The (cost-) effectiveness Of Surgical excision of Colorectal endometriosis compared to ART treatment trAjectory (TOSCA study) - a study protocol.

Currently, the optimal treatment to increase the chance of pregnancy and live birth in patients with colorectal endometriosis and subfertility is unknown. Evidence suggests that that both surgery and in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) are effective in improving live birth rate (LBR) among these women. However, the available evidence is of low quality, reports highly heterogeneous results, lacks direct comparison between both treatment options and does not assess whether a combination strategy results in a higher LBR compared to IVF/ICSI-only treatment. Additionally, the optimal timing of surgery within the treatment trajectory remains unclear. The primary objective of the TOSCA study is to assess the effectiveness of surgical treatment (potentially combined with IVF/ICSI) compared to IVF/ICSI-only treatment to increase the chance of an ongoing pregnancy resulting in a live birth in patients with colorectal endometriosis and subfertility, measured by cumulative LBR. Secondary objectives are to assess and compare quality of life and cost-effectiveness in both groups. Patients will be followed for 40 months after inclusion or until live birth. The TOSCA study is expected to be completed in 6 years.

Discriminatory Value of Steroid Hormones on Polycystic Ovary Syndrome and Clustering of Hyperandrogenism and Metabolic Factors.

OBJECTIVE: We determined (1) if 11-oxygenated androgens better identify polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) diagnosis in women with obesity compared to total or free testosterone (T) and free androgen index; (2) how biochemical hyperandrogenism and metabolic factors cluster in a cohort of women with infertility and obesity. METHODS: Women with obesity and PCOS comprised the study group (N = 132). Ovulatory women with obesity and idiopathic, tubal or male factor infertility were the control group (N = 83). Steroid hormones were measured by means of liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. Receiver operating characteristic curves and principal component analysis were used. RESULTS: Women with obesity and PCOS had higher 11-ketotestosterone (11 KT) (1.22 nmol/L [0.84; 1.65] vs 1.05 [0.78; 1.35], P = .04) compared to controls, but not 11ß-hydroxyandrostenedione 4.30 [2.87; 5.92] vs 4.06 [3.22; 5.73], P = .44). 11-ketotestosterone (area under the curve: 0.59) did not better discriminate PCOS in women with obesity compared to: total T (0.84), free T (0.91), and free androgen index (0.85). We identified 4 principal components (PCs) in the PCOS group (72.1% explained variance): (1) insulin resistance status; (2) blood pressure; (3) obesity; (4) androgen status and 4 PCs in the control group (68.7% explained variance) with variables representing metabolism being dispersed in component 2, 3, and 4. CONCLUSIONS: Eleven-oxygenated androgens do not aid in the diagnosis of PCOS in women with obesity. Insulin resistance is the strongest PC in the PCOS group. There is no major dominant characteristic that defines obese non-PCOS women.

Dietary and/or physical activity interventions in women with overweight or obesity prior to fertility treatment: protocol for a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Dietary and/or physical activity interventions are often recommended for women with overweight or obesity as the first step prior to fertility treatment. However, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) so far have shown inconsistent results. Therefore, we propose this individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of dietary and/or physical activity interventions in women with infertility and overweight or obesity on reproductive, maternal and perinatal outcomes and to explore if there are subgroup(s) of women who benefit from each specific intervention or their combination (treatment-covariate interactions). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will include RCTs with dietary and/or physical activity interventions as core interventions prior to fertility treatment in women with infertility and overweight or obesity. The primary outcome will be live birth. We will search MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and trial registries to identify eligible studies. We will approach authors of eligible trials to contribute individual participant data (IPD). We will perform risk of bias assessments according to the Risk of Bias 2 tool and a random-effects IPDMA. We will then explore treatment-covariate interactions for important participant-level characteristics. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical approval for the project (Venus-IPD) was exempted by the medical ethics committee of the University Medical Center Groningen (METc code: 2021/563, date: 17 November 2021). Data transfer agreement will be obtained from each participating institute/hospital. Outcomes will be disseminated internationally through the collaborative group, conference presentations and peer-reviewed publication. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021266201.

Effects of preconception weight loss after lifestyle intervention on fertility outcomes and pregnancy complications.

