ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Phenotype-driven protocol switching is associated with improved ART outcomes under constant gonadotropin dosage: a self-controlled analysis of 4,632 cycles.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Managing failure after an initial assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycle remains a significant clinical challenge. Clinicians often face a dilemma between repeating the index protocol, escalating gonadotropin (Gn) dosages, or switching to an alternative strategy. We aimed to evaluate whether phenotype-driven protocol switching, specifically addressing issues like over-suppression or poor embryo quality, is more effective than repeating the same protocol. Methods: This large-scale, retrospective, self-controlled study involved 4,632 patients who underwent two consecutive ART cycles between January 2010 and December 2025. Patients were stratified into four pathways based on their second-cycle strategy: (i) Releasing Suppression (Long-to-Antagonist, n=1,412); (ii) Boosting Quantity (Mild-to-Antagonist, n=220); (iii) Improving Quality (Antagonist-to-Mild, n=829); and (iv) Reference (Antagonist-to-Antagonist, n=2,171). The primary outcome was the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR). Statistical analysis employed the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for paired continuous data and multivariable logistic regression to identify independent predictors of success. Results: In the Reference group, repeating the same protocol under identical Gn dosages significantly increased the CLBR (9.9% to 51.9%, P < 0.001). Beyond this baseline, individualised switching yielded distinct benefits. The Long-to-Antagonist switch significantly increased the median oocyte retrieval (8.0 [5.0-12.0] vs 9.0 [6.0-13.0], P < 0.001). The Mild-to-Antagonist switch successfully expanded the oocyte cohort in low responders (2.0 [1.0-4.0] vs 3.0 [2.0-5.2], P < 0.001). Conversely, the Antagonist-to-Mild switch did not increase oocyte yield (P = 0.642) but significantly improved the good embryo rate (median 0.0% vs 16.7%, P < 0.001). Multivariable regression confirmed that while age and anti-Müllerian hormone remained dominant prognostic factors, appropriate protocol triage neutralised risks without requiring dose escalation (P > 0.05 for protocol switch strategies). Conclusions: Phenotype-driven "quantity" or "quality" rescue is associated with significant clinical improvements following ART failure while keeping Gn dosages constant. While tactical switching is effective, a substantial proportion of the success in a second attempt is driven by natural biological variation (regression to the mean)."
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.