Dataset Information

Affordable ART for developing countries: a cost benefit comparison of low dose stimulation versus high dose GnRH antagonist protocol.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: Low dose stimulation (LS) is emerging as an alternative regime in assisted reproductive technology (ART). This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of LS to the high dose GnRH antagonist (Atg) regime. METHODS: An observational prospective study conducted at an academic infertility unit from January to June 2007. Outcome measures included the numbers of follicles, oocytes and embryos, morphological quality of oocytes and embryos, clinical pregnancy (PR) and complication rate. RESULT: Ninety five first attempt ICSI cycles consisting of 54 LS and 41 Atg were analyzed. Subjects in both groups had comparable sociodemographics and reproductive characteristics. LS generated significantly fewer follicles, total oocytes, mature oocytes (all p < 0.0005) and immature oocytes (p = 0.009) than Atg but the number of excellent quality oocytes was similar. Significantly fewer embryos were available in LS although the proportion of usable embryos was higher, 83.2% vs. 67.0% for Atg. Mean embryos per transfer was 2.0 +/- 1.1 vs. 2.6 +/- 1.0 (p = 0.02) for a clinical PR per transfer of 43.2% vs. 50.0% for LS and Atg respectively. LS regime had a shorter gonadotrophin administration period with resultant COH cost one third of the Atg protocol (both, p < 0.0005). The cost per live birth per started cycle worked out to be USD 13,200 and 24,900 for LS and Atg respectively. Furthermore, LS had fewer incidences of OHSS compared to the Atg regime, 3.7% vs. 12.2%. CONCLUSION: LS cost benefits included lower amounts of gonadotrophin used and fewer injections. It is a viable alternative regime in producing comparable clinical PR at lower cost and less complication in ART.

SUBMITTER: Noorashikin M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2596680 | biostudies-other | 2008 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) has been shown to negatively influence endometrial receptivity. Reducing the GnRH-ant dose during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) when using a GnRH-ant protocol may be beneficial to embryo implantation. However, whether or not the minimum daily GnRH-ant dose should be individualized remains uncertain. In this retrospective study, we aimed to elucidate the feasibility and effectiveness of moderately reducing the daily GnRH-ant dose to 0.125 mg, and then adjusting the dose to 0.25 mg based on subsequent luteinizing hormone (LH) levels. Of the 434 patients analyzed in this study, 209 received our new flexible low-dose GnRH-ant protocol (Group 1) and 225 received a conventional GnRH-ant protocol with a fixed daily dose of 0.25 mg (Group 2). Furthermore, 105 and 114 cycles from groups 1 and 2 received fresh embryo transfer. In Group 1, 30 patients whose dose of 0.125 mg GnRH-ant was adjusted according to their LH levels and 179 patients who received consistently low doses were further divided into subgroups 1 and 2, respectively. Neither the number of retrieved oocytes and available embryos nor the implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, and ongoing pregnancy rate significantly differed between the two groups. However, GnRH-ant dose and stimulation duration were much lower and shorter in Group 1 than in Group 2 (p < 0.05). Subgroup 1 exhibited higher basal follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and lower antral follicle count (AFC) than subgroup 2 significantly. The number of retrieved oocytes and available embryos were lower in subgroup 1 than in subgroup 2 (6.83 ± 3.28 vs. 11.83 ± 4.82, 2.93 ± 1.86 vs. 4.99 ± 3.46, respectively, p < 0.05), while more canceled cycles for pre-ovulation occurred in subgroup 1 than in subgroup 2 (3/30 vs. 1/179, p < 0.05). The results showed that the flexible low-dose GnRH-ant protocol was as effective as the conventional fixed-dose GnRH-ant protocol with 0.25 mg per day for most patients with normal ovarian reserve. This retrospective analysis and the small sample size are the main limitations of this study, and a large sample RCT will be carried out in the future.

