Comparison of the pregnancy outcomes of progestin-primed vs. antagonist ovarian stimulation in patients with poor ovarian response: a retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) is an efficient controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) method. The study explored the pregnancy outcomes between PPOS and antagonist ovarian stimulation protocol (GnRH-ant) in infertile patients with poor ovarian response (POR). METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with POR who underwent COS at the Reproductive Medical Center of Shanxi Maternal and Child Health Hospital from January 2021 to April 2022. The cycles were grouped as the GnRH-ant group and the PPOS group. The primary outcome was the clinical pregnancy rate; the secondary outcomes included the biochemical pregnancy abortion rate and live birth rate. RESULTS: Frozen embryo transfer was used in all cycles in this study. The cycles were divided into the GnRH-ant (n = 236 cycles) and PPOS (n = 273 cycles) groups. Age, BMI, type of infertility, infertility duration, FSH, LH, PRL, E2, T, P, and the number of cycles in the hospital were similar between the two groups (all p > 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in the clinical pregnancy rate (primary outcome, 32.71% vs. 43.90%, p = 0.082), total Gn dose, total Gn days, ART mode (IVF or ICSI), AFC, MII follicles, 2PN embryos, fertility, cycle cancelation rate, biochemical pregnancy rate, abortion rate, or live birth rate between the two groups (all p > 0.05). The PPOS group exhibited a higher rate of high-quality embryos than the GnRH-ant group (50.12% vs. 42.90%, p = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: The PPOS protocol was comparable to the GnRH-ant protocol regarding induction parameters and cycle cancelation, biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, and abortion rates but might be associated with a higher proportion of high-quality embryos.

Micronized natural progesterone (Seidigestan®) vs GnRH antagonists for preventing the LH surge during controlled ovarian stimulation (PRO_NAT study): study protocol of a randomized clinical trial.

Introduction: Progesterone-primed cycles effectively suppress the pituitary LH surge during ovarian stimulation in oocyte donors and in the infertile population. Particularly in oocyte donors, the use of synthetic progesterone (progestins) has been explored in prospective clinical trials, showing mixed results. This trial was designed to determine whether the use of micronized natural progesterone is as effective as the GnRH-antagonist protocol in terms of the number of mature oocytes (MII) retrieved in oocyte donation cycles as a primary outcome, and it also aims to explore the corresponding results in recipients as a secondary outcome. Methods: We propose a prospective, open-label, non-inferiority clinical trial to compare a novel approach for oocyte donors with a control group, which follows the standard ovarian stimulation protocol used in our institution. A total of 150 donors (75 in each group) will be recruited and randomized using a computer algorithm. After obtaining informed consent, participants will be randomly assigned to one of two ovarian stimulation protocols: either the standard GnRH antagonist or the oral micronized natural progesterone protocol. Both groups will receive recombinant gonadotropins tailored to their antral follicle count and prior donation experiences, if any. The primary outcome is the number of mature metaphase II (MII) oocytes. Secondary measures include treatment duration, pregnancy outcomes in recipients, as well as the economic cost per MII oocyte obtained in each treatment regimen. Analyses for the primary outcome will be conducted in both the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations. Each donor can participate only once during the recruitment period. The estimated duration of the study is six months for the primary outcome and 15 months for the secondary outcomes. Discussion: The outcomes of this trial have the potential to inform evidence-based adjustments in the management of ovarian stimulation protocols for oocyte donors. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier, NCT05954962.

