STUDY QUESTION Does letrozole co-treatment during ovarian stimulation with gonadotrophins for IVF reduce the proportion of women with premature progesterone levels above 1.5 ng/ml at the time of triggering final oocyte maturation? SUMMARY ANSWER The proportion of women with premature progesterone above 1.5 ng/ml was not significantly affected by letrozole co-treatment. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY IVF creates multiple follicles with supraphysiological levels of sex steroids interrupting the endocrine milieu and affects the window of implantation. Letrozole is an effective aromatase inhibitor, normalizing serum oestradiol, thereby ameliorating some of the detrimental effects of IVF treatment. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A randomized, double-blinded placebo-controlled trial investigated letrozole intervention during stimulation for IVF with FSH. The trial was conducted at four fertility clinics at University Hospitals in Denmark from August 2016 to November 2018. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS A cohort of 129 women with expected normal ovarian reserve (anti-Müllerian hormone 8–32 nmol/l) completed an IVF cycle with fresh embryo transfer and received co-treatment with either 5 mg/day letrozole (n = 67) or placebo (n = 62), along with the FSH. Progesterone, oestradiol, FSH, LH and androgens were analysed in repeated serum samples collected from the start of the stimulation to the mid-luteal phase. In addition, the effect of letrozole on reproductive outcomes, total FSH consumption and adverse events were assessed. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE The proportion of women with premature progesterone >1.5 ng/ml was similar (6% vs 0% (OR 0.0, 95% CI [0.0; 1.6], P = 0.12) in the letrozole versus placebo groups, respectively), whereas the proportion of women with mid-luteal progesterone >30 ng/ml was significantly increased in the letrozole group: (59% vs 31% (OR 3.3, 95% CI [1.4; 7.1], P = 0.005)). Letrozole versus placebo decreased oestradiol levels on the ovulation trigger day by 68% (95% CI [60%; 75%], P < 0.0001). Other hormonal profiles, measured as AUC, showed the following results. The increase in LH in the letrozole group versus placebo group was 38% (95% CI [21%; 58%], P < 0.0001) and 34% (95% CI [11%; 61%], P = 0.006) in the follicular and luteal phases, respectively. In the letrozole group versus placebo group, testosterone increased by 79% (95% CI [55%; 105%], P < 0.0001) and 49% (95% CI [30%; 72%], P < 0.0001) in the follicular and luteal phases, respectively. In the letrozole group versus placebo group, the increase in androstenedione was by 85% (95% CI [59%; 114%], P < 0.0001) and 69% (95% CI [48%; 94%], P < 0.0001) in the follicular and luteal phases, respectively. The ongoing pregnancy rate was similar between the letrozole and placebo groups (31% vs 39% (risk-difference of 8%, 95% CI [−25%; 11%], P = 0.55)). No serious adverse reactions were recorded in either group. The total duration of exogenous FSH stimulation was 1 day shorter in the intervention group, significantly reducing total FSH consumption (mean difference −100 IU, 95% CI [−192; −21], P = 0.03). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Late follicular progesterone samples were collected on the day before and day of ovulation triggering for patient logistic considerations, and the recently emerged knowledge about diurnal variation of progesterone was not taken into account. The study was powered to detect hormonal variations but not differences in pregnancy outcomes. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Although the use of letrozole has no effect on the primary outcome, the number of women with a premature increase in progesterone on the day of ovulation triggering, the increased progesterone in the mid-luteal phase due to letrozole may contribute to optimizing the luteal phase endocrinology. The effect of letrozole on increasing androgens and reducing FSH consumption may be used in poor responders. However, the effect of letrozole on implantation and ongoing pregnancy rates should be evaluated in a meta-analysis or larger randomized controlled trial (RCT). STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) Funding was received from EU Interreg for ReproUnion and Ferring Pharmaceuticals, and Roche Diagnostics contributed with assays. N.S.M. and A.P. have received grants from Ferring, Merck Serono, Anecova and Gedeon Richter, and/or personal fees from IBSA, Vivoplex, ArtPred and SPD, outside the submitted work. The remaining authors have no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS NCT02939898 and NCT02946684 TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE 15 August 2016. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT 22 August 2016.
