Effectiveness of naturopathy for pregnancy in women with diminished ovarian reserve: feasibility randomized controlled trial.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Is conducting a randomized control trial (RCT) to assess the effectiveness of whole-system naturopathy in improving pregnancy rates among women with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) feasible? DESIGN: A two-arm, parallel group, assessor-blinded feasibility RCT was conducted. Women with DOR, trying to conceive naturally or by ART, were randomly assigned to naturopathy plus usual care, or usual care alone for 16 weeks. Primary outcomes were feasibility (recruitment, adherence, retention rates), acceptability and safety. Secondary outcomes included ongoing pregnancy rates, live birth rates and health-related outcomes (mental health, quality of life, diet, exercise, sleep and weight). Statistical significance of the differences between the two groups (P-values) were exploratory. RESULTS: One hundred and fifteen women completed the screening survey between March and November 2022. Of these, 66 women were assessed for eligibility and 41 (62%) consented. Recruitment resulted in seven enrolments each month. All 41 participants (100%) adhered to the intervention, 38 (93%) completed end-point questionnaires, 32 (78%) found study participation to be acceptable and 18 out of 21 (86%) from the intervention group would recommend a naturopathic intervention to other women with DOR. The naturopathic treatment was associated with only mild and temporary adverse events. No between-group differences were observed for pregnancy and live birth rates. CONCLUSION: The evaluation of whole-system naturopathy through a RCT was feasible and the treatment was acceptable and well tolerated according to women with DOR. Outcomes from this study will help inform sample size calculations powered for fertility outcomes for future RCTs on this topic.

Summary of the 2023 international evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome: an Australian perspective.

INTRODUCTION: The Australian-led 2023 International evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome was based on best available evidence, clinical expertise and consumer preference. It followed best practice, involved extensive evidence synthesis and applied relevant frameworks across evidence quality, feasibility, acceptability, cost and implementation. Thirty-nine societies and organisations covering 71 countries were engaged. The evidence in the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) has generally improved in the past five years, but remains of low to moderate quality. The technical evidence report, 52 systematic reviews and analyses (approximately 6000 pages) underpin 77 evidence-based and 54 consensus recommendations, with 123 practice points. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: Changes include: refinement of individual diagnostic criteria, a simplified diagnostic algorithm and inclusion of anti-Müllerian hormone levels as an alternative to ultrasound in adults only, and differentiation of adolescent and adult criteria; strengthening the recognition of broad features of PCOS including metabolic effects, cardiovascular disease, dermatological symptoms, sleep apnoea, a high prevalence of psychological features and a high risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes; emphasising the poorly recognised, diverse burden of disease, the vital need for greater health professional education, evidence-based patient information, improved models of care, shared decision making and research efforts to improve patient experience; maintained emphasis on healthy lifestyle, emotional wellbeing and quality of life, with awareness and consideration of weight stigma; and emphasising evidence-based medical therapy and cheaper and safer fertility management. CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THIS GUIDELINE: The 2023 guideline is approved by the National Health and Medical Research Council and provides clinicians and patients with clear advice on best practice in a common and neglected condition, based on the best available evidence, expert multidisciplinary input and consumer preferences. It provides vital, extensive patient and provider resources to enhance evidence-based care. The full guideline is available at www.monash.edu/medicine/mchri/pcos/guideline.

Recommendations from the 2024 Australian evidence-based guideline for unexplained infertility: ADAPTE process from the ESHRE evidence-based guideline on unexplained infertility.

