin alfa in ART: a randomized controlled trial in poor ovarian responders

Humaıdan, Peter; Chin, Wai; Rogoff, Daniela; D’Hooghe, Thomas; Longobardi, Salvatore; Hubbard, Julie; Schertz, Joan

doi:10.1093/humrep/dex208

Cited by 69 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…POR represent a challenging group of patients 25,28 , and the present study showed that there is no benefit of the freeze-all policy over fresh ET in POR patients undergoing the GnRH antagonist protocol for COS. Nowadays, there is evidence of increasing prevalence of POR 29 with a poor IVF prognosis [20][21][22] . In the present study, IRs were lower than 10%, both in the fresh ET and freeze-all groups, in accordance with previous studies published on POR [20][21][22][23]30 . Previously, Ç elik et al 31 evaluated the use of the freeze-all strategy in POR according to the Bologna criteria; the authors did not observe differences in IVF outcome when comparing fresh ET and elective frozen-thawed ET, corroborating the findings of the present study.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Poor ovarian responders (POR) represent 9-24% of patients undergoing IVF treatment; these individuals have very low pregnancy rates ranging from 3-14% [18][19][20][21][22][23] . Although several strategies have been proposed to optimize the ovarian response and the number of retrieved oocytes, there is no consensus regarding the treatments that are beneficial to POR [24][25][26] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does freeze‐all policy affect IVF outcome in poor ovarian responders?

Roque

Valle

Sampaio

et al. 2018

Ultrasound in Obstet & Gyne

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The freeze-all strategy, compared with fresh ET, had no impact on IVF outcomes in POR patients as defined according to the Bologna criteria. Multicenter studies including large numbers of patients should be carried out to confirm the results of this study and reach conclusions about the potential benefits of the freeze-all policy for poor responders. Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does freeze‐all policy affect IVF outcome in poor ovarian responders?

Roque

Valle

Sampaio

et al. 2018

Ultrasound in Obstet & Gyne

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A total of 939 patients were randomized to either a fixed daily dose of 300 IU rFSH and 150 IU rLH or rFSH 300 IU alone. There was no significant difference in LBR between the two groups [67]. However, a post hoc analysis, stratifying patients into mild, moderate, and severe POR, showed that moderate and severe POR patients had a significantly higher LBR and a lower pregnancy loss rate when 150 IU rLH was added to the stimulation protocol from day one of stimulation [67].…”

Section: Stimulation Protocolsmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…Very low live birth rates per cycle of 2.6% have been reported in Bologna POR patients undergoing natural cycle IVF [65,66]. In contrast, an 11% live birth rate per cycle was reported in the until now largest RCT including Bologna POR patients, using a GnRH agonist long protocol and 300 IU rFSH in combination with 150 IU rLH daily from day one of stimulation [67]. Furthermore, recently, a 20% ongoing pregnancy rate was reported in poor ovarian reserve patients using follicular as well as luteal phase stimulation (DuoStim) [57,58].…”

Section: Stimulation Protocolsmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Finally, two systematic reviews suggested that rLH supplementation during OS is beneficial in women with hyporesponse to exogenous FSH-only stimulation and specifically in women aged 36-39 years [47,52]. Humaidan et al [67] published the largest RCT in poor prognosis patients aligned with the POSEIDON group 4 patients. A total of 939 patients were randomized to either a fixed daily dose of 300 IU rFSH and 150 IU rLH or rFSH 300 IU alone.…”

Section: Stimulation Protocolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Novel Physiology and Definition of Poor Ovarian Response; Clinical Recommendations

Abu-Musa

Haahr

Humaıdan

2020

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Poor ovarian response (POR) to controlled ovarian stimulation (OS) presents a major challenge in assisted reproduction. The Bologna criteria represented the first serious attempt to set clear criteria for the definition of POR. However, the Bologna criteria were questioned because of the persistent heterogeneity among POR patients and the inability to provide management strategies. Based on these facts, a more recent classification, the POSEIDON (Patient-Oriented Strategies Encompassing IndividualizeD Oocyte Number) classification, was developed to provide a homogeneous and refined definition of POR that significantly reduces the heterogeneity of the Bologna criteria definition of POR and helps in the clinical handling and counseling of patients. In this review, we discuss the impact of the POSEIDON classification on the clinical management of patients with POR.

show abstract

The effects of flexible short protocol with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist on preventing premature ovulation in poor responders

Zhang,

Wang,

Zhang

et al. 2023

Arch Gynecol Obstet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The proportion of patients with poor ovarian response (POR) is increasing, but effective treatment remains a challenge. To control the hidden peaks of luteinizing hormone (LH) and premature ovulation for poor responders, this study investigated the efficacy of flexible short protocol (FSP) with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) on trigger day. Methods The 662 cycles of POR patients were retrospectively analyzed. The cohort was divided into control and intervention groups. The intervention group (group A) with 169 cycles received a GnRH-ant given on trigger day. The control (group B) with 493 cycles received only FSP. The clinical outcomes of the two groups were compared. Results Compared with group B, with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) on trigger day in group A the incidences of spontaneous premature ovulation decreased significantly (2.37% vs. 8.72%, P < 0.05). The number of fresh embryo-transfer cycles was 45 in group A and 117 in group B. There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes, including implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate and the cumulative live birth rate (12.0% vs. 9.34%; 22.22% vs. 21.93%; 17.78% vs. 14.91%; 20.51% vs. 20%, respectively; P > 0.05) between the two group. Conclusion FSP with GnRH-ant addition on trigger day had no effect on clinical outcomes, but could effectively inhibit the hidden peaks of luteinizing hormone (LH) and spontaneous premature ovulation in POR. Therefore, it is an advantageous option for POR women.

show abstract

Efficacy and safety of follitropin alfa/lutropin alfa in ART: a randomized controlled trial in poor ovarian responders

Cited by 69 publications

References 3 publications

Does freeze‐all policy affect IVF outcome in poor ovarian responders?

Does freeze‐all policy affect IVF outcome in poor ovarian responders?

Novel Physiology and Definition of Poor Ovarian Response; Clinical Recommendations

The effects of flexible short protocol with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist on preventing premature ovulation in poor responders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About