ArticleFrontiers in reproductive health2026
Medroxyprogesterone acetate vs. GnRH antagonist for preventing premature LH surge during ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technology: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in reproductive health, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the effectiveness of medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) vs. cetrorelix (GnRH antagonist) in preventing premature LH surge during ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles, including cycles for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) and fertility preservation. Design: Single-center, retrospective observational cohort study. Setting: Private fertility clinic in Santiago, Chile. Patients: A total of 2,964 ART cycles conducted between January 2018 and December 2022 were included after excluding 425 cycles that were cancelled. Among these, 1,793 were ICSI cycles (1,529 antagonist, 264 MPA) and 1,171 were fertility preservation cycles (862 antagonist, 309 MPA). Interventions: Ovarian stimulation using recombinant FSH and/or menotropins with ovulatory suppression by either oral MPA (10 mg/day) or daily cetrorelix (0.25 mg). Main outcome: Follicular response, oocyte yield, embryo development, euploidy and mosaicism rates, implantation, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth outcomes. Results: In fertility preservation cycles, MPA produced higher numbers of follicles ≥17 mm (8.7 vs. 6.7), oocytes retrieved (12.2 vs. 10.7), and mature oocytes (9.1 vs. 7.9; Conclusions: MPA is a safe and effective oral alternative to GnRH antagonists for LH suppression during ovarian stimulation in ART, providing comparable reproductive outcomes while reducing treatment burden.
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.