INTRODUCTION: The 2024 Australian evidence-based guideline for unexplained infertility provides clinicians with evidence-based recommendations for the optimal diagnostic workup for infertile couples to establish the diagnosis of unexplained infertility and optimal therapeutic approach to treat couples diagnosed with unexplained infertility in the Australian health care setting. The guideline recommendations were adapted for the Australian context from the rigorous, comprehensive European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) 2023 Evidence-based guideline: unexplained infertility, using the ADAPTE process and have been approved by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: The guideline includes 40 evidence-based recommendations, 21 practice points and three research recommendations addressing: definition - defining infertility and frequency of intercourse, infertility and age, female and male factor infertility; diagnosis - ovulation, ovarian reserve, tubal factor, uterine factor, laparoscopy, cervical/vaginal factor, male factor, additional testing for systemic conditions; and treatment - expectant management, active treatment, mechanical-surgical procedures, alternative therapeutic approaches, quality of life. CHANGES IN ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT RESULTING FROM THE GUIDELINE: This guideline refines the definition of unexplained infertility and addresses basic diagnostic procedures for infertility assessment not considered in previous guidelines on unexplained infertility. For therapeutic approaches, consideration of evidence quality, efficacy, safety and, in the Australian setting, feasibility, acceptability, cost, implementation and ultimately recommendation strength were integrated across multidisciplinary expertise and consumer perspectives in adapting recommendations to the Australian context by using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework, which had not been used in past guidelines on unexplained infertility to formulate recommendations. The Australian process also included an established data integrity check to ensure evidence could be trusted to guide practice. Practice points were added and expanded to consider the Australian setting. No evidence-based recommendations were underpinned by high quality evidence, with most having low or very low quality evidence. In this context, research recommendations were made including those for the Australian context. The full guideline and technical report are publicly available online and can be accessed at https://www.monash.edu/medicine/mchri/infertility and are supported by extensive translation resources, including the free patient ASKFertility mobile application (https://www.askfertility.org/).

Health needs, treatment decisions and experience of traditional complementary and integrative medicine use by women with diminished ovarian reserve: A cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Women with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) have fewer eggs than would be expected at their age. It is estimated that 10% of women seeking fertility treatment are diagnosed with DOR. However, the success rate of medically assisted reproduction (MAR) is significantly lower in women with DOR, thus many seek additional approaches. AIM: To explore the health needs of women with DOR, treatment options and experience of treatment including traditional complementary integrative medicine (TCIM). METHODS: Anyone with a diagnosis of DOR, living in Australia or New Zealand, aged over 18 were invited to complete an online survey distributed via fertility support networks and social media platforms from April to December 2021. RESULTS: Data from 67 respondents were included. The main aspects of health that were impacted by DOR were fertility (91.0%) and mental health (52.2%). The main treatment recommended was MAR with most women either currently using MAR (38.8%) or having previously used MAR (37.3%). TCIM was widely used with 88.1% of women utilising supplements, 74.6% consulting with TCIM practitioners, and 65.7% adopting self-care practices. The main reasons for using TCIM were to improve fertility or support pregnancy, and to support general health and well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Women with DOR have additional health needs apart from infertility, most notably mental health support. The main form of treatment utilised is MAR, despite DOR being challenging for fertility clinicians. TCIM was widely used, and respondents perceived benefits related to improving fertility, supporting pregnancy, or improving well-being through use of acupuncture, meditation, naturopathy, massage, yoga.

