Growth hormone supplementation during ovarian stimulation improves oocyte and embryo outcomes in IVF/PGT-A cycles of women who are not poor responders



To determine the effect of human growth hormone (GH) supplementation during ovarian stimulation in women undergoing IVF/PGT-A cycles, who do not meet the Bologna criteria for poor ovarian response (POR).


This is a retrospective cohort study of 41 women with suboptimal outcomes in their first cycle of IVF/PGT-A including lower than expected number of MII oocytes, poor blastulation rate, and/or lower than expected number of euploid embryos for their age, who underwent a subsequent IVF/PGT-A cycle with the same fixed dose gonadotropin protocol and adjuvant GH treatment. Daily cotreatment with GH started with first gonadotrophin injection. The IVF cycle outcomes were compared between the control and GH cycle using the Wilcoxon-Signed Rank test.


The total number of biopsied blastocysts (mean ± SD; 2.0 ± 1.6 vs 3.5 ± 3.2, p = 0.009) and euploid embryos (0.8 ± 1.0 vs 2.0 ± 2.8, p = 0.004) were significantly increased in the adjuvant GH cycle compared to the control cycle. The total number of MII oocytes also trended to be higher in the GH cycle (10.2 ± 6.3 vs 12.1 ± 8.3, p = 0.061). The overall blastulation and euploidy rate did not differ between the control and treatment cycle.


Our study uniquely investigated the use of adjuvant GH in IVF/PGT-A cycles in women without POR and without a priori suspicion for poor outcome based on their clinical parameters. Our study presents preliminary evidence that GH supplementation in these women is beneficial and is associated with an increased number of blastocysts for biopsy and greater number of euploid embryos for transfer.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.


  1. 1.

    Homburg R, et al. Growth hormone facilitates ovulation induction by gonadotrophins. Clin Endocrinol. 1988;29(1):113–7.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Hart RJ, Rombauts L, Norman RJ. Growth hormone in IVF cycles: any hope? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;29(3):119–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Serafim MK, et al. Impact of growth hormone (GH) and follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) on in vitro canine preantral follicle development and estradiol production. Growth Hormon IGF Res. 2015;25(2):85–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Hull KL, Harvey S. Growth hormone and reproduction: a review of endocrine and autocrine/paracrine interactions. Int J Endocrinol. 2014;2014:234014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Ipsa E, et al. Growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor action in reproductive tissues. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019;10:777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Mendoza C, et al. Follicular fluid markers of oocyte developmental potential. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(4):1017–22.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Mendoza C, et al. Relationship between fertilization results after intracytoplasmic sperm injection, and intrafollicular steroid, pituitary hormone and cytokine concentrations. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(3):628–35.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Younis JS, et al. The effect of growth hormone supplementation on in vitro fertilization outcome: a prospective randomized placebo-controlled double-blind study. Fertil Steril. 1992;58(3):575–80.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Kolibianakis EM, et al. Addition of growth hormone to gonadotrophins in ovarian stimulation of poor responders treated by in-vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2009;15(6):613–22.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Duffy JM, et al. Growth hormone for in vitro fertilization. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;1:CD000099.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Ferraretti AP, et al. ESHRE consensus on the definition of ‘poor response’ to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(7):1616–24.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Nardo LG, et al. Circulating basal anti-Müllerian hormone levels as predictor of ovarian response in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2009;92(5):1586–93.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Reichman DE, Goldschlag D, Rosenwaks Z. Value of antimüllerian hormone as a prognostic indicator of in vitro fertilization outcome. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(4):1012–8.e1.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Moon KY, et al. Nomogram to predict the number of oocytes retrieved in controlled ovarian stimulation. Clin Exp Reprod Med. 2016;43(2):112–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Pantos K, et al. Influence of advanced age on the blastocyst development rate and pregnancy rate in assisted reproductive technology. Fertil Steril. 1999;71(6):1144–6.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Franasiak JM, et al. The nature of aneuploidy with increasing age of the female partner: a review of 15,169 consecutive trophectoderm biopsies evaluated with comprehensive chromosomal screening. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(3):656–663.e1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Garcia-Velasco JA, et al. High doses of gonadotrophins combined with stop versus non-stop protocol of GnRH analogue administration in low responder IVF patients: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2000;15(11):2292–6.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Cakmak H, et al. A novel “delayed start” protocol with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist improves outcomes in poor responders. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(5):1308–14.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Ob’edkova K, et al. Growth hormone co-treatment in IVF/ICSI cycles in poor responders. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2017;33(sup1):15–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    La Marca A, et al. Female age, serum antimüllerian hormone level, and number of oocytes affect the rate and number of euploid blastocysts in in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles. Fertil Steril. 2017;108(5):777–783.e2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Polyzos NP, Sunkara SK. Sub-optimal responders following controlled ovarian stimulation: an overlooked group? Hum Reprod. 2015;30(9):2005–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Alvaro Mercadal B, et al. Characterization of a suboptimal IVF population and clinical outcome after two IVF cycles. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2018;34(2):125–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references




Not applicable

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Winifred Mak.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

IRB approval was granted through the UT Austin Institutional Review Board.

Consent to participate

Not applicable

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Skillern, A., Leonard, W., Pike, J. et al. Growth hormone supplementation during ovarian stimulation improves oocyte and embryo outcomes in IVF/PGT-A cycles of women who are not poor responders. J Assist Reprod Genet (2021).

Download citation


  • Growth hormone
  • In-vitro fertilization