A comprehensive review of the new FIGO classification of ovulatory disorders.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) system for the classification of disorders of ovulation was produced 50 years ago and, by international consensus, has been updated by the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO). OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: This review outlines in detail each component of the FIGO HyPO-P (hypothalamic, pituitary, ovarian, PCOS) classification with a concise description of each cause, and thereby provides a systematic method for diagnosis and management. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the published articles in the PubMed database in the English-language literature until October 2022, containing the keywords ovulatory disorders; ovulatory dysfunction; anovulation, and each subheading in the FIGO HyPO-P classification. We did not include abstracts or conference proceedings because the data are usually difficult to assess. OUTCOMES: We present the most comprehensive review of all disorders of ovulation, published systematically according to the logical FIGO classification. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: Improving the diagnosis of an individual's ovulatory dysfunction will significantly impact clinical practice by enabling healthcare practitioners to make a precise diagnosis and plan appropriate management.

Multi-stakeholder opinion statement on the care of individuals born with differences of sex development: common ground and opportunities for improvement.

BACKGROUND: In the last 15 years, the care provided for individuals born with differences of sex development (DSD) has evolved, with a strong emphasis on interdisciplinary approaches. However, these developments have not convinced some stakeholders to embrace the current model of care. This care model has also paid insufficient attention to socio-cultural differences and global inequalities. SUMMARY: This article is an opinion statement, resulting from in-depth discussions and reflection among clinicians, patients, and family support organizations based in the US and Europe, where we seek areas of common ground and try to identify opportunities to further develop resources. The product of these conversations is summarized in 10 panels. The corresponding sections provide additional discussion on some of the panel items. KEY MESSAGES: Participants identified areas of agreement and gained a deeper understanding of the reasons behind disagreements on certain matters and identified the necessary steps to foster future consensus. We offer preliminary recommendations for guiding clinical management and resource allocation. By promoting a broader consensus, we aim to enhance the quality of care and well-being for individuals of all ages who have a DSD.

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.

"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.

Association between body mass index, weight loss and the chance of pregnancy in women with polycystic ovary syndrome and overweight or obesity: a retrospective cohort study in the UK.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the associations between baseline BMI (Study 1) and change in body weight (Study 2) with the likelihood of pregnancy in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). SUMMARY ANSWER: In women with PCOS, higher baseline BMI was associated with a lower chance of pregnancy; however, weight loss was associated with an increased chance of pregnancy versus maintaining a stable weight or gaining weight. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Two studies in large cohorts of Danish women with the intention to become pregnant showed a decline in fecundability ratios with higher BMI. Furthermore, a meta-analysis found that overweight/obesity significantly worsened metabolic and reproductive outcomes in women with PCOS. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Data were extracted from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD database. Patients included women aged 18-45 years with BMI ≥18.5 (Study 1) or ≥25 kg/m2 (Study 2) at time of PCOS diagnosis (index date). The primary outcome was the time to first pregnancy recorded during 36-months' follow-up, analysed with Cox proportional hazard models and presented as hazard ratios (HRs). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Study 1 included 9955 women with PCOS. Study 2 included 7593 women with PCOS and median BMI of 34.0 kg/m2. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Higher BMI was associated with a lower chance of pregnancy in the 3 years following diagnosis. It was estimated that 41% of women with normal weight (18.5-24.9 kg/m2) would become pregnant compared to 17% of women with obesity class III (BMI ≥40.0 kg/m2) during follow-up. Furthermore, the chance of pregnancy for women with obesity class III was estimated to be 63% lower than for women with normal weight, with the same age and glycaemic status (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.31-0.44; P < 0.0001). A significant inverse association was found between BMI change and chance of pregnancy: 10% weight loss was estimated to increase the chance of pregnancy by 68% for women with baseline BMI of 40 kg/m2 (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.49-1.90). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Multiple factors influence the chance of pregnancy (the ability and willingness to become pregnant), which was addressed by exclusion criteria employed. The real-world nature of the study means that use of non-prescription contraceptives was not available. Bias may have been introduced by the fact that only around 40% of women with PCOS in the CPRD GOLD database had their BMI recorded during the year prior to PCOS diagnosis. BMI categories used in the analyses may not be applicable to women of all ethnicities. The study population was only representative of women in the UK and results may not be generalizable to other regions. PCOS diagnoses were based on codes entered into the system by primary care providers, and no information was available regarding the criteria used for diagnosis, although symptoms used to diagnose PCOS have not changed over time. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our observations provide further evidence of the benefits of weight loss in women with overweight/obesity and PCOS who are seeking to become pregnant. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Novo Nordisk A/S. A.H.B. declares fees for consultancy from Novo Nordisk. P.N.L. and C.L.H. are employees of Novo Nordisk. V.S. and A.V. are employees of, and hold shares in, Novo Nordisk. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

