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.

The wobbly evidence base of reproductive medicine.

In assisted reproduction, there is strong evidence for some things done, but no or only very weak evidence for others. There are several reasons for this. Most assisted reproduction procedures have small signal-to-noise ratios. This means that their treatment effect is sometimes only little better than the spontaneous conception rate, or the conception rate with traditional treatment. Hence, large trials are required. These demand complex multicentre logistics. The latter require substantial funding and funding for reproductive medicine in most countries is notoriously difficult to obtain (as opposed, for example, to oncology research or cardiovascular research). Apart from these funding issues, the creation of embryos specifically for research is only allowed in a limited number of European countries, thus tempting clinicians to skip preclinical studies altogether and go directly for clinical application in their patients, raising an ethical issue. Introducing new treatments into the clinic without proper evidence, however, is perhaps even more of an ethical issue. Subfertile couples are very vulnerable and should not be exploited.

Transperineal ultrasound compared to evacuation proctography for diagnosing enteroceles and intussusceptions.

INTRODUCTION: This study concerns the level of agreement between transperineal ultrasound and evacuation proctography for diagnosing enteroceles and intussusceptions. METHOD: In a prospective observational study, 50 consecutive women who were planned to have an evacuation proctography underwent transperineal ultrasound too. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive value, as well as the positive and negative likelihood ratio of transperineal ultrasound were assessed in comparison to evacuation proctography. To determine the interobserver agreement of transperineal ultrasound, the quadratic weighted kappa was calculated. Furthermore, receiver operating characteristic curves were generated to show the diagnostic capability of transperineal ultrasound. RESULTS: For diagnosing intussusceptions (PPV 1.00), a positive finding on transperineal ultrasound was predictive of an abnormal evacuation proctography. Sensitivity of transperineal ultrasound was poor for intussusceptions (0.25). For diagnosing enteroceles, the positive likelihood ratio was 2.10 and the negative likelihood ratio, 0.85. There are many false-positive findings of enteroceles on ultrasonography (PPV 0.29). The interobserver agreement of the two ultrasonographers assessed as the quadratic weighted kappa of diagnosing enteroceles was 0.44 and that of diagnosing intussusceptions was 0.23. CONCLUSION: An intussusception on ultrasound is predictive of an abnormal evacuation proctography. For diagnosing enteroceles, the diagnostic quality of transperineal ultrasound was limited compared to evacuation proctography.

Risk of borderline and invasive ovarian tumours after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization in a large Dutch cohort.

BACKGROUND: Long-term effects of ovarian stimulation for IVF on the risk of ovarian malignancies are unknown. METHODS: We identified a nationwide historic cohort of 19,146 women who received IVF treatment in the Netherlands between 1983 and 1995, and a comparison group of 6006 subfertile women not treated with IVF. In 1997-1999, data on reproductive risk factors were obtained from 65% of women and data on subfertility (treatment) were obtained from the medical records. The incidence of ovarian malignancies (including borderline ovarian tumours) through 2007 was assessed through linkage with disease registries. The risk of ovarian malignancies in the IVF group was compared with risks in the general population and the subfertile comparison group. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 14.7 years, the risk of borderline ovarian tumours was increased in the IVF group compared with the general population [standardized incidence ratio (SIR) = 1.76; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.16-2.56]. The overall SIR for invasive ovarian cancer was not significantly elevated, but increased with longer follow-up after first IVF (P = 0.02); the SIR was 3.54 (95% CI = 1.62-6.72) after 15 years. The risks of borderline ovarian tumours and of all ovarian malignancies combined in the IVF group were significantly increased compared with risks in the subfertile comparison group (hazard ratios = 4.23; 95% CI = 1.25-14.33 and 2.14; 95% CI = 1.07-4.25, respectively, adjusted for age, parity and subfertility cause). CONCLUSIONS: Ovarian stimulation for IVF may increase the risk of ovarian malignancies, especially borderline ovarian tumours. More large cohort studies are needed to confirm these findings and to examine the effect of IVF treatment characteristics.

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis of spinocerebellar ataxia 3 by (CAG)(n) repeat detection.

Spinocerebellar ataxia 3 (SCA3) is an autosomal dominant neurodegenerative disorder characterized by variable expression and a variable age of onset. SCA3/MJD (Machado-Joseph disease) is caused by an expansion of a (CAG)(n) repeat in the MJD1 gene on chromosome 14q32.1. A single cell PCR protocol has been developed for preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) of SCA3 to select unaffected embryos on the basis of the CAG genotype. Single leukocytes and blastomeres served as a single cell amplification test system to determine the percentage of allelic drop-out (ADO) and PCR efficiency. Out of 105 tested heterozygous single leukocytes, 103 (98.1%) showed a positive amplification signal, while five cells (4.9%) showed ADO. Amplification in single blastomeres was obtained in 13 out of a total of 14, and ADO was observed in two out of the 13 single blastomeres. PGD of SCA3 was performed in a couple with paternal transmission of the SCA3 allele. Seven embryos were available for biopsy, all biopsied blastomeres showed amplification and no ADO occurred. One embryo was diagnosed as affected whereas six embryos were diagnosed as unaffected. Two unaffected embryos were transferred and resulted in a singleton pregnancy and the birth of a healthy girl.