Recommendations from the 2023 International Evidence-based Guideline for the Assessment and Management of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome†.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the recommended assessment and management of those with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), based on the best available evidence, clinical expertise, and consumer preference? SUMMARY ANSWER: International evidence-based guidelines address prioritized questions and outcomes and include 254 recommendations and practice points, to promote consistent, evidence-based care and improve the experience and health outcomes in PCOS. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The 2018 International PCOS Guideline was independently evaluated as high quality and integrated multidisciplinary and consumer perspectives from six continents; it is now used in 196 countries and is widely cited. It was based on best available, but generally very low to low quality, evidence. It applied robust methodological processes and addressed shared priorities. The guideline transitioned from consensus based to evidence-based diagnostic criteria and enhanced accuracy of diagnosis, whilst promoting consistency of care. However, diagnosis is still delayed, the needs of those with PCOS are not being adequately met, evidence quality was low and evidence-practice gaps persist. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The 2023 International Evidence-based Guideline update reengaged the 2018 network across professional societies and consumer organizations, with multidisciplinary experts and women with PCOS directly involved at all stages. Extensive evidence synthesis was completed. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-II (AGREEII)-compliant processes were followed. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was applied across evidence quality, feasibility, acceptability, cost, implementation and ultimately recommendation strength and diversity and inclusion were considered throughout. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: This summary should be read in conjunction with the full Guideline for detailed participants and methods. Governance included a six-continent international advisory and management committee, five guideline development groups, and paediatric, consumer, and translation committees. Extensive consumer engagement and guideline experts informed the update scope and priorities. Engaged international society-nominated panels included paediatrics, endocrinology, gynaecology, primary care, reproductive endocrinology, obstetrics, psychiatry, psychology, dietetics, exercise physiology, obesity care, public health and other experts, alongside consumers, project management, evidence synthesis, statisticians and translation experts. Thirty-nine professional and consumer organizations covering 71 countries engaged in the process. Twenty meetings and five face-to-face forums over 12 months addressed 58 prioritized clinical questions involving 52 systematic and 3 narrative reviews. Evidence-based recommendations were developed and approved via consensus across five guideline panels, modified based on international feedback and peer review, independently reviewed for methodological rigour, and approved by the Australian Government National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The evidence in the assessment and management of PCOS has generally improved in the past five years, but remains of low to moderate quality. The technical evidence report and analyses (∼6000 pages) underpins 77 evidence-based and 54 consensus recommendations, with 123 practice points. Key updates include: i) further refinement of individual diagnostic criteria, a simplified diagnostic algorithm and inclusion of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels as an alternative to ultrasound in adults only; ii) strengthening recognition of broader features of PCOS including metabolic risk factors, cardiovascular disease, sleep apnea, very high prevalence of psychological features, and high risk status for adverse outcomes during pregnancy; iii) emphasizing the poorly recognized, diverse burden of disease and the need for greater healthcare professional education, evidence-based patient information, improved models of care and shared decision making to improve patient experience, alongside greater research; iv) maintained emphasis on healthy lifestyle, emotional wellbeing and quality of life, with awareness and consideration of weight stigma; and v) emphasizing evidence-based medical therapy and cheaper and safer fertility management. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Overall, recommendations are strengthened and evidence is improved, but remains generally low to moderate quality. Significantly greater research is now needed in this neglected, yet common condition. Regional health system variation was considered and acknowledged, with a further process for guideline and translation resource adaptation provided. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The 2023 International Guideline for the Assessment and Management of PCOS provides clinicians and patients with clear advice on best practice, based on the best available evidence, expert multidisciplinary input and consumer preferences. Research recommendations have been generated and a comprehensive multifaceted dissemination and translation program supports the Guideline with an integrated evaluation program. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This effort was primarily funded by the Australian Government via the National Health Medical Research Council (NHMRC) (APP1171592), supported by a partnership with American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Endocrine Society, European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology, and European Society for Endocrinology. The Commonwealth Government of Australia also supported Guideline translation through the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFCRI000266). HJT and AM are funded by NHMRC fellowships. JT is funded by a Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) fellowship. Guideline development group members were volunteers. Travel expenses were covered by the partnering organizations. Disclosures of interest were strictly managed according to NHMRC policy and are available with the full guideline, technical evidence report, peer review and responses (www.monash.edu/medicine/mchri/pcos). Of named authors HJT, CTT, AD, LM, LR, JBoyle, AM have no conflicts of interest to declare. JL declares grant from Ferring and Merck; consulting fees from Ferring and Titus Health Care; speaker's fees from Ferring; unpaid consultancy for Ferring, Roche Diagnostics and Ansh Labs; and sits on advisory boards for Ferring, Roche Diagnostics, Ansh Labs, and Gedeon Richter. TP declares a grant from Roche; consulting fees from Gedeon Richter and Organon; speaker's fees from Gedeon Richter and Exeltis; travel support from Gedeon Richter and Exeltis; unpaid consultancy for Roche Diagnostics; and sits on advisory boards for Roche Diagnostics. MC declares travels support from Merck; and sits on an advisory board for Merck. JBoivin declares grants from Merck Serono Ltd.; consulting fees from Ferring B.V; speaker's fees from Ferring Arzneimittell GmbH; travel support from Organon; and sits on an advisory board for the Office of Health Economics. RJN has received speaker's fees from Merck and sits on an advisory board for Ferring. AJoham has received speaker's fees from Novo Nordisk and Boehringer Ingelheim. The guideline was peer reviewed by special interest groups across our 39 partner and collaborating organizations, was independently methodologically assessed against AGREEII criteria and was approved by all members of the guideline development groups and by the NHMRC.

Statins for women with polycystic ovary syndrome not actively trying to conceive.

BACKGROUND: Statins are lipid-lowering agents with pleiotropic actions. Experts have proposed that in addition to improving the dyslipidaemia associated with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), statins may also exert other beneficial metabolic and endocrine effects, such as reducing testosterone levels. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2011. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of statin therapy in women with PCOS who are not actively trying to conceive. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group specialised register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHLs, and four ongoing trials registers on 7 November 2022. We also handsearched relevant conference proceedings and the reference lists of relevant trials for any additional studies, and we contacted experts in the field for any further ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of statin therapy in women with PCOS not actively trying to conceive. Eligible comparisons were statin versus placebo or no treatment, statin plus another agent versus the other agent alone, and statin versus another agent. We performed statistical analysis using Review Manager 5, and we assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE methods. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodology. Our primary outcomes were resumption of menstrual regularity and resumption of spontaneous ovulation. Our secondary outcomes were clinical and physiological measures including hirsutism, acne severity, testosterone levels, and adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: Six RCTs fulfilled the criteria for inclusion. They included 396 women with PCOS who received six weeks, three months, or six months of treatment; 374 women completed the studies. Three studies evaluated the effects of simvastatin and three studies evaluated the effects of atorvastatin. We summarised the results of the studies under the following comparisons. Statins versus placebo (3 RCTs) One trial measured resumption of menstrual regularity as menstrual cycle length in days. We are uncertain if statins compared with placebo shorten the mean length of the menstrual cycle (mean difference (MD) -2.00 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -24.86 to 20.86; 37 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported resumption of spontaneous ovulation, improvement in hirsutism, or improvement in acne. We are uncertain if statins compared with placebo reduce testosterone levels after six weeks (MD 0.06, 95% CI -0.72 to 0.84; 1 RCT, 20 participants; very low-certainty evidence), after 3 months (MD -0.53, 95% CI -1.61 to 0.54; 2 RCTs, 64 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or after 6 months (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.63; 1 RCT, 28 participants; very low-certainty evidence) Two studies recorded adverse events, and neither reported significant differences between the groups. Statins plus metformin versus metformin alone (1 RCT) The single RCT included in this comparison measured resumption of menstrual regularity as the number of spontaneous menses per six months. We are uncertain if statins plus metformin compared with metformin improves resumption of menstrual regularity (MD 0.60 menses, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.12; 69 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report resumption of spontaneous ovulation. We are uncertain if statins plus metformin compared with metformin alone improves hirsutism measured using the Ferriman-Gallwey score (MD -0.16, 95% CI -0.91 to 0.59; 69 participants; very low-certainty evidence), acne severity measured on a scale of 0 to 3 (MD -0.31, 95% CI -0.67 to 0.05; 69 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or testosterone levels (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.31; 69 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study reported that no significant adverse events occurred. Statins plus oral contraceptive pill versus oral contraceptive pill alone (1 RCT) The single RCT included in this comparison did not report resumption of menstrual regularity or spontaneous ovulation. We are uncertain if statins plus the oral contraceptive pill (OCP) improves hirsutism compared with OCP alone (MD -0.12, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.17; 48 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report improvement in acne severity. We are also uncertain if statins plus OCP compared with OCP alone reduces testosterone levels, because the certainty of the evidence was very low (MD -0.82, 95% CI -1.38 to -0.26; 48 participants). The study reported that no participants experienced significant side effects. Statins versus metformin (2 RCTs) We are uncertain if statins improve menstrual regularity compared with metformin (number of spontaneous menses per six months) compared to metformin (MD 0.50 menses, 95% CI -0.05 to 1.05; 1 RCT, 61 participants, very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported resumption of spontaneous ovulation. We are uncertain if statins compared with metformin reduce hirsutism measured using the Ferriman-Gallwey score (MD -0.26, 95% CI -0.97 to 0.45; 1 RCT, 61 participants; very low-certainty evidence), acne severity measured on a scale of 0 to 3 (MD -0.18, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.17; 1 RCT, 61 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or testosterone levels (MD -0.24, 95% CI -0.58 to 0.10; 1 RCT, 61 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Both trials reported that no significant adverse events had occurred. Statins versus oral contraceptive pill plus flutamide (1 RCT) According to the study report, no participants experienced any significant side effects. There were no available data for any other main outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for all main outcomes of this review was of very low certainty. Due to the limited evidence, we are uncertain if statins compared with placebo, or statins plus metformin compared with metformin alone, improve resumption of menstrual regularity. The trial evaluating statin plus OCP versus OCP alone reported neither of our primary outcomes. No other studies reported resumption of spontaneous ovulation. We are uncertain if statins improve hirsutism, acne severity, or testosterone. All trials that measured adverse events reported no significant differences between the groups.

Is there an optimal number of oocytes retrieved at which live birth rates or cumulative live birth rates per aspiration are maximized after ART? A systematic review.

