Elsevier

Fertility and Sterility

Volume 110, Issue 6, November 2018, Pages 1101-1108.e3
Fertility and Sterility

Original article
Patient experience in a randomized trial of a weekly progesterone vaginal ring versus a daily progesterone gel for luteal support after in vitro fertilization

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.07.014Get rights and content
Under a Creative Commons license
open access

Objective

To assess patient experience and convenience of using progesterone vaginal ring (VR) versus vaginal gel for women requiring luteal phase support during in vitro fertilization (IVF).

Design

Post hoc analysis of a prospective, randomized, single-blind, multicenter, phase 3 clinical trial.

Setting

Twenty-two U.S. IVF centers.

Patient(s)

Women undergoing IVF (N = 1,297).

Intervention(s)

Randomization to weekly VR or daily gel the day after egg retrieval for up to 10 weeks, with fresh embryo transfer IVF per site-specific procedures.

Main Outcome Measure(s)

Patient satisfaction questionnaire completed at final study visit.

Result(s)

In the women who were taking ≥1 dose of either VR (n = 647) or gel (n = 650), >97% reported that learning to use the formulation, remembering to take it at the correct time, and using it as prescribed was “easy” or “somewhat easy.” More VR than gel users reported noninterference with daily activity (93.3% vs. 74.7%, P<.001), sexual comfort (80.3% vs. 67.8%, P<.001), and sexual desire (73.8% vs. 61.8%, P<.001), as well as not being bothered during sexual intercourse (66.9% vs. 39.2%, P<.001). More gel than VR users reported no difficulty with application (97.4% vs. 80.9%, P<.001). Among women who had previously used progesterone during IVF, more VR users than gel users preferred their currently assigned treatment to their previous treatment (91.4% vs. 83.0%, P=.03).

Conclusion(s)

Weekly progesterone VR and daily progesterone gel were easy to use, with limited impact on quality of life. Overall, the VR appeared to interfere less with daily life, social activities, and sexual activity although the gel was less difficult or stressful to apply.

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT00615251.

Experiencia de las pacientes con anillo de progesterona vaginal semanal vs gel diario de progesterona en el soporte de fase lútea después de una Fecundación in Vitro

Objetivo

Evaluar la experiencia y comodidad de utilizar un anillo vaginal (VR) de progesterona vs progesterona en gel en mujeres que requerían soporte de fase lútea durante una fecundación in vitro (IVF).

Diseño

Análisis post hoc de un ensayo clínico prospectivo, aleatorizado, simple-ciego, multicéntrico, fase 3.

Sitio

Veintidós centros de IVF de U.S.

Paciente(s)

Mujeres que realizaron IVF (N: 1297).

Intervención(es)

Aleatorización a VR semanal o gel diario el día posterior a la captación de ovocitos y duración hasta 10 semanas, con transferencia de embriones en fresco en IVF según procedimientos específicos de cada centro.

Medida del Resultado(s) Principal(es)

Cuestionario de satisfacción de la paciente completado en la visita final del estudio.

Resultado(s)

De las mujeres que tomaron ≥ 1 dosis, bien de VR (N=647) o de gel (N=650), >97%, consideraron que aprender el uso de la formulación, recordando tomarla en el momento adecuado y utilizándola tal como estaba prescrita era “fácil” o “relativamente fácil”. Más usuarias de VR que usuarias de gel informaron de no interferencia con la actividad (93.3% vs 74.7%, P<.001), comodidad sexual (80.3% vs 67.8%, P<.001), y deseo sexual (73,8% vs 61,8%, P<.001), así como no interferencia durante las relaciones sexuales (66.9% vs 39.2%, P<.001). Más usuarias de gel que de VR informaron de ausencia de dificultad con la aplicación (97.4% vs 80.9%, P<.001). Entre las mujeres que habían usado previamente progesterona durante un ciclo de IVF, más usuarias de VR que de gel prefirieron el tratamiento actualmente asignado al tratamiento utilizado previamente (91.4% vs 83.0%, P=0.03).

Conclusión(es)

El VR semanal de progesterona y el gel vaginal diario de progesterona fueron fáciles de utilizar, con impacto limitado sobre la calidad de vida. Globalmente, el VR de progesterona pareció interferir menos en la vida diaria, en las actividades sociales y en la actividad sexual, aunque el gel era más fácil de usar o menos estresante en su aplicación.

Palabras clave

Fecundación In Vitro, Soporte de fase lútea, progesterona, gel vaginal, anillo vaginal.

Key Words

In vitro fertilization
luteal phase support
progesterone
vaginal gel
vaginal ring

Cited by (0)

E.S.G. has received support for past research from EMD Serono, and royalties from BioMed Central, Sanders & Parks, Springer, and UpToDate. T.J.-N. is an employee of Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Inc. G.D. is an employee of Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Y.D. is an employee of Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Inc. K.M.S. is an advisor/consultant for EMD Serono, Good Start Genetics, Illumina, and Myriad, has received speaker fees for AbbVie, and has received research support from Finox, Ovation Fertility, and Teva.

Supported by Teva Global Branded Products R&D, Inc., with analysis funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Products and manufacturers in article: Milprosa (progesterone vaginal ring), Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Parsippany, New Jersey; Crinone (progesterone gel), Actavis Pharma, Parsippany, New Jersey.