Ask Our Doctors – Archive
Our Medical Directors are outstanding physicians that you will find to be very personable and compassionate, who take care to ensure that you have the most cutting-edge fertility treatments at your disposal. This is your outlet to ask your questions to the doctors.
Thank you! The immune biopsy and NKC blood tests were done in Chicago. So they should be gold standard tests. Do you normally suggest patients to do both? Or do you have a preference for one or the other ?
I only require the NKa blood test (the K-562 target cell test).
Geoff Sher
Hi Dr Sher, I read some women saying their endometrial immune biopsies showed differing results to their NKC blood tests. Is this possible? Which test is more reliable the immune biopsy or immune bloods? Should the results be the same? What does it mean if they are different?
It really depends on the type of tests done, their interpretation and where they were performed.
Unless tests for immunologic implantation dysfunction (IID) are performed correctly and conducted by a one of the few reliable reproductive immunology reference laboratory in the United States, treatment will likely be unsuccessful. . In this regard it is most important that the right tests be ordered and that these be performed by a competent laboratory. There are in my opinion only a handful of reliable Reproductive Immunology Laboratories in the world and most are in the U.S.A. Also, it is my opinion that far too often, testing is inappropriate with the many redundant and incorrect tests being requested from and conducted by suboptimal laboratories. Finally for treatment to have the best chance of being successful, it is vital that the underlying type of IID (autoimmune IID versus alloimmune) be identified correctly and that the type, dosage, concentration and timing of treatments be carefully devised and implemented. I recommend that my patients be tested by ReproSource Reproductive Immunology Reference Laboratory, Boston, MA.
WHO SHOULD UNDERGO IID TESTING?
When it comes to who should be evaluated, the following conditions should in always raise a suspicion of an underlying IID, and trigger prompt testing:
•A diagnosis of endometriosis or the existence of symptoms suggestive of endometriosis (heavy/painful menstruation and pain with ovulation or with deep penetration during intercourse) I would however emphasize that a definitive diagnosis of endometriosis requires visualization of the lesions at laparoscopy or laparotomy)
•A personal or family history of autoimmune disease such as hyper/hypothyroidism (as those with elevated or depressed TSH blood levels, regardless of thyroid hormonal dysfunction), Lupus erythematosus, Rheumatoid arthritis, dermatomyositis, scleroderma etc.)
•“Unexplained” infertility
•Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL)
•A history of having miscarried a conceptus that, upon testing of products of conception, was found to have a normal numerical chromosomal configuration (euploid).
•Unexplained IVF failure
• “Unexplained” intrauterine growth retardation due to placental insufficiency or late pregnancy loss of a chromosomally normal baby
What Parameters should be tested?
In my opinion, too many Reproductive Immunologists unnecessarily unload a barrage of costly IID tests on unsuspecting patients. In most cases the initial test should be for NK cell activation, and only if this is positive, is it necessary to expand the testing.
The parameters that require measurement include:
oFor Autoimmune Implantation Dysfunction: Autoimmune implantation dysfunction, most commonly presents with presumed “infertility” due to such early pregnancy losses that the woman did not even know she was pregnant in the first place. Sometimes there as an early miscarriage. Tests required are: a) blood levels of all IgA, IgG and IgM-related antiphospholipid antibodies (APA’s) directed against six or seven specific phospholipids, b) both antithyroid antibodies (antithyroid and antimicrosomal antibodies), c) a comprehensive reproductive immunophenotype (RIP) and, c) most importantly, assessment of Natural Killer (NK) cell activity (rather than concentration) by measuring by their killing, using the K-562 target cell test and/or uterine cytokine measurement. As far as the ideal environment for performing such tests, it is important to recognize that currently there are only about 5 or 6, Reproductive Immunology Reference Laboratories in the U.S capable of reliably analyzing the required elements with a sufficient degree of sensitivity and specificity (in my opinion).
oFor Alloimmune implantation Dysfunction: While alloimmune Implantation usually presents with a history of unexplained (usually repeated) miscarriages or secondary infertility (where the woman conceived initially and thereupon was either unable to conceive started having repeated miscarriages it can also present as “presumed” primary infertility. Alloimmune dysfunction is diagnosed by testing the blood of both the male and female partners for matching DQ alpha genes and NK/CTL activation. It is important to note that any DQ alpha match (partial or complete) will only result in IID when there is concomitant NK/CTL activation (see elsewhere on this blog).
How should results be interpreted?
Central to making a diagnosis of an immunologic implantation dysfunction is the appropriate interpretation of natural killer cell activity (NKa) .In this regard, one of the commonest and most serious errors, is to regard the blood concentration of natural killer cells as being significant. Rather it is the activity (toxicity) of NK cells that matters as mentioned. Then there is the interpretation of reported results. The most important consideration is the percentage of target cells “killed” in the “native state”. In most cases a level of >10% killing should be regarded with suspicion and >12% overtly abnormal. In my opinion, trying to interpret the effect of adding IVIG or Intralipid to the sample in order assess whether and to what degree the use of these products would have a therapeutic benefit is seriously flawed and of little benefit. Clinically relevant NK cell deactivation can only be significantly effected in vivo and takes more than a week following infusion to occur. Thus what happens in the laboratory by adding these products to the sample prior to K-562 target cell testing is in my opinion likely irrelevant.
There exists a pervasive but blatant misconception on the part of many, that the addition of Intralipid (IL) /immunoglobulin-G IVIG) can have an immediate down-regulatory effect on NK cell activity. This has established a demand that Reproductive Immunology Reference Laboratories report on NK cell activity before and following exposure to IVIG and/or IL. However, the fact is that activated “functional” NK cells (NKa) cannot be deactivated in the laboratory. Effective down-regulation of activated NK cells can only be adequately accomplished if their activated “progenitor/parental” NK cells are first down-regulated. Thereupon once these down-regulated “precursor” NK cells are exposed to progesterone, they will begin spawning normal and functional NK cells, which takes about 10-14 days. It follows that to assess for a therapeutic response to IVIG/IL therapy would require that the patient first be treated (10-14 days prior to embryo transfer) and thereupon, about 2 weeks later, be retested. While at 1st glance this might seem to be a reasonable approach, in reality it would be of little clinical benefit because even if blood were to be drawn 10 -14 days after IL/IVIG treatment it would require an additional 10 days to receive results from the laboratory, by which time it would be far too late to be of practical advantage.
Neither IVIG nor IL is capable of significantly suppressing already activated “functional NK cells”. For this to happen, the IL/IVIG would have to down-regulate progenitor (parent) NK cell” activity. Thus, it should be infused 10-14 several prior to ovulation or progesterone administration so that the down-regulated “progenitor/precursor” NK cells” can propagate a sufficient number of normally regulated “functional NK cell” to be present at the implantation site 7 days later. In addition, to be effective, IL/IVIG therapy needs to be combined with steroid (dexamethasone/prednisone/prednisolone) therapy to down-regulates (often) concomitantly activated T-cells.
I strongly recommend that you visit http://www.DrGeoffreySherIVF.com. Then go to my Blog and access the “search bar”. Type in the titles of any/all of the articles listed below, one by one. “Click” and you will immediately be taken to those you select. Please also take the time to post any questions or comments with the full expectation that I will (as always) respond promptly.
•The IVF Journey: The importance of “Planning the Trip” Before Taking the Ride”
•Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) for IVF: Selecting the ideal protocol
•IVF: Factors Affecting Egg/Embryo “competency” during Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS)
•The Fundamental Requirements for Achieving Optimal IVF Success
•Use of GnRH Antagonists (Ganirelix/Cetrotide/Orgalutron) in IVF-Ovarian Stimulation Protocols.
•The Role of Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID) & Infertility (IID): PART 1-Background
•Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID) & Infertility (IID): PART 2- Making a Diagnosis
•Immunologic Dysfunction (IID) & Infertility (IID): PART 3-Treatment
•Thyroid autoantibodies and Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID) Why did my IVF Fail
•Recurrent Pregnancy Loss (RPL): Why do I keep losing my PregnanciesGenetically Testing Embryos for IVF
•Staggered IVF
•Staggered IVF with PGS- Selection of “Competent” Embryos Greatly Enhances the Utility & Efficiency of IVF.
•Embryo Banking/Stockpiling: Slows the “Biological Clock” and offers a Selective Alternative to IVF-Egg Donation
•Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGS) in IVF: It should be Used Selectively and NOT be Routine.
•IVF: Selecting the Best Quality Embryos to Transfer
•Preimplantation Genetic Sampling (PGS) Using: Next Generation Gene Sequencing (NGS): Method of Choice.
•PGS in IVF: Are Some Chromosomally abnormal Embryos Capable of Resulting in Normal Babies and Being Wrongly Discarded?
•Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction: Importance of Meticulous Evaluation and Strategic Management 🙁 Case Report)
•Intralipid and IVIG therapy: Understanding the Basis for its use in the Treatment of Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction (IID)
•Intralipid (IL) Administration in IVF: It’s Composition; how it Works; Administration; Side-effects; Reactions and Precautions
•Natural Killer Cell Activation (NKa) and Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction in IVF: The Controversy!
•Natural Killer Cell Activation (NKa) and Immunologic Implantation Dysfunction in IVF: The Controversy!
•Treating Out-of-State and Out-of-Country Patients at Sher-IVF in Las Vegas
•Should IVF Treatment Cycles be provided uninterrupted or be Conducted in 7-12 Pre-scheduled “Batches” per Year
•A personalized, stepwise approach to IVF
___________________________________________________________
ADDENDUM: PLEASE READ!!
INTRODUCING SHER FERTILITY SOLUTIONS (SFS)
Founded in April 2019, Sher Fertility Solutions (SFS) offers online (Skype/FaceTime) consultations to patients from > 40 different countries. All consultations are followed by a detailed written report presenting my personal recommendations for treatment of what often constitute complex Reproductive Issues.
If you wish to schedule an online consultation with me, please contact my assistant (Patti Converse) by phone (800-780-7437/702-533-2691), email (concierge@SherIVF.com) or, enroll online on then home-page of my website (www.SherIVF.com).
PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT SFS!
Geoff Sher
Hope you’re doing well! I got her Master’s degree in clinical embryology at Dundee University with a merit. I am very interested in getting an internship or a research position at Boston IVF lab. could I have the chance to work with you in the lab?. As the sponsorship is not an obstacle for me. I would appreciate you help!
Best regards,
Jawad
Hi Jawad,
Please contact Raifa Zody at Sher Fertility Institute-(SFS)-NY. She heads up our laboratory. Her email address is raifaz@sherinstitute.com.
Good luck!
Geoff Sher
I’m 36 and my partner is 34. We have MFI. Our first round of ICSI in Aug resulted in 14 eggs retrieved, 12 mature, 11 fertilized, 2 five-day blasts, 2 six-day blasts, 2 euploid. We did another round in Oct and were thrilled with our initial results: 30 eggs, 27 mature, 23 fertilized, 8 five-day blasts and 6 six-day blasts for a total of 14 embryos!! 10 more than last time! I was over the moon and assumed we’d have ~50% euploid (for the five-day blasts at least) since we had 50% last time. 50% is the average for my age. Cut to yesterday and our clinic says that out of the 14, only 1 is euploid. I’m in shock. What could account for this dramatic drop in euploid rate (50% —> 7%) in only 2 months? Did my egg quality fall off a cliff?
In round 1 (fewer eggs, 50% euploid), my trigger shot was 10K Novarel and I stimmed for 9 days, and round 2 (more eggs, 7% euploid) trigger was only 5K and I stimmed for 11 days. I understand the changes were due to follicle count and concern about OHSS; however, I’m worried that at my age, my lower-quality eggs need the full 10K Novarel for efficient meiosis. What do you think? Do you think the difference in Novarel could account for the disparity between my two cycles? If so, what can I do? My AMH level is 4.98, so it’s very likely I will have a large follicle count in my next cycle. Thanks in advance!
Respectfully,
In my opinion, 5,000U hCGu (Novarel) is half the dosage needed to optimize meiosis. It is likely that this reduced dosage given was done to reduce the risk of OHSS…but there are other ways to do this without compromising egg maturation during meiosis.
I strongly suggest that we talk. Call my assistant, Patti Converse (702-533-2691) and have her set up an online consultation with me for an in depth discussion.
The importance of the IVF stimulation protocol on egg/embryo quality cannot be overstated. This factor seems often to be overlooked or discounted by t IVF practitioners who use a “one-size-fits-all” approach to ovarian stimulation. My experience is that the use of individualized/customized COS protocols can greatly improve IVF outcome. While no one can influence underlying genetics or turn back the clock on a woman’s age, any competent IVF specialist should be able to tailor the protocol for COS to meet the individual needs of the patient.
Gonadotropins (LH and FSH), whether produced by the pituitary gland or administered by way of fertility drugs, have different “targeted” sites of action in the ovary. FSH targets cells that line the inner wall of the follicle (granulosa cells) and also form the cumulus cells that bind the egg to the inner surface of the follicle. Granulosa cells are responsible for estrogen production.
LH, on the other hand, targets the ovarian connective tissue (stroma/theca) that surrounds ovarian follicles resulting in the production of male hormones such as testosterone (predominantly), androstenedione and DHEA. These androgens are then transported to the granulosa cells of the adjacent follicles in a “bucket brigade fashion”. There FSH converts testosterone to estradiol, causing granulosa cells to multiply (proliferate) and produce estradiol, follicles to grows and eggs to develop (ovogenesis) It follows that ovarian androgens (mainly testosterone) is absolutely indispensable to follicle/ egg growth and development.
However, the emphasis is on a “normal” amount of testosterone. Over-exposure of the follicle to testosterone can in my opinion, compromise egg development and lead to an increased likelihood of chromosomal irregularities (aneuploid) following LH/hCG-induced egg maturational division (meiosis) and compromise embryo “competency/quality.
Ovarian androgens can also reach the uterine lining where they sometimes will compromise estrogen receptor -induced endometrial growth and development.
A significant percentage of older women and those who have diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) have increased LH activity is increased. Such women either over-produce LH and/or the LH produced is far more biologically active. Chronically increased LH activity leads to overgrowth of ovarian connective tissue (stroma/theca). This condition, which is often referred to as Stromal Hyperplasia or hyperthecosis can result in excessive ovarian androgen/testosterone production and poorer egg-embryo quality/competency, Similarly, women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), also characteristically have Stromal hyperplasia/hyperthecosis due to chronically increased LH activity. Thus they too often manifest with increased ovarian androgen production. It is therefore not surprising that “poor egg/embryo quality” is often also a feature of PCOS.
In my opinion, the over-administration of LH-containing menotropins such as Menopur, [which is comprised of roughly equal amount of FSH and hCG ,which acts similar to LH)], to older women, women with DOR and those who have PCOS can also lead to reduced egg/embryo competency . Similarly, drugs such as clomiphene or Letrozole that cause the pituitary gland to release excessive amounts of LH, are also potentially harmful to egg development and in my opinion, are best omitted from IVF COS protocols. This is especially the case when it comes to older women and those with DOR, who in my opinion should preferably be stimulated using FSH-dominant products such as Follistim, Puregon, Fostimon and Gonal-F.
Gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa): GnRHa such as Lupron, Buserelin, Superfact, Gonopeptyl etc. are often used to launch ovarian stimulation cycles. They act by causing an initial outpouring followed by a depletion of pituitary gonadotropins. This results in LH levels falling to low concentrations, within 4-7 days, thereby establishing a relatively “LH-free environment”. When GnRHa are administered for about 7 days prior to initiating gonadotropin stimulation (“long” pituitary down-regulation”), the LH depletion that will exist when COS is initiated, will usually be protective of subsequent egg development. In contrast, when the GnRHa administration commences along with the initiation of gonadotropin therapy, there will be a resultant immediate surge in the release of pituitary LH with the potential to increase ovarian testosterone to egg-compromising levels , from the outset of COS. This, in my opinion could be particularly harmful when undertaken in older women and those who have DOR.
