A revised prediction model for natural conception

Evaluating prognosis in unexplained infertility

IMPORTANCE

The diagnosis of unexplained infertility presents a dilemma as it signifies both uncertainty about the cause of infertility and the potential for natural conception. Immediate treatment of all would result in overtreatment. Prediction models estimating the likelihood of natural conception and subsequent live birth can guide treatment decisions.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate if in couples with unexplained infertility, prediction models are effective in guiding treatment decisions.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

This review examines 25 studies that assess prediction models for natural conception in couples with unexplained infertility in terms of derivation, validation, and impact analysis.

FINDINGS

The largest prediction models have been integrated in the synthesis models of Hunault, which includes female age and infertility duration, having been pregnant before and motile sperm percentage. Despite its limited discriminative capacity, this model demonstrates excellent calibration. Importantly, the impact of the Hunault model has been evaluated in randomized clinical trials, and shows that in couples with unexplained infertility and 12-month natural conception chances exceeding 30%, immediate treatment with intrauterine insemination (IUI) and controlled ovarian hyperstimulation is not better than expectant management for 6 months. Below the threshold of 30%, treatment with IUI is superior over expectant management, but immediate in vitro fertilization was not better than IUI.

CONCLUSION

In couples with unexplained infertility and a good prognosis for natural conception, treatment can be delayed, whereas in couples with a poor prognosis, immediate treatment (with IUI-controlled ovarian hyperstimulation) is warranted.

RELEVANCE

These data indicate that in couples with unexplained infertility, integration of prediction models into clinical decision making can optimize treatment selection and maximize fertility outcomes while limiting unnecessary treatment.

Should we adopt a prognosis-based approach to unexplained infertility?

The treatment of unexplained infertility is a contentious topic that continues to attract a great deal of interest amongst clinicians, patients and policy makers. The inability to identify an underlying pathology makes it difficult to devise effective treatments for this condition. Couples with unexplained infertility can conceive on their own and any proposed intervention needs to offer a better chance of having a baby. Over the years, several prognostic and prediction models based on routinely collected clinical data have been developed, but these are not widely used by clinicians and patients. In this opinion paper, we propose a prognosis-based approach such that a decision to access treatment is based on the estimated chances of natural and treatment-related conception, which, in the same couple, can change over time. This approach avoids treating all couples as a homogeneous group and minimizes unnecessary treatment whilst ensuring access to those who need it early.

An individualized decision between physical therapy or surgery for patients with degenerative meniscal tears cannot be based on continuous treatment selection markers: a marker-by-treatment analysis of the ESCAPE study

PURPOSE

Marker-by-treatment analyses are promising new methods in internal medicine, but have not yet been implemented in orthopaedics. With this analysis, specific cut-off points may be obtained, that can potentially identify whether meniscal surgery or physical therapy is the superior intervention for an individual patient. This study aimed to introduce a novel approach in orthopaedic research to identify relevant treatment selection markers that affect treatment outcome following meniscal surgery or physical therapy in patients with degenerative meniscal tears.

METHODS

Data were analysed from the ESCAPE trial, which assessed the treatment of patients over 45 years old with a degenerative meniscal tear. The treatment outcome of interest was a clinically relevant improvement on the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form at 3, 12, and 24 months follow-up. Logistic regression models were developed to predict the outcome using baseline characteristics (markers), the treatment (meniscal surgery or physical therapy), and a marker-by-treatment interaction term. Interactions with p < 0.10 were considered as potential treatment selection markers and used these to develop predictiveness curves which provide thresholds to identify marker-based differences in clinical outcomes between the two treatments.

RESULTS

Potential treatment selection markers included general physical health, pain during activities, knee function, BMI, and age. While some marker-based thresholds could be identified at 3, 12, and 24 months follow-up, none of the baseline characteristics were consistent markers at all three follow-up times.

CONCLUSION

This novel in-depth analysis did not result in clear clinical subgroups of patients who are substantially more likely to benefit from either surgery or physical therapy. However, this study may serve as an exemplar for other orthopaedic trials to investigate the heterogeneity in treatment effect. It will help clinicians to quantify the additional benefit of one treatment over another at an individual level, based on the patient's baseline characteristics.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Age-related natural fertility outcomes in women over 35 years: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis

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.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

S.J.C. received funding from the University of Adelaide Summer Research Scholarship. B.W.M. is supported by a NHMRC Investigator grant (GNT1176437), B.W.M. reports consultancy for ObsEva, Merck, Merck KGaA, iGenomix and Guerbet. B.W.M. reports research support by Merck and Guerbet.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018096552.

Tubal flushing with oil- or water-based contrast medium: can we identify markers that indicate treatment benefit?

STUDY QUESTION

Can we identify patient characteristics that distinguish which ovulatory infertile women undergoing hysterosalpingography (HSG) benefit more or less from flushing with oil-based contrast medium compared to water-based contrast medium?

SUMMARY ANSWER

In ovulatory infertile women, HSG with oil-based contrast medium resulted in higher 6-month ongoing pregnancy and live birth rates as compared to HSG with water-based contrast medium and this treatment effect was independent of characteristics of the couple.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

We recently showed that in infertile women undergoing HSG, flushing with oil-based contrast medium resulted in more ongoing pregnancies than flushing with water-based contrast medium.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

We used data from our randomized clinical trial (RCT) in which 1,119 ovulatory infertile women undergoing HSG during fertility work-up were randomized for use of oil-based (N = 557) or water-based (N = 562) contrast medium.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

We built logistic regression models to predict ongoing pregnancy and live birth (secondary outcome) as a function of the specific contrast, the specific marker, and marker-by-contrast-interaction. Markers considered were female age, maternal ethnicity, female smoking, body mass index (BMI), duration of infertility, infertility being primary or secondary, sperm quality, and previous appendectomy.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The 6-month ongoing pregnancy rates in the overall population were 39.7% after use of oil-based contrast versus 29.1% after use of water-based contrast medium [relative risk (RR), 1.37; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.16–1.61; P < 0.001]. Among the studied baseline characteristics, BMI (P = 0.002) and semen volume (P = 0.02) were statistically significant prognosticators. The treatment effect of oil-based contrast was stronger in women with a BMI ≤30 kg/m² [RR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.23–1.92; P = 0.002], and in women whose partner had a semen volume >3 ml [RR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.28–2.46; P = 0.02]. Also, in women who smoked, the treatment effect of flushing with oil was stronger, but this interaction did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.066). We found no positive effect of oil-based contrast in obese women. We found similar but weaker associations for live birth, which was probably due to lower number of events resulting in less power.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The RCT was restricted to infertile ovulatory women younger than 39 years of age without endocrinological disorders and at low risk for tubal pathology. Our results should not be generalized to infertile women who do not share these features.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

All infertile, ovulatory women younger than 39 years with a low risk for tubal pathology will benefit from an HSG with oil-based contrast; therefore, this should be offered to them after fertility work-up.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The original H2Oil RCT was an investigator-initiated study that was funded by the two academic institutions (AMC and VUmc) of the Amsterdam UMC. The study displayed in this paper was funded by an unconditional research grant from Guerbet. B.W.M. is supported by an NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). K.D. reports consultancy for Guerbet, during the conduct of the study, and also reports research grants from Guerbet. C.B.L. reports grants from Guerbet, during the conduct of the study, and grants from Ferring, grants from Merck, and personal fees from Ferring, outside the submitted work. P.H. reports grants from Guerbet, during the conduct of the study, and grants from Ferring and Merck, outside the submitted work. V.M. reports receiving travel and speakers fee as well as research grants from Guerbet. B.W.M. reports consultancy for ObsEva, Merck, Merck KGaA, and Guerbet, and research grants from Guerbet and Merck. The other authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NTR 3270 www.trialregister.nl

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

1 February 2012.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT

3 February 2012.

Optimization of laboratory procedures for intrauterine insemination: survey of methods in relation to clinical outcome

BACKGROUND

There is a wide practice variation of used methods and outcomes in IUI in fertility laboratories. Standardization of the IUI procedure is important for reducing inconsistency among laboratories in counseling infertile couples and in pregnancy results. The aim of the study was to evaluate the currently used laboratory procedures of IUI in Dutch fertility laboratories and their effect on IUI pregnancy results. Additionally, the methods for semen analysis (SA) were evaluated, as SA is related to IUI in terms of inseminated sperm number and IUI counseling.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This questionnaire survey study was sent to laboratories participating in the Dutch external quality control program for semen analysis (SKML) and consisted of 46 questions concerning laboratory management, methods for semen analysis and IUI, and clinical results. The results were analyzed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 52 laboratories (out of 99) provided information on used methodologies for SA or laboratory procedures of IUI and the organization of the laboratory. A wide variability was confirmed in used methods for both SA and IUI. Evaluation of pregnancy results obtained during 3 years (2013-2015) showed that specific used laboratory methods have a significant effect on the probability of becoming pregnant.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Important to remark is that in this survey study cycle-specific data, including variables of the individual couples (age, stimulation protocol, etc), were not included and may have effects on the results. The reported results provide an overview of the current practice performance; however, the organization of fertility laboratories is changing rapidly. The use of standardized methods in IUI is important for optimizing the performance of care and improving pregnancy results. The knowledge on used procedures, however, is limited, and further research on factors involving SA and the IUI procedure is necessary.