Platelet-Rich Plasma vs. Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor vs. Placebo and Outcomes in Frozen Embryo Transfer

NCT ID: NCT03945812

Last Updated: 2025-08-07

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE4

Total Enrollment

665 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2019-06-01

Study Completion Date

2023-03-08

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The goal of this clinical trial is to assess the impact of using Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) vs. Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (GCSF) vs. placebo on the outcomes of frozen embryo transfer (FET) in terms of clinical pregnancy rates. It will also assess their effect on chemical pregnancy rate, implantation rate, delivery outcomes, and endometrial parameters.

The main questions it aims to answer are:

Do the clinical pregnancy rates differ upon using PRP vs. GCSF vs. placebo during FET? What are the effects of PRP vs. GCSF vs. placebo during FET on chemical pregnancy rate, implantation rate, delivery outcomes, and endometrial parameters?

Researchers will compare the effect of administration of PRP vs. GCSF vs. placebo during FET on pregnancy outcomes.

Participants will be randomized to receive the study intervention seven days before embryo transfer: 1.0 ml of either PRP (prepared in-house), GCSF (Filgrastim, 300 mcg/1.0 mL), or 0.9% saline (placebo). The intervention will be administered by slow infusion into the uterine cavity with an intrauterine insemination catheter.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

INTRODUCTION AND STUDY RATIONALE Despite the advancements in the treatment of infertility, repeated failure of implantation continues as a challenging difficulty.

Embryo implantation is affected by many factors. Many efforts were made to improve the implantation rate by different methods blastocyst transfer, assisted hatching, preimplantation genetic screening, hysteroscopy, removal of hydrosalpinges and endometrial scratch. Furthermore, infertility specialists suggested some empirical methods like the infusion in the uterine cavity of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in patients with thin endometrium which has been shown to be effective in improving the pregnancy rate.

Another factor is granulocyte colony stimulating factor (GCSF) which has receptors in endometrial cells and may have a role in implantation. The use of GCSF in assisted reproductive technology (ART) has been tried by many research studies either via intrauterine or systemic administration.

There are limited studies that compared the impact of PRP and GCSF administration on the pregnancy rate and on the endometrial thickness with a small sample size.

The rationale behind this current study is to assess the impact of using PRP versus GCSF versus on the outcomes of FET in terms of pregnancy rates.

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Primary:

The primary objective of the study is to compare the clinical pregnancy rate determined by presence of fetal heart beat in transvaginal ultrasound after 6 weeks of embryo transfer in all groups.

Secondary:

To compare the following in the three study arms:

* Chemical pregnancy determined by positive serum β-HCG, 2 weeks after embryo transfer.
* Delivery outcomes: miscarriage and live bith rates.
* The implantation rate, calculated by dividing the number of gestational sacs observed via ultrasound by the number of embryos transferred.
* The change in endometrial parameters, assessed as endometrial thickness, Doppler indices, endometrial vascularization, blood volume histogram indices, and the histological dating of the endometrium.

SAMPLE SIZE CALCULATION The sample size was calculated using G\*Power 3.1.9.7. Based on Jie Li et al. study, the clinical pregnancy rate in the GCSF group was 25.1% compared to 14.4% in the placebo or no-treatment group. Assuming a 10% improvement in the clinical pregnancy rate with GCSF, a two-sided alpha level of 5%, and achieving 80% power, the sample size was initially calculated to be 498 women. To account for a 25% anticipated dropout rate, the final sample size was adjusted to 624 women (208 in each group). Although no studies comparing PRP to placebo, specifically in our study population, were published before designing our study, a 22% improvement in the clinical pregnancy rate with PRP was observed in studies involving women with thin endometrium. To reach sufficient power to detect differences between the three study arms, our calculation was based on GCSF.

Li J, Mo S, Chen Y. The effect of G-CSF on infertile women undergoing IVF treatment: A meta-analysis. Systems Biology in Reproductive Medicine. 2017/07/04 2017;63(4):239-247. doi:10.1080/19396368.2017.1287225

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS We will compare participants' baseline demographics and clinical characteristics across the study's three arms: PRP, GCSF, and saline. Categorical variables will be presented as frequency and percentage and compared using the Chi-squared test (χ2). Normally distributed variables will be reported as mean (standard deviation; SD) and compared using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), while non-normally distributed will be reported as median (25th to 75th percentile) and compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test. A p-value of less than 0.05 will be considered statistically significant.

Clinical pregnancy rate will be adjusted by the endometrial thickness (thin versus normal (≥ 7 mm)) in all groups.

An interim analysis will be conducted by the Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) after 60% of participants have been enrolled in the study to assess the efficacy of the intervention arms.

SUB-GROUP ANALYSIS: to evaluate the clinical pregnancy rates among patients based on:

* Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) value \<1 ng/ml (poor responders)
* Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)
* Reepeated, two or more, failed implantations (RIF).
* Triple-layered endometrium, evaluated by TVUS in the mid-luteal phase.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Infertility Frozen Embryo Transfer (FET)

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Investigators

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Granulocyte Colony Stimulating Factor Arm

Women in this group will receive GCSF with conventional hormonal therapy:

Estradiol valerate 6mg/day from day 2 of menstrual cycle Vaginal sildenafil citrate 25mg / 6 hours Then frozen embryo transfer will be performed.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Granulocyte Colony Stimulating Factor

Intervention Type DRUG

Filgrastim, Amgen, California, USA 300 mg/1.0 mL

Platelet Rich Plasma Arm

Women in this group will receive PRP with conventional hormonal therapy:

Estradiol valerate 6mg/day from day 2 of menstrual cycle Vaginal sildenafil citrate 25mg / 6 hours Then frozen embryo transfer will be performed.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Platelet Rich Plasma Arm

Intervention Type OTHER

Platelet Rich Plasma Arm

Saline

Women in this group will receive saline with conventional hormonal therapy:

Estradiol valerate 6mg/day from day 2 of menstrual cycle Vaginal sildenafil citrate 25mg / 6 hours Then frozen embryo transfer will be performed.

Group Type PLACEBO_COMPARATOR

Saline

Intervention Type OTHER

Saline 9%

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Granulocyte Colony Stimulating Factor

Filgrastim, Amgen, California, USA 300 mg/1.0 mL

Intervention Type DRUG

Platelet Rich Plasma Arm

Platelet Rich Plasma Arm

Intervention Type OTHER

Saline

Saline 9%

Intervention Type OTHER

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Filgrastim Saline 9%

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* All women aged 20-40 years
* Non-smoker
* BMI \< 30
* Normal endometrial cavity confirmed by hysteroscopy and ultrasound
* Visiting the center for IVF by FET during the period of the study

Exclusion Criteria

* History of anti-phospholipid syndrome confirmed by serological tests.
* History of any hematological and immunological disorders
* History of chromosomal or genetic abnormalities in the patient or in the family
* Any uterine abnormalities (congenital or acquired)
* Previous uterine surgeries except caesarean section
* Hypersensitivity to G-CSF
* Uncontrolled systemic disease
Minimum Eligible Age

20 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

40 Years

Eligible Sex

FEMALE

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

National Research Centre, Egypt

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Wael Elbanna Clinic

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Wael SS Elbanna, Consultant

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Wael Elbanna Clinic

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Hayat center

Maadi, Cairo Governorate, Egypt

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Egypt

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Mehrafza M, Kabodmehri R, Nikpouri Z, Pourseify G, Raoufi A, Eftekhari A, Samadnia S, Hosseini A. Comparing the Impact of Autologous Platelet-rich Plasma and Granulocyte Colony Stimulating Factor on Pregnancy Outcome in Patients with Repeated Implantation Failure. J Reprod Infertil. 2019 Jan-Mar;20(1):35-41.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 30859080 (View on PubMed)

Coughlan C, Ledger W, Wang Q, Liu F, Demirol A, Gurgan T, Cutting R, Ong K, Sallam H, Li TC. Recurrent implantation failure: definition and management. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014 Jan;28(1):14-38. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.08.011. Epub 2013 Sep 14.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24269084 (View on PubMed)

Rinehart J. Recurrent implantation failure: definition. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2007 Jul;24(7):284-7. doi: 10.1007/s10815-007-9147-4. Epub 2007 Aug 3.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 17674185 (View on PubMed)

Chang Y, Li J, Chen Y, Wei L, Yang X, Shi Y, Liang X. Autologous platelet-rich plasma promotes endometrial growth and improves pregnancy outcome during in vitro fertilization. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015 Jan 15;8(1):1286-90. eCollection 2015.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 25785127 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

INDV-0909012

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.