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.

Developing a core outcome set for future infertility research: an international consensus development study† ‡.

STUDY QUESTION: Can a core outcome set to standardize outcome selection, collection and reporting across future infertility research be developed? SUMMARY ANSWER: A minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, has been developed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for infertility. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Complex issues, including a failure to consider the perspectives of people with fertility problems when selecting outcomes, variations in outcome definitions and the selective reporting of outcomes on the basis of statistical analysis, make the results of infertility research difficult to interpret. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A three-round Delphi survey (372 participants from 41 countries) and consensus development workshop (30 participants from 27 countries). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, researchers and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus science methods. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The core outcome set consists of: viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound (accounting for singleton, twin and higher multiple pregnancy); pregnancy loss (accounting for ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, stillbirth and termination of pregnancy); live birth; gestational age at delivery; birthweight; neonatal mortality; and major congenital anomaly. Time to pregnancy leading to live birth should be reported when applicable. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, Delphi survey attrition and an arbitrary consensus threshold. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Embedding the core outcome set within RCTs and systematic reviews should ensure the comprehensive selection, collection and reporting of core outcomes. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement, and over 80 specialty journals, including the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group, Fertility and Sterility and Human Reproduction, have committed to implementing this core outcome set. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research was funded by the Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, Auckland Medical Research Fund and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study, the collection, management, analysis or interpretation of data, or manuscript preparation. B.W.J.M. is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). S.B. was supported by University of Auckland Foundation Seelye Travelling Fellowship. S.B. reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and an editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility group. J.L.H.E. reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. 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.J.M. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. 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. A.S. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. E.H.Y.N. reports research sponsorship from Merck. 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 work presented. All authors have completed the disclosure form. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative: 1023.

Standardizing definitions and reporting guidelines for the infertility core outcome set: an international consensus development study† ‡.

STUDY QUESTION: Can consensus definitions for the core outcome set for infertility be identified in order to recommend a standardized approach to reporting? SUMMARY ANSWER: Consensus definitions for individual core outcomes, contextual statements and a standardized reporting table have been developed. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Different definitions exist for individual core outcomes for infertility. This variation increases the opportunities for researchers to engage with selective outcome reporting, which undermines secondary research and compromises clinical practice guideline development. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Potential definitions were identified by a systematic review of definition development initiatives and clinical practice guidelines and by reviewing Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group guidelines. These definitions were discussed in a face-to-face consensus development meeting, which agreed consensus definitions. A standardized approach to reporting was also developed as part of the process. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, researchers and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus development methods. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Forty-four potential definitions were inventoried across four definition development initiatives, including the Harbin Consensus Conference Workshop Group and International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies, 12 clinical practice guidelines and Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group guidelines. Twenty-seven participants, from 11 countries, contributed to the consensus development meeting. Consensus definitions were successfully developed for all core outcomes. Specific recommendations were made to improve reporting. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations. There was limited representation from low- and middle-income countries. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: A minimum data set should assist researchers in populating protocols, case report forms and other data collection tools. The generic reporting table should provide clear guidance to researchers and improve the reporting of their results within journal publications and conference presentations. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials statement, and over 80 specialty journals have committed to implementing this core outcome set. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research was funded by the Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, Auckland Medical Research Fund and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and an editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. J.L.H.E. reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. 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. C.N. reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and a financial interest in NexHand. E.H.Y.N. reports research sponsorship from Merck. 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 of 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 work presented. All authors have completed the disclosure form. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative: 1023.