It is well documented that obesity decreases natural fertility among men and women as well as pregnancy chances after conventional infertility and assisted reproductive technology (ART)-based treatments. Moreover, pregnancy complications are increased in women with overweight and obesity. General guidelines on the treatment of obesity recommend lifestyle intervention, including diet and exercise as the first-line treatment, coupled with or without medical treatments, such as weight loss medication or bariatric surgery, to reduce complications of obesity in adults. In the context of infertility in various countries and infertility clinics, there is a body mass index limit for public refund of infertility treatment of women with obesity. In this respect, it is important to investigate the evidence of effects of lifestyle intervention preceding infertility treatment on reproductive outcomes. The combined results of 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the effectiveness of preconception lifestyle intervention on reproductive outcomes documented in the latest systemic review and meta-analysis, together with the most recent RCT performed in 2022 are discussed. The current evidence suggests that greater weight loss and increase in clinical pregnancy, live birth, and natural conception rates after lifestyle intervention compared with no intervention were observed, but it seems no beneficial effect of lifestyle intervention preceding ART was observed on these parameters. With respect to potential harm of lifestyle intervention, there is no significant increased risk of early pregnancy loss, although the most recent RCT (not included in the systematic review and meta-analysis) showed a trend toward an increased risk. Complications during pregnancy, such as early pregnancy loss and maternal as well as fetal and neonatal complications, are underreported in most studies and need further analysis in an individual participant data meta-analysis. Limitations of the studies as well as future perspectives and challenges in this field of research will be highlighted.

Fertility preservation for women with breast cancer: a multicentre randomized controlled trial on various ovarian stimulation protocols.

STUDY QUESTION: Does ovarian stimulation with the addition of tamoxifen or letrozole affect the number of cumulus-oocyte complexes (COCs) retrieved compared to standard ovarian stimulation in women with breast cancer who undergo fertility preservation? SUMMARY ANSWER: Alternative ovarian stimulation protocols with tamoxifen or letrozole did not affect the number of COCs retrieved at follicle aspiration in women with breast cancer. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Alternative ovarian stimulation protocols have been introduced for women with breast cancer who opt for fertility preservation by means of banking of oocytes or embryos. How these ovarian stimulation protocols compare to standard ovarian stimulation in terms of COC yield is unknown. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This multicentre, open-label randomized controlled superiority trial was carried out in 10 hospitals in the Netherlands and 1 hospital in Belgium between January 2014 and December 2018. We randomly assigned women with breast cancer, aged 18-43 years, who opted for banking of oocytes or embryos to one of three study arms; ovarian stimulation plus tamoxifen, ovarian stimulation plus letrozole or standard ovarian stimulation. Standard ovarian stimulation included GnRH antagonist, recombinant FSH and GnRH agonist trigger. Randomization was performed with a web-based system in a 1:1:1 ratio, stratified for oral contraception usage at start of ovarian stimulation, positive estrogen receptor (ER) status and positive lymph nodes. Patients and caregivers were not blinded to the assigned treatment. The primary outcome was number of COCs retrieved at follicle aspiration. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: During the study period, 162 women were randomly assigned to one of three interventions. Fifty-four underwent ovarian stimulation plus tamoxifen, 53 ovarian stimulation plus letrozole and 55 standard ovarian stimulation. Analysis was according to intention-to-treat principle. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: No differences among groups were observed in the mean (±SD) number of COCs retrieved: 12.5 (10.4) after ovarian stimulation plus tamoxifen, 14.2 (9.4) after ovarian stimulation plus letrozole and 13.6 (11.6) after standard ovarian stimulation (mean difference -1.13, 95% CI -5.70 to 3.43 for tamoxifen versus standard ovarian stimulation and 0.58, 95% CI -4.03 to 5.20 for letrozole versus standard ovarian stimulation). After adjusting for oral contraception usage at the start of ovarian stimulation, positive ER status and positive lymph nodes, the mean difference was -1.11 (95% CI -5.58 to 3.35) after ovarian stimulation plus tamoxifen versus standard ovarian stimulation and 0.30 (95% CI -4.19 to 4.78) after ovarian stimulation plus letrozole versus standard ovarian stimulation. There were also no differences in the number of oocytes or embryos banked. There was one serious adverse event after standard ovarian stimulation: one woman was admitted to the hospital because of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The available literature on which we based our hypothesis, power analysis and sample size calculation was scarce and studies were of low quality. Our study did not have sufficient power to perform subgroup analysis on follicular, luteal or random start of ovarian stimulation. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our study showed that adding tamoxifen or letrozole to a standard ovarian stimulation protocol in women with breast cancer does not impact the effectiveness of fertility preservation and paves the way for high-quality long-term follow-up on breast cancer treatment outcomes and women's future pregnancy outcomes. Our study also highlights the need for high-quality studies for all women opting for fertility preservation, as alternative ovarian stimulation protocols have been introduced to clinical practice without proper evidence. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was supported by a grant (2011.WO23.C129) of 'Stichting Pink Ribbon', a breast cancer fundraising charity organization in the Netherlands. M.G., C.B.L. and R.S. declared that the Center for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam UMC (location VUMC) has received unconditional research and educational grants from Guerbet, Merck and Ferring, not related to the presented work. C.B.L. declared a speakers fee for Inmed and Yingming. S.C.L. reports grants and non-financial support from Agendia, grants, non-financial support and other from AstraZeneca, grants from Eurocept-pharmaceuticals, grants and non-financial support from Genentech/Roche and Novartis, grants from Pfizer, grants and non-financial support from Tesaro and Immunomedics, other from Cergentis, IBM, Bayer, and Daiichi-Sankyo, outside the submitted work; In addition, S.C.L. has a patent UN23A01/P-EP pending that is unrelated to the present work. J.M.J.S. reported payments and travel grants from Merck and Ferring. C.C.M.B. reports her role as unpaid president of the National guideline committee on Fertility Preservation in women with cancer. K.F. received unrestricted grants from Merck Serono, Good Life and Ferring not related to present work. K.F. declared paid lectures for Ferring. D.S. declared former employment from Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD). K.F. declared paid lectures for Ferring. D.S. reports grants from MSD, Gedeon Richter and Ferring paid to his institution; consulting fee payments from MSD and Merck Serono paid to his institution; speaker honoraria from MSD, Gedeon Richter, Ferring Pharmaceuticals and Merck Serono paid to his institution. D.S. has also received travel and meeting support from MSD, Gedeon Richter, Ferring Pharmaceuticals and Merck Serono. No payments are related to present work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR4108. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 6 August 2013. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 30 January 2014.

