Building an evidence base for IVF ‘add-ons’

Comparison of stimulation protocols for dose determination of gonadotropins: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To date, evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of individualized controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) compared with standard dose COS has been inadequate.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the updated evidence from published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about the efficacy and safety of individualized COS with different ovarian reserve test biomarkers or clinical experience versus standard dose COS.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Terms and descriptors related to COS, individualized or standard, and RCT were combined to search, and only English language studies were included. Conference abstracts and comments were excluded.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs with comparison between different individualized COS strategies and standard starting dose strategy were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviews independently assessed the eligibility of retrieved citations in a predefined standardized manner. Relative risk (RRs) and the weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model on R software version 4.2.2.

MAIN RESULTS

Compared with the standard dose COS strategy in pairwise meta-analysis, the individualized COS strategy was associated with a notable lower risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS; 174/2384 [7.30%] vs 114/2412 [4.73%], RR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.47-0.93, I2 = 46%), a significantly lower risk of hyperresponse to stimulation (hyperresponse; 476/2402 [19.82%] vs 331/2437 [13.58%], RR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.57-0.90, I2 = 61%), and a slightly longer ovarian stimulation days (duration of stimulation; WMD 0.20, 95% CI: 0.01-0.40, I2 = 66%). Bayesian network meta-analysis also found that biomarker-tailored strategy had a significantly lower risk of OHSS than standard dose strategy (OHSS; RR 0.63, 95% CI: 0.41-0.97, I2 = 47.5%).

CONCLUSION

Compared with standard dose COS strategy, individualized COS strategy could significantly reduce the risks of OHSS and hyperresponse to stimulation, but the duration of stimulation was slightly longer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42023358439.

Moral justification for the use of 'add-ons' in assisted reproductive technology: experts' views and experiences

RESEARCH QUESTION

What factors do assisted reproductive terchnology (ART) providers take into account when they make decisions about offering 'add-ons'?

DESIGN

A qualitative analysis of interviews with 31 ART professionals, focusing on their views and experiences in relation to add-ons, including the factors that are considered when doctors make decisions about their use.

RESULTS

The participants reported that a range of considerations are taken into account when it comes to justifying the use of a particular add-on in a given circumstance, including the likelihood of benefit and harm, patients' perceived psychological needs and preferences, and organizational expectations. Importantly, patient preferences, psychological factors and low risk of harm appear to be stronger motivations than increasing the likelihood of a live birth or the desire to innovate.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that it cannot be taken for granted that add-ons and innovation are closely linked. One possible response to this would be regulatory reform; for example, only allowing 'unproven' add-ons to be used in the context of formal scientific evaluation. Alternatively, it could be made clear that add-ons that are not undergoing formal evaluation have more in common with other therapies lacking a clear evidence base, such as complementary and alternative medicines, than with conventional medical practice. Practices in relation to add-ons may also require a focus on the responsibilities of corporations, and the standards applying to purveyors of consumer goods and services.

The Internet of Things in assisted reproduction

The Internet of Things (IoT) is a network connecting physical objects with sensors, software and internet connectivity for data exchange. Integrating the IoT with medical devices shows promise in healthcare, particularly in IVF laboratories. By leveraging telecommunications, cybersecurity, data management and intelligent systems, the IoT can enable a data-driven laboratory with automation, improved conditions, personalized treatment and efficient workflows. The integration of 5G technology ensures fast and reliable connectivity for real-time data transmission, while blockchain technology secures patient data. Fog computing reduces latency and enables real-time analytics. Microelectromechanical systems enable wearable IoT and miniaturized monitoring devices for tracking IVF processes. However, challenges such as security risks and network issues must be addressed through cybersecurity measures and networking advancements. Clinical embryologists should maintain their expertise and knowledge for safety and oversight, even with IoT in the IVF laboratory.

Accounting for complexity in healthcare innovation debates: Professional views on the use of new IVF treatments

Social scientists have long been interested in the forces and values driving healthcare innovation. The simultaneous rise of 20th century healthcare reforms, increased importance of evidence and upsurge in lay health activism have shaped modern medicine. On this backdrop, fertility care emerged in the 1970s. Recent developments reveal a contentious relationship between new fertility treatments and clinical evidence, with emerging technologies being used without conclusive evidence of effectiveness despite being sold to patients. Initial critiques of this phenomenon emphasise commercial interests as the culprit, suggesting that the problematic use of unproven treatments is mainly driven by the private sector. Here, we challenge this over-simplified view of IVF care. Drawing on a qualitative analysis of key documents and 43 in-depth professional interviews, this article identifies three main stakeholder approaches to new treatment adoption. We argue that viewpoints are anchored within three critical overarching 'modes of coordination' or core values in modern healthcare: efficiency, effectiveness and patient-centeredness. This analysis encourages a more contextualised overview of fertility care than previous literatures have afforded. The IVF case shows that an emphasis on private versus public clinic practices obscure similarities between the two along with the values motivating healthcare professionals' approaches to new treatments.

Fact-finding survey on assisted reproductive technology in Japan

AIMS

In anticipation of the future development of assisted reproductive technology (ART) and to smoothly introduce new technology, it is necessary to understand the current staffing status of the medical system and the current state of treatment, as well as the status of in vitro fertilization add-ons, where the need for insurance coverage is currently a matter of debate.

METHODS

ART facilities in Japan were surveyed (437 valid responses, response rate: 71%). Current staffing status of the medical system, implementation rates of ART, add-on treatments, and medical supplies were investigated.

RESULTS

Despite the abundance of embryologists, nurses, and obstetricians and gynecologists in facilities, the majority of facilities lacked counselors, anesthesiologists, and other essential medical professionals. Conventional ovarian stimulation was widely adopted (median 120 [interquartile range 60-300] cycles), followed by mild ovarian simulation (60 [30-200]). Additionally, freeze-thaw embryo transfer cycles (300 [120-750]) were performed more frequently than fresh embryo transfer cycles (30 [30-60]). Among the add-ons, assisted hatching (85.1%), chronic endometritis examination (77.2%) and treatment (76.9%), artificial oocyte activation (67.3%), endometrial receptivity analysis (64.2%), and endometrial microbiome analysis (58.9%) were relatively widely employed.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles, freeze-all strategies, and add-on treatments have become popular and widely accepted despite the lack of robust evidence regarding their safety and efficacy.

Hope and Exploitation in Commercial Provision of Assisted Reproductive Technologies

Innovation is a key driver of care provision in assisted reproductive technologies (ART). ART providers offer a range of add-on interventions, aiming to augment standard in vitro fertilization protocols and improve the chances of a live birth. Particularly in the context of commercial provision, an ever-increasing array of add-ons are marketed to ART patients, even when evidence to support them is equivocal. A defining feature of ART is hope-hope that a cycle will lead to a baby or that another test or intervention will make a difference. Yet such hope also leaves ART patients vulnerable in a variety of ways. This article argues that previous attempts to safeguard ART patients have neglected how the use of add-ons in commercial ART can exploit patients' hopes. Commercial providers of ART should provide add-ons only free of charge, under a suitable research protocol.

Alternatives to in vitro fertilization

There have been concerns on the potential overuse of in vitro fertilization (IVF) in view of the lack of evidence on effectiveness in certain populations, potential short and long-term safety risks, and economic considerations. On the other hand, the use of alternatives to IVF seems to be underappreciated in clinical practice as well as research. In this review, we summarized the up-to-date evidence on the effectiveness, safety as well as cost-effectiveness of different alternatives to IVF, including expectant management, intrauterine insemination, tubal flushing, in vitro maturation as well as intravaginal culture. We also discussed the trend of IVF use over the last decade and the available tiers of service because of intravaginal culture, and revisited the roles of different alternatives to IVF in modern reproductive medicine from both clinical and research perspectives.

Semen processing using magnetic-activated cell sorting before ICSI is deemed safe for obstetric and perinatal outcomes: a retrospective multicentre study

RESEARCH QUESTION

Is magnetic-activated cell sorting (MACS) a safe semen sample processing technique for newborns and mothers when used for semen processing prior to intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles?