The FIGO ovulatory disorders classification system.

Ovulatory disorders are common causes of amenorrhea, abnormal uterine bleeding, and infertility, and are frequent manifestations of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). There are many potential causes and contributors to ovulatory dysfunction that challenge clinicians, trainees, educators, and those who perform basic, translational, clinical, and epidemiological research. Similarly, therapeutic approaches to ovulatory dysfunction potentially involve a spectrum of lifestyle, psychological, medical, and procedural interventions. Collaborative research, effective education, and consistent clinical care remain challenged by the absence of a consensus comprehensive system for classification of these disorders. The existing and complex system, attributed to WHO, was developed more than three decades ago and did not consider more than 30 years of research into these disorders in addition to technical advances in imaging and endocrinology. This manuscript describes the development of a new classification of ovulatory disorders performed under the aegis of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) and conducted using a rigorously applied Delphi process. The stakeholder organizations and individuals who participated in this process comprised specialty journals, experts at large, national, specialty obstetrical and gynecological societies, and informed lay representatives. After two face-to-face meetings and five Delphi rounds, the result is a three-level multi-tiered system. The system is applied after a preliminary assessment identifies the presence of an ovulatory disorder. The primary level of the system is based on an anatomic model (Hypothalamus, Pituitary, Ovary) that is completed with a separate category for PCOS. This core component of the system is easily remembered using the acronym HyPO-P. Each anatomic category is stratified in the second layer of the system to provide granularity for investigators, clinicians, and trainees using the "GAIN-FIT-PIE" mnemonic (Genetic, Autoimmune, Iatrogenic, Neoplasm; Functional, Infectious and Inflammatory, Trauma and Vascular; Physiological, Idiopathic, Endocrine). The tertiary level allows for specific diagnostic entities. It is anticipated that, if widely adopted, this system will facilitate education, clinical care, and the design and interpretation of research in a fashion that better informs progress in this field. Integral to the deployment of this system is a periodic process of reevaluation and appropriate revision, reflecting an improved understanding of this collection of disorders.

The FIGO Ovulatory Disorders Classification System†.

Ovulatory disorders are common causes of amenorrhea, abnormal uterine bleeding and infertility and are frequent manifestations of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). There are many potential causes and contributors to ovulatory dysfunction that challenge clinicians, trainees, educators, and those who perform basic, translational, clinical and epidemiological research. Similarly, therapeutic approaches to ovulatory dysfunction potentially involve a spectrum of lifestyle, psychological, medical and procedural interventions. Collaborative research, effective education and consistent clinical care remain challenged by the absence of a consensus comprehensive system for classification of these disorders. The existing and complex system, attributed to the World Health Organization (WHO), was developed more than three decades ago and did not consider more than 30 years of research into these disorders in addition to technical advances in imaging and endocrinology. This article describes the development of a new classification of ovulatory disorders performed under the aegis of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) and conducted using a rigorously applied Delphi process. The stakeholder organizations and individuals who participated in this process comprised specialty journals, experts at large, national, specialty obstetrical and gynecological societies, and informed lay representatives. After two face-to-face meetings and five Delphi rounds, the result is a three-level multi-tiered system. The system is applied after a preliminary assessment identifies the presence of an ovulatory disorder. The primary level of the system is based on an anatomic model (Hypothalamus, Pituitary, Ovary) that is completed with a separate category for PCOS. This core component of the system is easily remembered using the acronym HyPO-P. Each anatomic category is stratified in the second layer of the system to provide granularity for investigators, clinicians and trainees using the 'GAIN-FIT-PIE' mnemonic (Genetic, Autoimmune, Iatrogenic, Neoplasm; Functional, Infectious and Inflammatory, Trauma and Vascular; Physiological, Idiopathic, Endocrine). The tertiary level allows for specific diagnostic entities. It is anticipated that, if widely adopted, this system will facilitate education, clinical care and the design and interpretation of research in a fashion that better informs progress in this field. Integral to the deployment of this system is a periodic process of reevaluation and appropriate revision, reflecting an improved understanding of this collection of disorders.

The FIGO Ovulatory Disorders Classification System.

Ovulatory disorders are common causes of amenorrhea, abnormal uterine bleeding, and infertility, and are frequent manifestations of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). There are many potential causes and contributors to ovulatory dysfunction that challenge clinicians, trainees, educators, and those who perform basic, translational, clinical, and epidemiological research. Similarly, therapeutic approaches to ovulatory dysfunction potentially involve a spectrum of lifestyle, psychological, medical, and procedural interventions. Collaborative research, effective education, and consistent clinical care remain challenged by the absence of a consensus comprehensive system for classification of these disorders. The existing and complex system, attributed to WHO, was developed more than three decades ago and did not consider more than 30 years of research into these disorders in addition to technical advances in imaging and endocrinology. This manuscript describes the development of a new classification of ovulatory disorders performed under the aegis of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) and conducted using a rigorously applied Delphi process. The stakeholder organizations and individuals who participated in this process comprised specialty journals, experts at large, national, specialty obstetrical and gynecological societies, and informed lay representatives. After two face-to-face meetings and five Delphi rounds, the result is a three-level multi-tiered system. The system is applied after a preliminary assessment identifies the presence of an ovulatory disorder. The primary level of the system is based on an anatomic model (Hypothalamus, Pituitary, Ovary) that is completed with a separate category for PCOS. This core component of the system is easily remembered using the acronym HyPO-P. Each anatomic category is stratified in the second layer of the system to provide granularity for investigators, clinicians, and trainees using the "GAIN-FIT-PIE" mnemonic (Genetic, Autoimmune, Iatrogenic, Neoplasm; Functional, Infectious and Inflammatory, Trauma and vascular; Physiological, Idiopathic, Endocrine). The tertiary level allows for specific diagnostic entities. It is anticipated that, if widely adopted, this system will facilitate education, clinical care, and the design and interpretation of research in a fashion that better informs progress in this field. Integral to the deployment of this system is a periodic process of reevaluation and appropriate revision, reflecting an improved understanding of this collection of disorders.

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.

