INTEnsity of ovariaN Stimulation and Embryo Quality

NCT ID: NCT04983173

Last Updated: 2025-03-11

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

RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

PHASE4

Total Enrollment

110 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2021-11-23

Study Completion Date

2026-06-30

Brief Summary

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

The management of suboptimal ovarian responders remains a challenging task in IVF. These patients are frequently managed with an intense stimulation protocol of ovarian stimulation in order obtain the maximum number of embryos and, therefore, maximize the cumulative live birth rate. However, the concept of "the more the better" has been recently defied by the one of "mild stimulation". Defenders of this protocol state that with mild stimulation only the best quality oocytes are allowed to grow and, therefore, higher quality embryos will be obtained. However, the impact of the intensity of ovarian stimulation on embryo quality is far from consensual. Moreover, its effect on early embryo development has never been evaluated.

Therefore, the investigators set out to perform this randomized controlled trial comparing the number of GQB and the morphokinetic parameters of early embryo development in infertile patients undergoing two different intensities of ovarian stimulation, a milder approach (CC plus 150 IU daily dose of rFSH) and a more intense approach (300 IU daily dose of rFSH).

Detailed Description

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

Despite the lack of a consistent definition for "mild stimulation" (MS), the International Society for Mild Approaches in Assisted Reproduction defined it as a protocol performed with gonadotropins, alone or with oral compounds, at lower doses or for a shorter duration, with the aim of achieving 2-7 oocytes. One of the strategies proposed for MS is the use of Clomiphene Citrate (CC). CC acts as a selective estrogen-receptor modulator. By blocking estrogen receptors in the hypothalamic arcuate nucleus, it increases the production of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) and, as a result, FSH and luteinizing hormone (LH). Moreover, CC increases the pituitary sensitivity to GnRH and granulosa cell sensitivity to pituitary gonadotropins. Taking these actions into account, several protocols have adopted a combination of CC and exogenous gonadotropins with the aim of improving follicular recruitment and, therefore, ovarian response to stimulation, in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). The available evidence has allowed for the inclusion of CC in international guidelines as a treatment option, alone or in combination with gonadotropins, equally recommended in the management of poor responders when compared to gonadotropin stimulation alone.

The concept behind MS is that, with this approach, only the healthier follicles with higher quality oocytes are allowed to grow. Proponents of this protocol state that MS reduces the risk of multiple pregnancy and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), as well as patient dropout rate and treatment costs. However, evidence regarding clinical outcomes is far from consensual. The best available evidence regarding MS in predicted poor responders comes from the OPTIMIST trial, showing no difference in the cumulative live birth rates when a mild approach, using 150 IU of rFSH, was compared to an individualized protocol of 225/450 IU rFSH. However, several methodological inconsistencies have been pointed out in this randomized controlled trial. In particular, a black hole was left in the management of predicted low responders with an intermediate prognosis (antral follicle count between 8-10), taking into account the allowance for dose adjustments in the second cycle in the 150 IU group. Considering that the control group was treated with rFSH 225 IU daily, a comparison of two identical doses might have been provided.

Evidence regarding the effect of MS on embryo quality is also conflicting. Baart et al. first reported a lower aneuploidy rate following MS when compared to conventional protocols and concluded that mitotic segregation errors might increase with growing gonadotropin dosages. However, this has not been confirmed in recent studies. As for the number of good quality embryos, while previous studies have shown no difference regarding MS and conventional protocols, Vermey et al found a positive correlation between the number of retrieved oocytes and the embryo quality.

Although these previous studies provide some valuable information, the heterogeneity of the available evidence cannot be disregarded. Moreover, to the best our knowledge, the effect of the intensity of ovarian stimulation on early embryo development has not been previously described. Therefore, the investigators set out to perform this randomized controlled trial comparing the number of good quality blastocysts (GQB) and morphokinetic parameters of early embryo development in patients with a predicted suboptimal ovarian response undergoing two different intensities of ovarian stimulation, a milder (CC 50 mg/day from cycle D2-6 + rFSH 150 IU daily from D2 onwards) and a more intense approach (300 IU daily dose of rFSH starting on cycle D2).

