Comparing Blastocyst Euploid Rates Between the Progestin-primed and Gonadotrophin-releasing Hormone Antagonist Protocols in Aneuploidy Genetic Testing: a Randomised Trial Protocol

Overview

Journal BMJ Open

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2024 Mar 23

PMID 38521533

Authors

He Li

Min Yu

Wenbi Zhang

Junling Chen

Hua Chen

Xiang Lu

Lu Li

Ernest H Y Ng

Xiaoxi Sun

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

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.

References

Evans M, Parikh T, DeCherney A, Csokmay J, Healy M, Hill M . Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of ovulation suppression with progestins compared with GnRH analogs in assisted reproduction cycles. Reprod Biomed Online. 2019; 38(5):691-698. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2018.12.044. View

Yu S, Long H, Chang H, Liu Y, Gao H, Zhu J . New application of dydrogesterone as a part of a progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol for IVF: a randomized controlled trial including 516 first IVF/ICSI cycles. Hum Reprod. 2018; 33(2):229-237. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dex367. View

Gardner D, Lane M, Schoolcraft W . Physiology and culture of the human blastocyst. J Reprod Immunol. 2002; 55(1-2):85-100. DOI: 10.1016/s0165-0378(01)00136-x. View

Ata B, Capuzzo M, Turkgeldi E, Yildiz S, La Marca A . Progestins for pituitary suppression during ovarian stimulation for ART: a comprehensive and systematic review including meta-analyses. Hum Reprod Update. 2020; 27(1):48-66. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmaa040. View

Al-Inany H, Youssef M, Ayeleke R, Brown J, Lam W, Broekmans F . Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016; 4:CD001750. PMC: 8626739. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001750.pub4. View

Kuang Y, Chen Q, Fu Y, Wang Y, Hong Q, Lyu Q . Medroxyprogesterone acetate is an effective oral alternative for preventing premature luteinizing hormone surges in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2015; 104(1):62-70.e3. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.03.022. View

Chen H, Teng X, Sun Z, Yao D, Wang Z, Chen Z . Comparison of the cumulative live birth rates after 1 in vitro fertilization cycle in women using gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol vs. progestin-primed ovarian stimulation: a propensity score-matched study. Fertil Steril. 2022; 118(4):701-712. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2022.06.012. View

Alexandru P, Guler Cekic S, Yildiz S, Turkgeldi E, Ata B . Progestins versus GnRH analogues for pituitary suppression during ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020; 40(6):894-903. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.01.027. View

Pai A, Sung Y, Li C, Lin C, Chang C . Progestin Primed Ovarian Stimulation (PPOS) protocol yields lower euploidy rate in older patients undergoing IVF. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2023; 21(1):72. PMC: 10408156. DOI: 10.1186/s12958-023-01124-3. View

10.

Carvalho F, Coonen E, Goossens V, Kokkali G, Rubio C, Meijer-Hoogeveen M . ESHRE PGT Consortium good practice recommendations for the organisation of PGT. Hum Reprod Open. 2020; 2020(3):hoaa021. PMC: 7257038. DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hoaa021. View

11.

Begueria R, Garcia D, Vassena R, Rodriguez A . Medroxyprogesterone acetate versus ganirelix in oocyte donation: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2019; 34(5):872-880. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dez034. View

12.

Kasaven L, Marcus D, Theodorou E, Jones B, Saso S, Naja R . Systematic review and meta-analysis: does pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy at the blastocyst stage improve live birth rate?. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2023; 40(10):2297-2316. PMC: 10504192. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-023-02866-0. View

13.

Viotti M . Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Chromosomal Abnormalities: Aneuploidy, Mosaicism, and Structural Rearrangements. Genes (Basel). 2020; 11(6). PMC: 7349251. DOI: 10.3390/genes11060602. View

14.

Dong J, Wang Y, Chai W, Hong Q, Wang N, Sun L . The pregnancy outcome of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation using 4 versus 10 mg of medroxyprogesterone acetate per day in infertile women undergoing in vitro fertilisation: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG. 2017; 124(7):1048-1055. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.14622. View

15.

Zolfaroli I, Ferriol G, Mora J, Cano A . Impact of progestin ovarian stimulation on newborn outcomes: a meta-analysis. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020; 37(5):1203-1212. PMC: 7244671. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-020-01755-0. View

16.

Cornelisse S, Zagers M, Kostova E, Fleischer K, van Wely M, Mastenbroek S . Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (abnormal number of chromosomes) in in vitro fertilisation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020; 9:CD005291. PMC: 8094272. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005291.pub3. View

17.

Massin N . New stimulation regimens: endogenous and exogenous progesterone use to block the LH surge during ovarian stimulation for IVF. Hum Reprod Update. 2017; 23(2):211-220. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmw047. View

18.

Hipp H, Crawford S, Boulet S, Toner J, Sparks A, Kawwass J . Trends and Outcomes for Preimplantation Genetic Testing in the United States, 2014-2018. JAMA. 2022; 327(13):1288-1290. PMC: 8984775. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2022.1892. View

19.

De Geyter C, Calhaz-Jorge C, Kupka M, Wyns C, Mocanu E, Motrenko T . Corrigendum. ART in Europe, 2015: results generated from European registries by ESHRE. Hum Reprod Open. 2020; 2020(3):hoaa038. PMC: 7508022. DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hoaa038. View

20.

Wang N, Lin J, Zhu Q, Fan Y, Wang Y, Fu Y . Comparison of neonatal outcomes and live-birth defects after progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: A large retrospective cohort study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018; 97(34):e11906. PMC: 6112954. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000011906. View