Effectiveness of a 6-Month Lifestyle Intervention on Diet, Physical Activity, Quality of Life, and Markers of Cardiometabolic Health in Women with PCOS and Obesity and Non-PCOS Obese Controls: One Size Fits All?

Little is known about the difference in effectiveness of lifestyle intervention between women with PCOS and non-PCOS women. In a post hoc longitudinal analysis of a randomized, controlled trial, we aimed to investigate whether infertile women with PCOS and obesity (N = 87) responded differently to a 6-month lifestyle intervention program than infertile non-PCOS obese controls (N = 172). We evaluated several aspects of the intervention such as changes in diet, physical activity, and dropout rate, as well as the effect on weight, quality of life (QoL), and cardiometabolic outcomes. Multilevel analyses were used, and analyses were adjusted for baseline characteristics such as age, education, and smoking. Although BMI in both groups significantly decreased at 3 months and 6 months, there were no significant differences between the groups at 3 months (adjusted B: -0.3, 95% CI: -0.9 to 0.3, p = 0.35) and 6 months (adjusted B: 0.5, 95% CI: -0.4 to 1.4, p = 0.29). Women with PCOS and non-PCOS women had similar compliance with the lifestyle intervention in terms of actual change in diet and physical activity. Mental QoL scores were not different at either 3 or 6 months. Physical QoL scores were lower in women with PCOS compared with non-PCOS women at 3 months (adjusted B: -2.4, 95% CI: -4.8 to -0.06, p = 0.045) but not at 6 months. Cardiometabolic parameters did not differ between the groups. Our results showed that infertile women with PCOS and obesity and non-PCOS obese controls responded largely similarly to our lifestyle intervention and achieved the same level of improvement in markers of cardiometabolic health.

