Disclosure Robert Fischer Fertility Centre Hamburg Hamburg, Germany Declared no potential conflict of interest.
Updates on Luteal Phase supplementation Kiev 21.09.2018 Robert Fischer MVZ Fertility Center Hamburg robert.fischer@amedes-group.com ISO 9001:2015
Outline Why is Luteal Phase support (LPS) required Luteal Phase after hcg triggering New challenges:gnrh-a triggering The more physiological LPS The evidence - The new option Conclusions
Human Corpus Luteum P4 secretion is maximum during mid-luteal phase inducing a serum P4 of 40-60 nmol/l (13-19 ng/dl) in natural cycle Sufficient P4 essential for endometrium decidualisation preceding implantation Soules et al. Obstet Gynecol 1988;71:659-66.
LH-P4 Pulse PULSATILE LH Filicori et al., 1984 Stimulation of steroidogenesis by the CL Stimulation of cytokines and growth factors that take part in implantation Extragonadal activation of endometrial LH receptors and enhancement of implantation
Progesterone is antiapoptotic for the endometrium No Tx Progesterone increases the immunostaining of the antiapoptotic bcl-2 P4 Lovely et al., 2005 TUNEL labeling apoptotic bodies D26 endometrium with P or placebo treatment
Is LPS required? LP in ALL stimulated ART cycles is abnormal (vs 8.1% natural cycles) Main reason is the inhibition of LH secretion (LH pulse frequency and amplitude) due to supraphysiological steroid levels and distruption of the feedback mechanisms of the Hypothalamo-pituitary-ovarian axis. an insufficient progesterone concentration at the time of implantation or during early pregnancy may cause early pregnancy loss. Tavaniotou, 2001; Fauser and Devroey, 2003;Edwards, 1980; Fatemi, 2007
Luteal phase of stimulated cycles abnormal Supraphysiologic steroid levels (due to multifollicular development) inhibits LH secretion Low LH levels causes luteolysis, shortened luteal phase, and may result in implantation failure Mid-cycle LH levels Natural cycle 6.0 IU/L hcg trigger 0.2 IU/L GnRHa trigger 1.5 IU/L P4 requirement during LP of stimulated cycles greater than natural cycle Jones 1996; Albano et al. Fertil Steril 1998;70:357-9; Tavaniotou et al. Hum Reprod Update 2000;6:139-48; Fauser & Devroey. Trends Endocrinol Metab 2003;14:236-42; Trinchard-Lugan et al. Reprod Biomed Online. 2002;4:106-15; Sherbahn 2013; Humaidan et al. Hum Reprod 2005;20:1213-20.
Pregnancy loss (%) Higher Progesterone Level Reduce Pregnancy Loss Pregnancy loss in relation to the mid-luteal phase progesterone levels in women undergoing ovulation with an agonist trigger 100 80 60 40 20 0 Results from four independent studies Results from four independent studies Humaidan et al. (2005) Hum Reprod. 20:1213-20 Humaidan et al. (2010) Fertil Steril. 93:847-54 Engmann et al. (2008) Fertil Steril. 89:84-91 Humaidan et al. (2013) PMID:23753114 0 100 200 300 400 500 Mid-luteal phase progesterone levels (nmol/l) Yding Andersen & Andersen, RBMOnline, 2014; 28:552
Mid-luteal Progesterone levels are associated with increased pregnancy rates Viable pregnancies had significantly higher mean P 4 levels in the early luteal phase than non-pregnant. 73% of viable pregnancies, 42% of clinical abortions and 20% of preclinical abortions had a P 4 level exceeding 95 nmol/l in the mid-luteal phase (Liu et al., 1995) A significant positive association between the mean P 4 concentration during the luteal phase and the clinical pregnancy rate in a study of 544 women undergoing IVF treatment (Mitwally MF et al., 2010) A significant higher P 4 concentration in patients that became pregnant compared to those who did not (Ellenborgen A et al., 2004) Yding Andersen & Andersen, RBMOnline, 2014; 28:552
Arce J et al., RBMOnline, 2011;22:449 Progesterone Level is Linked to Live Birth Live birth rate associated with the mid-luteal progesterone concentration 25-32 >32-48 >48-80 >80-127 >127 None of the 53 women with a progesterone concentration below 25 nmol/l had a clinical pregnancy and were not included in the present analysis
Mid-Luteal Phase Progesterone Level as Predictor of Live Birth Rate Vaginal progesterone average level ~ 37 nmol/l Vaginal progesterone Cmax ~ 46 nmol/l Prediction of the chance of a live birth based on the mid-luteal progesterone concentration (multivariate logistic regression model) Arce J et al., RBMOnline, 2011;22:449
