Increasing evidence on the significance of nutrition in reproduction is emerging from both animal and human studies, suggesting a mutual association between nutrition and female fertility. Different “fertile” dietary patterns have been studied; however, in humans, conflicting results or weak correlations are often reported, probably because of the individual variations in genome, proteome, metabolome, and microbiome and the extent of exposure to different environmental conditions. In this scenario, “precision nutrition”, namely personalized dietary patterns based on deep phenotyping and on metabolomics, microbiome, and nutrigenetics of each case, might be more efficient for infertile patients than applying a generic nutritional approach. In this review, we report on new insights into the nutritional management of infertile patients, discussing the main nutrigenetic, nutrigenomic, and microbiomic aspects that should be investigated to achieve effective personalized nutritional interventions. Specifically, we will focus on the management of low-grade chronic inflammation, which is associated with several infertility-related diseases.

Background and Objectives: Some biomarkers of ovarian responsiveness to gonadotropins and the total number of retrieved oocytes are known to affect the success rate after controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) and in vitro fertilization (IVF). The aim of this study was to study another putative marker, the Ovarian Sensitivity Index (OSI: (number of retrieved oocytes/total gonadotropin dose) × 1000), assessing whether (a) it correlates with ovarian responsiveness biomarkers, (b) it is an independent predictor of clinical pregnancy, (c) it predicts clinical pregnancy comparably to the number of retrieved oocytes, and (d) it is consistent in the repeated COS cycles of the same woman. Design: retrospective analysis. Setting: public IVF Unit in University Hospital. Cases and Measurements: 1612 patients submitted to 3353 IVF cycles were included, their OSI was calculated and it was correlated with the ovarian responsiveness biomarkers (age, BMI, anti-Mullerian hormone, antral follicle count). The OSI and the total number of oocytes were compared for their value in predicting clinical pregnancy. The inter-cycle consistency of the OSI was estimated in 209 patients who underwent two consecutive cycles in which the ovarian stimulation regimen was changed from the Gonadotropin-releasing Hormone (GnRH)-agonist long protocol to the GnRH-antagonist protocol or vice-versa. Results: The OSI turned out to be significantly related to age and BMI (inversely), the anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) and the antral follicle count (AFC) (directly), to be an independent predictor of clinical pregnancy, and to correlate with clinical pregnancy better than the total number of oocytes (p < 0.0001 vs. <0.002). In patients who underwent two consecutive COS cycles changing stimulation regimen, the OSI showed 82% consistency. Conclusion(s): The OSI significantly correlates to the currently used biomarkers of ovarian responsiveness; it is an independent predictor of clinical pregnancy; it is more predictive of clinical pregnancy than the total number of oocytes, and is highly consistent in repeated IVF cycles even when the COS protocol changes. These characteristics make the OSI quite suitable to be incorporated into more complex prediction models of IVF outcome.

Exogenous human follicle-stimulating hormone (hFSH), either derived from extraction and purification from the urine or obtained by recombinant technology in the form of follitropin α, β and δ (rFSH), has been used for decades in the treatment of infertility. The main applications of FSH treatment in the woman have been, and still are, ovulation induction in oligo-anovulatory subjects, and stimulation of the development of a cohort of follicles in patients undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for in vitro fertilization (IVF). In the last years, two biosimilars of follitropin alfa, rFSH compounds structurally and functionally similar to the originator, have been approved and marketed for clinical use in Europe. Moreover, some other rFSH biosimilars are currently under investigation. The objective of this article is to review the available evidences comparing the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of rFSH follitropin alpha originator with its biosimilars, discussing the clinical trials that allowed biosimilars to get registration and marketing authorization.

The association of recombinant FSH (rFSH) plus recombinant LH (rLH) is currently used for Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in human IVF, but its efficacy has, to date, not yet been compared to that of human Menopausal Gonadotropin (hMG), the FSH + LH activity-containing urinary drug. Eight hundred forty-eight (848) IVF patients classified as expected “poor” or “normal” responders according to antral follicle count (AFC) and basal (day 3) FSH were treated with rFSH + rLH (2:1 ratio, n = 398, Group A) or hMG (n = 450, Group B). Data were collected under real-life practice circumstances and the pregnancy rate with fresh embryos was calculated by stratifying patients according to the number of retrieved oocytes (1–2, 3–4, 5–6, 7–8, >8). Overall, the pregnancy rate in both groups progressively improved according to the number of oocytes retrieved. When comparing patients within the same subgroup of oocyte yield, Group A and B showed a comparable outcome up to the reported highest yield (>8). When more than 8 oocytes were available, Group A had a significantly better pregnancy rate outcome. Patients’ characteristics did not significantly differ between the two groups and the better outcome in the best responding patients in Group A was confirmed by a multivariable logistic regression analysis, that showed that both the use of rFSH + rLH and the total number of retrieved oocytes increased the probability of pregnancy with odd ratio (OR) of 1.628 and 1.083, respectively. When comparing patients with the same number of retrieved oocytes under real-life circumstances, the association of rFSH + rLH results in a significantly higher pregnancy rate than hMG when more than 8 oocytes are retrieved. The reason(s) for this are unknown, but a more favorable effect on oocyte quality and/or endometrial receptivity could be involved.

(1) Background: Several researchers have investigated alternative markers related to ovarian responsiveness in order to better predict IVF outcomes, particularly in advanced reproductive-aged women. The follicular output rate (FORT), the follicle-oocyte index (FOI) and the ovarian sensitivity index (OSI) are among the most promising. However, these three metrics have not been investigated as independent predictors of live birth in women of advanced reproductive age; neither have they been compared to the two ‘component’ characteristics that are used to calculate them. (2) Methods: A logistic regression model containing all relevant predictors of ovarian reserve or response was used to evaluate the potential of FORT, FOI and OSI as predictors of live birth. After, the non-linear associations between FORT, FOI and OSI and the probability of live birth were evaluated. Finally, we fitted multiple logistic regression models to compare whether FORT, FOI and OSI were more informative predictors than their components. (3) Results: 590 couples received a total of 740 IVF cycles, after which, 127 (17.5%) obtained a live birth. None of FORT, FOI and OSI showed a strength of association or a p-value even close to female age (odds ratio for live birth (95% confidence interval) 1.00 (0.99–1.01), 1.00 (0.99–1.01), 0.98 (0.88–1.11) and 0.58 (0.48–0.72), respectively). The three models comparing FORT, FOI and OSI with the number of oocytes retrieved, the AFC, the number of preovulatory follicles and the FSH total dose were not more informative. (4) Conclusions: In a population of women of advanced age with unexplained infertility, none of FORT, FOI and OSI were predictive of live birth or more predictive than the two ‘component’ characteristics that were used to calculate them. We suggest clinicians and researchers still use female age as the most reliable predictor of an IVF treatment.