Influence of GnRH antagonist in reproductive women on in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer in fresh cycles

Xu,Yang; Zhang,Yu‑Song; Zhu,Dong‑Yi; Zhai,Xiang‑Hong; Wu,Feng‑Xia; Wang,An‑Cong

doi:10.3892/br.2018.1176

February-2019 Volume 10 Issue 2

Full Size Image

Journals

International Journal of Molecular Medicine

International Journal of Molecular Medicine is an international journal devoted to molecular mechanisms of human disease.

International Journal of Oncology

International Journal of Oncology is an international journal devoted to oncology research and cancer treatment.

Molecular Medicine Reports

Covers molecular medicine topics such as pharmacology, pathology, genetics, neuroscience, infectious diseases, molecular cardiology, and molecular surgery.

Oncology Reports

Oncology Reports is an international journal devoted to fundamental and applied research in Oncology.

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine is an international journal devoted to laboratory and clinical medicine.

Oncology Letters

Oncology Letters is an international journal devoted to Experimental and Clinical Oncology.

Biomedical Reports

Explores a wide range of biological and medical fields, including pharmacology, genetics, microbiology, neuroscience, and molecular cardiology.

Molecular and Clinical Oncology

International journal addressing all aspects of oncology research, from tumorigenesis and oncogenes to chemotherapy and metastasis.

World Academy of Sciences Journal

Multidisciplinary open-access journal spanning biochemistry, genetics, neuroscience, environmental health, and synthetic biology.

International Journal of Functional Nutrition

Open-access journal combining biochemistry, pharmacology, immunology, and genetics to advance health through functional nutrition.

International Journal of Epigenetics

Publishes open-access research on using epigenetics to advance understanding and treatment of human disease.

Medicine International

An International Open Access Journal Devoted to General Medicine.

February-2019 Volume 10 Issue 2

Full Size Image

Article

Influence of GnRH antagonist in reproductive women on in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer in fresh cycles

Authors:
- Yang Xu
- Yu‑Song Zhang
- Dong‑Yi Zhu
- Xiang‑Hong Zhai
- Feng‑Xia Wu
- An‑Cong Wang
View Affiliations / Copyright

Affiliations: Department of Reproductive Medicine, Linyi People's Hospital, Linyi, Shandong 276003, P.R. China, Department of Imaging, Linyi People's Hospital, Linyi, Shandong 276003, P.R. China, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Linyi People's Hospital, Linyi, Shandong 276003, P.R. China, Department of Anatomy, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, P.R. China
Pages: 113-118
|
Published online on: November 29, 2018

https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2018.1176
Expand metrics +

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the influence of a gonadotropin‑releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist compared with a GnRH agonist on in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle outcome in reproductive women. The characteristics of treatment and outcomes of pregnancy were retrospectively compared between the antagonist (GnRH‑A, antagonist group) and agonist (GnRH‑a, agonist group) regimens. The area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves was also used to evaluate whether the endometrial thickness (cm), progesterone (P) level (ng/ml) and estradiol (E2) level (pg/ml) on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration (hCG day) had the ideal sensitivity and specificity for predicting clinical pregnancy. There were no significant differences in the baseline profiles of luteinizing hormone, E2 and P between the GnRH‑A and GnRH‑a groups (P=0.646, 0.224 and 0.119, respectively). However age, body mass index and follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) level significantly differed between the two groups (P<0.001, =0.025 and <0.001, respectively). Regarding treatment, there were significant differences in the stimulation duration (recombinant FSH days of usage), dose of gonadotrophins, E2, and P levels on hCG day, endometrial thickness on hCG day, mean number of total oocytes retrieved, mean number of two pronuclei oocytes, mean number of embryos available and mean number of embryos transferred (all P<0.001). The rate of clinical pregnancy was lower with the GnRH antagonist than with the GnRH agonist (P<0.001). Additionally, the live birth rate in the GnRH‑A group was significantly lower than that in the GnRH‑a group (P<0.001). The rate of ectopic pregnancy did not differ significantly between the treatment groups (P=0.840). However, the rate of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) in group GnRH‑A was significantly lower than that in group GnRH‑a (P=0.039). Therefore, in the present series of patients who underwent IVF embryo transfer cycles, a GnRH antagonist protocol was associated with significantly lower rates of clinical pregnancy and live birth compared with a GnRH agonist protocol; however, the rate of OHSS was significantly lower with GnRH antagonist compared with GnRH agonist. Furthermore, the results of the influence of endometrial thickness on clinical pregnancy, based on the ROC curve (AUC), demonstrated that the AUC was 0.553 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.521‑0.585], and with a cutoff of 9.25 cm, the Youden index [sensitivity‑(1‑specificity)] was 0.085. The results of the influence of E2 level on hCG day on the clinical pregnancy rate revealed an AUC of 0.613 (95% CI: 0.581‑0.644), and with a cutoff of 1,520 pg/ml, the Youden index was 0.184. The results of the influence of P level on hCG day (ng/ml) on the clinical pregnancy rate revealed an AUC of 0.526 (95% CI: 0.494‑0.558), and with a cutoff of 0.415 ng/ml, the Youden index was 0.061. These results of the ROC curve analyses demonstrated that neither the endometrial thickness nor the E2 and P levels on hCG day had the ideal sensitivity or specificity for predicting clinical pregnancy.

