1
|
Van Muylder A, D'Hooghe T, Luyten J. Economic Evaluation of Medically Assisted Reproduction: A Methodological Systematic Review. Med Decis Making 2023; 43:973-991. [PMID: 37621143 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x231188129] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/26/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Medically assisted reproduction (MAR) is a challenging application area for health economic evaluations, entailing a broad range of costs and outcomes, stretching out long-term and accruing to several parties. PURPOSE To systematically review which costs and outcomes are included in published economic evaluations of MAR and to compare these with health technology assessment (HTA) prescriptions about which cost and outcomes should be considered for different evaluation objectives. DATA SOURCES HTA guidelines and systematic searches of PubMed Central, Embase, WOS CC, CINAHL, Cochrane (CENTRAL), HTA, and NHS EED. STUDY SELECTION All economic evaluations of MAR published from 2010 to 2022. DATA EXTRACTION A predetermined data collection form summarized study characteristics. Essential costs and outcomes of MAR were listed based on HTA and treatment guidelines for different evaluation objectives. For each study, included costs and outcomes were reviewed. DATA SYNTHESIS The review identified 93 cost-effectiveness estimates, of which 57% were expressed as cost-per-(healthy)-live-birth, 19% as cost-per-pregnancy, and 47% adopted a clinic perspective. Few adopted societal perspectives and only 2% used quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Broader evaluations omitted various relevant costs and outcomes related to MAR. There are several cost and outcome categories for which available HTA guidelines do not provide conclusive directions regarding inclusion or exclusion. LIMITATIONS Studies published before 2010 and of interventions not clearly labeled as MAR were excluded. We focus on methods rather than which MAR treatments are cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS Economic evaluations of MAR typically calculate a short-term cost-per-live-birth from a clinic perspective. Broader analyses, using cost-per-QALY or BCRs from societal perspectives, considering the full scope of reproduction-related costs and outcomes, are scarce and often incomplete. We provide a summary of costs and outcomes for future research guidance and identify areas requiring HTA methodological development. HIGHLIGHTS The cost-effectiveness of MAR procedures can be exceptionally complex to estimate as there is a broad range of costs and outcomes involved, in principle stretching out over multiple generations and over many stakeholders.We list 21 key areas of costs and outcomes of MAR. Which of these needs to be accounted for alters for different evaluation objectives (determined by the type of economic evaluation, time horizon considered, and perspective).Published studies mostly investigate cost-effectiveness in the very short-term, from a clinic perspective, expressed as cost-per-live-birth. There is a lack of comprehensive economic evaluations that adopt a broader perspective with a longer time horizon. The broader the evaluation objective, the more relevant costs and outcomes were excluded.For several costs and outcomes, particularly those relevant for broader, societal evaluations of MAR, the inclusion or exclusion is theoretically ambiguous, and HTA guidelines do not offer sufficient guidance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Astrid Van Muylder
- Department Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium (AVM, JL); Research Group Reproductive Medicine, Department of Development and Regeneration, Organ Systems, Group Biomedical Sciences, KU Leuven (University of Leuven), Belgium (TD); Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA (TD); Global Medical Affairs Fertility, Research and Development, Merck Healthcare KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany (TD). The review was written at the Leuven Institute for Healthcare Policy. It was presented at the ESHRE 38th Annual Meeting (Milan 2022). The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Astrid Van Muylder and Jeroen Luyten have no conflicting interests to declare. The participation of Thomas D'Hooghe to this publication is part of his academic work; he does not see a conflict of interest as Merck KGaA was not involved in writing this article. The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: We acknowledge an internal funding from KU Leuven for this study. The funding agreement ensured the authors' independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report. The following authors are employed by the sponsor: Astrid Van Muylder and Jeroen Luyten
| | - Thomas D'Hooghe
- Department Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium (AVM, JL); Research Group Reproductive Medicine, Department of Development and Regeneration, Organ Systems, Group Biomedical Sciences, KU Leuven (University of Leuven), Belgium (TD); Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA (TD); Global Medical Affairs Fertility, Research and Development, Merck Healthcare KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany (TD). The review was written at the Leuven Institute for Healthcare Policy. It was presented at the ESHRE 38th Annual Meeting (Milan 2022). The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Astrid Van Muylder and Jeroen Luyten have no conflicting interests to declare. The participation of Thomas D'Hooghe to this publication is part of his academic work; he does not see a conflict of interest as Merck KGaA was not involved in writing this article. The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: We acknowledge an internal funding from KU Leuven for this study. The funding agreement ensured the authors' independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report. The following authors are employed by the sponsor: Astrid Van Muylder and Jeroen Luyten