Comparison of antral follicle count and serum anti Müllerian hormone level for determination of gonadotropin dosing in in-vitro fertilization: randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the proportion of women achieving a desired ovarian response following ovarian stimulation when gonadotropin dosing was determined based on antral follicle count (AFC) vs serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level, in women undergoing in-vitro fertilization (IVF) using the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol. METHODS: This was a randomized double-blind trial carried out in a university-affiliated assisted reproduction unit. A total of 200 women undergoing their first IVF cycle using the GnRH-antagonist protocol between April 2016 and February 2018 were randomized to determination of gonadotropin dosing based on either AFC or serum AMH level measured in the pretreatment cycle 1 month before the IVF cycle. Patients underwent IVF as per our center's standard protocol. The proportion of subjects achieving a desired ovarian response, defined as retrieval of six to 14 oocytes, was compared between the two study arms. Subgroup analysis of patients with baseline AFC > 5 and those with baseline AFC ≤ 5 was performed. Concordance in AFC and AMH categorization between the pretreatment cycle and the ovarian-stimulation cycle was assessed using Cohen's kappa (κ). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients achieving a desired ovarian response between the AFC (54%) and AMH (49%) groups (P = 0.479). The median number of oocytes retrieved was nine vs seven (P = 0.070), and the median follicular output rate was 0.54 vs 0.55 (P = 0.764) in the AFC and AMH groups, respectively. Similar findings were observed on subgroup analysis of subjects with AFC ≤ 5 and AFC > 5 at the start of ovarian stimulation (P > 0.05 for all comparisons). There was moderate concordance between AFC and AMH measured in the pretreatment cycle and the stimulation cycle (κ = 0.478 and 0.587, respectively). CONCLUSION: The proportion of women achieving a desired ovarian response following ovarian stimulation using the GnRH-antagonist protocol is similar when the gonadotropin-dosing algorithm used is based on AFC or serum AMH level. Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Comparación del recuento de folículos sinusales y el nivel de la hormona antimulleriana en el suero para la determinación de la dosis de gonadotrofina en la fecundación in vitro: ensayo aleatorizado OBJETIVO: Comparar la proporción de mujeres que logran una respuesta ovárica deseada tras la estimulación del ovario cuando se determinó la dosis de gonadotrofina en función del recuento de folículos sinusales (AFC, por sus siglas en inglés) frente al nivel de la hormona antimulleriana (HAM) en el suero, en mujeres que se sometieron a una fecundación in vitro (FIV) mediante el protocolo de antagonistas de la hormona liberadora de gonadotropina (GnRH, por sus siglas en inglés). MÉTODOS: Se trata de un ensayo aleatorizado doble ciego realizado en una unidad de reproducción asistida afiliada a una universidad. Un total de 200 mujeres que se sometieron a su primer ciclo de FIV y utilizaron el protocolo de antagonistas de la GnRH entre abril de 2016 y febrero de 2018 fueron asignadas al azar a la determinación de la dosis de gonadotrofina basada en el nivel de AFC o de HAM en suero, medidos en el ciclo de pretratamiento un mes antes del ciclo de FIV. Las pacientes se sometieron a una FIV según el protocolo estándar de nuestro centro. La proporción de mujeres que lograron una respuesta ovárica deseada, definida como la recuperación de seis a 14 ovocitos, se comparó entre las dos ramas del estudio. Se realizó un análisis de subgrupos de las pacientes con AFC de base >5 y de aquellas con AFC de base ≤5. La concordancia en la categorización del AFC y la HAM entre el ciclo de pretratamiento y el ciclo de estimulación ovárica se evaluó utilizando la medida estadística kappa de Cohen (κ). RESULTADOS: No hubo diferencias significativas en la proporción de pacientes que lograron una respuesta ovárica deseada entre los grupos de AFC (54%) y HAM (49%) (P=0,479). La mediana del número de ovocitos recuperados fue de nueve frente a siete (P=0,070), y la mediana de la tasa de producción folicular fue de 0,54 frente a 0,55 (P=0,764) en los grupos AFC y HAM, respectivamente. Se observaron hallazgos similares en el análisis de subgrupos de pacientes con AFC ≤5 y AFC >5 al comienzo de la estimulación ovárica (P>0,05 para todas las comparaciones). Se observó una concordancia moderada entre el AFC y la HAM medidos en el ciclo de pretratamiento y el ciclo de estimulación (κ=0,478 y 0,587, respectivamente). CONCLUSIÓN: La proporción de mujeres que logran una respuesta ovárica deseada después de la estimulación ovárica utilizando el protocolo de antagonistas de la GnRH es similar cuando el algoritmo de dosificación de gonadotrofina utilizado se basa en el nivel del AFC o de la HAM en suero.

