The use of immunomodulation therapy in women with recurrent implantation failure undergoing assisted conception: A multicentre cohort study.

PROBLEM: Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) after multiple embryo transfers remains a vexing problem and immunomodulators have been used with conflicting results. This study aims to assess the effect of immunomodulation therapy on live birth rate (LBR) in women with RIF undergoing assisted reproduction treatment (ART). METHOD OF STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study in multicentre network of private assisted conception units in the UK. The study included women who had at least two failed attempts of embryo transfers at CARE fertility network in the period from 1997 to 2018. Women in the treatment group had immunomodulator drugs in the form of corticosteroids, low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), and intravenous intralipid (IVIL) infusions, either separately or in combination, after immunological testing, in addition to standard ART whilst women in the control group had only ART without immunomodulators. The primary outcome was LBR per cycle. Secondary outcomes included the rates of clinical pregnancy (CPR), cumulative live birth (CLBR), and miscarriage. RESULTS: A total of 27 163 ART cycles fulfilled the inclusion criteria, of which 5083 had immunomodulation treatment in addition to standard ART treatment, and 22 080 had standard ART treatment alone. Women in the treatment group were significantly older (mean age 38.5 vs. 37.1 years, p < .001), and had a higher number of previous failed ART cycles (mean 4.3 vs. 3.8, p < .01). There was a higher LBR in women who received immunomodulation therapy when compared with the control group (20.9% vs. 15.8%, odds ratio [OR] 1.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29-1.53, p < .001). Multivariate regression analysis showed that immunomodulation treatment was a significant independent predictor of live birth after adjusting for other confounders (adjusted OR [aOR] 1.33, 95% CI 1.15-1.54, p < .001). Survival analysis showed a higher CLBR in the treatment group (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.78, 95% CI 1.62-1.94, p < .001). CONCLUSION(S): This study provides evidence of a potential beneficial effect of immunomodulation therapy in women with RIF after immunological testing. There remains a need for high quality, adequately powered multicentre RCTs to robustly address the role of immunomodulation in women with RIF. There is also an urgent need for standardised screening tests for immune disorders that could preclude implantation.

Progesterone to prevent miscarriage in women with early pregnancy bleeding: the PRISM RCT.

