Dataset Information

Efficacy of letrozole versus clomiphene citrate on ovulation induction in patients with polycystic ovarian syndrome.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To compare the efficacy of letrozole (LTZ) vs clomiphene citrate (CC) for ovulation induction in patients having polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS).

Methods

This randomized controlled trial was conducted at The Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Nishtar Medical University Hospital, Multan, Pakistan from January 2021 to June 2021. A total of 78 women aged 18 to 30 years, diagnosed having PCOS were enrolled. In Group-A, 39 women were given LTZ, 5mg for five days of menstrual cycle. In Group-B, 39 women were given CC, 100mg for five days of menstrual cycle. All patients underwent transvaginal scan (TVS) for the evaluation of efficacy in terms of ovulation induction.

Results

Overall mean age was noted to be 25.41±2.84 years. Most of the patients, 51 (65.4%) belonged to rural area of residence. There were 52 (66.7%) patients with BMI less than 25 kg/m². Overall, mean duration of infertility was found to be 2.62±0.74 years. Among 70 patients who completed the follow ups and analyzed regarding efficacy, in Group-A, efficacy was noted in 23 (59.0%) patients in comparison to 14 (35.9%) in Group-B (p=0.0413). Mean endometrial thickness was significantly better in Group-A versus Group-B (8.1±1.5 mm vs. 6.8±1.9 mm, p=0.0022).

Conclusion

Aiming ovulation induction, letrozole in comparison to clomiphene citrate was found to have significantly better efficacy among women having anovulatory PCOS.

SUBMITTER: Khakwani M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9247780 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of the combination of clomiphene citrate (CC) and letrozole to that of CC alone in inducing ovulation in infertile women with ovulatory dysfunction.MethodsA randomized controlled trial was conducted at a single academic medical center between November 2020 and December 2021. Anovulatory infertility females, aged 18 to 40, were evenly distributed by a computer-generated block of four into two treatment groups. A "combination group" received a daily dose of CC (50 mg) and letrozole (2.5 mg), while a "CC-alone group" received a daily dose of CC alone (50 mg). The study medications were administered on days 3 through 7 of menstrual cycle. The primary outcome was the ovulation rate, defined by serum progesterone levels exceeding 3 ng/mL at the mid-luteal phase. The secondary outcomes were ovulation induction cycle characteristics, endometrial thickness, conception rate, and adverse events.ResultsOne hundred women (50 per group) were enrolled in the study. The mean age was not significantly different in both groups: 31.8 years in the combination group and 32.4 years in the CC-alone groups (P = 0.54). The prevalence of polycystic ovary syndrome in the combination and CC-alone groups was 48% and 44%, respectively (P = 0.841). According to intention-to-treat analysis, the ovulation rates were 78% and 70% in the combination and CC-alone groups, respectively (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the mean endometrial thickness or the number of dominant follicles of the groups. No serious adverse events were observed in either group.ConclusionsOur study found no significant difference between the combination of CC and letrozole and CC alone in inducing ovulation in infertile women with ovulatory dysfunction in one cycle. The small number of live births precluded any meaningful statistical analysis. Further studies are needed to validate and extend our findings beyond the scope of the current study.Trial registrationThe study was registered at https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org with the following number: TCTR20201108004 and was approved on 08/11/2020.

Project description:Would letrozole as a primary ovulation induction agent generate better pregnancy rates than clomiphene citrate (CC) in subfertile women with anovulatory polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS)?Participants receiving letrozole as a primary treatment achieved a significantly (P = 0.022) higher clinical pregnancy rate per patient (61.2%) compared to CC (43.0%).According to a recent Cochrane systematic review (2014), letrozole appears to improve live-birth (LB) and pregnancy rates in anovulatory women with PCOS, compared to CC. However, the review concluded that the quality of evidence was low due to poor reporting of study methods and possible publication bias.This double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) included 159 participants between April 2007 and June 2014. Subjects were randomly allocated to either CC (n = 79) or letrozole (n = 80) in a 1:1 ratio. Both drugs were encapsulated to look identical. Randomization was performed in mixed blocks and stratified by patients' BMI (<30 and 30-35 kg/m2).The trial included subfertile women diagnosed with PCOS. Treatment started with one tablet (CC 50 mg, letrozole 2.5 mg) increasing to two in non-responders and continuing until pregnancy or for up to six ovulatory cycles. Non-responders were crossed over to the other treatment after a 6-week break. Cycles were initially monitored with ultrasound follicle tracking then mid-luteal serum progesterone measurement in subsequent cycles.Amongst the 159 participants included in the intention-to-treat analysis, four women conceived before treatment and six were lost-to-follow-up. The remaining 149 participants (74 on CC and 75 on letrozole) completed at least the first treatment. Women receiving letrozole achieved a significantly (P = 0.022; absolute difference [95% confidence interval] 18% [3-33%]) higher pregnancy rate (61.%) than those on CC (43%). The median number of treatment cycles received until pregnancy was significantly (log rank P = 0.038) smaller with letrozole (4[3-5] cycles) compared to CC (6[4-7] cycles). LB rates were not statistically (P = 0.089) different between the two groups, although there was a trend towards higher rates on letrozole (48.8%) compared to CC (35.4%). After the crossover, pregnancy and LB rates on letrozole (n = 45; 28.9 and 24.4%, respectively) were not statistically (P = 0.539 and P = 0.601) different from CC (n = 31; 22.6 and 19.4%).One possible limitation of this trial may be the exclusion of PCOS women with BMI > 35 kg/m2, which would limit the applicability of the results in this subgroup of PCOS. However, this group of women are generally excluded from treatment in the majority of fertility centres, especially in Europe, due to the associated challenges and risks.The results of this trial are consistent with the recent Cochrane systematic review. However, with its robust design, the current RCT provides more valid and compelling evidence for the superiority of letrozole over CC as a primary ovulation induction agent in PCOS women with 40% increase in pregnancy rates and with a shorter time-to-pregnancy. Furthermore, the participants in this RCT are a good representation of subfertile PCOS population receiving fertility treatment in Europe and worldwide. The results are therefore globally generalizable for clinical practice.This RCT was mainly funded by the R&D Funding Scheme of Derby Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. The study also received funds from School of Medicine, University of Nottingham. The Trust R&D department was involved in the development of the protocol and the running of the trial. The trial was sponsored and monitored by the University of Nottingham. The authors have no conflicts of interest.www.Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00478504.Registration was verified on 23/05/2007.25/04/2007.

Project description:BackgroundClomiphene is the current first-line infertility treatment in women with the polycystic ovary syndrome, but aromatase inhibitors, including letrozole, might result in better pregnancy outcomes.MethodsIn this double-blind, multicenter trial, we randomly assigned 750 women, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive letrozole or clomiphene for up to five treatment cycles, with visits to determine ovulation and pregnancy, followed by tracking of pregnancies. The polycystic ovary syndrome was defined according to modified Rotterdam criteria (anovulation with either hyperandrogenism or polycystic ovaries). Participants were 18 to 40 years of age, had at least one patent fallopian tube and a normal uterine cavity, and had a male partner with a sperm concentration of at least 14 million per milliliter; the women and their partners agreed to have regular intercourse with the intent of conception during the study. The primary outcome was live birth during the treatment period.ResultsWomen who received letrozole had more cumulative live births than those who received clomiphene (103 of 374 [27.5%] vs. 72 of 376 [19.1%], P=0.007; rate ratio for live birth, 1.44; 95% confidence interval, 1.10 to 1.87) without significant differences in overall congenital anomalies, though there were four major congenital anomalies in the letrozole group versus one in the clomiphene group (P=0.65). The cumulative ovulation rate was higher with letrozole than with clomiphene (834 of 1352 treatment cycles [61.7%] vs. 688 of 1425 treatment cycles [48.3%], P<0.001). There were no significant between-group differences in pregnancy loss (49 of 154 pregnancies in the letrozole group [31.8%] and 30 of 103 pregnancies in the clomiphene group [29.1%]) or twin pregnancy (3.4% and 7.4%, respectively). Clomiphene was associated with a higher incidence of hot flushes, and letrozole was associated with higher incidences of fatigue and dizziness. Rates of other adverse events were similar in the two treatment groups.ConclusionsAs compared with clomiphene, letrozole was associated with higher live-birth and ovulation rates among infertile women with the polycystic ovary syndrome. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00719186.).

Project description:Introduction: Which is optimal to treat clomiphene citrate-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome (CCR-PCOS) with LOD or metformin remains a problem. There are three inconsistent or even contradictory views. Objectives: The present meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Metformin with or without CC and to compare them with LOD with or without CC (Met/Met-CC vs. LOD/LOD-CC) in women with CCR-PCOS who also have anovulation. Data source: The PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched to identify relevant studies reported between 1 Jan 1966 and 31 Aug 2019; the search was updated on 17 May 2022. Study eligibility criteria: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CCR-PCOS that had considered Met/Met-CC and LOD/LOD-CC as the exposure variables and fertility as the main outcome variable. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: We assessed study quality using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The primary effectiveness outcome was live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate and the primary safety outcome was miscarriage rate. A fixed-effect meta-analysis was performed. The robustness of the results was assessed using sensitivity analyses. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were performed to examine the reasons for heterogeneity. Publication bias was examined using the funnel plot, Egger linear regression, and Begg rank correlation tests. The quality of this meta-analysis was estimated according to the GRADE approach. This meta-analysis has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021240156). Results: Among 71 potentially relevant studies, we included five RCTs in our meta-analysis. We found no difference in effectiveness between Met-CC and LOD in terms of live birth/ongoing pregnancy (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.87-1.21, z = 0.28; p = 0.780), and miscarriage rates (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.46-1.36, z = 0.86; p = 0.390). I2 tests results revealed moderate or no heterogeneity (I2 = 51.4%, p = 0.083; I2= 0.0%; p = 0.952). Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the results. Funnel plot, Egger linear regression, and Begg rank correlation tests implied no publication bias (p > 0.05). LOD was more expensive than Met (€1050 vs. €50.16). The evidence quality was moderate. Conclusion: There is no evidence on the difference in the outcomes between the two interventions regarding ovulation, pregnancy, and live birth. As LOD is an invasive procedure and carries inherent risks, the use of Met/Met-CC should be the second-line treatment for women with CCR-PCOS. Systematic Review Registration: identifier CRD42021240156.