RESUMEN
Abstract: Sex steroids are converted to bioactive metabolites and vice versa by endometrial steroid-metabolising enzymes. Studies indicate that alterations in this metabolism might affect endometrial receptivity. This pilot study determined whether the endometrial formation and inactivation of 17ß-oestradiol differed between the supposedly embryo-receptive endometrium and non-receptive endometrium of women undergoing IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Endometrial biopsies were obtained from IVF/ICSI patients 5-8 days after ovulation in a natural cycle, prior to their second IVF/ICSI cycle with fresh embryo transfer (ET). Endometrial biopsies from patients who achieved clinical pregnancy after fresh ET (n = 15) were compared with endometrial biopsies from patients that did not conceive after fresh ET (n = 15). Formation of 17ß-oestradiol (oxidative 17ß-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenases (HSDs)), oestrone (reductive HSD17Bs) and inhibition of HSD17B1 activity were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography. The endometrial transcriptome was profiled using RNA sequencing followed by principal component analysis and differentially expressed gene analysis. The false discovery rate-adjusted P < 0.05 and log fold change >0.5 were selected as the screening threshold. Formation and inactivation of 17ß-oestradiol resulted similar between groups. Inhibition of HSD17B1 activity was significantly higher in the non-pregnant group when only primary infertile women (n = 12) were considered (27.1%, n = 5 vs 16.2%, n = 7, P = 0.04). Gene expression analysis confirmed the presence of HSD17B1 (encoding HSD17B1), HSD17B2 (encoding HSD17B2) and 33 of 46 analysed steroid metabolising enzymes in the endometrium. In the primary infertile subgroup (n = 10) 12 DEGs were found including LINC02349 which has been linked to implantation. However, the exact relationship between steroid-metabolising enzyme activity, expression and implantation outcome requires further investigation in larger, well-defined patient groups. Lay summary: Sex hormones are produced and broken down by enzymes that can be found in the endometrium (the inner lining of the womb). This enzyme activity might influence the chances of becoming pregnant. We compared (i) enzyme activity in the endometrium of 15 women who did and 15 women who did not become pregnant in their second in vitro fertilisation attempt, (ii) how enzyme activity can be blocked by an inhibitor, and (iii) differences in gene expression (the process by which instructions in our DNA are converted into a product). Enzyme activity was similar between groups. We found that in women who have never been pregnant in the past, inhibition of enzyme activity was higher and found differences in a gene that has been linked to the implantation of the embryo, but future studies should be performed in larger, well-defined patient groups to confirm these findings.
Asunto(s)
Infertilidad Femenina , Masculino , Embarazo , Animales , Femenino , Proyectos Piloto , Infertilidad Femenina/genética , Infertilidad Femenina/terapia , Infertilidad Femenina/metabolismo , Infertilidad Femenina/veterinaria , Semen , Estradiol/metabolismo , Endometrio/metabolismoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: This study aims to describe the motives and considerations of couples carrying a structural chromosomal abnormality deciding on preimplantation genetic testing (PGT). METHODS: A qualitative exploratory study was conducted using semi-structured dyadic interviews with 13 couples (N = 26) carrying a structural chromosomal abnormality. All couples had an informative consultation in our PGT centre in the Netherlands. RESULTS: Almost all couples considered PGT or natural conception combined with prenatal diagnosis (PND) as the only two reproductive options. Among several considerations mentioned, the majority indicated that the wish to increase the chance of a successful pregnancy was the most important motive to opt for PGT. All couples who opted for PGT had first tried to conceive spontaneously and entered the PGT programme because of their adverse experiences during these attempts (infertility, recurrent miscarriage, termination of pregnancy, birth of an affected child). Couples that refrained from PGT were of advanced maternal age and expressed the long trajectory of PGT as the main reason to refrain. If conceiving spontaneously would not lead to an ongoing pregnancy, these couples also indicated that they would use PGT. CONCLUSION: This study shows that couples carrying a structural chromosomal abnormality consider PGT and spontaneous conception with PND as relevant reproductive options. They are looking for the option that is in their opinion the fastest way to establish a successful pregnancy. Information on the perceived pros and cons of PGT or spontaneous conception in these couples can help to optimize counselling and psychological support during the decision-making process.
Asunto(s)
Aberraciones Cromosómicas , Heterocigoto , Motivación , Diagnóstico Preimplantación/psicología , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Embarazo , Diagnóstico Prenatal , Historia Reproductiva , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Women with early-stage breast cancer may still have a future child wish, while chemotherapy may impair fertility. To pursue on fertility preservation shortly after breast cancer diagnosis is complex. This review holds a critical reflection on all topics that need to be counseled to give them the opportunity to make a well-informed decision before starting any oncological treatment. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was performed on papers published in English language on breast cancer in young women, risk of chemotherapy-induced infertility, fertility preservation techniques, impact of possible mutation carriership, and future pregnancy outcome. RESULTS: Below 40 years of age, the risk of permanent chemotherapy-induced ovarian function failure is approximately 20%, where taxanes do not significantly add to this risk. Overall, 23% of reported women who performed fertility preservation by cryopreserving oocytes or embryos returned for embryo transfer. Of these, 40% gave live birth. Both fertility preservation in women diagnosed with breast cancer and pregnancy after treatment seem safe with respect to breast cancer survival. Women who have a genetic predisposition for breast cancer like BRCA gene mutation should also be informed about the possibility of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Women with an early stage of breast cancer and a possible future child wish should be referred to an expertise center in breast cancer, fertility preservation, and genetics in this complex decision-making process, shortly after diagnosis.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Asesoramiento Genético , Infertilidad Femenina/fisiopatología , Adulto , Neoplasias de la Mama/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Hidrocarburos Aromáticos con Puentes/uso terapéutico , Niño , Criopreservación , Femenino , Fertilidad/efectos de los fármacos , Fertilidad/fisiología , Preservación de la Fertilidad/métodos , Humanos , Infertilidad Femenina/patología , Infertilidad Femenina/prevención & control , Recuperación del Oocito/métodos , Oocitos/crecimiento & desarrollo , Oocitos/patología , Inducción de la Ovulación/métodos , Embarazo , Taxoides/uso terapéutico , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
