Sex differences in cancer outcomes across the range of eGFR.

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: People with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have increased incidence and mortality from most cancer types. We hypothesised that odds of presenting with advanced cancer may vary according to differences in eGFR, that this could contribute to increased all-cause mortality and that sex differences may exist. METHODS: Data were from Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank, including people with de-novo cancer diagnosis (2011-2017) and two kidney function tests within two years prior to diagnosis to determine baseline eGFR (mL/min/1.73m2). Logistic regression models determined odds of presenting with advanced cancer by baseline eGFR. Cox proportional hazards models tested associations between baseline eGFRcr and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: eGFR < 30 was associated with higher odds of presenting with advanced cancer of prostate, breast and female genital organs, but not other cancer sites. Compared to eGFR > 75-90, eGFR < 30 was associated with greater hazards of all-cause mortality in both sexes, but the association was stronger in females (female: HR 1.71, 95%CI 1.56-1.88; male versus female comparison HR 0.88, 95%CI 0.78-0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Lower or higher eGFR was not associated with substantially higher odds of presenting with advanced cancer across most cancer sites, but was associated with reduced survival. A stronger assocation with all-cause mortality in females compared to males with eGFR < 30 is concerning and warrants further scrutiny.

Sex differences in associations between creatinine and cystatin C-based kidney function measures with stroke and major bleeding.

PURPOSE: We sought to explore whether adding kidney function biomarkers based on creatinine (eGFRCr), cystatin C (eGFRCys) or a combination of the two (eGFRCr-Cys) could improve risk stratification for stroke and major bleeding, and whether there were sex differences in any additive value of kidney function biomarkers. METHOD: We included participants from the UK Biobank who had not had a previous ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke or major bleeding episode, and who had kidney function measures available at baseline. Cause-specific Cox proportional hazards models tested associations between eGFRCr, eGFRCys and eGFRCr-Cys (mL/min/1.73 m2) with ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke, major bleeding (gastrointestinal or intracranial, including haemorrhagic stroke) and all-cause mortality. FINDINGS: Among 452,879 eligible participants, 246,244 (54.4%) were women. Over 11.5 (IQR 10.8-12.2) years, there were 3706 ischaemic strokes, 795 haemorrhagic strokes, 26,025 major bleeding events and 28,851 deaths. eGFRCys was more strongly associated with ischaemic stroke than eGFRCr: an effect that was more pronounced in women (men - HR: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.12-1.19; female to male comparison - HR: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.05-1.16, per 10 mL/min/1.73 m2 decline in eGFRCys). This interaction effect was also demonstrated for eGFRCr-Cys, but not eGFRCr. eGFRCys and eGFRCr-Cys were more strongly associated with major bleeding and all-cause mortality than eGFRCr in both men and women. Event numbers were small for haemorrhagic stroke. DISCUSSION: To a greater degree than is seen in men, eGFRCr underestimates risk of ischaemic stroke and major bleeding in women compared to eGFRCys. The difference between measures is likely explained by non-GFR biology of creatinine and cystatin C. CONCLUSION: Enhanced measurement of cystatin C may improve risk stratification for ischaemic stroke and major bleeding and clinical treatment decisions in a general population setting, particularly for women.

AcceSS and Equity in Transplantation (ASSET) New Zealand: Protocol for population-wide data linkage platform to investigate equity in access to kidney failure health services in New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplantation is considered the ideal treatment for most people with kidney failure, conferring both survival and quality of life advantages, and is more cost effective than dialysis. Yet, current health systems may serve some people better than others, creating inequities in access to kidney failure treatments and health outcomes. AcceSS and Equity in Transplantation (ASSET) investigators aim to create a linked data platform to facilitate research enquiry into equity of health service delivery for people with kidney failure in New Zealand. METHODS: The New Zealand Ministry of Health will use patients' National Health Index (NHI) numbers to deterministically link individual records held in existing registry and administrative health databases in New Zealand to create the data platform. The initial data linkage will include a study population of incident patients captured in the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA), New Zealand Blood Service Database and the Australia and New Zealand Living Kidney Donor Registry (ANZLKD) from 2006 to 2019 and their linked health data. Health data sources will include National Non-Admitted Patient Collection Data, National Minimum Dataset, Cancer Registry, Programme for the Integration of Mental Health Data (PRIMHD), Pharmaceutical Claims Database and Mortality Collection Database. Initial exemplar studies include 1) kidney waitlist dynamics and pathway to transplantation; 2) impact of mental illness on accessing kidney waitlist and transplantation; 3) health service use of living donors following donation. CONCLUSION: The AcceSS and Equity in Transplantation (ASSET) linked data platform will provide opportunity for population-based health services research to examine equity in health care delivery and health outcomes in New Zealand. It also offers potential to inform future service planning by identifying where improvements can be made in the current health system to promote equity in access to health services for those in New Zealand.