Metformin for ovulation induction (excluding gonadotrophins) in women with polycystic ovary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is characterised by infrequent or absent ovulation, and high levels of androgens and insulin (hyperinsulinaemia). Hyperinsulinaemia occurs secondary to insulin resistance and is associated with an increased biochemical risk profile for cardiovascular disease and an increased prevalence of diabetes mellitus. Insulin-sensitising agents such as metformin may be effective in treating PCOS-related anovulation. This is an update of Morley 2017 and only includes studies on metformin. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of metformin in combination with or in comparison to clomiphene citrate (CC), letrozole and laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) in improving reproductive outcomes and associated gastrointestinal side effects for women with PCOS undergoing ovulation induction. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases from inception to December 2018: Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL. We searched registers of ongoing trials and reference lists from relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials of metformin compared with placebo, no treatment, or in combination with or compared with CC, letrozole and LOD for women with PCOS subfertility. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility and bias. Primary outcomes were live birth rate and gastrointestinal adverse effects. Secondary outcomes included other pregnancy outcomes and ovulation. We combined data to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed statistical heterogeneity using the I2 statistic and reported quality of the evidence for primary outcomes and reproductive outcomes using GRADE methodology. MAIN RESULTS: We included 41 studies (4552 women). Evidence quality ranged from very low to moderate based on GRADE assessment. Limitations were risk of bias (poor reporting of methodology and incomplete outcome data), imprecision and inconsistency. Metformin versus placebo or no treatment The evidence suggests that metformin may improve live birth rates compared with placebo (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.51; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 435 women; low-quality evidence). For a live birth rate of 19% following placebo, the live birth rate following metformin would be between 19% and 37%. The metformin group probably experiences more gastrointestinal side effects (OR 4.00, 95% CI 2.63 to 6.09; I2 = 39%; 7 studies, 713 women; moderate-quality evidence). With placebo, the risk of gastrointestinal side effects is 10% whereas with metformin this risk is between 22% and 40%. There are probably higher rates of clinical pregnancy (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.47 to 2.65; I2 = 30%; 11 studies, 1213 women; moderate-quality evidence). There may be higher rates of ovulation with metformin (OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.85 to 3.75; I2 = 61%; 13 studies, 684 women; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain about the effect on miscarriage rates (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.35; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 748 women; low-quality evidence). Metformin plus CC versus CC alone We are uncertain if metformin plus CC improves live birth rates compared to CC alone (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.65; I2 = 28%; 10 studies, 1219 women; low-quality evidence), but gastrointestinal side effects are probably more common with combined therapy (OR 4.26, 95% CI 2.83 to 6.40; I2 = 8%; 6 studies, 852 women; moderate quality evidence). The live birth rate with CC alone is 24%, which may change to between 23% to 34% with combined therapy. With CC alone, the risk of gastrointestinal side effects is 9%, which increases to between 21% to 37% with combined therapy. The combined therapy group probably has higher rates of clinical pregnancy (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.99; I2 = 31%; 19 studies, 1790 women; moderate-quality evidence). The combined group may have higher rates of ovulation (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.03; I2 = 63%;21 studies, 1568 women; low-quality evidence). There was no clear evidence of an effect on miscarriage (OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.00; I2 = 0%; 10 studies, 1206 women; low-quality evidence). Metformin versus CC When all studies were combined, findings for live birth were inconclusive and inconsistent (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.01; I2 = 86%; 5 studies, 741 women; very low-quality evidence). In subgroup analysis by obesity status, obese women had a lower birth rate in the metformin group (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.52; 2 studies, 500 women), while the non-obese group showed a possible benefit from metformin, with high heterogeneity (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.94; I2 = 78%, 3 studies, 241 women; very low-quality evidence). However, due to the very low quality of the evidence we cannot draw any conclusions. Among obese women taking metformin there may be lower rates of clinical pregnancy (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.55; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 500 women; low-quality evidence) and ovulation (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.43; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 500 women; low-quality evidence) while among non-obese women, the metformin group may have more pregnancies (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.29; I2 = 26%; 6 studies, 530 women; low-quality evidence) and no clear difference in ovulation rates (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.25; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 352 women; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether there is a difference in miscarriage rates between the groups (overall: OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.66; I2 = 36%; 6 studies, 781 women; low-quality evidence) and no studies reported gastrointestinal side effects. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our updated review suggests that metformin may be beneficial over placebo for live birth however, more women probably experience gastrointestinal side effects. We are uncertain if metformin plus CC improves live birth rates compared to CC alone, but gastrointestinal side effects are probably increased with combined therapy. When metformin was compared with CC, data for live birth were inconclusive, and the findings were limited by lack of evidence. Results differed by body mass index (BMI), emphasising the importance of stratifying results by BMI. No studies reported gastrointestinal side effects in this comparison. Due to the low quality of the evidence, we are uncertain of the effect of metformin on miscarriage in all three comparisons.

How Will the New Global Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Guideline Change Our Clinical Practice?

