DuoStim in Cases of PGT: Comparison of Embryo Quantity and Embryonic Quality Using MitoScore

Summary

Since preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) is being more frequently requested from patients as women pursue infertility treatments at an advanced age with a poorer prognosis, sometimes physicians are compelled to perform several stimulation cycles to obtain more eggs and, consequently, a greater number of biopsied embryos. Hence, the idea of carrying out this study arises as an attempt to optimize each menstrual cycle to the maximum. It is believed that the double stimulation (DuoStim) protocol could be an alternative for this group of patients, allowing to obtain a larger number of oocytes in a shorter period, thus, increasing the number of biopsied embryos and possibly decreasing the interval to achieve a successful pregnancy. The investigators aim to evaluate the potential usefulness of the DuoStim protocol for patients desiring to obtain oocytes as soon as possible. Using PGT, the investigators will compare the rate of euploid embryos per cycle in patients undergoing DuoStim protocol versus patients undergoing two conventional controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in consecutive cycles. Patients will include women with advanced age and poor response. This is a unicentric, prospective, randomized, non-blind, parallel-group controlled phase IV clinical study. The investigators hypothesize that the rate of euploid embryos per cycle is similar in the DuoStim group compared to the group undergoing two conventional controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in consecutive cycles. Furthermore the investigators will evaluate if there are differences regarding the number of total oocytes obtained, the number of mature oocytes, the number of biopsied blastocysts and the MitoScore index of the available euploid embryos.

Timeline

Start

2017-12-01

Primary completion

2019-12-01

Completion

2020-06-01

Publications

• Background Baerwald AR, Adams GP, Pierson RA. A new model for ovarian follicular development during the human menstrual cycle. Fertil Steril. 2003 Jul;80(1):116-22. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(03)00544-2.
• Background Cakmak H, Katz A, Cedars MI, Rosen MP. Effective method for emergency fertility preservation: random-start controlled ovarian stimulation. Fertil Steril. 2013 Dec;100(6):1673-80. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.07.1992. Epub 2013 Aug 26.
• Background Cakmak H, Rosen MP. Random-start ovarian stimulation in patients with cancer. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jun;27(3):215-21. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0000000000000180.
• Background Sonmezer M, Turkcuoglu I, Coskun U, Oktay K. Random-start controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for emergency fertility preservation in letrozole cycles. Fertil Steril. 2011 May;95(6):2125.e9-11. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.01.030. Epub 2011 Feb 3.
• Background von Wolff M, Thaler CJ, Frambach T, Zeeb C, Lawrenz B, Popovici RM, Strowitzki T. Ovarian stimulation to cryopreserve fertilized oocytes in cancer patients can be started in the luteal phase. Fertil Steril. 2009 Oct;92(4):1360-1365. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.08.011. Epub 2008 Oct 18.
• Background Bedoschi GM, de Albuquerque FO, Ferriani RA, Navarro PA. Ovarian stimulation during the luteal phase for fertility preservation of cancer patients: case reports and review of the literature. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2010 Aug;27(8):491-4. doi: 10.1007/s10815-010-9429-0. Epub 2010 May 9.
• Background Kuang Y, Chen Q, Hong Q, Lyu Q, Ai A, Fu Y, Shoham Z. Double stimulations during the follicular and luteal phases of poor responders in IVF/ICSI programmes (Shanghai protocol). Reprod Biomed Online. 2014 Dec;29(6):684-91. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.08.009. Epub 2014 Sep 6.
• Background Ubaldi FM, Capalbo A, Vaiarelli A, Cimadomo D, Colamaria S, Alviggi C, Trabucco E, Venturella R, Vajta G, Rienzi L. Follicular versus luteal phase ovarian stimulation during the same menstrual cycle (DuoStim) in a reduced ovarian reserve population results in a similar euploid blastocyst formation rate: new insight in ovarian reserve exploitation. Fertil Steril. 2016 Jun;105(6):1488-1495.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.03.002. Epub 2016 Mar 25.
• Background Bentov Y, Esfandiari N, Gokturk A, Burstein E, Fainaru O, Casper RF. An ongoing pregnancy from two waves of follicles developing during a long follicular phase of the same cycle. Fertil Steril. 2010 Jun;94(1):350.e8-11. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.12.033.
• Background Kuang Y, Hong Q, Chen Q, Lyu Q, Ai A, Fu Y, Shoham Z. Luteal-phase ovarian stimulation is feasible for producing competent oocytes in women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment, with optimal pregnancy outcomes in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles. Fertil Steril. 2014 Jan;101(1):105-11. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.09.007. Epub 2013 Oct 23.
• Background Chen H, Wang Y, Lyu Q, Ai A, Fu Y, Tian H, Cai R, Hong Q, Chen Q, Shoham Z, Kuang Y. Comparison of live-birth defects after luteal-phase ovarian stimulation vs. conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization and vitrified embryo transfer cycles. Fertil Steril. 2015 May;103(5):1194-1201.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.02.020. Epub 2015 Mar 23.
• Background Diez-Juan A, Rubio C, Marin C, Martinez S, Al-Asmar N, Riboldi M, Diaz-Gimeno P, Valbuena D, Simon C. Mitochondrial DNA content as a viability score in human euploid embryos: less is better. Fertil Steril. 2015 Sep;104(3):534-41.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.05.022. Epub 2015 Jun 11.

Drugs

Indications