Menstrual effluent induces epithelial-mesenchymal transitions in mesothelial cells.

BACKGROUND: Menstrual effluent affects mesothelial cell (MC) morphology. We evaluated whether these changes were consistent with epithelial-mesenchymal transitions (EMT). METHODS: Monolayer cultures of MC were incubated overnight in conditioned media, prepared from cells isolated form menstrual effluent, with or without kinase and ATP inhibitors. Changes in cell morphology were monitored using time-lapse video microscopy and immunohistochemistry. Effects on the expression of EMT-associated molecules were evaluated using real-time RT-PCR and/or Western blot analysis. RESULTS: Incubation in conditioned media disrupted cell-cell contacts, and increased MC motility. The changes were reversible. During the changes the distribution of cytokeratins, fibrillar actin and alpha-tubulin changed. Sodium azide, an inhibitor of ATP production, and Genistein, a general tyrosine kinase inhibitor, antagonized these effects. Wortmannin, a phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor, and SU6656, an Src tyrosine kinase inhibitor, only partially antagonized the effect. The expression of Snail and vimentin was markedly up-regulated, whereas the expression of E-cadherin was decreased and cytokeratins were altered. CONCLUSIONS: In MC, menstrual effluent initiates a reversible, energy-dependent transition process from an epithelial to a mesenchymal phenotype. Involvement of the (Src) tyrosine kinase signalling pathway and the changes in the expression of cytokeratins, Snail, vimentin and E-cadherin demonstrate that the morphological changes are EMT.

[Results from 10 years of preimplantation-genetic diagnostics in The Netherlands]. / Resultaten van 10 jaar preimplantatiegenetische diagnostiek in Nederland.

OBJECTIVE: To report the data from couples who were referred for preimplantation-genetic diagnostics (PGD) and treatment due to a significantly increased risk of offspring with a serious genetic disorder. DESIGN: Descriptive, prospective. METHOD: Data were collected from couples that underwent PGD in the period 1993/'03 at Maastricht University Hospital. Embryos produced by means of in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) were subjected to genetic tests several days after fertilisation. Subsequently 1 or 2 unaffected embryos were transferred to the uterus. Where there was an increased risk of a male with an X-linked genetic disorder, the gender was determined using fluorescence in-situ hybridisation (FISH). This method was also used to detect structural chromosomal abnormalities. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method was used for mutation detection and/or marker analysis of monogenetic disorders. RESULTS: A total of 691 couples were referred for PGD. The most frequent indications were X-linked disorders (30%), in particular Fragile-X syndrome, Duchenne/Becker muscular dystrophy and haemophilia A/B. This was followed by autosomal dominant disorders (26%), such as Huntington's disease and myotonic dystrophy, and then structural chromosomal abnormalities (24%). A total of 120 women underwent 260 PGD cycles. An embryo transfer was possible in 158 of the cycles and this resulted in 45 successful pregnancies. The pregnancy rate was 17% per cycle initiated and 28% per cycle with embryo transfer. Up until december 2003 29 singletons, 8 sets of twins and 1 set of triplets were born. There were no misdiagnoses and none of the babies had congenital abnormalities. CONCLUSION: PGD was a reliable and successful method, with pregnancy rates similar to those of IVF or intracytoplasmatic sperm injection. PGD should be stated as an alternative during the preconception counselling of couples with an increased genetic risk, especially for disorders where PGD can be routinely applied, such as Huntington's disease, myotonic dystrophy, cystic fibrosis, spinal muscular atrophy, Fragile-X syndrome and structural chromosomal abnormalities.

Endometrial wave-like activity in the non-pregnant uterus.

The non-pregnant uterus shows wave-like activity throughout the menstrual cycle. This uterine activity was first detected using intra-uterine pressure recordings. The use of ultrasound has made it possible to study the movements of the uterus in a non-invasive manner. Throughout the menstrual cycle, several wavelike activity patterns have been described; these patterns change throughout the menstrual cycle and are governed by steroid hormones. An adequate wave pattern seems to be related to successful reproduction in spontaneous cycles and assisted reproduction. Further insight into the phenomenon of endometrial wave-like activity might offer an opportunity to correct abnormal wave patterns and thereby improve pregnancy rates.

Risks and complications in assisted reproduction techniques: Report of an ESHRE consensus meeting.

Assisted reproduction technique (ART) is an efficacious treatment in subfertile couples. So far little attention has been paid to the safety of ART, i.e. to its adverse events and complications. The consensus meeting on Risks and Complications in ART held in Maastricht in May 2002 focused on four topics: multiple pregnancies, long-term effects of ART on women, effects of ART on offspring, and morbidity/mortality registries.