Project description:BackgroundA consensus has been reached on the preferred primary outcome of all infertility treatment trials, which is the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR). Some recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies have compared the effectiveness of GnRH-antagonist and GnRH-agonist protocols but showed inconsistent results. Studies commonly used conservative estimates and optimal estimates to described the CLBR of one incomplete assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycle and there are not many previous studies with data of the complete cycle to compare CLBRs in GnRH-antagonist versus GnRH-agonist protocols.MethodsA total of 18,853 patients have completed their first IVF cycle including fresh and subsequent frozen-thawed cycles during 2016-2019, 16,827 patients were treated with GnRH-a long and 2026 patients with GnRH-ant protocol. Multivariable logistic analysis was used to evaluate the difference of GnRH-a and GnRH-ant protocol in relation to CLBR. Utilized Propensity Score Matching(PSM) for sampling by up to 1:1 nearest neighbor matching to adjust the numerical difference and balance the confounders between groups.ResultsBefore PSM, significant differences were observed in baseline characteristics and the CLBR was 50.91% in the GnRH-a and 33.42% in the GnRH-ant (OR = 2.07; 95%CI: 1.88-2.28; P < 0.001). Stratified analysis showed the CLBR of GnRH-ant was lower than GnRH-a in suboptimal responders(46.89 vs 27.42%, OR = 2.34, 95%CI = 1.99-2.74; P < 0.001) and no differences of CLBR were observed in other patients between protocols. After adjusting for potential confounders, multivariable logistic analysis found the CLBR of GnRH-ant group was lower than that of GnRH-a group (OR = 2.11, 95%CI:1.69-2.63, P < 0.001). After PSM balenced the confounders between groups, the CLBR of GnRH-a group was higher than that of GnRH-ant group in suboptimal responders((38.61 vs 28.22%, OR = 1.60, 95%CI = 1.28-1.99; P < 0.001) and the normal fertilization rate and number of available embryo in GnRH-a were higher than these of GnRH-ant groups in suboptimal responders (77.39 vs 75.22%; 2.86 ± 1.26 vs 2.61 ± 1.22; P < 0.05). No significant difference was observed in other patients between different protocols.ConclusionsIt is crucial to optimize the utilization of protocols in different ovarian response patients and reconsider the field of application of GnRH-ant protocols in China.

Project description:Objective: To compare the cumulative live birth rates (cLBRs) after the first assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycle using flexible gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH)-antagonist protocol vs. standard long GnRH agonist protocol for controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) in infertile women with different ages and ovarian reserve. Methods: Women who underwent ART treatment at our center between June 1st, 2015 and December 31st, 2018 were screened. Among them, only women who underwent their first COS cycle with flexible GnRH antagonist protocol or standard long GnRH agonist protocol were included in this study. The main outcome measurement was cLBR. Results: A total of 4,402 patients were eligible for the analysis, of whom, 2,762 patients used the GnRH agonist protocol and 1,640 patients used the GnRH antagonist protocol. The cLBRs of women in the antagonist protocol group and long agonist protocol group were 45.3 and 50.0%, respectively. Subgroup multivariable regression analysis showed that, in patients with low ovarian reserve (AFC ? 7), the cLBR was significantly lower in the antagonist group than in the long agonist protocol group [OR (95% CI) 0.62 (0.41, 0.94)], which effect was more robust in younger patients (<30 y) [OR (95% CI) 0.29 (0.11, 0.74)]. The analysis also revealed remarkably lower cLBR in patients above 40 years regardless of their AFC, although the difference was not statistically significant. However, in patients with high ovarian reserve (AFC >24), the cLBR was higher in cycles with antagonist protocol than with the long agonist protocol [OR (95% CI) 1.43 (0.96, 2.12)], and the effect was of statistical significance in younger patients (< 30 y) [OR (95% CI) 1.78 (1.07, 2.96)]. Conclusion: The present study suggests that the flexible GnRH antagonist protocol might not be suitable for patients with low ovarian reserve (AFC ? 7) or patients aged over 40 years. However, flexible GnRH antagonist protocol might be strongly recommended for patients under 30 years old and with high ovarian reserve (AFC > 24). For the rest groups of patients in the present cohort, antagonist protocol was slightly favored because it had lower OHSS in general and in patients with poly-cystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) according to previous publications.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve.MethodsWe searched the PubMed (1992-2016), Cochrane Library (1999-2016), Web of Science (1950-2016), Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM, 1979-2016), and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI, 1994-2016). Any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared GnRH-ant protocol and GnRH-a long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve were included, and data were extracted independently by two reviewers. The meta-analysis was performed by Revman 5.3 software.ResultsTwenty-nine RCTs (6399 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. Stimulation days (mean difference (MD) [95% confidence interval (CI)] = -0.8 [-1.36, -0.23], P = 0.006), gonadotrophin (Gn) dosage (MD [95% CI] = -3.52 [-5.56, -1.48], P = 0.0007), estradiol (E2) level on the day of human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) administration (MD [95% CI] = -365.49 [-532.93, -198.05], P<0.0001), the number of oocytes retrieved (MD [95% CI] = -1.41 [-1.84, -0.99], P<0.00001), the embryos obtained (MD [95% CI] = -0.99 [-1.38, -0.59], P<0.00001), incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (OR [95% CI] = 0.69 [0.57, 0.83], P<0.0001) were statistically significantly lower in GnRH-ant protocol than GnRH-a long protocol. However, the clinical pregnancy rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.90 [0.80, 1.01], P = 0.08), ongoing pregnancy rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.88 [0.77, 1.00], P = 0.05), live birth rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.95 [0.74, 1.09], P = 0.27), miscarriage rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.98 [0.69, 1.40], P = 0.93), and cycle cancellation rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.86 [0.52, 1.44], P = 0.57) showed no significant differences between the two groups.ConclusionGnRH-ant protocol substantially decreased the incidence of OHSS without influencing the pregnancy rate and live birth rate compared to GnRH-a long protocol among patients with normal ovarian reserve.