Conditions

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

Infertility

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

NONE

Study Groups

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

Experimental: Clomiphene Citrate (CC) + rFSH

Ovarian Stimulation with CC+rFSH

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Ovarian Stimulation with CC+rFSH

Intervention Type DRUG

: CC 50 mg/day (Omifin®) + rFSH 150 IU (Ovaleap®) GnRH antagonist: ganirelix 0.25 mg (Orgalutran®) Recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin (rhCG) 250 μg (Ovitrelle®) micronized progesterone 200 mg 3id (Utrogestan®)

rFSH

Ovarian Stimulation with rFSH

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Ovarian Stimulation with rFSH

Intervention Type DRUG

rFSH 300 IU rFSH (Ovaleap®) GnRH antagonist: ganirelix 0.25 mg (Orgalutran®) Recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin (rhCG) 250 μg (Ovitrelle®) micronized progesterone 200 mg 3id (Utrogestan®)

Interventions

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

Ovarian Stimulation with CC+rFSH

: CC 50 mg/day (Omifin®) + rFSH 150 IU (Ovaleap®) GnRH antagonist: ganirelix 0.25 mg (Orgalutran®) Recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin (rhCG) 250 μg (Ovitrelle®) micronized progesterone 200 mg 3id (Utrogestan®)

Intervention Type DRUG

Ovarian Stimulation with rFSH

rFSH 300 IU rFSH (Ovaleap®) GnRH antagonist: ganirelix 0.25 mg (Orgalutran®) Recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin (rhCG) 250 μg (Ovitrelle®) micronized progesterone 200 mg 3id (Utrogestan®)

Intervention Type DRUG

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* Able and willing to sign the Patient Consent Form and adhere to study visitation schedule
* Antral follicle count (AFC) ≥ 5 and ≤ 10
* Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) ≤1.5 ng/ml (AMH result of up to one year will be valid)
* Age ≥ 35 years and ≤40 years
* BMI ≥18.5 and \<25 kg/m2

Exclusion Criteria

* AFC \>10
* History of untreated autoimmune, endocrine or metabolic disorders
* Contraindication for hormonal treatment
* Preimplantation genetic diagnosis cycles
* Severe male factor (sperm concentration \<5 M/mL)
* Recent history of severe disease requiring regular treatment (clinically significant concurrent medical condition that could compromise subject safety or interfered with the trial assessment and patients with any contraindication of being pregnant).
Minimum Eligible Age

35 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.

Fundación Santiago Dexeus Font

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.

Nikolaos P Polyzos, MD PhD

Role: STUDY_CHAIR

Hospital Universitari Dexeus

Ana Neves, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Hospital Universitari Dexeus

Locations

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

Salud de la Mujer Dexeus

Barcelona, , Spain

Site Status RECRUITING

Countries

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

Spain

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Nikolaos P Polyzos, MD PhD

Role: CONTACT

0034932274700

Ignacio Rodríguez, MSc

Role: CONTACT

0034932274700

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Nikolaos P Polyzos, MD PhD

Role: primary

0034683470069

Nacho Rodriguez, BsC

Role: backup

0034932274700 ext. 22029

References

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

Nargund G, Fauser BC, Macklon NS, Ombelet W, Nygren K, Frydman R; Rotterdam ISMAAR Consensus Group on Terminology for Ovarian Stimulation for IVF. The ISMAAR proposal on terminology for ovarian stimulation for IVF. Hum Reprod. 2007 Nov;22(11):2801-4. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dem285. Epub 2007 Sep 12.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 17855409 (View on PubMed)

Dickey RP, Holtkamp DE. Development, pharmacology and clinical experience with clomiphene citrate. Hum Reprod Update. 1996 Nov-Dec;2(6):483-506. doi: 10.1093/humupd/2.6.483.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 9111183 (View on PubMed)

Bechtejew TN, Nadai MN, Nastri CO, Martins WP. Clomiphene citrate and letrozole to reduce follicle-stimulating hormone consumption during ovarian stimulation: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Sep;50(3):315-323. doi: 10.1002/uog.17442. Epub 2017 Aug 10.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28236310 (View on PubMed)

Kamath MS, Maheshwari A, Bhattacharya S, Lor KY, Gibreel A. Oral medications including clomiphene citrate or aromatase inhibitors with gonadotropins for controlled ovarian stimulation in women undergoing in vitro fertilisation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Nov 2;11(11):CD008528. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008528.pub3.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 29096046 (View on PubMed)