STUDY QUESTION: Are six cycles of ovulation induction with gonadotrophins more cost-effective than six cycles of ovulation induction with clomiphene citrate (CC) with or without IUI in normogonadotropic anovulatory women not pregnant after six ovulatory cycles with CC? SUMMARY ANSWER: Both gonadotrophins and IUI are more expensive when compared with CC and intercourse, and gonadotrophins are more effective than CC. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In women with normogonadotropic anovulation who ovulate but do not conceive after six cycles with CC, medication is usually switched to gonadotrophins, with or without IUI. The cost-effectiveness of these changes in policy is unknown. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We performed an economic evaluation of ovulation induction with gonadotrophins compared with CC with or without IUI in a two-by-two factorial multicentre randomized controlled trial in normogonadotropic anovulatory women not pregnant after six ovulatory cycles with CC. Between December 2008 and December 2015 women were allocated to six cycles with gonadotrophins plus IUI, six cycles with gonadotrophins plus intercourse, six cycles with CC plus IUI or six cycles with CC plus intercourse. The primary outcome was conception leading to a live birth achieved within 8 months of randomization. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis on direct medical costs. We calculated the direct medical costs of ovulation induction with gonadotrophins versus CC and of IUI versus intercourse in six subsequent cycles. We included costs of medication, cycle monitoring, interventions, and pregnancy leading to live birth. Resource use was collected from the case report forms and unit costs were derived from various sources. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) for gonadotrophins compared to CC and for IUI compared to intercourse. We used non-parametric bootstrap resampling to investigate the effect of uncertainty in our estimates. The analysis was performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: We allocated 666 women in total to gonadotrophins and IUI (n = 166), gonadotrophins and intercourse (n = 165), CC and IUI (n = 163), or CC and intercourse (n = 172). Mean direct medical costs per woman receiving gonadotrophins or CC were 4495 versus 3006 (cost difference of 1475 (95% CI: 1457-1493)). Live birth rates were 52% in women allocated to gonadotrophins and 41% in those allocated to CC (relative risk (RR) 1.24:95% CI: 1.05-1.46). The ICER was 15 258 (95% CI: 8721 to 63 654) per additional live birth with gonadotrophins. Mean direct medical costs per woman allocated to IUI or intercourse were 4497 versus 3005 (cost difference of 1510 (95% CI: 1492-1529)). Live birth rates were 49% in women allocated to IUI and 43% in those allocated to intercourse (RR = 1.14:95% CI: 0.97-1.35). The ICER was 24 361 (95% CI: -11 290 to 85 172) per additional live birth with IUI. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We allowed participating hospitals to use their local protocols for ovulation induction and IUI, which may have led to variation in costs, but which increases generalizability. Indirect costs generated by transportation or productivity loss were not included. We did not evaluate letrozole, which is potentially more effective than CC. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Gonadotrophins are more effective, but more expensive than CC, therefore, the use of gonadotrophins in women with normogonadotropic anovulation who have not conceived after six ovulatory CC cycles depends on society's willingness to pay for an additional child. In view of the uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness estimate of IUI, these data are not sufficient to make recommendations on the use of IUI in these women. In countries where ovulation induction regimens are reimbursed, policy makers and health care professionals may use our results in their guidelines. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This trial was funded by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw number: 80-82310-97-12067). The Eudract number for this trial is 2008-006171-73. The Sponsor's Protocol Code Number is P08-40. CBLA reports unrestricted grant support from Merck and Ferring. BWM is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548) and reports consultancy for Merck, ObsEva and Guerbet. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR1449.
Asunto(s)
Anovulación/tratamiento farmacológico , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Fármacos para la Fertilidad Femenina/administración & dosificación , Infertilidad Femenina/terapia , Inseminación Artificial/economía , Inducción de la Ovulación/métodos , Adulto , Anovulación/sangre , Anovulación/complicaciones , Tasa de Natalidad , Clomifeno/administración & dosificación , Clomifeno/economía , Femenino , Fármacos para la Fertilidad Femenina/economía , Gonadotropinas/administración & dosificación , Gonadotropinas/sangre , Gonadotropinas/economía , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Infertilidad Femenina/sangre , Infertilidad Femenina/etiología , Nacimiento Vivo , Masculino , Países Bajos , Inducción de la Ovulación/economía , Embarazo , Índice de Embarazo , Insuficiencia del TratamientoRESUMEN
STUDY QUESTION: Is embryo culture media used during an IVF/ICSI treatment associated with differences in growth, body composition and cardiovascular development as determined in 9-year-old singleton IVF children? SUMMARY ANSWER: The choice of in vitro culture medium for human embryos is associated with differences in body weight, BMI, truncal adiposity, waist circumference and waist/hip ratio at the age of 9, while no significant differences were observed in cardiovascular development. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Children born after IVF/ICSI have an increased risk of low birthweight, which is correlated with a higher risk of cardiovascular diseases. Some studies show that IVF children exhibit a significantly higher systolic and diastolic blood pressure and higher fasting glucose levels compared to naturally conceived children. After alternating assignment to G1™ Version 3 (Vitrolife) or K-SICM (Cook) embryo culture media, birthweight of the resulting children was significantly higher in the Vitrolife group and they remained heavier during the first 2 years of life. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: In this observational cohort study (MEDIUM-KIDS), parents of singletons from a previous study were approached for further follow-up after the ninth birthday of their child. The singletons were born after fresh embryo transfer of cleavage stage embryos resulting from an IVF/ICSI treatment performed between July 2003 and December 2006 in our clinic, when two different culture media were used alternately: either G1™ Version 3 (Vitrolife) or K-SICM (Cook). Follow-up measurements were performed between March 2014 and December 2016. PARTICIPANT/MATERIALS, SETTINGS, METHODS: Parents were invited to attend our clinic with their child for a single visit lasting ~2.5 h. Two experienced clinicians performed all measurements as part of the MEDIUM-KIDS study in a standardized way. Height and weight of the child was measured using calibrated scales, 4-point skinfold thickness measurements were measured in triplicate and waist and hip circumference were measured using a tape measure. The following cardiovascular parameters were measured in a standardized way: blood pressure, heart rate and endothelial function by skin laser-Doppler with iontophoresis using vasodilatory drugs. Cortisol and cortisone concentrations in hair were measured. A blood sample was taken after an overnight fast for insulin, glucose, TSH and lipid analysis. Blood samples of the IVF children were compared with a non-IVF control group. Differences between culture medium groups were analysed by Student's t-test and effects