Transfer of thawed frozen embryo versus fresh embryo to improve the healthy baby rate in women undergoing IVF: the E-Freeze RCT.

BACKGROUND: Freezing all embryos, followed by thawing and transferring them into the uterine cavity at a later stage (freeze-all), instead of fresh-embryo transfer may lead to improved pregnancy rates and fewer complications during in vitro fertilisation and pregnancies resulting from it. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate if a policy of freeze-all results in a higher healthy baby rate than the current policy of transferring fresh embryos. DESIGN: This was a pragmatic, multicentre, two-arm, parallel-group, non-blinded, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Eighteen in vitro fertilisation clinics across the UK participated from February 2016 to April 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Couples undergoing their first, second or third cycle of in vitro fertilisation treatment in which the female partner was aged < 42 years. INTERVENTIONS: If at least three good-quality embryos were present on day 3 of embryo development, couples were randomly allocated to either freeze-all (intervention) or fresh-embryo transfer (control). OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was a healthy baby, defined as a live, singleton baby born at term, with an appropriate weight for their gestation. Secondary outcomes included ovarian hyperstimulation, live birth and clinical pregnancy rates, complications of pregnancy and childbirth, health economic outcome, and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory scores. RESULTS: A total of 1578 couples were consented and 619 couples were randomised. Most non-randomisations were because of the non-availability of at least three good-quality embryos (n = 476). Of the couples randomised, 117 (19%) did not adhere to the allocated intervention. The rate of non-adherence was higher in the freeze-all arm, with the leading reason being patient choice. The intention-to-treat analysis showed a healthy baby rate of 20.3% in the freeze-all arm and 24.4% in the fresh-embryo transfer arm (risk ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.62 to 1.15). Similar results were obtained using complier-average causal effect analysis (risk ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 1.10), per-protocol analysis (risk ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.26) and as-treated analysis (risk ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 1.29). The risk of ovarian hyperstimulation was 3.6% in the freeze-all arm and 8.1% in the fresh-embryo transfer arm (risk ratio 0.44, 99% confidence interval 0.15 to 1.30). There were no statistically significant differences between the freeze-all and the fresh-embryo transfer arms in the live birth rates (28.3% vs. 34.3%; risk ratio 0.83, 99% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.06) and clinical pregnancy rates (33.9% vs. 40.1%; risk ratio 0.85, 99% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.11). There was no statistically significant difference in anxiety scores for male participants (mean difference 0.1, 99% confidence interval -2.4 to 2.6) and female participants (mean difference 0.0, 99% confidence interval -2.2 to 2.2) between the arms. The economic analysis showed that freeze-all had a low probability of being cost-effective in terms of the incremental cost per healthy baby and incremental cost per live birth. LIMITATIONS: We were unable to reach the original planned sample size of 1086 and the rate of non-adherence to the allocated intervention was much higher than expected. CONCLUSION: When efficacy, safety and costs are considered, freeze-all is not better than fresh-embryo transfer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered as ISRCTN61225414. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 25. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

During in vitro fertilisation, eggs and sperm are mixed in a laboratory to create embryos. An embryo is placed in the womb 2­5 days later (fresh-embryo transfer) and the remaining embryos are frozen for future use. Initial research suggested that freezing all embryos followed by thawing and replacing them a few weeks later could improve treatment safety and success. Although these data were promising, the data came from small studies and were not enough to change practice and policy. We conducted a large, multicentre, clinical trial to evaluate the two strategies: fresh-embryo transfer compared with later transfer of frozen embryos. We also compared the costs of both strategies during in vitro fertilisation treatment, pregnancy and delivery. This study was conducted across 18 clinics in the UK from 2016 to 2019, and 619 couples participated. Couples were allocated to one of two strategies: immediate fresh-embryo transfer or freezing of all embryos followed later by transfer of frozen embryo. The study's aim was to find out which type of embryo transfer gave participants a higher chance of having a healthy baby. We found that freezing all embryos followed by frozen-embryo transfer did not lead to a higher chance of having a healthy baby. There were no differences between strategies in the number of live births, the miscarriage rate or the number of pregnancy complications. Fresh-embryo transfer was less costly from both a health-care and a patient perspective. A routine strategy of freezing all embryos is not justified given that there was no increase in success rates but there were extra costs and delays to embryo transfer.

