| 1. |
- Duffy, J. M. N., et al.
(författare)
-
Top 10 priorities for future infertility research: an international consensus development study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Human Reproduction. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0268-1161 .- 1460-2350. ; 35:12, s. 2715-2724
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- STUDY QUESTION: Can the priorities for future research in infertility be identified? SUMMARY ANSWER: The top 10 research priorities for the four areas of male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction and ethics, access and organization of care for people with fertility problems were identified. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Many fundamental questions regarding the prevention, management and consequences of infertility remain unanswered. This is a barrier to improving the care received by those people with fertility problems. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Potential research questions were collated from an initial international survey, a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and Cochrane systematic reviews. A rationalized list of confirmed research uncertainties was prioritized in an interim international survey. Prioritized research uncertainties were discussed during a consensus development meeting. Using a formal consensus development method, the modified nominal group technique, diverse stakeholders identified the top 10 research priorities for each of the categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction and ethics, access and organization of care. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems and others (healthcare funders, healthcare providers, healthcare regulators, research funding bodies and researchers) were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus methods advocated by the James Lind Alliance. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The initial survey was completed by 388 participants from 40 countries, and 423 potential research questions were submitted. Fourteen clinical practice guidelines and 162 Cochrane systematic reviews identified a further 236 potential research questions. A rationalized list of 231 confirmed research uncertainties was entered into an interim prioritization survey completed by 317 respondents from 43 countries. The top 10 research priorities for each of the four categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility (including age-related infertility, ovarian cysts, uterine cavity abnormalities and tubal factor infertility), medically assisted reproduction (including ovarian stimulation, IUI and IVF) and ethics, access and organization of care were identified during a consensus development meeting involving 41 participants from I I countries. These research priorities were diverse and seek answers to questions regarding prevention, treatment and the longer-term impact of infertility. They highlight the importance of pursuing research which has often been overlooked, including addressing the emotional and psychological impact of infertility, improving access to fertility treatment, particularly in lower resource settings and securing appropriate regulation. Addressing these priorities will require diverse research methodologies, including laboratory-based science, qualitative and quantitative research and population science. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, methodological decisions informed by professional judgment and arbitrary consensus definitions. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: We anticipate that identified research priorities, developed to specifically highlight the most pressing clinical needs as perceived by healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems and others, will help research funding organizations and researchers to develop their future research agenda.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Melo, P., et al.
(författare)
-
Surgical treatment for tubal disease in women due to undergo in vitro fertilisation
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. - 1469-493X. ; :10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Tubal disease accounts for 20% of infertility cases. Hydrosalpinx, caused by distal tubal occlusion leading to fluid accumulation in the tube(s), is a particularly severe form of tubal disease negatively affecting the outcomes of assisted reproductive technology (ART). It is thought that tubal surgery may improve the outcome of ART in women with hydrosalpinges. Objectives To assess the effectiveness and safety of tubal surgery in women with hydrosalpinges prior to undergoing conventional in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Search methods We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, DARE, and two trial registers on 8 January 2020, together with reference checking and contact with study authors and experts in the field to identify additional trials. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical treatment versus no surgical treatment, or comparing surgical interventions head-to-head, in women with tubal disease prior to undergoing IVF. Data collection and analysis We used Cochrane's standard methodological procedures. The primary outcomes were live birth rate (LBR) and surgical complication rate per woman randomised. Secondary outcomes included clinical, multiple and ectopic pregnancy rates, miscarriage rates and mean numbers of oocytes retrieved and of embryos obtained. Main results We included 11 parallel-design RCTs, involving a total of 1386 participants. The included trials compared different types of tubal surgery (salpingectomy, tubal occlusion or transvaginal aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid) to no tubal surgery, or individual interventions to one another. We assessed no studies as being at low risk of bias across all domains, with the main limitations being lack of blinding, wide confidence intervals and low event and sample sizes. We used GRADE methodology to rate the quality of the evidence. Apart from one moderate-quality result in one review comparison, the evidence provided by these 11 trials ranged between very low- to low-quality. Salpingectomy versus no tubal surgery No included study reported on LBR for this comparison. We are uncertain of the effect of salpingectomy on surgical complications such as the rate of conversion to laparotomy (Peto odds ratio (OR) 5.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 303.69; one RCT; n = 204; very low-quality evidence) and pelvic infection (Peto OR 5.80, 95% CI 0.11 to 303.69; one RCT; n = 204; very low-quality evidence). Salpingectomy probably increases clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) versus no surgery (risk ratio (RR) 2.02, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.82; four RCTs; n = 455; I-2 = 42.5%; moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that in women with a CPR of approximately 19% without tubal surgery, the rate with salpingectomy lies between 27% and 52%. Proximal tubal occlusion versus no surgery No study reported on LBR and surgical complication rate for this comparison. Tubal occlusion may increase CPR compared to no tubal surgery (RR 3.21, 95% CI 1.72 to 5.99; two RCTs; n = 209; I-2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). This suggests that with a CPR of approximately 12% without tubal surgery, the rate with tubal occlusion lies between 21% and 74%. Transvaginal aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid versus no surgery No study reported on LBR for this comparison, and there was insufficient evidence to identify a difference in surgical complication rate between groups (Peto OR not estimable; one RCT; n = 176). We are uncertain whether transvaginal aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid increases CPR compared to no tubal surgery (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.55; three RCTs; n = 311; I-2 = 0%; very low-quality evidence). Laparoscopic proximal tubal occlusion versus laparoscopic salpingectomy We are uncertain of the effect of laparoscopic proximal tubal occlusion versus laparoscopic salpingectomy on LBR (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.95; one RCT; n = 165; very low-quality evidence) and CPR (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.07; three RCTs; n = 347; I-2 = 77%; very low-quality evidence). No study reported on surgical complication rate for this comparison. Transvaginal aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid versus laparoscopic salpingectomy No study reported on LBR for this comparison, and there was insufficient evidence to identify a difference in surgical complication rate between groups (Peto OR not estimable; one RCT; n = 160). We are uncertain of the effect of transvaginal aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid versus laparoscopic salpingectomy on CPR (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.07; one RCT; n = 160; very low-quality evidence). Authors' conclusions We found moderate-quality evidence that salpingectomy prior to ART probably increases the CPR compared to no surgery in women with hydrosalpinges. When comparing tubal occlusion to no intervention, we found that tubal occlusion may increase CPR, although the evidence was of low quality. We found insufficient evidence of any effect on procedure- or pregnancy-related adverse events when comparing tubal surgery to no intervention. Importantly, none of the studies reported on long term fertility outcomes. Further high-quality trials are required to definitely determine the impact of tubal surgery on IVF and pregnancy outcomes of women with hydrosalpinges, particularly for LBR and surgical complications; and to investigate the relative efficacy and safety of the different surgical modalities in the treatment of hydrosalpinges prior to ART.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Chua, S. J., et al.
(författare)
-
Age-related natural fertility outcomes in women over 35 years: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Human Reproduction. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0268-1161 .- 1460-2350. ; 35:8, s. 1808-1820
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- STUDY QUESTION: What is the rate of natural conception leading to ongoing pregnancy or livebirth over 6-12 months for infertile women of age >= 35 years? SUMMARY ANSWER: Natural conception rates were still clinically relevant in women aged 35 years and above and were significantly higher in women with unexplained infertility compared to those with other diagnoses. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In recent years, increasing numbers of women have attempted to conceive at a later age, resulting in a commensurate increase in the need for ART. However, there is a lack of data on natural fertility outcomes (i.e. no interventions) in women with increasing age. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A systematic review with individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis was carried out. PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, clinicaltrials.gov were searched until 1 July 2018 including search terms 'fertility service', 'waiting list', 'treatment-independent' and 'spontaneous conception'. Language restrictions were not imposed. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Inclusion criteria were studies (at least partly) reporting on infertile couples with female partner of age >= 35 years who attended fertility services, underwent fertility workup (e.g. history, semen analysis, tubal status and ovulation status) and were exposed to natural conception (e.g. independent of treatment such as IVF, ovulation induction and tubal surgery). Studies that exclusively studied only one infertility diagnosis, without including other women presenting to infertility services for other causes of infertility, were excluded. For studies that met the inclusion criteria, study authors were contacted to provide IPD, after which fertility outcomes for women of age >= 35 years were retrieved. Time to pregnancy or livebirth and the effect of increasing age on fertility outcomes after adjustment for other prognostic factors were analysed. Quality of studies was graded with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (non-randomised controlled trials (RCTs)) or the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (for RCTs). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: We included nine studies (seven cohort studies and two RCTs) (n = 4379 women of at least age 35 years), with the observed composite primary outcome of ongoing pregnancy or livebirth occurring in 429 women (9.8%) over a median follow-up of 5 months (25th to 75th percentile: 2.5-8.5 months). Studies were of moderate to high quality. The probability of natural conception significantly decreased with any diagnosis of infertility, when compared with unexplained infertility. We found non-linear effects of female age and duration of infertility on ongoing pregnancy and tabulated the predicted probabilities for unexplained infertile women aged 35-42 years with either primary or secondary infertility and with a duration of infertility from 1 to 6 years. For a 35-year-old woman with 2 years of primary unexplained infertility, the predicted probability of natural conception leading to ongoing pregnancy or livebirth was 0.15 (95% CI 0.11-0.19) after 6 months and 0.24 (95% CI 0.17-0.30) after 12 months. For a 42-year-old woman, this decreased to 0.08 (95% CI 0.04-0.11) after 6 months and 0.13 (95% CI 0.07-0.18) after 12 months. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: In the studies selected, there were different study designs, recruitment strategies in different centres, protocols and countries and different methods of assessment of infertility. Data were limited for women above the age of 40 years. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Women attending fertility services should be encouraged to pursue natural conception while waiting for treatment to commence and after treatment if it is unsuccessful. Our results may aid in counselling women, and, in particular, for those with unexplained infertility.
|
|
| 6. |
- Duffy, J. M. N., et al.
(författare)
-
Developing a core outcome set for future infertility research: an international consensus development study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Human Reproduction. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0268-1161 .- 1460-2350. ; 35:12, s. 2725-2734
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- STUDY QUESTION: Can a core outcome set to standardize outcome selection, collection and reporting across future infertility research be developed? SUMMARY ANSWER: A minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, has been developed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for infertility. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Complex issues, including a failure to consider the perspectives of people with fertility problems when selecting outcomes, variations in outcome definitions and the selective reporting of outcomes on the basis of statistical analysis, make the results of infertility research difficult to interpret. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A three-round Delphi survey (372 participants from 41 countries) and consensus development workshop (30 participants from 27 countries). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, researchers and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus science methods. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The core outcome set consists of: viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound (accounting for singleton, twin and higher multiple pregnancy); pregnancy loss (accounting for ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, stillbirth and termination of pregnancy); live birth; gestational age at delivery; birthweight; neonatal mortality; and major congenital anomaly. Time to pregnancy leading to live birth should be reported when applicable. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, Delphi survey attrition and an arbitrary consensus threshold. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Embedding the core outcome set within RCTs and systematic reviews should ensure the comprehensive selection, collection and reporting of core outcomes. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement, and over 80 specialty journals, including the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group, Fertility and Sterility and Human Reproduction, have committed to implementing this core outcome set.
|
|
| 7. |
- Duffy, J. M. N., et al.
(författare)
-
Standardizing definitions and reporting guidelines for the infertility core outcome set: an international consensus development study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Human Reproduction. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0268-1161 .- 1460-2350. ; 35:12, s. 2735-2745
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- STUDY QUESTION: Can consensus definitions for the core outcome set for infertility be identified in order to recommend a standardized approach to reporting? SUMMARY ANSWER: Consensus definitions for individual core outcomes, contextual statements and a standardized reporting table have been developed. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Different definitions exist for individual core outcomes for infertility. This variation increases the opportunities for researchers to engage with selective outcome reporting, which undermines secondary research and compromises clinical practice guideline development. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Potential definitions were identified by a systematic review of definition development initiatives and clinical practice guidelines and by reviewing Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group guidelines. These definitions were discussed in a face-to-face consensus development meeting, which agreed consensus definitions. A standardized approach to reporting was also developed as part of the process. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, researchers and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus development methods. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Forty-four potential definitions were inventoried across four definition development initiatives, including the Harbin Consensus Conference Workshop Group and International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies, 12 clinical practice guidelines and Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group guidelines. Twenty-seven participants, from 11 countries, contributed to the consensus development meeting. Consensus definitions were successfully developed for all core outcomes. Specific recommendations were made to improve reporting. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations. There was limited representation from low- and middle-income countries. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: A minimum data set should assist researchers in populating protocols, case report forms and other data collection tools. The generic reporting table should provide clear guidance to researchers and improve the reporting of their results within journal publications and conference presentations. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials statement, and over 80 specialty journals have committed to implementing this core outcome set.
|
|
| 8. |
- Fredriksson, A., et al.
(författare)
-
Gonadotrophin stimulation and risk of relapse in breast cancer
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Human Reproduction Open. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 2399-3529. ; 2021:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- STUDY QUESTION: Is gonadotrophin stimulation as part of IVF associated with an increased risk of relapse in breast cancer? SUMMARY ANSWER: Controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) in connection with IVF in women with previous breast cancer was not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer relapse. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Breast cancer is the most common malignancy among women worldwide and the leading cause of cancer death among females. The use of COS with gonadotrophins with subsequent cryopreservation of oocytes or embryos in order to enhance the chances of pregnancy after cancer treatment is the current most established fertility preservation method for women with breast cancer. To date, there are only a few small retrospective hospital-based controlled studies evaluating the risk of breast cancer relapse in patients undergoing fertility preservation with or without COS, showing no evident risk of relapse in breast cancer after the use of gonadotoxic agents. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This was a retrospective, population-based cohort study comprising 5857 women with previous breast cancer of whom 337 were exposed to COS. Exposure (COS) and outcomes (relapse and death) were identified for all patients from 2005 to 2014 by assessing the National Quality Register for Assisted Reproduction, the Swedish Medical Birth Register, the National Patient Register, the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register, the Swedish Cause of Death Register, the National Breast Cancer Register and the Swedish Cancer Register. Matching according to set criteria was possible for 334 women, who constituted the control group. A total of 274 women had undergone IVF after completing breast cancer treatment and 63 women had undergone COS for fertility preservation at the time of breast cancer diagnosis. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Women aged 20-44years previously diagnosed with breast cancer and exposed to COS were matched for age at breast cancer diagnosis 5years, tumour size and lymph node involvement with a non-exposed control group, including women with known T- and N-stages. In a subsequent analysis, the matched cohort was assessed by also including women with unknown T- and N-stages. A secondary analysis comprised the entire non-matched cohort, including all women with known T- and N-stages. Also here, a subsequent analysis included women with missing data for T- and N-stages. The risk of relapse in breast cancer was estimated as crude hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CI using Cox proportional hazards models in the primary and secondary analyses where T- and N-stages were known: otherwise the risks of relapse were only given descriptively. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In the primary matched analysis, relapse occurred in 20 of 126 women exposed to COS (15.9%) compared with 39 of 126 (31.0%) in the control cohort (HR = 0.70; 95% CI 0.39-1.45; P=0.22). In the subsequent analysis, also including women with unknown T- and N-stages, relapse occurred in 27 of 337 (8.0%) women having undergone COS compared with 71/334 (21.3%) among the non-exposed. In the secondary adjusted analysis, relapse occurred in 20 of 126 (15.9%) exposed women and in 918 of 3729 (24.6%) non-exposed women (HR = 0.81; 95% CI 0.49-1.33; P=0.70). In the subsequent analysis, including unknown T- and N-stages, relapse occurred in 27 of 337 (8.0%) women in the exposed group and 1176 of 5520 (21.3%) in the non-exposed cohort. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: A substantial degree of missing data on important prognostic variables was a limitation, particularly when analysing the total cohort. Furthermore, data on confounding factors, such as BMI, were not completely covered. Another limitation was that a pre-specified variable for relapse was not in use for the majority of the National Breast Cancer Register. Furthermore, the follow-up time from available register data (2005-2014) is rather short. Finally, we cannot be sure whether the prognostic information from receptor status, showing a lower incidence in the exposed group, is representative. Information on T- and N-stages was missing in more than half of the patients. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: In this large, retrospective, matched cohort study, we found no increased risk of relapse in breast cancer among women who had been exposed to gonadotrophins as part of IVF. This is reassuring but might be confounded by the selection of a group of women with a more favourable prognosis than those not undergoing IVF. The present study strengthens previous findings by being large, national and register based. Its results are applicable to women undergoing fertility preservation as well as to those undergoing regular IVF treatment.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Lensen, S., et al.
(författare)
-
A Randomized Trial of Endometrial Scratching before In Vitro Fertilization
- 2019
-
Ingår i: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793. ; 380:4, s. 325-334
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND Endometrial scratching (with the use of a pipelle biopsy) is a technique proposed to facilitate embryo implantation and increase the probability of pregnancy in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). We conducted a pragmatic, multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial. Eligible women were undergoing IVF (fresh-embryo or frozen-embryo transfer), with no recent exposure to disruptive intrauterine instrumentation (e.g., hysteroscopy). Participants were randomly assigned in a 1: 1 ratio to either endometrial scratching (by pipelle biopsy between day 3 of the cycle preceding the embryo-transfer cycle and day 3 of the embryo-transfer cycle) or no intervention. The primary outcome was live birth. A total of 1364 women underwent randomization. The frequency of live birth was 180 of 690 women (26.1%) in the endometrial-scratch group and 176 of 674 women (26.1%) in the control group (adjusted odds ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.27). There were no significant between-group differences in the rates of ongoing pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, or miscarriage. The median score for pain from endometrial scratching (on a scale of 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating worse pain) was 3.5 (interquartile range, 1.9 to 6.0). Endometrial scratching did not result in a higher rate of live birth than no intervention among women undergoing IVF.
|
|