Efficacy and safety of dienogest in the treatment of deep infiltrating endometriosis: A meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review and conduct a meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of dienogest (DNG) in the prolonged conservative drug management of deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE). The findings from this study are intended to serve as a valuable reference for clinical decision-making regarding medication in the context of DIE. METHODS: Following the PRISMA Statement, we searched EMBASE, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Medline databases for relevant literature published in the public domain from the date of establishment of the database until October 2023. Subsequently, all English publications on clinical studies using DNG for the treatment of DIE were included. Studies involving surgical intervention or drug therapy for postoperative recurrence were excluded. All literature included in the review underwent risk assessment of bias. Two evaluators independently screened the publications, conducted a quality assessment of each article and extracted data. We used Revman 5.4 for the meta-analysis of the included literature. RESULTS: Our final analysis consisted of five clinical studies, involving a total of 256 patients. We found that there were significant improvements in the following indicators post-medication as compared to levels before taking the medication: dysmenorrhea (MD = 4.24, 95 % CI: 2.92-5.56, P < 0.00001), non-menstrual pelvic pain (MD = 3.11, 95 % CI: 2.34-3.88, P < 0.00001), dyspareunia (MD = 1.93, 95 % CI: 1.50-2.37, P < 0.00001), dyschezia (MD = 2.48, 95 % CI: 1.83-3.12, P < 0.00001), and rectosigmoid nodule size (MD = 0.32, 95 % CI: 0.18-0.46, P < 0.00001). Compared with pre-medication levels, the following indicators were significantly worse: headache (RR = 0.03, 95 % CI: 0.00-0.23, P = 0.0006), decreased libido (RR = 0.08, 95 % CI: 0.01-0.62, P = 0.02); and there was no significant improvement in dysuria (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: DNG showed efficacy in relieving pain-related symptoms and significantly reducing the size of the lesions when used in the drug conservative treatment of DIE.

Evaluation of the Impact of Letrozole in Combination with the GnRH Antagonist Ovarian Stimulation Protocol in Patients Expected to Have a Poor Ovarian Response (POSEIDON Groups 3 and 4).

Background and Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of adjuvant letrozole administration during ovarian stimulation using the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol on treatment outcomes in women categorized into POSEIDON groups 3 and 4. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from patients classified into POSEIDON groups 3 and 4 who underwent fresh embryo transfer subsequent to intracytoplasmic sperm injection following a GnRH antagonist stimulation protocol between January 2017 and December 2021. Patients were divided into two groups: the GnRH-LZ group, who received letrozole at a dosage of 5 mg/day for five consecutive days, and the GnRH-ant group, who did not receive adjuvant letrozole. The primary outcome measure of the study was a comparative analysis of live birth rates between the two groups. Results: A total of 449 patients were deemed suitable for final analysis and were allocated into two groups: 281 patients in the GnRH-ant group and 168 patients in the GnRH-LZ group. Live birth rates were found to be comparable in both groups (11% vs. 9%, p = 0.497). Letrozole administration significantly reduced the total amount of gonadotropins required (2606.2 ± 1284.5 vs. 3097.8 ± 1073.3, p < 0.001), the duration of ovarian stimulation (11.2 ± 3.9 vs. 10.2 ± 3, p = 0.005), and the serum peak estradiol concentration (901.4 ± 599.6 vs. 463.8 ± 312.3, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Adjuvant letrozole administration did not demonstrate a significant impact on live birth rates among women categorized into POSEIDON groups 3 and 4. However, this approach may offer potential cost reductions by diminishing the necessity for exogenous gonadotropins and shortening the duration of ovarian stimulation.

Ovarian response and embryo ploidy following oral micronized progesterone-primed ovarian stimulation versus GnRH antagonist protocol. A prospective study with repeated ovarian stimulation cycles.

