Evidence mapPaperPMID 33147288Full record

SynthesisPloS one2020

Dydrogesterone as an oral alternative to vaginal progesterone for IVF luteal phase support: A systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.

Georg Griesinger, Christophe Blockeel, Elke Kahler, Claire Pexman-Fieth, Jan I Olofsson, Stefan Driessen, Herman Tournaye

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. A randomised control trial on oral dydrogesteroneJournal of medicine and life · 2023
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Unmasking the risk: clinical trialsHuman reproduction open · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Progesterone in Pregnancy: Evidence-Based Strategies to Reduce Miscarriage and Enhance Assisted Reproductive Technology.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024
    Article
  19. Real-world utilization pattern of dydrogesterone in 7287 Indian women with obstetric and gynecological conditions: data from multicentric, retrospective study.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2024
    Observational
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Georg GriesingerDepartment of Gynecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0606-5804
Christophe BlockeelCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Elke KahlerEstablished Pharmaceuticals Division, Global Biometrics, Abbott Laboratories GmbH, Hannover, Germany.
Claire Pexman-FiethEstablished Pharmaceuticals Division, Global Clinical Development, Abbott GmbH, Wiesbaden, Germany.
Jan I OlofssonEstablished Pharmaceuticals Division, Global Medical Affairs, Abbott Products Operations AG, Allschwil, Switzerland.
Stefan DriessenGlobal Biometrics, Established Pharmaceuticals Division, Abbott Healthcare Products BV, Weesp, The Netherlands.
Herman TournayeCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Abbott (Germany) · DEUniversitair Ziekenhuis Brussel · BEAbbott (Netherlands) · NLKarolinska Institutet · SEUniversity Hospital Schleswig-Holstein · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the evidence on the efficacy and safety of oral dydrogesterone versus micronized vaginal progesterone (MVP) for luteal phase support. Embase and MEDLINE were searched for studies that evaluated the effect of luteal phase support with daily administration of oral dydrogesterone (20 to 40 mg) versus MVP capsules (600 to 800 mg) or gel (90 mg) on pregnancy or live birth rates in women undergoing fresh-cycle IVF (protocol registered at PROSPERO [CRD42018105949]). Individual participant data (IPD) were extracted for the primary analysis where available and aggregate data were extracted for the secondary analysis. Nine studies were eligible for inclusion; two studies had suitable IPD (full analysis sample: n = 1957). In the meta-analysis of IPD, oral dydrogesterone was associated with a significantly higher chance of ongoing pregnancy at 12 weeks of gestation (odds ratio [OR], 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08 to 1.61; P = 0.0075) and live birth (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.57; P = 0.0214) compared to MVP. A meta-analysis combining IPD and aggregate data for all nine studies also demonstrated a statistically significant difference between oral dydrogesterone and MVP (pregnancy: OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.34; P = 0.04; live birth: OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.38; P = 0.02). Safety parameters were similar between the two groups. Collectively, this study indicates that a higher pregnancy rate and live birth rate may be obtained in women receiving oral dydrogesterone versus MVP for luteal phase support.

Indexed as

Administration, IntravaginalAdministration, OralDydrogesteroneFemaleFertilization in VitroHumansLive BirthLuteal PhaseOvulation InductionPregnancyPregnancy RateProgesteroneProgestinsTreatment OutcomeDydrogesteroneProgesteroneProgestins

Identifiers

PMID33147288
PMCPMC7641447
OpenAlexW3096193509

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.