View Figures

View References

1	Lévy DP, Navarro JM, Schattman GL, Davis OK and Rosenwaks Z: The role of LH in ovarian stimulation: exogenous LH: let's design the future. Hum Reprod. 15:2258–2265. 2000.PubMed/NCBI
2	Huirne JA, van Loenen AC, Schats R, McDonnell J, Hompes PG, Schoemaker J, Homburg R and Lambalk CB: Dose-finding study of daily gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist for the prevention of premature luteinizing hormone surges in IVF/ICSI patients: Antide and hormone levels. Hum Reprod. 19:2206–2215. 2004.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
3	Huirne JA, van Loenen AC, Schats R, McDonnell J, Hompes PG, Schoemaker J, Homburg R and Lambalk CB: Dose-finding study of daily GnRH antagonist for the prevention of premature LH surges in IVF/ICSI patients: Optimal changes in LH and progesterone for clinical pregnancy. Hum Reprod. 20:359–367. 2005.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
4	Weiss JM, Ludwig M, Ortmann O and Diedrich K: GnRH antagonists in the treatment of infertility. Ann Med. 35:512–522. 2003.PubMed/NCBI
5	Raju GA, Chavan R, Deenadayal M, Gunasheela D, Gutgutia R, Haripriya G, Govindarajan M, Patel NH and Patki AS: Luteinizing hormone and follicle stimulating hormone synergy: A review of role in controlled ovarian hyper-stimulation. J Hum Reprod Sci. 6:227–234. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
6	Serafini P, Yadid I, Motta EL, Alegretti JR, Fioravanti J and Coslovsky M: Ovarian stimulation with daily late follicular phase administration of low-dose human chorionic gonadotropin for in vitro fertilization: A prospective, randomized trial. Fertil Steril. 86:830–838. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
7	Lambalk CB, Banga FR, Huirne JA, Toftager M, Pinborg A, Homburg R, van der Veen F and van Wely M: GnRH antagonist versus long agonist protocols in IVF: A systematic review and meta-analysis accounting for patient type. Hum Reprod Update. 23:560–579. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
8	te Velde ER and Pearson PL: The variability of female reproductive ageing. Hum Reprod Update. 8:141–154. 2002.PubMed/NCBI
9	Loutradis D, Drakakis P, Vomvolaki E and Antsaklis A: Different ovarian stimulation protocols for women with diminished ovarian reserve. J Assist Reprod Genet. 24:597–611. 2007.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
10	Zhai XH, Zhang P, Wu FX, Wang AC and Liu PS: GnRH antagonist for patients with polycystic ovary syndrome undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer in fresh cycles. Exp Ther Med. 13:3097–3102. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
11	Edwards RG, Bavister BD and Steptoe PC: Early stages of fertilization in vitro of human oocytes matured in vitro. Nature. 221:632–635. 1969.PubMed/NCBI
12	Lopata A, McMaster R, McBain JC and Johnston WI: In-vitro fertilization of preovulatory human eggs. J Reprod Fertil. 52:339–342. 1978.PubMed/NCBI
13	Younis JS, Radin O, Mirsky N, Izhaki I, Majara T, Bar-ami S and Ben-ami M: First polar body and nucleolar precursor body morphology is related to the ovarian reserve of infertile women. Reprod Biomed Online. 16:851–858. 2008.PubMed/NCBI
14	Bertran EA, Berlie HD, Taylor A, Divine G and Jaber LA: Diagnostic performance of HbA1c for diabetes in Arab vs. European populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabet Med. 34:156–166. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
15	Al-Inany HG, Youssef MA, Ayeleke RO, Brown J, Lam WS and Broekmans FJ: Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 4(CD001750)2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
16	Olivennes F, Cunha-Filho JS, Fanchin R, Bouchard P and Frydman R: The use of GnRH antagonists in ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod Update. 8:279–290. 2002.PubMed/NCBI
17	Rackow BW, Kliman HJ and Taylor HS: GnRH antagonists may affect endometrial receptivity. Fertil Steril. 89:1234–1239. 2008.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
18	Kolibianakis E, Bourgain C, Albano C, Osmanagaoglu K, Smitz J, Van Steirteghem A and Devroey P: Effect of ovarian stimulation with recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone, gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonists, and human chorionic gonadotropin on endometrial maturation on the day of oocyte pick-up. Fertil Steril. 78:1025–1029. 2002.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
19	Honnma H, Baba T, Sasaki M, Hashiba Y, Oguri H, Fukunaga T, Endo T and Asada Y: Different ovarian response by age in an anti-Müllerian hormone-matched group undergoing in vitro fertilization. J Assist Reprod Genet. 29:117–125. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
20	Nelson SM, Telfer EE and Anderson RA: The ageing ovary and uterus: New biological insights. Hum Reprod Update. 19:67–83. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
21	Bleil ME, Adler NE, Pasch LA, Sternfeld B, Gregorich SE, Rosen MP and Cedars MI: Psychological stress and reproductive aging among pre-menopausal women. Hum Reprod. 27:2720–2728. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
22	Friedler S, Schenker JG, Herman A and Lewin A; FriedlerS: The role of ultrasonography in the evaluation of endometrial receptivity following assisted reproductive treatments: A critical review. Hum Reprod Update. 2:323–335. 1996.PubMed/NCBI
23	Dekel N, Gnainsky Y, Granot I and Mor G: Inflammation and implantation. Am J Reprod Immunol. 63:17–21. 2010.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
24	Yoeli R, Ashkenazi J, Orvieto R, Shelef M, Kaplan B and Bar-Hava I: Significance of increased endometrial thickness in assisted reproduction technology treatments. J Assist Reprod Genet. 21:285–289. 2004.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar