Comparison between depot leuprorelin and daily buserelin in IVF. Comparison between depot and standard release triptoreline in in vitro fertilization: pituitary sensitivity, luteal function, pregnancy outcome, and perinatal results. A randomized prospective study of early follicular or midluteal initiation of long protocol gonadotropin-releasing hormone in an in vitro fertilization program. Comparison of short 7-day and prolonged treatment with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist desensitization for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Failure to preserve fertility in patients with Hodgkin's disease. Subcutaneous goserelin versus intranasal buserelin for pituitary down-regulation in patients undergoing IVF: a randomized comparative study. High doses of gonadotrophins combined with stop versus non-stop protocol of GnRH analogue administration in low responder IVF patients: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Cessation of gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue (GnRH-a) upon down-regulation versus conventional long GnRH-a protocol in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization. GnRH antagonist versus long GnRH agonist protocol in poor responders undergoing IVF: a randomized controlled trial.
To compare the effects of depot and daily forms of GnRH analogs in IVF programs.
                One hundred seventeen patients undergoing IVF, with no severe male factor, were randomized between two treatment groups. Pituitary desensitization was obtained in group 1 (60 patients) with a single IM injection of leuprorelin (3.75 mg), and in group 2 (57 patients) with buserelin (0.3 mg SC twice daily). In a subgroup of 10 patients (5 for the depot form and 5 for the daily form) several GnRH tests were performed to investigate pituitary desensitization.
                No differences were found in the time to reach desensitization. Resumption of pituitary activity occurred in 7 days with the daily form and in about 2 months with the depot form. No significant differences were found in the stimulation pattern, oocyte quality, percentage of fertilization. The pregnancy rate per transfer was slightly, but not significantly, better in the depot group (29.4% vs 25.9%). Implantation rate (11.9% vs 12.3%) and the percentage of miscarriages (26.6% vs 28.5%) were similar.
                Depot and daily forms of GnRH analogs are equally effective in superovulation induction for IVF. Considering improved patient compliance and preference, depot forms are advantageous. To compare the effects of depot and standard release form of triptoreline in superovulation induction in IVF programs.
                One hundred ninety-six patients undergoing IVF were randomized between two treatment groups. Pituitary desensitization was obtained in group 1 (102 patients) with a single IM injection of 3.75 mg D-Trp-6-luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) and, in group 2 (94 patients), with daily SC administration of 0.1 mg D-Trp-6-LH-RH. In a subgroup of 11 patients, a series of GnRH tests was performed to investigate pituitary desensitization and, in another subgroup of 12 patients, a study of luteal phase steroid profile was performed. In an additional 23 patients, a series of GnRH tests were performed to investigate pituitary desensitization during the late follicular and midluteal phases.
                No differences were found in the time necessary to reach desensitization (11.3 +/- 1.03 versus 11.3 +/- 1.45 days; mean +/- SEM), whereas resumption of pituitary activity takes place in 7 days after the discontinuation of the daily form and in about 2 months after discontinuation of the depot form. No differences were found in the duration of stimulation, number of FSH ampules, E2 levels, and number of follicles (11.7 +/- 0.68, versus 12.2 +/- 0.68) on hCG administration day and the total oocytes collected (9.1 +/- 0.6 versus 9.2 +/- 0.64). Oocyte quality, percentage of fertilization and cleavage, pregnancy rate per transfer (28.7% versus 25.6%), and miscarriages (about 30%) were similar in the two protocols. No difference was found in hormonal levels during the luteal phase. In both groups there was a high incidence of multiple pregnancy.
                Comparable results can be achieved with both long-acting and standard-release forms of GnRH analogs in patients undergoing assisted reproduction in terms of follicular stimulation and abortion rates despite differences in the duration of pituitary suppression. To determine the optimum menstrual cycle time to initiate a long-protocol gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) down-regulation regimen before hMG stimulation before IVF.
                Randomized, prospective, single, first cycle study.
                University teaching hospital.
                Eighty-six infertile couples undergoing IVF-ET attempt under rules for Ireland.
                Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist administered intranasally from day 1 or 21 of menstrual cycle. Human menopausal gonadotropin commenced when pituitary down-regulation was confirmed.
                Ovarian response, cancellation, fertilization, and pregnancy rates.
                No significant differences found between day 1 and day 21 initiation. But starting on day 1 is more easily recognizable by patients and avoids the possibility of administering GnRH-a in the presence of an unsuspected pregnancy.
                Both follicular and luteal phase initiation of GnRH-a long-protocol down-regulation are equally efficacious. In our clinical context, patients and management favor commencing on day 1. To compare two treatment regimens associating a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) and human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH).
                A prospective randomized trial.
                The outpatient fertility clinic of a university tertiary care center, the Hôpital A. Béclère, Clamart, France.
                One hundred eighty-two in vitro fertilization (IVF) candidates undergoing new or repeat IVF cycles at Hôpital A. Béclère over a 4-month period.
                Group 1 (7-day protocol): A short-acting preparation of GnRH-a (Tripteriline 0.1) was administered daily for 7 days, starting on cycle day 2. Ovarian stimulation with hMG was started on cycle day 4. Group 2 (long protocol): A timed release preparation of GnRH-a (Tripteriline 3.75 mg) was administered on cycle day 2. Ovarian stimulation with hMG was started after documented ovarian suppression.
                Response to COH, pregnancy rate (PR), tolerance.
                In the 7-day protocol, the amount of hMG required was markedly lower at 24 +/- 7 than in the long protocol group requiring 42.5 +/- 9.75 vials (75 IU) (mean +/- SD). No elevation of plasma LH occurred in either group. The number of oocytes retrieved was 7.3 +/- 1 and 10.7 +/- 1.2 (mean +/- SD) in the 7-day and long protocols, respectively. Yet, the number of embryos obtained and the PRs were similar in the two treatment groups.
                We observed that in COH, GnRH-a treatment could be interrupted safely several days before human chorionic gonadotropin administration without risking a premature increase of plasma luteinizing hormone. Moreover, the number of embryos available for fresh transfer and the ongoing PRs were similar in the new 7-day and in the classic long GnRH-a/hMG protocols, despite the smaller number of oocytes suggesting a greater efficiency of the 7-day protocol. The peak estradiol level and the hMG requirement were also lower in the 7-day GnRH-a/hMG protocol. The hypothesis that the "down-regulated" gonad is less vulnerable to the effects of cytotoxic chemotherapy for advanced Hodgkin's disease has been investigated. Thirty men and eighteen women were randomly allocated to receive an agonist analogue of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone prior to, and for the duration of, cytotoxic chemotherapy. Buserelin (d-Ser-[TBU]6 LHRH ethylamide) was prescribed in two different dosage schedules to twenty men, and in a single dosage schedule to eight women. A standard gonadotrophin-releasing hormone test (GnRH 100 micrograms) was performed 1 week prior to and on day 1 of each cycle of chemotherapy. In all patients peak luteinizing hormone responses to GnRH were suppressed throughout treatment. The higher of the two dosage schedules used in the men caused more effective suppression of luteinizing hormone, and both regimens led to an initial suppression of peak follicle-stimulating hormone responses to GnRH, which was not maintained. At follow-up assessment up to 3 years from the completion of treatment, all men treated with buserelin were profoundly oligospermic and four of the eight women were amenorrhoeic. All ten male controls were profoundly oligospermic, and six of nine female controls were amenorrhoeic. In the dosages and schedules investigated, buserelin was ineffective in conserving fertility. One-hundred women undergoing ovarian stimulation with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) and a human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) for in-vitro fertilization (IVF) participated in this randomized comparative study. The effectiveness of long-acting s.c. goserelin (Zoladex depot; 49 patients) and intranasally (i.n.) administered buserelin acetate (Suprefact; 51 patients) for pituitary down-regulation was compared. Treatment with s.c. goserelin (3.6 mg) or i.n. buserelin acetate (200 micrograms; 6 times/day) was started on day 21-23 of the cycle. Stimulation with 150 IU of HMG/day was started after at least 11 days of GnRH-a treatment. There were no differences in the time required for follicular development nor in the clinical outcome between groups treated with either goserelin or buserelin. The number of oocytes recovered in the goserelin group was 6.7 +/- 5.0 versus 6.3 +/- 4.9 in the buserelin group. There were 11 pregnancies after the use of goserelin (22.4%) and 12 pregnancies in those given buserelin (24.0%). The number of HMG ampoules needed for follicular maturation was higher in the goserelin group (27.9 +/- 7.8) than in the buserelin group (24.6 +/- 7.8, P < 0.05). The patients given buserelin suffered significantly more from tiredness, depression, headache and abdominal pain than those receiving goserelin, whereas there were no differences between the groups