Livebirth rate after one frozen embryo transfer in ovulatory women starting with natural, modified natural, or artificial endometrial preparation in Viet Nam: an open-label randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Use of frozen embryo transfer (FET) in in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) has increased. However, the best endometrial preparation protocol for FET cycles is unclear. We compared natural and modified natural cycle strategies with an artificial cycle strategy for endometrial preparation before FET. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label study, we recruited ovulatory women aged 18-45 years at a hospital in Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam, who were randomly allocated (1:1:1) to natural, modified natural, or artificial cycle endometrial preparation using a computer-generated random list and block randomisation. The trial was not masked due to the nature of the study interventions. In natural cycles, no oestrogen, progesterone, or human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) was used. In modified natural cycles, hCG was used to trigger ovulation. In artificial cycles, oral oestradiol valerate (8 mg/day from day 2-4 of menstruation) and vaginal progesterone (800 mg/day starting when endometrial thickness was ≥7 mm) were used. Embryos were vitrified, and then one or two day-3 embryos or one day-5 embryo were warmed and transferred under ultrasound guidance. If the first FET cycle was cancelled, subsequent cycles were performed with artificial endometrial preparation. The primary endpoint was livebirth after one FET. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04804020. FINDINGS: Between March 22, 2021, and March 14, 2023, 4779 women were screened and 1428 were randomly assigned (476 to each group). 99 first FET cycles were cancelled in each of the natural and modified cycle groups, versus none in the artificial cycle group. The livebirth rate after one FET was 174 (37%) of 476 in the natural cycle strategy group, 159 (33%) of 476 in the modified natural cycle strategy group, and 162 (34%) of 476 in the artificial cycle strategy group (relative risk 1·07 [95% CI 0·87-1·33] for natural vs artificial cycle strategy, and 0·98 [0·79-1·22] for modified natural vs artificial cycle strategy). Maternal and neonatal outcomes did not differ significantly between groups, as the power to detect small differences was low. INTERPRETATION: Although the livebirth rate was similar after natural, modified natural, and artificial cycle endometrial preparation strategies in ovulatory women undergoing FET IVF, no definitive conclusions can be made regarding the comparative safety of the three approaches. FUNDING: None.

The adverse effects of vitrification on mouse embryo development and metabolic phenotype in offspring.

Embryo vitrification is a standard procedure in assisted reproductive technology. Previous studies have shown that frozen embryo transfer is associated with an elevated risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. This study aimed to explore the effects of mouse blastocyst vitrification on the phenotype of vitrified-warmed blastocysts, their intrauterine and postnatal development, and the long-term metabolic health of the derived offspring. The vitrified-warmed blastocysts (IVF + VT group) exhibited reduced mitochondrial activity, increased apoptotic levels, and decreased cell numbers when compared to the fresh blastocysts (IVF group). Implantation rates, live pup rates, and crown-rump length at E18.5 were not different between the two groups. However, there was a significant decrease in fetal weight and fetal/placental weight ratio in the IVF + VT group. Furthermore, the offspring of the IVF + VT group at an age of 36 weeks had reduced whole energy consumption, impaired glucose and lipid metabolism when compared with the IVF group. Notably, RNA-seq results unveiled disturbed hepatic gene expression in the offspring from vitrified-warmed blastocysts. This study revealed the short-term negative impacts of vitrification on embryo and fetal development and the long-term influence on glucose and lipid metabolism that persist from the prenatal stage into adulthood in mice.

Eggsurance? A randomized controlled trial of a decision aid for elective egg freezing.

STUDY QUESTION: Does a purpose-designed Decision Aid for women considering elective egg freezing (EEF) impact decisional conflict and other decision-related outcomes? SUMMARY ANSWER: The Decision Aid reduces decisional conflict, prepares women for decision-making, and does not cause distress. WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN: Elective egg-freezing decisions are complex, with 78% of women reporting high decisional conflict. Decision Aids are used to support complex health decisions. We developed an online Decision Aid for women considering EEF and demonstrated that it was acceptable and useful in Phase 1 testing. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A single-blind, two-arm parallel group randomized controlled trial was carried out. Target sample size was 286 participants. Randomization was 1:1 to the control (existing website information) or intervention (Decision Aid plus existing website information) group and stratified by Australian state/territory and prior IVF specialist consultation. Participants were recruited between September 2020 and March 2021 with outcomes recorded over 12 months. Data were collected using online surveys and data collection was completed in March 2022. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Females aged ≥18 years, living in Australia, considering EEF, proficient in English, and with internet access were recruited using multiple methods including social media posts, Google advertising, newsletter/noticeboard posts, and fertility clinic promotion. After completing the baseline survey, participants were emailed their allocated website link(s). Follow-up surveys were sent at 6 and 12 months. Primary outcome was decisional conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale). Other outcomes included distress (Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale), knowledge about egg freezing and female age-related infertility (study-specific measure), whether a decision was made, preparedness to decide about egg freezing (Preparation for Decision-Making Scale), informed choice (Multi-Dimensional Measure of Informed Choice), and decision regret (Decision Regret Scale). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Overall, 306 participants (mean age 30 years; SD: 5.2) were randomized (intervention n = 150, control n = 156). Decisional Conflict Scale scores were significantly lower at 12 months (mean score difference: -6.99 [95% CI: -12.96, -1.02], P = 0.022) for the intervention versus control group after adjusting for baseline decisional conflict. At 6 months, the intervention group felt significantly more prepared to decide about EEF than the control (mean score difference: 9.22 [95% CI: 2.35, 16.08], P = 0.009). At 12 months, no group differences were observed in distress (mean score difference: 0.61 [95% CI: -3.72, 4.93], P = 0.783), knowledge (mean score difference: 0.23 [95% CI: -0.21, 0.66], P = 0.309), or whether a decision was made (relative risk: 1.21 [95% CI: 0.90, 1.64], P = 0.212). No group differences were found in informed choice (relative risk: 1.00 [95% CI: 0.81, 1.25], P = 0.983) or decision regret (median score difference: -5.00 [95% CI: -15.30, 5.30], P = 0.337) amongst participants who had decided about EEF by 12 months (intervention n = 48, control n = 45). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Unknown participant uptake and potential sampling bias due to the recruitment methods used and restrictions caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Some outcomes had small sample sizes limiting the inferences made. The use of study-specific or adapted validated measures may impact the reliability of some results. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This is the first randomized controlled trial to evaluate a Decision Aid for EEF. The Decision Aid reduced decisional conflict and improved women's preparation for decision making. The tool will be made publicly available and can be tailored for international use. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The Decision Aid was developed with funding from the Royal Women's Hospital Foundation and McBain Family Trust. The study was funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Project Grant APP1163202, awarded to M. Hickey, M. Peate, R.J. Norman, and R. Hart (2019-2021). S.S., M.P., D.K., and S.B. were supported by the NHMRC Project Grant APP1163202 to perform this work. R.H. is Medical Director of Fertility Specialists of Western Australia and National Medical Director of City Fertility. He has received grants from MSD, Merck-Serono, and Ferring Pharmaceuticals unrelated to this study and is a shareholder of CHA-SMG. R.L. is Director of Women's Health Melbourne (Medical Practice), ANZSREI Executive Secretary (Honorary), RANZCOG CREI Subspecialty Committee Member (Honorary), and a Fertility Specialist at Life Fertility Clinic Melbourne and Royal Women's Hospital Public Fertility Service. R.A.A. has received grants from Ferring Pharmaceuticals unrelated to this study. M.H., K.H., and R.J.N. have no conflicts to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620001032943. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 11 August 2020. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 29 September 2020.

