Does clinical performance of personalized embryo transfer (PET) guided by endometrial receptivity analysis (ERA) differ from frozen embryo transfer (FET) or fresh embryo transfer in infertile ...patients undergoing IVF?
Multicentre, open-label randomized controlled trial; 458 patients aged 37 years or younger undergoing IVF with blastocyst transfer at first appointment were randomized to PET guided by ERA, FET or fresh embryo transfer in 16 reproductive clinics.
Clinical outcomes by intention-to-treat analysis were comparable, but cumulative pregnancy rate was significantly higher in the PET (93.6%) compared with FET (79.7%) (P = 0.0005) and fresh embryo transfer groups (80.7%) (P = 0.0013). Analysis per protocol demonstrates that live birth rates at first embryo transfer were 56.2% in PET versus 42.4% in FET (P = 0.09), and 45.7% in fresh embryo transfer groups (P = 0.17). Cumulative live birth rates after 12 months were 71.2% in PET versus 55.4% in FET (P = 0.04), and 48.9% in fresh embryo transfer (P = 0.003). Pregnancy rates at the first embryo transfer in PET, FET and fresh embryo transfer arms were 72.5% versus 54.3% (P = 0.01) and 58.5% (P = 0.05), respectively. Implantation rates at first embryo transfer were 57.3% versus 43.2% (P = 0.03), and 38.6% (P = 0.004), respectively. Obstetrical outcomes, type of delivery and neonatal outcomes were similar in all groups.
Despite 50% of patients dropping out compared with 30% initially planned, per protocol analysis demonstrates statistically significant improvement in pregnancy, implantation and cumulative live birth rates in PET compared with FET and fresh embryo transfer arms, indicating the potential utility of PET guided by the ERA test at the first appointment.
Ulipristal acetate (UPA) and levonorgestrel are used as emergency hormonal contraceptives. Although both are highly effective in preventing pregnancy, UPA shows efficacy even when taken up to 120 h ...after unprotected sexual intercourse.
To investigate whether the mechanism of UPA's contraceptive action involves post-fertilization effects.
In vitro and in vivo studies using cultured human endometrial cells and a pre-clinical rat model.
Endometrial cells treated with UPA showed changes in the expression of receptivity gene markers and a significant decrease in trophoblast spheroids attached to the cultured cells. In addition, administration of UPA to female unmated rats decreased the expression of implantation-related genes in the endometrium and inhibited the number of implantation sites in the mated group compared to the non-treated group.
These results support that UPA as an emergency contraceptive might have post-fertilization effects that may affect embryo implantation.
To investigate the impact of endometrial receptivity array (ERA) before frozen embryo transfer in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). There is a lack of consensus regarding the use of ...ERA for increasing the success rate of IVF cycles, mainly in terms of the live birth rate.
PubMed, Web of Science and Embase were searched from inception up to February 15, 2022.
Not applicable.
Patients undergoing ERA vs no ERA before frozen embryo transfer.
Only comparative studies evaluating pregnancy rates of patients undergoing frozen embryo transfer cycles with or without prior ERA were included. Inter-study heterogeneity was also assessed using Cochrane's Q test and the I
statistic. The random-effects model was used to pool the odds ratio (OR) with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses were performed to investigate the impact of ERA on pregnancy rates according to the number of previous embryo transfer (ET) failures (≤ 2 previous failed ETs vs. > 2 failed ETs, defined as recurrent implantation failure). Separate analyses were performed according to the study design and adjustment for confounders.
The primary outcomes of the study were live birth rate and/or ongoing pregnancy rate. Implantation rate, biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, and miscarriage rate were considered secondary outcomes.
Eight studies (representing data on n = 2,784 patients; n = 831 had undergone ERA and n = 1,953 without ERA) were found to be eligible for this meta-analysis. The live birth or ongoing pregnancy rate for the ERA group was not significantly different compared with the non-ERA group (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.79-2.41; I
83.0%), nor was a difference seen in subgroup analyses based on the number of previous failed ETs. The rates of implantation, biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, and miscarriage were also comparable between the ERA and the non-ERA groups. After separate analyses according to the study design and adjustment for confounding factors, overall pooled estimates remained statistically nonsignificant.
The findings of the current meta-analysis did not reveal a significant change in the rate of pregnancy after IVF cycles using ERA, and it is not clear whether ERA can increase the pregnancy rate or not.
Prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022310862).
How endometriosis causes infertility, with the exception of tubal dysfunction caused by adhesions, is unclear. The inflammatory milieu in the pelvis and impaired receptivity of the eutopic ...endometrium are considered to be possible factors. Anatomical staging systems fail to predict the fertility status of endometriosis patients. Data from assisted reproductive technology cycles consistently suggest that oocytes from patients with endometriosis have a normal potential to develop into euploid blastocysts. Moreover, oocyte or embryo recipients with endometriosis seem to have similar or slightly lower pregnancy and live birth rates compared with recipients without endometriosis, suggesting that eutopic endometrium is not or is only minimally affected, which may be caused by undiagnosed adenomyosis. In-vivo observations from women with endometriomas provide evidence against a detrimental effect of endometriomas on oocytes. Combined with the absence of an obvious improvement in fertility following the surgical destruction or excision of peritoneal endometriosis or from temporary medical suppression of the disease and the associated inflammation, the available evidence makes endometriosis-associated infertility questionable in the absence of tubal dysfunction caused by adhesions. It is likely that no anatomical staging will correlate with fertility beyond assessing tubal function. In patients with endometriosis assisted reproductive technology is as effective as for other indications.
Purpose This study investigated whether RNA-Seq-based endometrial receptivity test (rsERT)—which provides precision for the optimal hour of the window of implantation (WOI)—can improve clinical ...outcomes of frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles in patients with a history of repeated implantation failure (RIF). Methods Patients with a history of RIF who received at least one autologous high-quality blastocyst during the subsequent FET cycle were retrospectively enrolled and divided into two groups: rsERT and FET, comprising patients who underwent rsERT-guided pET (n=115) and standard FET without rsERT (n=272), respectively. Results In the rsERT group, 39.1% (45/115) of patients were receptive. rsERT patients showed a higher probability of achieving both positive human chorionic gonadotropin (63.5% vs. 51.5%, P=0.03) and clinical pregnancy (54.8% vs. 38.6%, P=0.003) rates. In subgroup analysis, rsERT patients with non-receptive results had higher clinical pregnancy rates than patients undergoing FET (58.6% vs. 38.6%, P=0.003). rsERT patients with receptive results guided by rsERT with a precise WOI time had higher, although non-significant, clinical pregnancy rates (48.9% vs. 38.6%, P=0.192) than patients who underwent standard-time FET. Conclusion Hourly precise rsERT can significantly improve the probability of achieving clinical pregnancy in patients with RIF, especially in those with non-receptive rsERT results.
Aminopeptidase N (ANPEP) is a membrane-bound zinc-dependent peptidase. Although it is widely believed that ANPEP acts as an important angiogenesis regulatory factor, there are few studies about its ...function in the female reproductive system. In our previous research, we applied Isobaric Tags for Relative and Absolute Quantitation (iTRAQ) to analyze the influence of different controlled superovulation treatments for Assisted Reproductive Technology, In Vitro Fertilization and Embryo Transfer (IVF-ET)) patients from a global proteomic perspective to search for potential biomarkers associated with endometrium receptivity and embryo implantation. ANPEP is one of the proteins that demonstrated differential expression between different treatment groups and may be closely associated with endometrial receptivity. In this study, we assessed the expression of ANPEP in the endometrium of mice at different ages and found it to be highest in the mature period. We also detected ANPEP expression in the endometrium of IVF-ET patients in the proliferative, preimplantation and implantation stages, and the highest expression level of ANPEP was found in the last group. Human primary endometrial stromal cells were infected with an adenovirus expression vector containing the ANPEP gene and a green fluorescent protein (GFP) fusion protein; the mRNA levels of HOXA-10, LIF, and integrin β3 were found to be increased. Therefore, we conclude that ANPEP could be involved in the regulation of endometrial receptivity.
•The present study highlights ANPEP expressed in the endometrium could be involved in regulating endometrial receptivity.•ANPEP in mouse and human endometrium increases with the improvement of reproductive ability.•Some important endometrial receptivity factors in human endometrial cells increase with ANPEP upregulation.
Abstract
STUDY QUESTION
Does a personalized embryo transfer (pET) guided by tests for endometrial receptivity (TER) increase the effectiveness of ART procedures?
SUMMARY ANSWER
The use of TER-guided ...pET is not supported by current published evidence in women without repeated implantation failure (RIF), while in women with RIF more research is needed to assess a potential benefit.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
Implantation rates are still far from ideal, especially in some patients that have RIF with good-quality embryos. As a potential solution, a wide range of diverse TER use different sets of genes to identify displacements of the window of implantation to adjust the individual length of progesterone exposure in a pET.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION
A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. Search terms included endometrial receptivity analysis, ERA, personalized embryo transfer. CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, reference lists, clinical trials registers, and conference proceedings (search date October 2022) were searched, with no language restrictions.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing a pET guided by TER vs standard embryo transfer (sET) in different subgroups that undergo ART were identified. We also investigated pET in non-receptive-TER vs sET in receptive-TER, and pET in a specific population vs sET in a general population. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed with the Cochrane tool and ROBINS-I. Only those with low/moderate RoB underwent meta-analysis. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence (CoE).
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
We screened 2136 studies and included 35 (85% used ERA and 15% used other TER). Two studies were RCTs comparing endometrial receptivity analysis (ERA)-guided pET vs sET in women with no history of RIF. In women without RIF, no important differences (moderate-CoE) were found in live birth rates and clinical pregnancy rates (CPR). We also performed a meta-analysis of four cohort studies that were adjusted for confounding. In agreement with the RCTs, no benefits were found in women without RIF. However, in women with RIF, low CoE suggests that pET might improve the CPR (OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.42–4.40).
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION
We found few studies with low RoB. Only two RCTs in women without RIF were published, and none in women with RIF. Furthermore, the heterogeneity observed in populations, interventions, co-interventions, outcomes, comparisons, and procedures limited the pooling of many of the included studies.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
In the population of women without RIF, in agreement with previously published reviews, pET did not prove to be more effective than sET and, therefore, it precludes the routine use of this strategy in this population until more evidence is available. However, more research is advisable in women with RIF as low-certainty evidence from observational studies adjusted for confounders suggests that the CPR might be higher with pET guided by TER in this population. Although this review presents the best available evidence, it is still insufficient to change current policies.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)
No specific funding was obtained for this study. There are no conflicts of interest to declare.
REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO CRD42022299827.
PDF
