How much variation in oocyte yield after controlled ovarian stimulation can be explained? A multilevel modelling study

Attitudes, knowledge and practice regarding the anti-müllerian hormone test among general practitioners and reproductive specialists: A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

To describe clinicians' attitudes, knowledge and practice relating to the anti-müllerian hormone (AMH) test.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional nationwide survey.

SETTING

Australia.

POPULATION OR SAMPLE

A total of 362 general practitioners (GPs), gynaecologists and reproductive specialists.

METHODS

Clinicians were recruited through relevant professional organisations, with data collected from May 2021 to April 2022.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinicians' attitudes, knowledge and practice relating to the AMH test, measured using multiple choice, Likert scales and open-ended items.

RESULTS

Fifteen percent of GPs (n = 27) and 40% of gynaecologists and other specialists (n = 73) order at least one AMH test per month. Specialists reported raising the idea of testing most of the time, whereas GPs reported that patient request was more common. Half of clinicians lacked confidence interpreting (n = 182, 51%) and explaining (n = 173, 48%) an AMH result to their patients. Five percent (n = 19) believed the test was moderately/very useful in predicting natural conception/birth and 22% (n = 82) believed the same for predicting premature menopause, despite evidence that the test cannot reliably predict either. Forty percent (n = 144) had previously ordered the test to help with reproductive planning and 21% (n = 75) to provide reassurance about fertility.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians reported use of AMH testing in clinical circumstances not supported by the evidence. With the proliferation of direct-to-consumer testing, efforts to support clinicians in the judicious use of testing and effectively navigating patient requests are needed.

Individualised gonadotropin dose selection using markers of ovarian reserve for women undergoing in vitro fertilisation plus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI)

BACKGROUND

During a stimulated cycle of in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI), women receive daily doses of gonadotropin follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) to induce multifollicular development in the ovaries. A normal response to stimulation (e.g. retrieval of 5 to 15 oocytes) is considered desirable. Generally, the number of eggs retrieved is associated with the dose of FSH. Both hyper-response and poor response are associated with an increased chance of cycle cancellation. In hyper-response, this is due to increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), while poor response cycles are cancelled because the quantity and quality of oocytes is expected to be low. Clinicians often individualise the FSH dose using patient characteristics predictive of ovarian response. Traditionally, this meant women's age, but increasingly, clinicians use various ovarian reserve tests (ORTs). These include basal FSH (bFSH), antral follicle count (AFC), and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH). It is unclear whether individualising FSH dose improves clinical outcomes. This review updates the 2018 version.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of individualised gonadotropin dose selection using markers of ovarian reserve in women undergoing IVF/ICSI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trial registers in February 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared (a) different doses of FSH in women with a defined ORT profile (i.e. predicted low, normal, or high responders based on AMH, AFC, and/or bFSH) or (b) an individualised dosing strategy (based on at least one ORT measure) versus uniform dosing or a different individualised dosing algorithm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Primary outcomes were live birth/ongoing pregnancy and severe OHSS.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 26 studies, involving 8520 women (6 new studies added to 20 studies included in the previous version). We treated RCTs with multiple comparisons as separate trials for the purpose of this review. Meta-analysis was limited due to clinical heterogeneity. Evidence certainty ranged from very low to low, with the main limitations being imprecision and risk of bias associated with lack of blinding. Direct dose comparisons according to predicted response in women Due to differences in dose comparisons, caution is required when interpreting the RCTs in predicted low responders. All evidence was low or very low certainty. Effect estimates were very imprecise, and increased FSH dosing may or may not have an impact on rates of live birth/ongoing pregnancy, OHSS, and clinical pregnancy. Similarly, in predicted normal responders (10 studies, 4 comparisons), higher doses may or may not impact the probability of live birth/ongoing pregnancy (e.g. 200 versus 100 international units (IU): odds ratio (OR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 1.36; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 522 women) or clinical pregnancy. Results were imprecise, and a small benefit or harm remains possible. There were too few events for the OHSS outcome to enable inferences. In predicted high responders, lower doses may or may not affect live birth/ongoing pregnancy (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.46; 1 study, 521 women), severe OHSS, and clinical pregnancy. It is also unclear whether lower doses reduce moderate or severe OHSS (Peto OR 2.31, 95% CI 0.80 to 6.67; 1 study, 521 participants). ORT-algorithm studies Eight trials compared an ORT-based algorithm to a non-ORT control group. It is unclear whether live birth/ongoing pregnancy and clinical pregnancy are increased using an ORT-based algorithm (live birth/ongoing pregnancy: OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.29; I2 = 30%; 7 studies, 4400 women; clinical pregnancy: OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.18; I2 = 18%; 7 studies, 4400 women; low-certainty evidence). However, ORT algorithms may reduce moderate or severe OHSS (Peto OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.84; I2 = 0%; 7 studies, 4400 women; low-certainty evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether the groups differed in rates of severe OHSS (Peto OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.28; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 2724 women; low-certainty evidence). Our findings suggest that if the chance of live birth with a standard starting dose is 25%, the chance with ORT-based dosing would be between 25% and 31%. If the chance of moderate or severe OHSS with a standard starting dose is 5%, the chance with ORT-based dosing would be between 2% and 5%. These results should be treated cautiously due to heterogeneity in the algorithms: some algorithms appear to be more effective than others.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find that tailoring the FSH dose in any particular ORT population (low, normal, high ORT) affected live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates, but we could not rule out differences, due to sample size limitations. Low-certainty evidence suggests that it is unclear if ORT-based individualisation leads to an increase in live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates compared to a policy of giving all women 150 IU. The confidence interval is consistent with an increase of up to around six percentage points with ORT-based dosing (e.g. from 25% to 31%) or a very small decrease (< 1%). A difference of this magnitude could be important to many women. It is unclear if this is driven by improved outcomes in a particular subgroup. Further, ORT algorithms reduced the incidence of OHSS compared to standard dosing of 150 IU. However, the size of the effect is also unclear. The included studies were heterogeneous in design, which limited the interpretation of pooled estimates. It is likely that different ORT algorithms differ in their effectiveness. Current evidence does not provide a clear justification for adjusting the dose of 150 IU in poor or normal responders, especially as increased dose is associated with greater total FSH dose and cost. It is unclear whether a decreased dose in predicted high responders reduces OHSS, although this would appear to be the most likely explanation for the results.