GnRH-antagonists such as Ganirelix, Cetrotide and Orgalutron, on the other hand, act very rapidly (within hours) to block pituitary LH release. The purpose in using GnRH antagonists is to prevent the release of LH during COS. In contrast, the LH-lowering effect of GnRH agonists develops over a number of days.
GnRH antagonists are traditionally given, starting after 5th -7th day of gonadotropin stimulation. However, when this is done in older women and those (regardless of age) who have DOR, LH-suppression might be reached too late to prevent the deleterious effect of excessive ovarian androgen production on egg development in the early stage of ovarian stimulation. This is why, it is my preference to administer GnRH-antagonists, starting at the initiation of gonadotropin administration.
My preferred Protocols for Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS):
1.“Long” GnRHa (Lupron/Buserelin/Superfact/Gonopeptyl) Pituitary Down-regulation Protocol: The most commonly prescribed protocol for GnRHa/gonadotropin administration is the so-called “long protocol”. Here, GnRHa is given, starting a week or so prior to menstruation. This results in an initial rise in FSH and LH , which is rapidly followed by a precipitous fall to near zero. It is followed by a withdrawal bleed (menstruation), whereupon gonadotropin treatment should commence, while daily Lupron injections continue, to ensure a “low LH” environment. A modification to the “long protocol” which I prefer prescribing for older women and in cases of DOR, is the Agonist/Antagonist Conversion Protocol (A/ACP) where, upon the onset of a GnRHa-induced bleed, the agonist is supplanted by an antagonist (Ganirelix/Cetrotide/Orgalutron) and this is continued until the hCG trigger. In many such cases I often supplement with human growth hormone (HGH) in such cases in an attempt to enhance egg mitochondrial activity and so enhance egg development. This approach is often augmented with preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) of all embryos that reach the expanded blastocyst stage of development by day 5-6 post-fertilization. I also commonly recommend blastocyst banking to many such patients.
2.Short (“Flare”) GnRHa Protocol: Another GnRHa usage for COS is the so called “(micro) flare protocol”. This involves initiating gonadotropin therapy commensurate with initiation of gonadotropin administration. The supposed objective is to deliberately allow Lupron to elicit an initial surge (“flare”) in pituitary FSH release in order to augment FSH administration by increased FSH production. Unfortunately, this “spring board effect” constitutes “a double-edged sword”. While it indeed increases the release of FSH, it at the same time causes a surge in LH release. The latter can evoke excessive ovarian stromal/thecal androgen production which could potentially compromise egg quality, especially when it comes to older women and women with DOR. I am of the opinion that by evoking an exaggerated ovarian androgen response, such “(micro) flare protocols” can harm egg/embryo quality and reduce IVF success rates, especially when it comes to COS in older women, and in women with diminished ovarian reserve. Accordingly, I do not prescribe such protocols to my IVF patients.
3.Estrogen Priming – This is the approach I sometimes prescribe for my patients who have virtually depleted ovarian reserve , as determined by very low blood anti-Mullerian hormone AMH levels ( 40 different countries. All consultations are followed by a detailed written report presenting my personal recommendations for treatment of what often constitute complex Reproductive Issues.
If you wish to schedule an online consultation with me, please contact my assistant (Patti Converse) by phone (800-780-7437/702-533-2691), email (concierge@SherIVF.com) or, enroll online on then home-page of my website (www.SherIVF.com).
PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT SFS!
Geoff Sher
Hi Dr Sher how are you? I’m 43 years old on 22 february Will turn 44 i got 2 pregnancies the 1 st one last year but I had a miscarriage at 9 weeks on the 25 of December, this year I got pregnant again my and my husband super happy because we really want our baby but unfortunately I had to had an pregnancy interruption at 17 weeks and 5 days because our baby boy was diagnostic with T18 by amniocentesis test
Dr Sher, we are thinking to go for FIV but at least 2 places where I called for appointment we need to wait minimum 8 months to get 1st appointment and by the phone they say that will not be possible to do with my eggs due to my age in this case I feel that if we do this the baby will not be mine only will be my husband because will not be my eggs …
We don’t know how eggs donor works it’s safe? Do we get information about the donor??
