Oral dydrogesterone versus micronized vaginal progesterone for luteal phase support: a double-blind crossover study investigating pharmacokinetics and impact on the endometrium.

STUDY QUESTION: How do plasma progesterone (P) and dydrogesterone (D) concentrations together with endometrial histology, transcriptomic signatures, and immune cell composition differ when oral dydrogesterone (O-DYD) or micronized vaginal progesterone (MVP) is used for luteal phase support (LPS)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Although after O-DYD intake, even at steady-state, plasma D and 20αdihydrodydrogesterone (DHD) concentrations spiked in comparison to P concentrations, a similar endometrial signature was observed by histological and transcriptomic analysis of the endometrium. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: O-DYD for LPS has been proven to be noninferior compared to MVP in two phase III randomized controlled trials. Additionally, a combined individual participant data and aggregate data meta-analysis indicated that a higher pregnancy rate and live birth rate may be obtained in women receiving O-DYD versus MVP for LPS in fresh IVF/ICSI cycles. Little data are available on the pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles of O-DYD versus MVP and their potential molecular differences at the level of the reproductive organs, particularly at the endometrial level. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Thirty oocyte donors were planned to undergo two ovarian stimulation (OS) cycles with dual triggering (1.000 IU hCG + 0.2 mg triptorelin), each followed by 1 week of LPS: O-DYD or MVP, in a randomized, cross-over, double-blind, double-dummy fashion. On both the first and eighth days of LPS, serial blood samples upon first dosing were harvested for plasma D, DHD, and P concentration analyses. On Day 8 of LPS, an endometrial biopsy was collected for histologic examination, transcriptomics, and immune cell analysis. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: All oocyte donors were <35 years old, had regular menstrual cycles, no intrauterine contraceptive device, anti-Müllerian hormone within normal range and a BMI ≤29 kg/m2. OS was performed on a GnRH antagonist protocol followed by dual triggering (1.000 IU hCG + 0.2 mg triptorelin) as soon as ≥3 follicles of 20 mm were present. Following oocyte retrieval, subjects initiated LPS consisting of MVP 200 mg or O-DYD 10 mg, both three times daily. D, DHD, and P plasma levels were measured using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Histological assessment was carried out using the Noyes criteria. Endometrial RNA-sequencing was performed for individual biopsies and differential gene expression was analyzed. Endometrial single-cell suspensions were created followed by flow cytometry for immune cell typing. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 21 women completed the entire study protocol. Subjects and stimulation characteristics were found to be similar between groups. Following the first dose of O-DYD, the average observed maximal plasma concentrations (Cmax) for D and DHD were 2.9 and 77 ng/ml, respectively. The Cmax for D and DHD was reached after 1.5 and 1.6 h (=Tmax), respectively. On the eighth day of LPS, the first administration of that day gave rise to a Cmax of 3.6 and 88 ng/ml for D and DHD, respectively. For both, the observed Tmax was 1.5 h. Following the first dose of MVP, the Cmax for P was 16 ng/ml with a Tmax of 4.2 h. On the eighth day of LPS, the first administration of that day showed a Cmax for P of 21 ng/ml with a Tmax of 7.3 h. All 42 biopsies showed endometrium in the secretory phase. The mean cycle day was 23.9 (±1.2) in the O-DYD group versus 24.0 (±1.3) in the MVP group. RNA-sequencing did not reveal significantly differentially expressed genes between samples of both study groups. The average Euclidean distance between samples following O-DYD was significantly lower than following MVP (respectively 12.1 versus 18.8, Mann-Whitney P = 6.98e-14). Immune cell profiling showed a decrease of CD3 T-cell, γδ T-cell, and B-cell frequencies after MVP treatment compared to O-DYD, while the frequency of natural killer (NK) cells was significantly increased. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The main reason for caution is the small sample size, given the basic research nature of the project. The plasma concentrations are best estimates as this was not a formal PK study. Whole tissue bulk RNA-sequencing has been performed not correcting for bias caused by different tissue compositions across biopsies. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This is the first study comparing O-DYD/MVP, head-to-head, in a randomized design on a molecular level in IVF/ICSI. Plasma serum concentrations suggest that administration frequency is important, in addition to dose, specifically for O-DYD showing a rapid clearance. The molecular endometrial data are overall comparable and thus support the previously reported noninferior reproductive outcomes for O-DYD as compared to MVP. Further research is needed to explore the smaller intersample distance following O-DYD and the subtle changes detected in endometrial immune cells. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Not related to this work, C.Bl. has received honoraria for lectures, presentations, manuscript writing, educational events, or scientific advice from Abbott, Ferring, Organon, Cooper Surgical, Gedeon-Richter, IBSA, and Merck. H.T. has received honoraria for lectures, presentations, manuscript writing, educational events, or scientific advice from Abbott, Ferring, Cooper Surgical, Gedeon-Richter, Cook, and Goodlife. S.M. has received honoraria for lectures, presentations, educational events, or scientific advice from Abbott, Cooper Surgical, Gedeon-Richter, IBSA, and Merck and Oxolife. G.G. has received honoraria for lectures, presentations, educational events, or scientific advice from Merck, MSD, Organon, Ferring, Theramex, Gedeon-Richter, Abbott, Biosilu, ReprodWissen, Obseva, PregLem, Guerbet, Cooper, Igyxos, and OxoLife. S.V.-S. is listed as inventor on two patents (WO2019115755A1 and WO2022073973A1), which are not related to this work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EUDRACT 2018-000105-23.

Intracervical insemination versus intrauterine insemination with cryopreserved donor sperm in the natural cycle: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Is intracervical insemination (ICI) non-inferior to IUI with cryopreserved donor sperm in the natural cycle in terms of live birth? SUMMARY ANSWER: ICI with cryopreserved donor sperm in the natural cycle was inferior to IUI in terms of live birth. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Both ICI and IUI in the natural cycle are performed as first-line treatments in women who are eligible for donor sperm treatment. High-quality data on the effectiveness of ICI versus IUI with cryopreserved donor sperm in the natural cycle in terms of live birth is lacking. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We performed an open-label multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial in the Netherlands and Belgium. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We randomly allocated women who were eligible for donor sperm treatment with cryopreserved donor semen to six cycles of ICI in the natural cycle or six cycles of IUI in the natural cycle. The primary outcome was conception within 8 months after randomization leading to a live birth. Secondary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage and time to conception leading to live birth. We calculated relative risks (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) with 95% CI. Non-inferiority would be shown if the lower limit of the 95% RD CI was <-12%. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Between June 2014 and February 2019, we included 421 women, of whom 211 women were randomly allocated to ICI and 210 to IUI. Of the 211 women allocated to ICI, 2 women were excluded, 126 women completed treatment according to protocol and 75 women did not complete 6 treatment cycles. Of the 210 women allocated to IUI, 3 women were excluded, 140 women completed treatment according to protocol and 62 women did not complete 6 treatment cycles. Mean female age was 34 years (SD ±4) in both interventions. Conception leading to live birth occurred in 51 women (24%) allocated to ICI and in 81 women (39%) allocated to IUI (RR 0.63, 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.84). This corresponds to an absolute RD of -15%; 95% CI: -24% to -6.9%, suggesting inferiority of ICI. ICI also resulted in a lower live birth rate over time (hazard ratio 0.58, 95% CI: 0.41-0.82). Our per-protocol analysis showed that, within the 8 months treatment horizon, 48 women (38%) had live births after ICI and 79 women (56%) had live births after IUI (RR 0.68, 95% CI: 0.52-0.88; RD -18%, 95% CI: -30% to -6%). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study was non-blinded owing to the nature of the interventions. We consider it unlikely that this has introduced performance bias, since pregnancy outcomes are objective outcome measures. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Since ICI in the natural cycle was inferior to IUI in the natural cycle with cryopreserved donor sperm in terms of live birth rate, IUI is the preferred treatment. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This trial received funding from the Dutch Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw project number 837002407). B.W.J.M. is supported by an NHMRC Investigator grant (GNT1176437), reports consultancy for ObsEva and has received research funding from Guerbet, Ferring and Merck. The other authors do not declare a COI. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR4462. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 11 March 2014. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 03 June 2014.

Reduction of hospital stay at maternity unit: an evaluation of the impact on maternal and neonatal readmission.

In June 2015, the Belgian federal minister of public health imposed a reduction of 1 day in hospital stay at the maternity unit. This retrospective cohort study evaluated data of all patients who delivered between January 01 2010 and November 30 2015. Neonatal readmissions during the first 28 days postpartum and maternal readmissions during the first 6 weeks postpartum were studied. In total, 6009 births were included. The neonatal readmissions significantly increased (4.8% versus 6.9%, p value = .04) after June 2015. There was no significant difference in maternal readmissions between groups. In conclusion, hospital stay reduction at the maternity unit was linked with an increase of neonatal readmissions in the first 28 days postpartum, but did not have an effect on the maternal readmissions.Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? Many studies have evaluated the impact of early discharge on maternal and neonatal morbidity since 1950. Nevertheless, there are still concerns regarding the advantages and inconveniences of this policy. This retrospective cohort study took place in a tertiary referral centre in Belgium (CHU Tivoli) and evaluated data of all patients who delivered between January 01 2010 and November 30 2015.What the results of this study add? The readmissions for icterus increased significantly after the introduction of the reduced stay. There was no significant difference in maternal readmissions between groups.What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? A shorter hospital may be linked with an increase of neonatal readmissions in the first 28 days postpartum, but does not seem to have an effect on the maternal readmissions. Further prospective studies are needed in order to validate this hypothesis and also elucidate the reasons leading to a higher neonatal readmission rate.

Pregnancy after vasectomy: surgical reversal or assisted reproduction?

STUDY QUESTION: Should we opt for surgical vasovasostomy or IVF/ICSI after a vasectomy? SUMMARY ANSWER: Both options reveal acceptable pregnancy rates though the time to pregnancy was significantly lower in the immediate IVF/ICSI group. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: About 7.4% of men regret their vasectomy and express a renewed child wish. The choice between surgical vasectomy reversal or ICSI remains difficult for patients and their fertility specialist. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This study was a retrospective single-center cohort analysis of all males with a vasectomy in the past seeking treatment between 2006 and 2011 (n = 163). One group of patients opted for a reanastomosis procedure while the others opted for an immediate IVF/ICSI treatment. This included 99 males who underwent reanastomosis and 64 couples who immediately underwent ICSI treatment. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: All reanastomosis procedures were done by the same surgeon. ICSI was used in all cases where testicular sperm were extracted by fine needle aspiration (FNA) or testicular sperm extraction (TESE). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The mean male age at vasectomy was 35.5 years and 44.4 years at reanastomosis. The mean (range) obstructive interval was 9.53 years (1-27). No significant differences were found between the two groups in female patient characteristics, such as age and parity. In the reversal group, the crude cumulative delivery rate (CDR) was 49.5%. However, in the 45 patients of this group who attempted to conceive spontaneously ('primary reanastomosis' pathway), the crude CDR was 40.0%. The remaining 54 patients (the 'switchers' pathway) who underwent a reversal procedure and later switched to ART, had a crude CDR of 57.4%. Of these, four patients opted for insemination, including two who later decided to switch to IVF/ICSI. The 64 patients who immediately underwent IVF/ICSI ('primary IVF/ICSI' pathway) had a crude CDR of 43.8% and an expected CDR of 51.6%. The difference in delivery rates between the primary reanastomosis group (40.0%) and the primary IVF/ICSI group (43.8%) was not statistically significant. Time to pregnancy was significantly shorter in the primary IVF/ICSI pathway, at 8.2 versus 16.3 months in the reanastomosis group. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study population was rather small. Furthermore, the study may be limited by the fact that the reason for the renewed child wish in most cases was a new relationship with another woman, a factor which may also play a role in the cause of infertility. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Recanalisation of the vas seems to be a reasonable alternative for patients who do not wish to undergo immediate IVF/ICSI. In those who opt for ART immediately, the cumulative pregnancy rates seem comparable but the pregnancies occurred earlier. STUDY FUNDING, COMPETING INTEREST(S): No funding was used for this study. There is no conflict of interest for this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Impact of thyroid autoimmunity in euthyroid women on live birth rate after IUI.

Study question: Does thyroid autoimmunity (TAI) predict live birth rate in euthyroid women after one treatment cycle in IUI patients? Summary answer: TAI as such does not influence pregnancy outcome after IUI treatment. What is known already: The role of TAI on pregnancy outcome in the case of IVF/ICSI is largely debated in the literature. This is the first study to address this issue in the case of IUI. Study design, size, duration: This was a retrospective cohort study. A two-armed study design was performed: patients anti-thyroid peroxidase (TPO)+ and patients anti-TPO-. All patients who started their first IUI cycle in our fertility center between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2014 were included. After exclusion of those patients with or being treated for thyroid dysfunction, 3143 patients were finally included in the study. Participants/materials, setting, methods: After approval by the institutional review board we retrospectively included all patients who started their first IUI cycle in our center between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2014 with follow-up of outcome until 31 December 2015. Patients with clinical thyroid dysfunction were excluded (thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) <0.01 mIU/l; TSH >5 mIU/l) as were patients under treatment with levothyroxine or anti-thyroid drugs. These patients were then divided into two main groups: patients anti-TPO+ and patients anti-TPO- (= control group). Live birth delivery after 25 weeks of gestation was taken as the primary endpoint of our study. As a secondary endpoint, we evaluated differences in live birth delivery after IUI according to different upper limits of preconception TSH thresholds (<2.5 and <5.0 mIU/l). Furthermore, the influence of thyroid function (TSH, free thyroxine (fT4)), anti-TPO status, age, smoking, BMI, parity, ovarian reserve (anti-mullerian hormone (AMH) and FSH), IUI indication and IUI stimulation on live birth rate was analyzed. Main results and the role of chance: Between-group comparison did not show any significant difference between the anti-TPO+ and anti-TPO- group with respect to live birth delivery-, pregnancy- or miscarriage rate with odds ratio at 1.04 (95% CI: 0.63; 1.69), 0.98 (95% CI: 0.62; 1.55) and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.23; 2.39), respectively. In addition, there were no significant differences in live birth delivery-, pregnancy- or miscarriage rate when comparing subgroups according to TSH level (TSH ≥2.5 mIU/l vs. TSH <2.5 mIU/l) with an odds ratio at 1.05 (95% CI: 0.76; 1.47), 1.04 (95% CI: 0.77; 1.41) and  0.95 (95% CI: 0.47; 1.94), respectively. Limitations, reasons for caution: This study was powered for the primary aim, live birth rate. The limitations of this study are the absence of region-specific reference ranges for thyroid hormones and the absence of follow-up of TSH values during ART and subsequent pregnancy. Moreover, there was a time difference of 5 months between thyroid assessment and the start of stimulation. The area where the study was conducted corresponds to a mild iodine deficient area and data should be translated with caution to areas with different iodine backgrounds. Wider implications of the findings: Our findings indicate comparable pregnancy-, abortion- and delivery rates in women with and without TAI undergoing IUI. Moreover, we were unable to confirm a negative effect of TSH level above 2.5 mIU/l on live birth delivery rate. We therefore believe that advocating Levothyroxine treatment at TSH levels between 2.5 and 4 mIU/l needs to be considered with caution and requires further analysis in a prospective cohort study. Study funding/competing interest(s): No external funding was used for this study. No conflicts of interest are declared.

Administration of corifollitropin alfa on Day 2 versus Day 4 of the cycle in a GnRH antagonist protocol: a randomized controlled pilot study.

