InfertilityCOST2NCT02397135
Control Ovarian Stimulation Timing Test
An observational study of Infertility, run by Laval University at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
IVF (in vitro fertilization) cycles fails more often than they succeed. Surprisingly very little effort is invested in defining the reasons for failure and possibly finding ways to improve the success on the next cycle. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 25 to 42 years, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Infertility
- How many people
- 200 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- Jan 2015to Sep 2016
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 25 to 42 years
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Study population: IVF (In vitro fertilisation) patients infertile patients
Who may be able to join
- female Infertility
Who cannot join
- PCO (polycystic ovary) syndrome women over 42 male factor resulting in sperm samples less than 5 millions motile.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Canada1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Laval University
Québec, Quebec, G1V 0A6
Marc Andre Sirard, PhD, 418-656-7359, Marc-Andre.Sirard@fsaa.ulaval.ca
Isabelle Dufort, PhD, 418-656-2131 ext. 11465, isabelle.dufort.1@ulaval.ca
About this study
IVF (in vitro fertilization) cycles fails more often than they succeed. Surprisingly very little effort is invested in defining the reasons for failure and possibly finding ways to improve the success on the next cycle. The investigators believe that the main reasons for failure are related to oocyte quality and indirectly to the follicle response for a particular patient. The investigators have developed a panel of biomarkers to assess the faulty follicular conditions leading to lower oocyte quality. Using these markers would indicate if a given cycle was characterized by over growth, over-luteinization, early or late trigger. Indeed our transcriptomics analysis has identified biomarkers of follicles still in their growth phase at trigger or follicles that have already begun luteinisation compare to follicle that are at the optimal level of differentiation. Measuring these biomarkers would allow making a better diagnostic for a given patient and potentially explaining reasons for failure. The system would also become adjustable to variable COS (control ovarian stimulation) and individual clinical practices. It is important to realize that this is applicable to almost all cycle failure and can be done on a pool of follicular cells when none of the oocytes obtained has led to a pregnancy. This does not resolve uterine problems but often these are caused by hormonal conditions established by the ovary or the ovarian treatment. This technology can be applied in all IVF clinics as no special equipment is required. It would be particularly valuable in clinics where a number of cycles is limited due to funding, or in clinic where a package of 3 cycles is proposed to the patient. The patient interest to have a custom treatment increases at each failing cycle as well as the doctors' interest to succeed. This technology is not clinically validated yet and would require a period of testing where participating clinics will collect the samples for a retrospective analysis (presence of biomarkers of follicular problems vs outcome) then in a prospective analysis where the diagnostic is used in a sub-set of patient to modulate the second/third cycle compared the outcome to patient with no diagnostic. The increase in pregnancy rate or cumulative pregnancy rate should reach a minimum of 10 and 25 % respectively to indicate a significant value.
Read the detailed description
IVF (in vitro fertilization) cycles fails more often than they succeed. Surprisingly very little effort is invested in defining the reasons for failure and possibly finding ways to improve the success on the next cycle. We believe that the main reasons for failure are related to oocyte quality and indirectly to the follicle response for a particular patient. We have developed a panel of biomarkers to assess the faulty follicular conditions leading to lower oocyte quality. Using these markers would indicate if a given cycle was characterized by over growth, over-luteinization, early or late trigger. Indeed our transcriptomics analysis has identified biomarkers of follicles still in their growth phase at trigger or follicles that have already begun luteinisation compare to follicle that are at the optimal level of differentiation. Measuring these biomarkers would allow making a better diagnostic for a given patient and potentially explaining reasons for failure. The system would also become adjustable to variable COS (control ovarian stimulation) and individual clinical practices. It is important to realize that this is applicable to almost all cycle failure and can be done on a pool of follicular cells when none of the oocytes obtained has led to a pregnancy. This does not resolve uterine problems but often these are caused by hormonal conditions established by the ovary or the ovarian treatment.
This technology can be applied in all IVF clinics as no special equipment is required. It would be particularly valuable in clinics where a number of cycles is limited due to funding, or in clinic where a package of 3 cycles is proposed to the patient. The patient interest to have a custom treatment increases at each failing cycle as well as the doctors' interest to succeed.
This technology is not clinically validated yet and would require a period of testing where participating clinics will collect the samples for a retrospective analysis (presence of biomarkers of follicular problems vs outcome).
Five Canadian IVF clinics have agreed to provide a minimum of 200 anonymized samples with information on the cycle/patient medical status. From these samples, RNA will be extracted and the gene expression level will be measured for 3 housekeeping genes and 21 markers derived from previous studies (Hamel et al 2008 and 2010, Nivet et al 2015 submitted).
The genes leading to the best predictive value of negative outcome will then be classified according to our understanding of ovarian physiology as key indicator for generating a diagnostic. The read-outs provided to the clinic would then be one of the 5 following: Too early trigger, too late trigger, too high stimulation (FSH), too high differentiation (LH) or time spread response (a combination of immature and over mature follicles)
- Conditions
- Infertility
- Keywords
- genomic markers
- Medical subject headings
- Infertility
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Changes in gene expression levels between pregnant and non pregnant patients (ratio over housekeeping n=3) using 21 biomarkers to assess ovarian stimulation successes.
Measured: 30 days
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted24 Mar 2015 (estimated)
- Study startJan 2015
- Primary completionSep 2015 (estimated)
- Study completionSep 2016 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for InfertilityStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case only
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Enrolment
- 200 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Laval University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Merck Serono International SA
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Marc Andre Sirard, PhD, Principal investigator, Laval University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02397135
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2014-102
- Acronym
- COST2
- Status last verified
- Mar 2015
- First submitted
- 5 Mar 2015
- Last updated
- 24 Mar 2015
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Hamel M, Dufort I, Robert C, Gravel C, Leveille MC, Leader A, Sirard MA. Identification of differentially expressed markers in human follicular cells associated with competent oocytes. Hum Reprod. 2008 May;23(5):1118-27. doi: 10.1093/humrep/den048. Epub 2008 Feb 28.
PubMed 18310048Hamel M, Dufort I, Robert C, Leveille MC, Leader A, Sirard MA. Genomic assessment of follicular marker genes as pregnancy predictors for human IVF. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010 Feb;16(2):87-96. doi: 10.1093/molehr/gap079. Epub 2009 Sep 24.
PubMed 19778949Hamel M, Dufort I, Robert C, Leveille MC, Leader A, Sirard MA. Identification of follicular marker genes as pregnancy predictors for human IVF: new evidence for the involvement of luteinization process. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010 Aug;16(8):548-56. doi: 10.1093/molehr/gaq051. Epub 2010 Jul 7.
PubMed 20610614
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 24 Mar 2015. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Control Ovarian Stimulation Timing Test
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02397135
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- COST2 / 2014-102
- Conditions
- Infertility
- Keywords
- genomic markers
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 200 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Laval UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Merck Serono International SA
- Study start
- Jan 2015
- Primary completion
- Sep 2015 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Sep 2016 (estimated)
- First posted
- 24 Mar 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
IVF (in vitro fertilization) cycles fails more often than they succeed. Surprisingly very little effort is invested in defining the reasons for failure and possibly finding ways to improve the success on the next cycle. The investigators believe that the main reasons for failure are related to oocyte quality and indirectly to the follicle response for a particular patient. The investigators have developed a panel of biomarkers to assess the faulty follicular conditions leading to lower oocyte quality. Using these markers would indicate if a given cycle was characterized by over growth, over-luteinization, early or late trigger. Indeed our transcriptomics analysis has identified biomarkers of follicles still in their growth phase at trigger or follicles that have already begun luteinisation compare to follicle that are at the optimal level of differentiation. Measuring these biomarkers would allow making a better diagnostic for a given patient and potentially explaining reasons for failure. The system would also become adjustable to variable COS (control ovarian stimulation) and individual clinical practices. It is important to realize that this is applicable to almost all cycle failure and can be done on a pool of follicular cells when none of the oocytes obtained has led to a pregnancy. This does not resolve uterine problems but often these are caused by hormonal conditions established by the ovary or the ovarian treatment. This technology can be applied in all IVF clinics as no special equipment is required. It would be particularly valuable in clinics where a number of cycles is limited due to funding, or in clinic where a package of 3 cycles is proposed to the patient. The patient interest to have a custom treatment increases at each failing cycle as well as the doctors' interest to succeed. This technology is not clinically validated yet and would require a period of testing where participating clinics will collect the samples for a retrospective analysis (presence of biomarkers of follicular problems vs outcome) then in a prospective analysis where the diagnostic is used in a sub-set of patient to modulate the second/third cycle compared the outcome to patient with no diagnostic. The increase in pregnancy rate or cumulative pregnancy rate should reach a minimum of 10 and 25 % respectively to indicate a significant value.
Detailed description
IVF (in vitro fertilization) cycles fails more often than they succeed. Surprisingly very little effort is invested in defining the reasons for failure and possibly finding ways to improve the success on the next cycle. We believe that the main reasons for failure are related to oocyte quality and indirectly to the follicle response for a particular patient. We have developed a panel of biomarkers to assess the faulty follicular conditions leading to lower oocyte quality. Using these markers would indicate if a given cycle was characterized by over growth, over-luteinization, early or late trigger. Indeed our transcriptomics analysis has identified biomarkers of follicles still in their growth phase at trigger or follicles that have already begun luteinisation compare to follicle that are at the optimal level of differentiation. Measuring these biomarkers would allow making a better diagnostic for a given patient and potentially explaining reasons for failure. The system would also become adjustable to variable COS (control ovarian stimulation) and individual clinical practices. It is important to realize that this is applicable to almost all cycle failure and can be done on a pool of follicular cells when none of the oocytes obtained has led to a pregnancy. This does not resolve uterine problems but often these are caused by hormonal conditions established by the ovary or the ovarian treatment.
This technology can be applied in all IVF clinics as no special equipment is required. It would be particularly valuable in clinics where a number of cycles is limited due to funding, or in clinic where a package of 3 cycles is proposed to the patient. The patient interest to have a custom treatment increases at each failing cycle as well as the doctors' interest to succeed.
This technology is not clinically validated yet and would require a period of testing where participating clinics will collect the samples for a retrospective analysis (presence of biomarkers of follicular problems vs outcome).
Five Canadian IVF clinics have agreed to provide a minimum of 200 anonymized samples with information on the cycle/patient medical status. From these samples, RNA will be extracted and the gene expression level will be measured for 3 housekeeping genes and 21 markers derived from previous studies (Hamel et al 2008 and 2010, Nivet et al 2015 submitted).
The genes leading to the best predictive value of negative outcome will then be classified according to our understanding of ovarian physiology as key indicator for generating a diagnostic. The read-outs provided to the clinic would then be one of the 5 following: Too early trigger, too late trigger, too high stimulation (FSH), too high differentiation (LH) or time spread response (a combination of immature and over mature follicles)
Study design
- Observational model
- Case only
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 25 to 42 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
- Study population
- IVF (In vitro fertilisation) patients infertile patients
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- female Infertility
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- PCO (polycystic ovary) syndrome women over 42 male factor resulting in sperm samples less than 5 millions motile.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Changes in gene expression levels between pregnant and non pregnant patients (ratio over housekeeping n=3) using 21 biomarkers to assess ovarian stimulation successes.
Time frame: 30 days
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 24 Mar 2015.
- Background: PubMed 18310048Hamel M, Dufort I, Robert C, Gravel C, Leveille MC, Leader A, Sirard MA. Identification of differentially expressed markers in human follicular cells associated with competent oocytes. Hum Reprod. 2008 May;23(5):1118-27. doi: 10.1093/humrep/den048. Epub 2008 Feb 28.
- Background: PubMed 19778949Hamel M, Dufort I, Robert C, Leveille MC, Leader A, Sirard MA. Genomic assessment of follicular marker genes as pregnancy predictors for human IVF. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010 Feb;16(2):87-96. doi: 10.1093/molehr/gap079. Epub 2009 Sep 24.
- Background: PubMed 20610614Hamel M, Dufort I, Robert C, Leveille MC, Leader A, Sirard MA. Identification of follicular marker genes as pregnancy predictors for human IVF: new evidence for the involvement of luteinization process. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010 Aug;16(8):548-56. doi: 10.1093/molehr/gaq051. Epub 2010 Jul 7.
Related trials for Infertility
RecruitingObservational study
Safety and Efficacy of Corifollitropin Alfa N02 Injection in Elderly Women Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART)
Infertility
Active, not recruiting
Automation of the In Vitro Fertilization Laboratory
Infertility, ART
RecruitingObservational study
Inherited Reproductive Disorders
Genetic Disorder, Infertility
RecruitingObservational study
Biorepository in Participants Who Undergo OTC for Gonadotoxic Therapy
Acute Ovarian Failure, Infertility
Not yet recruiting
Implementing IVM for Fertility Treatment in Clinical Practice
Infertility
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Marc Andre Sirard, PhD principal investigator
Laval University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Infertility, run by Laval University at 1 site in Canada.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 24 Mar 2015. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Marc Andre Sirard, PhD (418-656-7359, Marc-Andre.Sirard@fsaa.ulaval.ca), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Changes in gene expression levels between pregnant and non pregnant patients (ratio over housekeeping n=3) using 21 biomarkers to assess ovarian stimulation successes. (time frame: 30 days). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02397135, which also lists 3 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 24 Mar 2015.