Murray, D. L., Reich, L., & Adashi, E. Y. (1989). Oral clomiphene citrate and vaginal progesterone suppositories in the treatment of luteal phase dysfunction: a comparative study. Fertility and sterility, 51(1), 35-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(16)60424-7
Murray DL, Reich L, Adashi EY. Oral clomiphene citrate and vaginal progesterone suppositories in the treatment of luteal phase dysfunction: a comparative study. Fertil Steril. 1989;51(1):35-41. doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(16)60424-7
Murray, D. L., et al. "Oral clomiphene citrate and vaginal progesterone suppositories in the treatment of luteal phase dysfunction: a comparative study." Fertility and sterility, vol. 51, no. 1, 1989, pp. 35-41.
For EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley:
License
No open license is recorded for this paper. Reuse terms are set by the publisher.
Clomiphene and progesterone showed no significant conception gap
This study looked back at the records of 65 infertility patients. All had luteal phase dysfunction (LPD), and biopsies showed it was fixed. Pregnancy rates over 12 months were not significantly different with clomiphene citrate or progesterone suppositories in this study. At 6 months, about 6 out of 10 clomiphene patients and 5 out of 10 progesterone patients were pregnant.
Key Findings
Sixty-five patients were studied: 35 treated with vaginal progesterone suppositories and 30 with oral clomiphene citrate. Four clomiphene patients were excluded because their biopsies stayed out of phase.
The cumulative conception rate by 1 year did not differ significantly between the groups (P = 0.7968): 81% with clomiphene citrate and 100% with progesterone suppositories.
At 6 months, 58% of clomiphene patients and 49% of progesterone patients were pregnant, compared with an estimated "normal" rate of 74%. At 12 months the estimated "normal" rate was 93%.
The progesterone curve differed from the theoretical normal curve (P < 0.01). The clomiphene curve could not be shown to differ from it (0.05 < P < 0.10, borderline).
Mean age was 31.67 years with clomiphene and 31.69 years with progesterone (P = 0.9004). Mean duration of infertility was 37.85 and 43.71 months (P = 0.2076).
Interpretation
The study is a retrospective cohort (a look back at past records) from one university center. It has no untreated comparison group, and the authors cite the ethical difficulty of withholding treatment. Only patients whose biopsy after treatment showed correction were included. Few patients remained under observation in the last months, so the 100% progesterone figure at 12 months rests on very few people. The authors call the two treatments comparable once the biopsy shows correction. They raise the possibility that a normal biopsy may not mean full functional recovery.
RRM Context
The researchers found the luteal phase problem by biopsy and treated it. They checked for correction before counting pregnancies. This sequence of finding a cause, treating it and confirming the result fits the cause-based approach of restorative reproductive medicine. The authors cite an earlier study with lower conception rates: 20.9 and 29.8% for clomiphene and progesterone. They speculate that including only corrected biopsies may explain the gap.
Our editorial summary of this paper, not the article's abstract.
Abstract
Oral clomiphene citrate (CC) and vaginal progesterone suppositories (PS) are common treatment modalities in luteal phase dysfunction (LPD). Little is known regarding the relative efficacy of these agents. To study the use of CC and PS in the management of LPD, a retrospective cohort study of patients presenting with infertility was undertaken. Sixty-five patients in whom LPD was diagnosed and corrected, as judged by endometrial biopsies, were studied; 35 were treated with PS and 30 with CC. Using Student's t-tests and chi-square analyses, the two treatment groups were demographically comparable. Using life-table analysis, no one therapeutic approach proved superior. Clomiphene citrate and PS are comparable treatment modalities in the setting of LPD given correction of endometrial lag.
Wilcox AJ et al., 2020·Human reproduction (Oxford, England)·Free full text on PubMed Central
What proportion of fertilized human ova are lost before implantation? An estimated 40 to 50% of fertilized ova fail to implant. Preimplantation loss is not detectable with current technology. Published estimates of preimplantation loss range from 10 to 70%. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, We combine data from epidemiologic, demographic, laboratory and in vitro fertilization studies to construct an empirical framework for the estimation of preimplantation loss. This framework is summarized in a user-friendly Excel file included in supplement. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, We draw from multiple sources to generate plausible estimates of fecundability, sterility, transient anovulation, intercourse patterns and the proportion of ova fertilized in the presence of sperm. We combine these estimates to generate a summary estimate of preimplantation loss. This estimate can be considered an average for couples in their prime reproductive years. MAIN Under a plausible range of assumptions, we estimate that 40 to 50% of fertilized ova fail to implant. LIMITATIONS, A crucial factor in estimating preimplantation loss is the probability that an ovum will be fertilized when exposed to sperm. Human data are available only from in vitro fertilization (IVF), which may not accurately represent events in vivo. We therefore assume a range of in vivo fertilization rates, from 64% (human IVF data) to 90% (mouse data). Our estimate of preimplantation loss takes into account the biological processes relevant to fertilization and loss. Using this empirical basis for estimation, we find support for the usual assumption that risk of loss is highest in the earliest days following fertilization. Furthermore, this framework can provide improved estimates as better reproductive data become available. To the extent that our estimates are accurate, more fertilized ova are apparently lost in vitro than in vivo, suggesting that further improvements in IVF success rates may be possible. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was supported by the Intramural Program of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, NIH. Professor Adashi serves as Co-Chair of the Safety Advisory Board of Ohana Biosciences, Inc. The other authors have no competing interests. N/A.