BACKGROUND: Progesterone is essential for a healthy pregnancy. Several small trials have suggested that progesterone therapy may rescue a pregnancy in women with early pregnancy bleeding, which is a symptom that is strongly associated with miscarriage. OBJECTIVES: (1) To assess the effects of vaginal micronised progesterone in women with vaginal bleeding in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. (2) To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of progesterone in women with early pregnancy bleeding. DESIGN: A multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial of progesterone in women with early pregnancy vaginal bleeding. SETTING: A total of 48 hospitals in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 16-39 years with early pregnancy bleeding. INTERVENTIONS: Women aged 16-39 years were randomly assigned to receive twice-daily vaginal suppositories containing either 400 mg of progesterone or a matched placebo from presentation to 16 weeks of gestation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was live birth at ≥ 34 weeks. In addition, a within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from an NHS and NHS/Personal Social Services perspective. RESULTS: A total of 4153 women from 48 hospitals in the UK received either progesterone (n = 2079) or placebo (n = 2074). The follow-up rate for the primary outcome was 97.2% (4038 out of 4153 participants). The live birth rate was 75% (1513 out of 2025 participants) in the progesterone group and 72% (1459 out of 2013 participants) in the placebo group (relative rate 1.03, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.07; p = 0.08). A significant subgroup effect (interaction test p = 0.007) was identified for prespecified subgroups by the number of previous miscarriages: none (74% in the progesterone group vs. 75% in the placebo group; relative rate 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.04; p = 0.72); one or two (76% in the progesterone group vs. 72% in the placebo group; relative rate 1.05, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.12; p = 0.07); and three or more (72% in the progesterone group vs. 57% in the placebo group; relative rate 1.28, 95% confidence interval 1.08 to 1.51; p = 0.004). A significant post hoc subgroup effect (interaction test p = 0.01) was identified in the subgroup of participants with early pregnancy bleeding and any number of previous miscarriage(s) (75% in the progesterone group vs. 70% in the placebo group; relative rate 1.09, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.15; p = 0.003). There were no significant differences in the rate of adverse events between the groups. The results of the health economics analysis show that progesterone was more costly than placebo (£7655 vs. £7572), with a mean cost difference of £83 (adjusted mean difference £76, 95% confidence interval -£559 to £711) between the two arms. Thus, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of progesterone compared with placebo was estimated as £3305 per additional live birth at ≥ 34 weeks of gestation. CONCLUSIONS: Progesterone therapy in the first trimester of pregnancy did not result in a significantly higher rate of live births among women with threatened miscarriage overall, but an important subgroup effect was identified. A conclusion on the cost-effectiveness of the PRISM trial would depend on the amount that society is willing to pay to increase the chances of an additional live birth at ≥ 34 weeks. For future work, we plan to conduct an individual participant data meta-analysis using all existing data sets. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14163439, EudraCT 2014-002348-42 and Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) 158326. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 33. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Miscarriage is a common complication of pregnancy that affects one in five pregnancies. Several small studies have suggested that progesterone, a hormone essential for maintaining a pregnancy, may reduce the risk of miscarriage in women presenting with early pregnancy bleeding. This research was undertaken to test whether or not progesterone given to pregnant women with early pregnancy bleeding would increase the number of live births when compared with placebo (dummy treatment). The women participating in the study had an equal chance of receiving progesterone or placebo, as determined by a computer; one group received progesterone (400 mg twice daily as vaginal pessaries) and the other group received placebo with an identical appearance. Treatment began when women presented with vaginal bleeding, were < 12 weeks of gestation and were found to have at least a pregnancy sac on an ultrasound scan. Treatment was stopped at 16 weeks of gestation, or earlier if the pregnancy ended before 16 weeks. Neither the participants nor their health-care professionals knew which treatment was being received. In total, 23,775 women were screened and 4153 women were randomised to receive either progesterone or placebo pessaries. Altogether, 2972 participants had a live birth after at least 34 weeks of gestation. Overall, the live birth rate in the progesterone group was 75% (1513 out of 2025 participants), compared with 72% (1459 out of 2013 participants) in the placebo group. Although the live birth rate was 3% higher in the progesterone group than in the placebo group, there was statistical uncertainty about this finding. However, it was observed that women with a history of one or more previous miscarriages and vaginal bleeding in their current pregnancy may benefit from progesterone. For women with no previous miscarriages, our analysis showed that the live birth rate was 74% (824 out of 1111 participants) in the progesterone group compared with 75% (840 out of 1127 participants) in the placebo group. For women with one or more previous miscarriages, the live birth rate was 75% (689 out of 914 participants) in the progesterone group compared with 70% (619 out of 886 participants) in the placebo group. The potential benefit appeared to be most strong for women with three or more previous miscarriages, who had a live birth rate of 72% (98 out of 137 participants) in the progesterone group compared with 57% (85 out of 148 participants) in the placebo group. Treatment with progesterone did not appear to have any negative effects.

Micronized vaginal progesterone to prevent miscarriage: a critical evaluation of randomized evidence.

Progesterone is essential for the maintenance of pregnancy. Several small trials have suggested that progesterone supplementation may reduce the risk of miscarriage in women with recurrent or threatened miscarriage. Cochrane Reviews summarized the evidence and found that the trials were small with substantial methodologic weaknesses. Since then, the effects of first-trimester use of vaginal micronized progesterone have been evaluated in 2 large, high-quality, multicenter placebo-controlled trials, one targeting women with unexplained recurrent miscarriages (the PROMISE [PROgesterone in recurrent MIScarriagE] trial) and the other targeting women with early pregnancy bleeding (the PRISM [PRogesterone In Spontaneous Miscarriage] trial). The PROMISE trial studied 836 women from 45 hospitals in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands and found a 3% greater live birth rate with progesterone but with substantial statistical uncertainty. The PRISM trial studied 4153 women from 48 hospitals in the United Kingdom and found a 3% greater live birth rate with progesterone, but with a P value of .08. A key finding, first observed in the PROMISE trial, and then replicated in the PRISM trial, was that treatment with vaginal micronized progesterone 400 mg twice daily was associated with increasing live birth rates according to the number of previous miscarriages. Prespecified PRISM trial subgroup analysis in women with the dual risk factors of previous miscarriage(s) and current pregnancy bleeding fulfilled all 11 conditions for credible subgroup analysis. For the subgroup of women with a history of 1 or more miscarriage(s) and current pregnancy bleeding, the live birth rate was 75% (689/914) with progesterone vs 70% (619/886) with placebo (rate difference 5%; risk ratio, 1.09, 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.15; P=.003). The benefit was greater for the subgroup of women with 3 or more previous miscarriages and current pregnancy bleeding; live birth rate was 72% (98/137) with progesterone vs 57% (85/148) with placebo (rate difference 15%; risk ratio, 1.28, 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.51; P=.004). No short-term safety concerns were identified from the PROMISE and PRISM trials. Therefore, women with a history of miscarriage who present with bleeding in early pregnancy may benefit from the use of vaginal micronized progesterone 400 mg twice daily. Women and their care providers should use the findings for shared decision-making.

Vitamin D and assisted reproductive treatment outcome: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D deficiency has been associated with an increased risk of abnormal pregnancy implantation leading to obstetric complications such as pre-eclampsia and fetal growth restriction. However, the effect of vitamin D on reproductive treatment outcomes in couples undergoing assisted reproductive treatment is poorly understood. This study investigates the association between vitamin D and reproductive treatment outcomes in women undergoing assisted reproductive treatments? METHODS: A prospective cohort study conducted at a large tertiary teaching hospital, United Kingdom. Five hundred women undergoing assisted reproductive treatment were recruited between September 2013 and September 2015. All participants had their serum vitamin D measured and their reproductive treatment outcomes collated. Women were categorised in to three groups: vitamin D replete (> 75 nmol/L), insufficient (50-75 nmol/L) and deficient (< 50 nmol/L) according to Endocrine Society guidance. The primary outcome was live birth. Secondary outcomes included biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy and pregnancy loss rates. RESULTS: Vitamin D deficiency was found in 53.2% (266/500) of participants and vitamin D insufficiency was found in 30.8% (154/500) of participants. Only 16% (80/500) of women were vitamin D replete. The live birth rates for vitamin D deficient, insufficient and replete women were 23.2% (57/246), 27.0% (38/141) and 37.7% (29/77) respectively (p = 0.04). The respective live birth rates for vitamin D deficient, insufficient and replete women were 24.3, 27.1, 34.4% after adjustment for key prognostic factors (p = 0.25). CONCLUSIONS: Vitamin D deficiency and insufficiency are common in women undergoing assisted reproductive treatments. The crude live birth rate achieved in women undergoing assisted reproductive treatments are associated with serum vitamin D, although statistical significance is lost when adjusting for important prognostic variables. Vitamin D deficiency could be an important condition to treat in women considering fertility treatment. A research trial to investigate the benefits of vitamin D deficiency treatment would test this hypothesis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov - NCT02187146 .

A Randomized Trial of Progesterone in Women with Bleeding in Early Pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Bleeding in early pregnancy is strongly associated with pregnancy loss. Progesterone is essential for the maintenance of pregnancy. Several small trials have suggested that progesterone therapy may improve pregnancy outcomes in women who have bleeding in early pregnancy. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate progesterone, as compared with placebo, in women with vaginal bleeding in early pregnancy. Women were randomly assigned to receive vaginal suppositories containing either 400 mg of progesterone or matching placebo twice daily, from the time at which they presented with bleeding through 16 weeks of gestation. The primary outcome was the birth of a live-born baby after at least 34 weeks of gestation. The primary analysis was performed in all participants for whom data on the primary outcome were available. A sensitivity analysis of the primary outcome that included all the participants was performed with the use of multiple imputation to account for missing data. RESULTS: A total of 4153 women, recruited at 48 hospitals in the United Kingdom, were randomly assigned to receive progesterone (2079 women) or placebo (2074 women). The percentage of women with available data for the primary outcome was 97% (4038 of 4153 women). The incidence of live births after at least 34 weeks of gestation was 75% (1513 of 2025 women) in the progesterone group and 72% (1459 of 2013 women) in the placebo group (relative rate, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00 to 1.07; P = 0.08). The sensitivity analysis, in which missing primary outcome data were imputed, resulted in a similar finding (relative rate, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.07; P = 0.08). The incidence of adverse events did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among women with bleeding in early pregnancy, progesterone therapy administered during the first trimester did not result in a significantly higher incidence of live births than placebo. (Funded by the United Kingdom National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment program; PRISM Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN14163439.).

Hysteroscopy in recurrent in-vitro fertilisation failure (TROPHY): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The success rate of in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) remains low and many women undergo multiple treatment cycles. A previous meta-analysis suggested hysteroscopy could improve outcomes in women who have had recurrent implantation failure; however, studies were of poor quality and a definitive randomised trial was needed. In the TROPHY trial we aimed to assess whether hysteroscopy improves the livebirth rate following IVF treatment in women with recurrent failure of implantation. METHODS: We did a multicentre, randomised controlled trial in eight hospitals in the UK, Belgium, Italy, and the Czech Republic. We recruited women younger than 38 years who had normal ultrasound of the uterine cavity and history of two to four unsuccessful IVF cycles. We used an independent web-based trial management system to randomly assign (1:1) women to receive outpatient hysteroscopy (hysteroscopy group) or no hysteroscopy (control group) in the month before starting a treatment cycle of IVF (with or without intracytoplasmic sperm injection). A computer-based algorithm minimised for key prognostic variables: age, body-mass index, basal follicle-stimulating hormone concentration, and the number of previous failed IVF cycles. The order of group assignment was masked to the researchers at the time of recruitment and randomisation. Embryologists involved in the embryo transfer were masked to group allocation, but physicians doing the procedure knew of group assignment and had hysteroscopy findings accessible. Participants were not masked to their group assignment. The primary outcome was the livebirth rate (proportion of women who had a live baby beyond 24 weeks of gestation) in the intention-to-treat population. The trial was registered with the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN35859078. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2010, and Dec 31, 2013, we randomly assigned 350 women to the hysteroscopy group and 352 women to the control group. 102 (29%) of women in the hysteroscopy group had a livebirth after IVF compared with 102 (29%) women in the control group (risk ratio 1·0, 95% CI 0·79-1·25; p=0·96). No hysteroscopy-related adverse events were reported. INTERPRETATION: Outpatient hysteroscopy before IVF in women with a normal ultrasound of the uterine cavity and a history of unsuccessful IVF treatment cycles does not improve the livebirth rate. Further research into the effectiveness of surgical correction of specific uterine cavity abnormalities before IVF is warranted. FUNDING: European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy.

Investigating the effect of ethnicity on IVF outcome.

Success rates for IVF among women from different ethnic groups have been inconclusive. In this study, the relationship between ethnicity and IVF outcome was investigated. Results of a cohort study analysing 13,473 first cycles were compared with the results of meta-analysed data from 16 published studies. Adjustment was made for age, body-mass index, cause of infertility, duration of infertility, previous live birth, previous spontaneous abortion and number of embryos transferred. Black and South Asian women were found to have lower live birth rates compared with White women: Black versus White (OR 0.42 [0.25 to 0.70]; P = 0.001); South Asian versus White (OR 0.80 [0.65t o 0.99]; P = 0.04). Black women had significantly lower clinical pregnancy rates compared with White women (OR 0.41 [0.25 to 9 0.67]; P < 0.001). The meta-analysed results also showed that Black and South Asian women had statistically significant reduced odds of live birth (OR 0.62 [0.55 to 0.71); P < 0.001 and OR 0.66 [0.52 to 0.85); P = 0.001, respectively). Black and South Asian women seem to have the poorest outcome, which is not explained by the commonly known confounders. Future research needs to investigate the possible explanations for this difference and improve IVF outcome for all women.

Accuracy of single progesterone test to predict early pregnancy outcome in women with pain or bleeding: meta-analysis of cohort studies.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy with which a single progesterone measurement in early pregnancy discriminates between viable and non-viable pregnancy. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, ProQuest, Conference Proceedings Citation Index, and the Cochrane Library from inception until April 2012, plus reference lists of relevant studies. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were selected on the basis of participants (women with spontaneous pregnancy of less than 14 weeks of gestation); test (single serum progesterone measurement); outcome (viable intrauterine pregnancy, miscarriage, or ectopic pregnancy) diagnosed on the basis of combinations of pregnancy test, ultrasound scan, laparoscopy, and histological examination; design (cohort studies of test accuracy); and sufficient data being reported. RESULTS: 26 cohort studies, including 9436 pregnant women, were included, consisting of 7 studies in women with symptoms and inconclusive ultrasound assessment and 19 studies in women with symptoms alone. Among women with symptoms and inconclusive ultrasound assessments, the progesterone test (5 studies with 1998 participants and cut-off values from 3.2 to 6 ng/mL) predicted a non-viable pregnancy with pooled sensitivity of 74.6% (95% confidence interval 50.6% to 89.4%), specificity of 98.4% (90.9% to 99.7%), positive likelihood ratio of 45 (7.1 to 289), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.26 (0.12 to 0.57). The median prevalence of a non-viable pregnancy was 73.2%, and the probability of a non-viable pregnancy was raised to 99.2% if the progesterone was low. For women with symptoms alone, the progesterone test had a higher specificity when a threshold of 10 ng/mL was used (9 studies with 4689 participants) and predicted a non-viable pregnancy with pooled sensitivity of 66.5% (53.6% to 77.4%), specificity of 96.3% (91.1% to 98.5%), positive likelihood ratio of 18 (7.2 to 45), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.35 (0.24 to 0.50). The probability of a non-viable pregnancy was raised from 62.9% to 96.8%. CONCLUSION: A single progesterone measurement for women in early pregnancy presenting with bleeding or pain and inconclusive ultrasound assessments can rule out a viable pregnancy.