Hysterosalpingo-foam sonography versus hysterosalpingography during fertility work-up: an economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the costs and effects of tubal patency testing by hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy) compared to hysterosalpingography (HSG) in infertile women during the fertility work-up? SUMMARY ANSWER: During the fertility work-up, clinical management based on the test results of HyFoSy leads to slightly lower, though not statistically significant, live birth rates, at lower costs, compared to management based on HSG results. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Traditionally, tubal patency testing during the fertility work-up is performed by HSG. The FOAM trial, formally a non-inferiority study, showed that management decisions based on the results of HyFoSy resulted in a comparable live birth rate at 12 months compared to HSG (46% versus 47%; difference -1.2%, 95% CI: -3.4% to 1.5%; P = 0.27). Compared to HSG, HyFoSy is associated with significantly less pain, it lacks ionizing radiation and exposure to iodinated contrast medium. Moreover, HyFoSy can be performed by a gynaecologist during a one-stop fertility work-up. To our knowledge, the costs of both strategies have never been compared. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We performed an economic evaluation alongside the FOAM trial, a randomized multicenter study conducted in the Netherlands. Participating infertile women underwent, both HyFoSy and HSG, in a randomized order. The results of both tests were compared and women with discordant test results were randomly allocated to management based on the results of one of the tests. The follow-up period was twelve months. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We studied 1160 infertile women (18-41 years) scheduled for tubal patency testing. The primary outcome was ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth. The economic evaluation compared costs and effects of management based on either test within 12 months. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): the difference in total costs and chance of live birth. Data were analyzed using the intention to treat principle. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Between May 2015 and January 2019, 1026 of the 1160 women underwent both tubal tests and had data available: 747 women with concordant results (48% live births), 136 with inconclusive results (40% live births), and 143 with discordant results (41% had a live birth after management based on HyFoSy results versus 49% with live birth after management based on HSG results). When comparing the two strategies-management based on HyfoSy results versus HSG results-the estimated chance of live birth was 46% after HyFoSy versus 47% after HSG (difference -1.2%; 95% CI: -3.4% to 1.5%). For the procedures itself, HyFoSy cost €136 and HSG €280. When costs of additional fertility treatments were incorporated, the mean total costs per couple were €3307 for the HyFoSy strategy and €3427 for the HSG strategy (mean difference €-119; 95% CI: €-125 to €-114). So, while HyFoSy led to lower costs per couple, live birth rates were also slightly lower. The ICER was €10 042, meaning that by using HyFoSy instead of HSG we would save €10 042 per each additional live birth lost. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: When interpreting the results of this study, it needs to be considered that there was a considerable uncertainty around the ICER, and that the direct fertility enhancing effect of both tubal patency tests was not incorporated as women underwent both tubal patency tests in this study. WIDER IMPLICATION OF THE FINDINGS: Compared to clinical management based on HSG results, management guided by HyFoSy leads to slightly lower live birth rates (though not statistically significant) at lower costs, less pain, without ionizing radiation and iodinated contrast exposure. Further research on the comparison of the direct fertility-enhancing effect of both tubal patency tests is needed. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): FOAM trial was an investigator-initiated study, funded by ZonMw, a Dutch organization for Health Research and Development (project number 837001504). IQ Medical Ventures provided the ExEm®-FOAM kits free of charge. The funders had no role in study design, collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data. K.D. reports travel-and speakers fees from Guerbet and her department received research grants from Guerbet outside the submitted work. H.R.V. received consulting-and travel fee from Ferring. A.M.v.P. reports received consulting fee from DEKRA and fee for an expert meeting from Ferring, both outside the submitted work. C.H.d.K. received travel fee from Merck. F.J.M.B. received a grant from Merck and speakers fee from Besins Healthcare. F.J.M.B. is a member of the advisory board of Merck and Ferring. J.v.D. reported speakers fee from Ferring. J.S. reports a research agreement with Takeda and consultancy for Sanofi on MR of motility outside the submitted work. M.v.W. received a travel grant from Oxford Press in the role of deputy editor for Human Reproduction and participates in a DSMB as independent methodologist in obstetrics studies in which she has no other role. B.W.M. received an investigator grant from NHMRC GNT1176437. B.W.M. reports consultancy for ObsEva, Merck, Guerbet, iGenomix, and Merck KGaA and travel support from Merck KGaA. V.M. received research grants from Guerbet, Merck, and Ferring and travel and speakers fees from Guerbet. The other authors do not report conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: International Clinical Trials Registry Platform No. NTR4746.