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a far reaching condition that has a number of reproductive and general health implications. There has been much debate in recent years about the diagnosis and definition of PCOS and a plethora of studies assessing its management, ranging from the psychosocial aspects of the conditions, to the treatment of hyperandrogenism, anovulatory infertility, and the long-term metabolic and reproductive consequences. There has been a need to synthesise the evidence and produce an international consensus guideline for all aspects of the management of PCOS and this was achieved with the publication of the International evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome. The guideline is broadly categorised into 5 sections, which focus on diagnosis, holistic management and safe, effective fertility treatment. This article summarises the key points of the guidance and brings the management of PCOS up to date for the 21st century.

Insulin-sensitising drugs (metformin, rosiglitazone, pioglitazone, D-chiro-inositol) for women with polycystic ovary syndrome, oligo amenorrhoea and subfertility.

BACKGROUND: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is characterised by infrequent or absent ovulation, and high levels of androgens and insulin (hyperinsulinaemia). Hyperinsulinaemia occurs secondary to insulin resistance and is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus. Insulin-sensitising agents such as metformin may be effective in treating PCOS-related anovulation. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of insulin-sensitising drugs in improving reproductive and metabolic outcomes for women with PCOS undergoing ovulation induction. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases from inception to January 2017: Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL. We searched registers of ongoing trials and reference lists from relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials of insulin-sensitising drugs compared with placebo, no treatment, or an ovulation-induction agent for women with oligo and anovulatory PCOS. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility and bias. Primary outcomes were live birth rate and gastrointestinal adverse effects. Secondary outcomes included other pregnancy outcomes, menstrual frequency and metabolic effects. We combined data to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed statistical heterogeneity using the I2 statistic and reported quality of the evidence for primary outcomes using GRADE methodology. MAIN RESULTS: We assessed the interventions metformin, clomiphene citrate, metformin plus clomiphene citrate, D-chiro-inositol, rosiglitazone and pioglitazone. We compared these with each other, placebo or no treatment. We included 48 studies (4451 women), 42 of which investigated metformin (4024 women). Evidence quality ranged from very low to moderate. Limitations were risk of bias (poor reporting of methodology and incomplete outcome data), imprecision and inconsistency. Metformin versus placebo or no treatmentThe evidence suggests that metformin may improve live birth rates compared with placebo (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.51, 4 studies, 435 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence). The metformin group experienced more gastrointestinal side effects (OR 4.76, 95% CI 3.06 to 7.41, 7 studies, 670 women, I2 = 61%, moderate-quality evidence) but had higher rates of clinical pregnancy (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.42 to 2.64, 9 studies, 1027 women, I2 = 43%, moderate-quality evidence), ovulation (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.81 to 3.59, 14 studies, 701 women, I2 = 58%, moderate-quality evidence) and menstrual frequency (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.14 to 2.61, 7 studies, 427 women, I2 = 54%, low-quality evidence). There was no clear evidence of a difference in miscarriage rates (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.35, 4 studies, 748 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence). Metformin plus clomiphene citrate versus clomiphene citrate alone There was no conclusive evidence of a difference between the groups in live birth rates (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.59, 9 studies, 1079 women, I2 = 20%, low-quality evidence), but gastrointestinal side effects were more common with combined therapy (OR 3.97, 95% CI 2.59 to 6.08, 3 studies, 591 women, I2 = 47%, moderate-quality evidence). However, the combined therapy group had higher rates of clinical pregnancy (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.99, 16 studies, 1529 women, I2 = 33%, moderate-quality evidence) and ovulation (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.92, 21 studies, 1624 women, I2 = 64%, moderate-quality evidence). There was a statistically significant difference in miscarriage rate per woman, with higher rates in the combined therapy group (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.46, 9 studies, 1096 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence) but this is of uncertain clinical significance due to low-quality evidence, and no clear difference between groups when we analysed miscarriage per pregnancy (OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.12, 8 studies; 400 pregnancies, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence). Metformin versus clomiphene citrateWhen all studies were combined, findings for live birth were inconclusive and inconsistent (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.01, 5 studies, 741 women, I2 = 86%, very low-quality evidence). In subgroup analysis by obesity status, obese women had a lower birth rate in the metformin group (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.52, 2 studies, 500 women, I2 = 0%, very low-quality evidence), while data from the non-obese group showed a possible benefit from metformin, with high heterogeneity (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.94, 3 studies, 241 women, I2 = 78%, very low-quality evidence). Similarly, among obese women taking metformin there were lower rates of clinical pregnancy (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.55, 2 studies, 500 women, I2 = 0%, very low-quality evidence) and ovulation (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.43 2 studies, 500 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence) while among non-obese women, the metformin group had more pregnancies (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.33, 5 studies, 490 women, I2 = 41%, very low-quality evidence) and no clear difference in ovulation rates (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.28, 4 studies, 312 women, low-quality evidence, I2=0%). There was no clear evidence of a difference in miscarriage rates (overall: OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.67, 5 studies, 741 women, I2 = 52%, very low-quality evidence). D-chiro-inositol (2 studies), rosiglitazone (1 study) or pioglitazone (1 study) versus placebo or no treatmentWe were unable to draw conclusions regarding other insulin-sensitising drugs as no studies reported primary outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our updated review suggests that metformin alone may be beneficial over placebo for live birth, although the evidence quality was low. When metformin was compared with clomiphene citrate, data for live birth were inconclusive, and our findings were limited by lack of evidence. Results differed by body mass index (BMI), emphasising the importance of stratifying results by BMI. An improvement in clinical pregnancy and ovulation suggests that clomiphene citrate remains preferable to metformin for ovulation induction in obese women with PCOS.An improved clinical pregnancy and ovulation rate with metformin and clomiphene citrate versus clomiphene citrate alone suggests that combined therapy may be useful although we do not know whether this translates into increased live births. Women taking metformin alone or with combined therapy should be advised that there is no evidence of increased miscarriages, but gastrointestinal side effects are more likely.

