1 Tecnobios Procreazione, Centre for Reproductive Health and 2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Reproductive Medicine Unit, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
![]() |
Abstract |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Key words: GnRH-agonist/IVF/ovarian stimulation/reduced dose/triptorelin
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Several authors have suggested that partial pituitary desensitization in an assisted reproduction procedure might be sufficient (Balasch et al., 1992a; Simon et al., 1994
), but the minimal effective dose of GnRH agonists needed to avoid premature LH surge during ovarian stimulation has not yet been clearly determined. Some authors (Broekmans et al., 1996
; Janssens et al., 1998
) showed, with the use of GnRH challenge tests, that comparable degrees of suppression of the pituitary can be achieved with either 100 or 50 µg/day triptorelin. Lower doses such as 25 µg/day (Broekmans et al., 1996
) or 15 µg/day (Janssens et al., 1998
) still give noteworthy pituitary suppression, but the clinical usefulness of such low doses in avoiding LH surge in ovarian stimulation has yet to be demonstrated. A recent report (Janssens et al., 2000
) showed no improvement in pregnancy rate using 15 µg triptorelin daily versus 50 or 100 µg daily.
It has been demonstrated that once the pituitary is suppressed, the dose of GnRH agonist needed to prevent an LH surge decreases with the length of treatment (Sandow and Donnez, 1990). Lowering the dose of triptorelin at the start of stimulation from 0.5 mg per day to 0.1 mg per day seems to be as effective as continuing with 0.5 mg per day (Balasch et al., 1992b
; Simon et al., 1994
).
Feldberg et al. (1994) compared three doses of triptorelin administered in a long luteal protocol in women with previous poor response to gonadotrophins: 3.75 mg in a single i.m. dose; 0.5 mg s.c. per day decreased to 0.1 mg s.c. per day; 0.1 mg s.c. per day decreased to 0.05 mg s.c. per day (Feldberg et al., 1994). In the lowest dose group they found higher oestradiol concentrations, larger numbers of oocytes collected/fertilized and more embryos transferred, as well as a lower cancellation rate and a higher, although not significant, pregnancy rate. A lower number of human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) ampoules and duration of stimulation were also found in this group.
The aim of the present study was to investigate whether a reduced daily dose of triptorelin at the start of ovarian stimulation produced better results versus long-acting triptorelin, in patients undergoing IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) procedures.
![]() |
Materials and methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Eligible patients who agreed to participate were randomized in two treatment groups. In group 1 (standard protocol, 66 patients), pituitary desensitization was performed with a single i.m. injection of triptorelin, 3.75 mg (Decapeptyl® 3.75; Ipsen Spa, Milan, Italy), on day 21 of the cycle preceding treatment.
Group 2 patients (66 patients) received a daily s.c. injection of 100 µg triptorelin (Decapeptyl® 0.1, Ipsen Spa), starting from day 21 of the cycle preceding treatment. At the onset of menses (start time of FSH stimulation) the dose was reduced to 50 µg s.c. daily until the day of human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) administration.
At the onset of menses, patients in both groups began ovarian stimulation with highly purified urofollitropin (Metrodin® HP 75, Serono, Milan, Italy). The stimulation protocol comprised 4 ampoules (300 IU) daily for 2 days and 2 ampoules (150 IU) daily for 4 days; the dose was then adjusted according to individual response as assessed by 17ß-oestradiol assays and ultrasound scanning performed every other day.
HCG (Profasi® HP; Serono), 10 000 IU, was administered when one or more follicles reached a maximal diameter >23 mm, with oestradiol concentrations corresponding to the number of follicles.
Transvaginal oocyte retrieval was performed under ultrasound guidance 34 h after HCG administration.
Two days after oocyte retrieval, a maximum of two embryos in women aged <35 years and a maximum of three in women aged >35 years were replaced via transcervical route. All remaining embryos presenting adequate morphology were cryopreserved for future use.
Luteal phase was sustained with natural progesterone in oil (Prontogest®; Amsa, Firenze, Italy), 50 mg i.m. daily from day 1 after oocyte retrieval.
Pregnancy was defined as the presence of one or more gestational sacs detected on ultrasound scan performed at least 4 weeks after embryo transfer. Biochemical pregnancies (a rise of ß-HCG with no further evidence of gestational sac on ultrasound scan) were not considered.
Parameters evaluated
The primary endpoint was the total number of oocytes retrieved from patients who received HCG. The following secondary endpoints were also recorded: number of FSH ampoules used, number of days of stimulation, 17ß-oestradiol concentration on the day of HCG administration, LH on day 7 of stimulation and on the day of HCG administration, progesterone on the day of HCG administration, number of follicles (total and >17 mm in diameter) on the day of HCG administration, number of oocytes collected, number of mature oocytes, fertilization rate, number of cleaved embryos, number of embryos transferred or frozen, number of clinical pregnancies, miscarriages and multiple pregnancies.