Can hysterosalpingo-foam sonography replace hysterosalpingography as first-choice tubal patency test? A randomized non-inferiority trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Does hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy) lead to similar pregnancy outcomes, compared with hysterosalpingography (HSG), as first-choice tubal patency test in infertile couples? SUMMARY ANSWER: HyFoSy and HSG produce similar findings in a majority of patients and clinical management based on the results of either HyFoSy or HSG, leads to comparable pregnancy outcomes. HyFoSy is experienced as significantly less painful. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Traditionally, tubal patency testing during fertility work-up is performed by HSG. HyFoSy is an alternative imaging technique lacking ionizing radiation and iodinated contrast medium exposure which is less expensive than HSG. Globally, there is a shift towards the use of office-based diagnostic methods, such as HyFoSy. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This multicentre, prospective, comparative study with a randomized design was conducted in 26 hospitals in The Netherlands. Participating women underwent both HyFoSy and HSG in randomized order. In case of discordant results, women were randomly allocated to either a management strategy based on HyFoSy or one based on HSG. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We included infertile women between 18 and 41 years old who were scheduled for tubal patency testing during their fertility work-up. Women with anovulatory cycles not responding to ovulation induction, endometriosis, severe male infertility or a known iodine contrast allergy were excluded. The primary outcome for the comparison of the HyFoSy- and HSG-based strategies was ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth within 12 months after inclusion in an intention-to-treat analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Between May 2015 and January 2019, 1026 women underwent HyFoSy and HSG. HyFoSy was inconclusive in 97 of them (9.5%), HSG was inconclusive in 30 (2.9%) and both were inconclusive in 9 (0.9%). In 747 women (73%) conclusive tests results were concordant. Of the 143/1026 (14%) with discordant results, 105 were randomized to clinical management based on the results of either HyFoSy or HSG. In this group, 22 of the 54 women (41%) allocated to management based on HyFoSy and 25 of 51 women (49%) allocated to management based on HSG had an ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth (Difference -8%; 95% CI: -27% to 10%). In total, clinical management based on the results of HyFoSy was estimated to lead to a live birth in 474 of 1026 women (46%) versus 486 of 1026 (47%) for management based on HSG (Difference -1.2%; 95% CI: -3.4% to 1.5%). Given the pre-defined margin of -2%, statistically significant non-inferiority of HyFoSy relative to HSG could not be demonstrated (P = 0.27). The mean pain score for HyFoSy on the 1-10 Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was 3.1 (SD 2.2) and the mean VAS pain score for HSG was 5.4 (SD 2.5; P for difference < 0.001). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Since all women underwent both tubal patency tests, no conclusions on a direct therapeutic effect of tubal flushing could be drawn. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: HyFoSy or HSG produce similar tubal pathology findings in a majority of infertile couples and, where they differ, a difference in findings does not lead to substantial difference in pregnancy outcome, while HyFoSy is associated with significantly less pain. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The FOAM study was an investigator-initiated study funded by ZonMw, The Netherlands organization for Health Research and Development (project number 837001504). ZonMw funded the whole project. IQ Medical Ventures provided the ExEm-foam® kits free of charge. The funders had no role in study design, collection, analysis and interpretation of the data. K.D. reports travel and speaker fees from Guerbet. F.J.M.B. reports personal fees as a member of the external advisory board for Merck Serono, The Netherlands, and a research support grant from Merck Serono, outside the submitted work. C.B.L. reports speakers' fee from Ferring in the past, and his department receives research grants from Ferring, Merck and Guerbet. J.S. reports a research agreement with Takeda on MR of motility outside the submitted work. M.V.W. reports leading The Netherlands Satellite of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. B.W.J.M. is supported by an NHMRC Investigator grant (GNT1176437). B.W.J.M. reports consultancy for Guerbet and research funding from Merck and Guerbet. V.M. reports non-financial support from IQ medicals ventures, during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Guerbet, outside the submitted work. The other authors do not report conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR4746/NL4587 (https://www.trialregister.nl). TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 19 August 2014. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 7 May 2015.

