Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
Phase 3 N=90 Randomized Treatment

Progestin Primed Double Stimulation Protocol Versus Flexible GnRH Antagonist Protocol in Poor Responders

Infertility, Female

Enrolled (actual)
90
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Feb 2022
Primary outcome: Primary: the Number of M2 Oocytes Retrieved — 6; 4.5 oocytes — p=0.254

Study Design & Population

Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 3
Interventions
Duphaston (Drug); Gonadotropin (Drug); Cetrotide Injectable Product (Drug); Decapeptyl (Drug); Chorionic Gonadotropin (Drug); Combined Oral Contraceptive (Drug); Cyclo-Progynova (Drug); progesterone (Drug)
Age
Adult · 20+ yrs
Sex
Female
Sponsor
El Shatby University Hospital for Obstetrics and Gynecology
Primary completion
Mar 2021

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
the Number of M2 Oocytes Retrieved
6; 4.5 0.254
PRIMARY
the Fertilization Rate
71.43; 80.91 0.219
PRIMARY
the Resultant Embryos Number
4; 3 0.269
PRIMARY
the Implantation Rate
50; 50 0.072
PRIMARY
the Clinical Pregnancy Rate.
7; 8 1
SECONDARY
the Difference in the Ongoing Pregnancy Rate in Both Protocols.
6; 5 0.720
SECONDARY
the Difference Between the Follicular Phase and the Luteal Phase of the Progestin Primed Double Stimulation Protocol Regarding the Total Days of Controlled Ovarian Hyperstimulation
10; 12 0.002 sig
SECONDARY
the Difference Between the Follicular Phase and the Luteal Phase of the Progestin Primed Double Stimulation Protocol Regarding the Total Dosage of Gonadotropins Used in the Controlled Ovarian Hyperstimulation
3000; 3600 0.007 sig
SECONDARY
the Difference Between the Follicular Phase and the Luteal Phase of the Progestin Primed Double Stimulation Protocol Regarding the Number of M2 Oocytes Retrieved
2; 4 0.001 sig
SECONDARY
the Difference Between the Follicular Phase and the Luteal Phase of the Progestin Primed Double Stimulation Protocol Regarding the Fertilization Rate.
66.67; 100 0.04 sig
SECONDARY
the Difference Between the Follicular Phase and the Luteal Phase of the Progestin Primed Double Stimulation Protocol Regarding the Resultant Embryos Number
1; 3 <0.001 sig
SECONDARY
Assessing the Difference Between the Follicular Phase of the Progestin Primed Double Stimulation Protocol and the First Round of the Conventional GnRH Antagonist Protocol Regarding the Number of M2 Oocytes Retrieved .
2; 2 0.851
SECONDARY
Assessing the Difference Between the Follicular Phase of the Progestin Primed Double Stimulation Protocol and the First Round of the Conventional GnRH Antagonist Protocol Regarding the Fertilization Rate.
66.67; 91.67 0.304
SECONDARY
Assessing the Difference Between the Follicular Phase of the Progestin Primed Double Stimulation Protocol and the First Round of the Conventional GnRH Antagonist Protocol Regarding the Resultant Embryos Number.
1.66; 1.69 0.486

Summary

The worldwide prevalence of primary and secondary infertility is estimated at ~2% and 10.5%, respectively, among women aged 20-44 years and attempting to conceive. Poor ovarian responders (PORs) involve 9-24% of patients undergoing in-vitro fertilization (IVF). proper tailoring of the ovarian stimulation protocol in order to maximize the number of oocytes collected represents a crucial step for them to eventually conceive. Recent evidence indicates that in the same menstrual cycle, there are multiple follicular recruitment waves. This coincides with the theory that folliculogenesis occurs in a wave-like fashion. Thus, within a single menstrual cycle, there can theoretically be multiple opportunities for a clinician to collect oocytes, as opposed to the conventional single cohort of antral follicles during the follicular phase. Utilizing this concept, clinicians have been attempting to retrieve oocytes from poor responders using both the follicular-phase stimulation (FPS) and the luteal-phase stimulation (LPS) protocols to increase the number of oocytes collected shorter within shorter period of time. By increasing the number of the retrieved oocytes collected, a better clinical can be assured since there is a clear relationship between the number of oocytes collected and live birth rates across all female age groups. which protocol is the most effective remains controversial and the efficacy of PPOS in POR compared with that of conventional protocols is unclear.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

poor ovarian responders patients defined by Bologna criteria

Exclusion Criteria

  • Male factor infertility due to azoospermia.
  • Patients with uncorrected uterine pathology.
  • Patients with the diagnosis of severe endometriosis.
  • Patients with BMI over 35.
View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04537078). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search