Kennedy JL et al., 1987·Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am
Methods to induce ovulation in anovulatory women have blossomed over the last three decades. The introduction of clomiphene citrate in 1960 allowed us for the first time to provoke follicle development in patients with normo or hyperestrogenic forms of anovulation. The development of human menopausal gonadotropins in the early 1960s gave us a much more powerful tool with which to influence ovulation in all forms of ovulatory disturbances. Elucidation of the pulsatile secretion of gonadotropin-releasing hormone together with its isolation and synthesis has allowed us to streamline our methods of inducing ovulation in hypothalamic amenorrheic patients by using endogenous control mechanisms to maximize both safety and effectiveness. However, there are problems yet to solve. Polycystic ovarian disease has long eluded our efforts to resolve its pathophysiology as well as to devise a consistently effective and safe means of treatment. Methods to restore ovulation in patients with polycystic ovarian disease refractory to clomiphene citrate is the quest of future investigations.
Fertility following bilateral ovarian wedge resection (BOWR) was evaluated in a retrospective cohort study of 90 consecutive cases of the polycystic ovary syndrome. Post-BOWR follow-up was available for varying time spans of up to 10 years. BOWR resulted in the resumption of menstrual cyclicity in 91.1% (82/90) of the cases. However, within this ovulatory group, 26 patients were characterized by oligo-ovulation and a significantly reduced conception rate (29.2%), as compared with that of 56 normo-ovulatory counterparts (60.3%). Although the crude overall conception rate for this series was 47.8%, the overall cumulative probability of conception at the end of follow-up as determined by life table analysis was 73%. The likelihood of conception at any given point in time was estimated by a monthly fecundability rate of 1.34%. Our findings also indicate that the probability of post-BOWR conception was unaffected by age, race, ward status, or duration of infertility. In contrast, persistent post-BOWR oligo- or anovulation and the presence of concurrent tuboperitoneal disease were reaffirmed as the most important determinants of the likelihood of post-BOWR conception. A minimum incidence of 7.8% was documented for acquired post-BOWR pelvic disease.
The incidence of luteal phase defects in 366 infertility patients was 12.7%. Life-table analysis was used for determination of the conception rate with clomiphene citrate therapy, and with this method, evidence was found for the presence of two subgroups with respect to response. The crude conception rate was 40.9%. In a group of patients with a luteal phase defect and no other infertility factors, those that conceived had a significantly larger mean biopsy delay than those who did not (6.28 days versus 4.32; P less than 0.02). In a group with a histologic delay of 5 days or more, the conception rate was 79%, while the rate was only 8.9% in those with a less severe deficit (P less than 0.001). Theoretic considerations for clomiphene citrate therapy are discussed.
Vaginal progesterone suppositories are an accepted treatment for infertility attributed to luteal phase defects. Although oral micronized progesterone may be preferable to suppositories for many patients, there are no studies on its use for patients with luteal phase defects. This study evaluated the efficacy of oral micronized progesterone for the treatment of luteal phase defects. Seven women with luteal phase defects previously corrected by vaginal suppositories were administered oral micronized progesterone (200 mg by mouth three times a day). Endometrial biopsies were performed to evaluate treatment efficacy. Questionnaires were used to assess side effects, including sedation. On oral micronized progesterone, all patients had in-phase endometrial biopsies. Despite complaints of drowsiness, the majority of patients preferred the oral formulation over the vaginal route of administration. We conclude that oral micronized progesterone is efficacious in the treatment of luteal phase defects.
Three hundred and ninety-six patients were evaluated for primary and secondary infertility between December 1976 and May 1979 at a large referral center. Timed late luteal endometrial biopsies were routinely obtained as part of the work-up and were repeated for confirmation if subsequent menses did not occur within 2 days of the expected date. If both biopsies were abnormal, a diagnosis of luteal phase defect (LPD) was made and patients were treated with vaginal progesterone suppositories for a minimum of 6 months. LPD was discovered in 32 of 396 patients (8.1%); among those patients whose infertility was not complicated by other abnormalities, 9 of 13 conceived (70%) and 7 of 13 carried to term (54%). These data suggest an incidence higher than generally recognized and a very encouraging response to replacement therapy.
Sixty-nine infertile women with a midluteal serum progesterone level of 4 to 14 ng/ml were treated with a graduated dosage schedule of clomiphene citrate until the progesterone level on day 21 was greater than 20 ng/ml. Thirty-one pregnancies occurred, 58% during the first adequate treatment cycle and 19% during the second cycle. The abortion rate was 23%. After 6 adequate treatment cycles, laparoscopic evaluation was performed on 28 of 39 patients who did not conceive. Pathology was noted in 57%. Seven of 17 patients with intraperitoneal causes of infertility conceived after alternative therapy. The corrected pregnancy rate was 60%. Results of this study suggest that low luteal phase progesterone levels may compromise fertility and that clomiphene citrate enhances pregnancy rates.
PMID 2910717 2910717 DOI 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)60424-7 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)60424-7 Murray et al. 1989, Murray 1989
Cite this article
Murray, D. L., Reich, L., & Adashi, E. Y. (1989). Oral clomiphene citrate and vaginal progesterone suppositories in the treatment of luteal phase dysfunction: a comparative study. Fertility and sterility, 51(1), 35-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(16)60424-7
Murray DL, Reich L, Adashi EY. Oral clomiphene citrate and vaginal progesterone suppositories in the treatment of luteal phase dysfunction: a comparative study. Fertil Steril. 1989;51(1):35-41. doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(16)60424-7
Murray, D. L., et al. "Oral clomiphene citrate and vaginal progesterone suppositories in the treatment of luteal phase dysfunction: a comparative study." Fertility and sterility, vol. 51, no. 1, 1989, pp. 35-41.