The FOAM study: is Hysterosalpingo foam sonography (HyFoSy) a cost-effective alternative for hysterosalpingography (HSG) in assessing tubal patency in subfertile women? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Tubal pathology is a causative factor in 20% of subfertile couples. Traditionally, tubal testing during fertility work-up is performed by hysterosalpingography (HSG). Hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy) is a new technique that is thought to have comparable accuracy as HSG, while it is less expensive and more patient friendly. HyFoSy would be an acceptable alternative for HSG, provided it has similar effectiveness in terms of patient outcomes. METHODS/DESIGN: We aim to compare the effectiveness and costs of management guided by HyFoSy or by HSG. Consenting women will undergo tubal testing by both HyFoSy and HSG in a randomized order during fertility work-up. The study group will consist of 1163 subfertile women between 18 and 41 years old who are scheduled for tubal patency testing during their fertility work-up. Women with anovulatory cycles not responding to ovulation induction, endometriosis, severe male subfertility or a known contrast (iodine) allergy will be excluded. We anticipate that 7 % (N = 82) of the participants will have discordant test results for HyFoSy and HSG. These participants will be randomly allocated to either a management strategy based on HyFoSy or a management strategy based on HSG, resulting in either a diagnostic laparoscopy with chromopertubation or a strategy that assumes tubal patency (intrauterine insemination or expectant management). The primary outcome is ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth within 12 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes are patient pain scores, time to pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage rate, multiple pregnancy rate, preterm birth rate and number of additional treatments. Costs will be estimated by counting resource use and calculating unit prices. DISCUSSION: This trial will compare the effectiveness and costs of HyFoSy versus HSG in assessing tubal patency in subfertile women. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register (NTR 4746, http://www.trialregister.nl ). Date of registration: 19 August 2014.

Gonadotrophins versus clomifene citrate with or without intrauterine insemination in women with normogonadotropic anovulation and clomifene failure (M-OVIN): a randomised, two-by-two factorial trial.

BACKGROUND: In many countries, clomifene citrate is the treatment of first choice in women with normogonadotropic anovulation (ie, absent or irregular ovulation). If these women ovulate but do not conceive after several cycles with clomifene citrate, medication is usually switched to gonadotrophins, with or without intrauterine insemination. We aimed to assess whether switching to gonadotrophins is more effective than continuing clomifene citrate, and whether intrauterine insemination is more effective than intercourse. METHODS: In this two-by-two factorial multicentre randomised clinical trial, we recruited women aged 18 years and older with normogonadotropic anovulation not pregnant after six ovulatory cycles of clomifene citrate (maximum of 150 mg daily for 5 days) from 48 Dutch hospitals. Women were randomly assigned using a central password-protected internet-based randomisation programme to receive six cycles with gonadotrophins plus intrauterine insemination, six cycles with gonadotrophins plus intercourse, six cycles with clomifene citrate plus intrauterine insemination, or six cycles with clomifene citrate plus intercourse. Clomifene citrate dosages varied from 50 to 150 mg daily orally and gonadotrophin starting dose was 50 or 75 IU daily subcutaneously. The primary outcome was conception leading to livebirth within 8 months after randomisation defined as any baby born alive after a gestational age beyond 24 weeks. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. We made two comparisons, one in which gonadotrophins were compared with clomifene citrate and one in which intrauterine insemination was compared with intercourse. This completed study is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, number NTR1449. FINDINGS: Between Dec 8, 2008, and Dec 16, 2015, we randomly assigned 666 women to gonadotrophins and intrauterine insemination (n=166), gonadotrophins and intercourse (n=165), clomifene citrate and intrauterine insemination (n=163), or clomifene citrate and intercourse (n=172). Women allocated to gonadotrophins had more livebirths than those allocated to clomifene citrate (167 [52%] of 327 women vs 138 [41%] of 334 women, relative risk [RR] 1·24 [95% CI 1·05-1·46]; p=0·0124). Addition of intrauterine insemination did not increase livebirths compared with intercourse (161 [49%] vs 144 [43%], RR 1·14 [95% CI 0·97-1·35]; p=0·1152). Multiple pregnancy rates for the two comparisons were low and not different. There were three adverse events: one child with congenital abnormalities and one stillbirth in two women treated with clomifene citrate, and one immature delivery due to cervical insufficiency in a woman treated with gonadotrophins. INTERPRETATION: In women with normogonadotropic anovulation and clomifene citrate failure, a switch of treatment to gonadotrophins increased the chance of livebirth over treatment with clomifene citrate; there was no evidence that addition of intrauterine insemination does so. FUNDING: The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development.