I would like to have the FIV with my eggs you think is possible?
Would like to know what u think Dr Sher
Thank you for your time!
Dulce living at Montréal Canada
We should talk! Please call my assistant, Patti Converse and set up an online consultation with me to discuss. In the interim, please read the following:
It is primarily the egg (rather than the sperm) that determines the chromosomal integrity (karyotype) of the embryo, the most important determinant of egg/embryo competency”. A “competent” egg is therefore one that has a normal karyotype and has the best potential to propagate a “competent” embryo. In turn, a “competent embryo is one that possesses the highest potential to implant and develop into a normal, healthy, baby.
When it comes to reproductive performance, humans are the least efficient of all mammals. Even in young women under 35y, at best only 1 out of 2 eggs are chromosomally numerically normal (euploid). The remained have an irregular number of chromosomes (aneuploid) and are thus “incompetent”. The incidence of egg aneuploidy increases with age such by age 39 years, 3 in 4 are competent, and by the mid-forties, less 8 to 9 out of 10 are aneuploid. The fertilization of an aneuploid egg will inevitably lead to embryo aneuploid and an aneuploid embryo cannot propagate a normal pregnancy
Within hours of the spontaneous pre-ovulatory luteinizing hormone (LH) surge, and also following administration of the human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) “trigger” shot (given to induce ovulation after ovarian stimulation with fertility drugs), the egg embarks on a rapid maturational process that involves halving of its 46 chromosomes to 23. During this process, (known as meiosis) 23 chromosomes are retained within the nucleus of the egg while the remaining (now redundant) 23are expelled, enveloped by a thin membrane. This small structure comes to lie immediately below the “shell” of the egg (the zona pellucida) and is known as the 1st polar body or PB-1. The spermatozoon, in the process of its maturation also undergoes meiosis at which time it too reduces its chromosomes by half. Thus in the process of fertilization the sperm divides into two separate functional gametes, each containing 23 chromosomes such that with subsequent fertilization, the 23 chromosomes in the egg, fuse with the 23 chromosomes of the mature sperm resulting in the development of an embryo that has 46 chromosomes (the normal human genome) comprising a combination of the genetic material from both partners. For the embryo to have exactly 46 chromosomes (the euploid number), both the mature egg and mature spermatozoon must contain exactly 23 chromosomes. Only euploid embryos are “competent” (capable of developing into healthy babies). Those with an irregular number of chromosomes (aneuploid embryos) are “incompetent” and are incapable of developing into healthy babies. While embryo “incompetence” can result from either egg or sperm aneuploidy, it usually stems from egg aneuploidy. However, in cases of moderate or severe male factor infertility, the sperm’s contribution to aneuploidy of the embryo increases significantly.
While embryo ploidy (numerical chromosomal integrity) is not the only determinant of its “competency, it is by far the most important and in fact is rate-limiting factor in human reproduction. It is causal in most cases of “failed implantation” which in turn is responsible for most cases of failed IVF. It causes early miscarriages and is responsible for many chromosomal birth defects such as X-monosomy and Down’s syndrome. . In most cases, embryos that develop too slowly as well as those that grow too fast (i.e. ones that by day 3 post-fertilization comprise fewer than 6 cells or more than 9 cells) and/or embryos that contain a large amount of cell debris or “fragments” are usually aneuploid and are thus “incompetent”. Additionally, embryos that fail to survive in culture to the blastocyst stage are also almost always aneuploid/”incompetent”. At a certain point in the later stage of a woman’s reproductive career, the number of remaining eggs in her ovaries falls below a certain threshold, upon which she is unable to respond optimally to fertility drugs. Often times this is signaled by a rising day 3 blood follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) level. Such women with diminishing ovarian reserve produce fewer eggs in response to ovarian stimulation. While diminished ovarian reserve is most commonly encountered in women over 40 years of age it can and indeed sometimes does occur in much younger women. A few important (but often overlooked concepts should be considered in this regard: 1. Age: It is advancing chronologic age and NOT declining ovarian reserve (as evidenced by abnormal blood AMH or FSH that results in an increased incidence of egg/embryo “incompetence” due to aneuploidy 2. DOR: The ovaries and developing eggs of women with diminished ovarian reserve (regardless of age) are highly susceptible to the adverse effect of excessive Luteinizing Hormone (LH)-induced overproduction of male hormones (mainly testosterone). A little testosterone produced by the ovary promotes normal follicle growth and orderly egg development but too much testosterone has the opposite effect. That is why (especially in women with diminished ovarian reserve who often have high LH and increased ovarian testosterone production , the use of ovarian stimulation protocols that fail to down-regulate LH production prior to initiating stimulation with gonadotropins, often prejudices egg/embryo quality and IVF outcome. Simply stated, while age is certainly the most important factor in determining the incidence of egg/embryo aneuploidy, women with diminished ovarian reserve (regardless of their age), unless they receive customized/individualized protocols of ovarian stimulation are less likely to propagate euploid (competent) eggs/embryos.
Selection of the ideal protocol for controlled ovarian stimulation: While NOTHING can be done to lower the incidence of age related aneuploidy, it is indeed possible to avoid a further increase in egg/embryo aneuploidy by individualizing the protocols of ovarian stimulation used.
•My preferred protocols for women who have relatively normal ovarian reserve:
a)The conventional long pituitary down regulation protocol: BCP are commenced early in the cycle and continued for at least 10 days. Starting 3 days before the BCP is to be discontinued, it is overlapped with an agonist such as Lupron 10U daily for three (3) days and continued until menstruation begins (which should ensue within 5-7 days of stopping the BCP). At that point an US examination is done along with a baseline measurement of blood estradiol to exclude a functional ovarian cyst. Simultaneously, the Lupron dosage is reduced to 5U daily and an FSH-dominant gonadotropin such as Follistim, Puregon or Gonal-f daily is commenced for 2 days. On the 3rd day the gonadotropin dosage is reduced and a small amount of daily menotropin (Menopur 75U daily) is added. Daily ultrasound and blood estradiol measurements are done starting on the 7th or 8th day of gonadotropin administration and continued until daily ultrasound follicle assessments indicate that most follicles have fully developed. At this point egg maturation is “triggered” using an intramuscular injection of 10,000U hCG. And an egg retrieval is scheduled for 36h later.
b)The agonist/antagonist conversion protocol (A/ACOP): This is essentially the same as the conventional long down regulation protocol (as above), except that with the onset of post-BCP menstruation, the agonist is supplanted by daily administration of a GnRH antagonist (e.g. Ganirelix, Cetrotide or Orgalutron) at a dosage of 125mcg daily until the day of the hCG trigger
•My preferred protocol for women who have relatively diminished ovarian reserve (DOR):
When it comes to women who have DOR I favor the use of the A/ACP, adding supplementary human growth hormone (HGH). In some cases where the DOR is regarded as severe, I also augment the process with estrogen priming, preferring twice weekly intramuscular administration of estradiol valerate (Delestrogen), starting with the commencement of antagonist injection and continuing for 1 week before commencing gonadotropins and continued until the hCG “trigger. I further recommend that such women be offered access to preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) for4 embryo selection and in some cases, for embryo banking (stockpiling). This is followed in a later hormone replacement cycle with the selective transfer of up to two (2) PGS-normal, euploid blastocysts. In this way we are able to capitalize on whatever residual ovarian reserve and egg quality might still exist and thereby “make hay while the sun still shines” , significantly enhancing the opportunity to achieve a viable pregnancy
•The following Ovarian stimulation protocols are in my opinion best avoided in women with DOR:
a)Microdose agonist (e.g. Lupron) “flare” protocols
b)High doses of LH/hCG-containing fertility drugs (E.G. Menopur).
c)Protocols that incorporate supplementation with male hormones (e.g. testosterone)
d)Supplementation with DHEA
e)Clomiphene citrate or Letrozole which cause an elevation in LH and thus increase ovarian male hormone (testosterone and androstenedione output.
f)“Triggering” egg maturation using too low a dosage of hCG (e.g. 5,000U rather than 10,000U) or Ovidrel e.g. 250mcg of Ovidrel rather than 500mcg)
g)“Triggering” women who have large numbers of follicles using an agonist such as Lupron, Superfact or Buserelin.
