Two of a kind? Immunological and clinical risk factors differ between recurrent implantation failure and recurrent miscarriage

Pregnancy Outcomes in Non-Criteria Obstetric Antiphospholipid Syndrome: Analysis of a Cohort of 91 Patients

Background: The clinical and laboratory features of patients with non-criteria obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome (NC-OAPS), as well as their pregnancy outcomes and ideal treatment are not clearly determined. The aim of this study is to describe the characteristics and outcomes of pregnancies in NC-OAPS and compare them with an obstetric APS (OAPS) cohort. Methods: This is a retrospective study conducted on a cohort of women referred to a high-risk obstetric unit of a tertiary hospital. Women that were classified as having OAPS or NC-OAPS were included and compared in terms of clinical and laboratory characteristics, management, and subsequent pregnancy outcomes. Results: We identified 107 women with 143 pregnancies, 91 with NC-OAPS and 16 with OAPS. There were no differences in demographic features between both groups. Women with NC-OAPS were more likely to have recurrent implantation failure and were predominantly positive for a single antiphospholipid antibody (aPL) subtype. Both groups were treated similarly (low dose aspirin plus low molecular weight heparin in 87.4% of NC-OAPS and 83.3% of OAPS, p > 0.05). Live birth rate (82.4% and 75.0%, respectively, p > 0.05) and adverse pregnancy outcomes (31.6% vs. 37.5%, p > 0.05) in subsequent pregnancies during follow-up were also similar between groups. Conclusions: This study revealed differences in the previous pregnancy morbidity and aPL profiles in women with NC-OAPS and OAPS, although the therapeutic approach and the outcomes of subsequent pregnancies were similar in both groups.

Innate and adaptive immune dysregulation in women with recurrent implantation failure

Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) is a condition where a woman fails to obtain pregnancy after multiple embryo transfer cycles, even with superior-quality blastocysts. There are various factors that can contribute to RIF, including immunologic disturbances. The immune system is extremely important during pregnancy. Immune cells such as T cells, B cells, natural killer (NK) cells, and macrophages (MQ) are present in the female reproductive tract and are accountable for regulating the immune response to invading pathogens and maintaining tissue homeostasis. Dysregulation of these immune cells can lead to inflammation, which can impair fertility. One of the most common immunological disturbances observed in RIF is an altered Th1/Th2 ratio, along with changes in NK cell and macrophage numbers. In addition, the presence of some antibodies, such as anti-ovarian antibodies, can also contribute to RIF. Interleukins have been implicated in the development of an inflammatory response that can interfere with successful embryo implantation. As a result, a comprehensive understanding of immunological compartments in RIF women could assist us in determining the immunological origins of this disease. We will discuss immunological factors that might contribute to RIF etiology, including cellular and molecular components.

Clinical Relevance of Vaginal and Endometrial Microbiome Investigation in Women with Repeated Implantation Failure and Recurrent Pregnancy Loss

Recent studies have investigated if and how the vaginal and endometrial microbiome might affect endometrial receptivity and reproductive health. Although there is no consensus on the existence of a core uterine microbiome yet, evidence shows that the dominance of Lactobacillus spp. in the female reproductive tract is generally associated with eubiosis and improved chances of successful implantation and an ongoing pregnancy. Conversely, vaginal and endometrial dysbiosis can cause local inflammation and an increase of pro-inflammatory cytokines, compromising the integrity and receptivity of the endometrial mucosa and potentially hampering successful embryonic implantation. This review provides a critical appraisal of the influence of the vaginal and endometrial microbiome as parts of the female reproductive tract on fertility outcomes, focusing on repeated implantation failure (RIF) and recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL). It seems that RIF as well as RPL are both associated with an increase in microbiome diversity and a loss of Lactobacillus dominance in the lower female reproductive system.

NK and T Cell Subtypes in the Endometrium of Patients with Recurrent Pregnancy Loss and Recurrent Implantation Failure: Implications for Pregnancy Success

BACKGROUND

RPL and RIF are challenges in reproductive medicine. The immune system plays a pivotal role in endometrial receptivity, successful implantation, and pregnancy complications. Immunological changes have been associated with RPL and RIF. Understanding immune dysregulation especially in NK and T cell subtypes may lead to better diagnostic concepts and treatments. From July 2019 to August 2020 patients with RPL and RIF underwent a standardized diagnostic procedure including endometrial biopsies. Immune cell analysis was performed using flow cytometry. Patients were contacted in March 2023 and interviewed concerning their pregnancy outcomes following diagnostics.

RESULTS

Out of 68 patients undergoing endometrial biopsies, 49 patients were finally included. Live birth rates were high with 72% in RPL and 86% in RIF. Immune cell analysis revealed that patients with RPL had more cytotoxic CD56dimCD16high cells, while RIF patients had more CD56+ uNK cells. RPL patients with pregnancy complications showed increased NKT cell percentages.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest specific immune changes in RPL and RIF patients, offering potential therapeutic targets. Tailored immunotherapy based on endometrial immunophenotyping might be an option, but further research is needed.

ESHRE good practice recommendations on recurrent implantation failure

STUDY QUESTION

How should recurrent implantation failure (RIF) in patients undergoing ART be defined and managed?

SUMMARY ANSWER

This is the first ESHRE good practice recommendations paper providing a definition for RIF together with recommendations on how to investigate causes and contributing factors, and how to improve the chances of a pregnancy.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

RIF is a challenge in the ART clinic, with a multitude of investigations and interventions offered and applied in clinical practice, often without biological rationale or with unequivocal evidence of benefit.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

This document was developed according to a predefined methodology for ESHRE good practice recommendations. Recommendations are supported by data from the literature, if available, and the results of a previously published survey on clinical practice in RIF and the expertise of the working group. A literature search was performed in PubMed and Cochrane focussing on 'recurrent reproductive failure', 'recurrent implantation failure', and 'repeated implantation failure'.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

The ESHRE Working Group on Recurrent Implantation Failure included eight members representing the ESHRE Special Interest Groups for Implantation and Early Pregnancy, Reproductive Endocrinology, and Embryology, with an independent chair and an expert in statistics. The recommendations for clinical practice were formulated based on the expert opinion of the working group, while taking into consideration the published data and results of the survey on uptake in clinical practice. The draft document was then open to ESHRE members for online peer review and was revised in light of the comments received.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The working group recommends considering RIF as a secondary phenomenon of ART, as it can only be observed in patients undergoing IVF, and that the following description of RIF be adopted: 'RIF describes the scenario in which the transfer of embryos considered to be viable has failed to result in a positive pregnancy test sufficiently often in a specific patient to warrant consideration of further investigations and/or interventions'. It was agreed that the recommended threshold for the cumulative predicted chance of implantation to identify RIF for the purposes of initiating further investigation is 60%. When a couple have not had a successful implantation by a certain number of embryo transfers and the cumulative predicted chance of implantation associated with that number is greater than 60%, then they should be counselled on further investigation and/or treatment options. This term defines clinical RIF for which further actions should be considered. Nineteen recommendations were formulated on investigations when RIF is suspected, and 13 on interventions. Recommendations were colour-coded based on whether the investigations/interventions were recommended (green), to be considered (orange), or not recommended, i.e. not to be offered routinely (red).

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

While awaiting the results of further studies and trials, the ESHRE Working Group on Recurrent Implantation Failure recommends identifying RIF based on the chance of successful implantation for the individual patient or couple and to restrict investigations and treatments to those supported by a clear rationale and data indicating their likely benefit.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This article provides not only good practice advice but also highlights the investigations and interventions that need further research. This research, when well-conducted, will be key to making progress in the clinical management of RIF.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The meetings and technical support for this project were funded by ESHRE. N.M. declared consulting fees from ArtPRED (The Netherlands) and Freya Biosciences (Denmark); Honoraria for lectures from Gedeon Richter, Merck, Abbott, and IBSA; being co-founder of Verso Biosense. He is Co-Chief Editor of Reproductive Biomedicine Online (RBMO). D.C. declared being an Associate Editor of Human Reproduction Update, and declared honoraria for lectures from Merck, Organon, IBSA, and Fairtility; support for attending meetings from Cooper Surgical, Fujifilm Irvine Scientific. G.G. declared that he or his institution received financial or non-financial support for research, lectures, workshops, advisory roles, or travelling from Ferring, Merck, Gedeon-Richter, PregLem, Abbott, Vifor, Organon, MSD, Coopersurgical, ObsEVA, and ReprodWissen. He is an Editor of the journals Archives of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biomedicine Online, and Editor in Chief of Journal Gynäkologische Endokrinologie. He is involved in guideline developments and quality control on national and international level. G.L. declared he or his institution received honoraria for lectures from Merck, Ferring, Vianex/Organon, and MSD. He is an Associate Editor of Human Reproduction Update, immediate past Coordinator of Special Interest Group for Reproductive Endocrinology of ESHRE and has been involved in Guideline Development Groups of ESHRE and national fertility authorities. D.J.M. declared being an Associate Editor for Human Reproduction Open and statistical Advisor for Reproductive Biomedicine Online. B.T. declared being shareholder of Reprognostics and she or her institution received financial or non-financial support for research, clinical trials, lectures, workshops, advisory roles or travelling from support for attending meetings from Ferring, MSD, Exeltis, Merck Serono, Bayer, Teva, Theramex and Novartis, Astropharm, Ferring. The other authors had nothing to disclose.

DISCLAIMER

This Good Practice Recommendations (GPR) document represents the views of ESHRE, which are the result of consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders and are based on the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. ESHRE GPRs should be used for information and educational purposes. They should not be interpreted as setting a standard of care or be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care, or be exclusive of other methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. They do not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, or variations based on locality and facility type. Furthermore, ESHRE GPRs do not constitute or imply the endorsement, or favouring, of any of the included technologies by ESHRE.

Effect of low-molecular-weight heparin in women undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) and recurrent implantation failure (RIF) during in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment are still tough problems without effective treatments; thus, they are important research topics. There is controversy on whether low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) improves pregnancy outcomes in women with unexplained RPL and RIF. Moreover, currently, there is a paucity of reports on the role of LMWH in the entire population undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles. This study aimed to estimate the effects of LMWH on pregnancy outcomes in women undergoing FET cycles.

METHODS

There were 1881 female patients included in the study. Of the 1881 patients, 107 underwent preimplantation genetic diagnosis cycles, which were analyzed individually. The patients were divided into two groups: the LMWH group received injections of 4100 IU/d LMWH from the day of transfer until 14 ± 2 days posttransplant, the control group was the comparison group (without LMWH use). The baseline characteristics and reproductive outcomes of the patients were reviewed.

RESULTS

Of the 1774 women with normal FET cycles, no significant differences were found in the number of embryos implanted (1.31 ± 0.02 vs. 1.28 ± 0.02), embryo implantation rate, biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate, late abortion rate, and ectopic pregnancy rate between the two groups. The LMWH group had a higher early abortion (17.8% [76/427] vs. 12.5% [55/439], p = 0.030). In the sub-group analysis, among the patients who underwent more than four transfers, the LMWH group had a lower late abortion rate (1.7% [1/60] vs. 13.2% [7/53], p = 0.043). Similarly, of the 107 women who underwent preimplantation genetic diagnosis cycles, the reproductive outcomes were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In the general population and PGD patients, LMWH did not improve pregnancy outcomes. Therefore, the routine use of LMWH is not recommended for early treatment.

Immunophenotyping of peripheral blood monocytes could help identify a baseline pro-inflammatory profile in women with recurrent reproductive failure

Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) and recurrent implantation failure (RIF) are two well-defined clinical entities, but the role of the monocytes in their pathophysiology needs to be clarified. This study aimed to evaluate the role of the three monocyte subsets (classical, intermediate, and non-classical) and relevant cytokines/chemokines in a cohort of RPL and RIF women to better characterize a baseline proinflammatory profile that could define inflammatory pathophysiology in these two different conditions. We evaluated 108 non-pregnant women: 53 RPL, 24 RIF, and 31 fertile healthy controls (HC). Multiparametric flow cytometry was used to quantify the frequency of surface chemokine receptors (CCR2, CCR5, and CX3CR1) on the monocyte subsets. Cytokines were assessed in plasma samples using a multiplex assay. The CX3CR1⁺ and CCR5⁺ intermediate monocytes were significantly higher in RPL and RIF compared to HC. A significant positive correlation was observed between CX3CR1⁺ intermediate monocytes and IL-17A (P = .03, r = 0.43). The Boruta algorithm followed by a multivariate logistic regression model was used to select the most relevant variables that could help define RPL and RIF: in RPL were CX3CR1 non-classical monocytes, TGF-β1, and CCR5 intermediate monocytes; in RIF: CCR5 intermediate monocytes and TGF-β3. The combination of these variables could predict RPL and RIF with 90 % and 82 %, respectively. Our study suggests that a combination of specific blood monocyte subsets and cytokines could aid in identifying RPL and RIF women with a pro-inflammatory profile. These findings could provide a more integrated understanding of these pathologies. Further investigation and validation in independent cohorts are warranted.

Recurrent Miscarriage: Diagnostic and Therapeutic Procedures. Guideline of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG (S2k-Level, AWMF Registry No. 015/050, May 2022)

Purpose The aim of this guideline is to standardize the diagnosis and therapy of recurrent miscarriage (RM) using evidence from the recent literature. This is done by using consistent definitions, objective evaluations and standardized treatment protocols.

Methods When this guideline was compiled, special consideration was given to previous recommendations in prior versions of this guideline and the recommendations of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, and a detailed individual search of the literature about the different topics was carried out.

Recommendations Recommendations about the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures offered to couples with RM were developed based on the international literature. Special attention was paid to known risk factors such as chromosomal, anatomical, endocrinological, physiological coagulation, psychological, infectious and immune disorders. Recommendations were also developed for those cases where investigations are unable to find any abnormality (idiopathic RM).

Biology of cancer; from cellular and molecular mechanisms to developmental processes and adaptation

Cancer research has been largely focused on the cellular and molecular levels of investigation. Recent data show that not only the cell but also the extracellular matrix plays a major role in the progression of malignancy. In this way, the cells and the extracellular matrix create a specific local microenvironment that supports malignant development. At the same time, cancer implies a systemic evolution which is closely related to developmental processes and adaptation. Consequently, there is currently a real gap between the local investigation of cancer at the microenvironmental level, and the pathophysiological approach to cancer as a systemic disease. In fact, the cells and the matrix are not only complementary structures but also interdependent components that act synergistically. Such relationships lead to cell-matrix integration, a supracellular form of biological organization that supports tissue development. The emergence of this supracellular level of organization, as a structure, leads to the emergence of the supracellular control of proliferation, as a supracellular function. In humans, proliferation is generally involved in developmental processes and adaptation. These processes suppose a specific configuration at the systemic level, which generates high-order guidance for local supracellular control of proliferation. In conclusion, the supracellular control of proliferation act as an interface between the downstream level of cell division and differentiation, and upstream level of developmental processes and adaptation. Understanding these processes and their disorders is useful not only to complete the big picture of malignancy as a systemic disease, but also to open new treatment perspectives in the form of etiopathogenic (supracellular or informational) therapies.

The Role of Endometrial Stem/Progenitor Cells in Recurrent Reproductive Failure

Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) and recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL), collectively referred to as recurrent reproductive failure (RRF), are both challenging conditions with many unanswered questions relating to causes and management options. Both conditions are proposed to be related to an aberrant endometrial microenvironment, with different proposed aetiologies related to a restrictive or permissive endometrium for an invading embryo. The impressive regenerative capacity of the human endometrium has been well-established and has led to the isolation and characterisation of several subtypes of endometrial stem/progenitor cells (eSPCs). eSPCs are known to be involved in the pathogenesis of endometrium-related disorders (such as endometriosis) and have been proposed to be implicated in the pathogenesis of RRF. This review appraises the current knowledge of eSPCs, and their involvement in RRF, highlighting the considerable unknown aspects in this field, and providing avenues for future research to facilitate much-needed advances in the diagnosis and management of millions of women suffering with RRF.

Uterine microbiota plasticity during the menstrual cycle: Differences between healthy controls and patients with recurrent miscarriage or implantation failure

In contrast to the former notion of a sterile womb, sequencing techniques have proven a bacterial colonization of the uterus. However, timing of microbiota analysis regarding possible intra-cycle variations as well as specific alterations in patients with recurrent miscarriage (RM) or recurrent implantation failure (RIF) remain unknown. In total, n = 20 RM-, n = 20 RIF-patients and n = 10 healthy controls were included in this prospective study. In every subject, uterine flushing was performed during follicular, ovulatory and luteal phase. Bacterial DNA was isolated and 16S amplicon sequencing analysis of the V3-V4 region was carried out. Diversity measures were compared between samples from the disease groups and the control group separately for each timepoint of the menstrual cycle and over time. In the control group a significant decrease of species richness and evenness was shown around ovulation which remained at this lower level during the luteal phase (Shannon index), indicating a more uniform distribution of microbiota (p < 0.05). This loss of diversity during the menstrual cycle was not apparent in RIF and RM patients. A higher similarity was seen in taxonomic distribution between RM and RIF patients compared to the control group. Longitudinal dynamics included increases in Firmicutes (controls and RM only) and a concomitant loss of Proteobacteria in controls that was not present in RIF and RM. We demonstrate longitudinal intra-cycle-dependent changes in the endometrial microbiota of healthy controls. An increased diversity in both patient groups could be the cause or consequence of a micro-environment that is more prone to pregnancy failures.

Antiphospholipid antibodies in women with recurrent embryo implantation failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) are related to poor pregnancy outcomes, but their effect on embryo implantation is unclear. We aimed to assess the prevalence of different aPL in women with recurrent implantation failure (RIF).

METHODS

We searched studies in PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus and Cochrane Library. Quality of studies was scored by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and risk of bias assessment by items described in RevMan5 software. Statistical analyses were made using random-effects model and presented as pooled Odds Ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed by I²% and D²%.

RESULTS

This systematic review and meta-analysis included 17 studies and showed a high degree of variability in aPL positivity in RIF. In the latter, the risk of bias assessment suggested unclear bias on study performance with a median sample size and interquartile range for RIF patients and fertile women of 96 (57-417) and 100 (60.5-202.5), respectively. Among the criteria aPL, IgG anticardiolipin autoantibodies (OR 5.02, 95% CI [1.95, 12.93]) were associated with RIF. Within the non-criteria aPL, anti-β2 glycoprotein I-IgA (OR 64.8, 95% CI [9.74, 431.0]), and antiphosphatidylglycerol-IgG and IgM (OR 10.74, 95% CI [5.25, 22.0]; OR 4.26, 95% CI [1.76,10.31]; respectively) were associated with RIF, too.

CONCLUSIONS

Anticardiolipin-IgG is a prevalent autoantibody in women with RIF. Three other non-criteria aPL, aβ2GP I-IgA, aPG-IgG and aPG-IgM also present a positive rate in RIF. Overall, these results advise about testing them as indicators of RIF risk in women seeking IVF treatment.

A review of the pathophysiology of recurrent implantation failure

Implantation is a critical step in human reproduction. The success of this step is dependent on a competent blastocyst, receptive endometrium, and successful cross talk between the embryonic and maternal interfaces. Recurrent implantation failure is the lack of implantation after the transfer of several embryo transfers. As the success of in vitro fertilization has increased and failures have become more unacceptable for patients and providers, the literature on recurrent implantation failure has increased. While this clinical phenomenon is often encountered, there is not a universally agreed-on definition-something addressed in an earlier portion of this Views and Reviews. Implantation failure can result from several different factors. In this review, we discuss factors including the maternal immune system, genetics of the embryo and parents, anatomic factors, hematologic factors, reproductive tract microbiome, and endocrine milieu, which factors into embryo and endometrial synchrony. These potential causes are at various stages of research and not all have clear implications or immediately apparent treatment.

Definition, diagnostic and therapeutic options in recurrent implantation failure: an international survey of clinicians and embryologists

STUDY QUESTION

What is the global variability in recurrent implantation failure (RIF) definition, investigation and therapy, currently offered to patients undergoing IVF?

SUMAMRY ANSWER

Definitions, diagnostic investigations and treatments offered to RIF patients differ widely amongst assisted reproduction healthcare professionals and clinical guidelines on RIF are urgently needed.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

RIF affects around 10% of patients undergoing IVF worldwide. There is no consensus on the definition of RIF, its diagnostic investigations or the therapeutic options, which leads to inconsistencies in clinical practice.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A cross-sectional study of clinicians and embryologists was conducted between May and June 2020. The survey included 43 questions aimed at understanding participants' background and their current practice with regards to defining, investigating and managing RIF. The questions were designed by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) Special Interest Group (SIG) on implantation and early pregnancy following three consensus meetings.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

A total of 8579 ESHRE members from 6916 IVF centers were invited to participate using two global email calls based on their pre-specified interest in implantation and early pregnancy. SurveyMonkey and SPSS were used for data collection and analysis, respectively. Furthermore, differences were reported in the answers of European and non-European professionals, as well as between public and private settings and among clinicians clustered according to the average number of RIF patients treated per year.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The final data set included 735 clinicians and 300 embryologist or IVF-biologists. The majority defines RIF based on the number of failed embryo transfers (ETs) with the most common threshold adopted being three ETs both fresh and frozen. More than two-thirds take lifestyle factors into account, mainly drugs, smoking and BMI. The highest consensus on which diagnostic investigations should be performed was reached for anatomical malformations and gynecological aspects focusing on hydrosalpinx, Asherman's syndrome, endometrial thickness and endometriosis. Concerning treatment of RIF patients, the highest consensus was reached for preconceptional therapies, including BMI adjustment, smoking and endometritis followed by therapies during IVF procedures.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The response rate was relatively low, but comparable to other surveys.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

A consensus on definition, diagnosis and treatment of RIF would help to reduce costly, time-consuming and poorly validated approaches.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No external funding was used. B.T. received support from Bayer for Clinical trials concerning endometriosis and Ferring for clinical trials concerning ovarian stimulation. She received reimbursement for travel expenses from Astropharm, Ferring. Dr Kade and is a shareholder of Reprognostics. She is a board member of the Austrian Society for Obstetrics and Gynecology (OEGGG), the associate head of the 'Reproduktionsmedizinische Zentren Baden-Württemberg' (RZBW), a member of guideline group of the German Society for Obstetrics and Gynecology (DGGG) and an editorial board member of the following journals: American Journal of Reproductive Immunology (AJRI), Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics. All the other authors declare no conflict of interest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Functional NK surrogate biomarkers for inflammatory recurrent pregnancy loss and recurrent implantation failure

PROBLEM

Expansion of circulating NK cells has been related to pregnancy complications. This study aims at investigating several surface NK cell markers to identify a baseline inflammatory profile in women with recurrent pregnancy loss (iRPL) and recurrent implantation failure (iRIF).

METHOD OF STUDY

Expression of NKp30, TIGIT, NKp46, and DNAM-1 on total peripheral blood NK subsets, regulatory (CD56^bright CD16^neg ), and cytotoxic (CD56^dim CD16^pos/neg ) NK cells was measured.

RESULTS

Eighty-three women were recruited and classified into two groups, 58 women with RPL and 25 with RIF. A control group of 31 fertile women was included. Expression of NKp30 on cytNK was significantly higher in RPL (p = .019) and RIF (p < .001) than HC. TIGIT on cytNK cells was also higher in both RPL (p < .001) and RIF (p < .01). An optimal cutoff of 70% for NKp30⁺ cytNK disclosed a sensitivity of 82%, a specificity of 55%, and 83% PPV for RPL diagnosis. A cutoff level of 83% for TIGIT⁺ cytNK was chosen to discriminate between healthy controls and RPL women, with PPV of 84%.

CONCLUSION

Our preliminary data on this RPL and RIF cohorts suggest a simple diagnostic tool by combining NKp30 and TIGIT on cytNK cells to better identify a subgroup of RPL and RIF patients with a baseline inflammatory profile. A more rigorous selection of these patients through phenotyping peripheral cytNK cells may better define patients that could benefit from an immunomodulatory treatment to prevent further pregnancy losses. The performance of these biomarkers requires further investigation and validation in independent cohorts.

Determining Diagnostic Criteria of Unexplained Recurrent Implantation Failure: A Retrospective Study of Two vs Three or More Implantation Failure

BACKGROUND

The definition of recurrent implantation failure (RIF) differs clinically, one of the most controversial diagnostic criteria is the number of failed treatment cycles. We tried to investigate whether the two implantation failure could be included in the diagnostic criteria of RIF.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the clinical data of patients (N=1518) aged under 40 years with two or more implantation failure, recruited from the Center for Reproductive Medicine of the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from January 2016 to June 2019.

RESULTS

After adjusting for confounding factors by using binary logistic regression, the results showed that partial general information and: distribution of associated factors were significant differences such as maternal age (aOR=1.054, P=0.001), type of cycle (aOR=2.040, P<0.001), stage of embryos development (aOR=0.287, P<0.001), number of embryos transferred (aOR=0.184, P<0.001), female factor (tubal pathology) (aOR=0.432, P=0.031) and male factor (aOR=1.734, P=0.002) between the groups with two and three or more unexplained implantation failure. And further explored whether these differential factors had a significant negative impact on pregnancy outcome, the results showed that: for patients who had three unexplained implantation failure, in the fourth cycle of ET, the live birth rate decreased significantly with age (aOR=0.921, P<0.001), and the live birth rate of blastocyst transfer was significantly higher than that of cleavage embryo transfer (aOR=1.826, P=0.007). At their first assisted pregnancy treatment after the diagnosis of RIF according to these two different definitions, there were no significant difference in the biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, ectopic pregnancy rate and abortion rate (P>0.05), but the live birth rate (35.64% vs 42.95%, P=0.004) was significantly different. According to the definition of 'two or more failed treatment cycles', the live birth rate of the first ET treatment after RIF diagnosis was significantly lower than that of patients according to the definition of 'three or more failed treatment cycles'.

CONCLUSION

For patients with unexplained recurrent implantation failure, two implantation failure cannot be included in the diagnostic criteria of RIF. This study supports the generally accepted definition of three or more failed treatment cycles for RIF.