Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, St. Mary's Hospital, Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Sidra Medicine, Doha, Qatar.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Nov 22;11(11):CD000099. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000099.pub4.
In an effort to improve outcomes of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) cycles, the use of growth hormone (GH) has been considered as adjuvant treatment in ovarian stimulation. Improving the outcomes of IVF is especially important for women with infertility who are considered 'poor responders'. We have compared the outcomes of IVF with adjuvant GH versus no adjuvant treatment in routine use, and specifically in poor responders.
To assess the effectiveness and safety of growth hormone as an adjunct to IVF compared to standard IVF for women with infertility SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases (to November 2020): Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group specialised register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Epistemonikos database and trial registers together with reference checking and contact with study authors and experts in the field to identify additional trials.
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adjuvant GH treatment in IVF compared with no adjuvant treatment for women with infertility. We excluded trials where additional adjuvant treatments were used with GH. We also excluded trials comparing different IVF protocols.
We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Two review authors independently performed assessment of trial risk of bias and extraction of relevant data. The primary review outcome was live birth rate. The secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy rate, oocytes retrieved, embryo transfer, units of gonadotropin used and adverse events, i.e. ectopic pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), congenital anomalies, oedema.
We included 16 RCTs (1352 women). Two RCTs (80 women) studied GH in routine use, and 14 RCTs (1272 women) studied GH in poor responders. The evidence was low to very low certainty, the main limitations being risk of bias, imprecision and heterogeneity. Adjuvant growth hormone compared to no adjuvant: routine use for in vitro fertilisation (IVF) The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of GH on live birth rate per woman randomised for routine use in IVF (odds ratio (OR) 1.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 4.43; I = 0%; 2 trials, 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence). If the chance of live birth without adjuvant GH is assumed to be 15%, the chance of live birth with GH would be between 6% and 43%. There was insufficient evidence to reach a conclusion regarding clinical pregnancy rates per woman randomised, number of women with at least one oocyte retrieved per woman randomised and embryo transfer achieved per woman randomised; reported data were unsuitable for analysis. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of GH on mean number of oocytes retrieved in normal responders (mean difference (MD) -0.02, 95% CI -0.79 to 0.74; I = 0%; 2 trials, 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of GH on mean units of gonadotropin used in normal responders (MD 13.57, 95% CI -112.88 to 140.01; I = 0%; 2 trials, 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of GH on adverse events in normal responders. Adjuvant growth hormone compared to no adjuvant: use in poor responders for in vitro fertilisation (IVF) The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of GH on live birth rate per woman randomised for poor responders (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.70; I = 0%; 8 trials, 737 participants; very low-certainty evidence). If the chance of live birth without adjuvant GH is assumed to be 11%, the chance of live birth with GH would be between 13% and 25%. Adjuvant GH results in a slight increase in pregnancy rates in poor responders (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.53; I = 15%; 11 trials, 1033 participants; low-certainty evidence). The results suggest, if the pregnancy rate without adjuvant GH is assumed to be 15%, with GH the pregnancy rate in poor responders would be between 19% and 31%. The evidence suggests that GH results in little to no difference in number of women with at least one oocyte retrieved (OR 5.67, 95% CI 1.54 to 20.83; I = 0%; 2 trials, 148 participants; low-certainty evidence). If the chance of retrieving at least one oocyte in poor responders was 81%, with GH the chance is between 87% and 99%. There is a slight increase in mean number of oocytes retrieved with the use of GH for poor responders (MD 1.40, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.64; I = 87%; 12 trials, 1153 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of GH on embryo transfer achieved (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.08 to 4.96; I = 25%; 4 trials, 214 participants; very low-certainty evidence). If the chance of achieving embryo transfer is assumed to be 77%, the chance with GH will be 78% to 94%. Use of GH results in reduction of mean units of gonadotropins used for stimulation in poor responders (MD -1088.19, 95% CI -1203.20 to -973.18; I = 91%; 8 trials, 685 participants; low-certainty evidence). High heterogeneity in the analyses for mean number of oocytes retrieved and units of GH used suggests quite different effects according to differences including in trial protocols (populations, GH dose and schedule), so these results should be interpreted with caution. We are uncertain of the effect of GH on adverse events in poor responders as six of the 14 included trials failed to report this outcome.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The use of adjuvant GH in IVF treatment protocols has uncertain effect on live birth rates and mean number of oocytes retrieved in normal responders. However, it slightly increases the number of oocytes retrieved and pregnancy rates in poor responders, while there is an uncertain effect on live birth rates in this group. The results however, need to be interpreted with caution, as the included trials were small and few in number, with significant bias and imprecision. Also, the dose and regimen of GH used in trials was variable. Therefore, further research is necessary to fully define the role of GH as adjuvant therapy in IVF.