The high responder: a review of pathophysiology and outcomes during IVF treatment.

This review attempts to summarize the known literature on high responders to ovarian stimulation during assisted reproductive techniques (ART). Response to gonadotrophins is subject to significant interindividual and intercycle variation, thus carrying a risk of high response or poor response to ovarian stimulation regimens. The main risk for high responders is the development of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) which is associated with significant morbidity. Hence, the definition of high responders in the literature has primarily focussed on risk factors for OHSS. Strategies to reduce OHSS including tailoring of the ovarian stimulation regimens and adjusting gonadotrophin doses according to patient characteristics and findings during the cycle of stimulation. In addition, modifying the type of ovulation trigger used and adjuvant therapies, such as metformin, intravenous colloids and vascular endothelial growth factor blockers, have also been studied as options to reduce OHSS. Apart from the risk of OHSS, high response also appears to have an adverse impact on the oocyte and endometrium, though there is a paucity of data regarding the extent and mechanisms behind this impact.

The management of anovulatory infertility in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: an analysis of the evidence to support the development of global WHO guidance.

BACKGROUND: Here we describe the consensus guideline methodology, summarise the evidence-based recommendations we provided to the World Health Organisation (WHO) for their consideration in the development of global guidance and present a narrative review on the management of anovulatory infertility in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: The aim of this paper was to present an evidence base for the management of anovulatory PCOS. SEARCH METHODS: The evidence to support providing recommendations involved a collaborative process for: (i) identification of priority questions and critical outcomes, (ii) retrieval of up-to-date evidence and exiting guidelines, (iii) assessment and synthesis of the evidence and (iv) the formulation of draft recommendations to be used for reaching consensus with a wide range of global stakeholders. For each draft recommendation, the methodologist evaluated the quality of the supporting evidence that was then graded as very low, low, moderate or high for consideration during consensus. OUTCOMES: Evidence was synthesized and we made recommendations across the definition of PCOS including hyperandrogenism, menstrual cycle regulation and ovarian assessment. Metabolic features and the impact of ethnicity were covered. Management includes lifestyle changes, bariatric surgery, pharmacotherapy (including clomiphene citrate (CC), aromatase inhibitors, metformin and gonadotropins), as well as laparoscopic surgery. In-vitro fertilization (IVF) was considered as were the risks of ovulation induction and of pregnancy in PCOS. Approximately 80% of women who suffer from anovulatory infertility have PCOS. Lifestyle intervention is recommended first in women who are obese largely on the basis of general health benefits. Bariatric surgery can be considered where the body mass index (BMI) is ≥35 kg/m2 and lifestyle therapy has failed. Carefully conducted and monitored pharmacological ovulation induction can achieve good cumulative pregnancy rates and multiple pregnancy rates can be minimized with adherence to recommended protocols. CC should be first-line pharmacotherapy for ovulation induction and letrozole can also be used as first-line therapy. Metformin alone has limited benefits in improving live birth rates. Gonadotropins and laparoscopic surgery can be used as second-line treatment. There is no clear evidence for efficacy of acupuncture or herbal mixtures in women with PCOS. For women with PCOS who fail lifestyle and ovulation induction therapy or have additional infertility factors, IVF can be used with the safer gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol. If a GnRH-agonist protocol is used, metformin as an adjunct may reduce the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Patients should be informed of the potential side effects of ovulation induction agents and of IVF on the foetus, and of the risks of multiple pregnancy. Increased risks for the mother during pregnancy and for the child, including the exacerbating impact of obesity on adverse outcomes, should also be discussed. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: This guidance generation and evidence-synthesis analysis has been conducted in a manner to be considered for global applicability for the safe administration of ovulation induction for anovulatory women with PCOS.

Hypothalamic-pituitary, ovarian and adrenal contributions to polycystic ovary syndrome.

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a prevalent heterogeneous disorder linked with disturbances of reproductive, endocrine and metabolic function. The definition and aetiological hypotheses of PCOS are continually developing to incorporate evolving evidence of the syndrome, which appears to be both multifactorial and polygenic. The pathophysiology of PCOS encompasses inherent ovarian dysfunction that is strongly influenced by external factors including the hypothalamic-pituitary axis and hyperinsulinaemia. Neuroendocrine abnormalities including increased gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) pulse frequency with consequent hypersecretion of luteinising hormone (LH) affects ovarian androgen synthesis, folliculogenesis and oocyte development. Disturbed ovarian-pituitary and hypothalamic feedback accentuates the gonadotrophin abnormalities, and there is emerging evidence putatively implicating dysfunction of the Kiss 1 system. Within the follicle subunit itself, there are intra-ovarian paracrine modulators, cytokines and growth factors, which appear to play a role. Adrenally derived androgens may also contribute to the pathogenesis of PCOS, but their role is less defined.

DNA copy number variations are important in the complex genetic architecture of müllerian disorders.

OBJECTIVE: To clinically and genetically investigate women with müllerian disorders, including Mayer-Rokitanksy-Kuster-Hauser (MRKH) syndrome. DESIGN: Two-year prospective clinical and laboratory study. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): Thirty-five women over 16 years of age with a müllerian disorder, including MRKH. INTERVENTION(S): Women were recruited from specialist gynecology clinics or identified from the Scottish Disorders of Sex Development Register (www.sdsd.scot.nhs.uk/index.html). Associated abnormalities were detected by clinical examination, imaging studies, and biochemical analyses. Chromosomal microduplications and microdeletions were detected by array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) and validated by fluorescence in situ hydridization. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Identification of associated congenital and biochemical abnormalities and identification of regions of genomic imbalance using array CGH. RESULT(S): Associated congenital anomalies were common, present in 25/35 (71%) of affected women, particularly renal and skeletal abnormalities, which were present in 15/35 (43%) and 17/35 (49%) women, respectively. Using array CGH, novel or recurrent regions of genomic imbalance were identified in 4/11 (36%) women with MRKH and in 5/24 (21%) women with other müllerian abnormalities. CONCLUSION(S): Additional congenital abnormalities and regions of genomic imbalance are common in women with müllerian disorders, including MRKH. Recurrent microdeletions and microduplications associated with MRKH implicate specific possibly causative genes. The investigation of women with müllerian disorders should be thorough, and array CGH should be considered, given the potential highly significant familial implications of a chromosomal abnormality.

British Fertility Society Policy and Practice Committee: adjuvants in IVF: evidence for good clinical practice.

Optimisation of the environment favourable for satisfactory ovarian response to stimulation and successful embryo implantation remains at the core of assisted conception programmes. The evidence base for the routine use of different adjuvants, alone or in combination, for women undergoing their first in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment cycle and for those with poor prognosis is inadequate. The aim of this document is to update the last review of the available literature carried out by the British Fertility Society Policy and Practice Committee (BFS P&P) published in 2009 and to provide fertility professionals with evidence-based guidance and recommendations regarding the use of immunotherapy, vasodilators, uterine relaxants, aspirin, heparin, growth hormone, dehydroepiandrosterone, oestrogen and metformin as adjuvants in IVF. Unfortunately despite the lapse of 5 years since the last publication, there is still a lack of robust evidence for most of the adjuvants searched and large well-designed randomised controlled trials are still needed. One possible exception is metformin, which seems to have a positive effect in women with polycystic ovary syndrome undergoing IVF. Patients who are given other adjuvants on an empirical basis should always be informed of the lack of evidence and the potential side effects.

Metformin in reproductive health, pregnancy and gynaecological cancer: established and emerging indications.

BACKGROUND: Metformin is an effective oral anti-hyperglycaemic drug used as first-line medical treatment for type 2 diabetes. It improves systemic hyperglycaemia by reducing hepatic glucose production and enhancing peripheral insulin sensitivity. It also stimulates fat oxidation and reduces fat synthesis and storage. The molecular mechanism of this drug is thought to be secondary to its actions on the mitochondrial respiratory chain. METHODS: This paper reviews the relevant literature (research articles up to October 2013) on the use of metformin in infertility, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), pregnancy and gynaecological cancers. We present a comprehensive discussion of the evidence supporting the efficacy of metformin in these clinical conditions. RESULTS: Metformin is used clinically off-label in the management of hirsutism, acne and insulin resistance in PCOS, although the evidence for anti-androgenic effects is inconsistent. Metformin is also used to improve ovulation in women with PCOS both alone and in combination with clomiphene citrate. Trial findings are conflicting but metformin treatment in IVF/ICSI cycles may reduce the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and increase live birth rates. Metformin also appears to be effective and safe for the treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), particularly for overweight and obese women. Studies have shown that metformin is safe in pregnancy and women with GDM treated with metformin have less weight gain during pregnancy than those treated with insulin. One study with a 2-year follow-up demonstrated that babies born to women treated with metformin also developed less visceral fat, making them less prone to insulin resistance in later life. These findings have sparked interest in the use of metformin for pregnant, obese, non-diabetic women. On-going clinical trials are underway to determine if women treated prophylactically with metformin have a reduced incidence of GDM and demonstrate less weight gain during pregnancy. The hypothesis in these studies is that babies born to obese women on prophylactic metformin will also have better outcomes. Epidemiological studies have linked metformin exposure to a decreased risk of cancer. Pre-clinical experiments report that metformin has a growth-static effect on several cancers, including endometrial cancer, which may be partly due to the effect of metformin on the PI3K/AKT/mTOR signal transduction pathway. A number of on-going early phase clinical trials aim to explore the anti-cancer effects of metformin and investigate its potential as a chemopreventative or adjuvant treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Obesity is on the rise in developing countries and is strongly linked to several reproductive health problems, including PCOS, GDM and endometrial cancer. Traditional lifestyle measures aimed at weight reduction are challenging to implement and maintain. Metformin may be a valuable alternative to, or adjunct for, modifying the toxic effects of obesity in these populations. This review will appraise the evidence for the use of metformin for the prevention and treatment of adverse health outcomes in obstetrics and gynaecology.