108
Views
6
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Research

Effectiveness of corifollitropin alfa used for ovarian stimulation of poor responder patients

&
Pages 609-615 | Published online: 17 Oct 2016

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the efficiency and efficacy of corifollitropin alfa (follicle-stimulating hormone–carboxy terminal peptide) in the treatment of poor responder patients.

Methods

A total of 85 poor responder patients with a mean age 40.2±3.9 years entered our assisted fertilization program. The patients were prospectively randomized into two groups based on the ovarian stimulation regimen used: group A (study group) (n=42) received clomiphene citrate and corifollitropin alfa for the first 7 days of stimulation followed by recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (rFSH) in a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol, and group B (control group) (n=43) received clomiphene citrate and a daily injection of rFSH in a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol. We analyzed the stimulation outcome, the number of retrieved oocytes, cleaving embryos, and pregnancy and implantation rates as well.

Results

Comparable results were observed between the two groups in terms of demographic data, stimulation outcome, and the number of canceled cycles. There were no differences evident between groups A and B with respect to the number of retrieved oocytes (3.0±0.8 and 2.7±0.7, respectively) and the number of cleaving embryos (1.8±0.6 and 1.7±0.7, respectively). Higher, though not statistically significant, differences were observed in favor of group A compared to group B in terms of pregnancy rate per cycle (19% and 16.3%, respectively), pregnancy rate per transfer (21.6% and 17.9%, respectively), and implantation rate (14.7% and 13.4%, respectively). Also, miscarriage rate was similar between patients treated with corifollitropin alfa and those treated with daily rFSH injection (12.5% and 14.2%, respectively).

Conclusion

The results show that ovarian stimulation with corifollitropin alfa appears to be as efficacious and efficient as daily injection rFSH regimen to treat patients with poor ovarian response.

Introduction

The ovarian stimulation induction is a prerequisite procedure in assisted fertilization technologies. The recruitment of a sufficient number of growing follicles following ovarian stimulation increases the oocyte yield and subsequently the success rate after in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment. However, some women exhibit a scarce ovarian response following controlled ovarian stimulation, and this phenomenon is mainly observed in the so-called “poor responder” patients.Citation1 Poor ovarian response (POR) to gonadotropins affects ~9%–24% of IVF patients, and many other causes could be involved, such as woman’s age, endometriosis, genetic disorders, ovarian surgery, or even iatrogenic factors.Citation2,Citation3 Until recently, there was insufficient evidence to uniformly define poor responder patients, and the most common criteria used were based on the low number of recovered oocytes following an adequate ovarian stimulation.Citation4Citation8 More recently, a first systematic and realistic attempt to identify women who respond poorly to stimulation has been reported by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. They established and published the so-called “Bologna Criteria”,Citation9,Citation10 which include: 1) advanced women’s age (>40 years) or any other risk factor for POR; 2) recovering a few number of oocytes (<3 oocytes) following previous ovarian stimulation; and 3) abnormal ovarian reserve test (antral follicle count <5–7 or antiMullerian hormone <0.5–1.1 ng/mL). However, it has been established that the presence of two of these criteria after maximal stimulation are sufficient to define a patient as poor responder in the absence of advanced maternal age or abnormal ovarian reserve test.Citation9,Citation10

Several ovarian stimulation regimens have been used to treat poor responder women, but the results achieved are still controversial. These protocols include: varying the dose of gonadotropins or the day of menstrual cycle to initiate the stimulation,Citation11,Citation12 high dose of gonadotropins in a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) long protocol,Citation13,Citation14 administration of GnRH and gonadotropins together in the follicular phase (flare-up protocol),Citation15,Citation16 pre-cycle estrogen treatment,Citation17 growth hormone co-treatment,Citation18 gonadotropin suppression with oral contraception before IVF cycle,Citation19 using clomiphene citrate for stimulationCitation20 or clomiphene citrate with human menopausal gonadotropin in an antagonist GnRH protocol,Citation21 and non-stimulated (nature cycle) IVF treatment.Citation22 All these stimulation regimens have been used with a limited success, and adequate number and quality of retrieved oocytes in poor responder women still remain the most challenging items in assisted reproductive technologies.Citation23,Citation24

