Utrogestan as an effective oral alternative for preventing premature luteinizing hormone surges in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization

Xiuxian Zhu, Xiaole Zhang, Yonglun Fu, Xiuxian Zhu, Xiaole Zhang, Yonglun Fu

Abstract

A major cause of cycle cancellation during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) is the occurrence of premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surges. Steroidal preparations can modulate the secretion of gonadotropins (Gn); however, few studies using progesterone to inhibit the premature LH surges in COH have been published. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the oral delivery of progesterone soft capsules (Utrogestan) to prevent LH surges from the follicular phase and to compare cycle characteristics as well as to evaluate pregnancy outcomes in subsequent frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles. A total of 374 patients were enrolled in this retrospective study, among which 187 patients were simultaneously administered Utrogestan and human menopausal gonadotrophin (hMG) from cycle day 3 until the trigger day. A short protocol including 187 controls with comparable age, body mass index (BMI), infertility duration, and antral follicle count was also used. GnRH agonist (0.1 mg) or hCG (3000 IU) was used for a trigger when the dominant follicles matured. Viable embryos were cryopreserved for later transfer in both groups. The primary outcome was the number of oocytes retrieved. The secondary outcomes included the number of mature oocytes, incidence of premature LH surge, and clinical pregnancy outcomes from FET cycles. Consistent LH suppression was achieved during COH, with a range of 0.07 to 8.9 IU/L, and no premature LH surge was detected. The number of oocytes retrieved in the Utrogestan and hMG protocol was comparable with that in the short protocol (10.92 ± 5.74 vs 10.6 ± 6.22, P > 0.05), and the dose of hMG was higher than that used in the short protocol (1884.22 ± 439.47 IU vs 1446.26 ± 550.48 IU, P < 0.05). No significant between-group difference was observed in the mature oocyte rate (88.88% vs 90.12%), cleavage rate (96.58% vs 96.58%), clinical pregnancy rate (54.27% vs 51.65%), or implantation rate (33.59% vs 34.02%). The study shows that Utrogestan is an effective oral alternative for preventing premature LH surges in women undergoing COH, which will help to establish a convenient user regimen in combination with FET.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
The flowchart of the study.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
The hormone profiles of Utrogestan + hMG protocol in the subgroups of trigger by GnRH-a or hCG. The mean ± SD values show the temporal associations among circulating concentrations of FSH, LH, E2, and P. The red line refers to the subgroup with GnRH-a trigger and the green line stands for the subgroup with hCG trigger. The asterisk (∗) represent P < 0.05 at the time point.