DESIGN

This retrospective multicentre cohort study involved patients undergoing ICSI cycles with either donor or autologous oocytes from January 2008 to February 2020. They were divided into two groups: those who underwent standard semen preparation (reference group) and those who had an added MACS procedure (MACS group). A total of 25,356 deliveries were assessed in the case of cycles using donor oocytes, and 19,703 deliveries from cycles using autologous oocytes. Of these, 20,439 and 15,917, respectively, were singleton deliveries. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes were retrospectively assessed. All means, rates and incidences were computed per live newborn in each study group.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the main obstetric and perinatal morbidities affecting the mothers' and newborns' well-being between groups using either donated or autologous oocytes. There was a significant increase in the incidence of gestational anaemia in both subpopulations (donor oocytes P = 0.01; autologous oocytes P < 0.001). However, this incidence was within the estimated prevalence for gestational anaemia in the general population. There was a statistically significant decrease in preterm (P = 0.02) and very preterm (P = 0.01) birth rates in the MACS group in cycles using donor oocytes.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of MACS during semen preparation before ICSI using either donor or autologous oocytes appears to be safe for the mothers' and newborns' well-being during pregnancy and birth. Nevertheless, a close follow-up of these parameters in the future is advised, especially concerning anaemia, in order to detect even smaller effect sizes.

Fertility specialists' views, behavior, and attitudes towards the use of endometrial scratching in Italy

BACKGROUND

Endometrial scratching (ES) or injury is intentional damage to the endometrium performed to improve reproductive outcomes for infertile women desiring pregnancy. Moreover, recent systematic reviews with meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials demonstrated that ES is not effective, data on the safety are limited, and it should not be recommended in clinical practice. The aim of the current study was to assess the view and behavior towards ES among fertility specialists throughout infertility centers in Italy, and the relationship between these views and the attitudes towards the use of ES as an add-on in their commercial setting.

METHODS

Online survey among infertility centers, affiliated to Italian Society of Human Reproduction (SIRU), was performed using a detailed questionnaire including 45 questions with the possibility to give "closed" multi-choice answers for 41 items and "open" answers for 4 items. Online data from the websites of the infertility centers resulting in affiliation with the specialists were also recorded and analyzed. The quality of information about ES given on infertility centers websites was assessed using a scoring matrix including 10 specific questions (scored from 0 to 2 points), and the possible scores ranged from 0 to 13 points ('excellent' if the score was 9 points or more, 'moderate' if the score was between 5 and 8, and 'poor' if it was 4 points or less).

RESULTS

The response rate was of 60.6% (43 questionnaires / 71 infertility SIRU-affiliated centers). All included questionnaires were completed in their entirety. Most physicians (~ 70%) reported to offer ES to less than 10% of their patients. The procedure is mainly performed in the secretory phase (69.2%) using pipelle (61.5%), and usually in medical ambulatory (56.4%) before IVF cycles to improve implantation (71.8%) without drugs administration (e.g., pain drugs, antibiotics, anti-hemorrhagics, or others) before (76.8%) or after (64.1%) the procedure. Only a little proportion of infertility centers included in the analysis proposes formally the ES as an add-on procedure (9.3%), even if, when proposed, the full description of the indications, efficacy, safety, and costs is never addressed. However, the overall information quality of the websites was generally "poor" ranging from 3 to 8 and having a low total score (4.7 ± 1.6; mean ± standard deviation).

CONCLUSIONS

In Italy, ES is a procedure still performed among fertility specialists for improving the implantation rate in IVF patients. Moreover, they have a poor attitude in proposing ES as an add-on in the commercial setting.

Influence of a hyaluronan-binding system for sperm selection in intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles on embryo morphokinetic parameters and in vitro fertilization cycle outcomes

PURPOSE

Although the impact of the paternal contribution to embryo quality and blastocyst formation is a well-known phenomenon, the current literature provides insufficient evidence that hyaluronan-binding sperm selection methods improve assisted reproductive treatment outcomes. Thus, we compared the cycle outcomes of morphologically selected intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) with hyaluronan binding physiological intracytoplasmic sperm injection (PICSI) cycles.

METHODS

A total of 2415 ICSI and 400 PICSI procedures of 1630 patients who underwent in vitro fertilization cycles using a time-lapse monitoring system between 2014 and 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. Fertilization rate, embryo quality, clinical pregnancy rate, biochemical pregnancy rate and miscarriage rate were evaluated, differences in morphokinetic parameters and cycle outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

In total, 85.8 and 14.2% of the whole cohort were fertilized with standard ICSI and PICSI, respectively. The proportion of fertilized oocytes did not significantly differ between groups (74.53 ± 1.33 vs. 72.92 ± 2.64, p > 0.05). Similarly, the proportion of good-quality embryos according to the time-lapse parameters and the clinical pregnancy rate did not significantly differ between groups (71.93 ± 4.21 vs. 71.33 ± 2.64, p > 0.05 and 45.55 ± 2.91 vs. 44.96 ± 1.25, p > 0.05). No statistically significant differences were found between groups in clinical pregnancy rates (45.55 ± 2.91 vs. 44.96 ± 1.25, p > 0.05). Biochemical pregnancy rates (11.24 ± 2.12 vs. 10.85 ± 1.83, p > 0.05) and miscarriage rates (24.89 ± 3.74 vs. 27.91 ± 4.91, p > 0.05) were not significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSION

The effects of the PICSI procedure on fertilization rate, biochemical pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, embryo quality, and clinical pregnancy outcomes were not superior. The effect of the PICSI procedure on embryo morphokinetics was not apparent when all parameters were considered.

Patient informed choice in the age of evidence-based medicine: IVF patients' approaches to biomedical evidence and fertility treatment add-ons

With the increasing offer of fertility treatment by a largely privatised sector, which has involved the proliferation of treatment add-ons lacking evidence of effectiveness, In-Vitro Fertilisation (IVF) patients are expected to make informed choices on what to include in their treatment. Drawing on interviews with 51 individuals undergoing fertility treatment, this article explores patients' approaches to medical evidence interpretation and its role in their decisions to include add-ons. While most IVF patients share understandings of what counts as medical evidence, our findings show how their approaches also differ. Our analysis focuses on how patients negotiate the notion of medical evidence and its relation to other forms of experience or knowledge. We present four different approaches to evidence in IVF: (1) delegating evaluations of evidence to experts; (2) critically assessing available evidence; (3) acknowledging the process of making evidence; and (4) contextualising evidence in their lived experience of infertility. We suggest that patients' choice to include add-ons is not due to a lack of information on or understanding of evidence, but rather should be interpreted as part of the complexity of patients' experiences of infertility.

Are we leaving money on the table in infertility RCTs? Trialists should statistically adjust for prespecified, prognostic covariates to increase power

Infertility randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are often too small to detect realistic treatment effects. Large observational studies have been proposed as a solution. However, this strategy threatens to weaken the evidence base further, because non-random assignment to treatments makes it impossible to distinguish effects of treatment from confounding factors. Alternative solutions are required. Power in an RCT can be increased by adjusting for prespecified, prognostic covariates when performing statistical analysis, and if stratified randomization or minimization has been used, it is essential to adjust in order to get the correct answer. We present data showing that this simple, free and frequently necessary strategy for increasing power is seldom employed, even in trials appearing in leading journals. We use this article to motivate a pedagogical discussion and provide a worked example. While covariate adjustment cannot solve the problem of underpowered trials outright, there is an imperative to use sound methodology to maximize the information each trial yields.

The Current Practice of Assisted Hatching for Embryos in Fertility Centres: a General Survey

At present, there is no standardised protocol for assisted hatching (AH) and the field is beset with contradictory data. We hypothesised that such contradiction may be related to inconsistencies in clinical practice. This study aimed to investigate the application, preferences, and variations of AH in current clinical practice prior to embryo transfer (AHpET) and biopsy (AHpBP). An online voluntary survey, consisted of 25 questions regarding different aspects of AH, was circulated amongst different fertility centres via newsletters between October 2019 and March 2020. One-hundred twenty-nine different fertility centres participated in the survey. AHpBP was widely used (90.6% [48/53]) amongst these centres, especially for trophectoderm biopsy (92.2% [47/51]). In contrast, only 64.6% (73/113) of centres administrated AHpET; the application of AHpET was even lower in UK-based centres (36.6% [15/41]). Although laser pulses have become the predominant technique for AH, significant variation existed in the precise strategy. Zona pellucida (ZP) drilling was the main method for AHpBP, whilst both ZP drilling and ZP thinning were applied equally for AHpET. Furthermore, the ZP manipulation varied widely with regards to the size of the ZP opening and the extension of ZP thinning. This is the first representative survey relating to the current practice of AH. Laser-assisted AH is used extensively, especially for AHpBP. However, there is significant disparity in clinical practice across different centres. Future research should aim to create a standardised protocol for AH to help reduce the evident variation in clinical practice and investigate the true value of AH.

Cumulative live birth rates in donor oocyte ICSI cycles are not improved by magnetic-activated cell sorting sperm selection

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does magnetic-activated cell sorting (MACS) for sperm selection increase cumulative live birth rates (CLBR) or improve clinical parameters of reproductive success in couples undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) with donor oocytes?

DESIGN

Retrospective multicentre observational study including data compiled from unselected couples who underwent ICSI cycles with donated oocytes in 15 Spanish IVIRMA fertility clinics (January 2008 to February 2020). Patients were divided into reference (standard semen processing, n = 40,157) and MACS (additional sperm selection step by MACS, n = 1,240) groups. CLBR were plotted on Kaplan-Meier curves and compared using the Mantel-Cox test. Proportions were compared with a generalized estimating equation model, and results were adjusted to clinically relevant variables.

RESULTS

The MACS group showed a 27.1% CLBR after one embryo was transferred and 81.6% after four; the reference group had CLBR of 19.6% and 78.5%, respectively. CLBR in the MACS group was 4.2% after five oocytes were used and 75.5% after 15; for the reference group, CLBR were 7.8% and 78.3%, respectively. Kaplan-Meier curves showed statistically significant differences in CLBR per number of embryos transferred and per number of donated metaphase II oocytes between the two groups (both P < 0.0001), but not for CLBR per embryo transfer. No significant differences between groups were found for classical clinical outcomes such as pregnancy and live birth rates per embryo transfer.

CONCLUSIONS

Although MACS sperm selection slightly increased the CLBR per embryo transferred compared with the reference group, this change was not clinically meaningful. MACS should not be recommended indiscriminately to all infertile patients undergoing ICSI with donated oocytes as a sperm processing add-on.

Enucleated oocyte donation: first for infertility treatment, then for mitochondrial diseases

There seems to be a consensus that enucleated oocyte donation (EOD) should only be used to reduce the risk of having a child with mitochondrial disorders. However, this paper argues that in the initial phase in which we are at the moment, EOD should first be used to remedy infertility caused by poor oocyte quality or poor embryonic development. That learning period will allow researchers to improve their technical skills and the knowledge of the best procedure before starting on high-risk cases. Mitochondrial carryover of pathologic mtDNA is the main cause of concern for the offspring. That risk does not exist in infertility cases. The application of EOD to treat infertility should at present be performed in a clinical research setting to obtain more evidence about efficacy and safety.

Revisiting selected ethical aspects of current clinical in vitro fertilization (IVF) practice

Ethical considerations are central to all medicine though, likely, nowhere more essential than in the practice of reproductive endocrinology and infertility. Through in vitro fertilization (IVF), this is the only field in medicine involved in creating human life. IVF has, indeed, so far led to close to 10 million births worldwide. Yet, relating to substantial changes in clinical practice of IVF, the medical literature has remained surprisingly quiet over the last two decades. Major changes especially since 2010, however, call for an updated commentary. Three key changes deserve special notice: Starting out as a strictly medical service, IVF in recent years, in efforts to expand female reproductive lifespans in a process given the term “planned” oocyte cryopreservation, increasingly became more socially motivated. The IVF field also increasingly underwent industrialization and commoditization by outside financial interests. Finally, at least partially driven by industrialization and commoditization, so-called add-ons, the term describing mostly unvalidated tests and procedures added to IVF since 2010, have been held responsible for worldwide declines in fresh, non-donor live birthrates after IVF, to levels not seen since the mid-1990s. We here, therefore, do not offer a review of bioethical considerations regarding IVF as a fertility treatment, but attempt to point out ethical issues that arose because of major recent changes in clinical IVF practice.

Endometrial scratch to increase live birth rates in women undergoing first-time in vitro fertilisation: RCT and systematic review

BACKGROUND

In vitro fertilisation is a widely used reproductive technique that can be undertaken with or without intracytoplasmic sperm injection. The endometrial scratch procedure is an in vitro fertilisation 'add-on' that is sometimes provided prior to the first in vitro fertilisation cycle, but there is a lack of evidence to support its use.

OBJECTIVES

(1) To assess the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of endometrial scratch compared with treatment as usual in women undergoing their first in vitro fertilisation cycle (the 'Endometrial Scratch Trial') and (2) to undertake a systematic review to combine the results of the Endometrial Scratch Trial with those of previous trials in which endometrial scratch was provided prior to the first in vitro fertilisation cycle.

DESIGN

A pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, open-label, parallel-group, individually randomised controlled trial. Participants were randomised (1 : 1) via a web-based system to receive endometrial scratch or treatment as usual using stratified block randomisation. The systematic review involved searching electronic databases (undertaken in January 2020) and clinicaltrials.gov (undertaken in September 2020) for relevant trials.

SETTING

Sixteen UK fertility units.

PARTICIPANTS

Women aged 18-37 years, inclusive, undergoing their first in vitro fertilisation cycle. The exclusion criteria included severe endometriosis, body mass index ≥ 35 kg/m² and previous trauma to the endometrium.

INTERVENTIONS

Endometrial scratch was undertaken in the mid-luteal phase of the menstrual cycle prior to in vitro fertilisation, and involved inserting a pipelle into the cavity of the uterus and rotating and withdrawing it three or four times. The endometrial scratch group then received usual in vitro fertilisation treatment. The treatment-as-usual group received usual in vitro fertilisation only.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was live birth after completion of 24 weeks' gestation within 10.5 months of egg collection. Secondary outcomes included implantation, pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, pain and tolerability of the procedure, adverse events and treatment costs.

RESULTS

One thousand and forty-eight (30.3%) women were randomised to treatment as usual (n = 525) or endometrial scratch (n = 523) and were followed up between July 2016 and October 2019 and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. In the endometrial scratch group, 453 (86.6%) women received the endometrial scratch procedure. A total of 494 (94.1%) women in the treatment-as-usual group and 497 (95.0%) women in the endometrial scratch group underwent in vitro fertilisation. The live birth rate was 37.1% (195/525) in the treatment-as-usual group and 38.6% (202/523) in the endometrial scratch group: an unadjusted absolute difference of 1.5% (95% confidence interval -4.4% to 7.4%; p = 0.621). There were no statistically significant differences in secondary outcomes. Safety events were comparable across groups. No neonatal deaths were recorded. The cost per successful live birth was £11.90 per woman (95% confidence interval -£134 to £127). The pooled results of this trial and of eight similar trials found no evidence of a significant effect of endometrial scratch in increasing live birth rate (odds ratio 1.03, 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.22).

LIMITATIONS

A sham endometrial scratch procedure was not undertaken, but it is unlikely that doing so would have influenced the results, as objective fertility outcomes were used. A total of 9.2% of women randomised to receive endometrial scratch did not undergo the procedure, which may have slightly diluted the treatment effect.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence to support the theory that performing endometrial scratch in the mid-luteal phase in women undergoing their first in vitro fertilisation cycle significantly improves live birth rate, although the procedure was well tolerated and safe. We recommend that endometrial scratch is not undertaken in this population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered as ISRCTN23800982.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Intralipid therapy and adverse reproductive outcome: is there any evidence?

Controversy exists regarding the benefits of intravenous intralipid therapy in patients with a poor reproductive history. It is frequently reported that there is no evidence to support the effectiveness, utility or safety for this treatment. While individual studies may be perceived as weak, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to determine if there is any advantage to patients. PubMed, Embase and Scopus searches were performed with the target populations being either recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL), or recurrent implantation failure (RIF) undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) and receiving intralipid infusions. These cohorts were compared with either placebo, no intervention or alternative treatments. The most relevant outcome measures were considered to be clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), live birth rate (LBR), implantation rate (IR) and miscarriage rate (MR). Twelve studies encompassing 2676 participants met the criteria for selection and were included and reviewed. Treatment of the target population with intralipid led to an improvement in IR (Odds Ratio (OR): 2.97, 2.05–4.29), pregnancy rate (OR: 1.64, 1.31–2.04), and LBR (OR: 2.36, 1.75–3.17), with a reduction in MR (OR: 0.2, 0.14–0.30). Although intravenous intralipid is not recommended as a routine treatment for recurrent miscarriage or implantation failure, there is enough data to suggest consideration in selected patients where routine testing is unremarkable, standard treatments have failed and immunological risk factors are present. The presence of abnormal uterine natural killer (uNK) cells needs more study as a target marker to determine those who could benefit.

Enacting evidence-based medicine in fertility care: Tensions between commercialisation and knowledge standardisation

In this article we explore the recent enactment of evidence-based medicine (EBM) in the field of fertility care. We aim to contribute to the medical sociology literature through an analysis of how evidence is produced, interpreted and institutionalised in a relatively new medical field such as in vitro fertilisation (IVF), characterised by high uncertainty due to limited knowledge and high levels of commercialisation. Drawing on extensive ethnographic research conducted in England, this article explores the challenges IVF professionals encounter in producing credible data on the effectiveness of additional treatments, offering novel insights on the tensions between commercialisation and standardisation in the enactment of EBM. Extant medical sociology and Science and Technology Studies literature has shown the hidden professional work required to enact randomised control trials in practice. Our analysis shows that this hidden work is not enough when there is a broader lack of standardisation in both clinical and research practices, as producing 'good quality' evidence requires high levels of standardisation of knowledge production.

A Baby at All Costs? Exploring the Use and Provision of Unproven Adjuvant Treatments in the Context of IVF

The year 2018 marked 40 years since the birth of Louise Brown, the first baby born as a result of pioneering in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment. Since then, advances have seen a wide range of reproductive technologies emerge into clinical practice, including adjuvant treatments often referred to as IVF "add-ons." However, these "optional extras" have faced growing criticism, especially when they have often come at additional financial cost to the patient and have little evidence supporting their efficacy to improve pregnancy or birth rates. Despite this, according to the latest national patient survey by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, three quarters of patients who had fertility treatment in the United Kingdom in the past two years had at least one type of treatment add-on highlighting the growing demand for these interventions. This article uses a psychosocial perspective to consider the motivations behind patient and clinician behavior along with the wider societal and economic factors that may be impacting upon the increase in the use of adjuvant treatments in fertility clinics more widely. It suggests the reasons fertility patients use unproven "optional extras" are complex, with interpersonal, psychological, and social factors intertwining to generate an increase in the use of IVF add-ons.

Higher Doses of FSH Used for Superovulation Do Not Adversely Affect Embryonic Ploidy: A Randomized Controlled Trial (STimulation Resulting in Embryonic Aneuploidy using Menopur (STREAM) Trial)

Research Question: Does the dose of gonadotropin used for superovulation in IVF affect the proportion of euploid blastocysts obtained after fertilization?

Study Design: Multicentre randomized controlled trial recruiting 57 women who were treated with ovarian stimulation using either 150 or 300 IU Menopur per day. Both groups received GnRH antagonist from day 5 of ovarian stimulation and final oocyte maturation was induced using a leuprolide GnRH (gonadotropin releasing hormone) agonist trigger when three or more follicles reached 17 mm diameter. Oocyte collection was scheduled 36–38 hours post trigger. In vitro fertilization (IVF) or Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) were performed according to individual unit protocol and embryos were cultured to blastocyst stage. A trophectoderm biopsy was performed on day 5 of embryo culture and used for preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy. Euploid embryos were transferred in subsequent frozen embryo transfer cycles with appropriate endometrial preparation.

Results: The number of oocytes obtained from women randomized to 150 IU Menopur was between 3 and 17 (mean = 9), whereas the number of oocytes obtained from women randomized to 300 IU Menopur was between 3 and 24 (mean = 11). There was a positive linear relationship between serum AMH concentration and oocyte yield in both the 150 and 300 IU Menopur groups ([Formula: see text] = 0.3359, [Formula: see text] = 0.1129 and [Formula: see text] = 0.3741, [Formula: see text] = 0.1399). The percentage of euploid to aneuploid embryos in the 150 IU Menopur group was 63% and in the 300 IU Menopur group, the proportion was 75%, which was not significantly different ([Formula: see text] = 0.17).

Conclusion: The higher dose ovarian stimulation protocol did not significantly increase the number of oocytes retrieved, nor did the higher dose protocol reduce the proportion of euploid embryos created. This study does not support the hypothesis that use of higher doses of gonadotropin for ovarian stimulation results in a reduction in the proportion of euploid embryos obtained after IVF.

How common is add-on use and how do patients decide whether to use them? A national survey of IVF patients

STUDY QUESTION

What is the prevalence and pattern of IVF add-on use in Australia?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Among women having IVF in the last 3 years, 82% had used one or more IVF add-on, most commonly acupuncture, preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy and Chinese herbal medicine.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

IVF add-ons are procedures, techniques or medicines which may be considered nonessential to IVF, but usually used in attempts to improve the probability of conception and live birth. The use of IVF add-ons is believed to be widespread; however, there is little information about the prevalence and patterns of use in different settings.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

An online survey was distributed via social media to women in Australia who had undergone IVF since 2017. Women were excluded if they were gestational surrogates, used a surrogate, or underwent ovarian stimulation for oocyte donation or elective oocyte cryopreservation only. The survey was open from 21 June to 14 July 2020.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Survey questions included demographics, IVF and medical history, and use of IVF add-ons including details of the type of add-on, costs and information sources used. Participants were also asked about the relative importance of evidence regarding safety and effectiveness, factors considered in decision-making and decision regret.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

A total of 1590 eligible responses were analysed. Overall, 82% of women had used one or more add-ons and these usually incurred an additional cost (72%). Around half (54%) had learned about add-ons from their fertility specialist, and most reported that the decision to use add-ons was equally shared with the specialist. Women placed a high level of importance on scientific evidence for safety and efficacy, and half (49%) assumed that add-ons were known to be safe. Most women experienced some regret at the decision to use IVF add-ons (66%), and this was more severe among women whose IVF was unsuccessful (83%) and who believed that the specialist had a larger contribution to the decision to use add-ons (75%).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

This retrospective survey relied on patient recall. Some aspects were particularly prone to bias such as contributions to decision-making. This approach to capturing IVF add-on use may yield different results to data collected directly from IVF clinics or from fertility specialists.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

There is a very high prevalence of IVF add-on use in Australia which may be generalisable to other settings with similar models of IVF provision. Although women placed high importance on scientific evidence to support add-ons, most add-ons do not have robust evidence of safety and effectiveness. This suggests that IVF patients are not adequately informed about the risks and benefits of IVF add-ons, or are not aware of the paucity of evidence to support their use.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This research was supported by a McKenzie Postdoctoral Fellowship Grant (University of Melbourne), a Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Innovation Grant (University of Melbourne) and an NHMRC Investigator Grant (APP1195189). A.P. declares that he provides fertility services at Melbourne IVF (part of Virtus Health). J.W. reports grants from Wellcome Trust, during the conduct of the study, and that publishing benefits his career. The remaining authors report no conflict of interest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

A randomised controlled trial to assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of the endometrial scratch procedure prior to first-time IVF, with or without ICSI

STUDY QUESTION

What is the clinical-effectiveness and safety of the endometrial scratch (ES) procedure compared to no ES, prior to usual first time in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment?

SUMMARY ANSWER

ES was safe but did not improve pregnancy outcomes when performed in the mid-luteal phase prior to the first IVF cycle, with or without intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

ES is an ‘add-on’ treatment that is available to women undergoing a first cycle of IVF, with or without ICSI, despite a lack of evidence to support its use.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This pragmatic, superiority, open-label, multi-centre, parallel-group randomised controlled trial involving 1048 women assessed the clinical effectiveness and safety of the ES procedure prior to first time IVF, with or without ICSI, between July 2016 and October 2019.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Participants aged 18–37 years undergoing their first cycle of IVF, with or without ICSI, were recruited from 16 UK fertility clinics and randomised (1:1) by a web-based system with restricted access rights that concealed allocation. Stratified block randomisation was used to allocate participants to TAU or ES in the mid-luteal phase followed by usual IVF with or without ICSI treatment. The primary outcome was live birth after completing 24 weeks gestation within 10.5 months of egg collection.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

In total, 1048 women randomised to TAU (n = 525) and ES (n = 523) were available for intention to treat analysis. In the ES group, 453 (86.6%) received the ES procedure. IVF, with or without ICSI, was received in 494 (94.1%) and 497 (95.0%) of ES and TAU participants respectively. Live birth rate was 37.1% (195/525) in the TAU and 38.6% (202/523) in the ES: an unadjusted absolute difference of 1.5% (95% CI −4.4% to 7.4%, P = 0.621). There were no statistical differences in secondary outcomes. Adverse events were comparable across groups.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

A sham ES procedure was not undertaken in the control group, however, we do not believe this would have influenced the results as objective fertility outcomes were used.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This is the largest trial that is adequately powered to assess the impact of ES on women undergoing their first cycle of IVF. ES was safe, but did not significantly improve pregnancy outcomes when performed in the mid-luteal phase prior to the first IVF or ICSI cycle. We recommend that ES is not undertaken in this population.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

Funded by the National Institute of Health Research. Stephen Walters is an National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Senior Investigator (2018 to present) and was a member of the following during the project: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Clinical Trials and Evaluation Committee (2011–2017), NIHR HTA Commissioning Strategy Group (2012 to 2017); NIHR Programme Grants for Applied Research Committee (2020 to present); NIHR Pre doctoral Fellowship Committee (2019 to present). Dr. Martins da Silva reports grants from AstraZeneca, during the conduct of the study; and is Associate editor of Human Reproduction and Editorial Board member of Reproduction and Fertility. Dr. Bhide reports grants from Bart's Charity and grants and non-financial support from Pharmasure Pharmaceuticals outside the submitted work.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN number: ISRCTN23800982.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

31 May 2016

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT

04 July 2016

VALUE study: a protocol for a qualitative semi-structured interview study of IVF add-ons use by patients, clinicians and embryologists in the UK and Australia

INTRODUCTION

For couples undergoing assisted reproduction, a plethora of adjuncts are available; these are known as 'add-ons'. Most add-ons are not supported by good quality randomised trial evidence of efficacy, with some proven to be ineffective. However, estimates suggest that over 70% of fertility clinics provide at least one add-on, often at extra cost to the patient. This study has three aims. First, to undertake a survey of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) clinics in the UK to ascertain which add-ons are being offered and at what cost. Second, to undertake qualitative semi-structured interviews of patients, clinicians and embryologists, to explore their opinions and beliefs surrounding add-ons. Third, to review the interpretation of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority traffic light system, to better understand the information required by IVF patients, clinicians and embryologists when making decisions about add-ons.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

All UK IVF clinics will be contacted by email and invited to complete an online survey. The survey will ask them which add-ons they offer, at what cost per cycle and how information is shared with patients. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted in the UK and Australia with three groups of participants: (i) fertility patients; (ii) clinicians and (iii) embryologists. Participants for the interviews will be recruited via social media channels, website adverts, email and snowball sampling. Up to 20 participants will be recruited for each group in each country. Following an online consent process, interviews will be conducted via video-conferencing software, transcribed verbatim and data subjected to inductive thematic analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been granted by the Universities of Sheffield, Bath Spa and Melbourne. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated to regulatory bodies in the UK and Australia. A lay summary of findings will be shared via Fertility Network, UK.

Sperm Selection by Magnetic-Activated Cell Sorting before Microinjection of Autologous Oocytes Increases Cumulative Live Birth Rates with Limited Clinical Impact: A Retrospective Study in Unselected Males

Simple Summary

Many couples attending infertility clinics still need to repeat treatments and undergo several failed attempts before achieving a healthy newborn, which leaves room for improvement in the techniques we currently use in the clinic. Among the different procedures susceptible to improvement, the selection of the most adequate sperm to be injected inside the egg is crucial to the cycle’s success. Magnetic-activated cell sorting (MACS) is a technique that removes physiologically abnormal sperm that have started a programmed cell death (apoptotic) process from a semen sample. However, it is not recommended to all patients because there is no agreement between the published literature on whether it improves reproductive outcomes. This study used data from all intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles performed using the patient’s own oocytes in our clinics from January 2008 to February 2020. Our findings support that MACS should not be recommended to all infertile couples, since there was no significant difference in results compared to treatments in which MACS was not used. This study provides clinicians and patients with more accurate information on how MACS will impact their chances of pregnancy, and it will lead to studies focused on specific populations to which the technique can be particularly helpful.

Abstract

The application of MACS non-apoptotic sperm selection in infertility clinics is controversial since the published literature does not agree on its effect on reproductive outcomes. Therefore, it is not part of the routine clinical practice. Classical measures of reproductive success (pregnancy or live birth rates per ovarian stimulation) introduce a bias in the evaluation of a technique’s effect, since only the best embryo is transferred. This retrospective, multicenter, observational study evaluated the impact of MACS on reproductive outcomes, measuring results in classical parameters and cumulative live birth rates (CLBR). Data from ICSI cycles using autologous oocyte in Spanish IVIRMA fertility clinics from January 2008 to February 2020 were divided into two groups according to their semen processing: standard practice (reference: 46,807 patients) versus an added MACS sperm selection (1779 patients). Only when measured as CLBR per embryo transferred and per MII oocyte used was the difference between groups statistically significant. There were no significant differences between MACS and reference groups on pregnancy and live birth rates. In conclusion, results suggest that non-apoptotic sperm selection by MACS on unselected males prior to ICSI with autologous oocytes has limited clinical impact, showing a subtle increase in CLBR per embryo transferred.

"Add-Ons" for Assisted Reproductive Technology: Do Patients Get Honest Information from Fertility Clinics' Websites?

"Add-on" procedures are actively promoted on some fertility clinic websites as proven means to improve IVF success rates, especially for couples with repeated implantation/IVF failures. However, the actual contribution of these interventions to live birth rates remains inconclusive. At present, little is known about the type and quality of the information provided on the IVF clinics' websites regarding the merits of "add-ons." A systematic evaluation of the quality of information on "add-on" procedures in fertility clinic websites was performed using 10-criteria structured questionnaire. We included English language websites that presented in the Google.com search engine after typing the following key-words:"endometrial scratching"(ES), "intralipid infusions"(ILI), "assisted hatching"(AHA), "PGT-A," or "PGS". In total, 254 websites were evaluated. In most cases, an accurate description of the "add-on" procedures was provided (78.8%). However, only a minority (12%) reported their undetermined effectiveness. The use of PGT-A was more often encouraged (52.8%) than ES (23.6%) and AHA (16%). The cost was infrequently presented (6.9%). Scientific references were only rarely provided for ILI, versus 12.7% for ES, 4.0% for AHA, and 5.6% for PGT-A. The information entry date was often missing. None of the websites reported the clinic's pregnancy-rate following the "add-on" procedures. Information on "add-ons" available to patients from IVF clinic websites is often inaccurate. This could perpetuate false myths among infertile patients about these procedures and raises concern regarding possible commercial bias. It is imperative that IVF clinic websites will better communicate the associated risks and uncertainties of "add-ons" to prospective patients.

Repeated implantation failure (RIF): an iatrogenic meaningless definition that generates unnecessary and costly use of add-on procedures

This opinion paper addresses the literature regarding repeated implantation failure (RIF) in IVF embryo transfer programmes. We provide several lines of discussion as to why such diagnosis might be wrong, why it should not be a call for action or a reason to change the course of treatment, and how RIF biases the quality of the publications and leads to the use of unnecessary and costly adjuvant procedures beyond basic IVF. We argue that these costly add-on procedures are being offered to patients in this highly privatized sector to prevent them from quitting the programme and as a by-product to increase the clinic income. The patients, on the other hand, often equate lucrative hi-tech procedures with possible success and request them despite the lack of proof of the efficacy of most of the procedures.

Endometrial Receptivity Analysis (ERA) test: an unproven technology

This article addresses the limitations of the endometrial receptivity array (ERA) methodology to increase implantation. Such limitations vary from the assumed inconsistency of the endometrial biopsy, the variable number of genes found to be dysregulated in endometrium samples without the embryonal-induced effect, the failure to account for the simultaneous serum progesterone level, and the expected low percentage of patients who may need this add-on procedure, to the difficulties in synchronising the endometrium with hormone replacements in successive cycles and the inherent perinatal risks associated with routine cryopreservation of embryos. Without a gold standard to compare, the claim that the window of implantation (WOI) might be off by ±12 h only requires a good argument for the advantage it provides to human procreation, knowing that embryos can linger for days before actual embedding starts and that the window is actually a few days. The intra-patient variations in the test need to be addressed. In summary, like all other add-ons, it is doubtful whether the ERA test use can significantly enhance implantation success rates.

The challenges of trials in reproductive medicine: can a Bayesian approach help?

Reproductive medicine is imbued with debates over the results of key trials. This has resulted in heterogeneity in clinical practice and a disconnect between researchers and the patient group they aim to treat. The criticisms of trials originate from the nature of reproductive health conditions and limitations imposed in designing trials to assess effect in a patient group with heterogenous pathologies leading to the same condition. This leads to challenges in balancing the difficulties of recruiting an enriched patient cohort versus the dilutionary effect and need for subgroup analysis from wider recruitment. These challenges manifest as a failure to achieve traditional statistical significance. One potential solution to overcoming these inherent challenges is that of a Bayesian statistical approach. Using examples from the literature we demonstrate the benefits of a Bayesian approach. Taking published data and using a flat prior (no background information used), a Bayesian re-analysis of the PRISM and EAGeR trials is presented. This demonstrated a 94.7% chance of progesterone and a 95.3% probability of aspirin preventing miscarriage, in contrast to the original trial conclusions. These highlight the role a Bayesian approach can play in overcoming the challenges of trials within reproductive health.

Live birth achieved despite the absence of ejaculated spermatozoa and mature oocytes retrieved: a case report

The most common reason for in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle cancelation is a lack of quality gametes available for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Here we present the successful fertility treatment of the couple affected by obstructive azoospermia combined with suboptimal response to controlled ovarian stimulation. Since the conventional approach appeared ineffective to overcome both partnersˈ specific problems, the targeted interventions, namely, (1) pharmacological enhancement of sperm motility and (2) polarized light microscopy (PLM)-guided optimization of ICSI time, were applied to rescue the cycle with only immature oocytes and immotile testicular sperm retrieved. The treatment with theophylline aided the selection of viable spermatozoa derived from cryopreserved testicular tissue. When the traditional stimulation protocol failed to produce mature eggs, non-invasive spindle imaging was employed to adjust the sperm injection time to the maturational stage of oocytes extruding a polar body in vitro. The fertilization of 12 late-maturing oocytes yielded 5 zygotes, which all developed into blastocysts. One embryo was transferred into the uterus on day 5 post-fertilization, and another 3 good quality blastocysts were vitrified for later use. The pregnancy resulted in a full-term delivery of a healthy child. This case demonstrates that the individualization beyond the standard IVF protocols should be considered to maximize the chance of poor-prognosis patients to achieve pregnancy with their own gametes.

Time to reality check the promises of machine learning-powered precision medicine

Machine learning methods, combined with large electronic health databases, could enable a personalised approach to medicine through improved diagnosis and prediction of individual responses to therapies. If successful, this strategy would represent a revolution in clinical research and practice. However, although the vision of individually tailored medicine is alluring, there is a need to distinguish genuine potential from hype. We argue that the goal of personalised medical care faces serious challenges, many of which cannot be addressed through algorithmic complexity, and call for collaboration between traditional methodologists and experts in medical machine learning to avoid extensive research waste.

Generating translatable evidence to improve patient care: the contribution of human factors

Generating translatable evidence to improve patient care has proved challenging in reproductive medicine, with many 'add-on' treatments in routine assisted conception clinical practice that have not been reliably tested. This has consequences for patient care; specifically, IVF pregnancy rates have not improved. A change of culture is required in our profession, from indiscriminately applying the latest 'add-on' to large-scale participation in generating reliable translatable evidence.

Assessing endometrial receptivity after recurrent implantation failure: a prospective controlled cohort study

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the prevalence of disrupted markers of endometrial function among women experiencing recurrent implantation failure (RIF), and does the prevalence differ from a control cohort?

DESIGN

Prospective controlled cohort study. In total, 86 women with a history of RIF and 37 women starting their first fertility treatment were recruited for this study. Endometrial and blood profiling were carried out in a hormone-substituted cycle using oestradiol and progesterone. Endometrial biopsies were analysed by histology, immune cell profiling, and the endometrial receptivity array (ERA®) test (Igenomix, Valencia, Spain). The vaginal microbiome was analysed using a NGS-based technology (ArtPRED, Amsterdam, the Netherlands). Blood tests included oestradiol, progesterone, prolactin, thyroid-stimulating hormone, vitamin D and anti-phospholipid antibody levels.

RESULTS

Patients who had experienced RIF produced a range of test abnormalities. Compared with controls, women with RIF had a higher prevalence of chronic endometritis (24% versus 6%), a lower vitamin D level and a borderline lower progesterone level. Women who had experienced RIF had a more favourable vaginal microbiome compared with controls. Although the RIF cohort was older than the controls (mean age 33.8 years versus 30.2 years), no differences between the groups were observed in immune cell profiling and the ERA test.

CONCLUSION

These data demonstrate that a single test or treatment for the endometrial factor in RIF is unlikely to be clinically effective. Diagnosing the endometrium in women with RIF permits targeted rather than blind interventions. Relative vitamin D deficiency, lower mid-luteal progesterone and chronic endometritis are ready targets for treatment. Understanding the role and treatment of an unfavourable vaginal microbiome in RIF needs further investigation.

The prevalence, promotion and pricing of three IVF add-ons on fertility clinic websites

RESEARCH QUESTION

How are IVF clinic websites advertising three common IVF add-ons: assisted hatching, time-lapse embryo imaging and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A)?

DESIGN

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority 'Choose a fertility clinic' website service was used to identify IVF clinics and their websites. Assisted hatching, time-lapse embryo imaging and PGT-A were examined to determine which websites advertised them, what price they charged and what claims they made in relation to the add-ons.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven eligible clinics were identified, with 72 unique websites; 37 (43%) clinics were part of one of nine groups of IVF clinics, of sizes ranging from two to eight clinics in the UK. Time-lapse imaging (TLI) was the most frequently advertised of the three add-ons (67% of clinics), followed by PGT-A (47%) and assisted hatching (28%). Very few websites stated that the effectiveness of the add-on was in doubt or unclear (four, two and one websites for TLI, PGT-A and assisted hatching, respectively), and none raised the possibility that an add-on might have negative effects. Claims of efficacy were often based on upstream outcomes (e.g. implantation, pregnancy). Some claims that PGT-A and TLI improved live birth rates were found. There was substantial variation in pricing.

CONCLUSIONS

IVF clinic websites provide valuable information for patients seeking fertility treatment so it is key that the information is accurate and complete. There is a need for transparent information on interventions, including uncertainties and risks, to be made available by IVF clinics to support well-informed treatment decisions. The selected add-ons are widely advertised, and there is wide variation in pricing.