Sample size
A sample size of 66 patients in each group would have 90% power and a significance level of 0.05 to detect a difference in the mean number of oocytes of 2.3 (SD 6.5).
Assignment
Randomization was performed on an individual basis using sealed envelopes containing the name of one of the two treatments. The assignment took place when eligible patients agreed to participate, about 2 weeks before the day of triptorelin administration. Each envelope and allocation was sequentially numbered. The contents of the envelopes were only known to medical staff who had no involvement with the trial.
Statistical analysis
The analysis was performed with an SPSS program on an intention-to-treat basis and included all randomized patients who received HCG. Descriptive statistics have been performed for each variable, quantitative results were presented by using mean and standard deviations, qualitative results were summarized by using distribution of frequencies.
Before comparing the two groups, each variable was tested in order to check the normality distribution using KolmogorovSmirnov test, the comparisons of means was performed using a two-sample unpaired t-test or MannWhitney test. Proportions for the two groups were compared using a 2 test and a Fisher's exact test. A value of P < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.
The results being presented here represent the first interim analysis of this study, which is still ongoing.
The 95% confidence interval (CI) around the point estimates of the effect of treatment were calculated for all the primary and secondary endpoints.
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
|
Table I shows the characteristics of the ovarian stimulation in the two groups of patients. The number of FSH ampoules used was lower in group 2 (41 ± 26 versus 46.6 ± 25.3 in group 1, P < 0.03). Days of stimulation were significantly lower in group 2 (11 ± 1.3 versus 11.8 ± 1.5, P < 0.002). No significant difference was seen in oestradiol concentrations and in the number of follicles (total and >17 mm) seen on the day of HCG administration or of total oocytes collected. The number of mature oocytes was significantly higher in the 3.75 triptorelin group (Table I
), but no differences were detected in the number of fertilized oocytes or embryos obtained/transferred.
If ICSI patients only (in which an evaluation of oocyte nuclear maturity is feasible) are considered, no significant differences were found between the two groups in the number of metaphase II oocytes (12 ± 4.6 in group 1 versus 11 ± 3.5 in group 2).
LH concentrations were lower in the depot triptorelin group: on day 7 of stimulation the difference was not significant (0.91 ± 0.48 IU/l in group 1 versus 1.06 ± 0.41 IU/l in group 2: P = 0.06), but it became highly significant on the day of HCG administration (0.74 ± 0.28 IU/l in group 1 versus 1.01 ± 0.49 IU/l in group 2: P = 0.0001) (Table II). Progesterone on the day of HCG administration was low in both groups (0.52 ± 0.24 ng/ml in group 1 versus 0.43 ± 0.07 ng/ml in group 2).
|
|
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
A key benefit of GnRH agonist lies in its inhibiting effect on the endogenous secretion of LH. However, concern has been raised about excessive pituitary suppression, especially in poor responder patients, resulting in reduced ovarian response and a need for higher gonadotrophin dosage for stimulation. Furthermore, it is now well known that GnRH analogues have extra-pituitary collateral effects, including a direct effect on ovarian steroidogenesis. An inhibitory action has been suggested by various authors with in-vitro studies (Tureck et al., 1982; Parinaud et al., 1988
; Smitz et al., 1992
). In light of the above, using low doses of this kind of drug would seem appropriate (Loumaye et al., 1989
), though the minimal effective dose of GnRH agonists to prevent premature LH surge during ovarian stimulation has still not been clearly defined.
Some authors have suggested that only partial pituitary desensitization in an assisted reproduction procedure might be sufficient and have put forward protocols using reduced GnRH agonist doses. As regards depot formulation, both the full (3.75 mg) and half (1.87 mg) dose of GnRH agonist triptorelin seem to be equally effective in pituitary desensitization, with similar duration for both desensitization and recovery time (Balasch et al., 1992a).
No difference in terms of stimulation quality and IVF outcome was reported (Porcu et al., 1994, 1995
) in two different studies comparing a depot and a daily administered form of GnRH agonist (triptorelin 3.75 mg, 1 ampoule i.m. versus triptorelin 100 µg s.c. daily and leuprorelin 3.75 mg, 1 ampoule i.m. versus buserelin 0.3 mg s.c. daily respectively). The clinical results of our research confirm such studies, however, the daily dose administered during stimulation in those studies remained unchanged throughout treatment and was not reduced as in ours.
Indeed, there is some evidence that once the pituitary is suppressed, the dose of GnRH agonist needed to prevent the LH surge decreases with the length of treatment (Sandow and Donnez, 1990). Halving the dose of a daily administered GnRH agonist at the beginning of stimulation has been successfully performed both in normal (Elgendy et al., 1998
) and poor (Feldberg et al., 1994
; Olivennes et al., 1996
) responders, with no adverse effect on the quality of ovarian response to stimulation.
Our results, in agreement with Feldberg (Feldberg et al., 1994) and Olivennes (Olivennes et al., 1996
), show a shorter stimulation phase and a lower number of FSH ampoules administered in the low dose s.c. GnRH agonist group. However, unlike the above reports, we did not find better ovarian response with low dose GnRH agonist. In our study ovarian stimulation did not change with the two different GnRH agonist regimens, showing similar oestradiol concentrations and number of follicles recruited on the day of HCG administration and oocytes collected. The number of oocytes classified as `mature' via cumulusoocyte complex examination was significantly higher in the depot triptorelin group. However oocyte quality, as measured by the number of metaphase II oocytes (ICSI patients only), as well as fertilization and implantation rates were similar, with no apparent adverse effects of low dose triptorelin on embryo quality.
Elgendy et al. studied the effect of a reduced dose of a different GnRH agonist, nafarelin acetate, administered as an intranasal spray in young, normally-responding women (Elgendy et al., 1998). Unlike our study, they found no difference in the number of ampoules of gonadotrophins used nor in the length of stimulation required, though the number of oocytes and of embryos available for transfer or freezing were higher in the low dose GnRH agonist group. However, as in our study, the pregnancy rate was similar in both GnRH agonist regimens.
If we also consider the result of embryo freezing no difference was found in our study in the cumulative pregnancy rate between the two groups. This is not so surprising if we consider that the number and quality of embryos frozen were similar in both groups.
A daily dose of 50 µg triptorelin has proven sufficient to prevent the spontaneous LH surge (Broekmans et al., 1996; Janssens et al., 1998
). None of our patients seemed to have ovulated before oocyte retrieval: LH or progesterone assay performed on the day of HCG administration showed no evidence of an LH surge or premature luteinization. Moreover, some oocytes were found in every retrieval and the number of post-mature or degenerative oocytes was very low.
In our study, LH concentrations were lower in the depot triptorelin group: on day 7 of stimulation the difference was not significant, but it became highly significant on the day of HCG. This finding demonstrates that low doses of daily triptorelin induce a low degree of pituitary desensitization, yet this lower suppression does not seem to affect the clinical results of our study, which are similar in both groups.
Our findings confirm the report by Janssens et al. (2000), who compared a placebo with three doses of triptorelin: 100, 50 and 15 µg daily, and showed that 50 µg was equivalent to 100 µg in terms of IVF outcome (Janssens et al., 2000). A 15 µg dose was capable of preventing an LH surge, with a lower degree of pituitary suppression, but the IVF results appeared to be worse, although not significantly so.
We may postulate that probably in young woman (in our study all were aged 38 years), with normal ovarian reserve and hormonal pattern, the degree of pituitary suppression might be almost irrelevant as regards response to stimulation and treatment outcome. It would be of interest to check in women aged >38 years, when ovarian reserve begins to decrease, whether lowering the GnRH agonist dosage may bring some improvement in the success of assisted reproduction. Such a trial is now in progress in our centre.
It is well known that GnRH analogues exert a luteolytic effect (Smitz et al., 1988). In our study the implantation rate is similar in the two groups of patients. Since the same dose of exogenous progesterone was given in both groups as luteal support, no difference can be inferred as regards the effect of long- and short-acting GnRH analogues on luteal phase. This finding is in accordance with previous studies which showed no differences in hormonal profile in the luteal phase with both GnRH analogues (Porcu et al., 1994
). Despite the different duration of pituitary suppression, depot formulations do not seem to impair luteal function and fetal development, more than daily-administered forms. Luteal support is necessary with both formulations, as has recently been confirmed (Beckers et al., 2000
).
Our study confirms that a low dose of triptorelin is capable of inducing adequate pituitary suppression during ovarian stimulation. Although this dose does not significantly improve IVF outcome, the possibility of a shorter treatment, requiring a lower amount of gonadotrophins, should be taken into consideration on account of its economic advantage.
It may be sensible to adopt a case-by-case approach, weighing up the convenience of a single i.m. administration with the risk of higher treatment costs against the discomfort of multiple injections, albeit with lower costs.
Additional studies are needed to evaluate the benefit of further reducing the dose of GnRH agonist on the outcome of assisted reproduction.
![]() |
Notes |
---|
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Balasch, J., Jove, I.C., Moreno, V. et al. (1992b) The comparison of two gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists in an in-vitro fertilization program. Fertil. Steril., 58, 991994.[ISI][Medline]
Beckers, N.G., Laven, J.S., Eijkemans, M.J. et al. (2000) Follicular and luteal phase characteristics following early cessation of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist during ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization. Hum. Reprod., 15, 4349.
