G-CSF treatment improves IVF outcome in women with recurrent implantation failure in IVF

Scarpellini, F.; Sbracia, Marco

doi:10.1016/j.jri.2012.03.435

Cited by 25 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This was in accordance with the study of Scarpellini & Sbracia in women with repeated IVF failure that documented higher implantation rate in IVF women who had received GCSF compared with the placebo group (Scarpellini & Sbracia 2012). In contrast, in three other studies, GCSF administration did not affect the implantation or pregnancy rates (Barad et al 2014, Eftekhar et al 2014, Li et al 2014).…”

Section: The Effect Of Gcsf On Implantation and Pregnancy In Ivfsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…In contrast, in three other studies, GCSF administration did not affect the implantation or pregnancy rates (Barad et al 2014, Eftekhar et al 2014, Li et al 2014). The differences in administration route, participants' age, endometrial thickness, and sample sizes could have contributed to the observed differences in the results; in the study of Scarpellini & Sbracia and our study, the sample size was larger, GCSF was administered systemically through the subcutaneous route, the study populations were younger, and had normal proliferating endometrium (Scarpellini & Sbracia 2012), whereas in other studies, GCSF was administered locally through intrauterine perfusion, the sample sizes were smaller, the endometrium was thin in two studies, and the participants were older in the third study (Barad et al 2014, Eftekhar et al 2014, Li et al 2014.…”

Section: The Effect Of Gcsf On Implantation and Pregnancy In Ivfmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…Since then, several studies with controversial results have evaluated the effect of GCSF on endometrial thickness and IVF success (Scarpellini & Sbracia 2012, Gleicher et al 2013, Barad et al 2014, Eftekhar et al 2014, Kunicki et al 2014, Li et al 2014, Xu et al 2015. In the studies of Scarpellini and coworkers and Xu and coworkers, the implantation and pregnancy rates were significantly higher in IVF patients treated with GCSF (Scarpellini & Sbracia 2012, Xu et al 2015, whereas in the studies of Barad and coworkers and Li and coworkers, treatment with GCSF did not affect endometrial thickness, implantation, or pregnancy rates in IVF patients (Barad et al 2014, Li et al 2014.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These studies had some limitations that might preclude the researchers from making a precise conclusion, including small sample size (Gleicher et al 2013, Eftekhar et al 2014, Kunicki et al 2014, Li et al 2014, Xu et al 2015, no control groups (Gleicher et al 2013, Kunicki et al 2014, no randomization (Gleicher et al 2013, Eftekhar et al 2014, Kunicki et al 2014, Li et al 2014, and unintended selection bias (Scarpellini & Sbracia 2012, Barad et al 2014, Li et al 2014, Xu et al 2015. All these studies have suggested that large, randomized, controlled trials are still needed to evaluate the efficacy of GCSF administration on IVF success (Scarpellini & Sbracia 2012, Gleicher et al 2013, Barad et al 2014, Eftekhar et al 2014, Kunicki et al 2014, Li et al 2014, Xu et al 2015.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All these studies have suggested that large, randomized, controlled trials are still needed to evaluate the efficacy of GCSF administration on IVF success (Scarpellini & Sbracia 2012, Gleicher et al 2013, Barad et al 2014, Eftekhar et al 2014, Kunicki et al 2014, Li et al 2014, Xu et al 2015. The efficacy of GCSF in patients with repeated IVF failure has not been established yet.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in repeated IVF failure, a randomized trial

Aleyasin¹,

Abediasl²,

Nazari³

et al. 2016

Reproduction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies have revealed key roles for granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GCSF) in embryo implantation process and maintenance of pregnancy, and some studies showed promising results by using local intrauterine infusion of GCSF in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). This multicenter, randomized, controlled trial included 112 infertile women with repeated IVF failure to evaluate the efficacy of systemic single-dose subcutaneous GCSF administration on IVF success in these women. In this study, the Long Protocol of ovarian stimulation was used for all participants. Sealed, numbered envelopes assigned 56 patients to receive subcutaneous 300 µg GCSF before implantation and 56 in the control group. The implantation (number of gestational sacs on the total number of transferred embryos), chemical pregnancy (positive serum β-HCG), and clinical pregnancy (gestational sac and fetal heart) rates were compared between the two groups. This trial is registered at www.irct.ir (IRCT201503119568N11). The successful implantation (18% vs 7.2%, P = 0.007), chemical pregnancy (44.6% vs 19.6%, P = 0.005), and clinical pregnancy (37.5% vs 14.3%, P = 0.005) rates were significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group. After adjustment for participants' age, endometrial thickness, good-quality oocyte counts, number of transferred embryos, and anti-Mullerian hormone levels, GCSF treatment remained significantly associated with successful implantation (OR = 2.63, 95% CI = 1.09-6.96), having chemical pregnancy (OR= 2.74, 95% CI = 1.11-7.38) and clinical pregnancy (OR = 2.94, 95% CI = 1.23-8.33). In conclusion, administration of single-dose systemic subcutaneous GCSF before implantation significantly increases the IVF success, implantation, and pregnancy rates in infertile women with repeated IVF failure.

show abstract

Section: The Effect Of Gcsf On Implantation and Pregnancy In Ivfsupporting

confidence: 85%