Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

The Need of LH in ART and Differences Between Sources of LH Activity

956

Published on

Published in: Health & Medicine, Technology
0 Comments
5 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
956
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
5
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. LH Forum I, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Jun 2013
  • 2. Esteves, 3
  • 3. Review this Lecture at:http://www.androfert.com.br/reviewEsteves, 4Esteves SC – June 2013
  • 4. Esteves, 5 Modified from Sackett et al. Oxford Centre for EBM Levels of Evidence (2009)Level Type of evidence1a Obtained from meta-analysis of randomised trials1b Obtained from at least one randomised trial2a Obtained from one well-designed controlledstudy without randomisation2b Obtained from at least one other type of well-designed quasi-experimental study3 Obtained from well-designed non-experimentalstudies (comparative and correlation studies, caseseries)4 Obtained from expert committee reports or opinionsor clinical experience of respected authoritiesGrade Arecommendation• Good andconsistentscientific evidence Information concerning IVF population Evidence-based medicine
  • 5. Esteves, 6Role of LH in ReproductiveCycles23Who Need LH?
  • 6. LHFSHLHEsteves, 7
  • 7. Esteves, 8• Mild Stimulation(low dose rec-hFSH +GnRH ant.):• 5 oocytesretrieved;• IR = 31%• ConventionalStimulation :• 10 oocytesretrieved;• IR = 29%Verberg et al.Hum Reprod Update 2009; 15: 5–12.Esteves, 8 Alviggi et al. Reprod Biomed Online 2006;12:221.Early Follicular Phase:Promotion of steroidogenesis(theca cells)• Adequate estrogen production• Uterine/endometrial changesLate Follicular Phase:Steroidogenesis and stimulationof final follicular maturation(granulosa cells)
  • 8. Balasch J, Fábreques F. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2002, 14:265.Esteves, 9• Normal androgen and estrogen biosynthesis• Normal follicular growth and development• Normal oocyte maturationNormal• Suppression of GC proliferation• Follicular atresia (non-dominant follicles)• Premature luteinization• Oocyte development compromisedHigh• Insufficient androgen (and estrogen) synthesis• Follicular maturation impaired• Inadequate endometrial proliferationLow
  • 9. Esteves, 100510150 5 10 15 20Days of Stimulation50100Follicle Size(mm)and FSH(IU/L)09EndometrialThickness(mm)
  • 10. Esteves, 1102575225050010001500200025003000Day 1 Day 5 Day 10 hCG0 25 75 225The European Recombinant Human LH Study Group, JCEM 1998; 83:1507Addition of LH (UI):
  • 11. Esteves, 120257522502468Day 1 Day 5 Day 10 hCG0 25 75 225 rLHThe European Recombinant Human LH Study Group, JCEM 1998; 83:1507Evidence for LH threshold (2)Injected rec-hLH LH Cmax75 UI 0.5 – 1.35 UI/L
  • 12. Esteves, 13LH is essential for normal ovarian steroidogenesis.75 UI rec-hLH is sufficient to promote optimalfollicular and endometrial growth, as well asandrogen production, in HH women (WHO I).In reproductive cycles optimal folliculardevelopment occurs within an ‘LH window’,above a certain ‘LH threshold’ and below an ‘LHceiling’ (1.1 to 5.1 UI/L).