of confounders were analysed using multivariable regression analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Of the 294 eligible children (168 Vitrolife and 126 Cook), 136 children (75 Vitrolife and 61 Cook) participated in the study. Baseline characteristics of the participating children from the Vitrolife and Cook group were similar. Birthweight was higher in the Vitrolife group, in keeping with the full cohort. After correction for confounders, the difference in weight and BMI attributable to culture medium was 1.58 kg (95% CI: 0.01-3.14) and 0.84 kg/m2 (95% CI: 0.02-1.67), respectively, with the Vitrolife children being heavier. Height and height corrected for age and gender (SDS scores) were similar in both groups. Furthermore, waist circumference was significantly higher in the Vitrolife group with a corrected difference of 3.21 cm (95%CI: 0.60-5.81) leading to a 0.03 increase (95% CI: 0.01-0.05) in waist/hip ratio. Subscapular skinfolds combined with suprailiacal skinfolds (defined as truncal adiposity), was also significantly higher in Vitrolife children (adjusted difference 3.44 cm [95% CI: 0.27-6.62]). Both systolic (adj. beta 0.364 [95% CI: -2.129 to 2.856],) and diastolic (adj. beta 0.275 [95% CI: -2.105 to 2.654]) blood pressures (mmHg) were comparable for the two groups. After an overnight fast, cholesterol, glucose, insulin, low and high-density lipoprotein, triglycerides and TSH were normal and similar in the two groups. Endothelial function in the microcirculation was compared by using maximum perfusion units corrected for the baseline value as a measure for vasodilatory capacity. There were no significant differences between the two groups. Cortisol and cortisone concentration in hair samples were comparable. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: A limitation of the original study was its pseudo-randomized design. This and the dwindling enthusiasm of families for participation (47.7% after 9 years) prevent us from drawing robust causal conclusions from the observed association. Nevertheless, to date this is oldest cohort of IVF/ICSI children where culture medium was allocated alternatingly and used in a blinded setting, to be studied. We believe that our participants are representative for the full cohort. The current number of participants was sufficient to rule out differences as little as 3 mmHg in systolic and diastolic blood pressures. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study underlines the importance of structured follow-up of IVF/ICSI children to further elucidate possible long-term health effects. Health professionals and culture medium manufacturers should be aware that small changes in culture conditions and culture medium composition for the early embryo can have long-term health effects. The similar cardiovascular results for the two groups are reassuring but the children may still be too young to detect differences in cardiovascular development. Prolonged follow-up and structured investigations up until adulthood are necessary to gain more insight and reassurance in the cardiovascular development of IVF offspring, although long-term follow-up will become more complicated by confounding life-style and environmental factors possibly influencing development. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was financially supported by the March of Dimes (Grant number #6-FY13-153). The sponsor of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation or writing of the report. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR4220.
Asunto(s)
Composición Corporal/efectos de los fármacos , Peso Corporal/efectos de los fármacos , Sistema Cardiovascular/efectos de los fármacos , Medios de Cultivo/farmacología , Estatura/efectos de los fármacos , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/etiología , Niño , Desarrollo Infantil/efectos de los fármacos , Técnicas de Cultivo de Embriones , Fertilización In Vitro/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Reproductive decision making for couples with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) is complex and can result in decisional conflict or regret. This study investigated couples' support needs and aimed to identify vulnerable couples. Ultimately, we should strive to develop a clear standard of care guideline regarding reproductive decision support. METHODS: Mixed methods were used for data collection. A focus group study was conducted among 18 couples (N = 35) with HBOC who had made a reproductive decision after reproductive counselling. Subsequently, 129 similar couples (N = 258) were invited to complete a cross-sectional survey based on the focus group study. RESULTS: Clinical and practical aspects of reproductive counselling were positively evaluated in the focus group study, although couples indicated a need for additional support with emotional and social concerns in which their relationship, social environment, and the way they picture their desired family were key elements. The survey was completed by 86 participants. Making a reproductive choice was experienced as (very) difficult by 43%, and 69% showed a need for additional support during decision making. Younger participants and those who opted for a natural pregnancy experienced more difficulty with reproductive decision making, and partners showed a higher need for psychological support than carriers. CONCLUSIONS: Couples with HBOC who need to make a reproductive decision have specific needs for guidance and support, of which the desired content and methods can vary. It is therefore important to identify vulnerable couples and to attune counselling to couples' needs.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/psicología , Carcinoma Epitelial de Ovario/psicología , Conflicto Psicológico , Toma de Decisiones , Matrimonio/psicología , Adulto , Actitud Frente a la Salud , Neoplasias de la Mama/genética , Carcinoma Epitelial de Ovario/genética , Estudios Transversales , Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión , Femenino , Heterocigoto , Humanos , Masculino , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , EmbarazoRESUMEN
Classic galactosemia is a rare inherited disorder of galactose metabolism. Primary ovarian insufficiency (POI) with subfertility affects > 80% of female patients and is an important concern for patients and their parents. Healthcare providers are often consulted for subfertility treatment possibilities. An option brought up by the families is intrafamilial oocyte donation (mother-to-daughter or sister-to-sister). In addition to POI, galactosemia patients can also present varying cognitive and neurological impairments, which may not be fully clear at the time when mother-to-daughter oocyte donation is considered. Ethical and societal aspects arise when exploring this option. This study aimed to provide guidance in aspects to consider based on the views of different groups involved in the oocyte donation process. A qualitative study using in-depth semi-structured interviews with > 50 participants (patients, family members, and healthcare providers) was conducted. From these interviews, themes of concern emerged, which are illustrated and reviewed: (1) family relations, (2) medical impact, (3) patients' cognitive level, (4) agreements to be made in advance and organization of counseling, (5) disclosure to the child, and (6) need for follow-up. We conclude that discussing and carrying out intrafamilial oocyte donation in galactosemia patients requires carefully addressing these themes. This study adds value to the already existing recommendations on intrafamilial oocyte donation in general, since it highlights important additional aspects from the perspectives of patients and their families.
Asunto(s)
Preservación de la Fertilidad/ética , Galactosemias/fisiopatología , Infertilidad/etiología , Donación de Oocito/ética , Insuficiencia Ovárica Primaria/etiología , Femenino , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Madres , Países Bajos , Núcleo Familiar , Insuficiencia Ovárica Primaria/complicaciones , Investigación CualitativaRESUMEN
STUDY QUESTION: Do embryo culture media used during an IVF/ICSI treatment have an effect on cognitive development of singleton IVF children at 9 years of age? SUMMARY ANSWER: Cognitive development of children born after culture in two different embryo culture media is comparable. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Previously, we have shown that the culture medium used in an IVF/ICSI treatment affects birthweight and weight at 2 years of age after alternating assignment to embryo culture in either K-SCICM (Cook) or G1™ Version 3 (Vitrolife). Children with low birthweight are known to have an increased risk for learning disabilities. Data on cognitive development in general of children born after ART are still conflicting, and the only study reporting on the effects of culture medium on cognitive development shows significant differences in cognitive development between two culture medium groups. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: In this observational cohort follow-up study (MEDIUM-KIDS), parents of all singletons from our abovementioned study were approached after the ninth birthday of their child to participate in an additional follow-up study. Of the 294 eligible children included in the original study, 119 children (70 Vitrolife and 49 Cook) participated in the current study. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS: All follow-up measurements were performed between March 2014 and December 2016. CITO (Dutch Central Institute for Test Development) developed the Dutch pupil monitoring system, which involves nationwide independent, standardized, academic achievement score tests to monitor the child's school performance twice a year at fixed time points from third grade onward. The tests include language skills (vocabulary and orthography), mathematics and reading capability and comprehension. Results from the tests performed between third and sixth grades, expressed as ability scores, were obtained from the school. To investigate school performance development over the years, we used a mixed effects multilevel model. The least complex model with the best fit was selected to analyze whether culture medium affects cognitive development in our cohort. The study had enough power to detect a difference in ability score that reflects at least one performance category between the two groups. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: No differences were seen in baseline characteristics between participants and non-participants (both parental and children characteristics). For all domains, the random intercept model was used. All analyses showed comparable results for the two culture medium groups. No significant differences were observed for any of the cognitive development domains, even after correction for potential confounders. Parental level of education was higher in the IVF group (45%) if compared to the national average level of education (35%), which most likely explains the higher CITO scores for the IVF children if compared to the National ability scores. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: A limitation of the study was its pseudo-randomized design and the relatively low participation rate of 40.5%. This and the number of missing data prevent us from drawing robust causal conclusions. However, as this is the first and therewith oldest cohort of children where culture medium was allocated alternatingly and used in a blinded setting, in the same period, with all other conditions identical this study gives up until now the best available evidence. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our study analyzes the effects of culture medium on school performance of children born after IVF/ICSI in a prospective cohort study. Although further research on long-term academic skills and also on behavior is essential, our results are reassuring and should make parents of children born after IVF/ICSI feel comfortable with their children's cognitive development. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The study was financially supported by the March of Dimes (Grant no. #6-FY13-153). The sponsor of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation or writing of the report. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR4220.
RESUMEN
Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer caused by a BRCA1/2 mutation is the most frequent indication for preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) in the Netherlands. The extent to which involved professionals are informed about this option, however, is unclear. The few available international studies mostly represent a limited range of professionals, and suggest that their knowledge about PGD for hereditary cancer syndromes is sparse and referral for PGD is based on limited understanding. A cross-sectional survey assessing awareness, knowledge, acceptability and PGD-referral for BRCA was completed by 188 professionals involved in the field of breast and ovarian cancer or reproduction. One-half of professionals were aware of PGD for BRCA, and most had a low to moderate level of knowledge. A total of 86% considered PGD for BRCA acceptable and 48% had referred patients with BRCA for PGD. Awareness and knowledge was higher among professionals who worked at a university hospital (compared with a general hospital). Knowledge of PGD was positively associated with discussing and referring for PGD, and PGD acceptability was associated with previous awareness. Although PGD counselling is the primary responsibility of the geneticist, other involved professionals may be gatekeepers as patients rely on them for raising awareness and referral.
Asunto(s)
Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Síndrome de Cáncer de Mama y Ovario Hereditario/diagnóstico , Diagnóstico Preimplantación , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Síndrome de Cáncer de Mama y Ovario Hereditario/genética , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Derivación y ConsultaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine whether BRCA1/2 mutation carriers produce fewer mature oocytes after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF) with preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), in comparison to a PGD control group. METHODS: A retrospective, international, multicenter cohort study was performed on data of first PGD cycles performed between January 2006 and September 2015. Data were extracted from medical files. The study was performed in one PGD center and three affiliated IVF centers in the Netherlands and one PGD center in Belgium. Exposed couples underwent PGD because of a pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation, controls for other monogenic conditions. Only couples treated in a long gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist-suppressive protocol, stimulated with at least 150 IU follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), were included. Women suspected to have a diminished ovarian reserve status due to chemotherapy, auto-immune disorders, or genetic conditions (other than BRCA1/2 mutations) were excluded. A total of 106 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers underwent PGD in this period, of which 43 (20 BRCA1 and 23 BRCA2 mutation carriers) met the inclusion criteria. They were compared to 174 controls selected by frequency matching. RESULTS: Thirty-eight BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (18 BRCA1 and 20 BRCA2 mutation carriers) and 154 controls proceeded to oocyte pickup. The median number of mature oocytes was 7.0 (interquartile range (IQR) 4.0-9.0) in the BRCA group as a whole, 6.5 (IQR 4.0-8.0) in BRCA1 mutation carriers, 7.5 (IQR 5.5-9.0) in BRCA2 mutation carriers, and 8.0 (IQR 6.0-11.0) in controls. Multiple linear regression analysis with the number of mature oocytes as a dependent variable and adjustment for treatment center, female age, female body mass index (BMI), type of gonadotropin used, and the total dose of gonadotropins administered revealed a significantly lower yield of mature oocytes in the BRCA group as compared to controls (p = 0.04). This finding could be fully accounted for by the BRCA1 subgroup (BRCA1 mutation carriers versus controls p = 0.02, BRCA2 mutation carriers versus controls p = 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: Ovarian response to stimulation, expressed as the number of mature oocytes, was reduced in BRCA1 but not in BRCA2 mutation carriers. Although oocyte yield was in correspondence to a normal response in all subgroups, this finding points to a possible negative influence of the BRCA1 gene on ovarian reserve.
