ArticleReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2025
Euploidy rate and pregnancy outcomes in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy cycles using progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus GnRH antagonist protocol.
Article in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating progestin-primed and GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation protocols in PGT-A cycles: implications for clinical practice.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Impact of GnRH antagonist protocols versus progestin-primed ovarian stimulation on reproductive outcomes in advanced reproductive age women: a propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies has yielded contradictory findings regarding the relationship between controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) protocol and euploid blastocyst rate. This study aimed to investigate whether progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) influences the euploidy rate and pregnancy outcomes in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) cycles compared to GnRH antagonist protocol.
methodsThe retrospective study analyzed data from 598 PGT-A cycles conducted between January 2017 and October 2022 utilizing either PPOS (medroxyprogesterone acetate) or the GnRH antagonist protocol. The biopsied trophectoderm from 2218 blastocysts was collected for euploidy analysis via next-generation sequencing.
resultsBiopsied blastocyst number was comparable between PPOS group and GnRH antagonist group (3.51 ± 2.93 vs. 3.91 ± 3.19, P = 0.116), although PPOS yielded fewer MII oocytes (10.27 ± 6.59 vs. 11.60 ± 6.71, P = 0.015). The euploidy rate (43.3% vs. 45.0%, P = 0.423), aneuploidy rate (36.9% vs. 36.0%, P = 0.127), and mosaic rate (19.4% vs. 17.6%, P = 0.127) were similar between the PPOS and GnRH antagonist protocols. Additionally, PPOS demonstrated comparable pregnancy outcomes to GnRH antagonist protocol, including clinical pregnancy rates (58.1% vs. 59.8%, P = 0.713) and live birth rates (51.1% vs. 46.9%, P = 0.364). But lower miscarriage rate was shown in the PPOS protocol (7.9% vs. 16.8%, P = 0.019).
conclusionsThe PPOS protocol did not negatively impact euploid blastocyst formation or pregnancy outcomes compared to the GnRH antagonist protocol, indicating that medroxyprogesterone acetate was an alternate option to antagonists for women undergoing PGT-A.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.