Transforming social contracts: the social and cultural history of IVF in Denmark

How many infants have been born with the help of assisted reproductive technology?

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the total number of infants born globally between 1978 and 2018 after assisted reproductive technology (ART). Estimates are based on epidemiological data systematically and uniquely collected by the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies over 40 years.

DESIGN

The International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies has been reporting global results from country and regional registries since 1991. These observational cohort reports were collated and analyzed to obtain the number of infants born. Because reporting of outcomes is inconsistent, and clinics, countries, and regions report incompletely, sporadically, or not at all, statistical estimates were used to estimate the additional number of infants born from nonreporting clinics, countries, and regions. Upper and lower estimates were based on assumptions about the number of births from nonreporting clinics.

SUBJECTS

Patients starting an ART cycle between 1978 and 2018. All clinics reporting their outcomes to national and regional registries, or directly to the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies.

EXPOSURE

Assisted reproductive technologies.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The total number of infants born from ART annually from 1978 through 2018, including the estimated number from nonreporting clinics, countries, and regions.

RESULTS

The global lower and upper estimates of infants born from ART from 1978 through 2018 are 9,829,668 and 13,019,331.

CONCLUSION

Ten million and up to 13 million or more infants have been born from ART in the 40 years since the first ART-conceived infant was born in 1978. This large number of infants born from both conventional and innovative applications of ART confirms that ART has helped millions of people realize parenthood, is now mainstream medicine, has had a significant societal impact, including novel family formation, and highlighted inequities regarding reproductive rights and access to care.

Navigating the gestational surrogacy seas: the legalities and complexities of gestational carrier services

This paper offers a comprehensive review of the gestational surrogacy process in the US, as well as internationally, focusing on the legal and ethical challenges that gestational carriers, intended parents, fertility providers, and OB/GYNs may face. The objective of this review article is to serve as an overview and provide information on legal, cultural, and ethical aspects of the decisions to pursue gestational surrogacy both for intended parents and gestational carriers in the US and globally. By understanding the surrogacy landscape and the obstacles, the surrogacy agencies and other involved parties can improve the surrogacy process to better serve all parties involved.

Beyond the traditional distinctions of genome editing: evaluating a vulnerability framework

Over 40 years ago, the 1982 Splicing Life report outlined the two distinctions that have orientated much of the normative and legal landscape of genetic intervention or genome editing since - that of somatic versus germline (or heritable interventions) and medical versus non-medical (or enhancement) applications. During this time, these distinctions have been used to ethically prioritize some areas of research and potential application, such as somatic treatments, while considering others for prohibition, such as germline enhancements. Nevertheless, somatic interventions may also be done for controversial enhancement purposes while some germline interventions may be done with greater prima facie justification (e.g., the enhancement of athletic ability versus the avoidance of Tay-Sachs disease). Even with new somatic treatments that are generally lauded, exemplified with the case of Casgevy, many issues still arise - such as cost and access, particularly salient on a global level. The concerns over a dystopian future of genetic haves and have nots, as a result of enhancement and/or germline interventions, that perhaps may happen, should not distract us from a greater attention to what is happening in the here and now. In this paper, we will highlight the limits of the two distinctions in terms of moving from questions of "should a technology be used" to "how should a technology be used." We argue that an additional focus on vulnerability and marginalization can be useful to support the attempt to better prioritize which interventions should be permitted or prohibited. We show how this can better dovetail with calls for effective (global) governance and reasonable consensus by focusing on the most urgent issues and developing policy accordingly, while leaving aside more abstract issues for further discussion.

Assisted Reproductive Technology Results Using Donor or Partner Sperm: A Danish Nationwide Register-Based Cohort Study

This was a nationwide cohort study based on Danish health registers focusing on assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatments in women using donor or partner sperm from 2007 to 2017. Women using donor sperm were subdivided into groups based on relationship status: women with male partners, single women, or women with female partners. The live birth adjusted odds ratios (aORs) after the IUI treatments in women using donor sperm compared with women using partner sperm were 1.48 (95% CI: 1.38–1.59) in women with male partners using donor sperm, 1.20 (95% CI: 1.13–1.28) in single women, and 1.46 (95% CI: 1.32–1.62) in women with female partners. The live birth aORs after IVF treatments in women using donor sperm compared with women using partner sperm were 1.16 (95% CI: 1.02–1.32) in women with male partners using donor sperm, 0.88 (95% CI: 0.80–0.96) in single women, and 1.20 (95% CI: 1.00–1.44), in women with female partners. The use of donor sperm was associated with a higher chance of a live birth after the IUI treatments, but there was no difference after the IVF treatments. Our study invites healthcare professionals to increase their attention toward the different needs and fertility issues of all women attending fertility clinics.

Congenital Heart Disease and Fertility: A Danish Nationwide Cohort Study Including Both Men and Women

Background Despite an increasing number of patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) reaching reproductive age, the fertility of these patients remains undescribed. Therefore, the aim of the study was to evaluate the fertility in men and women with CHD by estimating the risk of infertility and comparing the birth rates, proportions of individuals becoming parents or remaining childless, and the number of children per parent with unaffected individuals. Methods and Results The study population consisted of individuals born between 1977 and 2000. Information on CHD, infertility, and live born children were obtained from the Danish health registries. Hazard ratios for infertility were analyzed using a Cox regression model. Differences of proportions and birth rates were calculated and compared between groups. Among 1 385 895 individuals, a total of 8679 (0.6%) were diagnosed with CHD. Men and women with simple or moderate CHD had no increased risk of infertility when compared with the reference population. Estimates for complex CHD groups were too imprecise for evaluation. Individuals with CHD were more often childless with consequently lower birth rates compared with unaffected individuals. However, those becoming parents had the same number of children as the reference population. Conclusions Men and women with simple or moderate CHD had the same risk of infertility as the reference population. Despite patients with CHD more often being childless, those becoming parents had the same number of children as parents without CHD. The current findings increase the knowledge regarding fertility in the CHD population.

Does in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment provide good value for money? A cost-benefit analysis

Background

Using traditional health technology assessment (HTA) outcome metrics, such as quality-adjusted life-years, to assess fertility treatments raises considerable methodological challenges because the objective of fertility treatments is to create new life rather than extend, save, or improve health-related quality of life.

Objective

The aim of this study was to develop a novel cost-benefit framework to assess value for money of publicly funded IVF treatment; to determine the number of cost-beneficial treatment cycles for women of different ages; and to perform an incremental cost-benefit analysis from a taxpayer perspective.

Methods

We developed a Markov model to determine the net monetary benefit (NMB) of IVF treatment by female age and number of cycles performed. IVF treatment outcomes were monetized using taxpayers' willingness-to-pay values derived from a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Using the current funding environment as the comparator, we performed an incremental analysis of only funding cost-beneficial cycles. Similar outputs to cost-effectiveness analyses were generated, including net-benefit acceptability curves and cost-benefit planes. We created an interactive online app to provide a detailed and transparent presentation of the results.

Results

The results suggest that at least five publicly funded IVF cycles are cost-beneficial in women aged <42 years. Cost-benefit planes suggest a strong taxpayer preference for restricting funding to cost-beneficial cycles over current funding arrangements in Australia from an economic perspective.

Conclusions

The provision of fertility treatment is valued highly by taxpayers. This novel cost-benefit method overcomes several challenges of conventional cost-effectiveness methods and provides an exemplar for incorporating DCE results into HTA. The results offer new evidence to inform discussions about treatment funding arrangements.

Introduction

The contributions to this Symposium issue of RBMS have been prepared following a unique meeting held at Yale University in April 2015 entitled IVF: Global Histories. The articles gathered here present empirical histories of the development of IVF in various countries. These are not intended to be ethnographic, or to develop major new theoretical or conceptual arguments, but rather aim to be indicative case studies situating the development of IVF in specific national contexts with an emphasis on how particular societal influences in the various countries affected the development of the IVF industries there. To date, these histories have never been documented. This Symposium issue aims to begin to rectify this deficit, and to encourage further similar studies of the global development of IVF.