The association between the number of oocytes retrieved and fresh live birth rate (LBR) or cumulative LBR (CLBR), and whether an optimal number of oocytes are retrieved when LBR or CLBR are maximized, are highly relevant clinical questions; however published results are conflicting. A systematic review of all eligible studies (n = 16) published until January 2020 on MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL and Web of Science was conducted. Five studies evaluated only LBR from fresh cycles, five studies evaluated only CLBR from stimulated cycles and six evaluated both. A marked difference was observed between the oocyte yields at which LBR and CLBR were reportedly maximized in the individual studies. On the basis of nine studies, the optimal number of oocytes at which fresh LBR seems to be maximized is proposed to be between 12 and 18 oocytes (15 oocytes was the most common suggestion). On the other hand, CLBR continues to increase with the number of oocytes retrieved. This is the first systematic review on the topic, and it suggests that the retrieval of 12-18 oocytes is associated with maximal fresh LBR, whereas a continuing positive association is present between the number of oocytes retrieved and CLBR.

Health literacy needs in weight management of women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: Lifestyle modification plays a key role in weight management and chronic disease prevention in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Women with PCOS experience challenges in adopting and maintaining healthy lifestyle behaviours, which may be related to health literacy. The aims of this study were to explore the health literacy needs of women with PCOS in lifestyle and weight management to inform research and practice. METHODS: Ten women with PCOS participated in focus groups and semi-structured telephone interviews on lifestyle and weight management in PCOS. RESULTS: For functional health literacy, women with PCOS are highly motivated for lifestyle and weight management due to the long-term consequences of PCOS. For interactive health literacy, barriers included delayed diagnosis and poor communication. Women with PCOS were resourceful in accessing a wide range of weight management services but some experience barriers such as costs or the feelings of embarrassment associated with accessing relevant services. For critical health literacy, no facilitators and barriers could be identified for the domain of participation in making decisions for health. CONCLUSIONS: Women with PCOS experience facilitators and barriers in functional and interactive health literacy in lifestyle and weight management. SO WHAT?: Future interventions should seek to further understand and address these gaps in health literacy by increasing weight management skills through behaviour change techniques, improving health professional-patient communication through tools such as question prompt lists, enhancing peer support by increasing distributed health literacy in PCOS support groups and by providing opportunities for co-design of interventions.

Metformin treatment before and during IVF or ICSI in women with polycystic ovary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The use of insulin-sensitising agents, such as metformin, in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) who are undergoing ovulation induction or in vitro fertilisation (IVF) cycles has been widely studied. Metformin reduces hyperinsulinaemia and suppresses the excessive ovarian production of androgens. It is suggested that as a consequence metformin could improve assisted reproductive techniques (ART) outcomes, such as ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), pregnancy, and live birth rates. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of metformin as a co-treatment during IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in achieving pregnancy or live birth in women with PCOS. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online (CRSO), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, LILACS, the trial registries for ongoing trials, and reference lists of articles (from inception to 13 February 2020). SELECTION CRITERIA: Types of studies: randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing metformin treatment with placebo or no treatment in women with PCOS who underwent IVF or ICSI treatment. TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS: women of reproductive age with anovulation due to PCOS with or without co-existing infertility factors. Types of interventions: metformin administered before and during IVF or ICSI treatment. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: live birth rate, incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected the studies, extracted the data according to the protocol, and assessed study quality. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: This updated review includes 13 RCTs involving a total of 1132 women with PCOS undergoing IVF/ICSI treatments. We stratified the analysis by type of ovarian stimulation protocol used (long gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-agonist) or short gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-antagonist)) to determine whether the type of stimulation used influenced the outcomes. We did not perform meta-analysis on the overall (both ovarian stimulation protocols combined) data for the outcomes of live birth and clinical pregnancy rates per woman because of substantial heterogeneity. In the long protocol GnRH-agonist subgroup, the pooled evidence showed that we are uncertain of the effect of metformin on live birth rate per woman when compared with placebo/no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.79; 6 RCTs; 651 women; I2 = 47%; low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance for live birth following placebo/no treatment is 28%, the chance following metformin would be between 27% and 51%. Only one study used short protocol GnRH-antagonist and reported live birth rate. Metformin may reduce live birth rate compared with placebo/no treatment (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.79; 1 RCT; 153 women; low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance for live birth following placebo/no treatment is 43%, the chance following metformin would be between 13% and 34% (short GnRH-antagonist protocol). We found that metformin may reduce the incidence of OHSS (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.72; 11 RCTs; 1091 women; I2 = 38%; low-quality evidence). This suggests that for a woman with a 20% risk of OHSS without metformin, the corresponding risk using metformin would be between 6% and 14%. Using long protocol GnRH-agonist stimulation, metformin may increase clinical pregnancy rate per woman compared with placebo/no treatment (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.63; 10 RCTs; 915 women; I2 = 13%; low-quality evidence). Using short protocol GnRH-antagonist, we are uncertain of the effect of metformin on clinical pregnancy rate per woman compared with placebo/no treatment (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.21 to 9.14; 2 RCTs; 177 women; I2 = 87%; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of metformin on miscarriage rate per woman when compared with placebo/no treatment (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.32; 8 RCTs; 821 women; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). Metformin may result in an increase in side effects compared with placebo/no treatment (RR 3.35, 95% CI 2.34 to 4.79; 8 RCTs; 748 women; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). The overall quality of evidence ranged from very low to low. The main limitations were inconsistency, risk of bias, and imprecision. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This updated review on metformin versus placebo/no treatment before or during IVF/ICSI treatment in women with PCOS found no conclusive evidence that metformin improves live birth rates. In a long GnRH-agonist protocol, we are uncertain whether metformin improves live birth rates, but metformin may increase the clinical pregnancy rate. In a short GnRH-antagonist protocol, metformin may reduce live birth rates, although we are uncertain about the effect of metformin on clinical pregnancy rate. Metformin may reduce the incidence of OHSS but may result in a higher incidence of side effects. We are uncertain of the effect of metformin on miscarriage rate per woman.