Project description:BackgroundThe GnRH agonist long-acting protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol are widely used in ovarian stimulation. Which protocol eliciting higher live birth rate for IVF/ICSI patients with different ages, different ovarian reserves and different body mass index (BMI) has not been studied. However, among these protocols, the one that elicits higher live birth in IVF/ICSI patients with different ages, ovarian reserves and body mass indexes (BMI) has not been identified.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study about 8579 women who underwent the first IVF-ET from January, 2018 to August, 2021. Propensity Score Matching (PSM) was used to improve the comparability between two protocols.ResultsAfter PSM, significant higher live birth rates were found in the GnRH agonist long-acting protocol compared to GnRH antagonist protocol (44.04% vs. 38.32%) (p<0.001). Stratified analysis showed that for those with AMH levels between 3 ng/ml and 6 ng/ml, with BMI ≥ 24 kg/m2 and were aged ≥ 30 years old, and for those women with BMI < 24kg/m2 and were aged ≥30 years whose AMH levels were ≤ 3ng/ml, the GnRH agonist long-acting protocol was more likely to elicit live births [OR (95%CI), 2.13(1.19,3.80)], [OR (95%CI), 1.41(1.05,1.91)]. However, among women with BMI ≥ 24kg/m2 and were aged ≥30 years whose AMH levels were ≤ 3ng/ml, the GnRH agonist long-acting protocol had a lower possibility of eliciting live births [OR (95%CI), 0.54(0.32,0.90)]. Also, among women with AMH levels between 3 ng/ml and 6 ng/ml, with BMI ≥ 24 kg/m2 and with age < 30 years and for those with AMH levels between 3 ng/ml and 6 ng/ml, regardless of age, and with BMI<24kg/m2,, the possibility of live births was similar between the two protocols [OR (95%CI), 1.06(0.60,1.89)], [OR (95%CI), 1.38(0.97,1.97)], [OR (95%CI), 0.99(0.72,1.37)]. Among the women with AMH levels ≤ 3 ng/ml and with were aged < 30years, regardless of BMI, the possibility of live birth was similar between the two protocols [OR (95%CI), 1.02(0.68,1.54)], [OR (95%CI), 1.43(0.68,2.98)]. Moreover, among women with AMH levels ≥ 6ng/ml, the possibility of live birth was similar between the two protocols [OR (95%CI),1.42(0.75,2.69)], [OR (95%CI),1.02(0.19,5.35)], [OR (95%CI), 1.68(0.81,3.51)], [OR (95%CI), 0.51(0.10,2.55)].ConclusionsThe suitability of the GnRH agonist long-acting protocol or GnRH antagonist protocol to infertility patients is dependent on specific biological characteristics of the patients.

Dataset Information

Affordable ART for developing countries: a cost benefit comparison of low dose stimulation versus high dose GnRH antagonist protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets