Dataset Information

A questionnaire-based audit to assess overall experience and convenience among patients using vaginal progesterone tablets (Lutigest®) for luteal phase support during IVF treatment.

ABSTRACT: Purpose:The aim of this audit was to assess the overall experience and patient convenience of vaginal progesterone tablets (Lutigest®, marketed as Endometrin® in the USA) used for luteal phase support (LPS) during in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment. Patients and methods:This questionnaire-based audit included responses from 100 patients undergoing IVF treatment at six IVF clinics in the UK from September 2015 to November 2016. Fourteen days after starting progesterone supplementation for LPS during their IVF treatment, patients rated overall experience and perceived convenience of the prescribed progesterone by completing a questionnaire. Results:Of the 100 patients included, 96 received vaginal progesterone tablets for LPS. Overall, 53.1% (51/96) indicated that the progesterone tablets were "very easy" to use; 42.7% (41/96) and 44.8% (43/96) found it "very convenient" or "neither convenient or inconvenient" to administer the tablet, respectively. Overall experience with using progesterone tablets was rated as "very comfortable" by 34.4% (33/96) and "neither comfortable or uncomfortable" by 56.3% (54/96) of patients. The applicator was used by 93.8% (90/96) of patients to administer the tablet, and 86.5% (83/96) indicated that the applicator was easy to clean for repeated use. A total of 33 patients had a previous IVF cycle during which they were prescribed vaginal progesterone pessaries for LPS. Compared with progesterone pessaries, the majority found treatment with progesterone tablets to be more comfortable (60.6%; 20/33) and more convenient (57.6%; 19/33) and indicated that the progesterone tablet was their preferred progesterone formulation for LPS (60.6%; 20/33). Conclusion:These findings offer insights into real-world patient experiences with the progesterone vaginal tablet formulation. The results suggest overall patient convenience, ease, and comfort with using progesterone vaginal tablets for LPS. The majority of patients found progesterone vaginal tablets more convenient and comfortable to use compared with progesterone pessaries.

SUBMITTER: Heine P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5726362 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A questionnaire-based audit to assess overall experience and convenience among patients using vaginal progesterone tablets (Lutigest<sup>®</sup>) for luteal phase support during IVF treatment.

Heine Polly P Sellar Laura L Whitten Sue S Bajaj Priti P

Patient related outcome measures 20171208

<h4>Purpose</h4>The aim of this audit was to assess the overall experience and patient convenience of vaginal progesterone tablets (Lutigest<sup>®</sup>, marketed as Endometrin<sup>®</sup> in the USA) used for luteal phase support (LPS) during in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>This questionnaire-based audit included responses from 100 patients undergoing IVF treatment at six IVF clinics in the UK from September 2015 to November 2016. Fourteen days after starting ...[more]

