Ovarian stimulation modalities in poor responders

Abstract: In a group of IVF/ICSI cycles, despite the appropriate ovarian stimulation, the number of oocytes collected is below theexpected value. This condition is defined as poor ovarian response (POR) to stimulation. POR brings the risk of cycle cancellationwith an estimated rate of 20%. Infertility experts are trying to improve cycle outcomes of POR cases with multiple modifications. Thisreview article will present the latest modifications on the management of POR. The studies performed for improving cycle outcomein POR cases were evaluated and their notable results were presented. The first intervention among infertility specialists is to makea standard definition for POR. The BOLOGNA criteria and the subsequent POSEIDON group definitions are the latest updates inPOR management. GnRH antagonists, estradiol priming, double stimulation, letrozole administration, DHEA, and herbal therapysupplementations are the recent modifications done to improve oocyte retrieval and subsequent embryo transfer for POR cases. Thisreview article presents the encouraging methods applied for POR cases to improve cycle outcome.

PDF

___

1. Ulug U, Ben-Shlomo I, Turan E, Erden HF, Akman MA et al. Conception rates following assisted reproduction in poor responder patients: a retrospective study in 300 consecutive cycles. Reprod Biomed Online. 2003;6(4):439-443. doi:10.1016/ S1472-6483(10)62164-5.
2. Timeva T, Milachich T, Antonova I, Arabaji T, Shterev A et al. Correlation between number of retrieved oocytes and pregnancy rate after in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm infection. Scientific World Journal. 2006;6:686-690. doi:10.1100/tsw.2006.145.
3. Merviel P, Cabry-Goubet R, Lourdel E, Devaux A, BelhadriMansouri N, et al. Comparative prospective study of 2 ovarian stimulation protocols in poor responders: effect on implantation rate and ongoing pregnancy. Reprod Health. 2015;12:52. doi: 10.1186/s12978-015-0039-2.
4. Oudendijk JF, Yarde F, Eijkemans MJ, Broekmans FJ, Broer SL. The poor responder in IVF: is the prognosis always poor ?: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2012;18(1):1-11. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmr037.
5. Keay SD. Poor ovarian response to gonadotrophin stimulation the role of adjuvant treatments. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2002;5(1):46-52.
6. Ubaldi F, Vaiarelli A, D’Anna R, Rienzi L. Management of poor responders in IVF: is there anything new? Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:352098. doi: 10.1155/2014/352098.
7. Giovanale V, Pulcinelli FM, Ralli E, Primiero FM, Caserta D. Poor responders in IVF: an update in therapy. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2015;31(4):253-257. doi: 10.3109/09513590.2014.987228.
8. Ferraretti AP, Gianaroli L.The Bologna criteria for the definition of poor ovarian responders: is there a need for revision? Hum Reprod. 2014;29(9):1842-1845. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deu139.
9. Su HI. Measuring ovarian function in young cancer survivors. Minerva Endocrinol. 2010;35(4):259-270.
10. Papathanasiou A. Implementing the ESHRE ‘poor responder’ criteria in research studies: methodologicalimplications. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(9):1835-1838. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deu135
11. Frydman R. Poor responders: still a problem. Fertil Steril. 2011;96(5):1057. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.09.051.
12. Drakopoulos P, Blockeel C, Stoop D, Camus M, de Vos M et al. Conventional ovarian stimulation and single embryo transfer for IVF/ICSI. How many oocytes do we need to maximize cumulative live birth rates after utilization of all fresh and frozen embryos? Hum Reprod. 2016;31(2):370-376. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dev316.
13. Poseidon Group (Patient-Oriented Strategies Encompassing IndividualizeD Oocyte Number), Alviggi C, Andersen CY, Buehler K, Conforti A, De Placido G et al. A new more detailed stratification of low responders to ovarian stimulation: from a poor ovarianresponse to a low prognosis concept. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(6):1452-1453. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.02.005.
14. Berkkanoglu M, Ozgur K. What is the optimum maximal gonadotropin dosage used in microdose flare-up cycles in poorresponders? Fertil Steril. 2010;94(2):662-665. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.03.027.
15. Weissman A, Farhi J, Royburt M, Nahum H, Glezerman M et al. Prospective evaluation of two stimulation protocols for low responders who were undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2003;79(4):886-892. doi:10.1016/S0015- 0282(02)04928-2.
16. 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(1):61-76. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmg007.
17. Craft I, Gorgy A, Hill J, Menon D, Podsiadly B. Will GnRH antagonists provide new hope for patients considered ‘difficult responders’ to GnRHagonist protocols? Hum Reprod. 1999;14(12):2959-2962. doi: 10.1093/humrep/14.12.2959.
18. Marci R, Caserta D, Dolo V, Tatone C, Pavan A et al. GnRH antagonist in IVF poor-responder patients: results of a randomized trial. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005;11(2):189-193. doi:10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60957-1.
19. Kyrou D, Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, Papanikolaou EG, Bontis J et al. How to improve the probability of pregnancy in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(3):749-766. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.12.077.