A novel recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) analog, known as corifollitropin alfa, has recently been introduced for ovarian stimulation in patients undergoing IVF treatment.Citation25 It contains an alpha subunit, which is identical to that of FSH, coupled to a hybrid subunit of the beta subunit of human FSH and the carboxy-terminal peptide of the beta subunit of human chorionic gonadotropin.Citation26,Citation27 Clinical data on corifollitropin alfa have shown that it has longer half-life and slower absorption rate compared to rFSH.Citation28,Citation29 Thus, the administration of a single dose of corifollitropin alfa during the early follicular phase of the menstrual cycle is capable of sustaining follicular development for the first week of stimulation unlike rFSH, which must be injected daily.Citation30 Moreover, it has been demonstrated that corifollitropin alfa is well tolerated by patients and its use does not present any adverse events or complications.Citation31 Because of its bioactivity profile, some authors have suggested that corifollitropin alfa may have a positive effect on stimulation outcome of poor responder women undergoing IVF treatment.Citation32,Citation33

In the present study, we evaluated the effect of the long-acting FSH and corifollitropin alfa on stimulation and clinical outcomes, when used for ovarian stimulation of poor responder women.

Methods

Patient selection

A total of 85 poor responder women entered our IVF program from July 2013 to December 2015. The patients were considered poor responder according to “Bologna Criteria”:Citation9 1) advanced women’s age (>40 years); 2) few number of retrieved oocytes (<3 oocytes) following previous ovarian stimulation; and 3) abnormal ovarian reserve test (antral follicle count <5–7 or anti-Mullerian hormone <0.5–1.1 ng/mL). The patients were included in the study if they fulfilled all criteria or at least two of them. The patients were randomized before gonadotropin stimulation, using a computer-generated random assignment. Sealed envelopes were used until starting the process of randomization in order to conceal treatment allocation. The patients received all the information regarding the nature of the study and gave their written informed consent. The study was approved by One Day Medical Center ethical committee.

The primary parameters considered for statistical analysis were: the number of recovered oocytes, the number of mature metaphase II oocytes, the number of cleaving embryos, pregnancy rate, and implantation rate. We analyzed also the stimulation outcome, ie, canceled cycles, duration of stimulation, serum estradiol level, endometrial thickness on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin administration, fertilization rate, delivery rate, and miscarriage rate.

Ovarian stimulation

The patients were prospectively randomized into two groups: corifollitropin (group A), as the study group, and daily rFSH injection (group B) as the control group. In group A, 42 women aged 40.3±3.9 years were stimulated with 150 mg/day clomiphene citrate, starting from days 2 to 6 of the cycle. On day 2 of the cycle, a single dose of 150 μg of corifollitropin alfa (Elonva, Merck Sharp & Dohme Limited, Rome, Italy) was administered and thereafter a dose of 225 IU/day of FSH (Gonal F, Merk Serono, Rome, Italy) was administered daily, starting from day 7 of the cycle onward. In group B, 43 women aged 41±2.6 years received 150 mg/day clomiphene citrate from days 2 to 5 of the cycle and a dose of 225 IU of rFSH was administered daily, starting from day 3 of the cycle onward. When the leading follicle reached 14 mm, all patients in both groups received 0.25 mg/day GnRH antagonist. A dose of 10,000 IU of human chorionic gonadotropin (Gonasi HP, IBSA, Lugano, Switzerland) was administered in order to induce the final ovulation maturation and trigger when the leading follicle reached a diameter of 18–20 mm and at least two follicles of 17–18 mm. Ovum pick-up was performed 36 hours after human chorionic gonadotropin administration and the retrieved oocytes were assessed for their maturity. Mature metaphase II oocytes were inseminated by intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection and the resultant viable embryos were transferred into the patient’s uterus. The embryo transfer was performed on day 3 after insemination and a dose of 50 mg/day of progesterone was administered in order to support the luteal phase after embryo transfer.

Statistical analysis

The data were statistically analyzed using the JMP software (version 4.0.4; SAS Corp., Cary, NC, USA). According to the two-tailed hypothesis, the minimum total sample size required was 84 patients, at least 42 patients per group, in order to reach a statistical power of 80% with confidence intervals of 95% and an α level of 0.05. The two-tailed Student’s t-test, Fisher’s exact test, and two-by-two table were used to analyze the parameters between groups where appropriate, and the significance level was set at P≤0.05.

Results

Seventy-six out of the 85 studied women underwent the oocyte retrieval procedure, 37 women in group A and 39 women in group B. Nine patients were canceled because of ovarian response failure to stimulation: five in group A and four in group B. On comparing between the two groups, no statistically significant differences were observed regarding the primary end points (number of retrieved oocytes, number of cleaving embryos, pregnancy and implantation rates, and all studied secondary end points as well).