Moral justification for the use of 'add-ons' in assisted reproductive technology: experts' views and experiences.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What factors do assisted reproductive terchnology (ART) providers take into account when they make decisions about offering 'add-ons'? DESIGN: A qualitative analysis of interviews with 31 ART professionals, focusing on their views and experiences in relation to add-ons, including the factors that are considered when doctors make decisions about their use. RESULTS: The participants reported that a range of considerations are taken into account when it comes to justifying the use of a particular add-on in a given circumstance, including the likelihood of benefit and harm, patients' perceived psychological needs and preferences, and organizational expectations. Importantly, patient preferences, psychological factors and low risk of harm appear to be stronger motivations than increasing the likelihood of a live birth or the desire to innovate. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that it cannot be taken for granted that add-ons and innovation are closely linked. One possible response to this would be regulatory reform; for example, only allowing 'unproven' add-ons to be used in the context of formal scientific evaluation. Alternatively, it could be made clear that add-ons that are not undergoing formal evaluation have more in common with other therapies lacking a clear evidence base, such as complementary and alternative medicines, than with conventional medical practice. Practices in relation to add-ons may also require a focus on the responsibilities of corporations, and the standards applying to purveyors of consumer goods and services.

Medicine in the marketplace: clinician and patient views on commercial influences on assisted reproductive technology.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the views and experiences of patient and expert stakeholders on the positive and negative impacts of commercial influences on the provision of assisted reproductive technology (ART) services, and what are their suggestions for governance reforms? DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 31 ART industry experts from across Australia and New Zealand and 25 patients undergoing ART from metropolitan and regional Australia, between September 2020 and September 2021. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Expert and patient participants considered that commercial forces influence the provision of ART in a number of positive ways - increasing sustainability, ensuring consistency in standards and providing patients with greater choice. Participants also considered commercial forces to have a number of negative impacts, including increased costs to government and patients; the excessive use of interventions that lack sufficient evidence to be considered part of standard care; inadequately informed consent (particularly with regard to financial information); and threats to patient-provider relationships and patient-centred care. Participants varied in whether they believed that professional self-regulation is sufficient. While recognizing the benefits of commercial investment in healthcare, many considered that regulatory reforms, as well as organizational cultural initiatives, are needed as means to ensure the primacy of patient well-being. CONCLUSIONS: The views expressed in this study should be systematically and critically examined to derive insights into how best to govern ART. These insights may also inform the design and delivery of other types of healthcare that are provided in the private sector.

What moral weight should patient-led demand have in clinical decisions about assisted reproductive technologies?

Evidence suggests that one reason doctors provide certain interventions in assisted reproductive technologies (ART) is because of patient demand. This is particularly the case when it comes to unproven interventions such as 'add-ons' to in vitro fertilisation (IVF) cycles, or providing IVF cycles that are highly unlikely to succeed. Doctors tend to accede to demands for such interventions because patients are willing to do and pay 'whatever it takes' to have a baby. However, there is uncertainty as to what moral weight should be placed on patient-led demands in ART, including whether it is acceptable for such demands to be invoked as a justification for intervention. We address this issue in this paper. We start by elucidating what we mean by 'patient-led demand' and synthesise some of the evidence for this phenomenon. We then argue that a doctor's professional role morality (PRM) yields special responsibilities, particularly in commercialised healthcare settings such as ART, because of the nature of professions as social institutions that are distinct from markets. We argue on this basis that, while there may be reasons (consistent with PRM) for doctors to accede to patient demand, this is not always the case. There is often a gap in justification between acceding to patient-led demands and providing contested interventions, particularly in commercial settings. As a result, acceding to demand in such settings needs a strong justification to be consistent with PRM.