LPS REGIMENS AFTER hcg TRIGGER AND FRESH ET Outcome Measure: LBR or OPR Progesterone vs. hcg (alone or +P): No difference (5 RCT; 833 women; OR=0.95; 95% CI 0.65-1.38) Lower OHSS with P alone (5 RCT; 1,293 women; OR=0.46; 95% CI 0.30-0.71) Progesterone vs. P + estrogens: No difference (9 RCT; 1,651 women; OR=1.12; 95% CI 0.91-1.38) Progesterone vs. P + GnRH agonist: Lower P-only group (9 RCT; 2,861 women; OR=0.62; CI 0.48-0.81; Low quality) van der Linden et al Cochrane 2015 van der Linden et al, Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015:CD009154
Routes of progesterone administration Oral extensively metabolized; systemic side effects; low bioavailability Intramuscular effective but less convenient (pain, occasional sterile abcess; oil allergic reaction) Subcutaneous few clinical trials Rectal Not widely accepted; few clinical trials Vaginal as effective as IM injection; self administration Gibbons et al. Fertil Steril 1998;69:96-101; Ludwig & Diedrich. Acta Obs Gyn Scand. 2001; 80:452-66; Penzias Fertil Steril. 2002;77:318-23; Lockwood et al. Fertil Steril 2014; 101:112-119.
Progesterone regimens LPS after hcg trigger and FRESH ET Oral vs IM Vaginal/rectal vs. IM Vaginal/rectal vs. Oral Low-dose vs. High-dose vaginal Short (Early cessation) vs. Long protocol Micronized vs. Synthetic Vaginal ring vs. Gel Vaginal vs. Subcutaneous OHSS rates (Oral vs. IM; Low-dose vs. High-dose) 45 RCT; N=13,814 women Odds ratios not Significantly different Quality of Evidence varied from lowquality to very lowquality van der Linden et al, Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015:CD009154
ng/ml ng Pg/mg protein Pharmacokinetics data: vaginal route vs IM Plasma progesterone concentrations in steady state 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 USE OF EXOGENOUS PROGESTERONE Vaginal progesterone provide 4x200 mg/d2x50 mg/d Vaginal Pg IM Pg Progesterone concentrations in uterine tissue in steady state 8 steady state concentrations 6around 4 10 12 ng/ml in circulation Miles A et al, Fertil Steril 1994; 62: 485-90 First uterine pass effect / targeted delivery Cicinelli E et al, Obstet Gynecol 2000; 95: 403-6 12 10 2 0 4x200 mg/d Vaginal Pg 2x50 mg/d IM Pg
hcg/lh (IU/L) The exogenous hcg bolus trigger and the natural/gnrha trigger induced final maturation of follicles 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 OPU OPU+2 OPU+4 OPU+6 OPU+7 o 10.000 IU hcg o Natural mid-cycle surge of LH o GnRHa trigger induced mid-cycle surge of LH Time (days)
Progesterone (nmol/l) Levels of progesterone in the luteal phase following the natural menstrual cycle or by the use of hcg bolus trigger 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 10.000 IU hcg Natural mid-cycle surge -5 0 5 Days after OPU10 15 20
The hcg bolus trigger impacts on the luteal phase Due to the high concentrations of progesterone and oestradiol the pituitary is inactivated whether down-regulated or not no LH output There is a gap of hcg (LH-like activity) in the mid-luteal phase coinciding with the crucial time of implantation Trigger Day 6 Day 8 Day 14 On the other hand the hcg bolus trigger results in a strong luteotropic signal early in the luteal phase hcg The concentration GnRHa of progesterone peaks in the LH early activity luteal deficiency phase period and will advance the endometrium Luteal phase length (days) Yding Andersen & Andersen, RBMOnline 2014;28:552 28-32h LH activity deficiency period
number of cycles Histological dating Histological dating in natural and stimulated cycles 40 30 20 10 0 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 </=3 days > 3 days 1 0 GnRH-agonists P < 0.05 P< 0.001 40 30 20 10 0 P<0.05 (group) P< 0.001 (interaction) Pregnant </=3 days > 3 days Histological dating GnRH-antagonists Natural cycle Not Pregnant Stimulated cycle Day 5 Day 0 Day 2 Day 7 Luteal day Bourgain et al, Fertil Steril 2002
In GnRH antagonist/fsh cycles, advanced endometrial maturation on the day of oocyte retrieval correlates with altered gene expression Van Vaerenbergh I, Van Lommel L, Ghislain V, In't Veld P, Schuit F, Fatemi HM, Devroey P, Bourgain C. According to Noyes' criteria, all endometria taken on the day of oocyte retrieval showed an advanced maturation, ranging from +d2 to +d4. The patients with a subsequent clinical pregnancy all showed a histological dating corresponding to +d2 or +d3. When comparing endometria +d2-3 to +d4, the microarray results showed a differential expression of 2550 probe sets. Significantly up-regulated genes were SERPINB6, FOXO3A, SOX17 and CDC42. Down-regulated genes of interest were NRP1, HOXA10 and OSF2.