As depicted in , demographic data, stimulation outcome, and cancelation rate were similar in both groups. shows comparable embryological results, without any relevant significant differences observed between groups A and B in terms of the number of retrieved oocytes (3±0.8 and 2.7±0.7, respectively), the number of mature oocytes (25±0.8 and 2.4±0.8, respectively), and the number of cleaving transferred (1.8±0.6 and 1.7±0.7, respectively). Higher, though not statistically significant, difference in favor of group A compared to B in terms of pregnancy rate per embryo transfer (21.6% in group A and 17.9% in group B), pregnancy rate per cycle (19% in group A and 16.3% in group B), implantation rate (14.7 in group A and 13.4 in group B), and delivery rate per transfer (13.5 in group A and 10.3 in group B). Ongoing pregnancy rate and miscarriage rate were also similar between the two groups ().

Table 1 Demographic data and stimulation outcome

Table 2 Embryological characteristics

Table 3 Clinical outcome

Discussion

Ovarian stimulation is an important step in assisted reproduction technologies. It implements the administration of exogenous gonadotropins to induce the development of a number of follicles, thus increasing the oocyte yield and the availability of transferable embryos. In turn, adequate oocyte recruitment and recovery, following ovarian-controlled hyperstimulation, increases the likelihood of conception. However, not all women undergoing IVF treatment respond adequately to gonadotropins’ stimulation. This phenomenon occurs mainly in the so-called “poor responder” patients.Citation1 Obviously, poor response to gonadotropins’ stimulation still remains the most challenging problem in assisted reproduction field. Several ovarian stimulation approaches have been implemented with the aim to improve ovarian response and clinical outcome in poor responder women, but the results are still low and are often controversial.Citation11Citation21 The main reason for this controversy is due to the difficulties in establishing a uniform definition of poor responder patients, which can be universally applied.Citation34 Recently, the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology working group on POR has published a consensus paper describing three criteria to be used to identify women with POR, the so-called “Bologna Criteria”.Citation9,Citation10 Although these criteria remain the most realistic attempt to identify women with a high probability of having reduced ovarian reserves, further research on the various mechanisms and risk factors, which may differently influence the ovarian reserve, are still urgently needed.

Moreover, a recent Cochrane review, analyzing 10 published trials on different stimulation regimens used for the treatment of poor responder patients, did not find sufficient evidence to indicate any stimulation approach for routine clinical use to treat poor responder women.Citation24 With the advent of DNA technology, a novel recombinant long-acting gonadotropin, corifollitropin alfa, has been recently produced and became available for clinical application. Its efficacy to stimulate multiple follicular growths has been proven in normal responder’s women undergoing IVF treatment.Citation28Citation30

A growing body of evidence, as reported in the literature, has widely demonstrated that long-acting FSH (corifollitropin alfa) is noninferior to daily rFSH. A systematic review and meta-analysis included four randomized trials, with a total of 2,326 normal responder patients, on the role of corifollitropin alfa compared to rFSH in a GnRH antagonist downregulation protocol. The analyzed data showed no significant difference in ongoing pregnancy rate, while an increased risk of developing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome was observed in patients treated with corifollitropin alfa.Citation35 More recently, another meta-analysis, analyzing three randomized controlled trials, involving 3,392 normal responder’s women, on corifollitropin alfa compared to rFSH did not evidence any significant differences in all studied parameters, including pregnancy and live birth rates. The authors concluded that a single dose of corifollitropin alfa for the first 7 days of stimulation is similarly effective as daily injected rFSH.Citation36 Additionally, a Cochrane review including six randomized controlled trials, with a total of 3,753 patients, resulted in no significant differences between patients treated with the long-acting FSH and daily rFSH. From the analyzed data it was concluded that the long-acting FSH is a safe treatment and equally effective compared to daily FSH, but its efficacy in the treatment of hyper or poor responder women is still to be demonstrated.Citation37 Moreover, treatment of older women (aged ≥35 to ≤42 years) with corifollitropin alfa has proven to be as efficacious as daily rFSH in terms of the number of recovered oocytes, pregnancy rate, and live birth rate.Citation38

Nevertheless, in all preliminary studies on corifollitropin alfa, poor responder patients were excluded from studied population due to their reduced ovarian reserve,Citation37 but in our study we used a single dose of corifollitropin alfa administered in the early follicular phase of the menstrual cycle to induce multiple follicular recruitment and growth in poor responder patients undergoing IVF treatment. Previous studies have suggested that corifollitropin alfa might have a valuable role during the early phase of follicular development and growth. Based on the peculiar pharmacokinetic profile and bioactivity of corifollitropin alfa, which is characterized by around two-fold longer half-life in comparison to rFSH, it allows a sustained FSH activity during early follicular recruitment and development. This is a critical step for ovarian stimulation, particularly in the treatment of poor responder women.Citation28,Citation39