The trouble with IVF and randomised control trials: Professional legitimation narratives on time-lapse imaging and evidence-informed care

Focusing on the case of time-lapse imaging (TLI), this paper analyses how medical professionals negotiate the use of new 'add-on' fertility treatments in light of the limited evidence available. The data produced by TLI technologies is meant to help professionals identify the best embryo to be implanted. Embryo selection is essential in IVF practice for increasing pregnancy rates and reducing the negative effects of repeated failures. More than 5 years after the introduction of TLI in IVF labs, however, there has been no conclusive randomised control trial (RCT) evidence to show that the tools do indeed have a significant impact on pregnancy rates. Nonetheless, many public clinics in the UK have adopted such technologies. Consequently, our research asks: How is the use of TLI tools legitimised by professionals, in light of contradictory evidence? Focusing on 25 semi-structured staff interviews, we argue that professionals use several strategies to legitimise the use of TLI in the clinic without, however, challenging the tenets of evidence-based medicine (EBM) and the value it places on RCTs. Rather, professionals emphasise various advantages that TLI offers, including its use as a lab tool, its potential for knowledge production in embryology, and the role it plays in the management of patient expectations and course of treatment. This paper contributes to debates on the role of EBM in modern medicine and fertility care specifically - an area where this inter-relationship has been underexplored. We conclude by suggesting avenues towards a more nuanced understanding of EBM as it relates to IVF treatment and a rapidly changing biotechnology context.

Methodologic considerations in randomized clinical trials in reproductive medicine

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the cornerstone of evidence-based medicine. In this series in Fertility and Sterility, several aspects of RCTs are discussed, with contributions on multicenter RCTs, different international settings, and integrity of RCTs. The present contribution deals with methodologic issues. We discuss different types of RCTs based on null hypothesis (superiority vs. noninferiority vs. equivalence) as well as frequentist versus Bayesian interpretation. We also discuss the use of RCTs in the era of personalized medicine and RCTs to address diagnostic and prognostic questions. Finally, we address the use of big data compared with the use of RCTs.

In vitro fertilization add-ons for the endometrium: it doesn't add-up

The probability of live birth from an in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle is modest. Many additional treatments (add-ons) are available which promise to improve the success of IVF. This review summarizes the current evidence for common IVF add-ons which are suggested to improve endometrial receptivity. Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials and individual trials were included. Five add-ons were included: immune therapies, endometrial scratching, endometrial receptivity array, uterine artery vasodilation, and human chorionic gonadotropin instillation. The results suggest there is no robust evidence that these add-ons are effective or safe. Many IVF add-ons are costly, consuming precious resources which may be better spent on evidence-based treatments or further IVF. Large randomized controlled trials and appropriate safety assessment should be mandatory before the introduction of IVF add-ons into routine practice.

Vitrification and the demise of fresh treatment cycles in ART

The advent of vitrification has transformed the therapeutic landscape in assisted reproductive technology. Clear evidence for this is provided by the dramatic rise in the number of frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles being carried out annually. In this review, we examine the reasons that underlie this trend and the current evidence that points to the place FET cycles will come to inhabit in the future. Safety issues have been central to the narrative around the clinical application of vitrification and, as the evidence base grows, the risk benefit balance will become clearer for different patient groups. These will include recipients of donor eggs, as in some centres the use of cryopreserved donor eggs now exceeds that of fresh oocytes. Efficient cryopreservation techniques have also affected international transport of gametes and embryos, increasing international access. The profound changes that vitrification has created promises to fulfil a prediction made by this journal's founding Editor, Bob Edwards, that embryo and cryopreservation would solve many of the challenges presented by assisted reproductive technology.

Chromosomal mosaicism in human blastocysts: the ultimate diagnostic dilemma

BACKGROUND

Trophectoderm (TE) biopsy and next generation sequencing (NGS) are currently the preferred techniques for preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A). Although this approach delivered important improvements over previous testing strategies, increased sensitivity has also prompted a rise in diagnoses of uncertain clinical significance. This includes reports of chromosomal mosaicism, suggesting the presence of karyotypically distinct cells within a single TE biopsy. Given that PGT-A relies on the chromosomal constitution of the biopsied cells being representative of the entire embryo, the prevalence and clinical implications of blastocyst mosaicism continue to generate considerable controversy.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

The objective of this review was to evaluate existing scientific evidence regarding the prevalence and impact of chromosomal mosaicism in human blastocysts. We discuss insights from a biological, technical and clinical perspective to examine the implications of this diagnostic dilemma for PGT-A.

SEARCH METHODS

The PubMed and Google Scholar databases were used to search peer-reviewed publications using the following terms: ‘chromosomal mosaicism’, ‘human’, ‘embryo’, ‘blastocyst’, ‘implantation’, ‘next generation sequencing’ and ‘clinical management’ in combination with other keywords related to the subject area. Relevant articles in the English language, published until October 2019 were critically discussed.

OUTCOMES

Chromosomal mosaicism predominately results from errors in mitosis following fertilization. Although it appears to be less pervasive at later developmental stages, establishing the true prevalence of mosaicism in human blastocysts remains exceedingly challenging. In a clinical context, blastocyst mosaicism can only be reported based on a single TE biopsy and has been ascribed to 2–13% of embryos tested using NGS. Conversely, data from NGS studies disaggregating whole embryos suggests that mosaicism may be present in up to ~50% of blastocysts. However, differences in testing and reporting strategies, analysis platforms and the number of cells sampled inherently overshadow current data, while added uncertainties emanate from technical artefacts. Moreover, laboratory factors and aspects of in vitro culture generate further variability. Outcome data following the transfer of blastocysts diagnosed as mosaic remain limited. Current studies suggest that the transfer of putative mosaic embryos may lead to healthy live births, but also results in significantly reduced ongoing pregnancy rates compared to the transfer of euploid blastocysts. Observations that a subset of mosaic blastocysts has the capacity to develop normally have sparked discussions regarding the ability of embryos to self-correct. However, there is currently no direct evidence to support this assumption. Nevertheless, the exclusion of mosaic blastocysts results in fewer embryos available for transfer, which may inevitably compromise treatment outcomes.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

Chromosomal mosaicism in human blastocysts remains a perpetual diagnostic and clinical dilemma in the context of PGT-A. This review offers an important scientific resource, informing about the challenges, risks and value of diagnosing mosaicism. Elucidating these uncertainties will ultimately pave the way towards improved clinical and patient management.

The PGS/PGT-A controversy in IVF addressed as a formal conflict resolution analysis

PURPOSE

To use conflict resolution analysis on the conflict between proponents and opponents of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A), previously called preimplantation genetic screening (PGS).

METHODS

Considered in conflict analysis a case study, we reviewed the English literature based on key-word searches at www.pubmed.com and www.google.com, and interviewed professional opinion leaders and other actor-representatives. This analysis was the product of a mandated externship by L.M. at the Foundation for Reproductive Medicine (FRM), as part of the Master of Science Program in Negotiations and Conflict Resolution at Columbia University, New York, NY.

RESULTS

Initially a typical difference of opinion, conflict evolved after proponents rejected studies that failed to confirm expected benefits, and authors felt demeaned by their criticism. Becoming "destructive," the conflict evolved according to Glasl's escalation model stages. Proponents became continuous attractors. Unable to produce validations for PGT-A, proponents moved goal posts through 3 stages (PGS 1.0-PGS 3.0). Ultimately concurring that pregnancy and live birth rates are unaffected, they started claiming new benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

The FRM underwrote this study as a starting tool for a conflict resolution process. A consensus building conference of stakeholders appears as of this point to represent the most promising potential intervention. The goal of such a conference should be sustainable consensus about clinical utilization of PGS/PGT-A in IVF, based on transparent and validated criteria. A potential date for such a conference is set for 2020.

The effects of hyaluronate-containing medium on human embryo attachment to endometrial epithelial cells in vitro

STUDY QUESTION

Does embryo transfer medium containing hyaluronate (HA) promote the attachment phase of human embryo implantation?

SUMMARY ANSWER

HA-containing medium does not promote human blastocyst attachment to endometrial epithelial cells in vitro.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Embryo transfer media containing high concentrations of HA are being used to increase implantation and live birth rates in IVF treatment, although the mechanism of action is unknown.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Expression of HA-interacting genes in frozen-thawed oocytes/embryos was assessed by microarray analysis (n = 21). Fresh and frozen human blastocysts (n = 98) were co-cultured with human endometrial epithelial Ishikawa cell layers. Blastocyst attachment and the effects of a widely used HA-containing medium were measured.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Human embryos surplus to treatment requirements were donated with informed consent from several ART centres. Blastocyst-stage embryos were transferred at day 6 to confluent Ishikawa cell layers; some blastocysts were artificially hatched. Blastocyst attachment was monitored from 1 to 48 h, and the effects of blastocyst pre-treatment for 10 min with HA-containing medium were determined.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Human embryos expressed the HA receptor genes CD44 and HMMR, hyaluronan synthase genes HAS1–3, and hyaluronidase genes HYAL1–3, at all stages of preimplantation development. Attachment of partially hatched blastocysts to Ishikawa cells at 24 and 48 h was related to trophectoderm grade (P = 0.0004 and 0.007, respectively, n = 34). Blastocysts of varying clinical grades that had been artificially hatched were all attached within 48 h (n = 21). Treatment of artificially hatched blastocysts with HA-containing medium did not significantly affect attachment at early (1–6 h) or late (24 and 48 h) time points, compared with control blastocysts (n = 43).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Using an adenocarcinoma-derived cell line to model embryo-endometrium attachment may not fully recapitulate in vivo interactions. The high levels of blastocyst attachment seen with this in vitro model may limit the sensitivity with which the effects of HA can be observed.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Morphological trophectoderm grade can be correlated with blastocyst attachment in vitro. HA-containing medium may increase pregnancy rates by mechanisms other than promoting blastocyst attachment to endometrium.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This work was funded by a grant from the Wellbeing of Women, the NIHR Local Comprehensive Research Network and NIHR Manchester Clinical Research Facility, the Department of Health Scientist Practitioner Training Scheme, and the Ministry of Higher Education, The State of Libya. None of the authors has any conflict of interest to declare.

The impact of selected embryo culture conditions on ART treatment cycle outcomes: a UK national study

STUDY QUESTION

Are selected embryo culture conditions namely media, oxygen level, and incubator type, associated with IVF live birth rate (LBR) and the health of singleton offspring at birth?

SUMMARY ANSWER

There were statistically significant differences in LBR between the eight culture media systems analysed; however, none of the embryo culture factors showed statistically significant associations with birth weight (BW) in multivariable regression analyses.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

In clinical ART culture media is the initial environment provided for the growth of human embryos. Pre-implantation development is a critical period of developmental plasticity, which could have long-lasting effects on offspring growth and health. Although some studies have shown an impact of culture medium type on BW, the interaction between culture medium type and associated culture conditions on both treatment success rates (LBR) and offspring BW is largely unexplored. This study aimed to examine these factors in a large multicentre national survey capturing the range of clinical practice.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

In this cross-sectional study, data from a survey circulated to all UK IVF clinics requesting information regarding culture medium type, incubator type, and oxygen level used in ART between January 2011 and December 2013 were merged with routinely recorded treatment and outcome data held in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Register up to the end of 2014.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Forty-six (62%) UK clinics responded to the survey. A total of 75 287 fresh IVF/ICSI cycles were captured, including 18 693 singleton live births. IVF success (live birth, singleton or multiple; LB), singleton gestation and singleton gestation-adjusted BW were analysed using logistic and linear regression models adjusting for patient/treatment characteristics and clinic-specific effects.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Culture medium type was shown to have some impact on LBR (multivariable logistic regression, (MRL); post-regression Wald test, P < 0.001), but not on BW (MLR; post-regression Wald test, P = 0.215). However, blastocyst culture had the largest observed effect on odds of LBR (odds ratio (OR) = 1.35, CI: 1.29–1.42), increased the risk of pre-term birth even when controlling for oxygen tension (MLR; OR = 1.42, CI: 1.23–1.63), and gestation-adjusted BW (MLR, β = 38.97 g, CI: 19.42–58.53 g) when compared to cleavage-stage embryo culture. We noted a very strong effect of clinic site on both LBR and BW, thus confounding between treatment practices and clinic site may have masked the effect of culture conditions.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Larger datasets with more inter-centre variation are also needed, with key embryo culture variables comprehensively recorded in national treatment registries.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This study is the largest investigation of laboratory environmental effects in IVF on both LBR and singleton BW. Our findings largely agree with the literature, which has failed to show a consistent advantage of one culture media type over another. However, we noted some association of LBR with medium type, and the duration of embryo exposure to laboratory conditions (blastocyst culture) was associated with both LBR and singleton health at birth. Because of the strong effect of clinic site noted, further randomized controlled trials are needed in order to reliably determine the effect of embryo culture on IVF success rates and the growth and health of subsequent offspring.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This study was funded by the EU FP7 project grant EpiHealthNet (FP7-PEOPLE-2012-ITN -317 146). The authors have no competing interests to declare.

Don’t abandon RCTs in IVF. We don’t even understand them

The conclusion of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority that ‘add-on’ therapies in IVF are not supported by high-quality evidence has prompted new questions regarding the role of the randomized controlled trial (RCT) in evaluating infertility treatments. Critics argue that trials are cumbersome tools that provide irrelevant answers. Instead, they argue that greater emphasis should be placed on large observational databases, which can be analysed using powerful algorithms to determine which treatments work and for whom. Although the validity of these arguments rests upon the sciences of statistics and epidemiology, the discussion to date has largely been conducted without reference to these fields. We aim to remedy this omission, by evaluating the arguments against RCTs in IVF from a primarily methodological perspective. We suggest that, while criticism of the status quo is warranted, a retreat from RCTs is more likely to make things worse for patients and clinicians.

Do à la carte menus serve infertility patients? The ethics and regulation of in vitro fertility add-ons

Add-on treatments are the new black. They are provided (most frequently, sold) to patients undergoing in vitro fertilization on the premise that they will improve the chances of having a baby. However, the regulation of add-ons is consistently minimal, meaning that they are introduced into routine practice before they have been shown to improve the live birth rate. Debate on the adequacy of this light-touch approach rages. Defenders argue that demands for a rigorous approval process are paternalistic, as this would delay access to promising treatments. Critics respond that promising treatments may turn out to have adverse effects on patients and their offspring, contradicting the clinician's responsibility to do no harm. Some add-ons, including earlier versions of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy, might even reduce the live birth rate, raising the prospect of desperate patients paying more to worsen their chances. Informed consent represents a solution in principle, but in practice there is a clear tension between impartial information and direct-to-consumer advertising. Because the effects of a treatment cannot be known until it has been robustly evaluated, we argue that strong evidence should be required before add-ons are introduced to the clinic. In the meantime, there is an imperative to identify methods for communicating the associated risks and uncertainties of add-ons to prospective patients.

The Concept of Growth Hormone Deficiency Affecting Clinical Prognosis in IVF

The current understanding of human growth hormone (hGH; here GH) action is that the molecule is a 191-amino acid, single-chain polypeptide that is synthesized, stored and secreted by the somatotroph cells within the lateral wings of the anterior pituitary gland. It can be classified as a protein (comprising more than 50 amino acids) but true proteins have tertiary and quaternary chains creating a more complex structure, hence GH is usually classified as a polypeptide. GH is normally secreted at night during sleep and promotes skeletal, visceral and general body growth through the action of somatomedins or IGFs, notably IGF-1. In some tissues, GH action is directed via specific receptors GHRs; these are most abundant in liver, adipose and muscle tissues but have also been shown in granulosa cells, testicular tissues and on the oocyte, as well as in glandular cells of the luteal phase endometrium and decidua; such findings being recent and minimally researched to now. Following engagement with its receptor, the transduction process activates multiple signaling proteins. These all lead to extensive metabolic and mitogenic (growth promoting) responses. Clinically, GH is known to have an important role in pubertal development and is a key hormone for the vigor associated with adolescence and early adult life stages but has a faded presence and role for later adulthood, beyond age 30 years, and is minimally detected in advanced age, beyond 40 years. In association with the rapidly increasing trend for delaying reproduction beyond age 35 years, GH is being widely researched now as a potential adjuvant for infertility treatment in this group who, studies consistently show, have a poorer prognosis than younger females when relying on autologous oocytes. The idea that the age-related reduction in fertility prognosis is a feature of growth hormone deficiency is supported by our studies showing an elevated binding protein IGFBP-3/IGF-1 ratio and this can be reduced to a normal range (matching younger, good prognosis women) by the administration of GH as an adjuvant.