Search

Study Question: Can granulosa cells produce progesterone (P) in response to FSH stimulation?, Summary Answer: FSH actively promotes P synthesis and output from granulosa cells without luteinization by up-regulating the expression and increasing enzymatic activity of 3β-hydroxysteriod dehydrogenoase (3β-HSD), which converts pregnenolone to P., What Is Known Already: Serum P level may rise prematurely prior to ovulation trigger in stimulated IVF cycles and adversely affect implantation and clinical pregnancy rates by impairing endometrial receptivity., Study Design, Size, Duration: A translational research study., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: Human ovarian cortical samples (n = 15) and non-luteinizing FSH-responsive human mitotic granulosa cell line (HGrC1) were stimulated with rec-FSH at 12.5, 25 and 50 mIU/ml concentrations for 24 and 48 h. FSH receptor expression was knocked-down and up-regulated in the granulosa cells using short hairpin RNA (shRNA) technology and activin-A administration, respectively. The expressions of the steroidogenic enzymes were analyzed at mRNA level by real-time quantitative RT-PCR, and protein level by western blot and immunoprecipitation assay. The enzymatic activity of 3β-HSD was measured using a spectrophotometric method. In vitro estradiol (E2) and P productions of the cells before and after FSH stimulation were measured by electro-chemiluminescence immunoassay method., Main Results and the Role of Chance: Stimulation of the HGrC1 cells with FSH resulted in a dose-dependent increase in the mRNA and protein level of 3β-HSD. Overall, when all time points and FSH doses were analyzed collectively, FSH significantly up-regulated the mRNA expression of its own receptor (3.73 ± 0.06-fold, P < 0.001), steroidogenic acute regulatory protein (stAR, 1.7 ± 0.03-fold, P < 0.01), side-chain cleavage enzyme (SCC, 1.75 ± 0.03-fold, P < 0.01), aromatase (4.49 ± 0.08-fold, P < 0.001), 3β-HSD (1.68 ± 0.02-fold, P < 0.01) and 17β-hydroxy steroid dehydrogenase (17β-HSD, 2.16 ± 0.02-fold, P < 0.01) in the granulosa cells. Expression of 17α-hydroxylase (17α-OH, 1.03 ± 0.01-fold P > 0.05) did not significantly change. Similar changes were observed in the protein expression analysis of these enzymes on western blotting after FSH stimulation. FSH significantly increased 3β-HSD, 17β-HSD and aromatase in a dose-dependent manner but did not affect 17α-OH. Protein expression of P was increased along with 3β-HSD after FSH stimulation, which was further evidenced by immunoprecipitation assay. Enzymatic activity of 3β-HSD was significantly enhanced by FSH administration in the HGrC1 cells in a dose-dependent manner. In line with these findings P output (1.05 ± 0.3 vs. 0.2 ± 0.1 ng/ml, respectively, P < 0.001) from the samples stimulated with FSH were significantly increased along with E2 (1918 ± 203 vs. 932 ± 102 pg/ml, respectively, P < 0.001) compared to unstimulated controls. FSH-induced increase in 3β-HSD expression was amplified and reversed in the HGrC1 cells when FSH receptor expression was up-regulated by activin-A and down-regulated with shRNA, respectively., Limitations and Reasons for Caution: As only the effect of FSH was studied we cannot extrapolate our findings to the potential effects of HMG and recombinant LH., Wider Implications of the Findings: This data provides a molecular explanation for the largely unexplained phenomenon of P rise during the follicular phase of gonadotropin stimulated IVF cycles. Our findings may progress the research to uncover potential mechanisms for preventing premature P rise that appears to be associated with inferior outcomes in women undergoing IVF., Study Funding/competing Interest(s): Funded by the School of Medicine and the Graduate School of Health Sciences of Koc University. All authors declare no conflict of interest., Trial Registration Number: None., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com)

A recently developed technology (xCelligence) integrating micro-electronics and cell biology allows real-time, uninterrupted and quantitative analysis of cell proliferation, viability and cytotoxicity by measuring the electrical impedance of the cell population in the wells without using any labeling agent. In this study we investigated if this system is a suitable model to analyze the effects of mitogenic (FSH) and cytotoxic (chemotherapy) agents with different toxicity profiles on human granulosa cells in comparison to conventional methods of assessing cell viability, DNA damage, apoptosis and steroidogenesis. The system generated the real-time growth curves of the cells, and determined their doubling times, mean cell indices and generated dose-response curves after exposure to cytotoxic and mitogenic stimuli. It accurately predicted the gonadotoxicity of the drugs and distinguished less toxic agents (5-FU and paclitaxel) from more toxic ones (cisplatin and cyclophosphamide). This platform can be a useful tool for specific end-point assays in reproductive toxicology., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Question: Is there any in vitro evidence for or against ovarian protection by co-administration of a GnRH agonist with chemotherapy in human?, Summary Answer: The co-administration of GnRH agonist leuprolide acetate with cytotoxic chemotherapy agents does not preserve ovarian reserve in vitro., What Is Known Already: Randomized controlled trials of the co-administration of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists with adjuvant chemotherapy to preserve ovarian function have shown contradictory results. This fact, together with the lack of a proven molecular mechanism of action for ovarian protection with GnRH agonist (GnRHa) places this approach as a fertility preservation strategy under scrutiny. We therefore aimed in this study to provide in vitro evidence for or against the role of GnRHa in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced damage in human ovary., Study Design, Settings, Size and Duration: This translational research study of ex vivo and in vitro models of