Dietary Intake, Eating Behavior, Physical Activity, and Quality of Life in Infertile Women with PCOS and Obesity Compared with Non-PCOS Obese Controls.

To personalize lifestyle advice for women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and obesity, detailed information regarding dietary intake, eating behavior, physical activity levels, and quality of life (QoL) may be useful. We aimed to investigate in a post-hoc cross-sectional analysis within a large multicenter randomized controlled trial in women with infertility whether there are significant differences in dietary intake (vegetables, fruits, sugary drinks, alcoholic beverages, savory snacks, and sweet snacks); eating behavior (emotional eating, external eating, and restricted eating); physical activity; and QoL between women with PCOS and obesity and non-PCOS obese controls. Participants were asked to complete the food frequency questionnaire (FFQ), the Dutch Eating Behavior Questionnaire (DEBQ), the Short QUestionnaire to ASsess Health-enhancing physical activity (SQUASH), and the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) at study entry (PCOS: n = 170; non-PCOS: n = 321, mean BMI: 36). Linear and binary (multinomial) logistic regressions were used, and the analyses were adjusted for age, waist-hip circumference ratio, and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR). No statistically significant differences in dietary intake or physical activity were observed between the two groups. The overall score of emotional eating was 34.6 ± 11.2 in the PCOS group and 34.1 ± 11.3 in the non-PCOS group (p = 0.11). QoL scores (physical and mental) did not differ between PCOS and non-PCOS women. These findings suggest that infertile women with PCOS and obesity and infertile non-PCOS obese controls do not have different dietary habits and have similar mental and physical QoL.

Long-term male fertility after treatment with radioactive iodine for differentiated thyroid carcinoma.

CONTEXT: Whilst radioactive iodine (RAI) is often administered in the treatment for differentiated thyroid carcinoma (DTC), long-term data on male fertility after RAI are scarce. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term male fertility after RAI for DTC, and to compare semen quality before and after RAI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Multicenter study including males with DTC ≥2 years after their final RAI treatment with a cumulative activity of ≥3.7 GBq. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Semen analysis, hormonal evaluation, and a fertility-focused questionnaire. Cut-off scores for 'low semen quality' were based on reference values of the general population as defined by the World Health Organization (WHO). RESULTS: Fifty-one participants had a median age of 40.5 (interquartile range (IQR): 34.0-49.6) years upon evaluation and a median follow-up of 5.8 (IQR: 3.0-9.5) years after their last RAI administration. The median cumulative administered activity of RAI was 7.4 (range: 3.7-23.3) GBq. The proportion of males with a low semen volume, concentration, progressive motility, or total motile sperm count did not differ from the 10th percentile cut-off of a general population (P = 0.500, P = 0.131, P = 0.094, and P = 0.500, respectively). Cryopreserved semen was used by 1 participant of the 20 who had preserved semen. CONCLUSIONS: Participants had a normal long-term semen quality. The proportion of participants with low semen quality parameters scoring below the 10th percentile did not differ from the general population. Cryopreservation of semen of males with DTC is not crucial for conceiving a child after RAI administration but may be considered in individual cases.

Lifestyle intervention prior to IVF does not improve embryo utilization rate and cumulative live birth rate in women with obesity: a nested cohort study.

STUDY QUESTION: Does lifestyle intervention consisting of an energy-restricted diet, enhancement of physical activity and motivational counseling prior to IVF improve embryo utilization rate (EUR) and cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) in women with obesity? SUMMARY ANSWER: A 6-month lifestyle intervention preceding IVF improved neither EUR nor CLBR in women with obesity in the first IVF treatment cycle where at least one oocyte was retrieved. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the efficacy of a low caloric liquid formula diet (LCD) preceding IVF in women with obesity was unable to demonstrate an effect of LCD on embryo quality and live birth rate: in this study, only one fresh embryo transfer (ET) or, in case of freeze-all strategy, the first transfer with frozen-thawed embryos was reported. We hypothesized that any effect on embryo quality of a lifestyle intervention in women with obesity undergoing IVF treatment is better revealed by EUR and CLBR after transfer of all fresh and frozen-thawed embryos. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: This is a nested cohort study within an RCT, the LIFEstyle study. The original study examined whether a 6-month lifestyle intervention prior to infertility treatment in women with obesity improved live birth rate, compared to prompt infertility treatment within 24 months after randomization. In the original study between 2009 and 2012, 577 (three women withdrew informed consent) women with obesity and infertility were assigned to a lifestyle intervention followed by infertility treatment (n = 289) or to prompt infertility treatment (n = 285). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS: Only participants from the LIFEstyle study who received IVF treatment were eligible for the current analysis. In total, 137 participants (n = 58 in the intervention group and n = 79 in the control group) started the first cycle. In 25 participants, the first cycle was cancelled prior to oocyte retrieval mostly due to poor response. Sixteen participants started a second or third consecutive cycle. The first cycle with successful oocyte retrieval was used for this analysis, resulting in analysis of 51 participants in the intervention group and 72 participants in the control group. Considering differences in embryo scoring methods and ET day strategy between IVF centers, we used EUR as a proxy for embryo quality. EUR was defined as the proportion of inseminated/injected oocytes per cycle that was transferred or cryopreserved as an embryo. Analysis was performed per cycle and per oocyte/embryo. CLBR was defined as the percentage of participants with at least one live birth from the first fresh and subsequent frozen-thawed ET(s). In addition, we calculated the Z-score for singleton neonatal birthweight and compared these outcomes between the two groups. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The overall mean age was 31.6 years and the mean BMI was 35.4 ± 3.2 kg/m2 in the intervention group, and 34.9 ± 2.9 kg/m2 in the control group. The weight change at 6 months was in favor of the intervention group (mean difference in kg vs the control group: -3.14, 95% CI: -5.73 to -0.56). The median (Q25; Q75) number of oocytes retrieved was 4.00 (2.00; 8.00) in the intervention group versus 6.00 (4.00; 9.75) in the control group, and was not significantly different, as was the number of oocytes inseminated/injected (4.00 [2.00; 8.00] vs 6.00 [3.00; 8.75]), normal fertilized embryos (2.00 [0.50; 5.00] vs 3.00 [1.00; 5.00]) and the number of cryopreserved embryos (2.00 [1.25; 4.75] vs 2.00 [1.00; 4.00]). The median (Q25; Q75) EUR was 33.3% (12.5%; 60.0%) in the intervention group and 33.3% (16.7%; 50.0%) in the control group in the per cycle analysis (adjusted B: 2.7%, 95% CI: -8.6% to 14.0%). In the per oocyte/embryo analysis, in total, 280 oocytes were injected or inseminated in the intervention group, 113 were utilized (transferred or cryopreserved, EUR = 40.4%); in the control group, EUR was 30.8% (142/461). The lifestyle intervention did not significantly improve EUR (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.36, 95% CI: 0.94-1.98) in the per oocyte/embryo analysis, taking into account the interdependency of the oocytes per participant. CLBR was not significantly different between the intervention group and the control group after adjusting for type of infertility (male factor and unexplained) and smoking (27.5% vs 22.2%, adjusted OR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.43-2.47). Singleton neonatal birthweight and Z-score were not significantly different between the two groups. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: This study is a nested cohort study within an RCT, and no power calculation was performed. The randomization was not stratified for indicated treatment, and although we corrected our analyses for baseline differences, there may be residual confounding. The limited absolute weight loss and the short duration of the lifestyle intervention might be insufficient to affect EUR and CLBR. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our data do not support the hypothesis of a beneficial short-term effect of lifestyle intervention on EUR and CLBR after IVF in women with obesity, although more studies are needed as there may be a potential clinically relevant effect on EUR. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The study was supported by a grant from ZonMw, the Dutch Organization for Health Research and Development (50-50110-96-518). A.H. has received an unrestricted educational grant from Ferring pharmaceuticals BV, The Netherlands. B.W.J.M. is supported by an NHMRC Investigator grant (GNT1176437). B.W.J.M. reports consultancy for Guerbet, has been a member of the ObsEva advisory board and holds Stock options for ObsEva. B.W.J.M. has received research funding from Guerbet, Ferring and Merck. F.J.M.B. reports personal fees from membership of the external advisory board for Merck Serono and a research support grant from Merck Serono, outside the submitted work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The LIFEstyle RCT was registered at the Dutch trial registry (NTR 1530). https://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=1530.

Long-Term Risk of Ovarian Cancer and Borderline Tumors After Assisted Reproductive Technology.

BACKGROUND: Long-term effects of assisted reproductive technology (ART) on ovarian tumor risk are unknown. METHODS: This nationwide cohort study comprises 30 625 women who received ovarian stimulation for ART in 1983-2000 and 9988 subfertile women not treated with ART. Incident invasive and borderline ovarian tumors were ascertained through linkage with the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the Dutch Pathology Registry until July 2018. Ovarian tumor risk in ART-treated women was compared with risks in the general population and the subfertile non-ART group. Statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 24 years, 158 invasive and 100 borderline ovarian tumors were observed. Ovarian cancer risk in the ART group was increased compared with the general population (standardized incidence ratio [SIR] = 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.18 to 1.71) but not when compared with the non-ART group (age- and parity-adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.70 to 1.50). Risk decreased with higher parity and with a larger number of successful ART cycles (resulting in childbirth, Ptrend = .001) but was not associated with the number of unsuccessful ART cycles. Borderline ovarian tumor risk was increased in ART-treated women compared with the general population (SIR = 2.20, 95% CI = 1.66 to 2.86) and with non-ART women (HR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.08 to 3.14). Risk did not increase with more ART cycles or longer follow-up time. CONCLUSIONS: Increased ovarian cancer risk in ART-treated women compared with the general population is likely explained by nulliparity rather than ART treatment. The increased risk of borderline ovarian tumors after ART must be interpreted with caution because no dose-response relationship was observed.

Long-Term Effects of Radioiodine Treatment on Female Fertility in Survivors of Childhood Differentiated Thyroid Carcinoma.

Background: Differentiated thyroid carcinoma (DTC) during childhood is a rare disease. Its excellent survival rate requires a focus on possible long-term adverse effects. This study aimed to evaluate fertility in female survivors of childhood DTC by assessing various reproductive characteristics combined with anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels (a marker of ovarian reserve). Methods: Female survivors of childhood DTC, diagnosed at ≤18 years of age between 1970 and 2013, were included. Survivors were excluded when follow-up time was less than five years or if they developed other malignancies before or after diagnosis of DTC. Survivors filled out a questionnaire regarding reproductive characteristics (e.g., age at menarche and menopause, pregnancies, pregnancy outcomes, need for assisted reproductive therapy). Survivors aged <18 years during evaluation received an altered questionnaire without questions regarding pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes. These data were combined with information from medical records. AMH levels were measured in serum samples and were compared with AMH levels from 420 women not treated for cancer. Results: Fifty-six survivors with a median age of 31.0 (interquartile range, IQR, 25.1-39.6) years were evaluated after a median follow-up of 15.4 (IQR 8.3-24.7) years. The median cumulative dose of 131I administered was 7.4 (IQR 3.7-13.0) GBq/200.0 (IQR 100.0-350.0) mCi. Twenty-five of the 55 survivors aged 18 years or older during evaluation reported 64 pregnancies, 45 of which resulted in live birth. Of these 55, 10.9% visited a fertility clinic. None of the survivors reported premature menopause. Age at AMH evaluation did not differ between DTC survivors and the comparison group (p = 0.268). Median AMH levels did not differ between DTC survivors and the comparison group [2.0 (IQR 1.0-3.7) µg/L vs. 1.6 (IQR 0.6-3.1) µg/L, respectively, p = 0.244]. The cumulative dose of 131I was not associated with AMH levels in DTC survivors (rs = 0.210, p = 0.130). Conclusions: Female survivors of DTC who received 131I treatment during childhood do not appear to have major abnormalities in reproductive characteristics nor in predictors of ovarian failure.

Dehydroepiandrosterone for women in the peri- or postmenopausal phase.

BACKGROUND: During menopause a decreasing ovarian follicular response generally causes a fluctuation and eventual decrease in estrogen levels. This can lead to the development of various perimenopausal and postmenopausal symptoms (for example hot flushes, night sweats, vaginal dryness). Dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) is one of the main precursors of androgens, which in turn are converted to testosterone and estrogens. It is possible that the administration of DHEA may increase estrogen and testosterone levels in peri- and postmenopausal women to alleviate their symptoms and improve general wellbeing and sexual function (for example libido, dyspareunia, satisfaction). Treatment with DHEA is controversial as there is uncertainty about its effectiveness and safety. This review should clearly outline the evidence for DHEA in the treatment of menopausal symptoms and evaluate its effectiveness and safety by combining the results of randomised controlled trials. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of administering DHEA to women with menopausal symptoms in the peri- or postmenopausal phase. SEARCH METHODS: The databases that we searched (3 June 2014) with no language restrictions applied were the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS. We also searched conference abstracts and citation lists in the ISI Web of Knowledge. Ongoing trials were searched in the trials registers. Reference lists of retrieved articles were checked. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials comparing any dose and form of DHEA by any route of administration versus any other active intervention, placebo or no treatment for a minimal treatment duration of seven days in peri- and postmenopausal women. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data after assessing eligibility for inclusion and quality of studies. Authors were contacted for additional information. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-eight trials with 1273 menopausal women were included in this review. Data could be extracted from 16 trials to conduct the meta-analysis. The overall quality of the studies was moderate to low with the majority of studies that were included in the meta-analysis having reasonable methodology. Compared to placebo, DHEA did not improve quality of life (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.03 to 0.34, P = 0.10, 8 studies, 287 women (132 from parallel and 155 from crossover trials), I² = 0%, moderate quality evidence; one trial of the nine that reported on this outcome was removed in a sensitivity analysis as it was judged to be at high risk of bias). DHEA was found to be associated with androgenic side effects (mainly acne) (odds ratio (OR) 3.77, 95% CI 1.36 to 10.4, P = 0.01, 5 studies, 376 women, I² = 10%, moderate quality evidence) when compared to placebo. No associations were found with other adverse effects. It was unclear whether DHEA affected menopausal symptoms as the results from the trials were inconsistent and could not easily be pooled to provide an overall effect due to different types of measurement (for example continuous, dichotomous, change and end scores). DHEA was found to improve sexual function (SMD 0.31, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.55, P = 0.01, 5 studies, 261 women (239 women from parallel trials and 22 women from crossover trials), I² = 0%; one trial judged to be at high risk of bias was removed during sensitivity analysis) compared to placebo.There was no difference in the acne associated with DHEA when comparing studies that used oral DHEA (OR 2.16, 95% CI 0.47 to 9.96, P = 0.90, 3 studies, 136 women, I² = 5%, very low quality evidence) to one study that used skin application of DHEA (OR 2.74, 95% CI 0.10 to 74.87, P = 0.90, 1 study, 22 women, very low quality evidence). The effects did not differ for sexual function when studies using oral DHEA (SMD 0.11, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.35, P = 0.36, 5 studies, 340 women, I² = 0) were compared to a study using intravaginal DHEA (SMD 0.42, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.81, 1 study, 218 women). Test for subgroup differences: Chi² = 1.77, df = 1 (P = 0.18), I² = 43.4%. Insufficient data were available to assess quality of life and menopausal symptoms for this comparison.There were insufficient data available to compare the effects of DHEA to hormone therapy (HT) for quality of life, menopausal symptoms, and adverse effects. No large differences in treatment effects were found for sexual function when comparing DHEA to HT (mean difference (MD) 1.26, 95% CI -0.21 to 2.73, P = 0.09, 2 studies, 41 women, I² = 0%). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that DHEA improves quality of life but there is some evidence that it is associated with androgenic side effects. There is uncertainty whether DHEA decreases menopausal symptoms, but DHEA may slightly improve sexual function compared with placebo.

Synchronised approach for intrauterine insemination in subfertile couples.

BACKGROUND: In many countries intrauterine insemination (IUI) is the treatment of first choice for a subfertile couple when the infertility work up reveals an ovulatory cycle, at least one open Fallopian tube and sufficient spermatozoa. The final goal of this treatment is to achieve a pregnancy and deliver a healthy (singleton) live birth. The probability of conceiving with IUI depends on various factors including age of the couple, type of subfertility, ovarian stimulation and the timing of insemination. IUI should logically be performed around the moment of ovulation. Since spermatozoa and oocytes have only limited survival time correct timing of the insemination is essential. As it is not known which technique of timing for IUI results in the best treatment outcome, we compared different techniques for timing IUI and different time intervals. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of different synchronisation methods in natural and stimulated cycles for IUI in subfertile couples. SEARCH METHODS: We searched for all publications which described randomised controlled trials of the timing of IUI. We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (1966 to October 2014), EMBASE (1974 to October 2014), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2014) and PsycINFO (inception to October 2014) electronic databases and prospective trial registers. Furthermore, we checked the reference lists of all obtained studies and performed a handsearch of conference abstracts. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different timing methods for IUI were included. The following interventions were evaluated: detection of luteinising hormone (LH) in urine or blood, single test; human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration; combination of LH detection and hCG administration; basal body temperature chart; ultrasound detection of ovulation; gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist administration; or other timing methods. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected the trials, extracted the data and assessed study risk of bias. We performed statistical analyses in accordance with the guidelines for statistical analysis developed by The Cochrane Collaboration. The overall quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE methods. MAIN RESULTS: Eighteen RCTs were included in the review, of which 14 were included in the meta-analyses (in total 2279 couples). The evidence was current to October 2013. The quality of the evidence was low or very low for most comparisons . The main limitations in the evidence were failure to describe study methods, serious imprecision and attrition bias.Ten RCTs compared different methods of timing for IUI. We found no evidence of a difference in live birth rates between hCG injection versus LH surge (odds ratio (OR) 1.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 18, 1 RCT, 24 women, very low quality evidence), urinary hCG versus recombinant hCG (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.03, 1 RCT, 284 women, low quality evidence) or hCG versus GnRH agonist (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.42 to 2.6, 3 RCTS, 104 women, I(2) = 0%, low quality evidence).Two RCTs compared the optimum time interval from hCG injection to IUI, comparing different time frames that ranged from 24 hours to 48 hours. Only one of these studies reported live birth rates, and found no difference between the groups (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.00, 1 RCT, 204 couples). One study compared early versus late hCG administration and one study compared different dosages of hCG, but neither reported the primary outcome of live birth.We found no evidence of a difference between any of the groups in rates of pregnancy or adverse events (multiple pregnancy, miscarriage, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS)). However, most of these data were very low quality. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to determine whether there is any difference in safety and effectiveness between different methods of synchronization of ovulation and insemination. More research is needed.

What is the optimal means of preparing the endometrium in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) enables surplus embryos derived from IVF or IVF-ICSI treatment to be stored and transferred at a later date. In recent years the number of FET cycles performed has increased due to transferring fewer embryos per transfer and improved laboratory techniques. Currently, there is little consensus on the most effective method of endometrium preparation prior to FET. METHODS Using both MEDLINE and EMBASE database a systematic review and meta-analysis of literature was performed. Case-series, case-control studies and articles in languages other than English, Dutch or Spanish were excluded. Those studies comparing clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates as well as live birth rates in (i) true natural cycle FET (NC-FET) versus modified NC-FET, (ii) NC-FET versus artificial cycle FET (AC-FET), (iii) AC-FET versus artificial with GnRH agonist cycle FET and (iv) NC-FET versus artificial with GnRH agonist cycle FET were included. Forest plots were constructed and relative risks or odds ratios were calculated. RESULTS A total of 43 publications were selected for critical appraisal and 20 articles were included in the final review. For all comparisons, no differences in the clinical pregnancy rate, ongoing pregnancy rate or live birth rate could be found. Based on information provided in the articles no conclusions could be drawn with regard to cancellation rates. CONCLUSIONS Based on the current literature it is not possible to identify one method of endometrium preparation in FET as being more effective than another. Therefore, all of the current methods of endometrial preparation appear to be equally successful in terms of ongoing pregnancy rate. However, in some comparisons predominantly retrospective studies were included leaving these comparisons subject to selection and publication bias. Also patients' preferences as well as cost-efficiency were not addressed in any of the included studies. Therefore, prospective randomized studies addressing these issues are needed.