in experiencing mental irritability, nausea and swelling. Subcutaneous goserelin depot injection offers a useful alternative for pituitary down-regulation in IVF stimulation. Recent evidence suggests that early cessation of gonadotrophin releasing hormone analogue (GnRHa) administration may offer some benefit to low responder patients undergoing IVF. A prospective, randomized controlled trial was designed to evaluate whether early cessation of GnRHa in an ovarian stimulation regimen is more beneficial than just increasing the doses of gonadotrophins. Seventy low responder patients (less than three mature follicles in a previous cycle) with normal basal follicle stimulating hormone concentrations and a previous cancelled IVF cycle were randomly allocated into two protocols: (i) non-stop protocol: long GnRHa suppression with high doses of gonadotrophins, and (ii) stop protocol, in which GnRHa administration is stopped with the onset of menses, while gonadotrophin doses remained similar to the non-stop protocol. A significantly higher number of mature oocytes were obtained in the study group (stop protocol) compared to the control group (non-stop protocol) (8.7 +/- 0.9 versus 6.2 +/- 0.7, P: = 0. 027). The stop protocol reduced the number of ampoules of gonadotrophins required (56.6 +/- 2.7 versus 68.0 +/- 3.5, P: = 0. 013). Both protocols resulted in a similar cancellation rate (2.7 versus 5.8%) (with no cycles cancelled due to ovulation), pregnancy rate (14.3 versus 18.7%), and implantation rate (12.1 versus 8.8%). The early cessation of GnRHa combined with high doses of gonadotrophins permitted the retrieval of a significantly higher number of oocytes. To determine whether a controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) regimen that involves GnRH agonist (GnRH-a) discontinuation before administration of gonadotropins would benefit poor responders.
                A prospective, randomized controlled trial.
                Hospital-based IVF Unit.
                Sixty-three patients with previous poor response to COH and/or high basal FSH level (> or =9 mIU/mL) undergoing 78 IVF-ET cycles.
                In both groups, administration of GnRH-a was started in the midluteal phase. Whereas in the study group (40 cycles), it ended before administration of gonadotropins, in controls (38 cycles) GnRH-a treatment was continued throughout the follicular phase.
                Ovarian stimulation patterns and IVF outcome.
                A significantly higher cancellation rate was noted in the study group than in the controls (22.5% versus 5%, respectively). The new and control regimens resulted in similar stimulation characteristics and clinical pregnancy rates (11% versus 10.3%, respectively). In 13 patients with a basal FSH level that was not persistently high, the new regimen resulted in a significantly higher number of retrieved oocytes compared with the standard protocol (7.6+/-1.03 versus 4.0+/-0.68, respectively).
                Whereas for most low responders, the new COH regimen offers no further advantage, future prospective studies may demonstrate whether it can confer a benefit for a subset of patients with a basal FSH level that is not persistently high. This is the first published report of a prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing a fixed, multi-dose GnRH antagonist protocol with a long GnRH agonist protocol in poor responders undergoing IVF.
                Sixty-six poor responders were randomized into two groups: the study group received 0.25 mg of cetrorelix daily starting on day 6 of stimulation; the control group received 600 microg of buserelin acetate daily starting in the mid-luteal phase of the preceding cycle. Both groups were given a fixed dose of recombinant FSH (300 IU daily) for stimulation.
                There were no significant differences in the cycle cancellation rates, duration of stimulation, consumption of gonadotrophins, and mean numbers of mature follicles, oocytes and embryos obtained. The implantation rates were similar, but the number of embryos transferred was significantly higher for the antagonist group (2.32 +/- 0.58 versus 1.50 +/- 0.83; P = 0.01). The pregnancy rates were also higher in the antagonist group, but the difference was not statistically significant.
                A fixed multi-dose GnRH antagonist protocol is feasible for patients who are poor responders on a long agonist protocol; however, our study failed to demonstrate an overall improvement in ovarian responsiveness. Clinical outcomes may be improved by developing more flexible antagonist regimens, an approach that requires further evaluation.
We found no evidence of a significant difference between depot and daily GnRHa use for pituitary down regulation in IVF cycles using the long protocol, but substantial differences could not be ruled out. Since depot GnRHa requires more gonadotrophins and a longer duration of use, it may increase the overall costs of IVF treatment.