The wide-genomic approach demonstrates a 2-day difference on the cluster of genes governing endometrial receptivity 15k 8x15K Day LH/hCG+7
Too much of the good? Experimental evidence suggests prolonged exposure to hcg is detrimental to endometrial receptivity. (Evans & Salamonsen, Hum.Rerod.2013). This study found that chronic exposure to normal hcg in vitro mediated a down-regulation of LHR in the endometrial epithelial cells and renders cells refractory to acute hcg. Evidence indicates that supra-physiological levels of hcg during the mid-luteal phase may interfere with successful implantation.
The Role of Hyperglycosylated hcg (H-hCG) A form of hcg that becomes considerably more glycosylated than normal hcg -makes the H-hCG fold in a way different to normal hcg, leading to biological properties that normal hcg does not possess. In addition to activating the LHR, the H-hCG also acts as a TGF-β antagonist (Cole, 2012). Almost all the hcg secreted from the implanting blastocyst is H-hCG and none is normal hcg, while normal hcg only takes over later on during pregnancy. Studies show that it is the deficiency of H-hCG that can cause incomplete blastocyst implantation or pregnancy failures, biochemical pregnancies and miscarriages (Cole, 2012). It may also be speculated that just when the implanting embryo starts to secrete almost exclusively H-hCG in very small quantities, the presence of normal hcg of around 40 80 IU/L attenuates successful implantation because it may interfere with the specific actions mediated by H-hCG.
The new challenge: GnRH agonist for triggering of ovulation and Fresh E.T. First trials low clinical pregnancy rate high early pregnancy loss (Humaidan et al., 2005; Kolibianakis et al., 2005 Griesinger et al., Fertil Steril 2007; Hum. Rep. Update 2006) Low live birth rate after GnRHa versus hcg triggering (Griesinger et al., Fertil Steril 2007) Low reproductive outcome attributed to a luteal phase insufficiency despite supplementation with progesterone and estradiol GnRHa triggering leads to significantly reduced total amounts of LH released by the pituitary due to profile and duration of surge. (Gonen et al., 1990; Itskovitz et al., 1991) LH mean mid-luteal phase 6.0 IU/l in natural cycle 0,2 IU/I hcg trigger (Tavaniotou and Devroey 2003) 1.5 IU/l in GnRH-a group (Humaidan et al, 2005)
Serum concentrations of LH (hcg), FSH, E2, and P ( during triggering of final stages of oocyte maturation with two GnRH agonist or hcg Trigger Day 6 Day 8 Day 14 hcg GnRHa 28-32h Fauser B C et al. JCEM 2002;87:709-715 2002 by Endocrine Society LH activity deficiency period LH activity deficiency period Luteal phase length (days)
Different Strategies for Lut.Phase Support (after GnRH-a Triggering) E2+Progesterone :(i.m.) high dose until 10 weeks pregnancy HCG :Multi Low-Dose 450 I.U. (Krause et al. 2006) (Engmann et al. 2008) Single- Dose 1500 I.U. /Double Dose (Humaidan et al.2010;2013) Dual Triggering (GnRHa+1000 I.U. hcg,if E2<4000pg/ml) (Shapiro et al.,2011; Engmann et al., 2012 ) Daily Micro-Dose (125 I.U.) hcg (C.Y.Andersen et al. 2015)) Luteal Phase Coasting (Kol et al.2016;fatemi et al.2017&2018) Rec LH: Multiple Dose 300 I.U. (Papanikolaou et al. 2011) GnRH Agonist :Multiple Dose daily (Pirard et al. 2006,2015) (Bar Hava et al. 2016)
