ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2025
Three different protocols for pituitary suppression: progestins (dydrogesterone or medroxyprogesterone acetate) versus GnRH antagonist-balancing efficacy and cost in ovarian stimulation.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Luteinizing hormone dynamics during progestin-primed ovarian stimulation do not predict follicular output in women with normo-ovarian reserve.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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the clinical effectiveness and overall treatment cost of three ovarian stimulation protocols-dydrogesterone (DYD), medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), and GnRH antagonist-in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF).
methodsThis prospective, multicenter cohort study was conducted at two IVF units from March 2023 to March 2024. A total of 307 women undergoing IVF were divided into three groups based on their pituitary suppression protocol: DYD (n = 99), MPA (n = 101), and GnRH antagonist (n = 107). Ovarian stimulation parameters, pregnancy outcomes, and detailed cost analyses were then compared across these groups.
resultsThe number of mature oocytes (MII) retrieved and follicular output rate (FOI) were comparable among the three groups (MII, p = 0.67; FOI, p = 0.74). Gonadotropin consumption and estradiol levels on trigger day were significantly higher in the MPA group (p < 0.001 and p = 0.009, respectively). Clinical pregnancy rates (DYD 37.4%, MPA 32.7%, GnRH antagonist 34.6%; p = 0.78) and ongoing pregnancy rates (DYD 32.3%, MPA 28.7%, GnRH antagonist 29.9%; p = 0.85) did not differ significantly among groups. While the LH suppression cost per cycle was highest in the GnRH antagonist group (257.7 USD), the total cycle cost for this group was the lowest, as it typically involves fresh embryo transfer compared to frozen embryo transfer (FET) in PPOS (progestin-primed ovarian stimulation) protocols.
conclusionPPOS protocols (DYD or MPA) offer clinical outcomes comparable to the GnRH antagonist protocol. While PPOS regimens may provide cost advantages in freeze-all settings due to lower LH suppression, the overall economic benefit hinges on the embryo transfer strategy. Therefore, optimal protocol selection should be individualized, considering both clinical characteristics and cost.
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.