Birthweight in infants conceived through in vitro fertilization following blastocyst or cleavage-stage embryo transfer: a national registry study

Cumulative pregnancy rates of two strategies: Day 3 fresh embryo transfer followed by Day 3 or Day 5/6 vitrification and embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial

STUDY QUESTION

Are cumulative pregnancy rates better if supernumerary embryos are vitrified on Day 5/6 instead of Day 3?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The results do not show a significant difference in cumulative pregnancy rates between the Day 3 and Day 5/6 vitrification groups.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Pregnancy and live birth rates following IVF or ICSI treatment are higher after extended embryo culture and blastocyst transfer (Day 5/6) compared to cleavage-stage (Day 3) transfer. Cumulative pregnancy rates from one oocyte retrieval (OR) cycle show no significant difference after fresh and frozen embryo transfers, but only one study has used vitrification for the cryopreservation of supernumerary embryos while four studies have used a slow freezing protocol.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Our prospective randomized controlled trial was performed in an academic centre between January 2018 and August 2020. Patients were randomized into vitrification Day 3 (n = 80) or Day 5/6 (n = 81) groups. The primary outcome was the cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate (cOPR), considering only the first pregnancy for each couple. The power calculation revealed that 75 patients were required in each group, when assuming a 50% cOPR with four embryo transfers in the vitrification Day 3 group vs two transfers in the vitrification Day 5/6 group.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Patients <38 years undergoing their first or second OR cycles were randomized at the start of the first cycle. Up to two cycles were included in the analysis. A fresh embryo transfer was performed on Day 3. Supernumerary embryos (with ≥6 cells, <25% fragmentation, and equal blastomeres) or blastocysts (with expansion grade ≥2 with inner cell mass and trophectoderm score A/B) were vitrified on Day 3 or Day 5/6, respectively, and then transferred at a later date. A time-to-event analysis was performed with the patient's first ongoing pregnancy as the event of interest and the number of embryo transfers as the time component. The statistical comparison was performed by a Cox proportional hazards model. Cumulative costs of vitrification on Day 3 vs Day 5/6 were explored and compared using Mann-Whitney U tests.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

By December 2021, 233 transfers (96 fresh and 137 frozen) in 77 patients were performed in the vitrification Day 3 group and 201 transfers (88 fresh and 113 frozen) in 77 patients were performed in the vitrification Day 5/6 group. The time-to-event analysis did not show a difference between the two arms with regard to the patient's first ongoing pregnancy as the primary study outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 1.25, 95% CI 0.82; 1.92, P = 0.30). The cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate after eight transfers (from one or two ORs) was 57% in the vitrification Day 3 group vs 58% in the vitrification Day 5/6 group. The median number of embryo transfers until a pregnancy was achieved was five vs four, respectively, in the vitrification Day 3 group vs the Day 5/6 group. Similar results were found for the secondary study outcome, i.e. clinical pregnancy with foetal heart rate (HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.78; 1.80, P = 0.41). The cumulative clinical pregnancy rate (cCPR) after eight embryo transfers was 62% in the vitrification Day 3 group vs 59% in the vitrification Day 5/6 group. The median number of transfers until a pregnancy was achieved was four in both groups. The healthcare consumption pattern differed between the two groups and we observed higher costs for the vitrification Day 3 group compared to the vitrification Day 5/6 group, although these differences were not statistically significant.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Although our power calculation revealed that only 75 patients were needed in each study group (β = 0.87, α < 0.05), the numbers were low. Also, different numbers of single and double embryo transfers were performed between the two groups, which may have affected the results. The cost analysis was performed on a subset of the patients and is therefore exploratory.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Our study shows no difference in the cumulative pregnancy rate nor costs after fresh and frozen embryo transfers of at most two sequential OR cycles between the Day 3 and Day 5/6 vitrification groups; however, obstetric and perinatal outcomes should be taken into account to determine the best strategy.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This study was funded as an investigator-sponsored study of S.D. by Merck nv/sa Belgium, an affiliate of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany, and by Gedeon Richter Benelux (PA18-0162). The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04196036.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

15 January 2018.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT

15 January 2018.

Congenital anomaly and perinatal outcome following blastocyst- vs cleavage-stage embryo transfer: systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To compare the reported rate of any congenital anomaly and perinatal outcome of pregnancy following blastocyst- vs cleavage-stage embryo transfer using a pairwise meta-analysis and to evaluate the same outcomes following fresh-blastocyst, frozen-blastocyst, fresh-cleavage or frozen-cleavage embryo transfer using a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in PubMed, Scopus and CENTRAL and registers for ongoing studies, from inception to February 2022, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with any sample size and observational studies including at least 100 live births per group, comparing the rates of any congenital anomaly and perinatal outcome of pregnancy following fresh/frozen embryo transfer at cleavage (day 2-3) vs blastocyst (day 5-7) stage. Risk ratios (RRs) along with their 95% CIs were pooled via a random-effects model meta-analysis. Within a frequentist network meta-analysis framework, outcomes of all four treatment modalities (i.e. fresh-blastocyst, fresh-cleavage, frozen-blastocyst, frozen-cleavage) were compared further. Any congenital anomaly constituted the primary outcome, whereas preterm delivery (delivery < 37 weeks), low birth weight (LBW; < 2500 g), gender of the neonate (male), perinatal death and healthy neonate (defined as liveborn neonate, delivered at term, weighing ≥ 2500 g, surviving for at least 28 days postbirth and without any congenital anomaly) were considered as secondary outcomes. Subgroup analyses by plurality (liveborn singleton vs multiple pregnancy) were conducted in the pairwise and network meta-analyses. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB2 tool for RCTs and the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE.

RESULTS

Through the literature search, 550 studies were retrieved and 33 were included in the systematic review. We found no significant difference in the risk for any congenital anomaly between blastocyst- and cleavage-stage transfer (RR, 0.80 (95% CI, 0.63-1.03); 10 studies; n = 192 442; I²  = 85.5%). An increased probability of a male neonate was observed following blastocyst- vs cleavage-stage transfer (RR, 1.07 (95% CI, 1.06-1.09); 18 studies; n = 227 530; I²  = 32.7%). No significant differences in other secondary outcomes or significant subgroup differences between liveborn singletons and multiple pregnancies were observed. The network meta-analysis showed a significantly lower risk for LBW following frozen-blastocyst vs fresh-blastocyst (RR, 0.76 (95% CI, 0.60-0.95)) or fresh-cleavage (RR, 0.74 (95% CI, 0.59-0.93)) transfer. Frozen-blastocyst transfer was associated with an increased risk for perinatal death compared with the fresh-cleavage method (RR, 2.06 (95% CI, 1.10-3.88)). The higher probability of a male neonate following blastocyst transfer remained evident in the network comparisons. All outcomes were assessed to be of very-low certainty of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Current very-low certainty of evidence shows that there may be little-to-no difference in the risk for congenital anomaly or adverse perinatal outcome of pregnancy following blastocyst- vs cleavage-stage embryo transfer, although there was a slightly increased probability of a male neonate following blastocyst transfer. When considering cryopreservation, frozen-blastocyst transfer was associated with a reduction in the risk for LBW compared with both fresh-transfer modalities, and fresh-cleavage transfer may be associated with a reduction in the risk for perinatal death compared with frozen-blastocyst transfer. High-quality RCTs with separate data on fresh and frozen cycles and consistent reporting of culture conditions and freezing methods are mandatory. Individual participant data meta-analyses are required to address the substantial inconsistency resulting from current aggregate data approaches. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

A comparison of perinatal outcomes following fresh blastocyst or cleavage stage embryo transfer in singletons and twins and between singleton siblings

STUDY QUESTION

Are perinatal outcomes following fresh blastocyst versus fresh cleavage stage embryo transfer (ET) different in singletons, twins, and between singleton siblings?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Singleton babies conceived following fresh blastocyst, versus cleavage stage, ET are less likely to be small for gestational age (SGA) or to have a congenital anomaly (a result confirmed by comparing singleton siblings), while singletons born following fresh blastocyst ET were at a higher risk of being large for gestational age (LGA) than their sibling born following fresh cleavage stage ET.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Blastocyst stage transfer is now the preferred strategy in most IVF units. Previous studies have suggested that babies conceived through blastocyst transfer are at increased risk of preterm birth and LGA.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

A national population-based retrospective cohort study was performed using linked Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) data on 130 516 IVF and ICSI livebirths occurring from 103 062 women between 2000 and 2017.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

We included women who had at least one singleton livebirth resulting from IVF/ICSI fresh embryo treatment, using their own eggs and partner's sperm. A linked HFEA dataset was analysed using a multilevel framework, which accommodated repeated IVF cycles resulting in livebirths in the same woman. A population-averaged robust Poisson model was used for binary outcomes and a multinomial logistic regression model was used for categorical outcomes. Unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) (95% CI) were calculated.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

There were 130 516 livebirths in 103 062 women, including 86 630 singletons, 43 886 twin births, and 5384 pairs of singleton siblings. In comparison with fresh cleavage stage ET, fresh blastocyst stage transfer in singletons was associated with a lower risk of low birthweight (aRR = 0.92; 95% CI 0.86, 0.99), lower risk of being SGA (0.83; 0.78, 0.89), and lower risk of congenital anomaly (0.79; 0.71, 0.89). This analysis did not show an increase in risk associated with preterm birth (1.00; 0.94, 1.06), high birthweight (0.99; 0.93, 1.06), LGA (0.99; 0.93, 1.05), and the chance of healthy singleton baby (1.00; 1.00, 1.02). Twins resulting from fresh blastocyst stage ET were at slightly higher risk of preterm birth (1.05; 1.02, 1.10) compared with twins conceived following fresh cleavage stage ET. There was insufficient evidence for an association with the other perinatal outcomes. Singleton siblings born following fresh blastocyst stage ET were at a higher risk of being LGA (1.57; 1.01, 2.46) and at lower risk of having a congenital anomaly (0.52; 0.28, 0.97) compared to their singleton siblings born following cleavage stage ET. There was some evidence of excess risk of preterm birth (1.42; 0.97, 2.23) associated with blastocyst stage transfer. However, we could not confirm an association between blastocyst stage ET and low birthweight (1.35; 0.81, 2.27), high birthweight (1.19; 0.80, 1.77), and the chance of being a healthy baby (0.97; 0.86, 1.09).

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

This was an observational study where we were unable to adjust for some key confounders, such as maternal smoking status and BMI, which may change from one pregnancy to another and are not recorded in the HFEA dataset.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

In the largest study of its kind, our analysis of singleton siblings, corrected for unmeasured, non-time varying maternal factors, confirms the previously reported association between blastocyst transfer and LGA babies, and shows a reduced risk of congenital anomaly following blastocyst transfer. Our sibling analysis did not confirm a decreased risk of low birthweight following blastocyst transfer. Overall, absolute risks are low and there is insufficient evidence to challenge the practice of extended culture of embryos.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

This project is financed by an NHS Grampian Endowment Research Grant, project number 17/052. One of the authors, S.B., was the Editor in Chief of HROpen until 31 December 2022 and would have been in that role when the paper was first submitted. As an invited speaker, S.B. has received travel expenses, accommodation and honoraria from Merck, Organon, and Ferring. A.M. has received travel expenses, accommodation, and honoraria from Merck Serono, Cook Medical, Pharmasure, Gedeon Richter, and Ferring. D.J.M. is currently a HROpen Associate Editor.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Extended culture of cleavage-stage embryos in vitrified-thawed cycles may be an alternative to frozen and thawed blastocysts during in vitro fertilization

AIM

We compared the clinical outcomes of vitrified-thawed cycles during in vitro fertilization (IVF) for frozen and thawed blastocysts compared to cleavage-stage embryos that were frozen, thawed and extended culture to the blastocyst stage.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between January 2014 and December 2016, 908 frozen-thawed cycles were included in the study. After removing cycles that met exclusion criteria, clinical outcomes for 355 cleavage-stage embryos with extended blastocyst culture (Group I) were compared with 279 frozen and thawed blastocysts (Group II).

RESULTS

Cryo-survival rate of the two groups were similar (96.7% versus 95.0%). Implantation rates (28.9% versus 22.4%, p = .04) and clinical pregnancy rates (37.2% versus 27.9%, p = .03) were higher in Group I. Pregnancy, live birth and abortus rates were similar in both groups. Although overall abortus rates were similar in both groups, abortus rates before 12 weeks of gestation were higher in Group I, and chemical abortus rates were higher in Group II (p = .03, p = .04). Weeks of gestation at birth and birth weight were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of extended blastocyst culture of cleavage-stage embryos was not inferior to frozen and thawed blastocysts. Freezing at the cleavage-stage can provide similar cryo-survival rates than blastocyst vitrification. Vitrifying surplus or all embryos for storage at the cleavage-stage allows higher implantation and clinical pregnancy rates. But after abortus, live birth rates were similar in both groups.

Obstetric and perinatal outcomes of singleton pregnancies after blastocyst-stage embryo transfer compared with those after cleavage-stage embryo transfer: a systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Extended embryo culture to blastocyst stage is widely used in IVF and is the default strategy in most clinics. The last decade has witnessed a growing interest in obstetric-perinatal outcomes following blastocyst transfer. Recent studies have challenged the conclusions of systematic reviews that associate risks of preterm birth (PTB) and large for gestational age (LGA) babies with blastocyst transfer. A higher proportion of blastocysts is transferred as frozen-thawed embryos, which may also have added implications.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

The aim of this study was to conduct an updated systematic review of the obstetric-perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies following blastocyst-stage transfer compared to cleavage-stage transfer in IVF/ICSI cycles. Where deemed appropriate, data were combined in cumulative meta-analyses.

SEARCH METHODS

Data sources from Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (1980-2020) were searched using combinations of relevant keywords. Searches had no language restrictions and were limited to human studies. Observational studies and randomized controlled trials comparing obstetric-perinatal outcomes between singleton pregnancies after blastocyst-stage transfer and those after cleavage-stage transfer in IVF/ICSI cycles were sought. Two independent reviewers extracted data in 2 × 2 tables and assessed the methodological quality of the relevant studies using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme scoring. Cumulative meta-analyses were carried out with independent analysis of pregnancies after fresh and frozen embryo transfers, using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. If provided by included studies, adjusted effect sizes were combined in a sensitivity analysis.

OUTCOMES

A total of 35 studies were included (n = 520 769 singleton pregnancies). Outcome data suggest singleton pregnancies following fresh blastocyst transfer were associated with higher risk of LGA (risk ratio (RR) 1.14; 95% CI 1.05-1.24) and very PTB (RR 1.17; 95% CI 1.08-1.26) compared to fresh cleavage-stage transfer. Singleton pregnancies following frozen blastocyst transfer were associated with higher risks of LGA (RR 1.17; 95% CI 1.08-1.27), PTB (RR 1.13; 95% CI 1.03-1.24) and caesarean section (RR 1.08; 95% CI 1.03-1.13) but lower risks of small for gestational age (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.74-0.95) and perinatal mortality (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.58-0.86). Increased risks of LGA and PTB after frozen blastocyst transfer persisted in the sensitivity analysis, which also showed a significantly increased risk of PTB after fresh blastocyst transfer. Cumulative meta-analyses revealed consistency in prevalence and magnitude of risks for a number of years. Data on other perinatal outcomes are still evolving.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

While the available evidence is predominantly reassuring in the context of blastocyst-stage embryo transfer, observational data suggest that blastocyst transfer is associated with a higher risk of LGA. This holds true irrespective of fresh or frozen transfer. Meta-analysis of adjusted data showed an increased risk of PTB with fresh and frozen blastocyst transfer. However, the quality of available evidence ranges from low to very low. Although blastocyst-stage embryo transfer remains the default position in most centres, based on individual risk profile we may need to consider cleavage-stage embryo transfer in some to mitigate the risk of LGA/PTB.

Blastocyst versus cleavage transfers: who benefits?

PURPOSE

This retrospective cohort study determined the relative efficacy of blastocyst and cleavage-stage transfers in patients with differing numbers of zygotes.

METHODS

A total of 1116 women whose embryo transfers were planned independently of patient characteristics were included. Cleavage-stage (D3) and blastocyst-stage (D5) transfer outcomes were analyzed per number of zygotes. The D5 group included transfer cancellations as the intention-to-treat population. The effect of the embryo transfer date on the clinical outcomes (clinical pregnancy and implantation rates) was analyzed using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among the patients, 584 and 532 underwent D3 and D5 embryo transfers, respectively. The clinical pregnancy rates were significantly higher in D5 patients with ≥ 6 zygotes (25.7% vs 48.3%). The multivariate logistic regression analysis for clinical pregnancy did not show significant differences between the blastocyst and cleavage-stage transfers in patients with ≤ 5 zygotes (0.874 [0.635-1.204]). Compared to the cleavage-stage, blastocyst-stage transfers for patients with ≥ 6 zygotes resulted in a three-fold increase in clinical pregnancy rates (3.122 [1.797-5.425]).

CONCLUSION

Blastocyst transfers were not inferior to cleavage-stage embryo transfers among patients with few zygotes and were preferable for patients with several zygotes.

Genetic counseling prior to assisted reproductive technology

BACKGROUND

Reproductive medicine deals with fertility and is closely related to heredity. In reproductive medicine, it is necessary to provide genetic information for the patients prior to assisted reproductive technology (ART). Japan Society for Reproductive Medicine (JSRM) requires doctors involved in reproductive medicine to have standard knowledge of reproductive genetics and knowledge of reproductive medicine, which is covered in their publication, "required knowledge of reproductive medicine."

METHODS

With the aim of providing straightforward explanations to patients in the clinical situation at pre-ART counseling, we provide the following five topics, such as (a) risk of birth defects in children born with ART, (b) chromosomal abnormalities, (c) Y chromosome microdeletions (YCMs), (d) possible chromosomal abnormal pregnancy in oligospermatozoa requiring ICSI (intracytoplasmic sperm injection), and (e) epigenetic alterations.

MAIN FINDINGS

The frequency of chromosome abnormalities in infertile patients is 0.595%-0.64%. YCMs are observed in 2%-10% of severe oligospermic men. High incidence of spermatozoa with chromosomal abnormalities has been reported in advanced oligospermia and asthenozoospermia that require ICSI. Some epigenetic alterations were reported in the children born with ART.

CONCLUSION

Certain genetic knowledge is important for professionals involved in reproductive medicine, even if they are not genetic experts.

Perinatal outcomes in singleton live births after fresh blastocyst-stage embryo transfer: a retrospective analysis of 67 147 IVF/ICSI cycles

STUDY QUESTION

Are perinatal outcomes different between singleton live births conceived from fresh blastocyst transfer and those following the transfer of fresh cleavage-stage embryos?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Fresh blastocyst transfer does not increase risks of preterm birth (PTB), low/high birth weight or congenital anomaly and does not alter the sex ratio at birth or prejudice the chance of having a healthy baby.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Extended embryo culture is currently considered the best option for embryo selection, but concerns have been raised about increased risks of preterm delivery and large-for-gestational-age (LGA) babies.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on data from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) anonymised and cycle-based dataset in the UK between 1999 and 2011.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Baseline characteristics were compared between in vitro fertilisation (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) blastocyst-stage and cleavage-stage embryo transfer cycles using the χ2 test for categorical/dichotomised covariates and the Mann-Whitney test for continuous covariates. Statistical significance was set at <0.005. Poisson regression and multinomial logistic regression were used to establish relationships between perinatal outcomes and blastocyst-stage embryo transfer or cleavage-stage embryo transfer. Risk ratios (RRs), adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) and their 99.5% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated as a measure of strength of associations. Results were adjusted for clinically relevant covariates. A sub-group analysis included women undergoing their first IVF/ICSI treatment. The level of significance was set at <0.05, and 95% CIs were calculated in the sub-group analysis.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Of a total of 67 147 IVF/ICSI cycles, 11 152 involved blastocyst-stage embryo(s) and 55 995 involved cleavage-stage embryo(s). The two groups were comparable with regards to the risk of PTB (aRR, 1.00; 99.5% CI, 0.79-1.25), very-preterm birth (VPTB) (aRR, 1.00; 99.5% CI, 0.63-1.54), very-low birth weight (VLBW) (aRR, 0.84; 99.5% CI, 0.53-1.34), low birth weight (LBW) (aRR, 0.92; 99.5% CI, 0.73-1.16), high birth weight (HBW) (aRR, 0.94; 99.5% CI, 0.75-1.18) and very-high birth weight (VHBW) (aRR, 1.05; 99.5% CI, 0.66-1.65). The risk of congenital anomaly was 16% higher in the blastocyst-stage group than in the cleavage-stage group, but this was not statistically significant (aRR, 1.16; 99.5% CI, 0.90-1.49). The chance of having a healthy baby (born at term, with a normal birth weight and no congenital anomalies) was not altered by extended culture (aRR, 1.00; 99.5% CI, 0.93-1.07). Extended culture was associated with a marginal increase in the chance having a male baby in the main cycle-based analysis (aRR, 1.04; 99.5% CI, 1.01-1.09) but not in the sub-group analysis of women undergoing their first cycle of treatment (aRR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00-1.08). In the sub-group analysis, the risk of congenital anomalies was significantly higher after blastocyst-stage embryo transfer (aRR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.12-1.81).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

This study is limited by the use of observational data and inability to adjust for key confounders, such as maternal smoking status and body mass index (BMI), which were not recorded in the HFEA dataset. As the main analysis was cycle-based and we were unable to link cycles within women undergoing more than one IVF/ICSI cycle, we undertook a sub-group analysis on women undergoing their first treatment cycle.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Our findings should reassure women undergoing blastocyst-stage embryo transfer. For the first time, we have shown that babies born after blastocyst transfer have a similar chance of being healthy as those born after cleavage-stage embryos transfer.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The research activity of Dr Nicola Marconi was funded by the scholarship 'A. Griffini-J. Miglierina', Fondazione Comunitaria del Varesotto, Provincia di Varese, Italy. The authors do not have any competing interests to disclose.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.