Patient and professional perspectives about using in vitro fertilisation add-ons in the UK and Australia: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: In vitro fertilisation (IVF) add-ons are additional procedures offered alongside an IVF cycle with the aim of improving live birth rates. They are controversial because of the paucity of evidence to support their efficacy and safety, alongside the additional financial cost they often pose to patients. Despite this, they are popular. However, there is limited qualitative research regarding their use. The aims of the VALUE Study were to understand the decision-making process surrounding using or recommending add-ons; report sources of information for add-ons; and explore concerns for safety and effectiveness when considering their use. DESIGN: 'VALUE' is a qualitative semistructured interview study using inductive thematic analysis of anonymised transcriptions. SETTING: Participants were recruited from a broad geographical spread across the UK and Australia from public and private clinical settings. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n=25) and health professionals (embryologists (n=25) and clinicians (n=24)) were interviewed. A purposive sampling strategy was undertaken. The sampling framework included people having state-subsidised and private cycles, professionals working in public and private sectors, geographical location and professionals of all grades. RESULTS: Patients often made decisions about add-ons based on hope, minimising considerations of safety, efficacy or cost, whereas professionals sought the best outcomes for their patients and wanted to avoid them wasting their money. The driving forces behind add-on use differed: for patients, a professional opinion was the most influential reason, whereas for professionals, it was seen as patient driven. For both groups, applying the available evidence to individual circumstances was very challenging, especially in the sphere of IVF medicine, where the stakes are high. CONCLUSIONS: There is scope to build on the quality of the discourse between patients and professionals. Patients describe valuing their autonomy with add-ons, but for professionals, undertaking informed consent will be critical, no matter where they sit on the spectrum regarding add-ons. TRIAL REGISTRATION: osf.io/vnyb9.

Is our public research money well spent? Publication of research outputs from Health Research Council of New Zealand-funded studies: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reporting of results from the projects and programmes funded by the Health Research Council (HRC) New Zealand. DESIGN: A cross-sectional analysis. SETTING: Research projects and programmes funded by the HRC New Zealand from 2006 to 2014. PARTICIPANTS: Publicly available data provided by the HRC. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The number and proportion with evidence of publication and dissemination of a research output from HRC grants and the time taken to disseminate the results. RESULTS: Of the 374 HRC grants from 2006 to 2014, there was no evidence of publication or reporting of any research output for 48 studies (13%). Of the 326 (87%) grants with research outputs, there was a mean dissemination time of 4.73 years (SD 2.37). The total funding provided by the HRC was NZ$471 663 336, while the 48 grants with no evidence of dissemination represented NZ$47 095 727 (10%). CONCLUSIONS: Thirteen per cent of the HRC projects and programmes from 2006 to 2014 have not contributed to the healthcare evidence as their results remain unknown.

"It all depends on why it's red": qualitative interviews exploring patient and professional views of a traffic light system for IVF add-ons.

Background IVF add-ons are techniques, medicines or procedures used in addition to standard IVF with the aim of improving the chance of success. The United Kingdom's IVF regulator, ( the Human Fertilisation Embryology Authority (HFEA) developed a traffic light system to categorise add-ons as either green, amber, or red, based on results of randomised controlled trials. Method Qualitative interviews were undertaken to explore understanding and views of the HFEA traffic light system among IVF clinicians, embryologists and IVF patients across Australia and the United Kingdom. Results A total of 73 interviews were conducted. Overall, participants were supportive of the intention of the traffic light system, however many limitations were raised. It was widely recognized that a simple traffic light system necessarily omits information which may be important to understanding the evidence base. In particular, the red category was used in scenarios that patients viewed as having different implications for their decision-making, including 'no evidence' and 'evidence of harm'. Patients were surprised at the absence of any green add-ons and questioned the value of a traffic light system in this context. Many participants considered the website a helpful starting point, but desired more detail, including the contributing studies, results specific to patient demographics (e.g., <35 years and >35 years), and inclusion of more options (e.g. acupuncture). Overall, participants believed the website to be reliable and trustworthy, particularly due to the Government affiliation, and despite some concerns regarding transparency and an overly cautious regulator. Conclusion Participants identified many limitations with the current application of the traffic light system. These could be considered in any future updates to the HFEA website and for others developing similar decision support tools.