PMID: 29263708

Similar Datasets

Project description:Study questionIs the ongoing pregnancy rate with a new aqueous formulation of subcutaneous progesterone (Prolutex(®)) non-inferior to vaginal progesterone (Endometrin(®)) when used for luteal phase support of in vitro fertilization?Summary answerIn the per-protocol (PP) population, the ongoing pregnancy rates per oocyte retrieval at 12 weeks of gestation were comparable between Prolutex and Endometrin (41.6 versus 44.4%), with a difference between groups of -2.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) -9.7, 4.2), consistent with the non-inferiority of subcutaneous progesterone for luteal phase support.What is known alreadyLuteal phase support has been clearly demonstrated to improve pregnancy rates in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). Because of the increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome associated with the use of hCG, progesterone has become the treatment of choice for luteal phase support.Study design, size, durationThis prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled, parallel-group, multicentre, two-arm, non-inferiority study was performed at eight fertility clinics. A total of 800 women, aged 18-42 years, with a BMI of ≤ 30 kg/m(2), with <3 prior completed assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles, exhibiting baseline (Days 2-3) FSH of ≤ 15 IU/L and undergoing IVF at 8 centres (seven private, one academic) in the USA, were enrolled from January 2009 through June 2011.Participants/materials, setting, methodsIn total, 800 women undergoing IVF were randomized after retrieval of at least three oocytes to an aqueous preparation of progesterone administered subcutaneously (25 mg daily) or vaginal progesterone (100 mg bid daily). Randomization was performed to enrol 100 patients at each site using a randomization list that was generated with Statistical Analysis Software (SAS(®)). If a viable pregnancy occurred, progesterone treatment was continued up to 12 weeks of gestation.Main results and the role of chanceUsing a PP analysis, which included all patients who received an embryo transfer (Prolutex = 392; Endometrin = 390), the ongoing pregnancy rate per retrieval for subcutaneous versus vaginal progesterone was 41.6 versus 44.4%, with a difference between groups of -2.8% (95% CI -9.7, 4.2), consistent with the non-inferiority of subcutaneous progesterone for luteal phase support. In addition, rates of initial positive β-hCG (56.4% subcutaneous versus 59.0% vaginal; 95% CI -9.5, 4.3), clinical intrauterine pregnancy with fetal cardiac activity (42.6 versus 46.4%; 95% CI -10.8, 3.2), implantation defined as number of gestational sacs divided by number of embryos transferred (33.2 versus 35.1%; 95% CI -7.6, 4.0), live birth (41.1 versus 43.1%; 95% CI -8.9, 4.9) and take-home baby (41.1 versus 42.6%; 95% CI -8.4, 5.4) were comparable. Both formulations were well-tolerated, with no difference in serious adverse events. Analysis with the intention-to-treat population also demonstrated no difference for any outcomes between the treatment groups.Limitations, reasons for cautionThe conclusions are limited to the progesterone dosing regimen studied and duration of treatment for the patient population examined in this study.Wider implications of the findingsSubcutaneous progesterone represents a novel option for luteal phase support in women undergoing IVF who for personal reasons prefer not to use a vaginal preparation or who wish to avoid the side effects of vaginal or i.m. routes of administration.Study funding/competing interestsThe study was funded by Institut Biochimique SA (IBSA). CAJ, BC, ST and CJ are employees of IBSA. FH currently consults for IBSA.Trial registration numberNCT00828191.

Project description:BackgroundStudies have suggested that controlled ovarian hyperstimulation adversely affects endometrial receptivity due to advanced endometrial maturation. This adverse effect is mainly attributed to supraphysiological levels of both estrogen and progesterone identified in stimulated cycles. There is a paucity of published data investigating the very early luteal steroid profile following hCG trigger.Aim of the studyThis prospective, observational study was undertaken to determine the increase in serum progesterone levels after human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) trigger in stimulated IVF/ICSI cycles.Materials and methodsThis proof-of-concept study included 11 patients requiring ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI and who planned to avail of pre-implantation genetic screening with embryo vitrification of their biopsied embryos at blastocyst stage. For each study participant, five additional blood samples were drawn at the following specific times in the stimulation cycle, on the morning (10.00-12.00) of the assigned day to induce final oocyte maturation with hCG trigger, immediately prior to administration of hCG for final oocyte maturation, 1 h, 2 h, and 36 h post hCG trigger. A prediction model, the Gompertz curve, was used to determine serum progesterone levels at intervals between the 2 h post hCG trigger sample and the day of oocyte retrieval.ResultsStatistically significant increases in serum progesterone levels were identified following hCG administration as early as 1 h following trigger (P4 0.57 ng/ml, p < 0.05), 2 h following trigger (P4 0.88 ng/ml, p < 0.001) and on the day of oocyte retrieval (P4 9.68 ng/ml, p < 0.001). According to our prediction model, the Gompertz curve, the projected serum progesterone level at 4 h post trigger would have achieved a level of 1.45 ng/ml, 8 h post trigger of 3.04 ng/ml, and 12 h post trigger of 4.8 ng/ml. The very early and significant increases in serum progesterone following hCG trigger are clearly demonstrated in this study.ConclusionThe endometrium is undoubtedly exposed to rapidly increasing serum progesterone levels post hCG trigger that would not be identified until much later in natural menstrual cycles.Trial registration numberThis study is registered with clinicaltrials.gov under the identifier NCT04417569.

Dataset Information

A questionnaire-based audit to assess overall experience and convenience among patients using vaginal progesterone tablets (Lutigest®) for luteal phase support during IVF treatment.

Publications

A questionnaire-based audit to assess overall experience and convenience among patients using vaginal progesterone tablets (Lutigest<sup>®</sup>) for luteal phase support during IVF treatment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets