Ad
After my 20th shot of hormones, I texted my boyfriend, only half kidding, “I’m dying.” We had decided to freeze embryos, but after more than a week of drugs that made me feel like an overinflated balloon and forced me to take several secret naps a day, I no longer cared whether we froze anything. I was not doing this again.
In order to maximize the number of eggs that can be harvested from the human body, most women who undergo an egg retrieval spend two weeks, give or take, injecting themselves at home with a cocktail of drugs. The medications send the reproductive system into overdrive, encouraging the maximum number of egg-containing follicles to grow and mature at once. They can also cause itchiness, nausea, fatigue, sadness, headaches, moodiness, and severe bloating as your ovaries swell to the size of juicy lemons. Some people experience ovarian hyperstimulation, which can lead in rare cases to hospitalization. Studies have found the stress of fertility treatment to be a primary reason people stop pursuing it, even if they have insurance coverage.
Many people who continue with IVF feel that, if they want a child, they have no other choice. “Right now our treatment options are pretty binary,” Pietro Bortoletto, the director of reproductive surgery and a co-director of oncofertility at Boston IVF, told me. “Either you just put sperm inside the uterus. Or you do IVF, the full-fledged Cadillac of treatment.” But a third option is emerging, one that could reduce the cost and time that fertility patients spend at the doctor’s office and mitigate the side effects. It’s called in vitro maturation, or IVM. Whereas IVF relies on hormone injections to ripen a crop of eggs inside the body, IVM involves collecting immature eggs from the ovaries and maturing them in the lab. The first IVM baby was born in Korea in 1991, and since then, the method has generally yielded lower birth rates than IVF. Decades later, new scientific techniques are raising the possibility that IVM could be a viable alternative to IVF—at least for some patients—and free thousands of aspiring mothers from brutal protocols.
The challenge of IVM is to figure out how to make fragile, finicky human eggs mature in a dish as well as they do within the ovaries. The handful of researchers and companies leading the push to make IVM more mainstream are taking different approaches. One Texas-based company, Gameto, uses stem cells to produce something akin to an ovary in a dish, mimicking the chemical signals an egg would receive in the body. Last month, for the first time, a baby was born who was created using Gameto’s stem-cell medium, Fertilo. The fertility clinic at the University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City, in Vietnam, uses a technique that involves first allowing the retrieved eggs to rest, then ripening them. Lavima Fertility, a company that spun out of research at the Free University of Brussels, is working on commercializing that technique.
For now, these new treatments aren’t commercially available in the United States. The Food and Drug Administration hasn’t historically weighed in on the media that human embryos grow in, but it asked Gameto to seek approval to market Fertilo. Gameto is now preparing for Phase 3 clinical trials. Lavima could face similar hurdles. Older IVM methods are available in the U.S., but not widely used. Meanwhile, more than a dozen women in countries where Fertilo has been cleared for use, which include Australia, Mexico, Peru, and Argentina, are carrying Fertilo-assisted pregnancies, according to the company.
Compared with IVF, IVM is far more gentle. Harvesting immature follicles requires only one or two days of hormonal injections, or skips the process altogether. Reducing the hormone doses necessarily means fewer side effects and cases of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. (It may also curtail any possible long-term health effects of repeated exposure to these hormones, which have not been well studied.) Skipping or reducing the drugs can also save women thousands of dollars and many visits to a provider for blood work and monitoring. For women who live far from fertility clinics, or can’t commit to so many visits for other reasons, this protocol could make the difference between undergoing treatment and not, Bortoletto said.
Historically, IVM has generated fewer mature eggs and embryos compared with IVF. The stats are improving, but even if IVM maintains an overall lower success rate than IVF, it still could be the better option for several groups of patients. Egg donors, many of whom undergo multiple retrieval cycles, could be good candidates. So could hyper-responders—patients whose ovaries naturally develop more follicles each month, thanks to their young age or conditions such as PCOS. IVM clinicians could gather enough eggs from hyper-responders that even if a smaller number mature in the lab than might have in the ovaries, a patient would still have a good chance of pregnancy. These patients are also at the highest risk for uncomfortable or dangerous IVF side effects. IVM could be a safer choice, and an effective one. In a 2021 committee opinion, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine concluded that IVM reduced the burden of fertility treatment for these groups of patients. Some studies of hyper-responders have found a live birth rate of 40 percent or higher per IVM cycle, a number on par with that of IVF.
Many women seek IVF because they are approaching their 40s and have few eggs left; they will likely never be good IVM candidates. But IVM might work just fine for patients with blocked fallopian tubes, single and LGBTQ people, and young women who want to freeze their eggs. It could also be useful to cancer patients, many of whom don’t have time to undergo a lengthy IVF cycle before beginning cancer treatment that threatens their fertility. The University of Medicine and Pharmacy in Vietnam primarily offers IVM to women with PCOS, women who appear to have a significant reserve of eggs, and women with a condition that mutes their response to hormonal stimulation. Lan Vuong, who heads the department of obstetrics and gynecology, told me the live-birth rate with IVM there is about 35 percent.
IVM could go far in helping to reduce the physical and emotional toll that fertility treatment takes on women at a time when more people than ever are seeking it out. In some ways, IVF’s burden on women has increased: In an effort to improve birth rates, new drugs, with their attendant side effects, have been added to the standard protocols in the decades since 1978, when the first IVF baby was born. Beyond IVM, some companies are exploring new ways to reduce pain points, for instance by replacing needle injections with oral medications, some of which aim to have gentler side-effect profiles, or by having patients monitor a cycle at home instead of schlepping to the doctor every other day. Dina Radenkovic, the CEO of Gameto, told me that, within the fertility industry, there is a “growing recognition that fertility treatments must be not only effective but also more humane.”
Knowing all this, I can’t help imagining how my own experience could have been different. My doctor eventually told me that part of the reason my cycle was so painful was that I was a hyper-responder, even at the advanced age of 37. If a gentler option had been available, I would have been a prime candidate.
About the Author
Kristen V. BrownKristen V. Brown is a staff writer at The Atlantic.
More Stories
Aspiring Parents Have a New DNA Test to Obsess Over
How Tortillas Lost Their Magic
Explore More TopicsFood and Drug Administration, Mexico, Texas
Ad