Risk for Congenital Anomalies in Children Conceived With Medically Assisted Fertility Treatment : A Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: More than 2 million children are conceived annually using assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs), with a similar number conceived using ovulation induction and intrauterine insemination (OI/IUI). Previous studies suggest that ART-conceived children are at increased risk for congenital anomalies (CAs). However, the role of underlying infertility in this risk remains unclear, and ART clinical and laboratory practices have changed drastically over time, particularly there has been an increase in intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) and cryopreservation. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of underlying infertility and fertility treatment on CA risks in the first 2 years of life. DESIGN: Propensity score-weighted population-based cohort study. SETTING: New South Wales, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 851 984 infants (828 099 singletons and 23 885 plural children) delivered between 2009 and 2017. MEASUREMENTS: Adjusted risk difference (aRD) in CAs of infants conceived through fertility treatment compared with 2 naturally conceived (NC) control groups-those with and without a parental history of infertility (NC-infertile and NC-fertile). RESULTS: The overall incidence of CAs was 459 per 10 000 singleton births and 757 per 10 000 plural births. Compared with NC-fertile singleton control infants (n = 747 018), ART-conceived singleton infants (n = 31 256) had an elevated risk for major genitourinary abnormalities (aRD, 19.0 cases per 10 000 births [95% CI, 2.3 to 35.6]); the risk remained unchanged (aRD, 22 cases per 10 000 births [CI, 4.6 to 39.4]) when compared with NC-infertile singleton control infants (n = 36 251) (that is, after accounting for parental infertility), indicating that ART remained an independent risk. After accounting for parental infertility, ICSI in couples without male infertility was associated with an increased risk for major genitourinary abnormalities (aRD, 47.8 cases per 10 000 singleton births [CI, 12.6 to 83.1]). There was some suggestion of increased risk for CAs after fresh embryo transfer, although estimates were imprecise and inconsistent. There were no increased risks for CAs among OI/IUI-conceived infants (n = 13 574). LIMITATIONS: This study measured the risk for CAs only in those children who were born at or after 20 weeks' gestation. Observational study design precludes causal inference. Many estimates were imprecise. CONCLUSION: Patients should be counseled on the small increased risk for genitourinary abnormalities after ART, particularly after ICSI, which should be avoided in couples without problems of male infertility. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Money matters: a critique of 'informed financial consent'.

In recent years, concerns about the financial burdens of health care and growing recognition of the relevance of cost to decision making and patient experience have increasingly focused attention on financial 'transparency' and disclosure of costs to patients. In some jurisdictions, there have been calls not only for timely disclosure of costs information, but also for 'informed financial consent'. However, simply putting the 'financial' into 'informed consent' and invoking an informed consent standard for cost information encounters several ethical, legal, and practical difficulties. This article will examine the viability and desirability of 'informed financial consent', and whether it is possible to derive ideas from traditional informed consent that may improve decision making and the patient experience. We argue that, while there are important legal, ethical, and practical challenges to consider, some of the principles of informed consent to treatment can usefully guide financial communication. We also argue that, while medical practitioners (and their delegates) have an important role to play in bridging the gap between disclosure and enabling informed (financial) decision making, this must be part of a multi-faceted approach to financial communication that acknowledges the influence of non-clinical providers and other structural forces on discharging such obligations.

Association between ambient temperature exposure and pregnancy outcomes in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization in Shanghai, China: a retrospective cohort study.

