Preimplantation genetic testing for BRCA gene mutation carriers: a cost effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Gynecologic oncologists should be aware of the option of conception through IVF/PGT-M for families with high BRCA related morbidity or mortality. Our objective was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for selection and transfer of BRCA negative embryo in BRCA mutation carriers compared to natural conception. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness of two strategies, conception through IVF/PGT-M and BRCA negative embryo transfer versus natural conception with a 50% chance of BRCA positive newborn for BRCA mutation carriers was compared using a Markovian process decision analysis model. Costs of the two strategies were compared using quality adjusted life years (QALYs'). All costs were discounted at 3%. Incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) compared to willingness to pay threshold was used for cost-effectiveness analysis. RESULTS: IVF/ PGT-M is cost-effective with an ICER of 150,219 new Israeli Shekels, per QALY gained (equivalent to 44,480 USD), at a 3% discount rate. CONCLUSIONS: IVF/ PGT-M and BRCA negative embryo transfer compared to natural conception among BRCA positive parents is cost effective and may be offered for selected couples with high BRCA mutation related morbidity or mortality. Our results could impact decisions regarding conception among BRCA positive couples and health care providers.

Cost-effectiveness of freeze-all policy - A retrospective study based upon the outcome of cumulative live births.

OBJECT: We have previously reported that cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) are higher in the freeze-all group compared with controls (64.3% vs. 45.8%, p = 0.001). Here, we aim to determine if the freeze-all policy is more cost-effective than fresh embryo transfer followed by frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The analysis consisted of 704 ART (Assisted reproductive technology) cycles, which included in IVF (In vitro fertilisation) and ICSI (Intra Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection) cycles performed in Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan between January 2012 and June 2014. The freeze-all group involved 84 patients and the fresh Group 625 patients. Patients were followed up until all embryos obtained from a single controlled ovarian hyper-stimulation cycle were used up, or a live birth had been achieved. The total cost related to treatment of each patient was recorded. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was based on the incremental cost per couple and the incremental live birth rate of the freeze-all strategy compared with the fresh ET strategy. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) were performed. RESULTS: The total treatment cost per patient was significantly higher for the freeze-all group than in the fresh group (USD 3419.93 ± 638.13 vs. $2920.59 ± 711.08 p < 0.001). However, the total treatment cost per live birth in the freeze-all group was US $5319.89, vs. US $6382.42 in the fresh group. CEAC show that the freeze-all policy was a cost-effective treatment at a threshold of US $2703.57 for one additional live birth. Considering the Willingness-to-pay threshold per live birth, the probability was 60.1% at the threshold of US $2896.5, with the freeze-all group being more cost-effective than the fresh-ET group; or 90.1% at the threshold of $4183.8. CONCLUSION: The freeze-all policy is a cost-effective treatment, as long as the additional cost of US $2703.57 per additional live birth is financially acceptable for the subjects.

Pregnancy outcome and cost-effectiveness comparisons of artificial cycle-prepared frozen embryo transfer with or without GnRH agonist pretreatment for polycystic ovary syndrome: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the live birth rate and cost effectiveness of artificial cycle-prepared frozen embryo transfer (AC-FET) with or without GnRH agonist (GnRH-a) pretreatment for women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). DESIGN: Open-label, randomised, controlled trial. SETTING: Reproductive centre of a university-affiliated hospital. SAMPLE: A total of 343 women with PCOS, aged 24-40 years, scheduled for AC-FET and receiving no more than two blastocysts. METHODS: The pretreatment group (n = 172) received GnRH-a pretreatment and the control group (n = 171) did not. Analysis followed the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was live birth rate. Secondary outcome measures included clinical pregnancy rate, implantation rate, early pregnancy loss rate and direct treatment costs per FET cycle. RESULTS: Among the 343 women randomised, 330 (96.2%) underwent embryo transfer and 328 (95.6%) completed the protocols. Live birth rate according to ITT did not differ between the pretreatment and control groups [85/172 (49.4%) versus 92/171 (53.8%), absolute rate difference -4.4%, 95% CI -10.8% to 2.0% (P = 0.45). Implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate and early pregnancy loss rate also did not differ between groups, but median direct cost per FET cycle was significantly higher in the pretreatment group (7799.2 versus 4438.9 RMB, OR = 1.9, 95%CI 1.2-3.4, P < 0.001). Median direct cost per live birth was also significantly higher in the pretreatment group (15663.1 versus 8189.9 RMB, odds ratio [OR] = 1.9, 95% CI 1.2-3.8, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment with GnRH-a does not improve pregnancy outcomes for women with PCOS receiving AC-FET, but significantly increases patient cost. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: For women with PCOS, artificial cycle-prepared FET with GnRH agonist pretreatment provides no pregnancy outcome benefit but incurs higher cost.

Application of embryo biopsy and sex determination via polymerase chain reaction in a commercial equine embryo transfer program in Argentina.

Embryo biopsy for fetal sexing has clinical application, but few reports are available of its use within an active embryo transfer program. We evaluated results on biopsy of 459 embryos over one breeding season. There were no significant differences in pregnancy rate between biopsied and non-biopsied embryos (72% vs 73%) or for biopsied embryos recovered at the centre (73%) compared with those shipped overnight (72%). However, the pregnancy rate decreased significantly in shipped embryos biopsied ≥20h after collection. Overall, 86% of biopsies provided a sex diagnosis. The likelihood of a positive genomic (g) DNA result was significantly higher for biopsies from large blastocysts (96%) than from smaller embryos (70-85%). In total, 38% of biopsies were positive for Y chromosome DNA (Y-DNA) and were diagnosed as male. Subsequently, 95% of Y-DNA-positive embryos were confirmed as male and 78% of Y-DNA-negative embryos were confirmed as female. The accuracy of prediction of female (Y-DNA negative) was significantly higher when the biopsy sample was probed for Y-DNA only compared with probing for both gDNA and Y-DNA. We estimate that by transferring only Y-DNA-negative embryos, 3% of potential female pregnancies may have been lost, and production of male pregnancies was reduced by 72%.

Decision analysis about the cost-effectiveness of different in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer protocol under considering governments, hospitals, and patient.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the benefits of in vitro fertilization (IVF) for patients and hospitals under different protocols and if IVF treatment should be incorporated into health care. PERSPECTIVE: The government should consider including IVF treatment in health insurance. Hospitals and patients could obtain the best benefit by following the hospital's recommended protocol. SETTING: This retrospective study was conducted from January 2014 to August 2017 at an academic hospital. METHODS: A total of 7440 patients used gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) protocol, 2619 patients used, gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists (GnRHant) protocol, and 1514 patients used GnRHa ultra-long protocol. Primary outcomes were live birth rate (LBR), cost-effectiveness, hospital revenue, and government investment. RESULTS: The cycle times for the GnRHa protocol and the GnRHa ultra-long protocol were significantly higher than the GnRHant protocol. Patients who were ≤29 years chose the GnRHant protocol. The cost of a successful cycle was 67,579.39 ±â€Š9,917.55 ¥ and LBR was 29.25%. Patients who were >30 years had the GnRHa protocol as the dominant strategy, as it was more effective at lower costs and higher LBR. When patients were >30 to ≤34 years, the cost of a successful cycle was 66,556.7 ±â€Š8,448.08 ¥ and the LBR was 31.05%. When patients were >35 years, the cost of a successful cycle was 83,297.92 ±â€Š10,918.05 ¥ and the LBR was 25.07%. The government reimbursement for a cycle ranged between 11,372.12 ±â€Š2,147.71 ¥ and 12,753.67 ±â€Š1,905.02 ¥. CONCLUSIONS: The government should consider including IVF treatment in health insurance. Hospitals recommend the GnRHant protocol for patients <29 years old and the GnRHa protocol for patients >30 years old, to obtain the best benefits. Patients could obtain the best benefit by using the protocol recommended by the hospital.

BOARD INVITED REVIEW: Post-transfer consequences of in vitro-produced embryos in cattle.

In vitro embryo production (IVP) in cattle has gained worldwide interest in recent years, but the efficiency of using IVP embryos for calf production is far from optimal. This review will examine the pregnancy retention rates of IVP embryos and explore causes for pregnancy failures. Based on work completed over the past 25 yr, only 27% of cattle receiving IVP embryos will produce a live calf. Approximately 60% of these pregnancies fail during the first 6 wk of gestation. When compared with embryos generated by superovulation, pregnancy rates are 10% to 40% lower for cattle carrying IVP embryos, exemplifying that IVP embryos are consistently less competent than in vivo-generated embryos. Several abnormalities have been observed in the morphology of IVP conceptuses. After transfer, IVP embryos are less likely to undergo conceptus elongation, have reduced embryonic disk diameter, and have compromised yolk sac development. Marginal binucleate cell development, cotyledon development, and placental vascularization have also been documented, and these abnormalities are associated with altered fetal growth trajectories. Additionally, in vitro culture conditions increase the risk of large offspring syndrome. Further work is needed to decipher how the embryo culture environment alters post-transfer embryo development and survival. The risk of these neonatal disorders has been reduced by the use of serum-free synthetic oviductal fluid media formations and culture in low oxygen tension. However, alterations are still evident in IVP oocyte and embryo transcript abundances, timing of embryonic cleavage events and blastulation, incidence of aneuploidy, and embryonic methylation status. The inclusion of oviductal and uterine-derived embryokines in culture media is being examined as one way to improve the competency of IVP embryos. To conclude, the evidence presented herein clearly shows that bovine IVP systems still must be refined to make it an economical technology in cattle production systems. However, the current shortcomings do not negate its current value for certain embryo production needs and for investigating early embryonic development in cattle.

Cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the economical benefit of preimplantation genetic testing of aneuploidies (PGT-A) when applied in an extended culture and stringent elective single ET framework. DESIGN: Theoretical cost-effectiveness study. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENTS/ANIMAL(S): None. INTERVENTION(S): Comparison of the cost-effectiveness between two IVF treatment strategies: serial transfer of all available blastocysts without genetic testing (first fresh transfer and subsequent frozen-thawed transfer); and systematic use of genetic testing (trophectoderm biopsy, freeze-all, and frozen-thawed transfers of euploid blastocysts). The costs considered for this analysis are based on regional public health system provider. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Costs per live birth. RESULT(S): Cost-effectiveness profile of PGT-A improves with female age and number of available blastocysts. Sensitivity analyses varying the costs of ET, the costs of genetic analyses, the magnitude of the detrimental impact of PGT-A on live birth rate, and the crude live birth rates change to some extent the thresholds for effectiveness but generally confirm the notion that PGT-A can be economically advantageous in some specific subgroups. CONCLUSION(S): PGT-A can be cost-effective in specific clinical settings and population groups. Economic considerations deserve attention in the debate regarding the clinical utility of PGT-A.

[Economic studies of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer].

In vitro fertilization and embryo transplantation (IVF-ET) technology is one of the main treatments for infertility. But IVF-ET is expensive and has not be covered by health insurance in most developing countries. Therefore, how to obtain the maximum success rate with the minimum cost is a common concern of clinicians and patients. At present, the economic studies on IVF-ET mainly focus on different ovulation stimulating drugs, different ovulation stimulating protocols, different transplantation methods and the number of transplants. But the process of IVF-ET is complex, the relevant methods of economic study are diverse, and there are no unified standard for outcome indicators, so there is no unified conclusion for more economical and effective protocol by now. Therefore, to analyze the economic studies of IVF-ET, and to explore appropriate evaluation methods and cost-effective protocols will be helpful for reasonable allocation of medical resources and guidance of clinical selection. It would provide policy reference to include the costs of IVF-ET treatment in health insurance in the future.

Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy is cost-effective, shortens treatment time, and reduces the risk of failed embryo transfer and clinical miscarriage.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) is cost-effective for patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). DESIGN: Decision analytic model comparing costs and clinical outcomes of two strategies: IVF with and without PGT-A. SETTING: Genetics laboratory. PATIENTS: Women ≤ 42 years of age undergoing IVF. INTERVENTION(S): Decision analytic model applied to the above patient population utilizing a combination of actual clinical data and assumptions from the literature regarding the outcomes of IVF with and without PGT-A. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The primary outcome was cumulative IVF-related costs to achieve a live birth or exhaust the embryo cohort from a single oocyte retrieval. The secondary outcomes were time from retrieval to the embryo transfer resulting in live birth or completion of treatment, cumulative live birth rate, failed embryo transfers, and clinical losses. RESULTS: 8,998 patients from 74 IVF centers were included. For patients with greater than one embryo, the cost differential favored the use of PGT-A, ranging from $931-2411 and depending upon number of embryos screened. As expected, the cumulative live birth rate was equivalent for both groups once all embryos were exhausted. However, PGT-A reduced time in treatment by up to four months. In addition, patients undergoing PGT-A experienced fewer failed embryo transfers and clinical miscarriages. CONCLUSION: For patients with > 1 embryo, IVF with PGT-A reduces healthcare costs, shortens treatment time, and reduces the risk of failed embryo transfer and clinical miscarriage when compared to IVF alone.

Cost-effectiveness modelling of IVF in couples with unexplained infertility.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does delaying IVF for 6 months in couples with unexplained infertility, compared with immediate IVF treatment, decrease the cost of IVF without compromising success rates? DESIGN: Decision modelling was used to evaluate the cost and outcomes of immediate IVF versus delayed IVF for a cohort of women aged <40 years suffering unexplained infertility. Australian data and costs were used in the analysis. For different age groups, three scenarios were tested where 10%, 50% and 90% of couples with unexplained infertility delayed IVF for 6 months if they had a good prognosis for natural conception. The study included a total of 8781 couples aged <40 years, diagnosed with unexplained infertility and who had IVF in 2013. RESULTS: The studied couples underwent 27,648 fresh and frozen embryo transfers, for an estimated total cost of $141 million. Potential out-of-pocket cost savings if 90% of couples delayed IVF ranged from $4.7 to $12.2 million, with Medicare cost savings of up to $15.1 million. The impact on the total pregnancy and live birth rates after 18 months was minimal. CONCLUSIONS: In couples with unexplained infertility and a good prognosis for natural conception, delaying IVF for 6 months could substantially decrease out-of-pocket costs without compromising pregnancy and live birth rates over an 18-month period.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of freeze-only or fresh embryo transfer in IVF of non-PCOS women.

STUDY QUESTION: Is a freeze-only strategy more cost-effective from a patient perspective than fresh embryo transfer (ET) after one completed In Vitro Fertilization/ Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (IVF/ICSI) cycle in women without polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS)? SUMMARY ANSWER: There is a low probability of the freeze-only strategy being cost-effective over the fresh ET strategy for non-PCOS women undergoing IVF/ICSI. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Conventionally, IVF embryos are transferred in the same cycle in which oocytes are collected, while any remaining embryos are frozen and stored. We recently evaluated the effectiveness of a freeze-only strategy compared with a fresh ET strategy in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). There was no difference in live birth rate between the two strategies. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed alongside the RCT to compare a freeze-only strategy with a fresh ET strategy in non-PCOS women undergoing IVF/ICSI. The effectiveness measure for the CEA was the live birth rate. Data on the IVF procedure, pregnancy outcomes and complications were collected from chart review; additional information was obtained using patient questionnaires, by telephone. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: For all patients, we measured the direct medical costs relating to treatment (cryopreservation, pregnancy follow-up, delivery), direct non-medical costs (travel, accommodation) and indirect costs (income lost). The direct cost data were calculated from resources obtained from patient records and prices were applied based on a micro-costing approach. Indirect costs were calculated based on responses to the questionnaire. Patients were followed until all embryos obtained from a single controlled ovarian hyperstimulation cycle were used or a live birth was achieved. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was based on the incremental cost per couple and the incremental live birth rate of the freeze-only strategy compared with the fresh ET strategy. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) were also performed. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Between June 2015 and April 2016, 782 couples were randomized to a freeze-only (n = 391) or a fresh ET strategy (n = 391). Baseline characteristics including mean age, Body Mass Index (BMI), anti-Mullerian hormone, total dose of Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH), number of oocytes obtained, good quality Day 3 embryos, fertility outcomes and treatment complications were comparable between the two groups. The live birth rate (48.6% vs. 47.3%, respectively; risk ratio, 1.03; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 0.89, 1.19; P = 0.78) and the average cost per couple (3906 vs. 3512 EUR, respectively; absolute difference 393.6, 95% CI, -76.2, 863.5; P = 0.1) were similar in the freeze-only group versus fresh ET. Corresponding costs per live birth were 8037 EUR versus 7425 EUR in the freeze-only versus fresh ET group, respectively. The incremental cost for the freeze-only strategy compared with fresh ET was 30 997 EUR per 1% additional live birth rate. The direct non-medical costs and indirect costs of infertility treatment strategies represented ~45-52% of the total cost. PSA shows that the 95% CI of ICERs was -263 901 to 286 681 EUR. Out of 1000 simulations, 44% resulted in negative ICERs, including 13.0% of simulations in which the freeze-only strategy was dominant (more effective and less costly than fresh ET), and 31% of simulations in which the fresh embryo strategy was dominant. In the other 560 simulations with positive ICERs, the 95% CI of ICERs ranged from 2155 to 471 578 EUR. The CEAC shows that at a willingness to pay threshold of 300 000 EUR, the probability of the freeze-only strategy being cost-effective over the fresh ET strategy would be 58%. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Data were collected from a single private IVF center study in Vietnam where there is no public or insurance funding of IVF. Unit costs obtained might not be representative of other settings. Data obtained from secondary sources (medical records, financial and activity reports) could lack authenticity, and recall bias may have influenced questionnaire responses on which direct costs were based. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: In non-PCOS women undergoing IVF/ICSI, the results suggested that the freeze-only strategy was not cost-effective compared with fresh ET from a patient perspective. These findings indicate that other factors could be more important in deciding whether to use a freeze-only versus fresh ET strategy in this patient group. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded by My Duc Hospital; no external funding was received. Ben Willem J. Mol is supported by an NHMRC Practioner Fellowship (GNT 1082548) and reports consultancy for Merck, ObsEva and Guerbet. Robert J. Norman has shares in an IVF company and has received support from Merck and Ferring. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.

The cost of a euploid embryo identified from preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A): a counseling tool.

PURPOSE: To determine the expected out-of-pocket costs of IVF with preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) to attain a 50%, 75%, or 90% likelihood of a euploid blastocyst based on individual age and AMH, and develop a personalized counseling tool. METHODS: A cost analysis was performed and a counseling tool was developed using retrospective data from IVF cycles intended for PGT or blastocyst freeze-all between January 1, 2014 and August 31, 2017 (n = 330) and aggregate statistics on euploidy rates of > 149,000 embryos from CooperGenomics. Poisson regression was used to determine the number of biopsiable blastocysts obtained per cycle, based on age and AMH. The expected costs of attaining a 50%, 75%, and 90% likelihood of a euploid blastocyst were determined via 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations for each age and AMH combination, incorporating age-based euploidy rates and IVF/PGT-A cost assumptions. RESULTS: The cost to attain a 50% likelihood of a euploid blastocyst ranges from approximately $15,000 U.S. dollars (USD) for younger women with higher AMH values (≥ 2 ng/mL) to > $150,000 for the oldest women (44 years) with the lowest AMH values (< 0.1 ng/mL) in this cohort. The cost to attain a 75% versus 90% likelihood of a euploid blastocyst is similar (~ $16,000) for younger women with higher AMH values, but varies for the oldest women with low AMH values (~ $280,000 and > $450,000, respectively). A typical patient (36-37 years, AMH 2.5 ng/mL) should expect to spend ~ $30,000 for a 90% likelihood of attaining a euploid embryo. CONCLUSIONS: This tool can serve as a counseling adjunct by providing individualized cost information for patients regarding PGT-A.

Economic and genetic performance of various combinations of in vitro-produced embryo transfers and artificial insemination in a dairy herd.

The objective of this study was to find the optimal proportions of pregnancies from an in vitro-produced embryo transfer (IVP-ET) system and artificial insemination (AI) so that profitability is maximized over a range of prices for embryos and surplus dairy heifer calves. An existing stochastic, dynamic dairy model with genetic merits of 12 traits was adapted for scenarios where 0 to 100% of the eligible females in the herd were impregnated, in increments of 10%, using IVP-ET (ET0 to ET100, 11 scenarios). Oocytes were collected from the top donors selected for the trait lifetime net merit (NM$) and fertilized with sexed semen to produce IVP embryos. Due to their greater conception rates, first ranked were eligible heifer recipients based on lowest number of unsuccessful inseminations or embryo transfers, and then on age. Next, eligible cow recipients were ranked based on the greatest average estimated breeding values (EBV) of the traits cow conception rate and daughter pregnancy rate. Animals that were not recipients of IVP embryos received conventional semen through AI, except that the top 50% of heifers ranked for EBV of NM$ were inseminated with sexed semen for the first 2 AI. The economically optimal proportions of IVP-ET were determined using sensitivity analysis performed for 24 price sets involving 6 different selling prices of surplus dairy heifer calves at approximately 105 d of age and 4 different prices of IVP embryos. The model was run for 15 yr after the start of the IVP-ET program for each scenario. The mean ± standard error of true breeding values of NM$ of all cows in the herd in yr 15 was greater by $603 ± 2 per cow per year for ET100 when compared with ET0. The optimal proportion of IVP-ET ranged from ET100 (for surplus dairy heifer calves sold for ≥$300 along with an additional premium based on their EBV of NM$ and a ≤$100 embryo price) to as low as ET0 (surplus dairy heifer calves sold at $300 with a $200 embryo price). For the default assumptions, the profit/cow in yr 15 was greater by $337, $215, $116, and $69 compared with ET0 when embryo prices were $50, $100, $150, and $200. The optimal use of IVP-ET was 100, 100, 62, and 36% of all breedings for these embryo prices, respectively. At the input price of $165 for an IVP embryo, the difference in the net present value of yr 15 profit between ET40 (optimal scenario) and ET0 was $33 per cow. In conclusion, some use of IVP-ET was profitable for a wide range of IVP-ET prices and values of surplus dairy heifer calves.

Cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic screening for women older than 37 undergoing in vitro fertilization.

PURPOSE: Adding preimplantation genetic screening to in vitro fertilization has been shown to increase live birth rate in women older than 37. However, preimplantation genetic screening is an expensive procedure. Information on the cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic screening can help inform clinical decision making. METHODS: We constructed a decision analytic model for a hypothetical fresh, autologous in vitro fertilization cycle (with versus without preimplantation genetic screening) for women older than age 37 who had a successful oocyte retrieval and development of at least one blastocyst. The model incorporated probability and cost estimates of relevant clinical events based on data from published literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the impact of changes in model input parameters. RESULTS: In base-case analysis, IVF-PGS offered a 4.2 percentage point increase in live birth rate for an additional cost of $4509, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $105,489 per additional live birth. This ICER was below the expected cost of $145,063 for achieving one live birth with IVF (assuming an average LBR of 13.4% and $19,415 per cycle for this patient population). Sensitivity analysis suggested that ICER improved substantially with decreases in PGS cost and increases in PGS effectiveness. Monte Carlo simulation showed PGS to be cost-effective in 93.9% of iterations at an acceptability cutoff of $145,063. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the expected cost of achieving one live birth with IVF, PGS is a cost-effective strategy for women older than 37 undergoing IVF. Additional research on patients' willingness-to-pay per live birth would further inform our understanding regarding the cost-effectiveness of PGS.

A 50% reduction in multiple live birth rate is associated with a 13% cost saving: a real-life retrospective cost analysis.

Belgian legislation limiting the number of embryos for transfer has been shown to result in a 50% reduction of the multiple live birth rate (MLBR) per cycle without having a negative impact on the cumulative delivery rate per patient within six cycles or 36 months. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the cost saving associated with a 50% reduction in MLBR. A retrospective cost analysis was performed of 213 couples, who became pregnant and had a live birth after one or more assisted reproductive technology treatment cycles, and their 254 children. The mean cost of a singleton (n = 172) and multiple (n = 41) birth was calculated based on individual hospital invoices. The cost analysis showed a significantly higher total cost (assisted reproductive technology treatment, pregnancy follow-up, delivery, child cost until the age of 2 years) for multiple births (both children: mean €43,397) than for singleton births (mean: €17,866) (Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney P < 0.0001). A 50% reduction in MLBR resulted in a significant cost reduction related to hospital care of 13%.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of lifestyle intervention in obese infertile women.

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.

Cost-effectiveness of single versus double embryo transfer in IVF in relation to female age.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of single embryo transfer followed by an additional frozen-thawed single embryo transfer, if more embryos are available, as compared to double embryo transfer in relation to female age. STUDY DESIGN: We used a decision tree model to evaluate the costs from a healthcare provider perspective and the pregnancy rates of two embryo transfer policies: one fresh single embryo transfer followed by an additional frozen-thawed single embryo transfer, if more embryos are available (strategy I), and double embryo transfer (strategy II). The analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. Sensitivity analyses were carried out to evaluate the robustness of our model and to identify which model parameters had the strongest impact on the results. RESULTS: SET followed by an additional frozen-thawed single embryo transfer if available was dominant, less costly and more effective, over DET in women under 32 years. In women aged 32 or older DET was more effective than SET followed by an additional frozen-thawed single embryo transfer if available but also more costly. CONCLUSION: SET followed by an additional frozen-thawed single embryo transfer should be the preferred strategy in women under 32 undergoing IVF. The choice for SET followed by an additional frozen-thawed single embryo transfer or DET in women aged 32 or older depends on individual patient preferences and on how much society is willing to pay for an extra child. There is a strong need for a randomized clinical trial comparing the cost and effects of SET followed by an additional frozen-thawed single embryo transfer and DET in the latter category of women.

Comparison between an exclusive in vitro-produced embryo transfer system and artificial insemination for genetic, technical, and financial herd performance.

The objective of this study was to implement an in vitro-produced embryo transfer (IVP-ET) system in an existing stochastic dynamic dairy simulation model with multitrait genetics to evaluate the genetic, technical, and financial performance of a dairy herd implementing an exclusive IVP-ET or artificial insemination (AI) system. In the AI system, sexed semen was used on the genetically best heifers only. In the IVP-ET system, all of the animals in the herd were impregnated with female sexed embryos created through in vitro fertilization of oocytes collected from animals of superior genetics for different traits of interest. Each donor was assumed to yield on average 4.25 transferable embryos per collection. The remaining animals in the herd were used as recipients and received either a fresh embryo or a frozen embryo when fresh embryos were not available. Selection of donors was random or based on the greatest estimated breeding value (EBV) of lifetime net merit (NM$), milk yield, or daughter pregnancy rate. For both the IVP-ET and AI systems, culling of surplus heifer calves not needed to replace culled cows was based on the lowest EBV for the same traits. A herd of 1,000 milking cows was simulated 15 yr over time after the start of the IVP-ET system. The default cost to produce and transfer 1 embryo was set at $165. Prices of fresh embryos at which an exclusive IVP-ET system financially breaks even with the comparable AI system in yr 15 and for an investment period of 15 yr were also estimated. More surplus heifer calves were sold from the IVP-ET systems than from the comparable AI systems. The surplus calves from the IVP-ET systems were also genetically superior to the surplus calves from the comparable AI systems, which might be reflected in their market value as a premium price. The most profitable scenario among the 4 IVP-ET scenarios in yr 15 was the one in which NM$ was maximized in the herd. This scenario had an additional profit of $8/cow compared with a similar AI scenario that maximized NM$, provided that surplus heifer calves could be sold at a premium price based on the superiority of the EBV of NM$. For the IVP-ET system to be at least as profitable as the comparable AI system during a 15-yr investment period, the surplus calves from the IVP-ET system needed to be sold at the premium prices. The break-even price of fresh embryos was estimated to be $84 for the exclusive IVP-ET system. This resulted in the same profit as the AI system, which maximized NM$ for a 15-yr investment period and in which heifer calves were sold at a premium price.