The use of corifollitropin alfa to treat poor responder patients was first reported by Polyzos et al in two retrospective published studies.Citation32,Citation40 In one study, they retrospectively compared poor responder patients stimulated with corifollitropin alfa plus rFSH in a GnRH antagonist regimen, and poor responder patients stimulated with the standard human menopausal gonadotropin in a GnRH agonist protocol. The obtained results were comparable and the authors concluded that there is no relevant difference between the two groups regarding all studied parameters.Citation32 In another retrospective study, the same authors reported on ovarian stimulation of two groups of poor responder women, based on their age: ≤40 years and ≥40 years groups. The patients in both groups were stimulated using corifollitropin alfa plus highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin in a GnRH antagonist regimen. The author observed a statistically higher pregnancy rate in favor of patients aged ≤40 years compared to those aged ≥40 years (28% and 0%, respectively), whereas all other studied parameters were similar between the two groups.Citation40 Recently, a randomized controlled trial showed that there were no statistically significant differences in all studied parameters, including pregnancy and live birth rates, between poor responder patients treated with corifollitropin alfa and those treated with daily rFSH (follitropin beta).Citation41 Additionally, Rinaldi and SelmanCitation33 have retrospectively compared poor responder women treated with corifollitropin alfa plus rFSH in a GnRH antagonist regimen and those stimulated with daily rFSH injection in a GnRH antagonist regimen. The achieved results were similar between the two groups for all analyzed parameters, including pregnancy and implantation rates. As the study was analyzed retrospectively and a small number of patients were included, the authors have addressed further studies on the possible positive effect of corifollitropin alfa when used for ovarian stimulation in poor responder patients.Citation33

In the present prospective randomized study, we attempt ovarian stimulation in poor responder patients using a single dose of corifollitropin alfa administered in early follicular phase followed by rFSH in comparison to rFSH daily administered to stimulate poor responder women. In both gonadotropin treatment protocols, clomiphene citrate was added because it has an antiestrogen activity and is capable of interfering with endogenous estrogen in the pituitary gland and hypothalamus by blocking the receptor-binding sites through a feedback-mediating mechanism, resulting in higher production of FSH and LH hormones by the pituitary gland. It also activates the production of a high level of gonadotropins, induces the ovarian follicle’s development, maturation, and ovulation. However, although a general agreement on the specific role of clomiphene citrate in ovarian stimulation is still lacking,Citation42 some authors have suggested that it may have a positive effect in the treatment of patients with poor ovarian reserve.Citation20,Citation43Citation45

Our results show that corifollitropin alfa exhibits similar results compared with daily injected rFSH when used to stimulate patients who respond poorly to ovarian stimulation with standard stimulation regimens. Nevertheless, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of all studied parameters, including number of retrieved oocytes, mature oocytes, fertilization rate, pregnancy rate, and implantation rate; evidence of a trend was observed in favor of the patients stimulated with corifollitropin alfa plus rFSH compared to those treated with daily rFSH.

Conclusion

Our study shows that corifollitropin alfa appears to be as efficacious and efficient as a daily rFSH stimulation regimen, and suggests that it can be a reliable alternative stimulation regimen to treat patients with poor ovarian reserve. However, an additional study on a large number of patients should be addressed in order to establish the effective role of the long-acting FSH, corifollitropin alfa, in patients who respond poorly to gonadotropin stimulation.

Author contributions

All authors contributed toward data analysis, drafting and revising the paper and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

References

  • FauserBvan HeusdenAManipulation of human ovarian function: Physiological concepts and clinical consequencesEndocr Rev1997181711069034787
  • FasouliotisSSimonALauferNEvaluation and treatment of low responders in assisted reproductive technology: a challenge to meetJ Assist Reprod Genet200017735737311077616
  • KeaySLiversedgeNMathurRJenkinsJAssisted conception following poor ovarian response to gonadotrophin stimulationBr J Obstet Gynaecol199710455215279166190
  • SurreyESSchoolcraftWBEvaluating strategies for improving ovarian response of the poor responder undergoing assisted reproductive techniquesFertil Steril200073466767610731523
  • TarlatzisBCZepiridisLGrimbizisGBontisJClinical management of low ovarian response to stimulation for IVF: a systematic reviewHum Reprod Update20039617612638782
  • BukulmezOAriciAAssessment of ovarian reserveCurr Opin Obstet Gynecol200416323123715129052
  • KyrouDKolibianakisEVenetisCAPapanikolaouEGBontisJTarlatzisBCHow to improve the probability of pregnancy in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysisFertil Steril200991374976618639875
  • PolyzosNPDevroeyPA systematic review of randomized trials for the treatment of poor ovarian responders: is there any light at the end of the tunnel?Fertil Steril20119651058106122036048
  • FerrarettiAPLa MarcaAFauserBCTarlatzisBNargundGGanaroliLESHRE consensus on the definition of ‘poor response’ to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteriaHum Reprod20112671616162421505041
  • FerrarettiAPGianaroliLThe Bologna criteria for the definition of poor ovrian responders: is there a need for revisionHum Reprod20142991842184525008235
  • HofmannGETonerJPMuasherSJJonesGSHigh dose follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) ovarian stimulation in low-responder patients for in vitro fertilizationJ Vitro Fertil Embryo Transfer198965285289
  • van HoffMHAlberdaATHuismanGJZeilmakerGHLeerentveldRADoubling the human menopausal gonadotropin dose in course of an in-vitro fertilization treatment cycle in low responders: a randomized studyHum Reprod1993833693738473450
  • SerafiniPStoneBKerinJBatzofinJQuinnPMarrsRPAn alternate approach to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in ‘poor responders’: pretreatment with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogFertil Steril198849190953121401
  • LandJAYarmolinskayaMIDumoulinJCEversJLHigh-dose human menopausal gonadotropin stimulation in poor responders does not improve in vitro fertilization outcomeFertil Steril1997655961965
  • HowlesCMMacnameeMCEdwardsRGShort term use of an LHRH agonist to treat poor responders entering an in-vitro fertilization programmeHum Reprod1987286556563125212
  • KarandeVMorrisRRhinehartJMillerCRaoRGleicherNLimited success using the ‘flare’ protocol in poor responders in cycles with low basal follicle-stimulating hormone levels during in-vitro fertilizationFertil Steril19976759009039130896
  • RusselJBPre-cycle estrogen treatment and poor respondersAssist Reprod Rev199558289
  • DorJSeidmanDSAmudaiEBiderDLevranDMashiachSAdjuvant growth hormone therapy in poor responders to in-vitro fertilization: a prospective randomized placebo-controlled double-blind studyHum Reprod199510140437745068
  • GonenYJacobsenWCasperRFGonadotropin suppression with oral contraceptives before in-vitro fertilizationFertil Steril19905322822872105244
  • AwonugaAONabiAIn vitro fertilization with low-dose clomiphene citrate stimulation in women who respond poorly to superovulationJ Assist Reprod Genet19971495035079401867
  • Abdel MohsenIYoussefMAFMElashmwiHDarwishAMohsenMNKhattabSMClomiphene citrate plus modified GnRH antagonist protocol for women with poor ovarian response undergoing ICSI treatment cycles: randomized controlled trialGynecol Obstet20133158
  • LindheimSRVidaliADitkoffESauerMVZingerMPoor responders to ovarian hyperstimulation may benefit from an attempt at natural-cycle oocyte retrievalJ Assist Reprod Genet19971431741769090562
  • KarandeVGleicherNA rational approach to the management of low responders in in-vitro fertilizationHum Reprod19991471744174810402380
  • PandianZMcTavishARAucottLHamiltonMPBhattacharyaSInterventions for ‘poor responders’ to controlled ovarian hyper stimulation (COH) in in-vitro fertilisation (IVF)Cochrane Database Syst Rev2010201CD004379
  • FauserBCAlperMMLedgerWSchoolcraftWBZandvlietAMannaertsBMEngage InvestigatorsPharmacokinetics and follicular dynamics of corifollitropin alfa versus recombinant FSH during ovarian stimulation for IVFReprod Biomed Online201122Suppl 1S23S3121575846
  • FaresFASuganumaNNishimoriKLaPoltPSHsuehAJBoimeIDesign of a long-acting follitropin agonist by fusing the C-terminal sequence of the chorionic gonadotropin beta subunit to the follitropin beta subunitProc Natl Acad Sci U S A19928910430443081374895
  • FauserBCJMMannaertsBMJLDevroeyPLeaderABoimeIBairdDTAdvance in recombinant DNA technology: corifollitropin alfa, a hybrid molecule with sustained follicle-stimulating activity and reduced injection frequencyHum Reprod Update200915330932119182099
  • DuijkersIJKlippingCBoerrigterPJMachielsenCSDe BieJJVoortmanGSingle dose pharmacokinetics and effects on follicular growth and serum hormones of a long-acting recombinant FSH preparation (FSH-CTP) in healthy pituitary-suppressed femalesHum Reprod20021781987199312151425
  • DevroeyPFauserBCPlatteauPBeckersNGDhontMMannaertsBMInduction of multiple follicular development by a single dose of long-acting recombinant follicle-Stimulating hormone (FSH-CTP, corifollitropin alfa) for controlled ovarian stimulation before in vitro fertilizationJ Clin Endocrinol Metab20048952062207015126522
  • Corifollitropin Alfa Dose-Finding Study GroupA randomized dose-response trial of a single injection of corifollitropin alfa to sustain multifollicular growth during controlled ovarian stimulationHum Reprod200823112484249218684735
  • BoulouxPMHandelsmanDJJockenhövelFThe FSH-CTP study groupFirst human exposure to FSH-CTP in hypogonadotrophic hypogonadal malesHum Reprod20011681592159711473948
  • PolyzosNPDevosMHumaidanPCorifollitropin alfa followed by rFSH in a GnRH antagonist protocol for poor ovarian responder patients: an observational pilot studyFertil Steril201399242242623084565
  • RinaldiLSelmanHCorifollitropin alfa in poor responders: preliminary resultsAustin J In Vitro Fertili2014123
  • ShanbhagSAucottLBhattacharyaSHamiltonMAMcTavishARInterventions for ‘poor responders’ to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in in-vitro fertilisation (IVF)Cochrane Database Sys Rev2007241CD004379
  • Mahmoud YoussefMAvan WelyMAboulfoutouhIEl-KhyatWvan der VeenFAl-InanyHIs there a place for corifollitropin alfa in IVF/ICSI cycles? A systematic review and meta-analysisFertil Steril201297487688522277766
  • GriesingerGBoostanfarRGordonKGatesDSiskCMCStegmannJBCorifollitropin alfa versus recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone: an individual patient data meta-analysisReprod Biomed Online2016331566027178762
  • BoostanfarRShapiroBLevyMLarge, comparative, randomized double-blind trial confirming noninferiority of pregnancy rates for corifollitropin alfa compared with recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone in a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist controlled ovarian stimulation protocol in older patients undergoing in vitro fertilizationFertil Steril201510419410326003273
  • PouwerAWFarquharCKremerJALong-acting FSH versus daily FSH for women undergoing assisted reproductionCochrane Database Syst Rev2012136CD009577
  • DevroeyPBoostanfarRKoperNPMannaertsBMIjzerman-BoonPCFauserBCENGAGE InvestigatorsA double-blind, non-inferiority RCT comparing corifollitropin alfa and recombinant FSH during the first seven days of ovarian stimulation using a GnRH antagonist protocolHum Reprod200924123063307219684043
  • PolyzosNPDe VosMCoronaRAddition of highly purified HMG after corifollitropin alfa in antagonist-treated poor ovarian responders: a pilot studyHum Rerod201328512541260
  • KolibianakisEMVenetisCABosdouJKCorifollitropin alfa compared with follitropin beta in poor responders undergoing ICSI: a randomized controlled trialHum Reprod201530243244025492411
  • Ozcan CenksoyPFiciciogluCKizilkaleOThe comparision of effect of microdose GnRH-a flare-up, GnRH antagonist/aromatase inhibitor letrozole and GnRH antagonist/clomiphene citrate protocols on IVF outcomes in poor responder patientsGynecol Endocrinol201430748548924592985
  • MohsenIAYoussefMAFMElashmwiHDarwishAMohsenMNKhattabSMClomiphene citrate plus modified GnRH antagonist protocol for women with poor ovarian response undergoing ICSI treatment cycles: randomized controlled trialGynecol Obstet2013315810.4172/2161-0932.1000158
  • OktemMGulerIErdemMErdemABozkurtNKarabacakOComparison of the effectiveness of clomiphene citrate versus letrozole in mild IVF in poor prognosis subfertile women with failed IVF cyclesInt J Fertil Steril201593286291
  • JovanovicVPKortDHGuarnacciaMMSauerMVLoboRADoes the addition of clomiphene citrate or letrazole to gonadotropin treatment enhance the oocyte yield in poor responders undergoing IVF?J Assist Reprod Genet201128111067107221989495