STUDY QUESTION: What is the recommended management of ovarian stimulation, based on the best available evidence in the literature?SUMMARY ANSWER: The guideline development group formulated 84 recommendations answering 18 key questions on ovarian stimulation.WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI has been discussed briefly in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline on fertility problems, and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologist has published a statement on ovarian stimulation in assisted reproduction. There are, to our knowledge, no evidence-based guidelines dedicated to the process of ovarian stimulation.STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The guideline was developed according to the structured methodology for development of ESHRE guidelines. After formulation of key questions by a group of experts, literature searches and assessments were performed. Papers published up to 8 November 2018 and written in English were included. The critical outcomes for this guideline were efficacy in terms of cumulative live birth rate per started cycle or live birth rate per started cycle, as well as safety in terms of the rate of occurrence of moderate and/or severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Based on the collected evidence, recommendations were formulated and discussed until consensus was reached within the guideline group. A stakeholder review was organized after finalization of the draft. The final version was approved by the guideline group and the ESHRE Executive Committee.MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The guideline provides 84 recommendations: 7 recommendations on pre-stimulation management, 40 recommendations on LH suppression and gonadotrophin stimulation, 11 recommendations on monitoring during ovarian stimulation, 18 recommendations on triggering of final oocyte maturation and luteal support and 8 recommendations on the prevention of OHSS. These include 61 evidence-based recommendations—of which only 21 were formulated as strong recommendations—and 19 good practice points and 4 research-only recommendations. The guideline includes a strong recommendation for the use of either antral follicle count or anti-Müllerian hormone (instead of other ovarian reserve tests) to predict high and poor response to ovarian stimulation. The guideline also includes a strong recommendation for the use of the GnRH antagonist protocol over the GnRH agonist protocols in the general IVF/ICSI population, based on the comparable efficacy and higher safety. For predicted poor responders, GnRH antagonists and GnRH agonists are equally recommended. With regards to hormone pre-treatment and other adjuvant treatments (metformin, growth hormone (GH), testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone, aspirin and sildenafil), the guideline group concluded that none are recommended for increasing efficacy or safety.LIMITATIONS, REASON FOR CAUTION: Several newer interventions are not well studied yet. For most of these interventions, a recommendation against the intervention or a research-only recommendation was formulated based on insufficient evidence. Future studies may require these recommendations to be revised.WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The guideline provides clinicians with clear advice on best practice in ovarian stimulation, based on the best evidence available. In addition, a list of research recommendations is provided to promote further studies in ovarian stimulation.STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The guideline was developed and funded by ESHRE, covering expenses associated with the guideline meetings, with the literature searches and with the dissemination of the guideline. The guideline group members did not receive payment. F.B. reports research grant from Ferring and consulting fees from Merck, Ferring, Gedeon Richter and speaker’s fees from Merck. N.P. reports research grants from Ferring, MSD, Roche Diagnositics, Theramex and Besins Healthcare; consulting fees from MSD, Ferring and IBSA; and speaker’s fees from Ferring, MSD, Merck Serono, IBSA, Theramex, Besins Healthcare, Gedeon Richter and Roche Diagnostics. A.L.M reports research grants from Ferring, MSD, IBSA, Merck Serono, Gedeon Richter and TEVA and consulting fees from Roche, Beckman-Coulter. G.G. reports consulting fees from MSD, Ferring, Merck Serono, IBSA, Finox, Theramex, Gedeon-Richter, Glycotope, Abbott, Vitrolife, Biosilu, ReprodWissen, Obseva and PregLem and speaker’s fees from MSD, Ferring, Merck Serono, IBSA, Finox, TEVA, Gedeon Richter, Glycotope, Abbott, Vitrolife and Biosilu. E.B. reports research grants from Gedeon Richter; consulting and speaker’s fees from MSD, Ferring, Abbot, Gedeon Richter, Merck Serono, Roche Diagnostics and IBSA; and ownership interest from IVI-RMS Valencia. P.H. reports research grants from Gedeon Richter, Merck, IBSA and Ferring and speaker’s fees from MSD, IBSA, Merck and Gedeon Richter. J.U. reports speaker’s fees from IBSA and Ferring. N.M. reports research grants from MSD, Merck and IBSA; consulting fees from MSD, Merck, IBSA and Ferring and speaker’s fees from MSD, Merck, IBSA, Gedeon Richter and Theramex. M.G. reports speaker’s fees from Merck Serono, Ferring, Gedeon Richter and MSD. S.K.S. reports speaker’s fees from Merck, MSD, Ferring and Pharmasure. E.K. reports speaker’s fees from Merck Serono, Angellini Pharma and MSD. M.K. reports speaker’s fees from Ferring. T.T. reports speaker’s fees from Merck, MSD and MLD. The other authors report no conflicts of interest.Disclaimer: This guideline represents the views of ESHRE, which were achieved after careful consideration of the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. In the absence of scientific evidence on certain aspects, a consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders has been obtained.Adherence to...