Elective freezing of embryos versus fresh embryo transfer in IVF: a multicentre randomized controlled trial in the UK (E-Freeze).

STUDY QUESTION: Does a policy of elective freezing of embryos, followed by frozen embryo transfer result in a higher healthy baby rate, after first embryo transfer, when compared with the current policy of transferring fresh embryos? SUMMARY ANSWER: This study, although limited by sample size, provides no evidence to support the adoption of a routine policy of elective freeze in preference to fresh embryo transfer in order to improve IVF effectiveness in obtaining a healthy baby. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The policy of freezing all embryos followed by frozen embryo transfer is associated with a higher live birth rate for high responders but a similar/lower live birth after first embryo transfer and cumulative live birth rate for normal responders. Frozen embryo transfer is associated with a lower risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), preterm delivery and low birthweight babies but a higher risk of large babies and pre-eclampsia. There is also uncertainty about long-term outcomes, hence shifting to a policy of elective freezing for all remains controversial given the delay in treatment and extra costs involved in freezing all embryos. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A pragmatic two-arm parallel randomized controlled trial (E-Freeze) was conducted across 18 clinics in the UK from 2016 to 2019. A total of 619 couples were randomized (309 to elective freeze/310 to fresh). The primary outcome was a healthy baby after first embryo transfer (term, singleton live birth with appropriate weight for gestation); secondary outcomes included OHSS, live birth, clinical pregnancy, pregnancy complications and cost-effectiveness. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Couples undergoing their first, second or third cycle of IVF/ICSI treatment, with at least three good quality embryos on Day 3 where the female partner was ≥18 and <42 years of age were eligible. Those using donor gametes, undergoing preimplantation genetic testing or planning to freeze all their embryos were excluded. IVF/ICSI treatment was carried out according to local protocols. Women were followed up for pregnancy outcome after first embryo transfer following randomization. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Of the 619 couples randomized, 307 and 309 couples in the elective freeze and fresh transfer arms, respectively, were included in the primary analysis. There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference in outcomes in the elective freeze group compared to the fresh embryo transfer group: healthy baby rate {20.3% (62/307) versus 24.4% (75/309); risk ratio (RR), 95% CI: 0.84, 0.62 to 1.15}; OHSS (3.6% versus 8.1%; RR, 99% CI: 0.44, 0.15 to 1.30); live birth rate (28.3% versus 34.3%; RR, 99% CI 0.83, 0.65 to 1.06); and miscarriage (14.3% versus 12.9%; RR, 99% CI: 1.09, 0.72 to 1.66). Adherence to allocation was poor in the elective freeze group. The elective freeze approach was more costly and was unlikely to be cost-effective in a UK National Health Service context. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We have only reported on first embryo transfer after randomization; data on the cumulative live birth rate requires further follow-up. Planned target sample size was not obtained and the non-adherence to allocation rate was high among couples in the elective freeze arm owing to patient preference for fresh embryo transfer, but an analysis which took non-adherence into account showed similar results. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Results from the E-Freeze trial do not lend support to the policy of electively freezing all for everyone, taking both efficacy, safety and costs considerations into account. This method should only be adopted if there is a definite clinical indication. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme (13/115/82). This research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) (NIHR unique award identifier) using UK aid from the UK Government to support global health research. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the UK Department of Health and Social Care. J.L.B., C.C., E.J., P.H., J.J.K., L.L. and G.S. report receipt of funding from NIHR, during the conduct of the study. J.L.B., E.J., P.H., K.S. and L.L. report receipt of funding from NIHR, during the conduct of the study and outside the submitted work. A.M. reports grants from NIHR personal fees from Merck Serono, personal fees for lectures from Merck Serono, Ferring and Cooks outside the submitted work; travel/meeting support from Ferring and Pharmasure and participation in a Ferring advisory board. S.B. reports receipt of royalties and licenses from Cambridge University Press, a board membership role for NHS Grampian and other financial or non-financial interests related to his roles as Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and Editor and Contributing Author of Reproductive Medicine for the MRCOG, Cambridge University Press. D.B. reports grants from NIHR, during the conduct of the study; grants from European Commission, grants from Diabetes UK, grants from NIHR, grants from ESHRE, grants from MRC, outside the submitted work. Y.C. reports speaker fees from Merck Serono, and advisory board role for Merck Serono and shares in Complete Fertility. P.H. reports membership of the HTA Commissioning Committee. E.J. reports membership of the NHS England and NIHR Partnership Programme, membership of five Data Monitoring Committees (Chair of two), membership of six Trial Steering Committees (Chair of four), membership of the Northern Ireland Clinical Trials Unit Advisory Group and Chair of the board of Oxford Brain Health Clinical Trials Unit. R.M. reports consulting fees from Gedeon Richter, honorarium from Merck, support fees for attendance at educational events and conferences for Merck, Ferring, Bessins and Gedeon Richter, payments for participation on a Merck Safety or Advisory Board, Chair of the British Fertility Society and payments for an advisory role to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. G.S. reports travel and accommodation fees for attendance at a health economic advisory board from Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany. N.R.-F. reports shares in Nurture Fertility. Other authors' competing interests: none declared. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN: 61225414. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 29 December 2015. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 16 February 2016.

A Peek at LVADs Pumping to Recovery.

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have revolutionized the management of patients with advanced heart failure refractory to medical therapy. Current indications of LVADs include Bridge to Transplantation (BTT), Destination Therapy (DT) for long-term use, Bridge to the Decision (BTD) used as a temporary measure, and lastly Bridge to Recovery (BTR). Here, we briefly review the clinical evidence and the molecular mechanisms behind myocardial recovery following LVAD placement. We also share institutional protocols used at 2 major medical centers in the USA.

Associations of IVF singleton birthweight and gestation with clinical treatment and laboratory factors: a multicentre cohort study.

STUDY QUESTION: Do IVF treatment and laboratory factors affect singleton birthweight (BW)? SUMMARY ANSWER: BWs of IVF-conceived singleton babies are increasing with time, but we cannot identify the specific treatment factors responsible. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: IVF-conceived singleton babies from fresh transfers have slightly lower BW than those conceived naturally, whilst those from frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles are heavier and comparable to naturally conceived offspring. Our recent studies have shown that BW varies significantly between different IVF centres, and in a single centre, is also increasing with time, without a corresponding change in BWs of naturally conceived infants. Although it is likely that factors in the IVF treatment cycle, such as hormonal stimulation or embryo laboratory culture conditions, are associated with BW differences, our previous study designs were not able to confirm this. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Data relating to BW outcomes, IVF treatment and laboratory parameters were collated from pre-existing electronic records in five participating centres for all singleton babies conceived between August 2007 and December 2014. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Seven thousand, five hundred and eighty-eight births, 6207 from fresh and 1381 from FET. Infants with severe congenital abnormalities were excluded. The primary outcome of gestation-adjusted BW and secondary outcomes of unadjusted BW and gestation were analysed using multivariable regression models with robust standard errors to allow for the correlation between infants with the same mother. The models tested treatment factors allowing for confounding by centre, time and patient characteristics. A similar matched analysis of a subgroup of 379 sibling pairs was also performed. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: No significant associations of birth outcomes with IVF embryo culture parameters were seen independent of clinic or time, including embryo culture medium, incubator type or oxygen level, although small differences cannot be ruled out. We did not detect any significant differences associated with hormonal stimulation in fresh cycles or hormonal synchronization in FET cycles. Gestation-adjusted BW increased by 13.4 (95% CI 0.6-26.1) g per year over the period of the study, and babies born following FET were 92 (95% CI 57-128) g heavier on average than those from the fresh transfer. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Although no specific relationships have been identified independent of clinic and time, the confidence intervals remain large and do not exclude clinically relevant effect sizes. As this is an observational study, residual confounding may still be present. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study demonstrates the potential for large scale analysis of routine data to address critical questions concerning the long-term implications of IVF treatment, in accordance with the Developmental Origins of Health and Disease hypothesis. However, much larger studies, at a national scale with sufficiently detailed data, are required to identify the treatment parameters associated with differences in BW or other relevant outcomes. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was supported by the EU FP7 project grant, EpiHealthNet (FP7-PEOPLE-2012-ITN-317146). No competing interests were identified. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Study protocol: E-freeze - freezing of embryos in assisted conception: a randomised controlled trial evaluating the clinical and cost effectiveness of a policy of freezing embryos followed by thawed frozen embryo transfer compared with a policy of fresh embryo transfer, in women undergoing in vitro fertilisation.

BACKGROUND: Infertility affects one in seven couples; many of these need in vitro fertilisation (IVF). IVF involves external hormones to stimulate a woman's ovaries to produce eggs which are harvested surgically. Embryos, created in the laboratory by mixing eggs with sperm, are grown in culture for a few days before being replaced within the uterus (fresh embryo transfer). Spare embryos are usually frozen with a view to transfer at a later point in time - especially if the initial fresh transfer does not result in a pregnancy. Despite improvements in technology, IVF success rates remain low with an overall live birth rate of 25-30% per treatment. Additionally, there are concerns about health outcomes for mothers and babies conceived through IVF, particularly after fresh embryo transfer, including maternal ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and preterm delivery. It is believed that high levels of hormones during ovarian stimulation could create a relatively hostile environment for embryo implantation whilst increasing the risk of OHSS. It has been suggested that freezing all embryos with the intention of thawing and replacing them within the uterus at a later stage (thawed frozen embryo transfer) instead of fresh embryo transfer, may lead to improved pregnancy rates and fewer complications. We aim to compare the clinical and cost effectiveness of fresh and thawed frozen embryo transfer, with the primary aim of identifying any difference in the chance of having a healthy baby. METHODS: E-Freeze is a pragmatic, multicentre two-arm parallel group randomised controlled trial where women aged ≥18 and < 42 years, with at least three good quality embryos are randomly allocated to receive either a fresh or thawed frozen embryo transfer. The primary outcome is a healthy baby, defined as a term, singleton, live birth with appropriate weight for gestation. Cost effectiveness will be calculated from a healthcare and societal perspective. DISCUSSION: E-Freeze will determine the relative benefits of fresh and thawed frozen embryo transfer in terms of improving the chance of having a healthy baby. The results of this pragmatic study have the potential to be directly transferred to clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry: ISRCTN61225414 . Date assigned 29/12/2015.

Physiological, hyaluronan-selected intracytoplasmic sperm injection for infertility treatment (HABSelect): a parallel, two-group, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Sperm selection strategies aimed at improving success rates of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) include binding to hyaluronic acid (herein termed hyaluronan). Hyaluronan-selected sperm have reduced levels of DNA damage and aneuploidy. Use of hyaluronan-based sperm selection for ICSI (so-called physiological ICSI [PICSI]) is reported to reduce the proportion of pregnancies that end in miscarriage. However, the effect of PICSI on livebirth rates is uncertain. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of PICSI versus standard ICSI for improving livebirth rates among couples undergoing fertility treatment. METHODS: This parallel, two-group, randomised trial included couples undergoing an ICSI procedure with fresh embryo transfer at 16 assisted conception units in the UK. Eligible women (aged 18-43 years) had a body-mass index of 19-35 kg/m2 and a follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) concentration of 3·0-20·0 mIU/mL or, if no FSH measurement was available, an anti-müllerian hormone concentration of at least 1·5 pmol/L. Eligible men (aged 18-55 years) had not had a vasovasostomy or been treated for cancer in the 24 months before recruitment and were able, after at least 3 days of sexual abstinence, to produce freshly ejaculated sperm for the treatment cycle. Couples were randomly assigned (1:1) with an online system to receive either PICSI or a standard ICSI procedure. The primary outcome was full-term (≥37 weeks' gestational age) livebirth, which was assessed in all eligible couples who completed follow-up. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN99214271. FINDINGS: Between Feb 1, 2014, and Aug 31, 2016, 2772 couples were randomly assigned to receive PICSI (n=1387) or ICSI (n=1385), of whom 2752 (1381 in the PICSI group and 1371 in the ICSI group) were included in the primary analysis. The term livebirth rate did not differ significantly between PICSI (27·4% [379/1381]) and ICSI (25·2% [346/1371]) groups (odds ratio 1·12, 95% CI 0·95-1·34; p=0·18). There were 56 serious adverse events in total, including 31 in the PICSI group and 25 in the ICSI group; most were congenital abnormalities and none were attributed to treatment. INTERPRETATION: Compared with ICSI, PICSI does not significantly improve term livebirth rates. The wider use of PICSI, therefore, is not recommended at present. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme.

Single embryo transfer for all.

There is a global recognition of the need to reduce multiple pregnancies following assisted reproductive technology. Complications of multiple pregnancies can be simply avoided by replacing one embryo at a time. Most policies to reduce the number of double or higher order embryo transfers involve predicting which patients are at most risk by using a multiple birth minimisation strategy. These frequently consider factors such as patient age, previous treatments and embryo quality. However, with improvements in methods of embryo culture, embryo selection and cryopreservation, this chapter will question whether, at present, it is time to move to single embryo transfer (SET) for all.

Time lapse imaging: is it time to incorporate this technology into routine clinical practice?

Time-lapse imaging (TLI) systems for embryo incubation, assessment and selection are a novel technology available to in vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics. However, there is uncertainty about their clinical and cost-effectiveness and insufficient good quality evidence to warrant their routine use. Despite this, enthusiastic commercial marketing and slipping clinical equipoise have led to the widespread hasty introduction of this technology into practice, often at a considerable expense to the patient. We have reviewed the published literature and aim to summarize the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of these systems. These specialized incubators provide undisturbed embryo culture conditions and, by almost continuous monitoring of embryo development, generate morphokinetic parameters to aid embryo selection. They are thus hypothesized to improve outcomes following IVF. Although literature reports improved reproductive outcomes, these outcomes are largely surrogate and there is a paucity of studies reporting live births. The use of time lapse systems may reduce early pregnancy loss, increase elective single embryo transfers and limit multiple pregnancies through better embryo selection. However, the quality of the studies and hence the evidence so far, is low to moderate quality. We recommend further research producing robust high-quality evidence for and against the use of these systems.

Hyaluronic Acid Binding Sperm Selection for assisted reproduction treatment (HABSelect): study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The selection of a sperm with good genomic integrity is an important consideration for improving intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) outcome. Current convention selects sperm by vigour and morphology, but preliminary evidence suggests selection based on hyaluronic acid binding may be beneficial. The aim of the Hyaluronic Acid Binding Sperm Selection (HABSelect) trial is to determine the efficacy of hyaluronic acid (HA)-selection of sperm versus conventionally selected sperm prior to ICSI on live birth rate (LBR). The mechanistic aim is to assess whether and how the chromatin state of HA-selected sperm corresponds with clinical outcomes-clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), LBR and pregnancy loss (PL). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Couples attending UK Centres will be approached, eligibility screening performed and informed consent sought. Randomisation will occur within 24 hours prior to ICSI treatment. Participants will be randomly allocated 1:1 to the intervention arm (physiological intracytoplasmic sperm injection, PICSI) versus the control arm using conventional methods (ICSI). The primary clinical outcome is LBR ≥37 weeks' gestation with the mechanistic study determining LBR's relationship with sperm DNA integrity. Secondary outcomes will determine this for CPR and PL. Only embryologists performing the procedure will be aware of the treatment allocation. Steps will be taken to militate against biases arising from embryologists being non-blinded. Randomisation will use a minimisation algorithm to balance for key prognostic variables. The trial is powered to detect a 5% difference (24-29%: p=0.05) in LBR ≥37 weeks' gestation. Selected residual sperm samples will be tested by one or more assays of DNA integrity. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: HABSelect is a UK NIHR-EME funded study (reg no 11/14/34; IRAS REF. 13/YH/0162). The trial was designed in partnership with patient and public involvement to help maximise patient benefits. Trial findings will be reported as per CONSORT guidelines and will be made available in lay language via the trial web site (http://www.habselect.org.uk/). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN99214271; Pre-results.

Elective Single Embryo Transfer: an update to UK Best Practice Guidelines.

A significant number of multiple pregnancies and births worldwide continue to occur following treatment with Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ARTs). Whilst efforts have been made to increase the proportion of elective single embryo transfer (eSET) cycles, the multiple pregnancy rate or MPR remains at a level that most consider unacceptable given the associated clinical risks to mothers and babies, and the additional costs associated with neonatal care of premature and low birth weight babies. Northern Europe, Australia and Japan have continued to lead the way in the adoption of eSET. Randomised controlled trials or RCTs, meta-analyses and economic analyses support the implementation of an eSET policy, particularly in light of recent advances in ARTs. This paper provides a review of current evidence and an update to the eSET guidelines first published by Cutting et al. (2008) intended to assist ART clinics in the implementation of an effective eSET policy.

How should we choose the 'best' embryo? A commentary on behalf of the British Fertility Society and the Association of Clinical Embryologists.

Embryo selection to improve pregnancy rates remains a significant challenge in IVF. Non-invasive and invasive methods of embryo selection include morphological assessment, metabolomics, time-lapse imaging and preimplantation genetic screening. To date, none has been shown conclusively to yield improved implantation and live birth rates. This review summarises current understanding of methods for embryo selection.

Sperm DNA fragmentation, recurrent implantation failure and recurrent miscarriage.

Evidence is increasing that the integrity of sperm DNA may also be related to implantation failure and recurrent miscarriage (RM). To investigate this, the sperm DNA fragmentation in partners of 35 women with recurrent implantation failure (RIF) following in vitro fertilization, 16 women diagnosed with RM and seven recent fathers (control) were examined. Sperm were examined pre- and post-density centrifugation by the sperm chromatin dispersion (SCD) test and the terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) assay. There were no significant differences in the age of either partner or sperm concentration, motility or morphology between three groups. Moreover, there were no obvious differences in sperm DNA fragmentation measured by either test. However, whilst on average sperm DNA fragmentation in all groups was statistically lower in prepared sperm when measured by the SCD test, this was not seen with the results from the TUNEL assay. These results do not support the hypothesis that sperm DNA fragmentation is an important cause of RIF or RM, or that sperm DNA integrity testing has value in such patients. It also highlights significant differences between test methodologies and sperm preparation methods in interpreting the data from sperm DNA fragmentation tests.

ACE consensus meeting report: culture systems.

The UK Association of Clinical Embryologists held a workshop on Culture Systems for assisted conception in Sheffield on 22 May 2013. The meeting was organised in the light of the availability of numerous commercial products for the culture of human preimplantation embryos in vitro and the absence of data comparing the performance of these products. Expert opinions were presented, along with survey data provided by participating IVF Centres. The workshop highlighted the lack of a sound evidence base to support the selection of any one commercial product over another, and raised concerns over the lack of information defining precisely the composition of media, and the potential for adverse long-term effects of such products following their use in assisted conception.

ACE consensus meeting report: oocyte and embryo cryopreservation Sheffield 17.05.11.

The UK Association of Clinical Embryologists (ACE) held a consensus workshop on Oocyte and Embryo Cryopreservation in Sheffield, UK, on May 17th, 2011. This was organized in response to a number of considerations including the increasing prevalence of vitrification for oocyte and embryo cryopreservation in the UK and worldwide, coupled with an apparent lack of consensus over which methods of cryopreservation are optimal. The workshop included expert opinion and survey data on current practice provided by participating clinics. The workshop highlighted that an increasing number of clinics in the UK are choosing vitrification rather than controlled rate freezing, particularly for the storage of oocytes and blastocysts. It was evident that a variety of solutions are used in conjunction with open and closed containers. Data supplied by the participating clinics suggest that both freezing and vitrification can lead to similar outcomes in early embryos and blastocysts and at the moment there is no evidence base to recommend either method over the other. The delegates arrived at a number of consensus points which reflected current practice in the UK, but recognized the need for well-designed trials with careful follow up of the children born before optimal methods can be agreed.

Human oocyte cryopreservation: evidence for practice.

AIM: The aim of this article is to review the evidence regarding human oocyte cryopreservation by slow freezing and vitrification and to provide evidence-based clinical and laboratory guidelines on the effectiveness and safety of these technologies. SCOPE: These guidelines will address the following: Stage of oocyte maturity. Methods of cryopreservation/warming. Slow controlled cooling. Vitrification. Techniques used for insemination. Ovarian stimulation regimens. The guidelines do not cover recommendations for ovarian tissue freezing or in vitro oocyte maturation (IVM). OUTCOME MEASURES: The following outcome measures were examined: cryosurvival, fertilisation rate, cleavage rate, clinical pregnancy rate and implantation rate, health of resulting children.