ESHRE Reproductive endocrinology guidelines group. Ovarian Stimulation for IVF / ICSI - Guideline of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. Belgium: ESHRE; 2019

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Zhang JJ, Merhi Z, Yang M, Bodri D, Chavez-Badiola A, Repping S, van Wely M. Minimal stimulation IVF vs conventional IVF: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Jan;214(1):96.e1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.08.009. Epub 2015 Aug 8.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26259908 (View on PubMed)

Verberg MF, Eijkemans MJ, Heijnen EM, Broekmans FJ, de Klerk C, Fauser BC, Macklon NS. Why do couples drop-out from IVF treatment? A prospective cohort study. Hum Reprod. 2008 Sep;23(9):2050-5. doi: 10.1093/humrep/den219. Epub 2008 Jun 10.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18544578 (View on PubMed)

Heijnen EM, Eijkemans MJ, De Klerk C, Polinder S, Beckers NG, Klinkert ER, Broekmans FJ, Passchier J, Te Velde ER, Macklon NS, Fauser BC. A mild treatment strategy for in-vitro fertilisation: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2007 Mar 3;369(9563):743-749. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60360-2.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 17336650 (View on PubMed)

Aleyamma TK, Kamath MS, Muthukumar K, Mangalaraj AM, George K. Affordable ART: a different perspective. Hum Reprod. 2011 Dec;26(12):3312-8. doi: 10.1093/humrep/der323. Epub 2011 Oct 10.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21987524 (View on PubMed)

Paulson RJ, Fauser BCJM, Vuong LTN, Doody K. Can we modify assisted reproductive technology practice to broaden reproductive care access? Fertil Steril. 2016 May;105(5):1138-1143. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.03.013. Epub 2016 Apr 4.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 27054309 (View on PubMed)

Polyzos NP, Popovic-Todorovic B. SAY NO to mild ovarian stimulation for all poor responders: it is time to realize that not all poor responders are the same. Hum Reprod. 2020 Sep 1;35(9):1964-1971. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deaa183.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 32830232 (View on PubMed)

van Tilborg TC, Torrance HL, Oudshoorn SC, Eijkemans MJC, Koks CAM, Verhoeve HR, Nap AW, Scheffer GJ, Manger AP, Schoot BC, Sluijmer AV, Verhoeff A, Groen H, Laven JSE, Mol BWJ, Broekmans FJM; OPTIMIST study group. Individualized versus standard FSH dosing in women starting IVF/ICSI: an RCT. Part 1: The predicted poor responder. Hum Reprod. 2017 Dec 1;32(12):2496-2505. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dex318.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 29121326 (View on PubMed)

Verberg MF, Eijkemans MJ, Macklon NS, Heijnen EM, Baart EB, Hohmann FP, Fauser BC, Broekmans FJ. The clinical significance of the retrieval of a low number of oocytes following mild ovarian stimulation for IVF: a meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2009 Jan-Feb;15(1):5-12. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmn053.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 19091754 (View on PubMed)

Matsaseng T, Kruger T, Steyn W. Mild ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: are we ready to change? A meta-analysis. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2013;76(4):233-40. doi: 10.1159/000355980. Epub 2013 Nov 2.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24192422 (View on PubMed)

Sterrenburg MD, Veltman-Verhulst SM, Eijkemans MJ, Hughes EG, Macklon NS, Broekmans FJ, Fauser BC. Clinical outcomes in relation to the daily dose of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone for ovarian stimulation in in vitro fertilization in presumed normal responders younger than 39 years: a meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2011 Mar-Apr;17(2):184-96. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmq041. Epub 2010 Sep 15.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 20843965 (View on PubMed)

Baart EB, Martini E, Eijkemans MJ, Van Opstal D, Beckers NG, Verhoeff A, Macklon NS, Fauser BC. Milder ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization reduces aneuploidy in the human preimplantation embryo: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2007 Apr;22(4):980-8. doi: 10.1093/humrep/del484. Epub 2007 Jan 4.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 17204525 (View on PubMed)

La Marca A, Minasi MG, Sighinolfi G, Greco P, Argento C, Grisendi V, Fiorentino F, Greco E. Female age, serum antimullerian hormone level, and number of oocytes affect the rate and number of euploid blastocysts in in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles. Fertil Steril. 2017 Nov;108(5):777-783.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.08.029. Epub 2017 Oct 4.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28987789 (View on PubMed)