STUDY QUESTION: Does the initiation of corifollitropin alfa administration on cycle day 4 instead of cycle day 2 result in a reduced total rFSH consumption in a GnRH antagonist protocol? SUMMARY ANSWER: Initiation of corifollitropin alfa on cycle day 4 compared with day 2 results in significantly reduced total rFSH consumption at the end of the follicular phase. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In vitro fertilization treatment is associated with significant physical, psychological and emotional stress in infertile patients. This notion has fuelled the search for simplified treatment approaches that may reduce the treatment burden. The introduction of corifollitropin alfa has provided a more patient-friendly treatment protocol because it obviates the need for daily hormonal injections. In addition, postponing the initiation of hormonal stimulation should also reduce the total gonadotrophin consumption and the number of injections needed. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A prospective randomized controlled pilot study was conducted in a university centre in Belgium. Between December 2011 and March 2013, 59 patients were randomized in the study and 52 of these patients received the allocated intervention. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: All patients were randomly assigned to the control group (CD2), with initiation of corifollitropin alfa on cycle day 2, or to the study group (CD4) with initiation of stimulation on day 4. The GnRH antagonist was administered from cycle day 7 onwards in both treatment arms. The main outcome measure was the total rFSH consumption at the end of the follicular phase after corifollitropin alfa treatment. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The total dose of rFSH at the end of the follicular phase was significantly reduced in the CD4 group compared with the CD2 group (324 (276) IU in the CD2 group versus 173 (255) IU in the CD4 group, P = 0.015, mean difference -151, 95% confidence interval (CI) -301 to -1). A significant reduction of total duration of rFSH stimulation in the CD4 group was also observed (8.6 (1.4) days in CD2 group versus 7.8 (1.2) days in the CD4 group, P = 0.008, mean difference -0.8, 95% CI -1.6 to -0.1). The number of cumulus-oocyte-complexes was comparable in both treatment groups (12.8 (7.3) in CD2 group versus 14.7 (8.8) in the CD4 group, P = 0.461, mean difference 1.8, 95% CI -2.7 to 6.4). Ongoing pregnancy rates of 48% in the CD2 group and 41% in the CD4 group were achieved (P = 0.60, relative risk (RR) 0.85, 95% CI 0.46-1.56). Final oocyte maturation was triggered with GnRH agonist instead of hCG in two patients in the CD2 group and in eight patients in the CD4 group, because of an increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (P = 0.078, RR 3.7 (95% CI 0.88-15.8). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Before general implementation can be advised, this trial should be validated in a much larger randomized trial. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS If the approach of starting ovarian stimulation on Day 4 of the cycle could be implemented in a large population of infertile patients, it would result in a significant reduction of gonadotrophin consumption. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No external finance was involved in this study. C.B and N.P.P. have received fees from MSD. Otherwise the authors declare no conflict of interest regarding this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01633580).

Fast-release orodispersible tramadol as analgesia in hysterosalpingography with a metal cannula or a balloon catheter.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the potential benefit, in terms of pain relief, of the new oral fast-release orodispersible galvanic form of tramadol in women undergoing hysterosalpingography (HSG) with either a metal cannula or a balloon catheter. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2 x 2 factorial-design trial, conducted at a single academic centre, 128 women were assigned into groups: (I) tramadol and a metal cannula, (II) tramadol and a balloon catheter, (III) placebo and a metal cannula or (IV) placebo and a balloon catheter. The primary end-point was pain registered by the patients on 10-cm visual analogue scales (VASs) at various times during and after the procedure. Secondary end-points included side effects and pain as assessed by the same physician during HSG. RESULTS: The main effect of tramadol versus placebo medication (i.e. I and II versus III and IV) was a statistically significant difference (P < 0.001) in self-reported VAS of -0.91 (-1.35 to -0.47) on the absolute and -33% (-48% to -17%) on the relative scale in favour of tramadol. Likewise, there was a significant benefit for tramadol against placebo medication for physician-perceived VAS pain scores (39% relative reduction; P < 0.001). The main effect of the balloon catheter versus metal cannula (i.e. II and IV versus I and III) was a non-significant (P = 0.82) difference in patient-reported VAS of -0.05 (-0.49 to +0.39) and -2% (-21% to +17%). There were no medication-HSG device interactions and no differences in side effects. CONCLUSIONS: During and after HSG, fast-release orodispersible tramadol significantly reduces pain without increasing side effects.