Cross-border reproductive care use by women with infertility in Hong Kong: cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVES: Cross-border reproductive care (CBRC) is an increasingly common global phenomenon, but there is a lack of information regarding its frequency among residents of Hong Kong. This study aimed to evaluate the use of CBRC and the factors affecting its use among residents of Hong Kong. METHODS: This cross-sectional questionnaire study collected data from 1204 women with infertility who attended Hong Kong Hospital Authority and Family Planning Association infertility clinics. RESULTS: In total, 178 women (14.8% of all respondents) had used CBRC. Among respondents who had not used CBRC, 36.3% planned to use or would consider it. The main factors influencing the likelihood of using CBRC among women with infertility in Hong Kong use were long waiting times in the public sector and high cost in the private sector. Taiwan was the most preferred destination for CBRC (69.6% of respondents). Most information concerning CBRC was accessed via the internet. More than two thirds of respondents believed that the government in Hong Kong should formulate some regulations or guidance regarding CBRC. CONCLUSION: Nearly one in six women with infertility in Hong Kong had used CBRC. Among women who had not used CBRC, more than one third planned to use or would consider it. The main factors influencing the likelihood of CBRC use were long waiting times in the public sector and high cost in the private sector. These results will help clinicians to more effectively counsel patients considering CBRC and facilitate infertility services planning by authorities in Hong Kong.

Pattern and predictors of medical care received by hepatitis B carriers during pregnancy and after delivery.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to evaluate the pattern and predictors of medical care received by hepatitis B virus (HBV) carriers during pregnancy and after delivery in Hong Kong. STUDY DESIGN: The study is a retrospective analysis. METHODS: Pregnant HBV carriers and their infants were followed up for 9-12 months after delivery. Face-to-face interviews were conducted to investigate what medical care they received for HBV before, during and after pregnancy. RESULTS: Data were available for 412 HBV carriers. A total of 375 (91.0%) women were known HBV carriers before pregnancy. Routine antenatal screening picked out the remaining 37 (9.0%) HBV carriers; these women were younger, more likely to be smokers and had a lower level of education (P < 0.05) than known HBV carriers. In total, 356 of 412 (86.4%) HBV carriers did not receive any medical care for HBV during pregnancy. Known HBV carrier status, history of medical check-up and the use of antiviral treatment before pregnancy were significant predictors for HBV medical care during pregnancy (P < 0.05). The results show that 217 of 412 (52.6%) HBV carriers did not receive medical care for HBV after delivery. HBV medical care before pregnancy, use of antiviral treatment before pregnancy and a higher level of education were significant predictors for postpartum HBV medical care (P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that HBV medical care before pregnancy (odds ratio [OR], 7.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.21-18.65; P < 0.001) and the use of antiviral treatment (OR, 5.02; 95% CI, 1.41-17.81; P = 0.013) were associated with medical care during pregnancy. Medical care before pregnancy was also associated with postpartum HBV medical care (OR, 5.05; 95% CI, 3.29-7.51; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of HBV carriers did not receive HBV-related medical check-ups during and after pregnancy in Hong Kong despite the majority being aware of their carrier status. Medical care before pregnancy predicted antenatal and postpartum HBV medical care.

In vitro fertilisation in Hong Kong: the situation in 2019.

The popularity of in vitro fertilisation has continuously increased throughout the past 40 years owing to an increased incidence of infertility and delayed planning for pregnancy. The aim of this paper is to review the current situation of in vitro fertilisation in Hong Kong. In Hong Kong, in 2018, 7995 women underwent 5055 fresh and 5050 frozen-thawed embryo in vitro fertilisation cycles, resulting in an ongoing pregnancy rate of 33.7% per transfer. However, in vitro fertilisation is associated with several problems, including a high rate of multiple pregnancies and risks associated with cross-border reproductive care. Single embryo transfer is a simple strategy to reduce multiple pregnancies without compromising the cumulative live birth rate.

Hyperglycemia impedes definitive endoderm differentiation of human embryonic stem cells by modulating histone methylation patterns.

Exposure to maternal diabetes during fetal growth is a risk factor for the development of type II diabetes (T2D) in later life. Discovery of the mechanisms involved in this association should provide valuable background for therapeutic treatments. Early embryogenesis involves epigenetic changes including histone modifications. The bivalent histone methylation marks H3K4me3 and H3K27me3 are important for regulating key developmental genes during early fetal pancreas specification. We hypothesized that maternal hyperglycemia disrupted early pancreas development through changes in histone bivalency. A human embryonic stem cell line (VAL3) was used as the cell model for studying the effects of hyperglycemia upon differentiation into definitive endoderm (DE), an early stage of the pancreatic lineage. Hyperglycemic conditions significantly down-regulated the expression levels of DE markers SOX17, FOXA2, CXCR4 and EOMES during differentiation. This was associated with retention of the repressive histone methylation mark H3K27me3 on their promoters under hyperglycemic conditions. The disruption of histone methylation patterns was observed as early as the mesendoderm stage, with Wnt/ß-catenin signaling being suppressed during hyperglycemia. Treatment with Wnt/ß-catenin signaling activator CHIR-99021 restored the expression levels and chromatin methylation status of DE markers, even in a hyperglycemic environment. The disruption of DE development was also found in mouse embryos at day 7.5 post coitum from diabetic mothers. Furthermore, disruption of DE differentiation in VAL3 cells led to subsequent impairment in pancreatic progenitor formation. Thus, early exposure to hyperglycemic conditions hinders DE development with a possible relationship to the later impairment of pancreas specification.

Human varicella zoster virus is not present in the semen of a man affected by chickenpox during the in vitro fertilisation of his wife.

Human varicella zoster virus (VZV) is a member of the herpes virus family and affects humans only. Information about the presence of the virus in the semen samples of men affected by chickenpox is rather limited in the literature. Here, we reported a husband was affected by VZV during in vitro fertilisation treatment of his wife treated in our centre. The semen sample was checked for the presence of VZV by the PCR technique. The PCR result found no detectable viral DNA in the semen sample. The semen sample was then used for conventional IVF insemination and subsequently a healthy baby boy was born. This single case report suggests that the semen sample of men affected by chickenpox may be safe to use for assisted reproduction methods during the VZV infective period.

Efficacy of ulipristal acetate for emergency contraception and its effect on the subsequent bleeding pattern when administered before or after ovulation.

STUDY QUESTION: Does ulipristal acetate (UPA) have similar efficacy as emergency contraception (EC) when administered before and after ovulation? SUMMARY ANSWER: The efficacy of UPA-EC was significantly better when administered before than after ovulation. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Levonorgestrel (LNG) is effective as EC only when administered before, but not after ovulation. LNG EC taken in the pre-ovulatory and post-ovulatory phase results in shortening and lengthening of the index menstrual cycle, respectively. Whether the same applies to UPA is not known. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Prospective, open-label clinical cohort study conducted on 700 women between May 2011 and March 2014. PARTICIPANTS, SETTING, METHODS: Seven hundred women requesting EC within 120 h after a single act of unprotected sexual intercourse in the index menstrual cycle were recruited at a community family planning clinic in Hong Kong. Each subject received a single oral dose of UPA 30 mg, and 693 of them completed follow-up. Ovulatory status at the time of UPA administration was determined by serum progesterone level supplemented by menstrual history and ultrasound tracking. The main outcome measure was the percentage of pregnancies prevented (PPP). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The PPP was significantly higher in subjects who were pre-ovulatory (77.6%) compared with those who were post-ovulatory (36.4%) at the time of UPA administration (P < 0.0001). The observed pregnancy rate following UPA administration was significantly lower than the expected pregnancy rate only in the pre-ovulatory group (P < 0.0001), but not the post-ovulatory group (P = 0.281). The overall failure rate was 1.7% (1.4 versus 2.1% in the pre- and post-ovulatory groups, respectively). Pre-ovulatory administration of UPA resulted in a small delay (median of 3 days), whereas post-ovulatory administration resulted in a minimal advancement (median of 1 day) of the next menstruation, compared with that predicted from previous menstrual pattern. More pre-ovulatory subjects (19.1%) than post-ovulatory subjects (7.8%) had deviation of the next menses of more than 7 days (P < 0.001). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The ovulatory status of the subjects was determined based only on menstrual history and a spot sonographic finding together with serum hormonal profile at the time of recruitment. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our findings confirmed comparable efficacy of UPA in the Asian population as in western populations. The comparison between pre- and post-ovulatory use of UPA is a novel finding, which provides insights to its possible pharmacological action. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The UPA tablets were provided free of charge by Laboratoire HRA Pharma, who were not involved in the design and execution of the study, or the drafting and final approval of the manuscript. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The University of Hong Kong Clinical Trials Registry (reference number: HKUCTR-1197).

Comparative evaluation of three new commercial immunoassays for anti-Müllerian hormone measurement.

STUDY QUESTION: How do the three new anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) assay methods, manufactured by Beckman Coulter, Roche and Ansh Labs compare with each other and with the Gen II assay? SUMMARY ANSWER: The three new AMH assays are well correlated among themselves and with the Gen II assay, although differences in calibration do exist. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The Gen II assay has been the mainstay method for AMH measurement in the past few years. Recently, a few new AMH measurement methods have come to the market. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This was a prospective assay evaluation performed on 178 human serum samples. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: AMH concentration was measured in residual serum samples donated by female patients in a reproductive medicine centre. The three new assay methods were tested in parallel and the numerical values obtained were compared among themselves and with those obtained by the Gen II assay. The assay stability upon different sample storage conditions, intra-assay and inter-assay precision, linearity and dilution recovery, and diagnostic performance for polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) of the three new AMH assay methods were also compared. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: AMH values measured by the Gen II kit and the three new assay methods have good correlations (R > 0.9 for all pairwise correlations). Values measured by the Ansh Labs assay were significantly higher, whereas those by the Roche assay were significantly lower, than those from the Gen II and Beckman-Coulter automated assays (P < 0.05). AMH values were significantly different when measured on the fresh and frozen-thawed serum sample (at -20oC and -80oC) for all three new methods (P < 0.05), but the magnitude of difference was very small with the Beckman-Coulter automated assay and Roche assay. The intra-assay coefficients of variation (CVs) were 0.7-2.2%, 0.5-1.4%, and 1.4-5.4% for the Beckman-Counter automated, Roche and Ansh Labs assays, respectively. Their inter-assay CVs were 0.9-2.5%, 0.7-1.9%, and 6.2-13.5%, respectively. All three new assay methods showed acceptable linearity, and provided excellent discrimination of PCOS from controls. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The precision and dilution linearity experiments involved a small sample size, although these were not the primary outcome measures and have been properly evaluated in previous publications. The study was not designed or powered for determining diagnostic cut-off values. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The results demonstrate that the three new AMH assay methods are all valid methods to be adopted in the field of reproduction and are a basis for further work on their clinical application. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The authors have no competing interest to declare. The execution of this study was funded by the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Hong Kong.

Randomized, controlled, double-blind trial of topical lidocaine gel and intrauterine lidocaine infusion for pain relief during saline contrast sonohysterography.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of topical lidocaine gel and intrauterine lidocaine infusion administered prior to saline contrast sonohysterography (SCSH) in reducing pain level during the procedure. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial. We recruited 120 women scheduled to undergo SCSH and randomized them into one of three groups according to administration of gel and intrauterine infusion immediately prior to the procedure: (1) the 'lidocaine gel' group received 3 mL 2% lidocaine gel applied to the cervix and intrauterine infusion, using an infant feeding tube without balloon, of 5 mL normal saline; (2) the 'lidocaine infusion' group received 3 mL gel lubricant applied to the cervix and intrauterine infusion of 5 mL 2% lidocaine; (3) the placebo group received 3 mL gel lubricant applied to the cervix and intrauterine infusion of 5 mL normal saline. The tube was left in place for the SCSH procedure. The primary outcome measure was the overall pain level (on a scale of 0-100) reported by the women during the SCSH procedure. Women also rated their pain levels at various other time points and an observer assessed visible signs of the women's discomfort during the procedure, producing a distress score. RESULTS: There were no significant differences among the three groups in baseline characteristics, volume of saline solution infused, tenaculum use and duration and difficulty level of the SCSH procedure. The median (range) pain scores during normal saline infusion for the SCSH procedure were 0 (0-65) in the placebo group, 2.5 (0-80) in the lidocaine gel group, and 0 (0-70) in the lidocaine infusion group. The pain scores at other time points, the overall pain score and the distress score were also comparable for the three groups. No significant adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: SCSH performed with an infant feeding tube without balloon is associated with very low pain levels. Topical lidocaine gel application and intrauterine lidocaine infusion do not further reduce pain levels during SCSH.

Screening for dysglycaemia by oral glucose tolerance test should be recommended in all women with polycystic ovary syndrome.

STUDY QUESTION: Should fasting glucose (FG) or an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) be used to screen for dysglycaemia in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS)? SUMMARY ANSWER: A full OGTT should be recommended as the screening method for dysglycaemia in women with PCOS, regardless of BMI or family history of diabetes mellitus (DM). STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A cross-sectional study on 467 Chinese women diagnosed with PCOS by the Rotterdam criteria between January 2010 to December 2013. PARTICIPANTS, SETTING, METHODS: The study was done at a university hospital in Hong Kong. All subjects underwent a 75 g OGTT after overnight fasting. We evaluated the performance of FG alone, when compared with the full OGTT, in identifying subjects with dysglycaemia (prediabetes or DM, according to the 2010 diagnostic criteria of the American Diabetes Association). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Of the 467 subjects, 58 (12.4%) had dysglycaemia, among which 46 (9.8%) had prediabetes and 12 (2.6%) had DM, including 4 with known DM. Of the 46 subjects with prediabetes, 25 (54.3%) had normal FG and of the 8 subjects with screened DM in this study, 1 (12.5%) had normal FG. The sensitivity of FG alone in screening for prediabetes, DM and overall dysglycaemia were 45.7, 87.5 and 48.1%, respectively, i.e. missing 54.3% of prediabetes and 12.5% of DM cases as defined by the OGTT. Among the 54 subjects with screened dysglycaemia, 20 (37.0%) had BMI < 25 kg/m(2) and 35 (64.8%) had no family history of DM. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We only reported on the biochemical diagnosis of DM based on a single time point. In clinical practice, confirmatory results at another time point is required for definitive diagnosis in asymptomatic subjects. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: There is an ongoing debate as to whether FG or an OGTT should be used as a screening method for dysglycaemia in women with PCOS. Some guidelines also recommend glucose screening only in those who are overweight and/or having family history of diabetes (DM). There have been scarce data on this issue in the Chinese population, which the current study aims at addressing. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The study was supported by a research grant from the Hong Kong Obstetrical and Gynaecological Trust Fund, as well as internal research funding of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Hong Kong. All authors have no competing interests.

Endometrial vascularity is lower in pregnancies with pregnancy-induced hypertension or small-for-gestational-age fetus in live birth after in-vitro fertilization.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between endometrial/subendometrial vascularity and the risk of pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH) or small-for-gestational-age (SGA) fetuses in women who had a live birth following in-vitro fertilization (IVF). METHODS: This was a retrospective study of women who had a live birth after IVF from November 2002 to December 2004. Only women with a singleton pregnancy (n = 104) were included for analysis. Three-dimensional ultrasound measurement with power Doppler of the endometrial and subendometrial regions was performed on the day of oocyte retrieval in stimulated IVF cycles or on luteinizing hormone surge + 1 day in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles to measure the endometrial volume and the vascularization index (VI), flow index (FI) and vascularization flow index (VFI) of the endometrial and subendometrial regions. Pregnancy outcomes were also reviewed. RESULTS: Eight women (7.7%) had PIH or an SGA fetus. Women in the PIH/SGA group had significantly lower endometrial VI (0.504 vs 1.051; P = 0.023) and VFI (0.121 vs 0.253; P = 0.023) than those in the non-PIH/SGA group. However endometrial FI was significantly higher in the PIH/SGA group (23.04 vs 22.71; P = 0.028). There were no significant differences in subendometrial indices between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Women who had a live birth following IVF and whose pregnancy was complicated by PIH or an SGA fetus had significantly lower endometrial vascularity in terms of VI and VFI than did women without PIH or SGA.

Integration of patient characteristics and the results of Chlamydia antibody testing and hysterosalpingography in the diagnosis of tubal pathology: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Tubal patency tests are routinely performed in the diagnostic work-up of subfertile patients, but it is unknown whether these diagnostic tests add value beyond the information obtained by medical history taking and findings at physical examination. We used individual patient data meta-analysis to assess this question. METHODS: We approached authors of primary studies for data sets containing information on patient characteristics and results from tubal patency tests, such as Chlamydia antibody test (CAT), hysterosalpingography (HSG) and laparoscopy. We used logistic regression to create models that predict tubal pathology from medical history and physical examination alone, as well as models in which the results of tubal patency tests are integrated in the patient characteristics model. Laparoscopy was considered to be the reference test. RESULTS: We obtained data from four studies reporting on 4883 women. The duration of subfertility, number of previous pregnancies and a history of previous pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), pelvic surgery or Chlamydia infection qualified for the patient characteristics model. This model showed an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.63 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.65]. For any tubal pathology, the addition of HSG significantly improved the predictive performance to an AUC of 0.74 (95% CI 0.73-0.76) (P < 0.001). For bilateral tubal pathology, the addition of both CAT and HSG increased the predictive performance to an AUC of 0.76 (95% CI 0.74-0.79). CONCLUSIONS: In the work-up for subfertile couples, the combination of patient characteristics with CAT and HSG results gives the best diagnostic performance for the diagnosis of bilateral tubal pathology.

Effect of letrozole on uterine artery Doppler flow indices prior to first-trimester termination of pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: We previously demonstrated that a sequential regimen of letrozole and misoprostol resulted in a marked reduction in the serum estradiol concentration and in a higher efficacy of first-trimester termination of pregnancy than misoprostol alone. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of letrozole on uterine artery Doppler flow indices during early pregnancy. METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial. Thirty women requesting termination of pregnancy up to 63 days' gestation were randomized into two groups: a letrozole group receiving 10 mg of letrozole, daily, for 3 days, and a control group receiving a placebo for 3 days. Serum estradiol, progesterone and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) concentrations were measured before drug administration and then daily for 6 days. Ultrasound scanning for fetal viability and measurement of the pulsatility (PI) and resistance (RI) indices of the uterine arteries was performed before drug administration, and then on day 3 and day 7 after starting letrozole or placebo. All pregnancies were terminated by surgical evacuation on day 7 or day 8. RESULTS: Uterine artery PI and RI decreased significantly in the letrozole group, but not in the control group. Serum estradiol concentrations were significantly lower in the letrozole group than in the control group from day 2 onwards. Serum progesterone and hCG concentrations were comparable for the two groups throughout the 7 days. There were significantly more women in the letrozole group with vaginal bleeding. CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated that the use of letrozole in the first trimester of pregnancy suppresses serum estradiol levels but results in an increase in blood flow to the uterus. Further studies should be carried out to elucidate the mechanism of letrozole pretreatment in medical abortion.

Standardizing definitions and reporting guidelines for the infertility core outcome set: an international consensus development study.

STUDY QUESTION: Can consensus definitions for the core outcome set for infertility be identified in order to recommend a standardized approach to reporting? SUMMARY ANSWER: Consensus definitions for individual core outcomes, contextual statements, and a standardized reporting table have been developed. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Different definitions exist for individual core outcomes for infertility. This variation increases the opportunities for researchers to engage with selective outcome reporting, which undermines secondary research and compromises clinical practice guideline development. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Potential definitions were identified by a systematic review of definition development initiatives and clinical practice guidelines and by reviewing Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group guidelines. These definitions were discussed in a face-to-face consensus development meeting, which agreed consensus definitions. A standardized approach to reporting was also developed as part of the process. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, researchers, and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus development methods. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Forty-four potential definitions were inventoried across four definition development initiatives, including the Harbin Consensus Conference Workshop Group and International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies, 12 clinical practice guidelines, and Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group guidelines. Twenty-seven participants, from 11 countries, contributed to the consensus development meeting. Consensus definitions were successfully developed for all core outcomes. Specific recommendations were made to improve reporting. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations. There was limited representation from low- and middle-income countries. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: A minimum data set should assist researchers in populating protocols, case report forms, and other data collection tools. The generic reporting table should provide clear guidance to researchers and improve the reporting of their results within journal publications and conference presentations. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials statement, and over 80 specialty journals have committed to implementing this core outcome set. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research was funded by the Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, Auckland Medical Research Fund, and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and an editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility group. Hans Evers reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. 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. Craig Niederberger reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and a financial interest in NexHand. Ernest Ng reports research sponsorship from Merck. 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 work presented. All authors have completed the disclosure form. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative: 1023.

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.