Prediction model of gonadotropin starting dose and its clinical application in controlled ovarian stimulation

Background

Selecting an appropriate and personalized Gn starting dose (GSD) is an essential procedure for determining the quality and quantity of oocytes in the controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) process of the in-vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment cycle. The current approach for determining the GSD is mainly based on the experience of a clinician, lacking unified and scientific standards. This study aims to establish a prediction model of GSD, based on which good COS outcomes can be achieved with the influencing factors comprehensively evaluated quantitatively.

Material and methods

We collected a total of 1555 patients undergoing the first oocytes retrieving cycle and conducted correlation analysis to find the significant factors related to the GSD. Two GSD models are built based on two popular machine learning approaches, and the one with better model performance is selected as the final model. Finally, clinical application and validation were conducted to verify the effectiveness of the proposed model.

Results

(1) Age, duration of infertility, type of infertility, body mass index (BMI), antral follicle count (AFC), basal follicle stimulating hormone (bFSH), estradiol (E₂), luteinizing hormone (LH), anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) and COS treatment regimen were closely related to the GSD (P < 0.05). (2) The selected model has good modeling performance in terms of both root mean square error (RMSE) (29.87 ~ 34.21) and regression coefficient R (0.947 ~ 0.953). (3) A comprehensive evaluation of influencing factors for GSD is conducted and shows that the top four most significant factors are age, AMH, AFC, and BMI. (4) The proposed GSD can approximate the actual value well in the clinical application, with the mean absolute error of only 11.26 units, and the recommended results can prompt the number of oocytes retrieved (NOR) close to the optimal number.

Conclusion

Modeling the GSD value with machine learning approaches is feasible and effective, and the proposed model has good clinical application for determining the GSD in the IVF treatment cycle.

Reliability of AMH and AFC measurements and their correlation: a large multicenter study

PURPOSE

Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) and antral follicle count (AFC) are correlated with the ovarian response, but their reliability and reproducibility are questionable. This large multicenter study describes their distribution, inter-cycle and inter-center variability, and their correlation.

METHODS

A total of 25,854 IVF cycles among 15,219 patients were selected in 12 ART centers. Statistical distribution of AMH and AFC was studied by using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and Shapiro goodness of fit test. The reproducibility of AFC and AMH was measured using a mixed model regressing the logarithmic transformation of AFC with age.

RESULTS

The distribution of AMH and AFC was characterized by a wide dispersion of values, twice more important for AFC, and a logarithmic distribution. The faster decline in AMH than in AFC with age suggests that their correlation changes with age. AMH and AFC showed a very low proportion of concordance in the range of expected poor responders according to Bologna cutoffs. The heterogeneity for AMH and AFC across centers was small, but much larger across patients within each center. Concerning the patients with several successive cycles, the reproducibility for AMH seemed much better than for AFC. Comparing respective performances of AMH and AFC for the prediction of ovarian response depended on the local conditions for measuring these indicators and on the reproducibility of results improved over time.

CONCLUSION

Distribution of AMH and AFC was characterized by the wide dispersion of values, and a logarithmic distribution. Establishing cutoffs or a direct relationship AMH/AFC without considering age seems hazardous. Correlation between AMH and AFC was very poor in the range of poor responders.

Predıctıve value of pregnancy of follıcular fluıd fetuın-A and -B levels ın infertıle women after intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection

AIM

We aimed to investigate the value of follicular fluid fetuins-A and -B to predict successful IVF and pregnancy outcomes in infertile women with poor, normal, and high ovarian reserve.

METHODS

The follicular fluid of 96 infertile women who underwent intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) procedure was analyzed. Fetuins-A and -B levels were examined and compared in those who could achieve pregnancy and those who could not. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyzes were used to determine cut-off and statistically significant associations for fetuins-A and -B.

RESULTS

Follicular fluid fetuin-A levels were higher in cases with weak ovarian reserve (OR) (p < 0.05) and higher in patients who did not achieve clinical pregnancy (p < 0.05). Conversely, the follicular fluid fetuin-B levels were lower in cases with poor OR (p < 0.05) and were lower in patients who did not achieve a clinical pregnancy (p < 0.05). A follicular fluid fetuin-A concentration ≤ 19.12 ng/mL had a sensitivity and specificity of 94.74% and 93.1%, respectively, at predicting clinical pregnancy. While the follicular fluid fetuin-B concentration >24.7 ng/mL had sensitivity and specificity of 71.1% and 51.7%, respectively, for clinical pregnancy prediction.

CONCLUSION

Overall, high levels of follicular fluid fetuin-A may be independently associated with unsuccessful IVF irrespective of OR grouping. A low level of follicular fetuin-B was also associated with failed IVF. The sensitivity and specificity were found to be higher for fetuin-A in predicting clinical pregnancy. Therefore, the follicular fluid fetuin-A may be more predictive for successful IVF and clinical pregnancy outcomes than follicular fluid fetuin-B.

The FSHR G-29A variant is not associated with the ovarian response to exogenous FSH stimulation

A common genetic variant in the follicle stimulating hormone receptor gene (FSHR) 5'-untranslated region has been previously reported to influence FSHR gene expression. However, studies on the ovarian response to exogenous gonadotropin stimulation are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of variants at positions -29 of the FSHR gene with the ovarian response to exogenous FSH stimulation in Chinese women. The genotypes of the FSHR gene were assayed using the Sequenom MassARRAY system. Total RNA and protein was extracted from granulosa cells, and FSHR expression at the mRNA and protein levels was assessed using quantitative PCR and western blotting. Our data revealed that there was no association between the FSHR genotype at the -29 position and the outcome of controlled ovarian stimulation. The expression of FSHR, at both the mRNA and protein levels, was similar amongst the different FSHR genotypes assessed, but was significantly reduced in the low responders. These results indicate that the variants caused by mutations at position -29 are not associated with ovarian response, and the low ovarian response to gonadotropin stimulation may be caused by decreased FSHR expression.

Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) test information on Australian and New Zealand fertility clinic websites: a content analysis

OBJECTIVES

The anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) test has been promoted as a way to inform women about their future fertility. However, data consistently show the test is a poor predictor of natural fertility potential for an individual woman. As fertility centre websites are often a primary source of information for reproductive information, it is essential the information provided is accurate and reflects the available evidence. We aimed to systematically record and categorise information about the AMH test found on Australian and New Zealand fertility clinic websites.

DESIGN

Content analysis of online written information about the AMH test on fertility clinic websites.

SETTING

Accredited Australian and New Zealand fertility clinic websites.

METHODS

Data were extracted between April and June 2020. Any webpage that mentioned the AMH test, including blogs specifically about the AMH test posted since 2015, was analysed and the content categorised.

RESULTS

Of the 39 active accredited fertility clinics' websites, 25 included information about the AMH test. The amount of information varied widely, and embodied four overarching categories; (1) the utility of the AMH test, (2) who the test is suitable for, (3) possible actions in response to the test and (4) caveats and limitations of the test. Eight specific statements about the utility of the test were identified, many of which are not evidence-based. While some websites were transparent regarding the test's limitations, others mentioned no caveats or included persuasive statements actively promoting the test as empowering for a range of women in different circumstances.

CONCLUSIONS

Several websites had statements about the utility of the AMH test that are not supported by the evidence. This highlights the need for higher standards for information provided on fertility clinic websites to prevent women being misled to believe the test can reliably predict their fertility.

Changing stimulation protocol on repeat conventional ovarian stimulation cycles does not lead to improved laboratory outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether physicians' choice of ovarian stimulation protocol is associated with laboratory outcomes.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Single academic center.

PATIENT(S)

The subjects were 4,458 patients who completed more than one in vitro fertilization ovarian stimulation cycle within 1 year. On second stimulation, 49% repeated the same protocol and 51% underwent a different one.

INTERVENTION(S)

Estradiol priming antagonist, antagonist +/- oral contraceptive pill priming, long luteal protocol, Lupron (Lupron [AbbVie Inc, North Chicago, IL]) stop protocol, and flare were compared. Logistic or linear regression with cluster robust standard errors to account for covariates and paired data was used.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Oocytes collected (OC), fertilization rate, blastocyst progression (BP), usable embryos (UE), and euploid rate (ER).

RESULT(S)

First stimulation outcomes were comparable across all protocols for FR, BP, UE, and ER but were different for OC, after adjustment for covariates. For OC, the effect of switching protocols differed according to the type of the second stimulation. There was improvement in OC if the same stimulation was repeated, except for flare. In addition, there were slight, significant improvements in fertilization rate (difference in values or coefficient of 0.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.004, 0.4) and UE (coefficient 1.25; 95% CI, 0.79, 1.72) when the same stimulation was repeated. There were no changes in BP (coefficient 0.03; 95% CI, -0.01, 0.08) or ER (coefficient 0.01; 95% CI, -0.04, 0.06) when protocols were changed. In a low-BP subgroup, greater improvement was seen when the same protocol was repeated (coefficient 0.03; 95% CI 0.01, 0.04).

CONCLUSION(S)

There was a slight but significant improvement in laboratory outcomes when the same stimulation protocol was repeated, so careful consideration should be made before switching stimulation protocols for the purpose of improving laboratory outcomes.

Novel nomogram-based integrated gonadotropin therapy individualization in in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: A modeling approach

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to characterize a validated model for predicting oocyte retrieval in controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) and to construct model-based nomograms for assistance in clinical decision-making regarding the gonadotropin protocol and dose.

METHODS

This observational, retrospective, cohort study included 636 women with primary unexplained infertility and a normal menstrual cycle who were attempting assisted reproductive therapy for the first time. The enrolled women were split into an index group (n=497) for model building and a validation group (n=139). The primary outcome was absolute oocyte count. The dose-response relationship was tested using modified Poisson, negative binomial, hybrid Poisson-Emax, and linear models. The validation group was similarly analyzed, and its results were compared to that of the index group.

RESULTS

The Poisson model with the log-link function demonstrated superior predictive performance and precision (Akaike information criterion, 2,704; λ=8.27; relative standard error (λ)=2.02%). The covariate analysis included women's age (p<0.001), antral follicle count (p<0.001), basal follicle-stimulating hormone level (p<0.001), gonadotropin dose (p=0.042), and protocol type (p=0.002 and p<0.001 for short and antagonist protocols, respectively). The estimates from 500 bootstrap samples were close to those of the original model. The validation group showed model assessment metrics comparable to the index model. Based on the fitted model, a static nomogram was built to improve visualization. In addition, a dynamic electronic tool was created for convenience of use.

CONCLUSION

Based on our validated model, nomograms were constructed to help clinicians individualize the stimulation protocol and gonadotropin doses in COS cycles.

Individualized ovarian stimulation in IVF/ICSI treatment: it is time to stop using high FSH doses in predicted low responders

In IVF/ICSI treatment, the FSH starting dose is often increased in predicted low responders from the belief that it improves the chance of having a baby by maximizing the number of retrieved oocytes. This intervention has been evaluated in several randomized controlled trials, and despite a slight increase in the number of oocytes—on average one to two more oocytes in the high versus standard dose group—no beneficial impact on the probability of a live birth has been demonstrated (risk difference, −0.02; 95% CI, −0.11 to 0.06). Still, many clinicians and researchers maintain a highly ingrained belief in ‘the more oocytes, the better’. This is mainly based on cross-sectional studies, where the positive correlation between the number of retrieved oocytes and the probability of a live birth is interpreted as a direct causal relation. If the latter would be present, indeed, maximizing the oocyte number would benefit our patients. The current paper argues that the use of high FSH doses may not actually improve the probability of a live birth for predicted low responders undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment and exemplifies the flaws of directly using cross-sectional data to guide FSH dosing in clinical practice. Also, difficulties in the de-implementation of the increased FSH dosing strategy are discussed, which include the prioritization of intermediate outcomes (such as cycle cancellations) and the potential biases in the interpretation of study findings (such as confirmation or rescue bias).

Multivariate prediction of mixed, multilevel, sequential outcomes arising from in vitro fertilisation

In vitro fertilisation (IVF) comprises a sequence of interventions concerned with the creation and culture of embryos which are then transferred to the patient's uterus. While the clinically important endpoint is birth, the responses to each stage of treatment contain additional information about the reasons for success or failure. As such, the ability to predict not only the overall outcome of the cycle, but also the stage-specific responses, can be useful. This could be done by developing separate models for each response variable, but recent work has suggested that it may be advantageous to use a multivariate approach to model all outcomes simultaneously. Here, joint analysis of the sequential responses is complicated by mixed outcome types defined at two levels (patient and embryo). A further consideration is whether and how to incorporate information about the response at each stage in models for subsequent stages. We develop a case study using routinely collected data from a large reproductive medicine unit in order to investigate the feasibility and potential utility of multivariate prediction in IVF. We consider two possible scenarios. In the first, stage-specific responses are to be predicted prior to treatment commencement. In the second, responses are predicted dynamically, using the outcomes of previous stages as predictors. In both scenarios, we fail to observe benefits of joint modelling approaches compared to fitting separate regression models for each response variable.

Live birth achieved despite the absence of ejaculated spermatozoa and mature oocytes retrieved: a case report

The most common reason for in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle cancelation is a lack of quality gametes available for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Here we present the successful fertility treatment of the couple affected by obstructive azoospermia combined with suboptimal response to controlled ovarian stimulation. Since the conventional approach appeared ineffective to overcome both partnersˈ specific problems, the targeted interventions, namely, (1) pharmacological enhancement of sperm motility and (2) polarized light microscopy (PLM)-guided optimization of ICSI time, were applied to rescue the cycle with only immature oocytes and immotile testicular sperm retrieved. The treatment with theophylline aided the selection of viable spermatozoa derived from cryopreserved testicular tissue. When the traditional stimulation protocol failed to produce mature eggs, non-invasive spindle imaging was employed to adjust the sperm injection time to the maturational stage of oocytes extruding a polar body in vitro. The fertilization of 12 late-maturing oocytes yielded 5 zygotes, which all developed into blastocysts. One embryo was transferred into the uterus on day 5 post-fertilization, and another 3 good quality blastocysts were vitrified for later use. The pregnancy resulted in a full-term delivery of a healthy child. This case demonstrates that the individualization beyond the standard IVF protocols should be considered to maximize the chance of poor-prognosis patients to achieve pregnancy with their own gametes.

The risk of poor ovarian response during repeat IVF

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the incidence and risk factors for poor ovarian response (POR) during repeat IVF?

DESIGN

A retrospective analysis of 1224 consecutive patients who underwent at least two IVF stimulations in a single centre over a 6-year period. Risk factors from the initial treatment were assessed for association with POR during repeat IVF using logistic regression analysis. A simple, practical predictive model was constructed and evaluated for accuracy and calibration, based on the factors that demonstrated significant association with subsequent POR. POR during repeat IVF was defined as ≤3 retrieved oocytes or cancellation before retrieval following recruitment of ≤3 mature follicles.

RESULTS

The risk of POR during repeat IVF was approximately 11.5%. A higher POR risk during repeat IVF is associated with a reduced oocyte yield during the initial treatment (≤3 oocytes: odds ratio [OR] 14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.42-30.24; 4-9 oocytes: OR 4.13, 95% CI 2.00-8.54; 10-15 oocytes: OR 1) and low ovarian reserve (anti-Müllerian hormone [AMH] <5.4 pmol/l: OR 3.54, 95% CI 2.24-5.59; AMH 5.4-25 pmol/l: OR 1). Women with low ovarian reserve who experience POR during the initial IVF have the highest risk of suffering POR again during repeat IVF (57% within 1 year). Other groups, such as women with unexpected POR or expected poor responders with suboptimal ovarian response during the initial IVF, are also at risk of exhibiting POR during a subsequent treatment (28% within 1 year).

CONCLUSIONS

As there is a clear association between POR and lower live birth rates, this practical model may help manage patients' expectations during repeat IVF treatment.

Hormonal Effects in Reproductive Technology with Focus on Diminished Ovarian Reserve

Modern use of reproductive technologies has revolutionized the treatment of infertile couples. Strategies to improve ovarian function in cases of diminished ovarian reserve are perhaps the least understood area in this field and will be the chief focus of this chapter.

Don’t abandon RCTs in IVF. We don’t even understand them

The conclusion of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority that ‘add-on’ therapies in IVF are not supported by high-quality evidence has prompted new questions regarding the role of the randomized controlled trial (RCT) in evaluating infertility treatments. Critics argue that trials are cumbersome tools that provide irrelevant answers. Instead, they argue that greater emphasis should be placed on large observational databases, which can be analysed using powerful algorithms to determine which treatments work and for whom. Although the validity of these arguments rests upon the sciences of statistics and epidemiology, the discussion to date has largely been conducted without reference to these fields. We aim to remedy this omission, by evaluating the arguments against RCTs in IVF from a primarily methodological perspective. We suggest that, while criticism of the status quo is warranted, a retreat from RCTs is more likely to make things worse for patients and clinicians.

Do female age and body weight modify the effect of individualized FSH dosing in IVF/ICSI treatment? A secondary analysis of the OPTIMIST trial

INTRODUCTION

The OPTIMIST trial revealed that for women starting in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment, no substantial differences exist in first cycle and cumulative live birth rates between an antral follicle count (AFC)-based individualized follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) dose and a standard dose. Female age and body weight have been suggested to cause heterogeneity in the effect of FSH dose individualization. The objective of the current study is to evaluate whether these patient characteristics modify the effect of AFC-based individualized FSH dosing in IVF/ICSI treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A secondary data-analysis of the OPTIMIST trial. Women initiating IVF/ICSI treatment were classified as predicted poor (AFC 0-7), suboptimal (AFC 8-10) or hyper responders (AFC >15), and randomly allocated to a standard FSH dose (150 IU/d) or an individualized FSH dose (450, 225 or 100 IU/d for predicted poor, suboptimal and hyper responders, respectively). In each predicted response category, logistic regression models with interaction terms were used to evaluate the presence of effect modification. The first cycle was analyzed, and the primary outcomes were first complete cycle live birth rate (including fresh plus frozen-thawed embryo transfers) and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) risks.

RESULTS

No effect modification was revealed in the predicted poor (n = 234) and suboptimal (n = 277) responders. In the predicted hyper responders (n = 521), the effect of the individualized FSH dose on the first cycle live birth rate was modified by female age (P = 0.02) and the effect on OHSS risks was modified by body weight (P = 0.02). A dose reduction from 150 to 100 IU/d generally decreased the OHSS risks in predicted hyper responders, but also reduced the chance of a live birth in young women, and had no beneficial impact on OHSS risks in women with a relatively low body weight.

CONCLUSIONS

In women with a predicted hyper response undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment, female age and body weight seem to modify the effect of FSH dose individualization. Although a reduced FSH starting dose generally decreases the OHSS risks, it may also reduce the chance of a live birth, specifically for young women. Future studies could consider these findings when investigating the optimal approach to reduce OHSS risks while maintaining the probability of a live birth for predicted hyper responders in IVF/ICSI treatment.

Individualised gonadotropin dose selection using markers of ovarian reserve for women undergoing in vitro fertilisation plus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI)

BACKGROUND

During a cycle of in vitro fertilisation plus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI), women receive daily doses of gonadotropin follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) to induce multifollicular development in the ovaries. Generally, the dose of FSH is associated with the number of eggs retrieved. A normal response to stimulation is often considered desirable, for example the retrieval of 5 to 15 oocytes. Both poor and hyper-response are associated with increased chance of cycle cancellation. Hyper-response is also associated with increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Clinicians often individualise the FSH dose using patient characteristics predictive of ovarian response such as age. More recently, clinicians have begun using ovarian reserve tests (ORTs) to predict ovarian response based on the measurement of various biomarkers, including basal FSH (bFSH), antral follicle count (AFC), and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH). It is unclear whether individualising FSH dose based on these markers improves clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of individualised gonadotropin dose selection using markers of ovarian reserve in women undergoing IVF/ICSI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, DARE, ISI Web of Knowledge, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organisation International Trials Registry Platform search portal from inception to 27th July 2017. We checked the reference lists of relevant reviews and included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included trials that compared different doses of FSH in women with a defined ORT profile (i.e. predicted low, normal or high responders based on AMH, AFC, and/or bFSH) and trials that compared an individualised dosing strategy (based on at least one ORT measure) versus uniform dosing or a different individualised dosing algorithm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Primary outcomes were live birth/ongoing pregnancy and severe OHSS. Secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy, moderate or severe OHSS, multiple pregnancy, oocyte yield, cycle cancellations, and total dose and duration of FSH administration.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 trials (N = 6088); however, we treated those trials with multiple comparisons as separate trials for the purpose of this review. Meta-analysis was limited due to clinical heterogeneity. Evidence quality ranged from very low to moderate. The main limitations were imprecision and risk of bias associated with lack of blinding.Direct dose comparisons in women according to predicted responseAll evidence was low or very low quality.Due to differences in dose comparisons, caution is warranted in interpreting the findings of five small trials assessing predicted low responders. The effect estimates were very imprecise, and increased FSH dosing may or may not have an impact on rates of live birth/ongoing pregnancy, OHSS, and clinical pregnancy.Similarly, in predicted normal responders (nine studies, three comparisons), higher doses may or may not impact the probability of live birth/ongoing pregnancy (e.g. 200 versus 100 international units: OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.36; N = 522; 2 studies; I2 = 0%) or clinical pregnancy. Results were imprecise, and a small benefit or harm remains possible. There were too few events for the outcome of OHSS to enable any inferences.In predicted high responders, lower doses may or may not have an impact on rates of live birth/ongoing pregnancy (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.46; N = 521; 1 study), OHSS, and clinical pregnancy. However, lower doses probably reduce the likelihood of moderate or severe OHSS (Peto OR 2.31, 95% CI 0.80 to 6.67; N = 521; 1 study).ORT-algorithm studiesFour trials compared an ORT-based algorithm to a non-ORT control group. Rates of live birth/ongoing pregnancy and clinical pregnancy did not appear to differ by more than a few percentage points (respectively: OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.23; N = 2823, 4 studies; I2 = 34%; OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.13, 4 studies, I2=0%, moderate-quality evidence). However, ORT algorithms probably reduce the likelihood of moderate or severe OHSS (Peto OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.00; N = 2823; 4 studies; I2 = 0%, low quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether the groups differed in rates of severe OHSS (Peto OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.99; N = 1494; 3 studies; I2 = 0%, low quality evidence). Our findings suggest that if the chance of live birth with a standard dose is 26%, the chance with ORT-based dosing would be between 24% and 30%. If the chance of moderate or severe OHSS with a standard dose is 2.5%, the chance with ORT-based dosing would be between 0.8% and 2.5%. These results should be treated cautiously due to heterogeneity in the study designs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find that tailoring the FSH dose in any particular ORT population (low, normal, high ORT), influenced rates of live birth/ongoing pregnancy but we could not rule out differences, due to sample size limitations. In predicted high responders, lower doses of FSH seemed to reduce the overall incidence of moderate and severe OHSS. Moderate-quality evidence suggests that ORT-based individualisation produces similar live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates to a policy of giving all women 150 IU. However, in all cases the confidence intervals are consistent with an increase or decrease in the rate of around five percentage points with ORT-based dosing (e.g. from 25% to 20% or 30%). Although small, a difference of this magnitude could be important to many women. Further, ORT algorithms reduced the incidence of OHSS compared to standard dosing of 150 IU, probably by facilitating dose reductions in women with a predicted high response. However, the size of the effect is unclear. The included studies were heterogeneous in design, which limited the interpretation of pooled estimates, and many of the included studies had a serious risk of bias.Current evidence does not provide a clear justification for adjusting the standard dose of 150 IU in the case of poor or normal responders, especially as increased dose is generally associated with greater total FSH dose and therefore greater cost. However, a decreased dose in predicted high responders may reduce OHSS.