Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33422140›Full record

ArticleJournal of ovarian research2021

Rate of rebound in follicle growth after cessation of ovarian stimulation in initial non-responders: a prospective cohort study.

Norbert Gleicher, Andrea Weghofer, Sarah K Darmon, David H Barad

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ovarian research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Norbert GleicherThe Center for Human Reproduction, 10021, New York, NY, USA. ngleicher@thechr.com.
Andrea WeghoferThe Center for Human Reproduction, 10021, New York, NY, USA.
Sarah K DarmonThe Center for Human Reproduction, 10021, New York, NY, USA.
David H BaradThe Center for Human Reproduction, 10021, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

Center for Human Reproduction (CHR) n/aFoundation for Reproductive Medicine (FRM) n/a
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previously anecdotally observed rebounds in follicle growth after interruption of exogenous gonadotropins in absolute non-responders were the impetus for here reported study. In a prospective cohort study, we investigated 49 consecutive patients, absolutely unresponsive to maximal exogenous gonadotropin stimulation, for a so-called rebound response to ovarian stimulation. A rebound response was defined as follicle growth following complete withdrawal of exogenous gonadotropin stimulation after complete failure to respond to maximal gonadotropin stimulation over up to 5-7 days. Median age of study patients was 40.5 ± 5.1 years (range 23-52). Women with and without rebound did not differ significantly (40.0 ± 6.0 vs. 41.0 ± 7.0 years, P = 0.41), with 24 (49.0%) recording a rebound and 25 (51.0%) not. Among the former, 21 (87.5%) reached retrieval of 1-3 oocytes and 15 (30.6%) reached embryo transfer. A successful rebound in almost half of prior non-responders was an unsuspected response rate, as was retrieval of 1-3 oocytes in over half of rebounding patients. Attempting rebounds may, thus, represent another incremental step in very poor prognosis patients before giving up on utilization of autologous oocytes. Here presented findings support further investigations into the underlying physiology leading to such an unexpectedly high rebound rate.

Indexed as

AdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMiddle AgedOvarian FollicleOvulation InductionProspective StudiesYoung AdultFailure to respond, gonadotropin isotypeGlycosylationIn vitro fertilization (IVF)Low ovarian reservePoor prognosis

Identifiers

PMID33422140
PMCPMC7797149

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.