Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31838515›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2020

Individualized ovarian stimulation in IVF/ICSI treatment: it is time to stop using high FSH doses in predicted low responders.

Jori A Leijdekkers, Helen L Torrance, Nienke E Schouten, Theodora C van Tilborg, Simone C Oudshoorn, Ben Willem J Mol, Marinus J C Eijkemans, Frank J M Broekmans

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05103228 (Cumulative Pregnancy Rate With Lower and Higher Dose of Gonadotropin During Controlled Ovarian Hyperstimulation During IVF Among Expected Poor Responders), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05103228 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Cumulative Pregnancy Rate With Lower and Higher Dose of Gonadotropin During Controlled Ovarian Hyperstimulation During IVF Among Expected Poor Responders: a Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorPeter Kovacs MDRan2021 to 2023Enrolled190ConditionsInfertility, Ovarian DysfunctionArmsFollitropin Alfa, Follitropin delta, human menopausal gonadotropin
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Jori A LeijdekkersDepartment of Reproductive Medicine and Gynaecology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Helen L TorranceDepartment of Reproductive Medicine and Gynaecology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Nienke E SchoutenDepartment of Reproductive Medicine and Gynaecology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Theodora C van TilborgDepartment of Reproductive Medicine and Gynaecology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Simone C OudshoornDepartment of Reproductive Medicine and Gynaecology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Ben Willem J MolDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.
Marinus J C EijkemansJulius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Frank J M BroekmansDepartment of Reproductive Medicine and Gynaecology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In IVF/ICSI treatment, the FSH starting dose is often increased in predicted low responders from the belief that it improves the chance of having a baby by maximizing the number of retrieved oocytes. This intervention has been evaluated in several randomized controlled trials, and despite a slight increase in the number of oocytes-on average one to two more oocytes in the high versus standard dose group-no beneficial impact on the probability of a live birth has been demonstrated (risk difference, -0.02; 95% CI, -0.11 to 0.06). Still, many clinicians and researchers maintain a highly ingrained belief in 'the more oocytes, the better'. This is mainly based on cross-sectional studies, where the positive correlation between the number of retrieved oocytes and the probability of a live birth is interpreted as a direct causal relation. If the latter would be present, indeed, maximizing the oocyte number would benefit our patients. The current paper argues that the use of high FSH doses may not actually improve the probability of a live birth for predicted low responders undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment and exemplifies the flaws of directly using cross-sectional data to guide FSH dosing in clinical practice. Also, difficulties in the de-implementation of the increased FSH dosing strategy are discussed, which include the prioritization of intermediate outcomes (such as cycle cancellations) and the potential biases in the interpretation of study findings (such as confirmation or rescue bias).

Indexed as

Fertilization in VitroSperm Injections, IntracytoplasmicCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFollicle Stimulating HormoneHumansLive BirthOvulation InductionPregnancyPregnancy RateFollicle Stimulating HormoneFSH dosingIVF/ICSIlive birthoocyte numberpredicted low responder

Identifiers

PMID31838515
PMCPMC7485616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.