STUDY QUESTION: Does ambient temperature exposure affect outcomes including clinical pregnancy and live birth in women undergoing IVF? SUMMARY ANSWER: Both extreme cold and hot ambient temperatures were significantly associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes of IVF cycles. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Heat exposure has been linked to adverse pregnancy outcomes worldwide. However, the effect of ambient temperature on infertile women undergoing IVF treatment is unclear. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A retrospective cohort study was conducted from a database of 3452 infertile women who underwent their first fresh or frozen embryo transfer in the Shanghai First Maternity and Infant Hospital from April 2016 to December 2020. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Daily mean ambient temperature exposure for each patient was obtained based on their residential address. Temperature-stratified multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate associations between temperature exposure and pregnancy outcomes after controlling for confounders. Vulnerable sub-groups were identified using forest plots. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate were 45.7% and 37.1%, respectively. Regarding clinical pregnancy, a higher temperature during cold weather was significantly associated with a higher pregnancy rate in the period about 11 weeks before ovarian stimulation (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.102, 95% CI: 1.012-1.201). Regarding live birth, an increased temperature during cold weather was significantly related to a higher live birth rate in the period after confirmation of clinical pregnancy or biochemical pregnancy, with the aORs of 6.299 (95% CI: 3.949-10.047) or 10.486 (95% CI: 5.609-19.620), respectively. However, a higher temperature during hot weather was negatively associated with the live birth rate in the periods after confirmation of clinical pregnancy or biochemical pregnancy, with the aORs at 0.186 (95% CI: 0.121-0.285) or 0.302 (95% CI: 0.224-0.406), respectively. Moreover, the decline in live birth rates during cold and hot weather was accompanied by increased rates of early miscarriage (P < 0.05). Stratified analyses identified susceptibility characteristics among the participants. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Climate monitoring data were used to represent individual temperature exposure levels according to the patient's residential address in the study. We were not able to obtain information of personal outdoor activity and use of indoor air conditioners in this retrospective study, which may affect actual temperature exposure. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study highlights that the ambient temperature exposure should be taken into account during IVF treatment and afterwards. There is a need to be alert to extremes in cold and hot ambient temperatures, especially during the period of follicle development and pregnancy. With this knowledge, clinicians can scientifically determine the timing of IVF treatment and reinforce patients' awareness of self-protection to minimize adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with extreme temperatures. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was supported by a grant from the Clinical Research Plan of Shanghai Hospital Development Center [SHDC2020CR4080], a grant from the Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality [19411960500], and two grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China [81871213, 81671468]. B.W.M. is supported by a NHMRC Investigator grant (GNT1176437). B.W.M. reports consultancy for ObsEva, and research grants from Merck KGaA, Ferring and Guerbet. The other authors have no conflict of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Recommendations from the 2023 International Evidence-based Guideline for the Assessment and Management of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome†.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the recommended assessment and management of those with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), based on the best available evidence, clinical expertise, and consumer preference? SUMMARY ANSWER: International evidence-based guidelines address prioritized questions and outcomes and include 254 recommendations and practice points, to promote consistent, evidence-based care and improve the experience and health outcomes in PCOS. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The 2018 International PCOS Guideline was independently evaluated as high quality and integrated multidisciplinary and consumer perspectives from six continents; it is now used in 196 countries and is widely cited. It was based on best available, but generally very low to low quality, evidence. It applied robust methodological processes and addressed shared priorities. The guideline transitioned from consensus based to evidence-based diagnostic criteria and enhanced accuracy of diagnosis, whilst promoting consistency of care. However, diagnosis is still delayed, the needs of those with PCOS are not being adequately met, evidence quality was low and evidence-practice gaps persist. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The 2023 International Evidence-based Guideline update reengaged the 2018 network across professional societies and consumer organizations, with multidisciplinary experts and women with PCOS directly involved at all stages. Extensive evidence synthesis was completed. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-II (AGREEII)-compliant processes were followed. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was applied across evidence quality, feasibility, acceptability, cost, implementation and ultimately recommendation strength and diversity and inclusion were considered throughout. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: This summary should be read in conjunction with the full Guideline for detailed participants and methods. Governance included a six-continent international advisory and management committee, five guideline development groups, and paediatric, consumer, and translation committees. Extensive consumer engagement and guideline experts informed the update scope and priorities. Engaged international society-nominated panels included paediatrics, endocrinology, gynaecology, primary care, reproductive endocrinology, obstetrics, psychiatry, psychology, dietetics, exercise physiology, obesity care, public health and other experts, alongside consumers, project management, evidence synthesis, statisticians and translation experts. Thirty-nine professional and consumer organizations covering 71 countries engaged in the process. Twenty meetings and five face-to-face forums over 12 months addressed 58 prioritized clinical questions involving 52 systematic and 3 narrative reviews. Evidence-based recommendations were developed and approved via consensus across five guideline panels, modified based on international feedback and peer review, independently reviewed for methodological rigour, and approved by the Australian Government National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The evidence in the assessment and management of PCOS has generally improved in the past five years, but remains of low to moderate quality. The technical evidence report and analyses (∼6000 pages) underpins 77 evidence-based and 54 consensus recommendations, with 123 practice points. Key updates include: i) further refinement of individual diagnostic criteria, a simplified diagnostic algorithm and inclusion of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels as an alternative to ultrasound in adults only; ii) strengthening recognition of broader features of PCOS including metabolic risk factors, cardiovascular disease, sleep apnea, very high prevalence of psychological features, and high risk status for adverse outcomes during pregnancy; iii) emphasizing the poorly recognized, diverse burden of disease and the need for greater healthcare professional education, evidence-based patient information, improved models of care and shared decision making to improve patient experience, alongside greater research; iv) maintained emphasis on healthy lifestyle, emotional wellbeing and quality of life, with awareness and consideration of weight stigma; and v) emphasizing evidence-based medical therapy and cheaper and safer fertility management. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Overall, recommendations are strengthened and evidence is improved, but remains generally low to moderate quality. Significantly greater research is now needed in this neglected, yet common condition. Regional health system variation was considered and acknowledged, with a further process for guideline and translation resource adaptation provided. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The 2023 International Guideline for the Assessment and Management of PCOS provides clinicians and patients with clear advice on best practice, based on the best available evidence, expert multidisciplinary input and consumer preferences. Research recommendations have been generated and a comprehensive multifaceted dissemination and translation program supports the Guideline with an integrated evaluation program. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This effort was primarily funded by the Australian Government via the National Health Medical Research Council (NHMRC) (APP1171592), supported by a partnership with American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Endocrine Society, European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology, and European Society for Endocrinology. The Commonwealth Government of Australia also supported Guideline translation through the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFCRI000266). HJT and AM are funded by NHMRC fellowships. JT is funded by a Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) fellowship. Guideline development group members were volunteers. Travel expenses were covered by the partnering organizations. Disclosures of interest were strictly managed according to NHMRC policy and are available with the full guideline, technical evidence report, peer review and responses (www.monash.edu/medicine/mchri/pcos). Of named authors HJT, CTT, AD, LM, LR, JBoyle, AM have no conflicts of interest to declare. JL declares grant from Ferring and Merck; consulting fees from Ferring and Titus Health Care; speaker's fees from Ferring; unpaid consultancy for Ferring, Roche Diagnostics and Ansh Labs; and sits on advisory boards for Ferring, Roche Diagnostics, Ansh Labs, and Gedeon Richter. TP declares a grant from Roche; consulting fees from Gedeon Richter and Organon; speaker's fees from Gedeon Richter and Exeltis; travel support from Gedeon Richter and Exeltis; unpaid consultancy for Roche Diagnostics; and sits on advisory boards for Roche Diagnostics. MC declares travels support from Merck; and sits on an advisory board for Merck. JBoivin declares grants from Merck Serono Ltd.; consulting fees from Ferring B.V; speaker's fees from Ferring Arzneimittell GmbH; travel support from Organon; and sits on an advisory board for the Office of Health Economics. RJN has received speaker's fees from Merck and sits on an advisory board for Ferring. AJoham has received speaker's fees from Novo Nordisk and Boehringer Ingelheim. The guideline was peer reviewed by special interest groups across our 39 partner and collaborating organizations, was independently methodologically assessed against AGREEII criteria and was approved by all members of the guideline development groups and by the NHMRC.