References

    1. Van Loenen AC, Huirne JA, Schats R, et al. GnRH agonists, antagonists, and assisted conception. Semin Reprod Med 2002; 20:349–364.
    1. Bosch E, Valencia I, Escudero E, et al. Premature luteinization during gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles and its relationship with in vitro fertilization outcome. Fertil Steril 2003; 80:1444–1449.
    1. Kuang YP, Hong QQ, Chen QJ, et al. Luteal-phase ovarian stimulation is feasible for producing competent oocytes in women undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment, with optimal pregnancy outcomes in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles. Fertil Steril 2014; 101:105–111.
    1. Kuang YP, Chen QJ, Hong QQ, et al. Successful pregnancy and live birth after a cryopreserved embryo transfer using embryos originated from luteal-phase ovarian stimulation in a woman with primary infertility: a case report. J IVF Reprod Med Genet 2013; 1:106.
    1. Letterie GS. Inhibition of gonadotropin surge by a brief mid-cycle regimen of ethinyl estradiol and norethindrone: possible role in in vitro fertilization. Gynecol Endocrinol 2000; 14:1–4.
    1. Wong KM, Mastenbroek S, Repping S. Cryopreservation of human embryos and its contribution to in vitro fertilization success rates. Fertil Steril 2014; 102:19–26.
    1. Bo Huang, Dan Hu, Kun Qian, et al. Is frozen embryo transfer cycle associated with a significantly lower incidence of ectopic pregnancy? An analysis of more than 30,000 cycles. Fertil Steril 2014; 1021345–1021349.
    1. Roque M, Lattes K, Serra S, et al. Fresh embryo transfer versus frozen embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2013; 99:156–162.
    1. Fitzpatrick LA, Good A. Micronized progesterone: clinical indications and comparison with current treatments. Fertil Steril 1999; 72:389–397.
    1. Marinov B, Petkova S, Dukovski A, et al. Utrogestan and high risk pregnancy. Akush Ginekol (Sofiia) 2004; 43:22–24.
    1. Dierschke DJ, Yamaji T, Karsch FJ, et al. Blockade by progesterone of estrogen-induced LH and FSH release in the rhesus monkey. Endocrinology 1973; 92:1496–1501.
    1. Richter TA, Robinson JE, Evans NP. Progesterone blocks the estradiol-stimulated luteinizing hormone surge by disrupting activation in response to a stimulatory estradiol signal in the ewe. Biol Reprod 2002; 67:119–125.
    1. Richter TA, Robinson JE, Evans NP. Progesterone treatment that either blocks or augments the etradiol-induced gonadotropin-releasing hormone surge is associated with different patterns of hypothalamic neural activation. Neuroendocrinology 2001; 73:378–386.
    1. Richter TA, Robinson JE, Lozano JM, et al. Progesterone can block the preovulatory gonadotropin-releasing hormone/luteinising hormone surge in the ewe by a direct inhibitory action on oestradiol-responsive cells within the hypothalamus. J Neuroendocrinol 2005; 17:161–169.
    1. Harris TG, Dye S, Robinson JE, et al. Progesterone can block transmission of the estradiol-induced signal for luteinizing hormone surge generation during a specific period of time immediately after activation of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone surge-generating system. Endocrinology 1999; 140:827–834.
    1. Pohl CR, Richardson DW, Marshall G, et al. Mode of action of progesterone in the blockade of gonadotropin surges in the rhesus monkey. Endocrinology 1982; 110:1454–1455.
    1. Chabbert-Buffet N, Skinner DC, Caraty A, Bouchard P. Neuroendocrine effects of progesterone. Steroids 2000; 65:613–620.
    1. Le WW, Attardi B, Berghorn KA, et al. Progesterone blockade of a luteinizing hormone surge blocks luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone Fos activation and activation of its preoptic area afferents. Brain Res 1997; 778:272–280.
    1. Ruiz de Galarreta CM, Fanjul LF, Hsueh AJ. Progestin regulation of progesterone biosynthetic enzymes in cultured rat granulosa cells. Steroids 1985; 46:987–1002.
    1. Fanjul LF, Ruiz de Galarreta CM, Hsueh AJ. Progestin augmentation of gonadotropin-stimulated progesterone production by cultured rat granulosa cells. Endocrinology 1983; 112:405–407.
    1. Fanjul LF, Ruiz de Galarreta CM, Hsueh AJ. Estrogen regulation of progestin biosynthetic enzymes in cultured rat granulosa cells. Biol Reprod 1984; 30:903–912.
    1. Chabbert-Buffeta N, Skinner DC, Caraty A, et al. Neuroendocrine effects of progesterone. Steroids 2000; 65:613–620.
    1. Richter TA, Spackman DS, Robinson JE, et al. Role of endogenous opioid peptides in mediating progesterone-induced disruption of the activation and transmission stages of the GnRH surge induction process. Endocrinology 2001; 142:5212–5219.
    1. Bashour NM, Wray S. Progesterone directly and rapidly inhibits GnRH neuronal activity via progesterone receptor membrane component 1. Endocrinology 2012; 153:4457–4469.
    1. Petersen SL, Intlekofer KA, Moura-Conlon PJ, et al. Novel progesterone receptors: neural localization and possible functions. Front Neurosci 2013; 7:164.
    1. Hamdine O, Macklon NS, Eijkemans MJ, et al. Elevated early follicular progesterone levels and in vitro fertilization outcomes: a prospective intervention study and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2014; 102:448 e1–454 e1.
    1. Venetis CA, Kolibianakis EM, Bosdou JK, et al. Progesterone elevation and probability of pregnancy after IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis of over 60 000 cycles. Hum Reprod Update 2013; 19:433–457.
    1. Ganesh A, Chakravorty N, Mukherjee R, et al. Comparison of oral dydrogestrone with progesterone gel and micronized progesterone for luteal support in 1,373 women undergoing in vitro fertilization: a randomized clinical study. Fertil Steril 2011; 95:1961–1965.
    1. Youssef MA, Van der Veen F, Al-Inany HG, et al. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus HCG for oocyte triggering in antagonist-assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; 10:CD008046.
    1. Hamdine O, Macklon NS, Eijkemans MJ, et al. Elevated early follicular progesterone levels and in vitro fertilization outcomes: a prospective intervention study and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2014; 102:448–454.e1.
    1. Xu B, Li Z, Zhang H, et al. Serum progesterone level effects on the outcome of in vitro fertilization in patients with different ovarian response: an analysis of more than 10,000 cycles. Fertil Steril 2012; 97:1321–1327.e1-4.
    1. Humaidan P, Kol S, Papanikolaou EG. GnRH agonist for triggering of final oocyte maturation: time for a change of practice? Hum Reprod Update 2011; 17:510–524.

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit