First Australian estimates of incidence and prevalence of uterine fibroids: a data linkage cohort study 2000-2022.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the estimated prevalence and incidence of uterine fibroids diagnosed in Australian women of reproductive age? SUMMARY ANSWER: An estimated 7.3% of Australian women had a diagnosis of uterine fibroids by the age of 45-49 years, with age-specific incidence highest in women aged 40-44 years (5.0 cases per 1000 person-years). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Uterine fibroids are associated with a high symptom burden and may affect overall health and quality of life. Studies in different countries show a wide variation in both the prevalence (4.5-68%) and incidence (2.2-37.5 per 1000 person-years) of uterine fibroids, which may be partly explained by the type of investigation, method of case ascertainment, or the age range of the study population, necessitating the reporting of country-specific estimates. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This observational prospective cohort study using self-report survey and linked administrative data (2000-2022) included 8066 women, born between 1973 and 1978, in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: A combination of self-report survey and linked administrative health data (hospital, emergency department, the Medicare Benefits Schedule, and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme) were used to identify women with a report of a diagnosis of uterine fibroids between 2000 and 2022. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Of the 8066 Australian women followed for 22 years, an estimated 7.3% of women (95% CI 6.9, 7.6) had a diagnosis of uterine fibroids by the age of 45-49 years. The incidence increased with age and was highest in women aged 40-44 years (5.0 cases per 1000 person-years, 95% CI 4.3, 5.7 cases per 1000 person-years). Women with uterine fibroids were more likely to experience heavy or painful periods. They were also more likely to report low iron levels, endometriosis, and poor self-rated health and to have two or more annual visits to their general practitioner. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Our estimates are based on self-report of doctor diagnosis or treatment for fibroids and/or data linked to treatment and procedure administrative records. This predominantly captures women with symptomatic fibroids, but has the potential for misclassification of asymptomatic women and an underestimate of overall prevalence and incidence. In addition, questions on fibroids were only asked in surveys when women were 37-42 years of age to 43-48 years of age, so cases at younger ages may have been underestimated (particularly in women with less severe symptoms) as these were only ascertained through data linkage. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: These are the first population-based estimates of the prevalence and incidence of uterine fibroids in women of reproductive age in Australia. Establishing these first estimates will help inform health policy and health care provision in the Australian context. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The ALSWH is funded by the Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care. L.FW. was supported by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Centres for Research Excellence grant (APP1153420) and G.D.M. was supported by an NHMRC Leadership Fellowship (APP2009577). The funding bodies played no role in the design, the collection, analysis or interpretation of data, the writing of the manuscript, or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. There are no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

A Pt(IV)-conjugated brain penetrant macrocyclic peptide shows pre-clinical efficacy in glioblastoma.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most aggressive primary malignant brain tumor, with a median survival of approximately 15 months. Treatment is limited by the blood-brain barrier (BBB) which restricts the passage of most drugs to the brain. We previously reported the design and synthesis of a BBB-penetrant macrocyclic cell-penetrating peptide conjugate (M13) covalently linked at the axial position of a Pt(IV) cisplatin prodrug. Here we show the Pt(IV)-M13 conjugate releases active cisplatin upon intracellular reduction and effects potent in vitro GBM cell killing. Pt(IV)-M13 significantly increased platinum uptake in an in vitro BBB spheroid model and intravenous administration of Pt(IV)-M13 in GBM tumor-bearing mice led to higher platinum levels in brain tissue and intratumorally compared with cisplatin. Pt(IV)-M13 administration was tolerated in naïve nude mice at higher dosage regimes than cisplatin and significantly extended survival above controls in a murine GBM xenograft model (median survival 33 days for Pt(IV)-M13 vs 24 days for Pt(IV) prodrug, 22.5 days for cisplatin and 22 days for control). Increased numbers of γH2AX nuclear foci, biomarkers of DNA damage, were observed in tumors of Pt(IV)-M13-treated mice, consistent with elevated platinum levels. The present work provides the first demonstration that systemic injection of a Pt(IV) complex conjugated to a brain-penetrant macrocyclic peptide can lead to increased platinum levels in the brain and extend survival in mouse GBM models, supporting further development of this approach and the utility of brain-penetrating macrocyclic peptide conjugates for delivering non-BBB penetrant drugs to the central nervous system.

Top 10 priorities for future infertility research: an international consensus development study.

STUDY QUESTION: Can the priorities for future research in infertility be identified? SUMMARY ANSWER: The top 10 research priorities for the four areas of male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction, and ethics, access, and organization of care for people with fertility problems were identified. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Many fundamental questions regarding the prevention, management, and consequences of infertility remain unanswered. This is a barrier to improving the care received by those people with fertility problems. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Potential research questions were collated from an initial international survey, a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines, and Cochrane systematic reviews. A rationalized list of confirmed research uncertainties was prioritized in an interim international survey. Prioritized research uncertainties were discussed during a consensus development meeting. Using a formal consensus development method, the modified nominal group technique, diverse stakeholders identified the top 10 research priorities for each of the categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction, and ethics, access, and organization of care. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems, and others (healthcare funders, healthcare providers, healthcare regulators, research funding bodies and researchers) were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus methods advocated by the James Lind Alliance. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The initial survey was completed by 388 participants from 40 countries, and 423 potential research questions were submitted. Fourteen clinical practice guidelines and 162 Cochrane systematic reviews identified a further 236 potential research questions. A rationalized list of 231 confirmed research uncertainties were entered into an interim prioritization survey completed by 317 respondents from 43 countries. The top 10 research priorities for each of the four categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility (including age-related infertility, ovarian cysts, uterine cavity abnormalities, and tubal factor infertility), medically assisted reproduction (including ovarian stimulation, IUI, and IVF), and ethics, access, and organization of care, were identified during a consensus development meeting involving 41 participants from 11 countries. These research priorities were diverse and seek answers to questions regarding prevention, treatment, and the longer-term impact of infertility. They highlight the importance of pursuing research which has often been overlooked, including addressing the emotional and psychological impact of infertility, improving access to fertility treatment, particularly in lower resource settings, and securing appropriate regulation. Addressing these priorities will require diverse research methodologies, including laboratory-based science, qualitative and quantitative research, and population science. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, methodological decisions informed by professional judgement, and arbitrary consensus definitions. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: We anticipate that identified research priorities, developed to specifically highlight the most pressing clinical needs as perceived by healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems, and others, will help research funding organizations and researchers to develop their future research agenda. STUDY FUNDING/ COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was funded by the Auckland Medical Research Foundation, Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. Geoffrey Adamson reports research sponsorship from Abbott, personal fees from Abbott and LabCorp, a financial interest in Advanced Reproductive Care, committee membership of the FIGO Committee on Reproductive Medicine, International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies, International Federation of Fertility Societies, and World Endometriosis Research Foundation, and research sponsorship of the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies from Abbott and Ferring. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. Hans Evers reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. Andrew Horne reports research sponsorship from the Chief Scientist's Office, Ferring, Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, and Wellbeing of Women and consultancy fees from Abbvie, Ferring, Nordic Pharma, and Roche Diagnostics. M. Louise Hull reports grants from Merck, grants from Myovant, grants from Bayer, outside the submitted work and ownership in Embrace Fertility, a private fertility company. Neil Johnson reports research sponsorship from Abb-Vie and Myovant Sciences and consultancy fees from Guerbet, Myovant Sciences, Roche Diagnostics, and Vifor Pharma. José Knijnenburg reports research sponsorship from Ferring and Theramex. Richard Legro reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. Ben Mol reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. Ernest Ng reports research sponsorship from Merck. Craig Niederberger reports being the Co Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and retains a financial interest in NexHand. Jane Stewart reports being employed by a National Health Service fertility clinic, consultancy fees from Merck for educational events, sponsorship to attend a fertility conference from Ferring, and being a clinical subeditor of Human Fertility. Annika Strandell reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. Jack Wilkinson reports being a statistical editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. Andy Vail reports that he is a Statistical Editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology & Fertility Review Group and of the journal Reproduction. His employing institution has received payment from HFEA for his advice on review of research evidence to inform their 'traffic light' system for infertility treatment 'add-ons'. Lan Vuong reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the present work. All authors have completed the disclosure form. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.

Top 10 priorities for future infertility research: an international consensus development study† ‡.

STUDY QUESTION: Can the priorities for future research in infertility be identified? SUMMARY ANSWER: The top 10 research priorities for the four areas of male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction and ethics, access and organization of care for people with fertility problems were identified. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Many fundamental questions regarding the prevention, management and consequences of infertility remain unanswered. This is a barrier to improving the care received by those people with fertility problems. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Potential research questions were collated from an initial international survey, a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and Cochrane systematic reviews. A rationalized list of confirmed research uncertainties was prioritized in an interim international survey. Prioritized research uncertainties were discussed during a consensus development meeting. Using a formal consensus development method, the modified nominal group technique, diverse stakeholders identified the top 10 research priorities for each of the categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction and ethics, access and organization of care. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems and others (healthcare funders, healthcare providers, healthcare regulators, research funding bodies and researchers) were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus methods advocated by the James Lind Alliance. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The initial survey was completed by 388 participants from 40 countries, and 423 potential research questions were submitted. Fourteen clinical practice guidelines and 162 Cochrane systematic reviews identified a further 236 potential research questions. A rationalized list of 231 confirmed research uncertainties was entered into an interim prioritization survey completed by 317 respondents from 43 countries. The top 10 research priorities for each of the four categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility (including age-related infertility, ovarian cysts, uterine cavity abnormalities and tubal factor infertility), medically assisted reproduction (including ovarian stimulation, IUI and IVF) and ethics, access and organization of care were identified during a consensus development meeting involving 41 participants from 11 countries. These research priorities were diverse and seek answers to questions regarding prevention, treatment and the longer-term impact of infertility. They highlight the importance of pursuing research which has often been overlooked, including addressing the emotional and psychological impact of infertility, improving access to fertility treatment, particularly in lower resource settings and securing appropriate regulation. Addressing these priorities will require diverse research methodologies, including laboratory-based science, qualitative and quantitative research and population science. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, methodological decisions informed by professional judgment and arbitrary consensus definitions. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: We anticipate that identified research priorities, developed to specifically highlight the most pressing clinical needs as perceived by healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems and others, will help research funding organizations and researchers to develop their future research agenda. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was funded by the Auckland Medical Research Foundation, Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. G.D.A. reports research sponsorship from Abbott, personal fees from Abbott and LabCorp, a financial interest in Advanced Reproductive Care, committee membership of the FIGO Committee on Reproductive Medicine, International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies, International Federation of Fertility Societies and World Endometriosis Research Foundation, and research sponsorship of the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies from Abbott and Ferring. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. J.L.H.E. reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. A.W.H. reports research sponsorship from the Chief Scientist's Office, Ferring, Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research and Wellbeing of Women and consultancy fees from AbbVie, Ferring, Nordic Pharma and Roche Diagnostics. M.L.H. reports grants from Merck, grants from Myovant, grants from Bayer, outside the submitted work and ownership in Embrace Fertility, a private fertility company. N.P.J. reports research sponsorship from AbbVie and Myovant Sciences and consultancy fees from Guerbet, Myovant Sciences, Roche Diagnostics and Vifor Pharma. J.M.L.K. reports research sponsorship from Ferring and Theramex. R.S.L. reports consultancy fees from AbbVie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. B.W.M. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. E.H.Y.N. reports research sponsorship from Merck. C.N. reports being the Co Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring and retains a financial interest in NexHand. J.S. reports being employed by a National Health Service fertility clinic, consultancy fees from Merck for educational events, sponsorship to attend a fertility conference from Ferring and being a clinical subeditor of Human Fertility. A.S. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. J.W. reports being a statistical editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. A.V. reports that he is a Statistical Editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology & Fertility Review Group and the journal Reproduction. His employing institution has received payment from Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority for his advice on review of research evidence to inform their 'traffic light' system for infertility treatment 'add-ons'. N.L.V. reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the present work. All authors have completed the disclosure form. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Endometrial scratching for subfertility: everyone's doing it.

STUDY QUESTION: What proportion of clinicians across Australia, New Zealand and the UK are currently offering or recommending endometrial scratching for subfertility? SUMMARY ANSWER: Eighty-three percent of clinicians responding to this survey are recommending endometrial scratching to women undergoing IVF. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Endometrial scratching is currently being proposed as a technique to increase the probability of implantation in women undergoing IVF. While trial results provide evidence in favour of this procedure, there remains some uncertainty about both the extent of any beneficial effect and the subgroups of women most likely to benefit. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Cross-sectional survey with responses from a total of 143 public and private fertility care providers surveyed between August and October 2015. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: An online survey was distributed to all 189 fertility clinics across Australia, New Zealand and the UK. All clinicians, nurses and embryologists were eligible to take part. One hundred and forty-three of the 152 responses received were eligible for inclusion, with multiple responses per clinic in 33 cases. At least one response was received from 68 clinics (36% response rate per clinic). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: This survey found that 83% of clinicians commend endometrial scratching prior to IVF. Of these, 92% recommend endometrial scratching to women with recurrent implantation failure (RIF) and 6% recommend it to all women having IVF. Most respondents (73%) agreed that the procedure is beneficial in women with RIF undergoing IVF and disagreed (53%) that the procedure is beneficial for women undergoing their first IVF cycle. The most common timeframe for performing endometrial scratching is the luteal phase of the cycle prior to the IVF cycle. Additionally, only 4% of clinicians recommend endometrial scratching to women undergoing intrauterine insemination or trying to conceive naturally. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Fertility care providers who recommend endometrial scratching may be more likely to respond to the survey and this could exaggerate the use of the procedure reported here. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study was conducted across three countries and may be generalizable to similar settings. While this procedure already appears to be offered by the majority of respondents, the results of further studies in this area may further refine or expand the context in which this procedure is beneficial. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: No funding or competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

In-utero infection with HIV-1 associated with suppressed lymphoproliferative responses at birth.

In-utero exposure to HIV-1 may affect the immune system of the developing child and may induce HIV-1-specific immune responses, even in the absence of HIV-1 infection. We evaluated lymphoproliferative capacity at birth among 40 HIV-1-uninfected infants born to HIV-1-infected mothers and 10 infants who had acquired HIV-1 in utero. Cord blood mononuclear cells were assayed using [(3) H]-thymidine incorporation for proliferation in response to HIV-1 p55-gag and the control stimuli phytohaemagglutinin (PHA), Staphylococcus enterotoxin B (SEB) and allogeneic cells. In response to HIV-1 p55-gag, eight (20%) HIV-1-exposed, uninfected (EU) infants had a stimulation index (SI) ≥ 2 and three (30%) in-utero HIV-1 infected infants had SI ≥2. The frequency and magnitude of responses to HIV-1 p55-gag were low overall, and did not differ statistically between groups. However, proliferative responses to control stimuli were significantly higher in EU infants than in infants infected in utero, with a median SI in response to PHA of 123 [interquartile range (IQR) 77-231] versus 18 (IQR 4-86) between EU and infected infants, respectively (P < 0·001). Among infected infants, gestational maturity was associated with the strength of HIV-1 p55-gag response (P < 0·001); neither maternal nor infant HIV-1 viral load was associated. In summary, EU and HIV-1-infected infants mounted HIV-1-specific lymphoproliferative responses at similar rates (20-30%), and although global immune function was preserved among EU infants, neonatal immune responses were significantly compromised by HIV-1 infection. Such early lymphoproliferative compromise may, in part, explain rapid progression to AIDS and death among HIV-1-infected infants.

Biomarker evaluation of self-reported condom use among women in HIV-discordant couples.

Self-reported condom use is a commonly collected statistic, yet its use in research studies may be inaccurate. We evaluated this statistic among women in HIV-discordant couples enrolled in a clinical trial in Nairobi, Kenya. Vaginal swabs were acquired from 125 women and tested for prostate-specific antigen (PSA), a biomarker for semen exposure, using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Ten (10%) of 98 women who reported 100% use of condoms in the previous month tested PSA positive. In a bivariate logistic regression analysis, among women who reported 100% condom use in the previous month, those with ≤8 years of school had significantly higher odds of testing PSA-positive (odds ratio [OR] = 8.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-69.13) than women with more schooling. Our estimate may be conservative, as the ability to detect PSA may be limited to 24-48 hours after exposure. Less educated women may be a target group for counselling regarding reporting sexual behaviour in clinical trials.

A comparative analysis of assisted reproductive technology cycles in Australia and New Zealand 2004-2007.

BACKGROUND: There are different funding arrangements for fertility treatments between New Zealand (NZ) and Australia. In NZ, there are two options for patients accessing treatment: either meeting specified criteria for age, no smoking and BMI for publicly funding or funding their own treatment. This differs from Australia, which has no explicit eligibility criteria restricting access to fertility treatment. An analysis of assisted reproductive technology (ART) in Australia and NZ was undertaken to consider the impact of these different funding approaches. METHODS: Data were extracted from the Australian and New Zealand Assisted Reproduction Database between 2004 and 2007. A total of 116 111 autologous fresh cycles were included. RESULTS: In Australia, more cycles were in women aged 40 years or older compared with those in NZ (23.5 versus 16.0%, P < 0.01). Single embryo transfer was more common in NZ than that in Australia, in women < 35 years of age (75.1 versus 59.6%, P < 0.01). In women <35 years, the crude rates of clinical pregnancy (37.5 versus 31.2%, P < 0.01) and live delivery (31.6 versus 26%, P < 0.01) following fresh ART cycles were significantly higher in NZ than that in Australia. These differences in outcomes persisted in older age groups. CONCLUSIONS: The purpose of the criteria used in NZ to access public funding for fertility treatments is to optimize pregnancy outcomes. This approach has resulted in a healthier population of women undergoing treatment and may explain the improved pregnancy outcomes seen in NZ couples who undergo fertility treatments.

PCOSMIC: a multi-centre randomized trial in women with PolyCystic Ovary Syndrome evaluating Metformin for Infertility with Clomiphene.

BACKGROUND: Ovulation induction treatment with metformin, either alone or in combination with clomiphene citrate (CC), remains controversial even though previous randomized trials have examined this. METHODS: A double blinded multi-centre randomized trial was undertaken including 171 women with anovulatory or oligo-ovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome. Women with high body mass index (BMI) > 32 kg/m(2) received placebo ('standard care') or metformin; women with BMI < or = 32 kg/m(2) received CC ('standard care'), metformin or both. Treatment continued for 6 months or until pregnancy was confirmed. Primary outcomes were clinical pregnancy and live birth. RESULTS: For women with BMI > 32 kg/m(2), clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were 22% (7/32) and 16% (5/32) with metformin, 15% (5/33) and 6% (2/33) with placebo. For women with BMI < or = 32 kg/m(2), clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were 40% (14/35) and 29% (10/35) with metformin, 39% (14/36) and 36% (13/36) with CC, 54% (19/35) and 43% (15/35) with combination metformin plus CC. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that adding metformin to 'standard care' is beneficial. Pregnancy and live birth rates are low in women with BMI > 32 kg/m(2) whatever treatment is used, with no evidence of benefit of metformin over placebo. For women with BMI < or = 32 kg/m(2) there is no evidence of significant differences in outcomes whether treated with metformin, CC or both. ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00795808; trial protocol accepted for publication November 2005: Johnson, Aust N Z Journal Obstet Gynaecol 2006;46:141-145.

Epigenetic regulation of endometrium during the menstrual cycle.

The endometrium undergoes morphological and functional changes during the menstrual cycle which are essential for uterine receptivity. These changes are driven by estrogen and progesterone and involve the fine control of many different genes-several of which have been identified as being epigenetically regulated. Epigenetic modification may therefore influence the functional changes in the endometrium required for successful implantation. There is, however, only limited information on epigenetic regulation in endometrium. We review the potential role of epigenetic regulation of key processes during the menstrual cycle and present our own findings following a preliminary study into global acetylation levels in the human endometrium. A changing epigenetic state is associated with the differentiation of stem cells into different lineages and thus may be involved in endometrial regeneration. Histone acetylation is implicated in the vascular endothelial growth factor pathway during angiogenesis, and studies using histone deacetylase inhibitors suggest an involvement in endometrial proliferation and differentiation. The processes of decidualization and implantation are also associated with epigenetic change and epigenetic modulators show variable expression across the menstrual cycle. Our own studies found that endometrial global histone acetylation, as determined by western blotting, changed throughout the menstrual cycle and correlated well with expected transcription activity during the different phases. This suggests that epigenetics may be involved in the regulation of endometrial gene expression during the menstrual cycle and that abnormal epigenetic modifications may therefore be associated with implantation failure and early pregnancy loss as well as with other endometrial pathologies.

Mode of delivery decisions among HIV-infected mothers at an urban maternity hospital in Kenya.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the use of elective Caesarean section (ECS) for prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV (PMTCT) at an urban Kenyan maternity hospital, to describe mode of delivery decision making among HIV positive women, and to understand patient knowledge and attitudes regarding ECS for PMTCT. DESIGN: Descriptive cross-sectional study. SETTING: Pumwani Maternity Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya. SUBJECTS: Two hundred and fifty postpartum HIV-infected women. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: ECS delivery rate, correlates of mode of delivery decisions and ECS for PMTCT knowledge and attitudes RESULTS: The rate of delivery by ECS for PMTCT was 4.0% (10/250), though 13.6% (34/250) planned this mode of delivery. Patient education regarding ECS for PMTCT was limited, and 64% (160/250) of participants had never heard of ECS. Planning ECS for PMTCT was positively correlated with attending clinic at PMH (OR=9.12, 95% CI: 2.94-28.28, p<0.001), knowledge of ECS (OR=27.22, 95% CI: 5.04-148.20, p<0.001) and having a history of abdominal surgery (OR=30.96, 95% CI: 6.32-205.02, p<0.001). Delivering by ECS was associated with planning this mode of delivery (OR=19.52, 95% CI: 3.69-103.23, p<0.001). Planning but not delivering by ECS was mostly due to labour before scheduled ECS (55.6%, 15/27) or poor patient understanding of the intervention (29.6%,8/27). After education on ECS for PMTCT, 48.0% (120/250) of participants would consider elective Caesarean section if offered, though cost represented a significant barrier to acceptability. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge and utilisation of ECS for PMTCT are limited and varied in this patient population. ECS may be an acceptable mode of delivery for some Kenyan women, especially if the burden of cost is removed. A clear policy on ECS counselling and utilisation is urgently needed to ensure consistent and appropriate use of this PMTCT intervention in Kenya.

The impact of body mass index on semen parameters and reproductive hormones in human males: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that body mass index (BMI), especially obesity, is associated with subfertility in men. Semen parameters are central to male fertility and reproductive hormones also play a role in spermatogenesis. This review aimed to investigate the association of BMI with semen parameters and reproductive hormones in men of reproductive age. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Biological Abstracts, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases and references from relevant articles were searched in January and February 2009. Outcomes included for semen parameters were sperm concentration, total sperm count, semen volume, motility and morphology. Reproductive hormones included were testosterone, free testosterone, estradiol, FSH, LH, inhibin B and sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG). A meta-analysis was conducted to investigate sperm concentration and total sperm count. RESULTS: In total, 31 studies were included. Five studies were suitable for pooling and the meta-analysis found no evidence for a relationship between BMI and sperm concentration or total sperm count. Overall review of all studies similarly revealed little evidence for a relationship with semen parameters and increased BMI. There was strong evidence of a negative relationship for testosterone, SHBG and free testosterone with increased BMI. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review with meta-analysis has not found evidence of an association between increased BMI and semen parameters. The main limitation of this review is that data from most studies could not be aggregated for meta-analysis. Population-based studies with larger sample sizes and longitudinal studies are required.

Cervical insemination versus intra-uterine insemination of donor sperm for subfertility.

BACKGROUND: Insemination with donor sperm is an option for couples for whom in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) has been unsuccessful, couples with azoospermia and for single women or same sex couples. Insemination of sperm can be done via cervical (CI) or intra-uterine (IUI) routes. IUI has been considered potentially more effective than CI as the sperm bypasses the cervical mucus and is deposited closer to the fallopian tubes. The cost and risks of IUI may be higher because of the need for sperm preparation and the introduction of foreign material into the uterus. Donor sperm used for artificial insemination is mainly cryopreserved, due to concerns about HIV transmission. However, cycle fecundity is higher for fresh sperm. Insemination is often combined with ovulatory stimulation, with either clomiphene or gonadotrophin. There may be risks associated with these therapies, such as higher multiple pregnancy rates. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether pregnancy outcomes are improved using intra-uterine insemination in comparison to cervical insemination in women undergoing artificial insemination with donor sperm. SEARCH STRATEGY: The following databases were searched: the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library) , MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the reference lists of articles retrieved. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing IUI with CI were included. Crossover studies were included if pre-crossover data was available. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Study quality assessment and data extraction were carried out independently by two review authors (DB, JM). Authors of studies that potentially met the inclusion criteria were contacted, where possible if additional information was needed. MAIN RESULTS: The search strategy found 232 articles. Fifteen studies potentially met the inclusion criteria. Four studies were included in this review. All the included studies used cryopreserved sperm in stimulated cycles. In two studies 134 women had gonadotrophin-stimulated cycles and in two studies 74 women had clomiphene-stimulated cycles. The evidence showed that IUI after 6 cycles significantly improved live birth rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 3.86) and pregnancy rates (OR 3.37, 95% CI 1.90 to 5.96) in comparison to cervical insemination. There was no statistically significant evidence of an effect on multiple pregnancies (OR 2.19, 95% CI 0.79 to 6.07) or miscarriages (relative risk (RR) 3.92, 95% CI 0.85 to 17.96). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this systematic review support the use of IUI rather than CI in stimulated cycles using cryopreserved sperm for donor insemination.

Barrier agents for adhesion prevention after gynaecological surgery.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic adhesion can form as a result of inflammation, endometriosis or surgical trauma. During pelvic surgery, strategies to reduce pelvic adhesion formation may include placing synthetic barrier agents such as oxidised regenerated cellulose, polytetrafluoroethylene or Fibrin sheets between the pelvic structures. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of physical barriers used during pelvic surgery in women of reproductive age on pregnancy rates, pelvic pain, or postoperative adhesion reformation. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register (searched September 2007) which is based on regular searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and CENTRAL, plus handsearching of 20 relevant journals and conference proceedings, and searches of several key grey literature sources. In addition, companies were contacted for unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Any randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of physical barriers versus no treatment or other physical barriers in the prevention of adhesions in women undergoing gynaecological surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors assessed trial eligibility and quality. MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen RCTs were included. Five trials randomised patients while the remainder randomised pelvic organs. Laparoscopy (six trials) and laparotomy (10 trials) were the primary surgical techniques. Indications for surgery included myomectomy (five trials), ovarian surgery (five trials), pelvic adhesions (four trials), endometriosis (one trial), and mixed (one trial). Eleven trials assessed Interceed versus no treatment, two assessed Interceed versus Gore-Tex, one trial assessed Gore-Tex versus no treatment, and one trial assessed Seprafilm versus no treatment. A single trial assessed Fibrin sheet versus no treatment. No studies reported pregnancy or reduction in pain as outcomes. The use of Interceed was associated with reduced incidence of pelvic adhesion formation, both new formation and reformation following laparoscopic surgery or laparotomy. However, this result should be interpreted with caution. Gore-Tex was more effective than no barrier or Interceed in preventing adhesion formation. There was only limited evidence that Seprafilm was effective in preventing adhesion formation following myomectomy and no evidence to support Fibrin sheet. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The absorbable adhesion barrier Interceed reduces the incidence of adhesion formation following laparoscopy and laparotomy, but there are insufficient data to support its use to improve pregnancy rates. Gore-Tex may be superior to Interceed in preventing adhesion formation but its usefulness is limited by the need for suturing and later removal. There was no evidence of effectiveness of Seprafilm and Fibrin sheet in preventing adhesion formation.

Danazol for pelvic pain associated with endometriosis.

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis is defined as the presence of endometrial tissue (stromal and glandular) outside the normal uterine cavity. Conventional medical and surgical treatments for endometriosis aim to remove or decrease the deposits of ectopic endometrium. The observation that hyper androgenic states (an excess of male hormone) induce atrophy of the endometrium has led to the use of androgens in the treatment of endometriosis. Danazol is one of these treatments. The efficacy of danazol is based on its ability to produce a high androgen and low oestrogen environment (a pseudo menopause) which results in atrophy of the endometriotic implants and thus an improvement in painful symptoms. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of danazol compared to placebo or no treatment in the treatment of the symptoms and signs, other than infertility, of endometriosis in women of reproductive age. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register of trials (searched April 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2007), and MEDLINE (1966 to April 2007). In addition, all reference lists of included trials were searched, and relevant drug companies were contacted for details of unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials in which danazol (alone or as adjunctive therapy) was compared to placebo or no therapy. Trials which only reported infertility outcomes were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Only five trials met the inclusion criteria and two authors independently extracted data from these trials. All trials compared danazol to placebo. Three trials used danazol as sole therapy and three trials used danazol as an adjunct to surgery. Although the main outcome was pain improvement other data relating to laparoscopic scores and hormonal parameters were also collected. MAIN RESULTS: Treatment with danazol (including adjunctive to surgical therapy) was effective in relieving painful symptoms related to endometriosis when compared to placebo. Laparoscopic scores were improved with danazol treatment (including as adjunctive therapy) when compared with either placebo or no treatment. Side effects were more commonly reported in those patients receiving danazol than for placebo. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Danazol is effective in treating the symptoms and signs of endometriosis. However, its use is limited by the occurrence of androgenic side effects.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for heavy menstrual bleeding.

BACKGROUND: Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is an important cause of ill health in premenopausal women. Although surgery is often used as a treatment, a range of medical therapies are also available. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs reduce prostaglandin levels which are elevated in women with excessive menstrual bleeding and also may have a beneficial effect on dysmenorrhoea. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this review was to investigate the effectiveness of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in achieving a reduction in menstrual blood loss in women of reproductive years HMB. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders & Subfertility Group trials register (searched April 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2007), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2007), EMBASE (1985 to April 2007), CINAHL (1982 to April 2007), Current Contents (1993 to April 2007) and reference lists of articles. We also contacted manufacturers and researchers in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: The inclusion criteria were randomised comparisons of individual NSAIDs with either each other, placebo or other medical treatments in women with regular heavy periods measured either objectively or subjectively and with no pathological or iatrogenic (treatment induced) causes for their heavy menstrual blood loss. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Seventeen RCTs were identified that fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this review and data were extracted independently. Odds ratios for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes were estimated from the data of nine trials. The results of the remaining seven crossover trials with data unsuitable for pooling and one trial with skewed data were described in the Other Data section. MAIN RESULTS: As a group, NSAIDs were more effective than placebo at reducing heavy menstrual bleeding but less effective than either tranexamic acid, danazol or the levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (LNG IUS). Treatment with danazol caused a shorter duration of menstruation and more adverse events than NSAIDs but this did not appear to affect the acceptability of treatment. There were no statistically significant differences between NSAIDs and the other treatments (oral luteal progestogen, ethamsylate, an older progesterone releasing intra-uterine system (Progestasert), oral contraceptive pill (OCC)) but most studies were underpowered. There was no evidence of a difference between the individual NSAIDs (naproxen and mefenamic acid) in reducing HMB. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: NSAIDs reduce HMB when compared with placebo but are less effective than either tranexamic acid, danazol or LNG IUS. However, adverse events are more severe with danazol therapy. In the limited number of small studies suitable for evaluation, no significant difference in efficacy was demonstrated between NSAIDs and other medical treatments such as oral luteal progestogen, ethamsylate, OCC or another type of IUS, Progestasert.

WITHDRAWN: Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues for pain associated with endometriosis.

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis is a common gynaecological condition that frequently presents with the symptom of pain. The precise pathogenesis (mode of development) of endometriosis is unclear but it is evident that endometriosis arises by the dissemination of endometrium to ectopic sites and the subsequent establishment of deposits of ectopic endometrium. The observation that endometriosis is rarely seen in the hypo-oestrogenic (low levels of oestrogen) post-menopausal woman led to the concept of medical treatment by induction of a pseudo-menopause using Gonadotrophin Releasing Hormone Analogues (GnRHas). When administered in a non-pulsatile manner (the pituitary is normally stimulated by pulses of natural GnRH and all analogues act on the pituitary at a constant level) their use results in down regulation (switching off) of the pituitary and a hypogonadotrophic hypogonadal state (low levels of female hormones due to non stimulation of the ovary). OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of Gonadotrophin Releasing Hormone analogues (GnRHas) in the treatment of the painful symptoms of endometriosis by comparing them with no treatment, placebo, other recognised medical treatments, and surgical interventions. SEARCH STRATEGY: The search strategy of the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility review group (please see Review Group details) was used to identify all randomised trials of the use of GnRHas for the treatment of the painful symptoms of endometriosis. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials were included if they were randomised, and considered the effectiveness of GnRHas in the treatment of the painful symptoms of endometriosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Twenty-six studies had data appropriate for inclusion in the review. The largest group (15 studies) compared GnRHas with danazol. There are five studies comparing GnRHas with GnRHas plus add-back therapy, three comparing GnRHa with GnRHa in a different form or dose, one compares them with gestrinone, one with the combined oral contraceptive pill, and one with placebo. Data was extracted independently by two reviewers. The authors of eleven studies have been contacted to clarify missing or unclear data. Only four have replied to date. Data on relief of pain, change in revised American Fertility Society (rAFS) scores, and side effects was collected. MAIN RESULTS: No difference was found between GnRHas and any of the other active comparators with respect to pain relief or reduction in endometriotic deposits. The side effect profiles of the different treatments were different, with danazol and gestrinone having more androgenic side effects, while GnRHas tend to produce more hypo-oestrogenic symptoms. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is little or no difference in the effectiveness of GnRHas in comparison with other medical treatments for endometriosis. GnRHas do appear to be an effective treatment. Differences that do exist relate to side effect profiles. Side effects of GnRHas can be ameliorated by the addition of addback therapy.

Laparoscopic 'drilling' by diathermy or laser for ovulation induction in anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Surgical ovarian wedge resection was the first established treatment for women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) but was largely abandoned due to the risk of postsurgical adhesions and the introduction of medical ovulation induction with clomiphene and gonadotrophins. However, women with PCOS who are treated with gonadotrophins often have an over-production of follicles which may result in ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and multiple pregnancies. Moreover, gonadotrophins, though effective, are costly and time-consuming requiring intensive monitoring. Surgical therapy with laparoscopic ovarian 'drilling' (LOD) may avoid or reduce the need for gonadotrophins or may facilitate their usefulness. The procedure can be done on an outpatient basis with less trauma and fewer postoperative adhesions than with traditional surgical approaches. Many uncontrolled observational studies have claimed that ovarian drilling is followed, at least temporarily, by a high rate of spontaneous ovulation and conception or that subsequent medical ovulation induction becomes easier. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic ovarian drilling compared with ovulation induction for subfertile women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS. SEARCH STRATEGY: We used the search strategy of the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials of subfertile women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS who undertook laparoscopic ovarian drilling in order to induce ovulation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Sixteen trials were identified and nine were included in the review. All trials were assessed for quality criteria. The primary outcomes were live birth, ovulation and pregnancy rates and the secondary outcomes were rates of miscarriage, multiple pregnancy, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and cost. MAIN RESULTS: There was no evidence of a difference in live birth or clinical pregnancy rate between LOD and gonadotrophins and the pooled odds ratios (OR) (all studies) were 1.04 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.85) and 1.08 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.71) respectively. Multiple pregnancy rates were lower with ovarian drilling than with gonadotrophins (1% versus 16%; OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.52). There was no evidence of a difference in miscarriage rates between the two groups (OR 0.81, 95% 0.36 to 1.86). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of a difference in the live birth rate and miscarriage rate in women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS undergoing LOD compared to gonadotrophin treatment. The reduction in multiple pregnancy rates in women undergoing LOD makes this option attractive. However, there are ongoing concerns about long-term effects of LOD on ovarian function.

Surgical interruption of pelvic nerve pathways in dysmenorrhea: a systematic review of effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of surgical interruption of pelvic nerve pathways in primary and secondary dysmenorrhea. Data sources. The Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register (9 June 2004), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2004), MEDLINE (1966 to Nov. 2003), EMBASE (1980 to Nov. 2003), CINAHL (1982 to Oct. 2003), MetaRegister of Controlled Trials, the citation lists of review articles and included trials, and contact with the corresponding author of each included trial. REVIEW METHODS: The inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials of uterosacral nerve ablation or presacral neurectomy (both open and laparoscopic procedures) for the treatment of dysmenorrhea. The main outcome measures were pain relief and adverse effects. Two reviewers extracted data on characteristics of the study quality and the population, intervention, and outcome independently. RESULTS: Nine randomized controlled trials were included in the systematic review. There were two trials with open presacral neurectomy; all other trials used laparoscopic techniques. For the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea, laparoscopic uterosacral nerve ablation at 12 months was better when compared to a control or no treatment (OR 6.12; 95% CI 1.78-21.03). The comparison of laparoscopic uterosacral nerve ablation with presacral neurectomy for primary dysmenorrhea showed that at 12 months follow-up, presacral neurectomy was more effective (OR 0.10; 95% CI 0.03-0.32). In secondary dysmenorrhea, along with laparoscopic surgical treatment of endometriosis, the addition of laparoscopic uterosacral nerve ablation did not improve the pain relief (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.43-1.39), while presacral neurectomy did (OR 3.14; 95% CI 1.59-6.21). Adverse events were more common for presacral neurectomy than procedures without presacral neurectomy (OR 14.6; 95% CI 5-42.5). CONCLUSION: The evidence for nerve interruption in the management of dysmenorrhea is limited. Methodologically sound and sufficiently powered randomized controlled trials are needed.