Driving factors in treatment decision-making of patients seeking medical assistance for infertility: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

ART differs in effectiveness, side-effects, administration, and costs. To improve the decision-making process, we need to understand what factors patients consider to be most important.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

We conducted this systematic review to assess which aspects of ART treatment (effectiveness, safety, burden, costs, patient-centeredness, and genetic parenthood) are most important in the decision-making of patients with an unfulfilled wish to have a child.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched studies indexed in Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL prior to November 2023. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs), surveys, interviews, and conjoint analyses (CAs) about ART were included. Studies were included if they described two or more of the following attributes: effectiveness, safety, burden, costs, patient-centeredness, and genetic parenthood.Participants were men and women with an unfulfilled wish to have a child. From each DCE/CA study, we extracted the beta-coefficients and calculated the relative importance of treatment attributes or, in case of survey studies, extracted results. We assessed the risk of bias using the rating developed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation working group. Attributes were classified into effectiveness, safety, burden, costs, patient-centeredness, genetic parenthood, and others.

OUTCOMES

The search identified 938 studies of which 20 were included: 13 DCEs, three survey studies, three interview studies, and one conjoint analysis, with a total of 12 452 patients. Per study, 47-100% of the participants were women. Studies were assessed as having moderate to high risk of bias (critical: six studies, serious: four studies, moderate: nine studies, low: one study). The main limitation was the heterogeneity in the questionnaires and methodology utilized. Studies varied in the number and types of assessed attributes. Patients' treatment decision-making was mostly driven by effectiveness, followed by safety, burden, costs, and patient-centeredness. Effectiveness was rated as the first or second most important factor in 10 of the 12 DCE studies (83%) and the relative importance of effectiveness varied between 17% and 63%, with a median of 34% (moderate certainty of evidence). Of eight studies evaluating safety, five studies valued safety as the first or second most important factor (63%), and the relative importance ranged from 8% to 35% (median 23%) (moderate certainty of evidence). Cost was rated as first or second most important in five of 10 studies, and the importance relative to the other attributes varied between 5% and 47% (median 23%) (moderate certainty of evidence). Burden was rated as first or second by three of 10 studies (30%) and the relative importance varied between 1% and 43% (median 13%) (low certainty of evidence). Patient-centeredness was second most important in one of five studies (20%) and had a relative importance between 7% and 24% (median 14%) (low certainty of evidence). Results suggest that patients are prepared to trade-off some effectiveness for more safety, or less burden and patient-centeredness. When safety was evaluated, the safety of the child was considered more important than the mother's safety. Greater burden (cycle cancellations, number of injections, number of hospital visits, time) was more likely to be accepted by patients if they gained effectiveness, safety, or lower costs. Concerning patient-centeredness, information provision and physician attitude were considered most important, followed by involvement in decision-making, and treatment continuity by the same medical professional. Non-genetic parenthood did not have a clear impact on decision-making.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

The findings of this review can be used in future preference studies and can help healthcare professionals in guiding patients' decision-making and enable a more patient-centered approach.

What Features of Fertility Treatment do Patients Value? Price Elasticity and Willingness-to-Pay Values from a Discrete Choice Experiment

BACKGROUND

Infertility is a medical condition affecting an estimated 186 million people worldwide. Medically assisted fertility treatments allow many of these individuals to have a baby. Insights about preferences of patients who have experienced fertility treatment should be used to inform funding policies and treatment configurations that best reflect the patients' voice and the value of fertility treatment to patients.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the preferences for fertility treatment attributes of infertile women who had previously undergone or were undergoing fertility treatments-ex post perspective.

METHODS

We used data from a stated-preference discrete choice experiment (DCE) among 376 Australian women who had undergone or were undergoing fertility treatment. Respondents chose their preferred treatment choices in 12 hypothetical treatment choice scenarios described by seven attributes (success rates, side effects, counselling/peer support, treatment journey, continuity of care, availability of experimental treatment and out-of-pocket cost). We estimated random parameter logit (RPL) and latent class (LC) models that accounted for preference heterogeneity. The results were used to derive price elasticities of demand and marginal willingness-to-pay (WTP) values for the treatment attributes explored within the DCE survey.

RESULTS

Income level did not have a significant effect on marginal WTP for fertility treatment attributes. The demand for fertility treatment from an ex post perspective was found to be highly inelastic (treatment cost changes had almost no impact on demand). Success rates and out-of-pocket costs were significant and important predictors of individuals' treatment choices conditional on the attributes and levels included in the study. These were followed by counselling/peer support, side effects, treatment journey, continuity of care, and availability of experimental treatment, in that order. Respondents were willing to pay $383-$524 per one percentage point increase in the treatment success rate and over $2000 and over $3500 to avoid moderate and significant side effects, respectively (values are reported in AU$). Latent class models revealed that the majority of respondents (51%) were risk-averse success-rate seekers.

CONCLUSION

Infertile women who had previously undergone or were undergoing fertility treatment valued fertility treatment highly as reflected by highly price-inelastic demand. Success rate of treatment and out-of-pocket costs were the most important attributes and largely determined patients' WTP for fertility treatment relative to the attributes and levels used in the study. While further research should investigate the price sensitivity of women who have not experienced fertility treatment, these results might explain why women continue fertility treatment once they have commenced despite their financial capacity to pay. Future research should also determine patients' price elasticities for a fertility treatment program with multiple treatment cycles.

Womens’ preferences concerning IVF treatment: a discrete choice experiment with particular focus on embryo transfer policy

STUDY QUESTION

What outcomes are important for women to decide on the day of embryo transfer (ET) in IVF?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The highest cumulative live birth rate (cLBR) per treatment was the most important treatment outcome for women undergoing an IVF treatment, regardless of the number of transfers needed until pregnancy and impact on quality of life.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Cleavage stage (Day 3) and blastocyst stage (Day 5) ETs are common transfer policies in IVF. The choice for one or the other day of ET differs between clinics. From the literature, it remains unclear whether the day of transfer impacts the cLBR. Patient preferences for the day of ET have not been examined yet.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, AND DURATION

A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was performed to investigate female patients’ preferences and their values concerning various aspects of an IVF treatment, with a particular focus on ET policy. A multicenter DCE was conducted between May 2020 and June 2020 in which participants were asked to choose between different treatments. Each treatment was presented using hypothetical scenarios containing the following attributes: the probability of a healthy live birth per IVF treatment cycle, the number of embryos available for transfer (for fresh and frozen-thawed ET), the number of ETs until pregnancy and the impact of the treatment on the quality of life.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Women (n = 445) were asked to participate in the DCE at the start of an IVF treatment cycle in 10 Dutch fertility clinics. Participating women received an online questionnaire. The attributes’ relative importance was analyzed using logistic regression analyses.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

A total of 164 women participated. The most important attribute chosen was the cLBR. The total number of embryos suitable for transfer also influenced women’s treatment preferences. Neither the number of transfers needed until pregnancy, nor the impact on quality of life influenced the treatment preferences in the aggregated data. For women in the older age group (age ≥36 years) and the multipara subgroup, the impact on quality of life was more relevant. Naive patients (patients with no prior experience with IVF treatment) assigned less value to the number of ETs needed until pregnancy and assigned more value to the cLBR than the patients who had experienced IVF.

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

An important limitation of a DCE study is that not all attributes can be included, which might be relevant for making choices. Patients might make other choices in real life as the DCE scenarios presented here are hypothetical and might not exactly represent their personal situation. We tried to avoid potential bias by selecting the attributes that mattered most to the patients obtained through patient focus groups. The final selection of attributes and the assigned levels were established using the input of an expert panel of professionals and by performing a pilot study to test the validity of our questionnaire. Furthermore, because we only included women in our study, we cannot draw any conclusions on preferences for partners.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The results of this study may help fertility patients, clinicians, researchers and policymakers to prioritize the most important attributes in the choice for the day of ET. The present study shows that cLBR per IVF treatment is the most important outcome for women. However, currently, there is insufficient information in the literature to conclude which day of transfer is more effective regarding the cLBR. Randomized controlled trials on the subject of Day 3 versus Day 5 ETs and cLBR are needed to allow evidence-based counseling.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This work received no specific funding and there are no conflicts of interest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Efficacy and Safety of Weekly Somatrogon vs Daily Somatropin in Children With Growth Hormone Deficiency: A Phase 3 Study

CONTEXT

Somatrogon is a long-acting recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) in development for once-weekly treatment of children with growth hormone deficiency (GHD).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of once-weekly somatrogon with once-daily somatropin in prepubertal children with GHD.

METHODS

In this 12-month, open-label, randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 study, participants were randomized 1:1 to receive once-weekly somatrogon (0.66 mg/kg/week) or once-daily somatropin (0.24 mg/kg/week) for 12 months. A total of 228 prepubertal children (boys aged 3-11 years, girls aged 3-10 years) with GHD, impaired height and height velocity (HV), and no prior rhGH treatment were randomized and 224 received ≥1 dose of study treatment (somatrogon: 109; somatropin: 115). The primary endpoint was annualized HV at month 12.

RESULTS

HV at month 12 was 10.10 cm/year for somatrogon-treated subjects and 9.78 cm/year for somatropin-treated subjects, with a treatment difference (somatrogon-somatropin) of 0.33 (95% CI: -0.24, 0.89). The lower bound of the 2-sided 95% CI was higher than the prespecified noninferiority margin (-1.8 cm/year), demonstrating noninferiority of once-weekly somatrogon vs daily somatropin. HV at month 6 and change in height standard deviation score at months 6 and 12 were similar between both treatment groups. Both treatments were well tolerated, with a similar percentage of subjects experiencing mild to moderate treatment-emergent adverse events in both groups (somatrogon: 78.9%, somatropin: 79.1%).

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of once-weekly somatrogon was noninferior to once-daily somatropin, with similar safety and tolerability profiles. (ClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT02968004).

Self-Monitoring of Urinary Hormones in Combination with Telemedicine - a Timely Review and Opinion Piece in Medically Assisted Reproduction

Cycle monitoring via ultrasound and serum-based hormonal assays during medically assisted reproduction (MAR) can provide information on ovarian response and assist in optimizing treatment strategies in addition to reducing complications such as ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Two surveys conducted in 2019 and 2020, including overall 24 fertility specialists from Europe, Asia and Latin America, confirmed that the majority of fertility practitioners routinely conduct hormone monitoring during MAR. However, blood tests may cause inconvenience to patients. The reported drawbacks of blood tests identified by the survey included the validity of results from different service providers, long waiting times and discomfort to patients due to travelling to clinics for tests and repeated venepunctures. Historically, urine-based assays were used by fertility specialists in clinics but were subsequently replaced by more practical and automated serum-based assays. A remote urine-based hormonal assay could be an alternative to current serum-based testing at clinics, reducing the inconvenience of blood tests and the frequency of appointments, waiting times and patient burden. Here we provide an overview of the current standard of care for cycle monitoring and review the literature to assess the correlation between urine-based hormonal assays and serum-based hormonal assays during MAR. In addition, in this review, we discuss the evidence supporting the introduction of remote urine-based hormonal monitoring as part of a novel digital health solution that includes remote ultrasound and tele-counselling to link clinics and patients at home.

How Much Is a Human Life Worth? A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review studies eliciting monetary value of a statistical life (VSL) estimates within, and across, different sectors and other contexts; compare the reported estimates; and critically review the elicitation methods used.

METHODS

In June 2019, we searched the following databases to identify methodological and empirical studies: Cochrane Library, Compendex, Embase, Environment Complete, Informit, ProQuest, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines for reporting and a modified Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist to assess the quality of included studies.

RESULTS

We identified 1455 studies, of which we included 120 in the systematic review. A stated-preference approach was used in 76 articles, with 51%, 41%, and 8% being contingent valuation studies, discrete-choice experiments, or both, respectively. A revealed-preference approach was used in 43 articles, of which 74% were based on compensating-wage differentials. The human capital approach was used in only 1 article. We assessed most publications (87%) as being of high quality. Estimates for VSL varied substantially by context (sector, developed/developing country, socio-economic status, etc), with the median of midpoint purchasing power parity-adjusted estimates of 2019 US$5.7 million ($6.8 million, $8.7 million, and $5.3 million for health, labor market, and transportation safety sectors, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The large variation observed in published VSLs depends mainly on the context rather than the method used. We found higher median values for labor markets and developed countries. It is important that health economists and policymakers use context-specific VSL estimates. Methodological innovation and standardization are needed to maximize comparability of VSL estimates within, and across, sectors and methods.

The perspective of women with an increased risk of OHSS regarding the safety and burden of IVF: a discrete choice experiment

STUDY QUESTION

What are the preferences of women with an increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) for characteristics of IVF treatments?

SUMMARY ANSWER

In women with increased risk of OHSS, the chance of OHSS is a strong attribute in determining women's preference for IVF treatment and women are willing to trade off burden (side effects), costs and chance of pregnancy for lower risks of OHSS.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

OHSS is the most serious iatrogenic complication of ovarian stimulation. Polycystic ovaries, high antral follicle count (AFC) and previous OHSS increase the risk of developing OHSS. IVM of oocytes offers great potential for patients with high AFC, since there is no risk of OHSS. With regard to patients' perspectives on fertility treatments, it has been shown that women undergoing IVF place different values on treatment characteristics, such as effectiveness (pregnancy rate), cancellation risk, safety (OHSS risk) and burden (side effects). To our knowledge, the preferences for different IVF treatments in women with increased risk of OHSS have not been studied yet.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

A multicentre discrete choice experiment (DCE) was performed between 2012 and 2016. The selected attributes offered were chance of OHSS, which represents safety; number of injections; chance of cycle cancellation (the latter two represent burden); chance of pregnancy; and out-of-pocket costs/willingness to pay. A target sample size was calculated by including 20 patients for five attributes resulting in the aim to include 100 women.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

We invited subfertile women who were diagnosed with normogonadotrophic ovulation disorder and were undergoing treatment with gonadotrophins and/or had experienced (imminent) OHSS in a previous IVF treatment in the fertility clinic of four hospitals (three teaching and one academic). Women received a printed questionnaire with fictional scenarios and were asked, for each scenario, to choose their preferred treatment. We used a multinominal logit model to determine the preferences of women and investigated heterogeneity in preferences through latent class analysis. The decrease in OHSS risk required for women to accept an increased level of an undesirable attribute, i.e. their willingness to trade off, was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

We distributed 120 questionnaires with a response rate of 79% (95/120). There were 91 questionnaires included in the analysis. All five attributes influenced women's treatment preference. About half of the women considered chance of pregnancy to be more important, while the other half considered prevention of OHSS and lower costs to be more important. Women were willing to trade off cancellation rate, number of injections, chance of pregnancy and costs for lower OHSS chances. We found that women were willing to accept 5% more chance on cycle cancellation if the OHSS rate dropped with 2%. Women were willing to accept one extra treatment for a reduction of 3.9% in OHSS risk. With respect to costs, women were willing to pay €1000 instead of no costs for a decrease in OHSS rate of 5.4%.

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

The sample size of our study is relatively small which may limit the generalizability and sensitivity of the study.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The results of this DCE help us to understand the trade-off that women at risk of OHSS make in their preference for characteristics on IVF treatments. This knowledge may be used during the counselling of couples about their treatment options.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

B.W.M. is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). B.W.M. reports consultancy for Merck, ObsEva and Guerbet. J.P.d.B. reports personal fees from the Ferring Medical Advisory Board and grants from Ferring B. V and Merck Serono B. V outside the submitted work. There are no other conflicts of interest to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

None.

Desogestrel versus antagonist injections for LH suppression in oocyte donation cycles: a crossover study

To study whether ovarian response to corifollitropin among oocyte donors (OD) is different when oral desogestrel (DSG) is used to block the luteinizing hormone (LH) surge when compared to GnRH-antagonist use. This is a retrospective, cohort study at a private, university-based, IVF center including 35 OD. Patients underwent two stimulation cycles under corifollitropin alfa (CFT), one under an antagonist and another under DSG, between February 2015 and May 2017. In antagonist cycles, daily ganirelix was administered since a leading follicle reached 14 mm. In the DSG cycles, daily oral DSG was prescribed. The main outcome measure was oocytes retrieved. Compared to antagonist cycles, cycles under DSG received fewer injections (10.3 ± 2.8 vs. 5.0 ± 2.1, p < .001), nominally lower total supplementary gonadotropin dose (497.4 ± 338.9I U vs. 442.9 ± 332.8 IU, p=.45) with a lower total cost of medication (1018.6 ± 191.0€ vs. 813.8 ± 145.9€, p<.001). There were no differences in the total number of retrieved oocytes between groups (17.4 ± 7.5 vs. 18.6 ± 8.9, p=.34). In the corresponding oocyte recipients, clinical pregnancy rate was similar between groups: 52.0% vs. 58.6%, respectively (p=.78). ODs' stimulation's response under DSG is similar when compared to (17.4 ± 7.5 vs. 18.6 ± 8.9, p=.34) but associated with less injections and lower medication costs. The main advantage of this strategy is its simplicity, an aspect of utmost importance in the management of ODs.

Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future

OBJECTIVES

Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are increasingly advocated as a way to quantify preferences for health. However, increasing support does not necessarily result in increasing quality. Although specific reviews have been conducted in certain contexts, there exists no recent description of the general state of the science of health-related DCEs. The aim of this paper was to update prior reviews (1990-2012), to identify all health-related DCEs and to provide a description of trends, current practice and future challenges.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify health-related empirical DCEs published between 2013 and 2017. The search strategy and data extraction replicated prior reviews to allow the reporting of trends, although additional extraction fields were incorporated.

RESULTS

Of the 7877 abstracts generated, 301 studies met the inclusion criteria and underwent data extraction. In general, the total number of DCEs per year continued to increase, with broader areas of application and increased geographic scope. Studies reported using more sophisticated designs (e.g. D-efficient) with associated software (e.g. Ngene). The trend towards using more sophisticated econometric models also continued. However, many studies presented sophisticated methods with insufficient detail. Qualitative research methods continued to be a popular approach for identifying attributes and levels.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of empirical DCEs in health economics continues to grow. However, inadequate reporting of methodological details inhibits quality assessment. This may reduce decision-makers' confidence in results and their ability to act on the findings. How and when to integrate health-related DCE outcomes into decision-making remains an important area for future research.

Analysis of patient and nurse preferences for self-administered FSH injection devices in select European markets

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to assess product-specific features for a variety of self-administered injection devices and identify key factors that patients and nurses in select European markets find most important when selecting injection devices for self-administration of recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone and urinary human follicle-stimulating hormone for fertility/reproductive therapy.

Patients and methods

Patients (N=402) in France, Italy, Spain, Germany, the UK, the Netherlands, and Belgium, as well as reproductive/fertility nurses (N=40) in Germany, Italy, France, Spain, and the Czech Republic were surveyed. All patients were previously prescribed a follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) treatment for either in vitro fertilization or ovulation induction. Patient and nurse preferences for attributes across all injection devices in the market were obtained via an online questionnaire and evaluated using the maximum differential scaling (MaxDiff) and conjoint analyses, which captured the relative importance of the selected FSH injection device attributes to determine specific qualities in overall product preference.

Results

Both the MaxDiff and conjoint analyses indicated that, for patients and nurses, the ideal FSH injection device would be a highly accurate, multi-use reusable pen injector with a dial-back function that would be easy for both use and education/instruction. Patients and nurses each selected attributes pertinent to their own experiences with the FSH injection device. Categorically, patients valued factors that resulted in minimal impact on daily life, including reduced injection volume to minimize injection-site pain, as well as a reusable device that would be easy to use; nurses placed greater value on a device that would be easy to teach in order to instruct the greatest number of patients while minimizing risk.

Conclusion

Patient and nurse preferences were aligned on certain selected attributes of the FSH products. Although this study was an unbranded examination of attributes across all injection devices currently in the market, results demonstrated that the preferred product attributes were all characteristics of the Ovaleap^® Pen.

Societal preferences for fertility treatment in Australia: a stated preference discrete choice experiment

Objective: To investigate preferences for fertility treatment from the Australian general population with the aims of calculating the willingness to pay in tax contribution for attributes (characteristics) that make up treatment and for an "ideal" fertility treatment program. We also assessed whether willingness-to-pay varies by the relationship status or sexual orientation of the patient.Methods: A stated preference discrete choice experiment was administered to a panel of 801 individuals representative of the Australian general population. Seven attributes of fertility treatment under three broad categories were included: outcome, process, and cost. Attributes were identified through published literature, focus group discussions, expert knowledge, and a pilot study. A Bayesian fractional experimental design was used, and data analysis was performed using a generalized multinomial logit model. Further analyses included interaction terms and latent class modeling.Results: Six of the seven attributes influenced the choice of a treatment program. Under process attributes, individuals preferred: continuity of care of clinic staff, where patients are seen by the same doctor but different nurses at each visit; "alternative" treatments being offered to all patients; and onsite clinic counseling and peer-support groups. Personalization and tailoring of the treatment journey were not important. Among outcome attributes, the improved success rate of having a baby per cycle and significant side-effects were considered important. Cost of treatment also influenced the choice of treatment program. Individual preferences for fertility treatment were not associated with patients' relationship status or sexual orientation. Latent class modeling revealed sub-groups with distinct fertility treatment preferences.Conclusion: This study provides important insights into the attributes that influence the preferences of fertility treatment in Australia. It also estimates socially-inclusive willingness-to-pay values in tax contributions for an "ideal" package of treatment. The results can inform economic evaluations of fertility treatment programs.

Assessing Rationality in Discrete Choice Experiments in Health: An Investigation into the Use of Dominance Tests

BACKGROUND

Dominance tests are often applied to test for the rationality in the choice behavior of participants in discrete choice experiments (DCEs).

OBJECTIVES

To examine how dominance tests have been implemented in recent DCE applications in health and discuss their theoretical and empirical interpretation.

METHODS

Health-related DCEs published in 2015 were reviewed for the inclusion of tests on choice behavior. For studies that implemented a dominance test, information on application and interpretation of the test was extracted. Authors were contacted for test choice sets and observed proportions of subjects who chose the dominated option. Coefficients corresponding to the choice set were extracted to estimate the expected probability of choosing the dominated option with a logistic model and compared with the observed proportion. The theoretical range of expected probabilities of possible dominance tests was calculated.

RESULTS

Of 112 health-related DCEs, 49% included at least one test for choice behavior; 28 studies (25%) included a dominance test. The proportion of subjects in each study who chose the dominated option ranged from 0% to 21%. In 46% of the studies, the dominance test led to the exclusion of participants. In the 15 choice sets that were analyzed, 2 had larger proportions of participants choosing the dominated option than expected (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although dominance tests are frequently applied in DCEs, there is no consensus on how to account for them in data analysis and interpretation. Comparison of expected and observed proportions of participants failing the test might be indicative of DCE quality.

Sequential clomiphene/corifollitrophin alpha as a technique for mild controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in IVF: a proof of concept study

PURPOSE

Mild controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH), combined with oocyte retrieval (OR) under local anaesthesia (LA), may provide low-impact IVF. Since a single injection of corifollitrophin alfa (CFA) provides 7 days of COH, we hypothesised that clomiphene-citrate (CC) followed by CFA may provide adequate COH response from one single FSH injection. Therefore, the aim was to assess IVF outcomes after a novel clomiphene citrate/CFA (CC/CFA) protocol, compared to women undergoing standard rFSH COH protocols (good prognosis comparative cohort:GPCC) in a 1:2 matched design.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this pilot study of 25 patients (ANZCTR id:ACTRN12612000740897, MINIVA:Minimal_Stimulation_in_IVF), we examined the effectiveness of oral clomiphene (100 mg-days 2-6) followed by CFA in a GnRH antagonist protocol producing a single injection COH stimulation regime. All OR were conducted under LA pre-ovarian block. Cycle outcomes were compared to a matched good prognosis comparative cohort (GPCC) undergoing standard rFSH COH.

RESULTS

Mild stimulation was achieved with less oocytes being collected compared to the GPCC (6.4 ± 0.7 vs. 10.7 ± 0.9, p < 0.001), resulting in a reduced number of good quality embryos available for transfer/cryopreservation (3.7 ± 0.6 vs. 5.7 ± 0.5, p = 0.01). While embryo quality was similar between the two groups, endometrial thickness was significantly lower in the group receiving CC/CFA. Pregnancy rates were significantly lower in the CC/CFA cohort compared to GPCC (31.8 vs. 57.1%, p = 0.04) and 44% of CC/CFA participants required supplemental rFSH in order to achieve the hCG trigger criteria.

CONCLUSION

Sequential clomiphene CFA protocol does not appear to be an optimal regime for low impact IVF treatment as it does not provide adequate COH from a single CFA injection and results in lower fresh embryo transfer pregnancy rates and fewer embryos for cryopreservation.

Comparative economic study of the use of corifollitropin alfa and daily rFSH for controlled ovarian stimulation in older patients: Cost-minimization analysis based on the PURSUE study

This study presents an economic assessment of controlled ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technology procedures in Spain, comparing the use of corifollitropin alfa and various forms of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) in women of advanced maternal age. A cost-minimization analysis (CMA) was performed to assess the cost per cycle of controlled controlled ovarian stimulation, including only direct costs associated with the stimulation phase. The CMA was based on the population characteristics, the protocol, and the results obtained from the PURSUE study, taking into account 9 days of controlled controlled ovarian stimulation and 300 IU rFSH/day. The primary analysis included pharmacological costs alone. Different scenarios were evaluated including various doses and possible additional days (0-5) for rFSH. For the alternative analyses, the total costs (direct pharmacological costs, costs of visits and follow-up tests, and any additional pharmacological costs) were considered in both the private and public sectors. Treatment with corifollitropin alfa resulted in a lower pharmacological cost compared with rFSH (€757.25 and €950.30, respectively), creating a saving of approximately -20%. The results of the scenario analyses showed that corifollitropin alfa reduced the pharmacological cost of controlled ovarian stimulation in comparison with daily administration of doses ≥ 250 IU rFSH (considering same daily dose for all days), regardless of the additional days required (7-12 days) (average -€223; range -€488 to -€44). In conclusion, in addition to the efficacy shown in the PURSUE study, the use of corifollitropin alfa results in a decrease in the direct costs associated with controlled ovarian stimulation in older women in Spain.

Assessment of the societal and individual preferences for fertility treatment in Australia: study protocol for stated preference discrete choice experiments

INTRODUCTION

In Australia, societal and individual preferences for funding fertility treatment remain largely unknown. This has resulted in a lack of evidence about willingness to pay (WTP) for fertility treatment by either the general population (the funders) or infertile individuals (who directly benefit). Using a stated preference discrete choice experiment (SPDCE) approach has been suggested as a more appropriate method to inform economic evaluations of fertility treatment. We outline the protocol for an ongoing study which aims to assess fertility treatment preferences of both the general population and infertile individuals, and indirectly estimate their WTP for fertility treatment.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Two separate but related SPDCEs will be conducted for two population samples-the general population and infertile individuals-to elicit preferences for fertility treatment to indirectly estimate WTP. We describe the qualitative work to be undertaken to design the SPDCEs. We will use D-efficient fractional experimental designs informed by prior coefficients from the pilot surveys. The mode of administration for the SPDCE is also discussed. The final results will be analysed using mixed logit or latent class model.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study is being funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) project grant AP1104543 and has been approved by the University of New South Wales Human Research Ethics Committee (HEC 17255) and a fertility clinic's ethics committee. Findings of the study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and presented at various conferences. A lay summary of the results will be made publicly available on the University of New South Wales National Perinatal Epidemiology and Statistics Unit website. Our results will contribute to the development of an evidence-based policy framework for the provision of cost-effective and patient-centred fertility treatment in Australia.

Women's perspectives on ovulation induction with or without IUI as treatment for normogonadotrophic anovulation: a discrete choice experiment

Study Question

What are the treatment preferences of women with normogonadotrophic anovulation treated with ovulation induction with or without intrauterine insemination (IUI)?

Summary Answer

Women with normogonadotrophic anovulation differ in their treatment preference; half of them base their preference on the lowest burden and half of them on the highest effectiveness.

What is Known Already

Common treatments for anovulatory women who wish to conceive are ovulation induction using clomiphene citrate or letrozole taken in tablet form or with injections containing gonadotrophins, all optionally combined with IUI. Patient preferences for these alternatives have not yet been examined in these women.

Study Design, Size, and Duration

Between August 2014 and February 2017 we conducted a multicentre discrete choice experiment (DCE). The target sample size was calculated by including 20 women for six attributes in the main analysis resulting in the inclusion of 120 women to be able to assess heterogeneity across choices.

Participants/Materials, Setting, Methods

We invited treatment-naive women diagnosed with normogonadotropic anovulation and visiting the outpatient clinic of five Dutch centers (three teaching hospitals and two university hospitals) to participate in the DCE by completing a printed questionnaire. We asked women to indicate their preference in hypothetical alternative treatment scenarios by offering a series of choice sets from which they were to choose their preferred alternatives. The choice sets contained several treatment characteristics of interest, i.e. attributes concerning ovulation induction with clomiphene citrate or letrozole versus gonadotrophins, as well as intercourse and IUI. We selected six attributes: number of visits to the outpatient clinic during treatment; type of medication; intercourse or IUI; risk of side effects; willingness to pay; and pregnancy chances leading to the birth of a child after six treatment cycles.

We used a multinominal logit model to determine the preferences of women and investigated heterogeneity in preferences through latent class analysis. To determine if women were willing to make a trade-off for higher pregnancy rates at the expense of a higher burden, we calculated the marginal rate of substitution.

Main Results and the Role of Chance

The questionnaire was completed by 145 women. All six attributes influenced women’s treatment preferences and those valued as most important were low risk of side effects, a minimal number of hospital visits and intercourse. A total of 55% of women were driven by the wish to conceive with the least medical interference and lowest burden. The remaining women were success driven and chose mainly for the highest chances to conceive, regardless of the burden. Age and duration of subfertility did not significantly differ between these women. Women were willing to trade-off some burden and costs for higher pregnancy chances.

Limitations Reasons for Caution

The sample size of our study is relatively small which made it not possible to perform interaction tests and subgroup analyses.

Wider Implications of the Findings

Our results may be used during the counseling of couples about their treatment options. These findings are an argument to explore if a woman prefers potentially fast success or a medically less intense route that might take longer. The preference for the less intense route would lead to the continuation of ovulation induction with oral drugs such as clomiphene citrate or letrozole rather than treatment with injected gonadotrophins, or even IVF.

Study Funding/Competing Interest(s)

B.W.M. is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). B.W.M. reports consultancy for Merck, ObsEva and Guerbet. CBL reports grants from Merck and Ferring.

Trial Registration Number

None.