  • 13. Esteves, 14
  • 14. Esteves, 151. Alviggi et al. Reprod Biomed Online 2006;12:221; 2. Tarlatzis et al. Hum Reprod2006;21:90; 3. Esteves et al. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2009;7:111; 4. Marrs et al. ReprodBiomed Online 2004;8:175;5. Mochtar MH, Cochrane Database, 2007; 6. Alviggi, et al.RBMOnline 2009; 7. De Placido et al. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 2004;60:637;• Most normogonadotropic womenundergoing Ovarian Stimulation1-3Normal• ~20% of NG women have less sensitiveovaries• Older patients (≥35 years)4• Poor responders5• Slow/Hypo-responders6• Deeply suppressed endogenous LH levels(hypo-hypo; endometriosis treated with GnRH-a)7Low
  • 15. Esteves, 16• Older patients (≥35 years)• Poor responders• Slow/Hypo-responders• Deeply suppressed LHLessSensitiveOvariesMarrs et al. Reprod Biomed Online 2004;8:175; De Placido et al. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf)2004;60:637; Ferraretti et al. Fertil Steril. 2004; 82:1521-6; Alviggi, et al. RBMOnline 2012Poor RespondersAt least 2 of the following:Maternal age ≥40 yearsPrevious DOR (≤3 oocytes with aconventional stimulation)Abnormal ovarian reservebiomarker (AFC<5; AMH <1.1)Or:2 episodes of DOR after maximalstimulationHypo/Slow RespondersNormal markers of ovarian reserveHypo-responders:D1-D7: normal follicular recruitmentusing fixed dose of FSH;D7-D10: follicular growth plateaudespite stimulation with FSH.Slow responders:Require high doses of FSH (>3,000UI)to achieve follicular growth;May indicate genetic polymorphisms ofLH and/or FSH receptors.Prevalence ofinfertility patientsaged 35 or aboveis growing
  • 16. Impaired Oocyte QualityReduced Fertilization RateReduced Embryo QualityIncreased Miscarriage RatesReducedovarianparacrineactivityHurwitz &Santoro 2004LHreceptorpoly-morphismsAlviggi et al.,2006Androgensecretorycapacityreduced• Piltonen et al.,2003Decreasednumbers offunctionalLHreceptors• Vihko et al. 1996ReducedLHbioactivitywhileimmuno-reactivityunchanged• Mitchell et al.1995; Marama etal 1984Esteves, 17LessSensitiveOvariesWestergaard et al., 2000; Esposito et al.,2001; Humaidan et al., 2002
  • 17. Mochtar et al,20073 RCT (N=310)r-hFSH+rLH vs.r-hFSH alone*OPROR 1.85(95% CI: 1.10; 3.11)Bosdou et al,20127 RCT (N= 603)r-hFSH+rLH vs.r-hFSH alone*CPRLBR(only 1 RCT)RD: +6%,(95% CI: -0.3; +13.0)RD: +19%(95% CI: +1.0; +36.0%)Hill et al, 20127 RCT (N=902)r-hFSH+rLH vs.r-hFSH alone CPROR 1.37(95% CI: 1.03; 1.83)*long GnRH-a protocol; OR=odds-ratio; RD=risk differenceMochtar MH et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;2:CD005070; Bosdou JK et al,Hum Reprod Update 2012; 8(2):127-45. Hill MJ et al. Fertil Steril 2012; 97:1108-4.Esteves, 18
  • 18. Esteves, 196 9 11101418223240FSH step-up (+150 UI) LH supplementation(+150 UI)Normal RespondersMean No. oocytes retrieved IR (%) OPR (%)De Placido et al. Hum Reprod. 2004; 20: 390-6.RCT 260 pts. with “steady” response onstimulation D8 (E2 <180pg/mL; >6 follicles <10mm)3 groups:
  • 19. Esteves, 20811 11 1022411837r-hFSH doseincreased (max.450UI)r-hFSH doseincreased; r-hLH(75-150UI) addedr-hFSH doseincreased; HMGaddedcontrolsMean No. oocytes retrieved LBR (%)Ferraretti et al. Fertil Steril. 2004; 82:1521-6.RCT of 126 pts. showing follicular stagnation atstimulation d7-d10;4 groups:
  • 20. FSHTheca cellsGranulosacellsEsteves, 21Pregnancyrates% CyclecancellationNumberoocytesretrievedIncreasing theStimulation Doseof FSH……is not associated withbetter IVF outcomeManzi et al, 1994Klinkert et al, 2004Berkkanoglu & Ozgur, 2010
  • 21. Jamnongjit M et al. PNAS 2005;102:16257-16262Action of LH at the follicular level that increasesandrogen production for its later aromatizationto estrogens in a dose dependent manner mayrestore the follicular milieu in selected patientsto recover oocyte quality and, therefore, embryoquality and implantation rates.