为了提高体外受精(IVF)周期的结果,生长激素(GH)的使用已被认为是卵巢刺激的辅助治疗。改善 IVF 的结果对于被认为是“低反应者”的不孕女性尤为重要。我们比较了常规使用辅助 GH 与不使用辅助治疗的 IVF 的结果,特别是在低反应者中。
评估生长激素作为辅助治疗与标准 IVF 相比,在治疗不孕患者中的有效性和安全性。
我们检索了以下数据库(截至 2020 年 11 月):Cochrane 妇科和生殖学(CGF)组专业注册、CENTRAL、MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL、Epistemonikos 数据库以及试验登记处,并结合参考文献检查和与该领域的研究作者和专家的联系,以确定其他试验。
我们纳入了所有比较生长激素辅助治疗与不孕妇女不使用辅助治疗的随机对照试验(RCT)。我们排除了使用其他辅助治疗与 GH 联合使用的试验。我们还排除了比较不同 IVF 方案的试验。
我们使用了 Cochrane 推荐的标准方法学程序。两位综述作者独立评估了试验的偏倚风险和提取相关数据。主要的综述结果是活产率。次要结果是临床妊娠率、取出的卵母细胞数、胚胎移植、使用的促性腺激素单位和不良事件,即异位妊娠、多胎妊娠、卵巢过度刺激综合征(OHSS)、先天性异常、水肿。
我们纳入了 16 项 RCT(1352 名妇女)。两项 RCT(80 名妇女)研究了 GH 的常规使用,14 项 RCT(1272 名妇女)研究了 GH 在低反应者中的使用。证据的确定性为低到非常低,主要限制因素为偏倚、不精确性和异质性。
常规用于 IVF(体外受精)
证据非常不确定 GH 对常规使用 IVF 的活产率的影响(比值比(OR)1.32,95%置信区间(CI)0.40 至 4.43;I = 0%;2 项试验,80 名参与者;非常低确定性证据)。如果不使用辅助 GH 的活产机会假设为 15%,那么使用 GH 的活产机会将在 6%至 43%之间。关于临床妊娠率、每例随机妇女至少取出一个卵母细胞的人数和每例随机妇女胚胎移植的人数,没有足够的证据得出结论;报告的数据不适合分析。
证据非常不确定 GH 对正常反应者中取出的平均卵母细胞数的影响(平均差(MD)-0.02,95%CI-0.79 至 0.74;I = 0%;2 项试验,80 名参与者;非常低确定性证据)。证据非常不确定 GH 对正常反应者中使用的促性腺激素平均单位数的影响(MD13.57,95%CI-112.88 至 140.01;I = 0%;2 项试验,80 名参与者;非常低确定性证据)。我们对 GH 在正常反应者中的不良事件的影响不确定。
在 IVF 中用于低反应者
证据非常不确定 GH 对低反应者的活产率的影响(OR1.77,95%CI1.17 至 2.70;I = 0%;8 项试验,737 名参与者;非常低确定性证据)。如果不使用辅助 GH 的活产机会假设为 11%,那么使用 GH 的活产机会将在 13%至 25%之间。辅助 GH 可使低反应者的妊娠率略有增加(OR1.85,95%CI1.35 至 2.53;I = 15%;11 项试验,1033 名参与者;低确定性证据)。结果表明,如果不使用辅助 GH 的妊娠率假设为 15%,那么使用 GH 的妊娠率在低反应者中将在 19%至 31%之间。证据表明,GH 对至少取出一个卵母细胞的妇女人数几乎没有影响(OR5.67,95%CI1.54 至 20.83;I = 0%;2 项试验,148 名参与者;低确定性证据)。如果低反应者取出至少一个卵母细胞的机会为 81%,那么使用 GH 的机会将在 87%至 99%之间。使用 GH 可使低反应者取出的平均卵母细胞数略有增加(MD1.40,95%CI1.16 至 1.64;I = 87%;12 项试验,1153 名参与者;低确定性证据)。
证据非常不确定 GH 对胚胎移植的影响(OR2.32,95%CI1.08 至 4.96;I = 25%;4 项试验,214 名参与者;非常低确定性证据)。如果假设胚胎移植的机会为 77%,那么使用 GH 的机会将在 78%至 94%之间。使用 GH 可减少低反应者中刺激所需的促性腺激素单位数(MD-1088.19,95%CI-1203.20 至-973.18;I = 91%;8 项试验,685 名参与者;低确定性证据)。
由于 14 项纳入试验中的 6 项未能报告该结局,因此在分析平均取出的卵母细胞数和使用的 GH 单位数时存在很高的异质性。因此,这些结果应谨慎解释。我们对 GH 在低反应者中的不良事件的影响不确定,因为 14 项纳入试验中的 6 项未能报告该结局。
生长激素作为 IVF 治疗方案的辅助治疗,对正常反应者的活产率和平均取出的卵母细胞数没有确定的影响。然而,它能轻微增加低反应者的卵母细胞数和妊娠率,而对低反应者的活产率的影响不确定。然而,由于纳入的试验数量少且规模小,存在严重偏倚和不精确性,因此需要谨慎解释这些结果。此外,试验中使用的 GH 的剂量和方案也存在差异。因此,需要进一步的研究来充分确定 GH 作为 IVF 辅助治疗的作用。