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection versus conventional in-vitro fertilisation in couples with infertility in whom the male partner has normal total sperm count and motility: an open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of intracytoplasmic sperm injection has increased substantially worldwide, primarily in couples with non-male factor infertility. However, there is a paucity of evidence from randomised trials supporting this approach compared with conventional in-vitro fertilisation (IVF). We aimed to investigate whether intracytoplasmic sperm injection would result in a higher livebirth rate compared with conventional IVF. METHODS: This open-label, multicentre, randomised trial was done at two IVF centres in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (IVFMD, My Duc Hospital and IVFAS, An Sinh Hospital). Eligible couples were aged at least 18 years and the male partner's sperm count and motility (progressive motility) were normal based on WHO 2010 criteria. Couples had to have undergone two or fewer previous conventional IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection attempts, have used an antagonist protocol for ovarian stimulation, and agree to have two or fewer embryos transferred. Couples were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo either intracytoplasmic sperm injection or conventional IVF, using block randomisation with variable block size of 2, 4, or 8 and a telephone-based central randomisation method. The computer-generated randomisation list was prepared by an independent statistician who had no other involvement in the study. Embryologists and couples were not masked to study groups because of the type of interventions and differences in hospital fees, but clinicians performing embryo transfer were unaware of study group allocation. The primary outcome was livebirth after the first embryo transfer from the initiated cycle. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03428919. FINDINGS: Between March 16, 2018, and Aug 12, 2019, we randomly assigned 1064 couples to intracytoplasmic sperm injection (n=532) or conventional IVF (n=532). Livebirth after the first embryo transfer from the initiated cycle occurred in 184 (35%) of 532 couples randomly assigned to intracytoplasmic sperm injection and in 166 (31%) of 532 couples randomly assigned to conventional IVF (absolute difference 3·4%, 95% CI -2·4 to 9·2; risk ratio [RR] 1·11, 95% CI 0·93 to 1·32; p=0·27). 29 (5%) couples in the intracytoplasmic sperm injection group and 34 (6%) couples in the conventional IVF group had fertilisation failure (absolute difference -0·9%, -4·0 to 2·1, RR 0·85, 95% CI 0·53 to 1·38; p=0·60). INTERPRETATION: In couples with infertility in whom the male partner has a normal total sperm count and motility, intracytoplasmic sperm injection did not improve the livebirth rate compared with conventional IVF. Our results challenge the value of the routine use of intracytoplasmic sperm injection in assisted reproduction techniques for this population. FUNDING: My Duc Hospital and Merck Sharp and Dohme.

Population-wide contribution of medically assisted reproductive technologies to overall births in Australia: temporal trends and parental characteristics.

STUDY QUESTION: In a country with supportive funding for medically assisted reproduction (MAR) technologies, what is the proportion of MAR births over-time? SUMMARY ANSWER: In 2017, 6.7% of births were conceived by MAR (4.8% ART and 1.9% ovulation induction (OI)/IUI) with a 55% increase in ART births and a stable contribution from OI/IUI births over the past decade. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: There is considerable global variation in utilization rates of ART despite a similar infertility prevalence worldwide. While the overall contribution of ART to national births is known in many countries because of ART registries, very little is known about the contribution of OI/IUI treatment or the socio-demographic characteristics of the parents. Australia provides supportive public funding for all forms of MAR with no restrictions based on male or female age, and thus provides a unique setting to investigate the contribution of MAR to national births as well as the socio-demographic characteristics of parents across the different types of MAR births. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This is a novel population-based birth cohort study of 898 084 births using linked ART registry data and administrative data including birth registrations, medical services, pharmaceuticals, hospital admissions and deaths. Birth (a live or still birth of at least one baby of ≥400 g birthweight or ≥20 weeks' gestation) was the unit of analysis in this study. Multiple births were considered as one birth in our analysis. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: This study included a total of 898 084 births (606 488 mothers) in New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory, Australia 2009-2017. We calculated the prevalence of all categories of MAR-conceived births over the study period. Generalized estimating equations were used to examine the association between parental characteristics (parent's age, parity, socio-economic status, maternal country of birth, remoteness of mother's dwelling, pre-existing medical conditions, smoking, etc.) and ART and OI/IUI births relative to naturally conceived births. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The proportion of MAR births increased from 5.1% of all births in 2009 to 6.7% in 2017, representing a 30% increase over the decade. The proportion of OI/IUI births remained stable at around 2% of all births, representing 32% of all MAR births. Over the study period, ART births conceived by frozen embryo-transfer increased nearly 3-fold. OI/IUI births conceived using clomiphene citrate decreased by 39%, while OI/IUI births conceived using letrozole increased 56-fold. Overall, there was a 55% increase over the study period in the number of ART-conceived births, rising to 56% of births to mothers aged 40 years and older. In 2017, almost one in six births (17.6%) to mothers aged 40 years and over were conceived using ART treatment. Conversely, the proportion of OI/IUI births was similar across different mother's age groups and remained stable over the study period. ART children, but not OI/IUI children, were more likely to have parents who were socio-economically advantaged compared to naturally conceived children. For example, compared to naturally conceived births, ART births were 16% less likely to be born to mothers who live in the disadvantaged neighbourhoods after accounting for other covariates (adjusted relative risk (aRR): 0.84 [95% CI: 0.81-0.88]). ART- or OI/IUI-conceived children were 25% less likely to be born to immigrant mothers than births after natural conception (aRR: 0.75 [0.74-0.77]). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The social inequalities that we observed between the parents of children born using ART and naturally conceived children may not directly reflect disparities in accessing fertility care for individuals seeking treatment. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: With the ubiquitous decline in fertility rates around the world and the increasing trend to delay childbearing, this population-based study enhances our understanding of the contribution of different types of MARs to population profiles among births in high-income countries. The parental socio-demographic characteristics of MAR-conceived children differ significantly from naturally conceived children and this highlights the importance of accounting for such differences in studies investigating the health and development of MAR-conceived children. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded through Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) grant: APP1127437. G.M.C. is an employee of The University of New South Wales (UNSW) and Director of the National Perinatal Epidemiology and Statistics Unit (NPESU), UNSW. The NPESU manages the Australian and New Zealand Assisted Reproduction Database with funding support from the Fertility Society of Australia and New Zealand. C.V. is an employee of The University of New South Wales (UNSW), Director of Clinical Research of IVFAustralia, Member of the Board of the Fertility Society of Australia and New Zealand, and Member of Research Committee of School of Women's and Children's Health, UNSW. C.V. reports grants from Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), and Merck KGaA. C.V. reports consulting fees, and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers, bureaus, manuscript, writing or educational events or attending meeting or travel from Merck, Merck Sparpe & Dohme, Ferring, Gedon-Richter and Besins outside this submitted work. C.V. reported stock or stock options from Virtus Health Limited outside this submitted work. R.J.N. is an employee of The University of Adelaide, and Chair DSMC for natural therapies trial of The University of Hong Kong. R.J.N. reports grants from NHMRC. R.J.N. reports lecture fees and support for attending or travelling for lecture from Merck Serono which is outside this submitted work. L.R.J. is an employee of The UNSW and Foundation Director of the Centre for Big Data Research in Health at UNSW Sydney. L.R.J. reports grants from NHMRC. The other co-authors have no conflict of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Development of children born from IVM versus IVF: 2-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Is there any difference in developmental outcomes in children born after capacitation IVM (CAPA IVM) compared with conventional IVF? SUMMARY ANSWER: Overall development up to 24 months of age was comparable in children born after CAPA IVM compared with IVF. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: IVM has been shown to be a feasible alternative to conventional IVF in women with a high antral follicle count (AFC). In addition to live birth rate, childhood development is also a relevant metric to compare between the two approaches to ART and there are currently no data on this. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This study was a follow-up of babies born to women who participated in a randomized controlled trial comparing IVM with a pre-maturation step (CAPA IVM) and IVF. Developmental assessments were performed on 231 children over 24 months of follow-up. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Participants in the randomized controlled trial had an indication for ART and a high AFC (≥24 follicles in both ovaries). They were randomized to undergo one cycle of either IVM (n = 273) or IVF (n = 273). Of these, 96 women and 118 women, respectively, had live births. Seventy-six women (94 children, 79.2%) and 104 women (137 children, 88.1%), respectively, completed Ages & Stages Third Edition Questionnaire assessment (ASQ-3), and underwent evaluation of Developmental Red Flags at 6, 12 and 24 months of age. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Baseline characteristics of participants in the follow-up study between the IVM and IVF groups were comparable. Overall, there were no significant differences in ASQ-3 scores at 6, 12 and 24 months between children born after IVM or IVF. The proportion of children with developmental red flags was low and did not differ between the two groups. Slightly, but significantly, lower ASQ-3 problem solving and personal-social scores in twins from the IVM versus IVF group at 6 months were still within the normal range and had caught up to the IVF group in the 12- and 24-month assessments. The number of children confirmed to have abnormal mental and/or motor development after specialist assessment was four in the IVM group and two in the IVF group (relative risk 2.91, 95% CI 0.54-15.6; P = 0.23). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This study is an open-label follow-up of participants in a randomized controlled trial, and not all original trial subjects took part in the follow-up. The self-selected nature of the follow-up population could have introduced bias, and the sample size may have been insufficient to detect significant between-group differences in developmental outcomes. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Based on the current findings at 2 years of follow-up, there does not appear to be any significant concern about the effects of IVM on childhood development. These data add to the evidence available to physicians when considering different approaches to fertility treatment, but require validation in larger studies. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was funded by the Vietnam National Foundation for Science and Technology Development (NAFOSTED) under grant number FWO.106-YS.2017.02. L.N.V. has received speaker and conference fees from Merck, grant, speaker and conference fees from Merck Sharpe and Dohme, and speaker, conference and scientific board fees from Ferring; T.M.H. has received speaker fees from Merck, Merck Sharp and Dohme, and Ferring; R.J.N. has receives grant funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia; B.W.M. has acted as a paid consultant to Merck, ObsEva and Guerbet and is the recipient of grant money from an NHMRC Investigator Grant; J.E.J.S. reports lecture fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Biomérieux and Besins Female Healthcare, grants from Fund for Research Flanders (FWO) and is co-inventor on granted patents on CAPA-IVM methodology in the USA (US10392601B2) and Europe (EP3234112B1); T.D.P., M.H.N.N., N.A.N., T.T.L., V.T.T.T., N.T.N., H.L.T.H. and X.T.H.L. have no financial relationships with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous 3 years, and no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04296357 (www.clinicaltrials.gov). TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 5 March 2020. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 7 March 2020.

IVF Transfer of Fresh or Frozen Embryos in Women without Polycystic Ovaries.

BACKGROUND: Among women who are undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF), the transfer of frozen embryos has been shown to result in a higher rate of live birth than the transfer of fresh embryos in those with infertility associated with the polycystic ovary syndrome. It is not known whether frozen-embryo transfer results in similar benefit in women with infertility that is not associated with the polycystic ovary syndrome. METHODS: We randomly assigned 782 infertile women without the polycystic ovary syndrome who were undergoing a first or second IVF cycle to receive either a frozen embryo or a fresh embryo on day 3. In the frozen-embryo group, all grade 1 and 2 embryos had been cryopreserved, and a maximum of two embryos were thawed on the day of transfer in the following cycle. In the fresh-embryo group, a maximum of two fresh embryos were transferred in the stimulated cycle. The primary outcome was ongoing pregnancy after the first embryo transfer. RESULTS: After the first completed cycle, ongoing pregnancy occurred in 142 of 391 women (36.3%) in the frozen-embryo group and in 135 of 391 (34.5%) in the fresh-embryo group (risk ratio in the frozen-embryo group, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87 to 1.27; P=0.65). Rates of live birth after the first transfer were 33.8% and 31.5%, respectively (risk ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.31). CONCLUSIONS: Among infertile women without the polycystic ovary syndrome who were undergoing IVF, the transfer of frozen embryos did not result in significantly higher rates of ongoing pregnancy or live birth than the transfer of fresh embryos. (Funded by My Duc Hospital; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02471573 .).

Micronized progesterone plus dydrogesterone versus micronized progesterone alone for luteal phase support in frozen-thawed cycles (MIDRONE): a prospective cohort study.

STUDY QUESTION: Does the addition of oral dydrogesterone to vaginal progesterone as luteal phase support improve pregnancy outcomes during frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles compared with vaginal progesterone alone? SUMMARY ANSWER: Luteal phase support with oral dydrogesterone added to vaginal progesterone had a higher live birth rate and lower miscarriage rate compared with vaginal progesterone alone. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Progesterone is an important hormone that triggers secretory transformation of the endometrium to allow implantation of the embryo. During IVF, exogenous progesterone is administered for luteal phase support. However, there is wide inter-individual variation in absorption of progesterone via the vaginal wall. Oral dydrogesterone is effective and well tolerated when used to provide luteal phase support after fresh embryo transfer. However, there are currently no data on the effectiveness of luteal phase support with the combination of dydrogesterone with vaginal micronized progesterone compared with vaginal micronized progesterone after FET. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Prospective cohort study conducted at an academic infertility center in Vietnam from 26 June 2019 to 30 March 2020. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We studied 1364 women undergoing IVF with FET. Luteal support was started when endometrial thickness reached ≥8 mm. The luteal support regimen was either vaginal micronized progesterone 400 mg twice daily plus oral dydrogesterone 10 mg twice daily (second part of the study) or vaginal micronized progesterone 400 mg twice daily (first 4 months of the study). In women with a positive pregnancy test, the appropriate luteal phase support regimen was continued until 7 weeks' gestation. The primary endpoint was live birth after the first FET of the started cycle, with miscarriage <12 weeks as one of the secondary endpoints. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The vaginal progesterone + dydrogesterone group and vaginal progesterone groups included 732 and 632 participants, respectively. Live birth rates were 46.3% versus 41.3%, respectively (rate ratio [RR] 1.12, 95% CI 0.99-1.27, P = 0.06; multivariate analysis RR 1.30 (95% CI 1.01-1.68), P = 0.042), with a statistically significant lower rate of miscarriage at <12 weeks in the progesterone + dydrogesterone versus progesterone group (3.4% versus 6.6%; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32-0.83; P = 0.009). Birth weight of both singletons (2971.0 ± 628.4 versus 3118.8 ± 559.2 g; P = 0.004) and twins (2175.5 ± 494.8 versus 2494.2 ± 584.7; P = 0.002) was significantly lower in the progesterone plus dydrogesterone versus progesterone group. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The main limitations of the study were the open-label design and the non-randomized nature of the sequential administration of study treatments. However, our systematic comparison of the two strategies was able to be performed much more rapidly than a conventional randomized controlled trial. In addition, the single ethnicity population limits external generalizability. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our findings study suggest a role for oral dydrogesterone in addition to vaginal progesterone as luteal phase support in FET cycles to reduce the miscarriage rate and improve the live birth rate. Carefully planned prospective cohort studies with limited bias could be used as an alternative to randomized controlled clinical trials to inform clinical practice. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This study received no external funding. LNV has received speaker and conference fees from Merck, grant, speaker and conference fees from Merck Sharpe and Dohme, and speaker, conference and scientific board fees from Ferring; TMH has received speaker fees from Merck, Merck Sharp and Dohme, and Ferring; R.J.N. has received scientific board fees from Ferring and receives grant funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia; BWM has acted as a paid consultant to Merck, ObsEva and Guerbet, and is the recipient of grant money from an NHMRC Investigator Grant. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT0399876.

Network meta-analyses in reproductive medicine: challenges and opportunities.

Network meta-analysis allows researchers to synthesise both direct and indirect evidence, thus enabling simultaneous comparisons of multiple treatments. A relatively recent addition to evidence synthesis in reproductive medicine, this approach has become increasingly popular. Yet, the underlying assumptions of network meta-analyses, which drive the validity of their findings, have been frequently ignored. In this article, we discuss the strengths and limitations of network meta-analyses. In addition, we present an overview of published network meta-analyses in reproductive medicine, summarize their challenges and provide insights into future research opportunities.

In-vitro maturation of oocytes versus conventional IVF in women with infertility and a high antral follicle count: a randomized non-inferiority controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Is one cycle of IVM non-inferior to one cycle of conventional in IVF with respect to live birth rates in women with high antral follicle counts (AFCs)? SUMMARY ANSWER: We could not demonstrate non-inferiority of IVM compared with IVF. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: IVF with ovarian hyperstimulation has limitations in some subgroups of women at high risk of ovarian stimulation, such as those with polycystic ovary syndrome. IVM is an alternative ART for these women. IVM may be a feasible alternative to IVF in women with a high AFC, but there is a lack of data from randomized clinical trials comparing IVM with IVF in women at high risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This single-center, randomized, controlled non-inferiority trial was conducted at an academic infertility center in Vietnam from January 2018 to April 2019. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: In total, 546 women with an indication for ART and a high AFC (≥24 follicles in both ovaries) were randomized to the IVM (n = 273) group or the IVF (n = 273) group; each underwent one cycle of IVM with a prematuration step versus one cycle of IVF using a standard gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist triggering. The primary endpoint was live birth rate after the first embryo transfer. The non-inferiority margin for IVM versus IVF was -10%. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Live birth after the first embryo transfer occurred in 96 women (35.2%) in the IVM group and 118 women (43.2%) in the IVF group (absolute risk difference -8.1%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -16.6%, 0.5%). Cumulative ongoing pregnancy rates at 12 months after randomization were 44.0% in the IVM group and 62.6% in the IVF group (absolute risk difference -18.7%; 95% CI -27.3%, -10.1%). Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome did not occur in the IVM group, versus two cases in the IVF group. There were no statistically significant differences between the IVM and IVF groups with respect to the occurrence of pregnancy complications, obstetric and perinatal complications, preterm delivery, birth weight and neonatal complications. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The main limitation of the study was its open-label design. In addition, the findings are only applicable to IVM conducted using the prematuration step protocol used in this study. Finally, the single ethnicity population limits the external generalizability of the findings. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our randomized clinical trial compares live birth rates after IVM and IVF. Although IVM is a viable and safe alternative to IVF that may be suitable for some women seeking a mild ART approach, the current study findings approach inferiority for IVM compared with IVF when cumulative outcomes are considered. Future research should incorporate multiple cycles of IVM in the study design to estimate cumulative fertility outcomes and better inform clinical decision-making. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was partly supported by Ferring grant number 000323 and funded by the Vietnam National Foundation for Science and Technology Development (NAFOSTED) and by the Fund for Research Flanders (FWO). LNV has received speaker and conference fees from Merck, grant, speaker and conference fees from Merck Sharpe and Dohme, and speaker, conference and scientific board fees from Ferring; TMH has received speaker fees from Merck, Merck Sharp and Dohme, and Ferring; RJN has received conference and scientific board fees from Ferring, is a minor shareholder in an IVF company, and receives grant funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia; BWM has acted as a paid consultant to Merck, ObsEva and Guerbet, and is the recipient of grant money from an NHMRC Investigator Grant; RBG reports grants and fellowships from the NHMRC of Australia; JS reports lecture fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Biomérieux, Besins Female Healthcare and Merck, grants from Fund for Research Flanders (FWO), and is co-inventor on granted patents on CAPA-IVM methodology in the US (US10392601B2) and Europe (EP3234112B1); TDP, VQD, VNAH, NHG, AHL, THP and RW have no financial relationships with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years, and no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03405701 (www.clinicaltrials.gov). TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 16 January 2018. DATE OF FIRST PATENT'S ENROLMENT: 25 January 2018.

The BlastGen study: a randomized controlled trial of blastocyst media supplemented with granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does Embryogen®/BlastGen™ culture medium improve live birth rates compared with standard culture medium for women undergoing IVF and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) with poor prognosis. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. A total of 100 couples undergoing IVF/ICSI were randomly allocated to having their inseminated oocytes incubated in either Embryogen®/BlastGen™ sequential culture media or standard Cleavage/Blastocyst sequential culture media for 5 days (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02305420). RESULTS: No statistically significant difference in live birth rate was found between the control group and the Embryogen®/BlastGen™ group (17 [34%] versus 11 [22%], respectively) (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.22 to 1.32; P = 0.18). After adjustment for maternal age, body mass index and fertilization procedure, the blastulation rate reduced (40.6 ± 26.5 versus 24.6 ± 26.7; RR 0.70, CI 0.52 to 0.95; P < 0.05), and grade of the embryo transferred (OR 0.35, CI 0.16 to 0.77; P < 0.01) when Embryogen®/BlastGen™ medium was used. CONCLUSION: A significant reduction in day-5 embryo outcome parameters was found using Embryogen®/BlastGen™ compared with standard medium, and insufficient evidence of a difference in pregnancy outcomes. Taking into consideration the small samples size, study limitations and strict inclusion criteria of this single-centre study, further research is needed to determine the efficacy of Embryogen®/BlastGen™ medium in couples undergoing IVF/ICSI.

Menstrual Cycle Length and Patterns in a Global Cohort of Women Using a Mobile Phone App: Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing information characterizing menstrual cycle length in women, but less information is available on the potential differences across lifestyle variables. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe differences in menstrual cycle length, variability, and menstrual phase across women of different ages and BMI among a global cohort of Flo app users. We have also reported on demographic and lifestyle characteristics across median cycle lengths. METHODS: The analysis was run based on the aggregated anonymized dataset from a menstrual cycle tracker and ovulation calendar that covers all phases of the reproductive cycle. Self-reported information is documented, including demographics, menstrual flow and cycle length, ovulation information, and reproductive health and diseases. Data from women aged ≥18 years and who had logged at least three cycles (ie, 2 completed cycles and 1 current cycle) in the Flo app were included (1,579,819 women). RESULTS: Of the 1.5 million users, approximately half (638,683/1,579,819, 40.42%) were aged between 18 and 24 years. Just over half of those reporting BMIs were in the normal range (18.5-24.9 kg/m2; 202,420/356,598, 56.76%) and one-third were overweight or obese (>25 kg/m2; 120,983/356,598, 33.93%). A total of 16.32% (257,889/1,579,819) of women had a 28-day median cycle length. There was a higher percentage of women aged ≥40 years who had a 27-day median cycle length than those aged between 18 and 24 years (22,294/120,612, 18.48% vs 60,870/637,601, 9.55%), but a lower percentage with a 29-day median cycle length (10,572/120,612, 8.77% vs 79,626/637,601, 12.49%). There were a higher number of cycles with short luteal phases in younger women, whereas women aged ≥40 years had a higher number of cycles with longer luteal phases. Median menstrual cycle length and the length of the follicular and luteal phases were not remarkably different with increasing BMI, except for the heaviest women at a BMI of ≥50 kg/m2. CONCLUSIONS: On a global scale, we have provided extensive evidence on the characteristics of women and their menstrual cycle length and patterns across different age and BMI groups. This information is necessary to support updates of current clinical guidelines around menstrual cycle length and patterns for clinical use in fertility programs.

Projecting future utilization of medically assisted fertility treatments.

This study estimates the future utilization of medically assisted fertility treatments in Australia, focusing on assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs), intrauterine insemination (IUI), and ovulation induction. A multistate cohort component population projection model is used to determine future fertility rates from 2016 to 2026 by age and education level. These are combined with information on recent trends in use and success rates to indirectly estimate future age-specific probabilities of fertility treatment utilization. The number of ART cycles is expected to increase by 61 per cent between 2016 and 2026 if treatment success rates remain at 2015 levels, or by 34 per cent if recent improvements in ART success rates continue. The model also predicts that numbers of IUI cycles and ovulation induction cycles will decrease by 17 and 3 per cent, respectively. This research confirms the importance of including both technological improvements and socio-demographic changes when predicting future fertility treatment utilization.