human ovary and granulosa cells was conducted in a university hospital between 2013 and 2015., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: Ovarian cortical pieces (n = 15, age 14-37) and mitotic non-luteinized (COV434 and HGrC1) and non-mitotic luteinized human granulosa cells (HLGC) expressing GnRH receptor were used for the experiments. The samples were treated with cyclophosphamide, cisplatin, paclitaxel, 5-FU, or TAC combination regimen (docetaxel, adriamycin and cyclophosphamide) with and without GnRHa leuprolide acetate for 24 h. DNA damage, apoptosis, follicle reserve, hormone markers of ovarian function and reserve (estradiol (E2), progesterone (P) and anti-mullerian hormone (AMH)) and the expression of anti-apoptotic genes (bcl-2, bcl-xL, bcl-2L2, Mcl-1, BIRC-2 and XIAP) were compared among control, chemotherapy and chemotherapy + GnRHa groups., Main Results and the Role of Chance: The greatest magnitude of cytotoxicity was observed in the samples treated with cyclophosphamide, cisplatin and TAC regimen. Exposure to these drugs resulted in DNA damage, apoptosis and massive follicle loss along with a concurrent decline in the steroidogenic activity of the samples. GnRHa co-administered with chemotherapy agents stimulated its receptors and raised intracellular cAMP levels. But it neither activated anti-apoptotic pathways nor prevented follicle loss, DNA damage and apoptosis induced by these drugs., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: Our findings do not conclusively rule out the possibility that GnRHa may offer protection, if any, through some other mechanisms in vivo., Wider Implications of the Findings: GnRH agonist treatment with chemotherapy does not prevent or ameliorate ovarian damage and follicle loss in vitro. These data can be useful when consulting a young patient who may wish to receive GnRH treatment with chemotherapy to protect her ovaries from chemotherapy-induced damage., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Study Question: Do different chemotherapy drugs exert the same magnitude of cytotoxicity on dormant primordial follicles and the growing follicle fraction in the ovary in vivo and on mitotic non-luteinized and non-mitotic luteinized granulosa cells in vitro?, Summary Answer: Cyclophosphamide (alkylating agent) and cisplatin (alkylating like) impacted both primordial and pre-antral/antral follicles and both mitotic and non-mitotic granulosa cells, whereas the anti-metabolite cancer drug gemcitabine was detrimental only to pre-antral/antral follicles and mitotic non-luteinized granulosa cells., What Is Known Already: It is already known that anti-metabolite cancer drugs are less detrimental to the ovary than alkylating and alkylating like agents, such as cyclophosphamide and cisplatin. This assumption is largely based on the results of clinical reports showing lower rates of amenorrhea in women receiving anti-metabolite agent-based regimens compared with those treated with the protocols containing an alkylating drug or a platinum compound. But a quantitative comparison of gonadotoxicity with a histomorphometric proof of evidence has not been available for many chemotherapy drugs. Therefore, we combined in this study in vivo and in vitro models of human and rat origin that allows a comparative analysis of the impact of different chemotherapy agents on the ovary and granulosa cells using real-time quantitative cell indices, histomorphometry, steroidogenesis assays, and DNA damage and cell death/viability markers. We also aimed to investigate if there is a difference between mitotic and non-mitotic granulosa cells in terms of their sensitivity to the cytotoxic actions of chemotherapy drugs with different mechanisms of action. This issue has not been addressed previously., Study Design, Size, Duration: This translational research study involved in vivo analyses of ovaries in rats and in vitro analyses of granulosa cells of human and rat origin., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: For the in vivo assays, 54 4- to 6-week old Sprague-Dawley young female rats were randomly allocated into four groups of 13 to receive a single IP injection of: saline (control), gemcitabine (200 mg/kg), cisplatin (50 mg/kg) or cyclophosphamide (200 mg/kg). The animals were euthanized 72 h later. Follicle counts and serum AMH levels were compared between the groups. In vitro cytotoxicity studies were performed using mitotic non-luteinized rat (SIGC) and human (COV434, HGrC1) granulosa cells, and non-mitotic luteinized human (HLGC) granulosa cells. The cells were plated at a density of 5000 cells/well using DMEM-F12 culture media supplemented with 10% FBS. Chemotherapy agents were used at their therapeutic blood concentrations. The growth of mitotic granulosa cells was monitored real-time using xCelligence system. Live/dead cell and apoptosis assays were also carried out using intravital Yo-Pro-1 staining and cleaved caspase-3 expression, respectively. Estradiol (E2), progesterone (P) and anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) levels were assayed with ELISA., Main Results and the Role of Chance: Cyclophosphamide and cisplatin caused massive atresia of both primordials and growing follicles in the rat ovary whereas gemcitabine impacted pre-antral/antral follicles only. Cyclophosphamide and cisplatin induced apoptosis of both mitotic non-luteinized and non-mitotic luteinized granulosa cells in vitro. By contrast, cytotoxicity of gemcitabine was confined to mitotic non-luteinized granulosa cells., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: This study tested only three chemotherapeutic agents. The experimental methodology described here could be applied to other drugs for detailed analysis of their ovarian cytotoxicity., Wider Implications of the Findings: These findings indicate that in vivo and in vitro cytotoxic actions of chemotherapy drugs on the ovarian follicles and granulosa cells vary depending upon the their mechanism of action and the nature of the granulosa cells., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)