•Preimplantation Genetic Screening (PGS):
The introduction of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) for the first time permits identification of all the chromosomes in the egg and embryo such that we can now far better identify “competent” (euploid) embryos for selective transfer to the uterus. This vastly improves the efficiency and success of the IVF process. This additional tool has better equipped us to manage cases with DOR. In my opinion, next generation gene sequencing (NGS), currently represents the most reliable method for performing PGS
Please visit my Blog on this very site, http://www.DrGeoffreySherIVF.com, find the “search bar” and type in the titles of any/all of the articles listed below, one by one. “Click” and you will immediately be taken to those you select. Please also take the time to post any questions or comments with the full expectation that I will (as always) respond promptly
•Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) for IVF: Selecting the ideal protocol
•IVF: Factors Affecting Egg/Embryo “competency” during Controlled Ovarian Stimulation(COS)
•The Fundamental Requirements For Achieving Optimal IVF Success
•Ovarian Stimulation for IVF using GnRH Antagonists: Comparing the Agonist/Antagonist Conversion Protocol.(A/ACP) With the “Conventional” Antagonist Approach
•Anti Mullerian Hormone (AMH) Measurement to Assess Ovarian Reserve and Design the Optimal Protocol for Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in IVF.
•The “Biological Clock” and how it should Influence the Selection and Design of Ovarian Stimulation Protocols for IVF.
• A Rational Basis for selecting Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) protocols in women with Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR)
•Diagnosing and Treating Infertility due to Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR)
•Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS) in Older women and Women who have Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR): A Rational Basis for Selecting a Stimulation Protocol
•Human Growth Hormone Administration in IVF: Does it Enhances Egg/Embryo Quality and Outcome?
•The BCP: Does Launching a Cycle of Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COS). Coming off the BCP Compromise Response?
•Blastocyst Embryo Transfers Should be the Standard of Care in IVF
•Frozen Embryo Transfer (FET) versus “Fresh” ET: How to Make the Decision
•Frozen Embryo Transfer (FET): A Rational Approach to Hormonal Preparation and How new Methodology is Impacting IVF.
•Staggered IVF: An Excellent Option When. Advancing Age and Diminished Ovarian Reserve (DOR) Reduces IVF Success Rate
•Embryo Banking/Stockpiling: Slows the “Biological Clock” and offers a Selective Alternative to IVF-Egg Donation.
•Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGS) in IVF: It Should be Used Selectively and NOT be Routine.
•Preimplantation Genetic Sampling (PGS) Using: Next Generation Gene Sequencing (NGS): Method of Choice.
•PGS in IVF: Are Some Chromosomally Abnormal Embryos Capable of Resulting in Normal Babies and Being Wrongly Discarded?
•PGS and Assessment of Egg/Embryo “competency”: How Method, Timing and Methodology Could Affect Reliability
•Treating Out-of-State and Out-of-Country Patients at Sher-IVF in Las Vegas:
•Traveling for IVF from Out of State/Country–
•A personalized, stepwise approach to IVF
•How Many Embryos should be transferred: A Critical Decision in IVF.
•The Role of Nutritional Supplements in Preparing for IVF
•Premature Luteinization (“the premature LH surge): Why it happens and how it can be prevented.
•IVF Egg Donation: A Comprehensive Overview
______________________________________________________
ADDENDUM: PLEASE READ!!
INTRODUCING SHER FERTILITY SOLUTIONS (SFS)
Founded in April 2019, Sher Fertility Solutions (SFS) offers online (Skype/FaceTime) consultations to patients from > 40 different countries. All consultations are followed by a detailed written report presenting my personal recommendations for treatment of what often constitute complex Reproductive Issues.
If you wish to schedule an online consultation with me, please contact my assistant (Patti Converse) by phone (800-780-7437/702-533-2691), email (concierge@SherIVF.com) or, enroll online on then home-page of my website (www.SherIVF.com).
PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT SFS!
Geoff Sher