Publication bias in trials registered in the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: Is it a problem? A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Timely publication of clinical trials is critical to ensure the dissemination and implementation of high-quality healthcare evidence. This study investigates the publication rate and time to publication of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) registered in the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of RCTs registered with the ANZCTR in 2007, 2009, and 2011. Multiple bibliographic databases were searched until October 2021 to identify trial publications. We then calculated publication rates, proportions, and the time to publish calculated from the date of first participation enrolment to publication date. RESULTS: Of 1,970 trial registrations, 541 (27%) remained unpublished 10 to 14 years later, and the proportion of trials published decreased by 7% from 2007 to 2011. The average time to publish was 4.63 years. The prospective trial registration rate for 2007, 2009 and 2011 was 48% (952 trials) and over this time there was an increase of 19% (280 prospective trials). Trials funded by non-Industry organizations were more likely to be published (74%, 1204/1625 trials) than the industry-funded trials (61%, 224/345 trials). Larger trials with at least 1000 participants were published at a rate of 88% (85/97 trials) and on average took 5.4 years to be published. Smaller trials with less than 100 participants were published at a lower rate with 67% (687/1024 trials) published and these trials took 4.31 years on average to publish. CONCLUSIONS: Just over a quarter of all trials on the ANZCTR for 2007, 2009, and 2011 remain unpublished over a decade later. The average time to publication of nearly five years may reflect the larger trials which will have taken longer to recruit participants. Over half of study sample trials were retrospectively registered, but prospective registration improved over time, highlighting the role of mandating trial registration.

Effect of endometrial scratching on unassisted conception for unexplained infertility: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether endometrial scratching increases the chance of live birth in women with unexplained infertility attempting to conceive without assisted reproductive technology. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled, participant-blind, multicenter international trial. SETTING: Fertility clinics. PATIENT(S): Women with a diagnosis of unexplained infertility trying to conceive without assistance. INTERVENTION(S): Participants were randomly assigned to receive an endometrial biopsy or a placebo procedure (placement of a biopsy catheter in the posterior fornix, without inserting it into the external cervical os). Both groups performed regular unprotected intercourse with the intention of conceiving over three consecutive study cycles. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The primary outcome was live birth. RESULT(S): A total of 220 women underwent randomization. The live birth rate was 9% (10 of 113 women) in the endometrial-scratch group and 7% (7 of 107 women) in the control group (adjusted OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.50-4.03). There were no differences between the groups in the secondary outcomes of clinical pregnancy, viable pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, and miscarriage. Endometrial scratching was associated with a higher pain score on a 10-point scale (adjusted mean difference, 3.07; 95% CI, 2.53-3.60). CONCLUSION(S): This trial did not find evidence that endometrial scratching improves the live birth rate in women with unexplained infertility trying to conceive without assistance. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12614000656639.

A randomized trial of endometrial scratching in women with PCOS undergoing ovulation induction cycles.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does endometrial scratching improve the chance of a live birth in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) undergoing ovulation induction and trying to conceive? DESIGN: An international, multicentre, randomized, sham-controlled trial across six fertility clinics in three countries (New Zealand, UK and Brazil). Women with a diagnosis of PCOS who were planning to commence ovulation induction cycles (at least three cycles) in order to conceive were randomly assigned to receive the pipelle (scratch) procedure or a sham (placebo) procedure in the first cycle of ovulation induction. Women kept a diary of ovulation induction and sexual intercourse timing over three consecutive cycles and pregnancies were followed up to live birth. Primary outcome was live birth and secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, adverse pregnancy outcomes, neonatal outcomes, bleeding following procedure and pain score following procedure. RESULTS: A total of 117 women were randomized; 58 to the scratch group and 59 to the sham group. Live birth occurred in 11 (19%) women in the scratch group and 14 (24%) in the sham group (odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30-1.92). Secondary outcomes were similar in each group. Significantly higher pain scores were reported in the scratch group (adjusted mean difference 3.2, 95% CI 2.5-3.9) when measured on a visual analogue scale. CONCLUSION: No difference was detected in live birth rate for women with PCOS who received an endometrial scratch when trying to conceive using ovulation induction; however, uncertainty remains due to the small sample size in this study.