Ben-Rafael, Z., Lipitz, S., Bider, D. et al. (1991) Ovarian hyporesponsiveness in combined gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist and menotrophin therapy is associated with low serum follicle-stimulating hormone levels. Fertil. Steril., 55, 272275.[ISI][Medline]
Bramley, T.A., Menzies, G.S. and Baird, D.T. (1985) Specific binding of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone and an agonist to human corpus luteum homogenates: characterization, properties, and luteal phase levels. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., 61, 834841.[Abstract]
Broekmans, F.J., Hompes, P.G., Lambalk, C.B. et al. (1996) Short-term pituitary desensitization: effects of different doses of the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist triptorelin. Hum. Reprod., 11, 5560.[Abstract]
Casper, R.F. and Yen, S.S. (1979) Induction of luteolysis in the human with a long-acting analog of luteinizing hormone-releasing factor. Science, 205, 408410.[ISI][Medline]
Elgendy, M., Afnan, M., Holder, R. et al. (1998) Reducing the dose of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist on starting ovarian stimulation: effect on ovarian response and in-vitro fertilization outcome. Hum. Reprod., 13, 23822385.[Abstract]
Feldberg, D., Farhi, J., Ashkenazi, J. et al. (1994) Minidose gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist is the treatment of choice in poor responders with high follicle-stimulating hormone levels. Fertil. Steril., 62, 343346.[ISI][Medline]
Janssens, R.M., Vermeiden, J.P., Lambalk, C.B. et al. (1998) Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist dose-dependency of pituitary desensitization during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in IVF. Hum. Reprod., 13, 23862391.[Abstract]
Janssens, R.M., Lambalk, C.B., Vermeiden, J.P. et al. (2000) Dose-finding study of triptorelin acetate for prevention of a premature LH surge in IVF: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Hum. Reprod., 15, 23332340.
Latouche, J., Crumeyrolle-Arias, M., Jordan, D. et al. (1989) GnRH receptors in human granulosa cells: anatomical localization and characterization by autoradiographic study. Endocrinology, 125, 17391741.[Abstract]
Loumaye, E., Coen, G., Pampfer, S. et al. (1989) Use of a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist during ovarian stimulation leads to significant concentrations of peptide in follicular fluids. Fertil. Steril., 52, 256263.[ISI][Medline]
Olivennes, F., Righini, C., Fanchin, R. et al. (1996) A protocol using a low dose of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist might be the best protocol for patients with high follicle-stimulating hormone concentrations on day 3. Hum. Reprod., 11, 11691172.[Abstract]
Parinaud, J., Beaur, A., Bourreau, E. et al. (1988) Effect of a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist (buserelin) on steroidogenesis of cultured human preovulatory granulosa cells. Fertil. Steril., 50, 597602.[ISI][Medline]
Porcu, E., Dal Prato, L., Seracchioli, R. et al. (1994) Comparison between depot and standard release triptoreline in in vitro fertilization: pituitary sensitivity, luteal function, pregnancy outcome, and perinatal results. Fertil. Steril., 62, 126132.[ISI][Medline]
Porcu, E., Filicori, M., Dal Prato, L. et al. (1995) Comparison between depot leuprorelin and daily buserelin in IVF. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet., 12, 1519.[ISI][Medline]
Sandow, J. and Donnez, J. (1990) Clinical pharmacokinetics of LHRH analogues. Parthenon Publishing, Carnforth, Lancashire, UK.
Simon, A., Benshushan, A., Shushan, A. et al. (1994) A comparison between a standard and reduced dose of D-Trp-6-luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone administered after pituitary suppression for in-vitro fertilization. Hum. Reprod., 9, 18131817.[Abstract]
Smitz, J., Devroey, P., Camus, M. et al. (1988) The luteal phase and early pregnancy after combined GnRH-agonist/HMG treatment for superovulation in IVF or GIFT. Hum. Reprod., 3, 585590.[Abstract]
Smitz, J., Ron-El, R. and Tarlatzis, B. (1992) The use of gonadotrophin releasing hormone agonists for in-vitro fertilization and other assisted reproduction techniques: experience from three centres. Hum. Reprod., 7, 4966.[Abstract]
Tureck, R.W., Mastroianni, L. Jr, Blasco, L. et al. (1982) Inhibition of human granulosa cell progesterone secretion by a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., 54, 10781080.[ISI][Medline]
Zorn, J.R., Boyer, P. and Guichard, A. (1987) Never on a Sunday: programming for IVFET and GIFT [letter]. Lancet, i, 385386.
Submitted on December 4, 2000; accepted on March 15, 2001.