| | - Jeroen Luyten
- Department Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium (AVM, JL); Research Group Reproductive Medicine, Department of Development and Regeneration, Organ Systems, Group Biomedical Sciences, KU Leuven (University of Leuven), Belgium (TD); Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA (TD); Global Medical Affairs Fertility, Research and Development, Merck Healthcare KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany (TD). The review was written at the Leuven Institute for Healthcare Policy. It was presented at the ESHRE 38th Annual Meeting (Milan 2022). The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Astrid Van Muylder and Jeroen Luyten have no conflicting interests to declare. The participation of Thomas D'Hooghe to this publication is part of his academic work; he does not see a conflict of interest as Merck KGaA was not involved in writing this article. The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: We acknowledge an internal funding from KU Leuven for this study. The funding agreement ensured the authors' independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report. The following authors are employed by the sponsor: Astrid Van Muylder and Jeroen Luyten
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Tokgoz VY, Sukur YE, Ozmen B, Sonmezer M, Berker B, Aytac R, Atabekoglu CS. Clomiphene Citrate versus Recombinant FSH in intrauterine insemination cycles with mono- or bi-follicular development. JBRA Assist Reprod 2021; 25:383-389. [PMID: 33746515 PMCID: PMC8312288 DOI: 10.5935/1518-0557.20200106] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective: The present study aims to assess the success of controlled ovarian stimulation in intrauterine insemination cycles stimulated by recombinant-FSH and Clomiphene citrate for either mono- or bi-follicular development. Methods: We assessed 870 infertile patients treated with controlled ovarian stimulation in intrauterine insemination cycles at a university-based infertility clinic between January 2012 and December 2017. We compared the cycles stimulated by clomiphene citrate and recombinant-FSH in two set-ups; mono- and bi-follicular development. The main outcome measure was the clinical pregnancy rate per cycle. Results: The demographic and cycle parameters were similar between the groups, except for endometrial thickness on the day of hCG administration, which was higher in the recombinant-FSH group than the clomiphene citrate group. The overall clinical pregnancy rates in clomiphene citrate and recombinant-FSH groups were 9.8% and 10.3%, respectively (p=0.940). Regarding the entire cohort, clinical pregnancy was significantly higher in cases of bi-follicular development when compared to mono-follicular development (16.8% vs. 10.2%, respectively; p=0.009). Conclusions: Clomiphene citrate and recombinant-FSH have similar success rates in terms of clinical pregnancy, in either mono-follicular development or bi-follicular development. Clomiphene citrate and recombinant-FSH cycles resulted in comparable rates of bi-follicular development, which significantly increases clinical pregnancy rate. Clomiphene citrate and recombinant-FSH have similar success rates in terms of clinical pregnancy, in either mono-follicular development or bi-follicular development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vehbi Yavuz Tokgoz
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Eskisehir Osmangazi University Faculty of Medicine, Eskisehir, Turkey
| | - Yavuz Emre Sukur
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Batuhan Ozmen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Murat Sonmezer
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Bulent Berker
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Rusen Aytac
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Cem Somer Atabekoglu
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Affiliation(s)
- Gulam Bahadur
- Reproductive Medicine Unit, North Middlesex University Hospital, Old Admin Block, Sterling Way, London N18 1QX, UK.,Homerton Fertility Unit, Homerton University Hospital, Homerton Row, London E9 6SR, UK
| | - Roy Homburg
- Homerton Fertility Unit, Homerton University Hospital, Homerton Row, London E9 6SR, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bahadur G, Homburg R. Growing body of evidence supports intrauterine insemination as first line treatment and rejects unfounded concerns about its efficacy, risks and cost effectiveness. JBRA Assist Reprod 2019; 23:62-67. [PMID: 30277707 PMCID: PMC6364272 DOI: 10.5935/1518-0557.20180073] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
IUI has been practiced for five decades but only three unconvincing trials attempted to demonstrate the superiority of IUI over sexual intercourse (SI). In the absence of evidence of its effectiveness, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) recommended IVF over IUI after 2 years of unprotected SI. High-quality recent data in well-constructed studies suggest that biases against IUI procedures and in favour of IVF are invalid. It is unethical to continue to misinform patients and stakeholders. The well-constructed randomised controlled trials (RCT) show IUI procedure to be efficient, with minimal risk, and above all improved cost-effectiveness when compared to IVF for live birth. IUI as first-line treatment should be offered to most patients, while funding agencies and stakeholders need to be urgently informed of the cost-benefit in offering IUI. Fertility clinics, IVF interest groups, and regulatory bodies should amend their patient information and guidance to state that IUI should be the first line treatment and that IVF should be offered only when essential. Reappraising and promoting IUI based on evidence enhances patient autonomy, choices, and trust, while allowing the fertility industry to operate within an ethical and acceptable framework not seen as exploitative toward vulnerable patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gulam Bahadur
- Reproductive Medicine Unit, North Middlesex University Hospital, Old Admin Block, Sterling Way, London N18 1QX, UK.,Homerton Fertility Unit, Homerton University Hospital, Homerton Row, London E9 6SR,UK
| | - Roy Homburg
- Homerton Fertility Unit, Homerton University Hospital, Homerton Row, London E9 6SR,UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Di Paola R, Garzon S, Giuliani S, Laganà AS, Noventa M, Parissone F, Zorzi C, Raffaelli R, Ghezzi F, Franchi M, Zaffagnini S. Are we choosing the correct FSH starting dose during controlled ovarian stimulation for intrauterine insemination cycles? Potential application of a nomogram based on woman's age and markers of ovarian reserve. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2018; 298:1029-1035. [PMID: 30242498 DOI: 10.1007/s00404-018-4906-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 57] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2018] [Accepted: 09/12/2018] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the potential application of a nomogram based on woman's age and ovarian reserve markers as a tool to optimize the follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) starting dose in intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles. METHODS We conducted a retrospective analysis enrolling 179 infertile women undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation (COS), followed by IUI. Each woman received an FSH starting dose according to clinical decision. After collecting data about COS and IUI procedures, we calculated the FSH starting dose according to the nomogram. The main outcomes measured were women's baseline characteristics, COS, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS The FSH starting dose calculated by the nomogram was significantly lower than the one actually prescribed (p < 0.001), in only 14.8% of the cycles nomogram calculated a higher starting dose. When gonadotropin dose was decreased during COS, and similarly in case of hyper-response (more than two follicles ≥ 16 mm retrieved), the FSH starting dose calculated by the nomogram would have been lower in most of the cases (81.8% and 48.8%, respectively). Conversely, when gonadotropin dose was increased during COS and in case of low ovarian response (no follicle ≥ 16 mm retrieved), the FSH starting dose calculated by the nomogram would have been lower in most of the cases (64.7% and 100%, respectively); in these groups median anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level was 5.62 ng/mL. CONCLUSIONS The application of this nomogram in IUI cycles would lead to a more tailored FSH starting dose and improved cost-effectiveness, although in PCOS women, particularly the ones with high AMH, it does not seem adequate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rossana Di Paola
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, AOUI Verona, University of Verona, Piazzale Aristide Stefani 1, 37126, Verona, VR, Italy
| | - Simone Garzon
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, AOUI Verona, University of Verona, Piazzale Aristide Stefani 1, 37126, Verona, VR, Italy.
| | - Sara Giuliani
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, AOUI Verona, University of Verona, Piazzale Aristide Stefani 1, 37126, Verona, VR, Italy
| | - Antonio Simone Laganà
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "Filippo Del Ponte" Hospital, University of Insubria, Piazza Biroldi 1, 21100, Varese, VA, Italy
| | - Marco Noventa
- Department of Woman and Child Health, University of Padua, Via Nicolò Giustiniani, 3, 35128, Padua, PD, Italy
| | - Francesca Parissone
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, AOUI Verona, University of Verona, Piazzale Aristide Stefani 1, 37126, Verona, VR, Italy
| | - Carlotta Zorzi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, AOUI Verona, University of Verona, Piazzale Aristide Stefani 1, 37126, Verona, VR, Italy
| | - Ricciarda Raffaelli
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, AOUI Verona, University of Verona, Piazzale Aristide Stefani 1, 37126, Verona, VR, Italy
| | - Fabio Ghezzi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "Filippo Del Ponte" Hospital, University of Insubria, Piazza Biroldi 1, 21100, Varese, VA, Italy
| | - Massimo Franchi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, AOUI Verona, University of Verona, Piazzale Aristide Stefani 1, 37126, Verona, VR, Italy
| | - Stefano Zaffagnini
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, AOUI Verona, University of Verona, Piazzale Aristide Stefani 1, 37126, Verona, VR, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Bahadur G, Homburg R. Reappraisal of clinical data supports double IUI for improved pregnancy outcomes. Facts Views Vis Obgyn 2018; 10:45-46. [PMID: 30510667 PMCID: PMC6260673] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Optimising pregnancy and live birth outcomes for fertility procedures is highly desirable and involves disentangling numerous potentially contributing factors. In IUI procedures would double inseminations within a cycle be beneficial? Despite mistaken belief amongst the fertility practitioners the available evidence including Cochrane review has suggested, there would be beneficial effects of utilising double IUI within a cycle. Here we examine new evidence attempting to clarify the role of double versus single IUI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G Bahadur
- Reproductive Medicine Unit, North Middlesex University Hospital, Old Admin Block, Sterling Way, London N18 1QX, UK,Homerton Fertility Unit, Homerton University Hospital, Homerton Row, London E9 6SR, UK
| | - R Homburg
- Homerton Fertility Unit, Homerton University Hospital, Homerton Row, London E9 6SR, UK
| |
Collapse
|