Anatomy of progesterone delivery to the uterus Progesterone concentrations in sheep during the luteal phase Mean P 4 concentration in the ovarian vein was 800-fold higher than mean jugular venous levels Samples from ovarian veins contralateral to CL-bearing ovaries showed a mean P 4 concentration 30 times lower (ipsilateral: 1037 ±138; contralateral: 30 ±11 ng/ml; P < 0.001) Mean progesterone concentration in the uterine vein was approximately 30-fold higher than in jugular and similar in both uterine horns Ovarian production is more likely to cause a direct uterine effect than Vaginal route supplementation Abecia J et al., Anim. Reprod. Science, 1997;48:209
This is a proof-of-concept study conducted as a three arm RCT with a total of 93 patients Oestradiol (nmol/l) Progesterone (nmol/l) hcg (IU/L) Control Group1 Group 2 Control Group1 Group 2 Control Group1 Group 2 No. women 32 31 30 ANOVA 32 31 30 ANOVA 32 31 30 ANOVA Day of OT 7.0 ±0.7 7.7 ±1.0 9.4 ±1.0 P>0.10 2.5 ±0.3 3.1 ±0.3 2.6 ±0.2 P>0.10 NM 4.8 ±0.6 5.3 ±0.5 P>0.10 Day of OPU NM NM NM 36.7 ±4.7 15.1 ±2.0 11.0 ±1.0 P<0.001 74 ±4.4 2.0 ±0.2 2,2 ±0.2 P<0.001 Day of OPU + 7 4.4 ±0.5 5.7 ±0.8 6,8 ±0.6 P=0.04 170 ±25 301 ±42 277 ±24 P=0.009 1.8 ±0.2 3.2 ±0.5 3.2 ±0.3 P=0.014 Yding Andersen et al., Hum Rep 2015;30:2387
hcg (IU/L) 300 250 200 150 hcg during the luteal phase with different dosing 125 IU hcg daily 1.500 IU hcg on OPU and OPU+5 10.000 IU hcg on ovulation trigger GnRHa trigger induced mid-cycle surge of LH 100 50 0 0 24 48 72 96 120 144 168 192 216 240 264 288 OPU OPU+2 OPU+4 OPU+6 OPU+7 Time (hours)
A new concept of Luteal support By courtesy of C. Yieding Andersen & T. Kelsey
Reproductive outcome of IVF/ICSI treatment in following the antagonist protocol and receiving GnRHa trigger for final oocyte maturation. 100 IU hcg daily No exogenous P4 (1 day after OPU for 9 days) Bolus hcg (1.500 IU) (OPU + individualized OPU 5) 800 mg P4 vag (Ultrogest) Period of treatment June Oct. 2015 Jan. Oct. 2015 NA No. of cycles/women 94/84 150/127 NA P-value Age (years) 36.55 ± 0.43 37.35 ± 0.33 P>0.10* Days of stimulation 8.5 ± 0.12 8.5 ± 0.07 P>0.10* FSH consumption (IU) 2069 ± 75 2020 ± 59 P>0.10* No. oocytes (per cycle) 9.36 ± 0.42 11.58 ± 0.55 P>0.10* Normally fertilized (MII oocyte) 478/749 (64%) 925/1411 (66%) P>0.10** Cryopreserved: 2PNs/embryos 44/65 133/74 NA No. Embryos for culture 328 610 NA No. Embryos used for ET 132/80 (1.7) 234/135 (1.7) P>0.10** C.Yding Andersen,R.Fischer et al., JARG, 2016; PMID: 27448021
GnRH-a triggering for ovulation and LPS with only Mini hcg ( 100 IE s.c. OPU+1 until OPU +9) (<18 Follikel >12mm) 100 IE hcg daily no exogenous P4 (Start 1 day after OPU for 9 days) Bolus hcg (1.500 IE) (OPU + individualised OPU 5) +800 mg P4 vag (Ultrogest) P-value Cycles/Women Age 94/84 36.55 ± 0.43 150/127 37.35 ± 0.33 NA P > 0.10 Patients with ET (% /cycle) 80 (85 %) 135 (90 %) P > 0.10 Nr. pos. hcg (% of ETs) 44 (55 %) 72 (53 %) P > 0.10 Biochemical Pregnancies 2 /44 (4.5 %) 13/72 (18,1 %) P = 0.02 Clinical Pregnancies(%) 42 (53 %) 59 (44 %) P > 0.10 Clinical Miscarriage (%) 3/42 (7.1 %) 10/59 (17 %) P = 0.09 Total Pregnancy Losses 5/44 (11.5 %) 23/72 (31.9 %) P = 0.003 Ongoing Preg. Day 5 ET 47/75 (63%) 32/64 (50%) P= 0.028 OHSS 1 Late Onset-mild 0 NA Yding Andersen, Fischer JARG, 2016;
100 IU hcg( OPU+1 Until OPU+9 ) F.C.H. personal DATA (7/2015-12/2017) n=647 Age Group: <= 30 31-35 36-39 >= 40 Age 28,38 ± 1,77 (48) 33,37 ± 1,37 (178) 37,80 ± 1,09 (220) 41,88 ± 1,93 (201) Mean Nr. Cycles 1,60 ± 1,18 (48) 2,22 ± 1,81 (178) 2,71 ± 2,62 (220) 3,46 ± 2,73 (201) BMI 24,54 ± 4,01 (46) 23,74 ± 4,43 (178) 23,17 ± 3,63 (220) 22,60 ± 3,24 (201) Cycles 48 178 220 201 Freeze-All (FA) 10 (20,8%) 38 (21,6%) 20 (9,2%) 12 (6,0%) PBGT (nr.pregnant) 10 (20,8%) (3) 50 (28,4%) (18) 129 (59,4%) (47) 169 (84,5%) (33) ETs (%/without FA) 33 (86,8%) 128 (92,8%) 173 (87,8%) 108 (57,4%) CPR (%/ET) 19 (59%) 82 (64,1%) 87 (50,3%) 40 (37%) Twin(%/Pregnancy) 5 (26,3%) 28+1 (35,4%) 25 (28,7%) 4 (10,0%) Clinical Misscar. 1 (5,3%) 13 (14,6%) 14 (14,9%) 12 (30,0%) Ongoing/LBR 18 (48,7%) 69 (50,0%) 73 (37,1%) 28 (14,9%) OHSS (E+L) 0 0 0 0 Total pos hcg/et 22 (66,7%) 90 (70,3%) 96 (55,5%) 48 (44,4%) Bioch.Preg. 3 8 9 8 I.R. 43,6% 51,6% 40,1% 29,7%
F.C.H. personal DATA D5 ET (7/2015-12/2017) Age Group <= 30 31-35 36-39 >= 40 Day3: CPR/ET 0/2 (0%) 13/19 (68,4%) 17/49 (34,7%) 13/33 (39,4%) Oocytes 7,50 7,05 7,41 7,64 Embryos/ET 1,00 1,58 1,57 1,33 Day 5:CPR/ET 18/27 (66,7%) 58/92 (63,0%) 56/96 (58,3%) 23/52 (44,2%) Oocytes 10,48 11,16 9,64 8,65 Embryos/ET 1,78 1,76 1,63 1,35
Progesterone (nmol/l) hcg miu/ml P4 (ng/ml) 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 P4 & hcg levels in relation to oocyte pick-up: hcg l Natural cycle -5 0 Days after 5 OPU 10 HCG Start Dosis Tag 75 OPU+1 <1.2 <1.2 HCG mlu/ml E2 pg/ml P4 ng/ml 17 OHP µg/l OPU -2 OPU OPU +5 OPU +7 5,9 6.2 OPU -2 OPU OPU +5 2199 937 1460 1697 OPU OPU - +7 2 OPU OPU +5 OPU +7 0,9 5,4 127 137 OPU -2 OPU OPU +5 OPU +7 1.97 5.81 28.4 33.6
DAY 5 ET 1.1.2016-30.4.2017 (FCH Data) Mean age 37,6 years Cycles C.Pregnancy Rate ET Day 5: Fresh Blastocyst ET 295 60% FET Blastocyst 134 63% FET 2PN->Blastocyst 68-57% All n.s.
Conclusions The luteal phase following a hcg trigger will induce - high levels of progesterone in the early luteal phase - reduced C.L. stimulation during the mid-luteal phase around implantation In COS a threshold value of P 4 of around 80 100 nmol/l exists above which early pregnancy loss is reduced The agonist trigger allows a number of new luteal phase protocols to be tested A new regime using only daily 100 I.U. hcg s.c.from OPU+1 until OPU+9 is sufficent for LPS after GnRH-a ovulation triggeringshowing a P4 luteal phase pattern like the natural cycle and reduced pregnancy loss.
Thank you HAMBURG