STUDY QUESTION: Is there any difference in ovarian response and embryo ploidy following progesterone-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) using micronized progesterone or GnRH antagonist protocol? SUMMARY ANSWER: Pituitary downregulation with micronized progesterone as PPOS results in higher number of oocytes retrieved and a comparable number of euploid blastocysts to a GnRH antagonist protocol. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Although the GnRH antagonist is considered by most the gold standard protocol for controlling the LH surge during ovarian stimulation (OS) for IVF/ICSI, PPOS protocols are being increasingly used in freeze-all protocols. Still, despite the promising results of PPOS protocols, an early randomized trial reported potentially lower live births in recipients of oocytes resulting following downregulation with medroxyprogesterone acetate as compared with a GnRH antagonist protocol. The scope of the current prospective study was to investigate whether PPOS with micronized progesterone results in an equivalent yield of euploid blastocysts to a GnRH antagonist protocol. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: In this prospective study, performed between September 2019 to January 2022, 44 women underwent two consecutive OS protocols within a period of 6 months in a GnRH antagonist protocol or in a PPOS protocol with oral micronized progesterone. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Overall, 44 women underwent two OS cycles with an identical fixed dose of rFSH (225 or 300 IU) in both cycles. Downregulation in the first cycles was performed with the use of a flexible GnRH antagonist protocol (0.25 mg per day as soon as one follicle of 14 mm) and consecutively, after a washout period of 1 month, control of LH surge was performed with 200 mg of oral micronized progesterone from stimulation Day 1. After the completion of both cycles, all generated blastocysts underwent genetic analysis for aneuploidy screening (preimplantation genetic testing for aneuplody, PGT-A). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Comparisons between protocols did not reveal differences between the duration of OS. The hormonal profile on the day of trigger revealed statistically significant differences between protocols in all the tested hormones except for FSH: with significantly higher serum E2 levels, more elevated LH levels and higher progesterone levels in PPOS cycles as compared with antagonist cycles, respectively. Compared with the GnRH antagonist protocol, the PPOS protocol resulted in a significantly higher number of oocytes (12.7 ± 8.09 versus 10.3 ± 5.84; difference between means [DBM] -2.4 [95% CI -4.1 to -0.73]), metaphase II (9.1 ± 6.12 versus 7.3 ± 4.15; DBM -1.8 [95% CI -3.1 to -0.43]), and 2 pronuclei (7.1 ± 4.99 versus 5.7 ± 3.35; DBM -1.5 [95% CI -2.6.1 to -0.32]), respectively. Nevertheless, no differences were observed regarding the mean number of blastocysts between the PPOS and GnRH antagonist protocols (2.9 ± 2.11 versus 2.8 ± 2.12; DBM -0.07 [95% CI -0.67 to 0.53]) and the mean number of biopsied blastocysts (2.9 ± 2.16 versus 2.9 ± 2.15; DBM -0.07 [95% CI -0.70 to 0.56]), respectively. Concerning the euploidy rates per biopsied embryo, a 29% [95% CI 21.8-38.1%] and a 35% [95% CI 26.6-43.9%] were noticed in the PPOS and antagonist groups, respectively. Finally, no difference was observed for the primary outcome, with a mean number of euploid embryos of 0.86 ± 0.90 versus 1.00 ± 1.12 for the comparison of PPOS versus GnRh antagonist. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study was powered to detect differences in the mean number of euploid embryos and not in terms of pregnancy outcomes. Additionally, per protocol, there was no randomization, the first cycle was always a GnRH antagonist cycle and the second a PPOS with 1 month of washout period in between. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: In case of a freeze-all protocol, clinicians may safely consider oral micronized progesterone to control the LH surge and patients could benefit from the advantages of a medication of oral administration, with a potentially higher number of oocytes retrieved at a lower cost, without any compromise in embryo ploidy rates. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research was supported by an unrestricted grant from Theramex. N.P.P. has received Research grants from Merck Serono, Organon, Ferring Pharmaceutical, Roche, Theramex, IBSA, Gedeon Richter, and Besins Healthcare; honoraria for lectures from: Merck Serono, Organon, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Besins International, Roche Diagnostics, IBSA, Theramex, and Gedeon Richter; consulting fees from Merck Serono, Organon, Besins Healthcare, and IBSA. M.d.M.V., F.M., and I.R. declared no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study was registered at Clinical Trials Gov. (NCT04108039).

Association between the systemic immune-inflammation index and GnRH antagonist protocol IVF outcomes: a cohort study.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the relationship between the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) and IVF outcomes in women undergoing a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol? DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study analysed clinical data and blood samples collected before oocyte retrieval from participants undergoing IVF with the GnRH antagonist protocol. Logistic regression and generalized additive models were used to examine the association between SII quartiles and continuous SII values and IVF outcomes. RESULTS: Higher SII values correlated negatively with biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, live birth and implantation rates, and positively with early pregnancy loss, independent of age, body mass index, anti-Müllerian hormone and stimulation parameters. The most significant adverse outcomes were observed in the highest SII quartile. A non-linear relationship was identified between log-transformed SII and IVF outcomes, with an inflection point at an SII of approximately 6.72, indicating a threshold effect. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated SII is associated with poorer IVF outcomes in women after the GnRH antagonist protocol, suggesting its potential as a predictive marker in IVF treatments. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and explore the underlying mechanisms.

Antiprogestins for breast cancer treatment: We are almost ready.

The development of antiprogestins was initially a gynecological purpose. However, since mifepristone was developed, its application for breast cancer treatment was immediately proposed. Later, new compounds with lower antiglucocorticoid and antiandrogenic effects were developed to be applied to different pathologies, including breast cancer. We describe herein the studies performed in the breast cancer field with special focus on those reported in recent years, ranging from preclinical biological models to those carried out in patients. We highlight the potential use of antiprogestins in breast cancer prevention in women with BRCA1 mutations, and their use for breast cancer treatment, emphasizing the need to elucidate which patients will respond. In this sense, the PR isoform ratio has emerged as a possible tool to predict antiprogestin responsiveness. The effects of combined treatments of antiprogestins together with other drugs currently used in the clinic, such as tamoxifen, CDK4/CDK6 inhibitors or pembrolizumab in preclinical models is discussed since it is in this scenario that antiprogestins will be probably introduced. Finally, we explain how transcriptomic or proteomic studies, that were carried out in different luminal breast cancer models and in breast cancer samples that responded or were predicted to respond to the antiprogestin therapy, show a decrease in proliferative pathways. Deregulated pathways intrinsic of each model are discussed, as well as how these analyses may contribute to a better understanding of the mechanisms involved.

Age and dual trigger were found to be significant predictors of live birth in POSEIDON group 3 and 4 women treated with the GnRH antagonist protocol: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Despite recent advancements in assisted reproductive technology (ART), the effective management of patients with poor ovarian response (POR) remains a formidable challenge. While various treatment strategies and predictors of live births have been documented to provide guidance to fertility specialists in managing poor responders, research efforts have predominantly encompassed all POSEIDON groups. In this study, our objective was to analyze the factors correlated with live births (LB) within a subset of the POSEIDON groups, with a particular focus on POSEIDON groups 3 and 4. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Charts of 406 patients belonging to POSEIDON groups 3 and 4 who underwent ART treatment at a university-affiliated infertility clinic following a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist cycle between January 2016 and December 2021 were analyzed. Clinically significant factors associated with live births were incorporated into a logistic regression model for multivariate analysis to ascertain independent predictors of LB. Additionally, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was conducted to establish the optimal cut-off values. RESULTS: Live births were achieved in 48 cycles (8.7%). Female age (OR, 0.930; 95% CI: 0.874-0.991; p < 0.024), baseline serum luteinizing hormone (LH) levels (OR, 0.854; 95% CI: 0.741-0.984; p < 0.029), and dual triggers (OR, 4.004; 95% CI: 1.290-12.426; p < 0.016) were identified as independent factors associated with LB following multivariate logistic regression analysis. The optimal age cut-off was determined to be 33 years, with a sensitivity of 70.8% and specificity of 75%. CONCLUSIONS: Younger age, lower baseline serum LH levels, and dual-trigger administration appear to enhance the likelihood of live birth in POSEIDON groups 3 and 4 following treatments with the GnRH antagonist protocol.

Comparing blastocyst euploid rates between the progestin-primed and gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist protocols in aneuploidy genetic testing: a randomised trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Progestin can inhibit the pituitary luteinising hormone (LH) surge during ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and studies show progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) is effective in blocking the LH surge in IVF. More and more centres are using PPOS because this regimen appears simpler and cheaper. This study aims to compare the euploidy rate of blastocysts following the PPOS protocol and the gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in women undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A). METHODS/ANALYSIS: This is a randomised trial. A total of 400 women undergoing PGT-A will be enrolled and randomised according to a computer-generated randomisation list to either (1) the antagonist group: an antagonist given once daily from day 6 of ovarian stimulation till the day of the ovulation trigger; or (2) the PPOS group: dydrogesterone from the first day of ovarian stimulation till the day of ovulation trigger. The primary outcome is the euploidy rate of blastocysts. ETHICS/DISSEMINATION: An ethical approval was granted from the ethics committee of assisted reproductive medicine in Shanghai JiAi Genetics and IVF institute (JIAIE2020-03). A written informed consent will be obtained from each woman before any study procedure is performed, according to good clinical practice. The results of this randomised trial will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04414748.

Meta-analysis of trigger timing in normal responders undergoing GnRH antagonist ovarian hyperstimulation protocol.

IMPORTANCE: The first meta-analysis focused only on gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists, which helped determine the effect of delay trigger on pregnancy outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of delay trigger compared with standard trigger in normal responders undergoing GnRH antagonist protocol in improving pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: Studies published before April 2023 in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP and CBM databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies conducted in normal responders reporting the efficacy of delay trigger using GnRH antagonist protocol were included. Data were combined to calculate mean differences (MD) for continuous variables and odd ratios (OR) for categorical variables with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q test. RESULTS: Endpoints, including clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), live birth rate (LBR), the number of oocyte retrievals and embryos, and fertilization rate, were analyzed. Six (6) clinical studies (4 RCTs and 2 cohort studies) with 1,360 subjects were included. The pooled results showed that the number of oocyte retrievals (MD: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.10, 1.30, p < 0.01), fertilization rate (MD: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.29, 0.99, p < 0.01) and days of stimulation (MD: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.54, 1.37; p < 0.01) in the delay trigger group was significantly higher than that in the standard trigger group. However, there was no significant difference in the number of embryos (MD: 0.19, 95% CI: -0.29, 0.67, p = 0.44), CPR (OR: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.72, 1.75; p = 0.062), and LBR (OR: 1.23; 95% CI: 0.90, 1.66; p = 0.19) between the two trigger groups. CONCLUSION: Delaying trigger time in GnRH antagonist protocol increased the number of oocytes retrieved but not the number of embryos. Furthermore, delay trigger shot was not associated with a clinical benefit towards CPR and LBR in women who underwent fresh embryo transfer cycles. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number: CRD42023413217.

Comparison of progesterone protocol versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in terms of preventing premature LH surge and assisted reproductive technology outcome in infertile women: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Progesterone can be used instead of GnRH agonists and antagonists in order to avert a premature LH surge during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocol. Nonetheless, there is limited knowledge regarding its utilization. Thus, this study compared the effects of progesterone and GnRH antagonists (GnRH-ant) on premature LH surges and assisted reproductive technology (ART) results in infertile women undergoing ART. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this clinical trial, the progesterone protocol (study group) and GnRH-ant protocol (control group) were tested in 300 infertile individuals undergoing IVF/ICSI. The main outcome was the number of oocytes retrieved. The secondary outcomes included premature LH rise/surge, the quantity of follicles measuring ≥ 10 and 14 mm, oocyte maturity and fertilization rate, the number of viable embryos, high-quality embryo rate and pregnancy outcomes. RESULTS: The study group exhibited a statistically significant increase in the number of retrieved oocytes, follicles measuring 14 mm or greater, and viable embryos compared to the control group (P < 0.05). The study group also increased oocyte maturity, chemical pregnancy rate, and clinical pregnancy rate (P < 0.05). Both groups had similar mean serum LH, progesterone, and E2 levels on trigger day. The control group had more premature LH rise than the study group, although this difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, it can be stated that the progesterone protocol and the GnRH-ant protocol exhibit similar rates of sudden premature LH surge in infertile patients. However, it is important to note that the two regiments differ in their outcomes in ART. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered in the Iranian website ( www.irct.ir ) for clinical trials registration ( http://www.irct.ir : IRCT-ID: IRCT20201029049183N, 2020-11-27).

Cumulative live birth rate of in vitro fertilization cycle via progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in infertile women with normal ovarian reserve: an open-label, randomized controlled trial.

This study aimed to evaluate the cumulative live birth rate (cLBR) of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol for in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle in infertile women with normal ovarian reserve (NOR). Infertile women with NOR who underwent their first IVF cycle were enrolled in an open-label randomized controlled trial. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive a freeze-all strategy with delayed embryo transfer (PPOS group, n = 174) and fresh embryo transfer first (GnRH-ant group, n = 174). The primary outcome was the cLBR per aspiration. The cLBR between the PPOS group and GnRH-ant group were comparable (55.75% vs. 52.87%, p = 0.591). A premature luteinizing hormone surge was not observed in the PPOS group, while there were six cases (3.45%) in the GnRH-ant group, but no premature ovulation in either of the groups. The pregnancy outcomes, including implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate and miscarriage rate, were all comparable. In addition, the number of retrieved oocytes, mature oocytes and viable embryos were similar (all p > 0.05) between the two groups.

The Visual Effect of a Down-Regulation With Dienogest and GnRH Analogues in Endometriosis: Lessons Learned From Two-Step Surgical Approach.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the intraoperative visual effect of treatment with GnRH-analogues and Dienogest in endometriosis. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Every laparoscopy from all the different disciplines in our hospital is documented on video and stored in a database. The study was approved by the local ethics committee. A total of 193 patients with histological proven endometriosis from 2007 to 2021 were included, who underwent 2-step surgical procedure. Indications were endometrioma before CO2-Laser therapy, missing consent because of emergencies or other surgeries from other disciplines, or high active and extended disease. When endometriosis was suspected in a surgery conducted by other disciplines, a gynecological surgeon was called during the surgery. Data and intraoperative videos were reviewed by 2 independent reviewers at one referral center. Only cases with available video of first and second look laparoscopy were included. We excluded patient who had prior hormonal treatment in the last 6 months. Lesions were classified according to the description of Khan et al. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS (Version 27.0, IBM). Mann-Whitney U test (nonparametric analysis) and χ2 tests were applied. Percentages were calculated for categorical variables and mean and standard deviation were calculated for continuous variables. Significance level was set to p <.05. INTERVENTIONS: Seventy-seven received GnRH-analogues and 116 Dienogest for preoperative hormone down-regulation. The median duration of down-regulation with GnRH-analogues or Dienogest was 3 months. The mean age was 32.3 (SD 6.3) years for GnRH-analogues and 32.6 (SD 6.3) years for Dienogest, p = .619 respectively. The visible intraoperative effect will be demonstrated in the video. CONCLUSION: The effect of a hormonal treatment can be observed macroscopically in endometriosis. This can help to understand the in vivo response to the administrated treatment. This video is showing our past experience, as performing second-look laparoscopy is not state of the art anymore.

A randomized controlled trial to compare the live birth rate of the first frozen embryo transfer following the progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol vs. the antagonist protocol in women with an anticipated high ovarian response.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the live birth rate of the first frozen embryo transfer (FET) after ovarian stimulation by the progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol vs. the antagonist protocol in women with an anticipated high ovarian response who were undergoing in vitro fertilization. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: A tertiary assisted reproduction center. PATIENTS: Women with infertility aged <43 years undergoing the first in vitro fertilization cycle and having antral follicle count of >15. INTERVENTIONS: Medroxyprogesterone 10 mg daily was given from the start of ovarian stimulation until the day of ovulation trigger in the PPOS protocol. In the antagonist protocol, an antagonist 0.25 mg daily was given from the sixth day of ovarian stimulation until the day of ovulation trigger. Blinding was not possible for women or physicians but the biostatistician was blinded to the group assignment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Live birth rate of the first FET cycle. RESULTS: A total of 784 women were recruited from June 2020 and October 2021 and assigned randomly in a 1:1 ratio into two groups: PPOS group (n = 392) and antagonist group (n = 392). Embryo transfer was either cancelled or postponed in 62 women (62/392, 15.8%) in the PPOS group and 65 (65/392, 16.6%) in the antagonist group because of no transferable embryos or no FET within 6 months after randomization. The two groups were similar in demographic characteristics and the numbers of oocytes obtained or fertilized, cleaving embryos, good-quality embryos at day 3, blastocysts developed, and embryos or blastocysts frozen. There was no statistically significant difference in the live birth rate of the first FET cycle between the PPOS and antagonist groups on the basis of both the intention-to-treat analysis (37.5.0% [147/392] vs. 32.7% [128/392]; relative risk, 1.148 [95% confidence interval, 0.949-1.390]) and per-protocol analysis (44.5% [147/330] vs. 39.1% [128/327]; relative risk, 1.138 [95% confidence interval, 0.950-1.364]). Both groups showed comparable clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, miscarriage, multiple pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, and cumulative live birth rates. CONCLUSION: The live birth rates of the first FET following the PPOS and antagonist protocols were comparable in women with an anticipated high ovarian response. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04414761 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Sex-dependent regulation of social avoidance by oxytocin signaling in the ventral tegmental area.

It has been hypothesized that oxytocin increases the salience of social stimuli, whether the valence is positive or negative, through its interactions with the ventral tegmental area (VTA). Indeed, oxytocin neurons project to the VTA and activate dopamine neurons that are necessary for social experiences with positive valence. Surprisingly, though, there has not been an investigation of the role of oxytocin in the VTA in mediating social experiences with negative valence (e.g., social stress). Given that there are sex differences in how oxytocin regulates the salience of positively-valenced social interactions, we hypothesized that oxytocin acting in the VTA also alters the salience of social stress in a sex-dependent manner. To test this, female and male Syrian hamsters were site-specifically infused with either saline, oxytocin (9 µM), or oxytocin receptor antagonist (90 µM) into the VTA. Subjects were then exposed to either no defeat or a single, 15 min defeat by one RA. The day following social defeat, subjects underwent a 5 min social avoidance test. There was an interaction between sex and drug treatment, such that the oxytocin antagonist increased social avoidance compared to saline treatment in socially stressed females, while oxytocin decreased social avoidance compared to saline treatment in socially stressed males. Contrary to expectations, these results suggest that oxytocin signaling generally acts to decrease social avoidance, regardless of sex. These sex differences in the efficacy of oxytocin and oxytocin receptor antagonists to alter negatively-valenced social stimuli, however, should be considered when guiding pharmacotherapies for disorders involving social deficits.

LH supplementation in IVF: human nature, politics, and elephants in the room.

Luteinizing hormone (LH) is present throughout the natural follicular phase. However, the debate is still not settled on whether LH is needed during ovarian stimulation in IVF. This commentary looks at the evolution of this debate, mentioning three elephants in the room that were ignored by the Pharma industry, professional organizations, and clinicians alike: 1. The different endocrinology between the long agonist and the antagonist protocols. 2. The fixed dose of the two most widely commercially available antagonist preparations, namely cetrorelix and ganirelix. 3. The fact that most research in this area uses population-based criteria, ignoring endocrine parameters. Individual genetics of the LH receptor gene may also serve to individualize LH needs during stimulation; however, the jury is still out regarding this approach. CONCLUSIONS: Individual endocrine and genetics parameters may shed meaningful light on the question of LH supplemental during ovarian stimulation.

Oocyte competence is comparable between progestin primed ovarian stimulation with Norethisterone acetate (NETA-PPOS) and GnRH-antagonist protocols: A matched case-control study in PGT-A cycles.

OBJECTIVE: To outline oocyte competence after progestin primed ovarian stimulation with Norethisterone acetate (NETA-PPOS) compared to conventional GnRH-antagonist protocol. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective matched case-control study involving advanced-maternal-age women undergoing ICSI with PGT-A. 89 NETA-PPOS were matched with 178 control patients based on maternal age and ovarian reserve biomarkers. Both groups underwent recombinant-FSH OS with GnRH-agonist ovulation trigger and collected ≥1 MII. In the study group, NETA (10 mg/day) was administered orally starting from day2 of the menstrual cycle. Euploid blastocyst rate per cohort of metaphase-II oocytes (EBR per MII) was the primary outcome. All other embryological and clinical outcomes were reported. Gestational age, birthweight and length were also assessed. RESULTS: The EBR per MII was comparable among PPOS and control (13.9 % ± 19.3 % versus 13.3 % ± 17.9 %; the sample size allowed to exclude up to a 10 % difference). Blastocysts morphology and developmental rate were similar. No difference was reported for all clinical outcomes among the 61 and 107 vitrified-warmed euploid single blastocyst transfers respectively conducted. The cumulative live birth delivery rate per concluded cycles was also comparable (24.7 % versus 21.9 %). Neonatal outcomes were analogous. CONCLUSIONS: Oocyte competence after NETA-PPOS and standard OS is comparable. This evidence is reassuring and, because of its lower cost and possibly higher patients' compliance, supports PPOS administration whenever the patients are indicated to freeze-all (e.g., fertility preservation, PGT-A, oocyte donation). More data are required about follicle recruitment, oocyte yield, gestational and perinatal outcomes. Randomized-controlled-trials are advisable to confirm our evidence.

The Effects of Long-Term Dienogest Therapy on In Vitro Fertilization Outcomes in Women with Endometriosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Assessing dienogest's efficacy in endometriosis patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). DATA SOURCES: Systematic search in databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, Google Scholar) until 1 October 2022. STUDY SELECTIONS: Randomized trials and observational studies comparing extended dienogest pre-treatment, no pre-treatment, or gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist pre-treatment in endometriosis-linked IVF. OUTCOME MEASURES: live birth, clinical pregnancy rates, oocytes collected, miscarriage rate, gonadotropin consumption. DATA EXTRACTIONS AND SYNTHESES: Two authors independently assessed eligibility. Dichotomous variables were analyzed via a random-effect model and Mantel-Haenszel method to calculate weighted estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CI). I2 statistic gauged study heterogeneity; GRADE criteria evaluated evidence quality. CONCLUSIONS: Out of 191 publications, five studies with 723 participants were included. Uncertainty persists on whether prolonged dienogest affects live birth (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.29 to 6.84; 3 studies, n = 289; I2 86%) and clinical pregnancy rates (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.31 to 5.65; 3 studies, n = 289; I2 86%) compared to conventional IVF. Moreover, uncertainty remains regarding intervention impact on live birth (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.63 to 3.37; 1 study, n = 34) and clinical pregnancy rates (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.23; 3 studies, n = 288; I2 0%) versus long-term GnRH agonist therapy before IVF. Given limited data and very low evidence quality, doubts arise about the benefits of long-term dienogest pre-treatment before conventional IVF in endometriosis patients.

Evolution of protein domain repertoires of CALHM6.

Calcium (Ca2 +) homeostasis is essential in conducting various cellular processes including nerve transmission, muscular movement, and immune response. Changes in Ca2 + concentration in the cytoplasm are significant in bringing about various immune responses such as pathogen clearance and apoptosis. Various key players are involved in calcium homeostasis such as calcium binders, pumps, and channels. Sequence-based evolutionary information has recently been exploited to predict the biophysical behaviors of proteins, giving critical clues about their functionality. Ion channels are reportedly the first channels developed during evolution. Calcium homeostasis modulator protein 6 (CALHM6) is one such channel. Comprised of a single domain called Ca_hom_mod, CALHM6 is a stable protein interacting with various other proteins in calcium regulation. No previous attempt has been made to trace the exact evolutionary events in the domain of CALHM6, leaving plenty of room for exploring its evolution across a wide range of organisms. The current study aims to answer the questions by employing a computational-based strategy that used profile Hidden Markov Models (HMMs) to scan for the CALHM6 domain, integrated the data with a time-calibrated phylogenetic tree using BEAST and Mesquite, and visualized through iTOL. Around 4,000 domains were identified, and 14,000 domain gain, loss, and duplication events were observed at the end which also included various protein domains other than CALHM6. The data were analyzed concerning CALHM6 evolution as well as the domain gain, loss, and duplication of its interacting partners: Calpain, Vinculin, protein S100-A7, Thioredoxin, Peroxiredoxin, and Calmodulin-like protein 5. Duplication events of CALHM6 near higher eukaryotes showed its increasing complexity in structure and function. This in-silico phylogenetic approach applied to trace the evolution of CALHM6 was an effective approach to get a better understanding of the protein CALHM6.

The clinical trial of alternative relugolix administration for uterine leiomyoma prior to surgically treatment: a study protocol for Non-Adverse Relugolix Administration (NARA) trial.

BACKGROUND: Uterine leiomyomas are common for reproductive-aged women and affect women's quality of life due to heavy menstrual bleeding or dysmenorrhea. Leiomyomas grow according to estradiol exposure and decrease after post-menopause. In case serious symptoms are caused by leiomyomas, pharmacotherapy or surgical treatment is proposed. Prior to surgical treatment, pharmacotherapies aimed at the reduction of leiomyoma and uterine volume or improvement of anemia are introduced to conduct minimum invasive surgery (i.e., to reduce blood loss or surgical duration). Recently, relugolix (40 mg orally once daily) as a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) receptor antagonist has proved its sufficient efficacy in suppressing estradiol levels without the transient estradiol flare-up compared with GnRH agonist. However, long-term administration should not be permitted liable to for climacteric disorder or osteoporosis, and evidence is lacking on the actual efficacy and extent of adverse effects of the every-other-day dosing regimen. This trial aimed to prove non-inferiority in volume reduction effect on leiomyoma and safety (i.e., reduction of adverse effects) by every-other-day administration after 2 months of everyday administration compared to daily administration throughout the duration. METHODS: A minimization adaptive randomized control trial (RCT) will be conducted. Patients (over 20 years old) harboring leiomyoma who will be undergoing surgical treatment will be invited to participate. Patients who are enrolled in the intervention group will receive every-other-day administration for 16 weeks after 8 weeks of daily administration. Patients who are enrolled in the control group will receive daily throughout the 24 weeks. The primary outcome is the leiomyoma volume reduction, and the secondary endpoints are the reduction of uterine volume, the occurrence of the climacteric disorder, genital bleeding days, change rate of serum hormone or bone turnover markers, and bone mineral density after 24 weeks compared to before administration. DISCUSSION: This study aims to prove both the non-inferiority in leiomyoma volume reduction and superiority in adverse effects occurrence reduction, which will provide a novel method to escape adverse effects while maintaining the effect of leiomyoma reduction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials jRCTs051230078. Registered on 26 July 2023.