Background and objective: Mutations in bone morphogenic protein 15 (BMP15) and growth/differentiation factor 9 (GDF9) lead to altered fertility in animal models. In the human, a heterozygous point mutation of BMP15 has been associated with premature ovarian failure (POF). Subject and methods: We have directly sequenced both genes in a cohort of 203 POF patients presenting with primary or secondary amenorrhea and high FSH levels and in a control population including 54 women with regular menstrual cycles who had at least one child. Results: We have identified several heterozygous variants. One alteration in GDF9 (S186Y) and one in BMP15 (L148P) may have pathogenic effects as both positions are conserved in vertebrate species, ranging from the chicken to mammals. These variants were absent in the control samples. We also found synonymous and neutral substitutions. Conclusions: We propose that although mutations in BMP15 and GDF9 are not a major cause of ovarian insufficiency, they may be involved in POF.

Context: Puberty is associated with increased testicular testosterone (TT) synthesis, which is required to trigger spermatogenesis and to repress anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) production. However, testicular gonadotropin stimulation during fetal and newborn life neither initiates spermatogenesis nor represses AMH. Objective: We postulated that a lack of androgen receptor (AR) expression in Sertoli cells (SC) might explain why these processes do not occur during early human development. Methods and Patients: Using immunohistochemistry and quantitative PCR, we examined the relationship between AR, AMH, and FSH receptor expression in fetal, newborn, and adult human testis. The ability of testosterone to repress AMH secretion was evaluated in male newborns, neonates, and two adults with androgen insensitivity syndrome and also in vitro using SMAT1 SC. Results: FSH receptor was present in SC at all developmental stages. In fetal and newborn testis, AR was expressed in peritubular and Leydig cells but not in SC. This coincided with the absence of spermatogenesis and with strong SC AMH expression. In adult testis, spermatogenesis was associated with AR expression and with a decrease in SC AMH content. Accordingly, AR mRNA expression was lower and AMH mRNA expression higher in fetal testes than in adult testes. In androgen insensitivity syndrome patients, combined gonadotropin stimulation induced an increase in circulating testosterone and AMH, a finding consistent with a failure of TT to repress AMH in the absence of AR signalling. Finally, direct androgen repression of AMH only occurred in AR-expressing SMAT1 cells. Conclusion: Functional ARs are essential for TT-mediated AMH repression in SC.