20. Griesinger G, Diedrich K, Tarlatzis BC, Kolibianakis EM. GnRH-antagonists in ovarian stimulation for IVF in patients with poor response to gonadotrophins, polycystic ovary syndrome, and risk of ovarian hyperstimulation: a metaanalysis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2006;13(5):628-638. doi:10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60652-9.
21. Pu D, Wu J, Liu J. Comparisons of GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol in poor ovarian responders undergoing IVF. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(10):2742-2749. doi: 10.1093/ humrep/der240.
22. Dor J, Seidman DS, Amudai E, Bider D, Levran D, et al. Adjuvant growth hormone therapy in poor responders to in-vitro fertilization: a prospectiverandomized placebocontrolled double-blind study. Hum Reprod. 1995;10(1):40-43. doi:10.1093/humrep/10.1.40.
23. Kim CH, Chae HD, Chang YS. Pyridostigmine cotreatment for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in low respondersundergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 1999;71(4):652-657. doi:10.1016/S0015- 0282(98)00527-5.
24. Battaglia C, Salvatori M, Maxia N, Petraglia F, Facchinetti F et al. Adjuvant L-arginine treatment for in-vitro fertilization in poor responder patients. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(7):1690-1697. doi:10.1093/humrep/14.7.1690.
25. Massin N, Cedrin-Durnerin I, Coussieu C, Galey-Fontaine J, Wolf JP et al. Effects of transdermal testosterone application on the ovarian response to FSH in poorresponders undergoing assisted reproduction technique--a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Hum Reprod. 2006;21(5):1204-1211. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dei481.
26. Al-Safi ZA, Liu H, Carlson NE, Chosich J, Lesh J et al. Estradiol Priming Improves Gonadotrope Sensitivity and ProInflammatory Cytokines in Obese Women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2015;100(11):4372-4381. doi: 10.1210/jc.2015-1946.
27. Reynolds KA, Omurtag KR, Jimenez PT, Rhee JS, Tuuli MG et al. Cycle cancellation and pregnancy after luteal estradiol priming in women defined as poor responders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(11):2981- 2989. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det306.
28. Lukaszuk K, Liss J, Kunicki M, Kuczynski W, Pastuszek E et al. Estradiol Valerate Pretreatment in Short Protocol GnRH-Agonist Cycles versus Combined Pretreatment with Oral Contraceptive Pills in Long Protocol GnRH-Agonist Cycles: A Randomised Controlled Trial. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:628056. doi: 10.1155/2015/628056.
29. Mak SM, Wong WY, Chung HS, Chung PW, Kong GW et al. Effect of mid-follicular phase recombinant LH versus urinary HCG supplementation in poor ovarian responders undergoing IVF - a prospective double-blinded randomized study. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017;34(3):258-266. doi: 10.1016/j. rbmo.2016.11.014.
30. Kuang Y, Chen Q, Hong Q, Lyu Q, Ai A et al. Double stimulations during the follicular and luteal phases of poor responders in IVF/ICSI programmes (Shanghai protocol). Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;29(6):684-691. doi: 10.1016/j. rbmo.2014.08.009.
31. Madani T, Hemat M, Arabipoor A, Khodabakhshi SH, Zolfaghari Z. Double mild stimulation and egg collection in the same cycle for management of poor ovarianresponders. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2019;48(5):329-333. doi: 10.1016/j.jogoh.2018.12.004.
32. Bechtejew TN, Nadai MN, Nastri CO, Martins WP. Clomiphene citrate and letrozole to reduce follicle-stimulating hormone consumption during ovarian stimulation: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;50(3):315-323. doi: 10.1002/uog.17442.
33. Bastu E, Buyru F, Ozsurmeli M, Demiral I, Dogan M et al. A randomized, single-blind, prospective trial comparing three different gonadotropin doses with or without addition of letrozole during ovulation stimulation in patients with poor ovarian response. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;203:30-34. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.05.027.
34. Malik N, Kriplani A, Agarwal N, Bhatla N, Kachhawa G et al. Dehydroepiandrosterone as an adjunct to gonadotropins in infertile Indian women with premature ovarian aging: A pilot study. J Hum Reprod Sci. 2015;8(3):135-141. doi: 10.4103/0974-1208.165142.
35. Yakin K, Urman B. DHEA as a miracle drug in the treatment of poor responders; hype or hope? Hum Reprod. 2011;26(8):1941- 1944. doi: 10.1093/humrep/der150.
36. Liu Y, Hu L, Fan L, Wang F. Efficacy of dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) supplementation for in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2018;34(3):178-183. doi: 10.1080/09513590.2017. 1391202.
37. Narkwichean A, Maalouf W, Campbell BK, Jayaprakasan K. Efficacy of dehydroepiandrosterone to improve ovarian response in women with diminishedovarian reserve: a meta-analysis. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2013;11:44. doi: 10.1186/1477-7827-11-44.
38. Zhang H, Qin F, Liu A, Sun Q, Wang Q, et al. Kuntai capsule attenuates premature ovarian failure through the PI3K/AKT/ mTOR pathway. J Ethnopharmacol. 2019;239:111885. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2019.111885.
39. Lian F, Jiang XY. Effect of kuntai capsule on the number of retrieved oocytes, high-quality oocytes and embryos in in vitro fertilization of poor ovarian response patients. Zhongguo Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Za Zhi. 2014;34(8):917-921.