The effectiveness of intrauterine insemination: A matched cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To study the effectiveness of an intrauterine insemination (IUI) program compared to no treatment in subfertile couples with unexplained subfertility and a poor prognosis on natural conception. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective matched cohort study in which ongoing pregnancy rates in 72 couples who voluntarily dropped out of treatment with IUI were compared to ongoing pregnancy rates in 144 couples who continued treatment with IUI. Couples with unexplained subfertility, mild male subfertility or cervical factor subfertility who started treatment with IUI between January 2000 and December 2008 were included. Couples were matched on hospital, age, duration of subfertility, primary or secondary subfertility and diagnosis. Primary outcome was cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate after three years. Time to pregnancy was censored at the moment couples were lost to follow up or when their child wish ended and, for the no-treatment group, when couples re-started treatment. RESULTS: After three years, there were 18 pregnancies in the stopped treatment group (25%) versus 41 pregnancies in the IUI group (28%) (RR 1.1 (0.59-2.2)(p=0.4)). The cumulative pregnancy rate after three years was 40% in both groups, showing no difference in time to ongoing pregnancy (shared frailty model p=0.86). CONCLUSIONS: In couples with unexplained subfertility and a poor prognosis for natural conception, treatment with IUI does not to add to expectant management. There is need for a randomized clinical trial comparing IUI with expectant management in these couples.

Reporting multiple cycles in trials on medically assisted reproduction.

Trials assessing effectiveness in medically assisted reproduction (MAR) should aim to study the desired effect over multiple cycles, as this reflects clinical practice and captures the relevant perspective for the couple. The aim of this study was to assess the extent to which multiple cycles are reported in MAR trials. A sample of randomized controlled trials (RCT) was collected on MAR, published in four time periods, in 11 pre-specified peer-reviewed journals; 253 trials were included: 196 on IVF, 37 on intrauterine insemination and 20 on ovulation induction. Forty-eight (19%) reported on multiple cycles, which was significantly more common in trials on intrauterine insemination and ovulation induction compared with trials on IVF (P < 0.01). Both trials on IVF were multi-centre trials, and those using live birth as primary outcome, reported significantly more often on multiple cycles (OR 3.7 CI 1.1 to 12.5) and (OR 8.7 CI 1.8 to 40.3), respectively. Trials designed to compare protocol variations reported multiple cycles less often (OR 0.07 CI 0.01 to 0.74). Most RCT on MAR, especially those on IVF, do not report cumulative pregnancy rates. As not all women become pregnant in their first cycle, the clinical significance of these trials is limited.

Impact of assisted reproductive technology on the incidence of multiple-gestation infants: a population perspective.

OBJECTIVE: To study the value of a population view in assessing assisted reproductive technology (ART) multiple-gestation infants. DESIGN: Descriptive comparison of ART treatment and population statistics in seven developed countries (United States [U.S.], South Korea, United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, Denmark) with varying ART utilization and single-embryo transfer (SET) rates. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): Not applicable. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The contribution of ART multiple-gestation infants to the total number of multiple-gestation infants in a population was calculated in relation to utilization of ART and SET rates. RESULT(S): The number of ART treatments leading to embryo transfer varied from 304 per million inhabitants in the U.S. to 1,518 in Denmark. The percentage of ART cycles that utilized SET varied from 8.8% in South Korea to 53.3% in Australia. Reflecting both utilization rates and SET rates, the percentage of multiple-gestation infants in the population attributed to ART ranged from 14.7% in South Korea to 29.0% in Denmark. CONCLUSION(S): In seven countries, the contribution of ART multiple-gestation infants to all multiple-gestation infants varies from 14.7% to 29.0%, a percentage that was influenced by both the SET rate per cycle and ART utilization rates. In the monitoring of safety and efficacy of fertility treatment, registration of the percentage of SET cycles alone might not be sufficient.

Long term outcome in subfertile couples with isolated cervical factor.

OBJECTIVE: A previous randomized clinical trial (RCT) compared immediate treatment with intrauterine insemination (IUI) to expectant management for six months in subfertile couples with an isolated cervical factor. That study showed higher ongoing pregnancy rates in couples receiving intrauterine insemination. The current study compared the long-term effectiveness and costs of this intervention. STUDY DESIGN: We followed all couples (N=99) who were previously included in the RCT for three years after randomization and registered pregnancies and treatments. After the initial trial period, couples in both groups were offered further treatment according to local protocol. The primary outcome was an ongoing pregnancy after three years. RESULTS: After three years, there were 36 ongoing pregnancies in the immediate IUI group (N=51 couples) and 38 ongoing pregnancies in the expectant management group (N=48 couples). The ongoing pregnancy rates were 71% and 79% respectively (RR 0.89 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.7-1.1)). CONCLUSIONS: In couples with an isolated cervical factor, a treatment strategy including immediate treatment with IUI does not result in higher ongoing pregnancy rates on the long term. Initial expectant management is therefore justified in these couples and identifying a cervical factor by a post-coital test is unnecessary.

Healthy overweight male partners of subfertile couples should not worry about their semen quality.

OBJECTIVE: To study the effect of body mass index (BMI) on semen quality in a cohort of male partners in subfertile couples. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: A fertility center based in an academic hospital. PATIENT(S): Between January 2000 and January 2007, 1466 men visiting the Centre for Reproductive Medicine as part of a subfertile couple. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Semen volume (in mL), semen concentration (in millions per mL), percentage of motile spermatozoa, percentage of spermatozoa with normal forms, total sperm count (in millions), and total motile sperm count (in millions). RESULT(S): After exclusion of men without data on BMI, the data of 1401 men could be analyzed. The group of men with a BMI lower than 20 kg/m2, with a BMI between 25 and 30 kg/m2, and with a BMI>30 kg/m2 had a lower semen volume compared with the group with a BMI between 20 and 25 kg/m2. Other semen parameters were not statistically significantly different. Multivariable analysis (generalized linear model), correcting for confounders, showed no statistically significant association between BMI and semen parameters, including semen volume. CONCLUSION(S): Semen quality was not statistically significantly affected by BMI in a cohort of male partners in subfertile couples.

Term life birth after late abortion of the first twin.

The incidence of multiple pregnancy has increased significantly in recent years as a result of assisted reproductive therapy. The most important complication of these pregnancies remains preterm delivery. We report an extraordinary case of delayed delivery after late abortion of the first twin. Tocolysis successfully prolonged the pregnancy for more than three months, and combined with antibiotics and corticosteroids resulted in a term delivery of a second healthy sibling. A total of 37 reports that describe 145 cases of intentional delayed delivery are available. Delay of delivery may offer significant improvement in survival and outcome for the remaining fetus. Delay of delivery beyond 37 weeks is uncommon with only eight reports. A protocol for the procedure of delayed delivery of the second twin is suggested.

Idiopathic impaired spermatogenesis: genetic epidemiology is unlikely to provide a short-cut to better understanding.

The aetiology of impaired spermatogenesis is unknown in the majority of subfertile men. From several studies of concordance for involuntary childlessness among men, we can conclude that there is a substantial familial component in male subfertility and that shared loci segregating through families can be assumed. We now know that deletions on the Y chromosome, which do not penetrate fully, account for some of these cases. There are good reasons to suspect that other cases result from mutations in genes located elsewhere in the genome. In this article, we discuss different approaches to unravelling the molecular basis of impaired spermatogenesis originating from genetic abnormalities in chromosomes other than the Y chromosome. Genetic mapping studies are in general a good approach to detect disease-causing genes that are segregating through a population; they can provide a shortcut to unravelling the biochemistry of a disease. In this paper, we explain our reasons for arguing that linkage and association studies are no promising means to identify the genes causing impaired spermatogenesis. We conclude that direct screening of candidate genes for mutations will be necessary to detect genes involved in impaired spermatogenesis. However, this approach requires studies of the biochemical pathways of normal and abnormal spermatogenesis. Since we have a poor understanding of these pathways, more research is needed into the biochemistry of spermatogenesis.

Absence of mutations in the PCI gene in subfertile men.

The molecular aetiology of male subfertility is still unknown in the majority of cases and it is thought that multiple genes are involved. One of the genes that might play a role in male reproductive function is the protein C inhibitor (PCI) gene. In mice the presence of PCI is an absolute requirement for reproduction. In this study we performed a mutation screen of the PCI gene in subfertile men with severe teratozoospermia or idiopathic azoospermia. Male partners of subfertile couples with idiopathic azoospermia (n = 27) or teratozoospermia (n = 34) and men with normozoospermia (n = 34) were screened for mutations in the PCI gene by direct sequencing. Nine nucleotide variants found in the patients were not present in the initial control group and were therefore screened in an additional control group of 80 men with normozoospermia by restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis. In addition, PCI antigen levels were measured in the seminal plasma of the patients in which a potential mutation was found. In total, three new variants were exclusively present in men with idiopathic azoospermia, but are not likely to have caused the patients' phenotypes. In addition, the PCI antigen levels in seminal plasma of these three patients were not decreased. The fact that we were not able to detect causal mutations in the PCI gene does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the PCI protein is not involved in human male fertility, but the results of our study indicate that mutations in the human PCI gene are not a common cause of reduced semen parameters in men.

A family of human Y chromosomes has dispersed throughout northern Eurasia despite a 1.8-Mb deletion in the azoospermia factor c region.

The human Y chromosome is replete with amplicons-very large, nearly identical repeats-which render it susceptible to interstitial deletions that often cause spermatogenic failure. Here we describe a recurrent, 1.8-Mb deletion that removes half of the azoospermia factor c (AZFc) region, including 12 members of eight testis-specific gene families. We show that this "b2/b3" deletion arose at least four times in human history-likely on inverted variants of the AZFc region that we find exist as common polymorphisms. We observed the b2/b3 deletion primarily in one family of closely related Y chromosomes-branch N in the Y-chromosome genealogy-in which all chromosomes carried the deletion. This branch is known to be widely distributed in northern Eurasia, accounts for the majority of Y chromosomes in some populations, and appears to be several thousand years old. The population-genetic success of the b2/b3 deletion is surprising, (i) because it removes half of AZFc and (ii) because the gr/gr deletion, which removes a similar set of testis-specific genes, predisposes to spermatogenic failure. Our present findings suggest either that the b2/b3 deletion has at most a modest effect on fitness or that, within branch N, its effect has been counterbalanced by another genetic, possibly Y-linked, factor.

Familial clustering of impaired spermatogenesis: no evidence for a common genetic inheritance pattern.

BACKGROUND: The aetiology of impaired spermatogenesis is unknown in the majority of cases. Evidence of a contribution of genetic factors is still scarce. Therefore, the aim of our study was to assess whether male factor subfertility due to impaired spermatogenesis has a familial component and to test different genetic models of inheritance. METHODS: Cases were all men with severe idiopathic impaired spermatogenesis attending our fertility clinic from January 1998 until December 2001. Controls were all men with normozoospermia attending our fertility clinic in the same period. Family data were collected from the medical records and by additional interviews of the probands. If subfertility of a first-degree relative was mentioned, permission was sought to contact the affected family member in order to obtain all medical information available, including the results of semen analyses. RESULTS: In total, 160 patients and 285 controls were included in the analysis. Family size and number of brothers and sisters were equally distributed in both groups. In the patient group, 1.63% of the brothers who had tried to father a child were mentioned to be subfertile compared to 5.8% in the control group [odds ratio 3.18 (95% confidence interval 1.59-6.37)]. The subfertility among the brothers in the patient group was more often due to reduced semen parameters compared to the control group. The data did not fit with frequent autosomal dominant or recessive segregation. CONCLUSION: Male factor subfertility due to impaired spermatogenesis appears to cluster in families. Our data suggests that heritable genetic factors play a role in a limited number of cases. Impaired spermatogenesis is not caused by a common genetic defect, but is most likely a complex disease in which several different factors play a role.

Chromosomal region 11p15 is associated with male factor subfertility.

The molecular aetiology of male factor subfertility, due to impaired spermatogenesis, is still unknown in the majority of cases. It is thought to be a complex disorder in which multiple genes are implicated. Cryptorchidism and reduced fecundity are symptoms in male Beckwith-Wiedemann patients and the ZNF214 and ZNF215 genes, localized on chromosomal region 11p15, are associated with this syndrome. We hypothesized that the ZNF214 and ZNF215 genes, which are predominantly expressed in the testis, could be involved in male factor subfertility in patients with idiopathic impaired spermatogenesis or in patients with impaired spermatogenesis due to cryptorchidism. Male partners of subfertile couples with idiopathic azoo- or severe oligozoospermia, male partners with azoo- or severe oligozoospermia and cryptorchidism in their medical history and men with normozoospermia were screened for nine single nucleotide polymorphisms in the ZNF214 and ZNF215 genes. An association study was performed based on allele and estimated haplotype frequencies. Statistically significant differences in allele frequencies and in estimated haplotype frequencies were found in both patient groups compared with controls. Thereafter, both genes were screened for mutations in all patients by PCR and single strand conformation polymorphism analysis. Aberrant patterns were confirmed by DNA sequencing. Mutation analysis in ZNF214 and ZNF215 revealed five new variants in the patients that were not present in the controls. At least three of these mutations were inherited from the mother. Our results suggest that chromosomal region 11p15 is associated with male factor subfertility due to impaired spermatogenesis with and without cryptorchidism.

Partial DAZ deletions in a family with five infertile brothers.

OBJECTIVE: To study the genetic cause of infertility in a family with five infertile brothers. DESIGN: Case report. SETTINGS: Center for reproductive medicine at a university medical center. PATIENT(S): Five brothers presenting with primary infertility due to severely impaired spermatogenesis; also, their parents and two other paternally related family members. INTERVENTION(S): Fluorescence in situ hybridization and sequence family variant analysis was performed in leukocyte DNA to determine the number of deleted in azoospermia (DAZ) genes. Linkage analysis was performed for X chromosome inheritance, and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) was screened for mutations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): DAZ gene copy number, X chromosome linkage, and mtDNA sequence. RESULT(S): With conventional polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis, no deletions of the AZFc region were found, but with fluorescence in situ hybridization and sequence family variant analysis, only two DAZ genes instead of four were detected in all individuals tested. The five brothers did not share an identical X chromosomal locus, and no mutations were found in the mtDNA of the index patient. CONCLUSION(S): A reduced copy number of the DAZ genes is found in five infertile brothers with severely impaired spermatogenesis, as well as in their normospermic father and in two other fertile paternally related family members. This illustrates that the phenotype associated with a reduced copy number of the DAZ genes can be extremely variable.