Pharmaceutical industry payments and assisted reproduction in Australia: a retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the extent and nature of pharmaceutical industry payments related to fertility and assisted reproduction in Australia. DESIGN AND SETTING: This retrospective observational study employed four databases compiled from publicly available pharmaceutical industry transparency reports on educational event sponsorship (October 2011-April 2018), payments to healthcare professionals (October 2015-April 2018) and patient group support (January 2013-December 2017). Analyses were restricted to fertility-related payments by two major manufacturers of fertility medicines in Australia: Merck Serono and Merck, Sharp and Dohme (MSD). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptive statistics on fertility-related payments and other transfers of value (counts, total and median costs in Australian dollars) for educational events and to healthcare professionals and patient groups. RESULTS: Between October 2011 and April 2018, Merck Serono and MSD spent $A4 522 263 on 970 fertility-related events for healthcare professionals, including doctors, nurses and fertility scientists. 56.8% (551/970) events were held by fertility clinics and 29.3% (284/970) by professional medical associations. Between October 2015 and April 2018, Merck Serono spent $A403 800 across 177 payments to 118 fertility healthcare professionals, predominantly for educational event attendance. Recipients included obstetricians and gynaecologists (76.3% of payments, 135/177), nurses (11.3%, 20/177) and embryologists/fertility scientists (9.6%, 17/117). The highest paid healthcare professionals held leadership positions in major fertility clinics. Merck Serono provided $A662 850 to fertility-related patient groups for advocacy and education (January 2013-December 2017). CONCLUSIONS: The pharmaceutical industry sponsored a broad range of fertility clinicians and organisations, including doctors, nurses, embryologists, professional medical organisations, fertility clinics and patient groups. This sponsorship may contribute to the overuse of fertility services.

VALUE study: a protocol for a qualitative semi-structured interview study of IVF add-ons use by patients, clinicians and embryologists in the UK and Australia.

INTRODUCTION: For couples undergoing assisted reproduction, a plethora of adjuncts are available; these are known as 'add-ons'. Most add-ons are not supported by good quality randomised trial evidence of efficacy, with some proven to be ineffective. However, estimates suggest that over 70% of fertility clinics provide at least one add-on, often at extra cost to the patient. This study has three aims. First, to undertake a survey of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) clinics in the UK to ascertain which add-ons are being offered and at what cost. Second, to undertake qualitative semi-structured interviews of patients, clinicians and embryologists, to explore their opinions and beliefs surrounding add-ons. Third, to review the interpretation of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority traffic light system, to better understand the information required by IVF patients, clinicians and embryologists when making decisions about add-ons. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: All UK IVF clinics will be contacted by email and invited to complete an online survey. The survey will ask them which add-ons they offer, at what cost per cycle and how information is shared with patients. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted in the UK and Australia with three groups of participants: (i) fertility patients; (ii) clinicians and (iii) embryologists. Participants for the interviews will be recruited via social media channels, website adverts, email and snowball sampling. Up to 20 participants will be recruited for each group in each country. Following an online consent process, interviews will be conducted via video-conferencing software, transcribed verbatim and data subjected to inductive thematic analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the Universities of Sheffield, Bath Spa and Melbourne. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated to regulatory bodies in the UK and Australia. A lay summary of findings will be shared via Fertility Network, UK.

Avoiding multiple pregnancies in assisted reproductive technologies: transferring one embryo at a time should be the norm.

Multiple pregnancies following fertility treatments typically occur in 30% of women in whom more than one embryo is transferred. Worldwide, fewer than 20 countries have fully funded public fertility treatments, and many women utilizing assisted reproduction technologies are transferring more than one embryo for financial reasons because they consider it will be cheaper to have two embryos transferred in the one procedure. Yet, there is a large body of evidence for the poorer health, economic, and social outcomes for mother and baby from multiple pregnancies. Some countries have reduced the multiple pregnancy rate to less than 5% by linking the funding of ART to policies where the large majority of transfers are single embryos.

IVF and IUI in couples with unexplained infertility (FIIX study): study protocol of a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTIONS: In couples with unexplained infertility and a poor prognosis of natural conception, are four cycles of IUI with ovarian stimulation (IUI-OS) non-inferior to one completed cycle of IVF for the outcome of cumulative live birth? Are four cycles of IUI-OS associated with a lower cost per live birth compared to one completed cycle of IVF? Will four cycles of IUI-OS followed by one complete cycle of IVF result in as many live births at lower cost per live birth, than two complete cycles of IVF? Will four cycles of IUI-OS followed by two complete cycles of IVF result in more live births at lower cost per live birth, than two complete cycles of IVF alone? WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: IUI is widely used in the USA, the UK and Europe as a low cost, less invasive alternative to IVF for couples with unexplained infertility. Although three to six cycles of IUI were comparable to IVF in the three major studies carried out to date, gonadotrophin ovarian stimulation was used in the majority of cases, and this also resulted in a high multiple pregnancy rate in some studies. Ovarian stimulation with clomiphene citrate is known to have lower multiple pregnancy rates. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: The FIIX study is a multicentre, open label, parallel, pragmatic non-inferiority randomized controlled trial of 580 couples with unexplained infertility comparing four cycles of IUI-OS with clomiphene citrate and one completed cycle of IVF. Variable block randomization stratified by age and clinic with electronic allocation will be used. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS: Couples with poor prognosis for natural conception and who are eligible for publicly funded fertility treatment in six fertility clinics in New Zealand. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: Auckland Medical Research Fund (3718892/1119003), A+ Trust, Auckland District Health Board (A + 8479), Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust (3718514). No competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12619001003167. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 15 July 2019. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 02/08/2019.

The use of oil-soluble contrast media for tubal flushing in infertility: A consensus statement from ACCEPT (Australasian CREI Consensus Expert Panel on Trial evidence).

Good evidence that oil-soluble contrast media (OSCM) enhances pregnancy rates when used to assess fallopian tube patency by hysterosalpingogram has prompted rapid clinical uptake by some fertility doctors and imaging specialists in Australia and New Zealand. The ACCEPT group met in July 2019 to develop a consensus document outlining the indications for and safe use of OSCM, to inform and guide clinicians interested in offering procedures using this media to couples with infertility.

Clinician Identification of Birth Asphyxia Using Intrapartum Cardiotocography Among Neonates With and Without Encephalopathy in New Zealand.

Importance: Despite improvements in antenatal care and increasing cesarean delivery rates, birth asphyxia leading to neonatal encephalopathy (NE) continues to contribute to neonatal death and long-term neurodevelopmental disability. Cardiotocography (CTG) has been used in labor for several decades to detect a stressed fetus so that delivery can be expedited and NE avoided. Objective: To investigate whether experienced clinicians can detect and respond to abnormal readings from CTGs during the penultimate hour before birth in infants with moderate to severe NE but no acute peripartum event. Design, Setting, and Participants: This case-control study included 10 practicing obstetricians and midwives at maternity hospitals in New Zealand. Participants, who were masked to the perinatal outcome, were asked to assess CTG tracings from 35 neonates with NE and evidence of birth hypoxia (ie, cases) and 105 neonates without NE or birth hypoxia (ie, controls), all of whom were born in 2010 to 2011. Data analysis was conducted from May to December 2017. Exposures: Brief clinical details and 1 hour of CTG tracings from the penultimate hour before birth were provided for each baby. Clinicians assessed the CTG tracings and recommended a plan. Main Outcomes and Measures: Intra-assessor and interassessor agreement on CTG findings and action plans as well as sensitivity (ie, detection of NE) and specificity (ie, ruling out those without NE) for the assessment of abnormal CTG readings leading to immediate action (ie, fetal blood sample or immediate delivery) were reported. Results: A total of 35 infants (mean [SD] gestational age, 40 [1.4] weeks; 16 [45.7%] cesarean deliveries) were designated cases, and 105 infants (mean [SD] gestational age, 39.4 [1.2] weeks; 22 [21.0%] cesarean deliveries) were designated controls. No infants had congenital anomalies. The mean (range) sensitivity for detection of abnormal CTG results and for recommending immediate action for all assessors was 75% (63%-91%) and 41% (23%-57%), respectively, with a mean (range) specificity of 67% (53%-77%) and 87% (65%-99%), respectively. A sensitivity analysis including only assessors with 80% or more interassessor agreement only differed from the main analysis by 6% or less (mean [range] sensitivity for detection, 76% [63%-91%]; sensitivity for action plan, 36% [25%-49%]; specificity for detection, 71% [53%-77%]; and specificity for action plan, 93% [88%-99%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Experienced clinicians detected 3 of 4 infants who were subsequently diagnosed with NE. Action to expedite delivery was recommended for more than 40% of infants with NE. These results indicate that CTG does not identify all infants at risk of NE, and that there is a need for further investment in new approaches to fetal surveillance in labor.

Reporting assisted reproductive technology success rates on Australian and New Zealand fertility clinic websites.

BACKGROUND: Fertility clinics commonly report their success rates online. These can be difficult to interpret as they are influenced by the way the data are presented. To improve transparency, the Reproductive Technology Accreditation Committee (RTAC) has published guidelines to support fertility clinics with their online reporting of success rates. However, it is unclear whether compliance with these guidelines will allow patients to make fair comparisons between clinics. AIMS: To illustrate the variability in patient and treatment populations that contribute to fertility clinic published rates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fertility clinics offering in vitro fertilisation treatment in Australia or New Zealand were assessed for compliance with six guidelines adapted from RTAC's code of practice, for reporting success rates in the public domain. All graphs and/or tables reporting clinic success rates were assessed to illustrate the combination of outcome or treatment variables contributing to each dataset. RESULTS: Twenty of the 30 fertility clinic websites reported success rates. Of these only 17 reported live births. The median compliance score with RTAC guidelines was 8/8 (interquartile range: 6-8). Of 41 figures published across all websites, five reported clinical pregnancy rates as their only outcome measure. Thirty-seven figures reported success rates 'per embryo transfer', two figures used 'per egg collection', and no figures described success rates 'per cycle started'. Thirty-two different combinations of reporting variables were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Websites were broadly compliant with RTAC's guidelines. However, considering the variability in patient and treatment groups contributing to success rate data, patients cannot be expected to make an informed decision based on clinics' self-reported outcomes. RTAC guidelines could be improved by providing a clear definition of success, including the appropriate use of denominators.

Could DNA hydroxymethylation be crucial in influencing steroid hormone signaling in endometrial biology and endometriosis?

Endometriosis affects 10% of reproductive-aged women. It is characterized by the growth of the endometrium, outside the uterus and is associated with infertility and chronic abdominal pain. Lack of noninvasive diagnostic tools and early screening tests results in delayed treatment and subsequently increased disease severity. Endometriosis is a disease associated with a deregulated hormonal response, therefore, understanding the molecular mechanisms that govern this hormonal interplay is of paramount importance. DNA methylation is an epigenetic mark that regulates gene expression and is often associated with genes that code for steroid receptors and enzymes associated with estrogen synthesis and metabolism in endometriosis. DNA hydroxymethylation, which is structurally similar to methylation but functionally different, is a biologically critical mechanism that is also known to regulate gene expression. Ten Eleven Translocation (TET) proteins mediate hydroxymethylation. However, the role of DNA hydroxymethylation or TETs in the endometrium remains relatively unexplored. Currently, the "gold standard" technique used to study methylation patterns is bisulfite genomic sequencing. This technique also detects hydroxymethylation but fails to distinguish between the two, thereby limiting our understanding of these two processes. The presence of TETs in the male and female reproductive tract and its contribution to endometrial cancer makes it an important factor to study in endometriosis. This review summarizes the role of DNA methylation in aberrant steroid hormone signaling and hypothesizes that hydroxymethylation could be a factor influencing hormonal instability seen in endometriosis.

Introduction: Add-ons for assisted reproductive technology: can we be honest here?

Adjuncts, more often known as add-ons, are now part of the landscape of an in vitro fertilization cycle. Since the early days of in vitro fertilization, fertility services have rightly been seeking improved success rates. At present there are a multitude of choices for patients who are usually presented with a menu of add-ons to choose from. This is driven by the desire to give patients the best chances of becoming parents. This Views and Reviews series discusses all aspects of add-ons. It is not exhaustive as even as we are finishing the preparation of the series, there is a new study about the use of cytokines as an add-on. The overall conclusion from this series of articles is that despite considerable efforts to establish benefits with add-ons that there is a paucity of data when we consider the outcome of live birth.

Add-ons in the laboratory: hopeful, but not always helpful.

All the steps in an in vitro fertilization cycle are important but none more so than those that occur in the laboratory. To improve the chance of success, adjuncts, commonly referred to as 'add-ons', are offered. Yet as with other new interventions, add-ons in the laboratory require justification by well-designed studies prior to being offered as routine practice. Add-ons aim to improve the chance of a take-home baby, but, their safety and efficacy is less than clear. In addition, the financial burden from the use of add-ons is often borne by the couple. This review of the most commonly used laboratory add-ons did not find any high-quality evidence to support their use in routine practice.