STUDY QUESTION What are the downstream endocrine and paracrine consequences of letrozole (LZ) cotreatment during ovarian stimulation and is follicle growth and recruitment affected? SUMMARY ANSWER Letrozole cotreatment induces marked changes in both the follicular and luteal phase endocrinology causing potentiation of follicle diameter and an improved corpus luteum function without affecting the secondarily recruited follicle cohort. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Letrozole is a third-generation aromatase inhibitor that is well-established as an effective ovulatory agent, while its possible benefits in standard in vitro fertilization protocols are less thoroughly investigated. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This study included a double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized study with LZ or placebo intervention during ovarian stimulation for IVF treatment, an observational preceding baseline natural cycle and a succeeding follow-up visit. Participants were enrolled between August 2016 and November 2018. Data from the randomized, stimulated cycle were part of a larger RCT, which was previously published. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS The study was conducted at a public fertility clinic at Herlev Hospital, Denmark, including 31 healthy, normo-responding women eligible for IVF treatment. They underwent a natural baseline cycle and were subsequently randomized to receive either LZ 5 mg (n = 16) or placebo (n = 15) daily during ovarian stimulation from cycle day (CD) 2–3 until induction of ovulation. Throughout both cycles, monitoring was performed every third day with transvaginal ultrasound for assessment of follicle count and diameter, and blood analyses for the determination of twelve endocrine and paracrine parameters. A follow-up assessment was performed at CD2–3 in the succeeding cycle. In the randomized part of the study, we determined differences in blood parameters, follicle recruitment, and follicle diameter. In the observational part of the study, we assessed follicle recruitment in between cycles and its correlation to endocrine parameters. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Letrozole cotreatment significantly suppressed oestradiol (E2) concentrations in the follicular phase (area under the curve (AUC) −58% (95% CI [−70%; −43%], P < 0.001)) and luteal phase (AUC −39% [−63%; −1%], P = 0.046). This had a marked effect on the endocrine and paracrine output with increased follicular phase luteinizing hormone (AUC +37% [3%; 82%], P = 0.033), androstenedione (AUC +36% [6%; 74%], P = 0.016), testosterone (AUC +37% [7%; 73%], P = 0.013) and 17-OH-progesterone (AUC +114% [10%; 318%], P = 0.027). Furthermore, follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) was increased at stimulation day 5 in the LZ group (P < 0.05). In the luteal phase, increased corpus luteum output was reflected by elevated progesterone (AUC +44% [1%; 104%], P = 0.043), inhibin A (AUC +52% [11%; 108%], P = 0.011), androstenedione (AUC +31% [9%; 58%], P = 0.006) and testosterone (AUC +29% [6%; 57%], P = 0.012) in the LZ group. The altered balance between oestrogens and androgens was reflected in a markedly reduced SHBG concentration in the LZ group throughout the luteal phase (AUC −35% [−52%; −11%], P = 0.009). Endocrine and paracrine parameters were similar between groups at the follow-up visit. Letrozole cotreatment significantly increased the mean number of follicles >16 mm at oocyte retrieval (7.2 vs 5.2, difference: 2.0, 95% CI [0.1; 3.8], P = 0.036), while the mean total number of follicles at oocyte retrieval was the same (23.7 vs 23.5, difference: 0.2 [−5.8; 6.1], P = 0.958), and the mean FSH consumption during the stimulated cycle was similar (1500 vs 1520 IU, difference −20 IU [−175; 136], P = 0.794). Between cycles, the mean antral follicle count at CD2–3 was unchanged (natural cycle 19.0, stimulated cycle 20.9, follow-up cycle 19.7, P = 0.692) and there was no effect of LZ cotreatment on the recruitment of the next follicle cohort (test for interaction, P = 0.821). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION This study included a relatively small, selected group of healthy women with an expected normal ovarian function and reserve, and the effects of LZ may therefore be different in other patient groups. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS We confirm some previous findings concerning increased follicle growth and increased endogenous FSH and androgen production, which support the rationale for further studies on the use of LZ cotreatment, for example, as a form of endogenous androgen priming sensitizing the follicle to FSH. Letrozole appears to improve the luteal phase with better stimulation of corpus luteum and progesterone secretion. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(s) The authors declare no conflicts of interest relating to the present work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT02939898.
STUDY QUESTION Does adjuvant letrozole in ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF) decrease the uterine peristalsis frequency (UPF) prior to fresh embryo transfer (ET)? SUMMARY ANSWER Adjuvant letrozole in ovarian stimulation for IVF does not reduce the UPF significantly prior to fresh ET. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Throughout the cycle uterine peristalsis aids spermatozoa transport to the fallopian tube and may affect implantation. At fresh ET, UPF is negatively correlated with implantation and clinical pregnancy rates and is believed to be modulated by estradiol and progesterone. High levels of estradiol, from multiple follicular development, in ovarian stimulation have been reported to increase UPF, whereas progesterone is considered to be an utero-relaxant. The influence of androgens is unclear. Co-treatment with letrozole during gonadotropin ovarian stimulation limits the supra-physiological estradiol rise and may therefore reduce UPF prior to fresh ET. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This study was carried out on subjects participating in a single centre double blinded randomised controlled trial (RCT) of the impact of letrozole on follicle development and endocrine profiles, and investigated the impact of adjuvant letrozole in ovarian stimulation for IVF on UPF prior to fresh ET and the correlations of UPF with endocrine markers. Between 2016 and 2017, 39 women expected to be normal responders were randomised to co-treatment with letrozole or placebo. Of these, 33 women completed this element of the study. The study was carried out according to the Helsinki Declaration and the ICH-Good-Clinical-Practice. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Eligible women were randomised 1:1 to adjuvant treatment with letrozole 5 mg/day or placebo in an antagonist protocol using a fixed dose of recombinant (r) FSH 150 IU/day. Final maturation was triggered with hCG 6,500 IU and luteal support with vaginal progesterone was administered from the day following oocyte aspiration. Less than one hour prior to fresh ET, six-minute duration transvaginal ultrasound recordings of the uterus in sagittal section were performed and blood samples were drawn. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANGE A total of 33 women completed the study (letrozole n = 17; placebo n = 16). Age, BMI and ovarian reserve markers were similar between the groups. On day of ET, serum estradiol levels were significantly suppressed in the letrozole group to a mean of 867 ± 827 pmol/L compared to 3,110 ± 1,528 pmol/L in the placebo group (P < 0.001). Mean UPF prior to fresh ET did not differ between the intervention and placebo group (3.3 ± 0.36 versus 3.5 ± 0.51 per minute respectively, P = 0.108). UPF was assessed and agreed by two observers who were blinded to adjuvant treatment. Two patients were excluded due to poor quality of the ultrasound recordings. Supra-physiological serum estradiol in the placebo group were negatively correlated with UPF (P = 0.014; R = -0.62), but the more physiological serum estradiol levels in the letrozole group showed no correlation with UPF (P = 0.567; R = 0.15). Serum progesterone levels were similar in both groups and did not show any significant correlation with UPF. Testosterone levels were significantly higher in the letrozole group (P = 0.005) and showed a non-significant trend that negatively correlated with UPF in the placebo group (P-value=0.071, R= -0.48). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Limitations of the study included the limited sample size and the lack of a power calculation specifically determined for this endpoint. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The supra-physiological levels of estradiol generated during ovarian stimulation were significantly suppressed in the intervention group. However, UPF prior to fresh ET was similar in both groups. Modulating the luteal phase sex steroids with adjuvant letrozole had little measured impact on UPF. Any beneficial effect of adjuvant letrozole during ovarian stimulation is unlikely to be due to significant modulation of UPF. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) MDH's salary was funded by an unrestricted research grant from Gedeon Richter. The expenses of the study was funded by a scientific collaboration: ReproUnion, co-financed by the European Union, Interreg Öresund-Kattegat-Skagerrak and Ferring Pharmaceuticals. The assays for the analyses were funded by Roche Diagnostics and an unrestricted research grant from Merck Life Science AS, Denmark. The authors have no competing interests to declare regarding this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER Clinicatrials.gov: NCT02939898, EudraCT no.: 2015-005683-41.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.