Comparison of IVF-ET Outcomes between GnRH Antagonist Multiple Dose Protocol and GnRH Agonist Long Protocol in Patients with High Basal FSH Level or Advanced Age

높은 기저 난포 자극 호르몬 수치를 가지는 환자와 고령 환자의 체외수정시술을 위한 과배란 유도에서 GnRH antagonist 다회 투여법과 GnRH agonist 장기요법의 효용성에 대한 연구

  • Kim, JY (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pochon CHA University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, NK (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pochon CHA University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Yoon, TK (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pochon CHA University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Cha, SH (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pochon CHA University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, YS (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pochon CHA University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Won, HJ (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pochon CHA University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Cho, JH (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pochon CHA University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Cha, SK (Fertility Center of CHA General Hospital) ;
  • Chung, MK (Fertility Center of CHA General Hospital) ;
  • Choi, DH (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pochon CHA University, College of Medicine)
  • 김지연 (포천중문 의과대학교 산부인과학교실) ;
  • 김낙근 (포천중문 의과대학교 산부인과학교실) ;
  • 윤태기 (포천중문 의과대학교 산부인과학교실) ;
  • 차선희 (포천중문 의과대학교 산부인과학교실) ;
  • 김유신 (포천중문 의과대학교 산부인과학교실) ;
  • 원형재 (포천중문 의과대학교 산부인과학교실) ;
  • 조정현 (포천중문 의과대학교 산부인과학교실) ;
  • 차수경 (차병원 여성의학연구소) ;
  • 정미경 (차병원 여성의학연구소) ;
  • 최동희 (포천중문 의과대학교 산부인과학교실)
  • Published : 2005.12.30

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the efficacy of GnRH antagonist multiple dose protocol (MDP) with that of GnRH agonist long protocol (LP) in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization in patients with high basal FSH (follicle stimulating hormone) level or old age, a retrospective analysis was done. Methods: Two hundred ninety four infertile women (328 cycles) who were older than 41 years of age or had elevated basal FSH level (> 8.5 mIU/mL) were enrolled in this study. The patients had undergone IVF-ET after controlled ovarian hyperstimulation using GnRH antagonist multiple dose protocol (n=108, 118 cycles) or GnRH agonist long protocol (n=186, 210 cycles). The main outcome measurements were cycle cancellation rate, consumption of gonadotropins, the number of follicles recruited and total oocytes retrieved. The number of fertilized oocytes and transferred embryos, the clinical pregnancy rates, and the implantation rates were also reviewed. And enrolled patients were divided into three groups according to their age and basal FSH levels; Group A - those who were older than 41 years of age, Group B - those with elevated basal FSH level (> 8.5 mIU/mL) and Group C - those who were older than 41 years of age and with elevated basal FSH level (> 8.5 mIU/mL). Poor responders were classified as patients who had less than 4 retrieved oocytes, or those with $E_2$ level <500 pg/mL on the day of hCG injection or those who required more than 45 ampules of exogenous gonadotropin for stimulation. Results: The cancellation rate was lower in the GnRH antagonist group than in GnRH agonist group, but not statistically significant (6.8% vs. 9.5%, p=NS). The amount of used gonadotropins was significantly lower in GnRH antagonist group than in agonist group ($34.8{\pm}11.3$ ampules vs. $44.1{\pm}13.4$ ampules, p<0.001). The number of follicles > 14 mm in diameter was significantly higher in agonist group than in antagonist group ($6.7{\pm}4.6$ vs. $5.0{\pm}3.4$, p<0.01). But, there were no significant differences in clinical pregnancy rate (24.5% in antagonist group vs. 27.4% in agonist group, p=NS) and implantation rate (11.4% in antagonist group vs. 12.0% in agonist group, p=NS) between two groups. Mean number of retrieved oocytes was significantly higher in GnRH agonist LP group than in GnRH antagonist MDP group ($5.4{\pm}3.5$ vs. $6.6{\pm}5.0$, p<0.0001). But, the number of mature and fertilized oocytes, and the number of good quality (grade I and II) and transferred embryos were not different between two groups. In each group A, B, and C, the rate of poor response did not differ according to stimulation protocols. Conclusions: In conclusion, for infertile women expected poor ovarian response such as who are old age or has elevated basal FSH level, a protocol including a controlled ovarian hyperstimulation using GnRH antagonist appears at least as effective as that using a GnRH agonist, and may offer the advantage of reducing gonadotropin consumption and treatment period. However, much work remains to be done in optimizing the GnRH antagonist protocols and individualizing these to different cycle characteristics.

Keywords

References

  1. Fleming R, Adam AH, Barlow DH, Black WP, MacNaughton MC, Coutts JR. A new systemic treatment for infertile women with abnormal hormone profiles. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1982; 89: 80-3 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1982.tb04642.x
  2. Loumaye E. The control of endogenous secretion of LH by gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists during ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Hum Reprod 1990; 5: 357-76 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137105
  3. Ben-Rafael Z, Lipitz S, Bider D, Maschiach S. Ovarian hyporesponsiveness in combined gonadotropinreleasing hormone agonist and menotropin therapy is associated with low serum follicle-stimulating hormone levels. Fertil Steril 1991; 55: 272-5 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)54114-4
  4. Akman MA, Erden HF, Tosun SB, Bayazit N, Aksoy E, Bahceci M. Addition of GnRH antagonist in cycles of poor responders undergoing IVF. Hum Reprod 2000; 15: 2145-7 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/15.10.2145
  5. Akman MA, Erden HF, Tosun SB, Bayazit N, Aksoy E, Bahceci M. Comparison of agonistic flare-upprotocol and antagonistic multiple dose protocol in ovarian stimulation of poor responders: results of a prospective randomized trial. Hum Reprod 2001; 16: 868-70 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/16.5.868
  6. Tarlatzis BC, Zepiridis L, Grimbizis G, Bontis J. Clinical management of low ovarian response to stimulation for IVF: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update 2003; 9: 61-76 https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmg007
  7. 김정훈, 조윤경, 목정은. 난소 기능 예측인자로서 Immunoradiometric Assay로 측정 된 기초 혈중 난포자극호르몬 농도의 임상적 유용성에 관한 연구. 대한산부회지 1995; 38: 1924-36
  8. Erenus M, Souves C, Raj amahendr an P, Leung S, Fluker M, Gomel V. The effect of embryo quality on subsequent pregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1991; 56: 707-10 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)54603-2
  9. Fasouliotis SJ, Simon A, Laufer N. Evaluation and treatment of low responders in assisted reproductive technology: A challenge to meet. J Assist Reprod Genet 2000; 17: 357-73 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009465324197
  10. Hugues JN, Cedrin DI. Revisiting gonadotrophinreleasing hormone agonist protocols and management of poor ovarian responses to gonadotrophins. Hum Reprod 1998; 4: 83-101
  11. 김문영, 정병준. GnRH Antagonist (Cetrotide) Short Protocol의 임상적 유용성에 관한 연구. 대한산부회지 2001; 28: 265-70
  12. Fluker MR. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes 2000; 7: 350-6 https://doi.org/10.1097/00060793-200012000-00010
  13. Albano C, Felberbaum RE, Smitz J, RiethmullerWinzen H, Engel J, Diedrich K, et al. Ovarian stimulation with HMG: results of a prospective randomized phase III European study comparing the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) antagonist ceterorelix and the LHRH-agonist buserelin. Hum Reprod 2000; 15: 526-31 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/15.3.526
  14. Olivennes F, Belaisch-Allart J, Emperaire JC, Dechaud H, Alvarez S, Moreau L, et al. Prospective, randomized, controlled study of in vitro fertilizationembryo transfer with a single dose of a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) antagonist (cetrorelix) or a depot formula of an LH-RH agonist (triptorelin). Fertil Steril 2000; 73: 314-20 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00524-5
  15. Garcia JE, Jones GS, Acosta AA, Wright G. HMG/HCG follicular maturation for oocytes aspiration: phase 11,1981. Fertil Steril 1983; 39: 174-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)46815-9
  16. 이방현, 김정훈, 오영미. 체외수정시술을 위한 과배란 유도에 있어 GnRH Antagonist 다회 투여법과 GnRH Agonist 장기요법의 비교 연구. 대한산부회지 2003; 46: 1202-8
  17. 이은실, 김동환, 배도환. 저반응군 환자에서 GnRH Antagonist를 이용한 과배란 유도의 효용성에 관한 연구. 대한산부회지 2003; 46: 1999-2004
  18. Borm G, Mannaerts B. The European Orgalutran Study Group. Treatment with the gonadotropinreleasing hormone antagonist Ganirelix in women undergoing ovarian stimulation with recombinant follicle stimulation hormone is effective, safe and convenient: results of a controlled, randomized multicenter trial. Hum Reprod 2000; 15: 1490-8 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/15.7.1490
  19. Cheung LP, Lam PM, Lok IH, Chiu TT, Yeung SY, Tier CC, et al. GnRH antagonist versus long GnRH agonist protocol in poor responders undergoing IVF: a randommized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2005; 20: 616-21 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh668
  20. Olivennes F, Kadhel P, Rufat P, Fanchin R, Fernandez H, Frydman R. Perinatal outcome of twin pregnancies obtained after in vitro fertilization: comparison with twin pregnancies obtained spontaneously or after ovarian stimulation. Fertil Steril 1996; 66: 105-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)58395-2
  21. Scott RT, Hoffnab GE, Oehninger S, Muasher SJ. Intercycle variability of day 3 follicle stimulating hormone levels and its effect on stimulation quality in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1990; 53: 297
  22. Van Rooij IA, Bancsi LF, Broekmans FJ, Looman CW, Habbema JD, te Velde ER. Women older than 40 years of age and those with elevated folliclestimulating hormone levels differ in poor response rate and embryo quality in in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2003; 79(3): 482-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(02)04839-2