Wu Q, Li H, Zhu Y, Jiang W, Lu J, Wei D, Yan J, Chen ZJ. Dosage of exogenous gonadotropins is not associated with blastocyst aneuploidy or live-birth rates in PGS cycles in Chinese women. Hum Reprod. 2018 Oct 1;33(10):1875-1882. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dey270.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 30137360 (View on PubMed)

Venetis CA, Tilia L, Panlilio E, Kan A. Is more better? A higher oocyte yield is independently associated with more day-3 euploid embryos after ICSI. Hum Reprod. 2019 Jan 1;34(1):79-83. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dey342.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 30476100 (View on PubMed)

Irani M, Canon C, Robles A, Maddy B, Gunnala V, Qin X, Zhang C, Xu K, Rosenwaks Z. No effect of ovarian stimulation and oocyte yield on euploidy and live birth rates: an analysis of 12 298 trophectoderm biopsies. Hum Reprod. 2020 May 1;35(5):1082-1089. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deaa028.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 32348476 (View on PubMed)

Ghosh Dastidar S, Maity S, Ghosh Dastidar B. Reappraisal of IVF stimulation in good prognosis patients - a prospective randomized study to compare mild versus standard long protocol. Fertil Steril [Internet]. 2010;94(4):S28. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.07.108

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Golan A, Weissman A. Symposium: Update on prediction and management of OHSS. A modern classification of OHSS. Reprod Biomed Online. 2009 Jul;19(1):28-32. doi: 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60042-9.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 19573287 (View on PubMed)

Hohmann FP, Macklon NS, Fauser BC. A randomized comparison of two ovarian stimulation protocols with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist cotreatment for in vitro fertilization commencing recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone on cycle day 2 or 5 with the standard long GnRH agonist protocol. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2003 Jan;88(1):166-73. doi: 10.1210/jc.2002-020788.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12519847 (View on PubMed)

Datta AK, Maheshwari A, Felix N, Campbell S, Nargund G. Mild versus conventional ovarian stimulation for IVF in poor, normal and hyper-responders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2021 Feb 19;27(2):229-253. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmaa035.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 33146690 (View on PubMed)

Vermey BG, Chua SJ, Zafarmand MH, Wang R, Longobardi S, Cottell E, Beckers F, Mol BW, Venetis CA, D'Hooghe T. Is there an association between oocyte number and embryo quality? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2019 Nov;39(5):751-763. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2019.06.013. Epub 2019 Jul 3.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 31540848 (View on PubMed)

Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine and ESHRE Special Interest Group of Embryology. The Istanbul consensus workshop on embryo assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting. Hum Reprod. 2011 Jun;26(6):1270-83. doi: 10.1093/humrep/der037. Epub 2011 Apr 18.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21502182 (View on PubMed)

ESHRE Special Interest Group of Embryology and Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine. Electronic address: [email protected]. The Vienna consensus: report of an expert meeting on the development of ART laboratory performance indicators. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017 Nov;35(5):494-510. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.06.015. Epub 2017 Aug 4.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28784335 (View on PubMed)

Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, Dyer S, Racowsky C, de Mouzon J, Sokol R, Rienzi L, Sunde A, Schmidt L, Cooke ID, Simpson JL, van der Poel S. The International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility Care, 2017. Fertil Steril. 2017 Sep;108(3):393-406. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.06.005. Epub 2017 Jul 29.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28760517 (View on PubMed)

Montoya-Botero P, Martinez F, Rodriguez-Purata J, Rodriguez I, Coroleu B, Polyzos NP. Erratum. The effect of type of oral contraceptive pill and duration of use on fresh and cumulative live birth rates in IVF/ICSI cycles. Hum Reprod. 2021 Mar 18;36(4):1159-1161. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deaa358. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 33515004 (View on PubMed)

Related Links

Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.

http://www.dexeus.com

Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Reproduction Hospital Universitari Quiron Dexeus

Other Identifiers

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

2021-000941-42

Identifier Type: EUDRACT_NUMBER

Identifier Source: secondary_id

FSD-IEQ-2021-03

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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

Retrospective Database Studies
NCT01219296 COMPLETED
Use of IMSI in Poor Responders to IVF
NCT02358733 TERMINATED NA