Asunto(s)
Proteína BRCA1/genética , Proteína BRCA2/genética , Fertilización In Vitro , Inducción de la Ovulación/métodos , Diagnóstico Preimplantación/métodos , Adulto , Femenino , Hormona Folículo Estimulante , Gonadotropinas/administración & dosificación , Heterocigoto , Humanos , Técnicas de Maduración In Vitro de los Oocitos , Mutación , Oocitos/crecimiento & desarrollo , Oocitos/patología , Reserva Ovárica/genética , Embarazo , Índice de EmbarazoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy for breast cancer may have a negative impact on reproductive function due to gonadotoxicity. Fertility preservation via banking of oocytes or embryos after ovarian stimulation with FSH can increase the likelihood of a future live birth. It has been hypothesized that elevated serum estrogen levels during ovarian stimulation may induce breast tumour growth. This has led to the use of alternative stimulation protocols with addition of tamoxifen or letrozole. The effectiveness of these stimulation protocols in terms of oocyte yield is unknown. METHODS/DESIGN: Randomized open-label trial comparing ovarian stimulation plus tamoxifen and ovarian stimulation plus letrozole with standard ovarian stimulation in the course of fertility preservation. The study population consists of women with breast cancer who opt for banking of oocytes or embryos, aged 18-43years at randomisation. Primary outcome is the number of oocytes retrieved at follicle aspiration. Secondary outcomes are number of mature oocytes retrieved, number of oocytes or embryos banked and peak E2 levels during ovarian stimulation. DISCUSSION: Concerning the lack of evidence on which stimulation protocol should be used in women with breast cancer and the growing demand for fertility preservation, there is an urgent need to undertake this study. By performing this study, we will be able to closely monitor the effects of various stimulation protocols in women with breast cancer and pave the way for long term follow up on the safety of this procedure in terms of breast cancer prognosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR4108.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias de la Mama/tratamiento farmacológico , Preservación de la Fertilidad/métodos , Hormona Folículo Estimulante/uso terapéutico , Inducción de la Ovulación/métodos , Adolescente , Adulto , Factores de Edad , Antineoplásicos/administración & dosificación , Índice de Masa Corporal , Estrógenos/sangre , Femenino , Hormona Folículo Estimulante/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Letrozol , Nitrilos/uso terapéutico , Oocitos , Proyectos de Investigación , Factores Socioeconómicos , Tamoxifeno/uso terapéutico , Triazoles/uso terapéutico , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
STUDY QUESTION: What is the cost-effectiveness of lifestyle intervention preceding infertility treatment in obese infertile women? SUMMARY ANSWER: Lifestyle intervention preceding infertility treatment as compared to prompt infertility treatment in obese infertile women is not a cost-effective strategy in terms of healthy live birth rate within 24 months after randomization, but is more likely to be cost-effective using a longer follow-up period and live birth rate as endpoint. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In infertile couples, obesity decreases conception chances. We previously showed that lifestyle intervention prior to infertility treatment in obese infertile women did not increase the healthy singleton vaginal live birth rate at term, but increased natural conceptions, especially in anovulatory women. Cost-effectiveness analyses could provide relevant additional information to guide decisions regarding offering a lifestyle intervention to obese infertile women. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The cost-effectiveness of lifestyle intervention preceding infertility treatment compared to prompt infertility treatment was evaluated based on data of a previous RCT, the LIFEstyle study. The primary outcome for effectiveness was the vaginal birth of a healthy singleton at term within 24 months after randomization (the healthy live birth rate). The economic evaluation was performed from a hospital perspective and included direct medical costs of the lifestyle intervention, infertility treatments, medication and pregnancy in the intervention and control group. In addition, we performed exploratory cost-effectiveness analyses of scenarios with additional effectiveness outcomes (overall live birth within 24 months and overall live birth conceived within 24 months) and of subgroups, i.e. of ovulatory and anovulatory women, women <36 years and ≥36 years of age and of completers of the lifestyle intervention. Bootstrap analyses were performed to assess the uncertainty surrounding cost-effectiveness. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTINGS, METHODS: Infertile women with a BMI of ≥29 kg/m2 (no upper limit) were allocated to a 6-month lifestyle intervention programme preceding infertility treatment (intervention group, n = 290) or to prompt infertility treatment (control group, n = 287). After excluding women who withdrew informed consent or who were lost to follow-up we included 280 women in the intervention group and 284 women in the control group in the analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Total mean costs per woman in the intervention group within 24 months after randomization were 4324 (SD 4276) versus 5603 (SD 4632) in the control group (cost difference of -1278, P < 0.05). Healthy live birth rates were 27 and 35% in the intervention group and the control group, respectively (effect difference of -8.1%, P < 0.05), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 15 845 per additional percentage increase of the healthy live birth rate. Mean costs per healthy live birth event were 15 932 in the intervention group and 15 912 in the control group. Exploratory scenario analyses showed that after changing the effectiveness outcome to all live births conceived within 24 months, irrespective of delivery within or after 24 months, cost-effectiveness of the lifestyle intervention improved. Using this effectiveness outcome, the probability that lifestyle intervention preceding infertility treatment was cost-effective in anovulatory women was 40%, in completers of the lifestyle intervention 39%, and in women ≥36 years 29%. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: In contrast to the study protocol, we were not able to perform the analysis from a societal perspective. Besides the primary outcome of the LIFEstyle study, we performed exploratory analyses using outcomes observed at longer follow-up times and we evaluated subgroups of women; the trial was not powered on these additional outcomes or subgroup analyses. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Cost-effectiveness of a lifestyle intervention is more likely for longer follow-up times, and with live births conceived within 24 months as the effectiveness outcome. This effect was most profound in anovulatory women, in completers of the lifestyle intervention and in women ≥36 years old. This result indicates that the follow-up period of lifestyle interventions in obese infertile women is important. The scenario analyses performed in this study suggest that offering and reimbursing lifestyle intervention programmes in certain patient categories may be cost-effective and it provides directions for future research in this field. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was supported by a grant from ZonMw, the Dutch Organization for Health Research and Development (50-50110-96-518). The department of obstetrics and gynaecology of the UMCG received an unrestricted educational grant from Ferring pharmaceuticals BV, The Netherlands. B.W.J.M. is a consultant for ObsEva, Geneva. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The LIFEstyle RCT was registered at the Dutch trial registry (NTR 1530). http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC = 1530.
Asunto(s)
Estilo de Vida Saludable , Infertilidad Femenina/terapia , Obesidad/terapia , Programas de Reducción de Peso , Adulto , Tasa de Natalidad , Índice de Masa Corporal , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Criopreservación/economía , Costos Directos de Servicios , Transferencia de Embrión/economía , Composición Familiar , Femenino , Fertilización In Vitro/economía , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Salud del Lactante/economía , Infertilidad Femenina/complicaciones , Infertilidad Femenina/economía , Infertilidad Masculina/economía , Nacimiento Vivo , Perdida de Seguimiento , Masculino , Países Bajos/epidemiología , Obesidad/complicaciones , Obesidad/economía , Inducción de la Ovulación/economía , Pacientes Desistentes del Tratamiento , Pérdida de Peso , Programas de Reducción de Peso/economíaRESUMEN
STUDY QUESTION: Are there treatment selection markers that could aid in identifying couples, with unexplained or mild male subfertility, who would have better chances of a healthy child with IVF with single embryo transfer (IVF-SET) than with IUI with ovarian stimulation (IUI-OS)? SUMMARY ANSWER: We did not find any treatment selection markers that were associated with better chances of a healthy child with IVF-SET instead of IUI-OS in couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: A recent trial, comparing IVF-SET to IUI-OS, found no evidence of a difference between live birth rates and multiple pregnancy rates. It was suggested that IUI-OS should remain the first-line treatment instead of IVF-SET in couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility and female age between 18 and 38 years. The question remains whether there are some couples that may have higher pregnancy chances if treated with IVF-SET instead of IUI. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We performed our analyses on data from the INeS trial, where couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility and an unfavourable prognosis for natural conception were randomly allocated to IVF-SET, IVF in a modified natural cycle or IUI-OS. In view of the aim of this study, we only used data of the comparison between IVF-SET (201 couples) and IUI-OS (207 couples). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We pre-defined the following baseline characteristics as potential treatment selection markers: female age, ethnicity, smoking status, type of subfertility (primary/secondary), duration of subfertility, BMI, pre-wash total motile count and Hunault prediction score. For each potential treatment selection marker, we explored the association with the chances of a healthy child after IVF-SET and IUI-OS and tested if there was an interaction with treatment. Given the exploratory nature of our analysis, we used a P-value of 0.1. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: None of the markers were associated with higher chances of a healthy child from IVF-SET compared to IUI-OS (P-value for interaction >0.10). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Since this is the first large study that looked at potential treatment selection markers for IVF-SET compared to IUI-OS, we had no data on which to base a power calculation. The sample size was limited, making it difficult to detect any smaller associations. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: We could not identify couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility who would have had higher chances of a healthy child from immediate IVF-SET than from IUI-OS. As in the original trial IUI-OS had similar effectiveness and was less costly compared to IVF-SET, IUI-OS should remain the preferred first-line treatment in these couples. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was supported by a grant from the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, and a grant from the Netherlands' association of health care insurers. There are no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The trial was registered at the Dutch trial registry (NTR939).
Asunto(s)
Fertilización In Vitro/métodos , Infertilidad Masculina/terapia , Inseminación Artificial/métodos , Selección de Paciente , Adulto , Tasa de Natalidad , Femenino , Fertilización , Humanos , Masculino , Embarazo , Índice de Embarazo , PronósticoRESUMEN
STUDY QUESTION: To what extent are BRCA mutation carriers and their partners in the Netherlands aware about preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and prenatal diagnosis (PND) as reproductive options and what is their attitude towards these options? SUMMARY ANSWER: Awareness of PGD (66%) and PND (61%) among BRCA mutation carriers and their partners is relatively high and 80% and 26%, respectively, of BRCA carriers and their partners find offering PGD and PND for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) acceptable. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Internationally, awareness of PGD among persons with a genetic cancer predisposition appears to be relatively low (35%) and although acceptability is generally high (71%), only a small proportion of mutation carriers would consider using PGD (36%). However, for HBOC, there are no studies available that investigated the perspective of individuals with a confirmed BRCA1/2 mutation and their partners about PGD and PND including demographic and medical correlates of awareness and acceptability. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A cross-sectional survey was completed by 191 participants between July 2012 and June 2013. Participants were recruited through patient organizations (88%) and the databases of two Clinical Genetics departments in the Netherlands (12%). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Male and female BRCA carriers and their partners completed an online survey, which assessed demographic and medical characteristics, and awareness, knowledge, acceptability and consideration of PGD and PND as main outcomes. Correlations between demographic and medical characteristics and the main outcomes were investigated. MAIN RESULTS AND ROLE OF CHANCE: The majority of respondents were female (87%), of reproductive age (86%) and about half reported a desire for a child in the future. About two-thirds (66%) were aware of PGD and 61% of PND for HBOC. PGD knowledge was moderate (5.5 on a 9-point scale) and acceptability of PGD and PND for HBOC was 80% and 26%, respectively. A minority would personally consider using PGD (39%) or PND (20%). Individuals with a higher educational level were more likely to be aware of PGD (P < 0.001) and PND (P < 0.001) and persons with a more immediate child wish were more often aware of PGD (P = 0.044) and had more knowledge about PGD (P = 0.001). PGD acceptability was positively associated with knowledge about PGD (P = 0.047), and PND acceptability was higher among partners in comparison to carriers (P = 0.001). Participants with a history of cancer and with a higher perceived seriousness of breast and ovarian cancer were more likely to consider using PGD (P = 0.003 and P < 0.001 respectively) or PND (P = 0.021 and P = 0.017 respectively). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The response rate (23%) of participants invited by the clinical genetics departments was low, probably related to a simultaneous study that used a similar recruitment strategy within the same target group, which may have resulted in selection bias. Moreover, PGD knowledge was measured with an instrument that is not yet validated since to date such an instrument is not available in the literature. Finally, the cross-sectional design of this study limits us from drawing any causal conclusions. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Improvement of information provision remains needed, in order to timely inform all couples with HBOC about the available reproductive options and enable them to make a balanced reproductive decision. This may limit the risk of negative psychological impact due to decisional conflict and possible regret. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The Dutch breast cancer foundation Stichting Pink Ribbon (grant number 2010.PS11.C74). None of the authors have competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.
Asunto(s)
Proteína BRCA1/genética , Neoplasias de la Mama/genética , Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Reproducción/fisiología , Adulto , Estudios Transversales , Toma de Decisiones , Femenino , Pruebas Genéticas , Humanos , Masculino , Países Bajos , Embarazo , Diagnóstico PreimplantaciónRESUMEN
STUDY QUESTION: Do age, ovulatory status, severity of obesity and body fat distribution affect the effectiveness of lifestyle intervention in obese infertile women? SUMMARY ANSWER: We did not identify a subgroup in which lifestyle intervention increased the healthy live birth rate however it did increase the natural conception rate in anovulatory obese infertile women. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Obese women are at increased risk of infertility and are less likely to conceive after infertility treatment. We previously demonstrated that a 6-month lifestyle intervention preceding infertility treatment did not increase the rate of healthy live births (vaginal live birth of a healthy singleton at term) within 24 months of follow-up as compared to prompt infertility treatment in obese infertile women. Natural conceptions occurred more frequently in women who received a 6-month lifestyle intervention preceding infertility treatment. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This is a secondary analysis of a multicentre RCT (randomized controlled trial), the LIFEstyle study. Between 2009 and 2012, 577 obese infertile women were randomly assigned to a 6-month lifestyle intervention followed by infertility treatment (intervention group) or to prompt infertility treatment (control group). Subgroups were predefined in the study protocol, based on frequently used cut-off values in the literature: age (≥36 or <36 years), ovulatory status (anovulatory or ovulatory), BMI (≥35 or <35 kg/m2) and waist-hip (WH) ratio (≥0.8 or <0.8). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Data of 564 (98%) randomized women who completed follow-up were analyzed. We studied the effect of the intervention program in various subgroups on healthy live birth rate within 24 months, as well as the rate of overall live births (live births independent of gestational age, mode of delivery and health) and natural conceptions within 24 months. Live birth rates included pregnancies resulting from both treatment dependent and natural conceptions. Logistic regression models with randomization group, subgroup and the interaction between randomization group and subgroup were used. Significant interaction was defined as a P-value <0.1. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Neither maternal age, ovulatory status nor BMI had an impact on the healthy live birth rate within 24 months, nor did they influence the overall live birth rate within 24 months after randomization. WH ratio showed a significant interaction with the effect of lifestyle intervention on healthy live birth rate (P = 0.05), resulting in a lower healthy live birth rate in women with a WH ratio <0.8. WH ratio had no interaction regarding overall live birth rate (P = 0.27) or natural conception rate (P = 0.38). In anovulatory women, the effect of lifestyle intervention resulted in more natural conceptions compared to ovulatory women (P-value for interaction = 0.02). There was no interaction between other subgroups and the effect of the intervention on the rate of natural conception. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Since this was a subgroup analysis of a RCT and sample size determination of the trial was based on the primary outcome of the study, the study was not powered for analyses of all subgroups. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our finding that lifestyle intervention leads to increased natural conception in anovulatory obese women could be used in the counselling of these women, but requires further research using an appropriately powered study in order to confirm this result. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The study was supported by a grant from ZonMw, the Dutch Organisation for Health Research and Development (50-50110-96-518). The Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the UMCG received an unrestricted educational grant from Ferring pharmaceuticals BV, The Netherlands. Ben Mol is a consultant for ObsEva, Geneva. Annemieke Hoek received a speaker's fee for a postgraduate education from MSD pharmaceutical company, outside the submitted work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The LIFEstyle study was registered at the Dutch trial registry (NTR 1530).
Asunto(s)
Dieta Reductora , Ejercicio Físico , Infertilidad Femenina/terapia , Estilo de Vida , Obesidad/terapia , Pérdida de Peso , Adulto , Tasa de Natalidad , Femenino , Conductas Relacionadas con la Salud , Humanos , Infertilidad Femenina/complicaciones , Nacimiento Vivo , Edad Materna , Obesidad/complicaciones , Embarazo , Índice de Embarazo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
STUDY QUESTION: What is the cost-effectiveness of in vitro fertilization (IVF) with conventional ovarian stimulation, single embryo transfer (SET) and subsequent cryocycles or IVF in a modified natural cycle (MNC) compared with intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (IUI-COH) as a first-line treatment in couples with unexplained subfertility and an unfavourable prognosis on natural conception?. SUMMARY ANSWER: Both IVF strategies are significantly more expensive when compared with IUI-COH, without being significantly more effective. In the comparison between IVF-MNC and IUI-COH, the latter is the dominant strategy. Whether IVF-SET is cost-effective depends on society's willingness to pay for an additional healthy child. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: IUI-COH and IVF, either after conventional ovarian stimulation or in a MNC, are used as first-line treatments for couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility. As IUI-COH is less invasive, this treatment is usually offered before proceeding to IVF. Yet, as conventional IVF with SET may lead to higher pregnancy rates in fewer cycles for a lower multiple pregnancy rate, some have argued to start with IVF instead of IUI-COH. In addition, IVF in the MNC is considered to be a more patient friendly and less costly form of IVF. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomized noninferiority trial. Between January 2009 and February 2012, 602 couples with unexplained infertility and a poor prognosis on natural conception were allocated to three cycles of IVF-SET including frozen embryo transfers, six cycles of IVF-MNC or six cycles of IUI-COH. These couples were followed until 12 months after randomization. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We collected data on resource use related to treatment, medication and pregnancy from the case report forms. We calculated unit costs from various sources. For each of the three strategies, we calculated the mean costs and effectiveness. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated for IVF-SET compared with IUI-COH and for IVF-MNC compared with IUI-COH. Nonparametric bootstrap resampling was used to investigate the effect of uncertainty in our estimates. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: There were 104 healthy children (52%) born in the IVF-SET group, 83 (43%) the IVF-MNC group and 97 (47%) in the IUI-COH group. The mean costs per couple were 7187 for IVF-SET, 8206 for IVF-MNC and 5070 for IUI-COH. Compared with IUI-COH, the costs for IVF-SET and IVF-MNC were significantly higher (mean differences 2117; 95% CI: 1544-2657 and 3136, 95% CI: 2519-3754, respectively).The ICER for IVF-SET compared with IUI-COH was 43 375 for the birth of an additional healthy child. In the comparison of IVF-MNC to IUI-COH, the latter was the dominant strategy, i.e. more effective at lower costs. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We only report on direct health care costs. The present analysis is limited to 12 months. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Since we found no evidence in support of offering IVF as a first-line strategy in couples with unexplained and mild subfertility, IUI-COH should remain the treatment of first choice. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The study was supported by a grant from ZonMw, the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, (120620027) and a grant from Zorgverzekeraars Nederland, the Netherlands' association of health care insurers (09-003). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN52843371; Nederlands Trial Register NTR939.
Asunto(s)
Transferencia de Embrión/economía , Fertilización In Vitro/economía , Fertilización In Vitro/métodos , Inseminación Artificial/economía , Inducción de la Ovulación/economía , Transferencia de un Solo Embrión/economía , Adulto , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Criopreservación , Transferencia de Embrión/métodos , Femenino , Fertilización , Humanos , Infertilidad Masculina/terapia , Inseminación Artificial/métodos , Masculino , Modelos Económicos , Países Bajos , Inducción de la Ovulación/métodos , Embarazo , Resultado del Embarazo , Índice de Embarazo , Pronóstico , Transferencia de un Solo Embrión/métodosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer or in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle with that of intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in terms of a healthy child. DESIGN: Multicentre, open label, three arm, parallel group, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. SETTING: 17 centres in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Couples seeking fertility treatment after at least 12 months of unprotected intercourse, with the female partner aged between 18 and 38 years, an unfavourable prognosis for natural conception, and a diagnosis of unexplained or mild male subfertility. INTERVENTIONS: Three cycles of in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer (plus subsequent cryocycles), six cycles of in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle, or six cycles of intrauterine insemination with ovarian hyperstimulation within 12 months after randomisation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was birth of a healthy child resulting from a singleton pregnancy conceived within 12 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes were live birth, clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, time to pregnancy, complications of pregnancy, and neonatal morbidity and mortality RESULTS: 602 couples were randomly assigned between January 2009 and February 2012; 201 were allocated to in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer, 194 to in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle, and 207 to intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Birth of a healthy child occurred in 104 (52%) couples in the in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer group, 83 (43%) in the in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle group, and 97 (47%) in the intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation group. This corresponds to a risk, relative to intrauterine insemination with ovarian hyperstimulation, of 1.10 (95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.34) for in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer and 0.91 (0.73 to 1.14) for in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle. These 95% confidence intervals do not extend below the predefined threshold of 0.69 for inferiority. Multiple pregnancy rates per ongoing pregnancy were 6% (7/121) after in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer, 5% (5/102) after in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle, and 7% (8/119) after intrauterine insemination with ovarian hyperstimulation (one sided P=0.52 for in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer compared with intrauterine insemination with ovarian hyperstimulation; one sided P=0.33 for in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle compared with intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation). CONCLUSIONS: In vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer and in vitro fertilisation in a modified natural cycle were non-inferior to intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in terms of the birth of a healthy child and showed comparable, low multiple pregnancy rates.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN52843371; Nederlands Trial Register NTR939.
Asunto(s)
Transferencia de Embrión/métodos , Fertilización In Vitro/métodos , Infertilidad Masculina , Inseminación Artificial/métodos , Embarazo Múltiple/estadística & datos numéricos , Transferencia de un Solo Embrión , Adolescente , Adulto , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Países Bajos , Embarazo , Resultado del Embarazo , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
STUDY QUESTION: Do clinical characteristics of recurrent miscarriage couples with a chromosomal abnormality and who opt for PGD differ from couples that decline PGD after extensive genetic counselling? SUMMARY ANSWER: No differences in clinical characteristics are identified between recurrent miscarriage couples carrying a structural chromosomal abnormality who opt for PGD compared with those that decline PGD after extensive genetic counselling. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Couples who have experienced two or more miscarriages (recurrent miscarriage) are at increased recurrence risk if one of the partners carries a structural chromosomal abnormality. PGD can be offered to avoid (another) miscarriage or pregnancy termination when (invasive) prenatal diagnosis shows an abnormal result. To date, no reports are available that describe reproductive decision-making after genetic counselling on PGD in these specific couples. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Retrospective cohort study of 294 couples carrying a structural chromosomal abnormality seeking genetic counselling on PGD between 1996 and 2012. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Participants were recurrent miscarriage couples carrying a structural chromosomal abnormality. They had been referred for genetic counselling to the only national licensed PGD centre. Clinical characteristics analysed included couple associated characteristics, characteristics concerning reproductive history and external characteristics such as type of physician that referred the couple for genetic counselling and the clinical geneticist performing the counselling on PGD. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Of 294 couples referred for counselling on PGD, 26 were not accepted because they did not meet the criteria for IVF-PGD. The remaining cohort of 268 couples consisted of two-thirds female and one-third male carriers. Main PGD indications were reciprocal translocations (83.9%) and Robertsonian translocations (16.7%). Following genetic counselling, 76.9% of included couples chose PGD as their reproductive option, the others declined PGD. Reproductive choice is not influenced by sex of the translocation carrier (P = 0.499), type of chromosomal abnormality (P = 0.346), number of previous miscarriages (P = 0.882), history of termination of pregnancy (TOP) because of an unbalanced fetal karyotype (P = 0.800), referring physician (P = 0.208) or geneticist who performed the counselling (P = 0.410). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This study only included recurrent miscarriage couples carrying a structural chromosomal abnormality, who were actually referred to a PGD clinic for genetic counselling. We lack information on couples who were not referred for PGD. Some of these patients may not have been informed on PGD at all, while others were not referred for counselling because they did not opt for PGD to start with. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study shows that reproductive choices in couples with recurrent miscarriage on the basis of a structural chromosomal abnormality are not influenced by characteristics of the couple itself, nor by their obstetric history or external characteristics. These findings suggest that a couples' intrinsic attitude towards PGD treatment is a major factor influencing their reproductive choice. Future research will focus on these personal motives that seem to push reproductive decision-making following genetic counselling in a given direction.
Asunto(s)
Aborto Habitual/etiología , Trastornos de los Cromosomas/diagnóstico , Asesoramiento Genético , Heterocigoto , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud , Diagnóstico Preimplantación , Translocación Genética , Aborto Habitual/fisiopatología , Aborto Habitual/prevención & control , Centros Médicos Académicos , Adulto , Trastornos de los Cromosomas/genética , Trastornos de los Cromosomas/fisiopatología , Estudios de Cohortes , Composición Familiar , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Países Bajos , Servicio Ambulatorio en Hospital , Educación del Paciente como Asunto , Embarazo , Derivación y Consulta , Conducta Reproductiva , Historia Reproductiva , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
STUDY QUESTION: How do couples with a BRCA1/2 mutation decide on preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and prenatal diagnosis (PND) for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC)? SUMMARY ANSWER: BRCA couples primarily classify PGD and/or PND as reproductive options based on the perceived severity of HBOC and moral considerations, and consequently weigh the few important advantages of PGD against numerous smaller disadvantages. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Awareness of PGD is generally low among persons at high risk for hereditary cancers. Most persons with HBOC are in favour of offering PGD for BRCA1/2 mutations, although only a minority would consider this option for themselves. Studies exploring the motivations for using or refraining from PGD among well-informed BRCA carriers of reproductive age are lacking. We studied the reproductive decision-making process by interviewing a group of well-informed, reproductive aged couples carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation, regarding their decisional motives and considerations. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This exploratory, qualitative study investigated the motives and considerations taken into account by couples with a BRCA1/2 mutation and who have received extensive counselling on PGD and PND and have made a well-informed decision regarding this option. Eighteen couples took part in focus group and dyadic interviews between January and September 2012. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Semi-structured focus groups were conducted containing two to four couples, assembled based on the reproductive method the couple had chosen: PGD (n = 6 couples) or conception without testing (n = 8 couples). Couples who had chosen PND for BRCA (n = 4) were interviewed dyadically. Two of the women, of whom one had chosen PND and the other had chosen no testing, had a history of breast cancer. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: None of the couples who opted for PGD or conception without testing found the use of PND, with possible pregnancy termination, acceptable. PND users chose this method because of decisive, mainly practical reasons (natural conception, high chance of favourable outcome). Motives and considerations regarding PGD largely overlapped between PGD users, PND users and non-users, all mentioning some significant advantages (e.g. protecting the child and family from the mutation) and many smaller disadvantages (e.g. the necessity of in vitro fertilization (IVF), low chance of pregnancy by IVF/PGD). For female carriers, the safety of hormonal stimulation and the time required for PGD before undergoing preventive surgeries were important factors in the decision. Non-users expressed doubts about the moral justness of their decision afterwards and emphasized the impact the decision still had on their lives. LIMITATIONS, REASON FOR CAUTION: The interviewed couples were at different stages in their chosen trajectory, up to 3 years after completion. This may have led to recall bias of original motives and considerations. Couples who did not actively seek information about PGD were excluded. Therefore the results may not be readily generalizable to all BRCA couples. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The perceived severity of HBOC and, for female carriers, the safety of hormonal stimulation and the time frames for PGD planning before preventive surgeries are essential items BRCA couples consider in reproductive decision-making. The emotional impact of this decision should not be underestimated; especially non-users may experience feelings of doubt or guilt up to several years afterwards. PGD counselling with tailored information addressing these items and decisional support in order to guarantee well-informed decision-making is needed. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded by the Dutch breast cancer foundation Stichting Pink Ribbon, grant number 2010.PS11.C74. None of the authors have competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.