ArticleCureus2025
Ovarian Responses and Outcomes of In Vitro Fertilization Following Progesterone-Primed Ovarian Stimulation and Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone (GnRH) Antagonist Protocols Using Follitropin Delta.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aimed to examine the effects on oocyte retrieval, culture results, and pregnancy rates in Japanese women who underwent ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology using two different protocols with follitropin delta. Specifically, it compared ovarian responses between a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol, used as a conventional controlled ovarian stimulation method, and a progesterone-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol, considered a relatively new method. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective, observational study was conducted at a single in vitro fertilization clinic in Tokyo, Japan, from April 2022 to March 2024. The study population included infertile patients who were scheduled for treatment and met the inclusion criteria. Eligible participants were Japanese women aged 20-45 years with preserved ovarian function, indicated by an anti-Müllerian hormone level of ≥0.8 ng/mL. Exclusion criteria included contraindications for follitropin delta, previous oocyte stimulation for egg donation or fertility preservation, follicle-stimulating hormone levels ≥35 mIU/mL, uncontrolled malignant disease, stage III/IV endometriosis, and the use of hormone preparations (excluding thyroid medication) during the last menstrual cycle prior to study entry. The primary endpoint was the pregnancy rate per transfer in GnRH antagonist and PPOS cycles. Secondary endpoints included the number of oocytes retrieved and the blastocyst formation rate. Ongoing pregnancy was defined as a pregnancy in which a fetal heart rate was confirmed by 10 weeks of gestation. Accumulated data from GnRH antagonist cycles and PPOS cycles at the institution were combined to compare oocyte retrieval outcomes and pregnancy rates per transfer. Additionally, a stratified analysis by age (<35, 35-39, and ≥40 years) was performed.
resultsAccumulated data included 149 GnRH antagonist cycles and 147 PPOS cycles. Oocyte retrieval outcomes and pregnancy rates per transfer were compared between the two protocols. There was no significant difference in the number of oocytes retrieved. However, the number of blastocysts showed a higher trend in the PPOS group compared to the GnRH antagonist group (p = 0.065). Across all age groups, the PPOS cycle tended to yield higher numbers of retrieved oocytes and blastocysts. Nonetheless, no significant difference was observed in the pregnancy rate per transfer between the two protocols.
conclusionsBoth the GnRH antagonist and PPOS protocols demonstrated trends toward higher numbers of retrieved oocytes and blastocysts, with comparable pregnancy rates across all age groups, suggesting similar clinical outcomes. A key limitation of this study is its retrospective design at a single institution; therefore, future prospective, large-scale studies are warranted.
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.