Objective Premature ovarian failure (POF) encompasses a heterogeneous spectrum of conditions, with phenotypic variability among patients. The etiology of POF remains unknown in most cases. We performed a global phenotyping of POF women with the aim of better orienting attempts at an etiological diagnosis. Design and methods We performed a mixed retrospective and prospective study of clinical, biological, histological, morphological, and genetic data relating to 357 consecutive POF patients between 1997 and 2008. The study was conducted at a reproductive endocrinology referral center. Results Seventy-six percent of the patients presented with normal puberty and secondary amenorrhea. Family history was present in 14% of the patients, clinical and/or biological autoimmunity in 14.3%. Fifty-six women had a fluctuating form of POF. The presence of follicles was suggested at ultrasonography in 50% of the patients, and observed in 29% at histology; the negative predictive value of the presence of follicles at ultrasonography was 77%. Bone mineral density alterations were found in 58% of the women. Eight patients had X chromosomal abnormalities other than Turner's syndrome, eight other patients evidenced FMR1 pre-mutation. Two other patients had autoimmune polyendocrine syndrome type 2 and 1. Conclusion A genetic cause of POF was identified in 25 patients, i.e. 7% of the whole cohort. POF etiology remains most often undiscovered. Novel strategies of POF phenotyping are in such content mandatory to improve the rate of POF patients for whom etiology is identified.

The advent of embryo and oocyte vitrification today gives reproductive specialists an opportunity to consider new strategies for improving the practice and results of IVF attempts. As the freezing of entire cohorts does not compromise, and may even improve, the results of IVF attempts, it is possible to break away from the standard sequence of stimulation–retrieval–transfer. The constraints associated with ovarian stimulation in relation to the potential harmful effects of the hormonal environment on endometrial receptivity can be avoided. This review will look at the new stimulation protocols where progesterone is used to block the LH surge. Thanks to ‘freeze all’ strategies, the increase in progesterone could actually be no longer a cause for concern. There are two ways of using progesterone, whether it be endogenous, as in luteal phase stimulation, or exogenous, as in the use of progesterone in the follicular phase i.e. progestin primed ovarian stimulation. A literature search was carried out (until September 2016) on MEDLINE. The following text words were utilized to generate the list of citations: progestin primed ovarian stimulation, luteal phase stimulation, luteal stimulation, duostim, double stimulation, random start. Articles and their references were then examined in order to identify other potential studies. All of the articles are reported in this review. The use of progesterone during ovarian stimulation is effective in blocking the LH surge, whether endogenous or exogenous, and it does not affect the number of oocytes collected or the quality of the embryos obtained. Its main constraint is that it requires total freezing and delayed transfer. A variety of stimulation protocols can be derived from these two methods, and their implications are discussed, from fertility preservation to ovarian response profiles to organization for the patients and clincs. These new regimens enable more flexibility and are of emerging interest in daily practice. However, their medical and economic significance remains to be demonstrated. The use of luteal phase or follicular phase protocols with progestins could rapidly develop in the context of oocyte donation and fertility preservation not related to oncology. Their place could develop even more in the general population of patients in IVF programs. The strategy of total freezing continues to develop, thanks to technical improvements, in particular vitrification and PGS on blastocysts, and thanks to studies showing improvements in embryo implantation when the transfer take place far removed from the hormonal changes caused by ovarian stimulation.

BACKGROUND: In primates, androgens can play a synergistic role with FSH in promoting the early follicular recruitment, which is critical in assisted reproduction technique programmes. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether poor responders can benefit from androgen application. METHODS: Inclusion criteria were a previous poor ovarian response to controlled ovarian stimulation and a decreased hormonal ovarian reserve. Selected women were randomized to receive either transdermal application of testosterone (n = 24) or placebo (n = 25) gel for 15 days before FSH treatment for a second IVF cycle. Similar GnRH analogue and equivalent FSH daily doses were used in both cycles. The primary outcome was the total number of oocytes retrieved. RESULTS: Testosterone gel application resulted in a significant increase in plasma testosterone levels but did not significantly improve the antral follicle count. Furthermore, after gel application, the main parameters of the ovarian response (numbers of pre-ovulatory follicles, total and mature oocytes and embryos) did not significantly differ between testosterone and placebo-treated patients. CONCLUSION: No significant beneficial effects of androgen administration on the ovarian response to FSH could be demonstrated. However, subsequent clinical trials are needed to determine whether an optimal dose and/or a longer duration of testosterone administration may be helpful.