  • 22. Esteves, 23Androgen secretory capacity decreases with ovarian aging.Mechanisms include decreased number of functional LHreceptors and ovarian paracrine activity. LH-rpolymorphisms possibly involved in hypo-responders.LH supplementation in COS is an evidence-based strategyto maximize pregnancy results.4 subgroups benefit of LH supplementation in COS:Women with less sensitive ovaries (ovarianaging) have poor IVF outcomes.
  • 23. Esteves, 24Role of LH in Reproductive CyclesWho Need LH
  • 24. How much LH should be used?Should the dose be fixed or flexible?At what stage of the cycle should LHbe administered?Is LH needed in a GnRH antagonistprotocol?What kind of LH – recombinant LH orHMG?
  • 25. Mochtar et al.3 RCT(N=216)Kolibianakis etal. 2 RCT(N=176)Baruffi et al.5 RCT (N= 434)Estradiol onhCG day (pg/ml)WMD 571(95% CI 259; 882)- WMD 514(95% CI 368; 660)No. retrievedoocytesWMD 0.50(95% CI -0.68; 1.68)-WMD 0.41(95% CI -0.44; 1.3)CPR†/LBR*†OR 0.79(95% CI: 0.26; 2.43)*OR 0.86(95% CI: 0.04; 1.85)†OR 0.89(95% CI: 0.57; 1.39)Unselected women undergoing COS;r-hFSH+r-hLH vs. r-hFSH alone in antagonist cyclesMochtar et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;2:CD005070; Kolibianakis et al, HumReprod Update. 2007;13:445-52; Baruffi et al, Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;14:14-25.Esteves, 26WMD weight mean difference
  • 26. Yes, for women aged >35 yo61%25%19%68%33%27%%2PN Ongoing PR Implantation300 rec-hFSH 225 IU rec-hFSH + 75 IU rec-hLHEsteves, 27RCT; 292 NG women aged 36-39; GnRH antagonist D6 (fixed)LH started on day 1Bosch et al. Fertil Steril. 2011; 95:1031-6.
  • 27. Esteves, 28Matched case-control study;N=4,719 pts.; long GnRH-a protocol3 groups:1914 143126 2505101520253035Fixed 2:1 r-hFSH(150IU)/r-hLH(75IU)HMG rec-hFSH + HMGDuration ofStimulation(days)Mean No.oocytesretrievedIR (%)CPR pertransfer (%)P=0.02Buhler KF, Fisher R. Gynecol Endocrinol 2011;1-6.
  • 28. *Steelman-Pohley Rat Bioassay, 1953; Bassett et al. Reprod Biomed Online 2005;10:169–177; Driebergen et al. Curr Med Res Opin 2003;19:41–46.ConventionalBioassay*HighvariabilityRat ovaryweightgainUrinaryEsteves, 29FbM: Novelanalitycal methodProtein content insolution by massMinimal batch-to-batch variability(1.6%)RecombinantSize ExclusionHigh PerformanceLiquidChromatography
  • 29. Beta unit Carboxyl terminal segmentLonger in hCG; higherreceptor affinityAbsent in LH and present inhCG (Longer Half-life)Purity(LHcontent)hCGcontent(IU/vial)LHactivity(IU/vial)Specificactivity(LH/mgprotein)Rec-hLH >99% 0 75 22,000 IUhMG-HP 3% ~70 75* ≥ 60 IUAdapted from ASRM Practice Committee. Fertil Steril. 2008; 90:S13-20.Esteves, 30*derives primarily from hCG, which is concentrated duringpurification or added to achieve the desired LH-likebiological activity.
  • 30. In pts. treated with HMG (hCG-LH activity),expression of LH/hCG receptor and other genesinvolved in steroids biosynthesis in GCs islowered:Reflect LH receptors down-regulation:May explain the observed lower progesterone levels:Trinchard-Lugan I et al. Reprod Biomed Online 2002; 4:106-115; Menon KM et al. BiolReprod 2004; 70:861-866; Grondal ML et al. Fertil Steril 2009; 91: 1820-1830.Esteves, 31
  • 31. Esteves, 32Population Biomarker Cut-off Sensitivity Specificity AccuracyDOR1AMH 0.82 76% 88% 0.88AFC 5 92% 58% 0.75*Beckman-Couter generation II assay; 1DOR: diminished ovarian response(≤4 oocytes retrieved)Leão RBF, Nakano FY, Esteves SC. ASRM 2013, submittedDefine “Who isWho” BeforeCOS UsingBiomarkers• Group of 131 womenundergoingconventional COSafter pituitary down-regulation for IVFIndividualizationof COS strategy
  • 32. Esteves, 33La Marca et al, Hum Reprod 2009;24:2264; Fleming et al, Fertil Steril 2012;98:1097;Broekmans et al. Fertil Steril, 2010; 94:1044-51; Scheffer et al. Hum Reprod 2003;18:700Reflect No. Pre-antral and Small AntralFollicles(≤4-8mm); gonadotropin-independentLow inter and intra-cycle variationassessment at any cycle day in asingle measurementAMHAFCTVUS at early follicular phase (D2-D4)2-10 mm (mean diameter); 2D-planeReflect No. AF at a given time that can bestimulated by gonadotropinsLow inter-cycle variation
  • 33. Esteves, 34Define “Who isWho” Before COSUsing BiomarkersAMH ≤ 0.82“PoorResponders”0.25 mg/day GnRHAntagonist (flexible)Rec-hLH (75-150 IU)FSH dose decreasedby the same amountLH addedOCPVaginalProgesteronegel 8%2 3 4 5 76 8 9 10 11 12 131MensesStart day14 15rec-FSH (Fbm)262.5 - 375 IU16 17D2 or D3 ETor FET (basedon P4 levelshCG day)Individualizationof COS strategy
  • 34. Esteves, 35PoorRespondersAMH ≤ 0.82rec-hFSH FbM + rec-hLH 75 IU (D6)+ GnRH antagonist• Total daily dose: 262.5 to 375 IU1Poor response: ≤4 oocytes retrievedLeão RBF, Nakano FY, Esteves SC. ASRM 2013, submittedProspective study involving 118 womenundergoing IVF/ICSIResponse toCOSConventionaldown-regulationCOS (n=131)IndividualizedCOS(n=118)PvaluePoor1 64.2% 34.0% 0.02CPR per ETCancellation35.0%22.5%36.3%10.0%0.920.21
  • 35. Esteves, 36A fixed dose of 75-150 IU rec-hLH seems adequateto restore androgen secretory capacity in mostpatients with ovarian aging.LH supplementation can start either fromstimulation day 1 or day 6; maximum beneficialeffect yet to be determined;LH supplementation is beneficial to women aged>35 in a GnRH antagonist protocol.
  • 36. Esteves, 37Recombinant LH has 3 major differences compared tourinary LH (HMG):1. Higher purity and specific activity in rec-hLHSC delivery in very small volumes2. Higher dose precision in rec-hLHProtein content in solution by mass (FbM)3. LH activity is hCG dependent in u-HMGhCG concentrated/added to achieve LH-like biological activity;hCG has higher half-life and biological activity than rec-hLH;Lower expression of LH receptor gene (down-regulation) afterhCG exposure; may influence GC function.
  • 37. AMH seems to be the best biomarker to identifypatients at risk of poor response in COS.AMH results can be used to individualize COS.Our experience with poor responders shows thatiCOS using rec-hLH supplementation inassociation with GnRH antagonists is a validstrategy to maximize the beneficial effects oftreatment while minimizing the risk of cyclecancellation.

×