Metformin versus the combined oral contraceptive pill for hirsutism, acne, and menstrual pattern in polycystic ovary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Metformin has been proposed as possibly a safer and more effective long-term treatment than the oral contraceptive pill (OCP) in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). It is important to directly compare the efficacy and safety of metformin versus OCP in the long-term treatment of women with PCOS. This is an update of a Cochrane Review comparing insulin sensitising agents with the OCP and only includes studies on metformin. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of metformin versus the OCP (alone or in combination) in improving clinical, hormonal, and metabolic features of PCOS. SEARCH METHODS: In August 2019 we searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL, the trial registers, handsearched references of the identified articles, and contacted experts in the field to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the use of metformin versus the OCP (alone or in combination) for women with PCOS. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methods recommended by Cochrane. The primary review outcomes were the clinical parameters of hirsutism and adverse events, both severe (requiring stopping of medication), and minor. In the presence of substantial heterogeneity (I2 statistic > 50), which could be explained by pre-specified subgroup analyses on the basis of BMI, we reported the subgroups separately. MAIN RESULTS: This is a substantive update. We identified 38 additional studies. We included 44 RCTs (2253 women), which comprised 39 RCTs on adult women (2047 women) and five RCTs on adolescent women (206 women). Evidence quality ranged from very low to low. The main limitations were risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency. Metformin versus the OCP In adult women, we are uncertain of the effect of metformin compared to the OCP on hirsutism in subgroup body mass index (BMI) < 25 kg/m2 (mean difference (MD) 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.44 to 1.19, 3 RCTs, n = 134, I2 = 50%, very low-quality evidence) and subgroup BMI > 30 kg/m2 (MD -0.38, 95% CI -1.93 to 1.17; 2 RCTs, n = 85, I2 = 34%, low-quality evidence). Metformin may be less effective in improving hirsutism compared to the OCP in the subgroup BMI 25 kg/m2 to 30 kg/m2 (MD 1.92, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.64, 5 RCTs, n = 254, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence). Metformin may increase severe gastro-intestinal adverse events rate compared to the OCP (Peto odds ratio (OR) 6.42, 95% CI 2.98 to 13.84, 11 RCTs, n = 602, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence). Metformin may decrease the incidence of severe other adverse events compared to the OCP (Peto OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.44, 8 RCTs, n = 363, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence). There were no trials reporting on minor adverse events. In adolescents, we are uncertain whether there is a difference between Metformin and the OCP, on hirsutism and adverse events. Metformin versus metformin combined with the OCP In adult women, metformin may be less effective in improving hirsutism compared to Metformin combined with the OCP (MD 1.36, 95% CI 0.62 to 2.11, 3 RCTs, n = 135, I2= 9%, low-quality evidence). We are uncertain if there was a difference between metformin and metformin combined with the OCP for severe gastro-intestinal adverse events (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.21 to 2.53, 3 RCTs, n = 171, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence), or for severe other adverse events (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.82, 2 RCTs, n = 109, I2 = 44%, low-quality evidence). There were no trials reporting on minor adverse events. In adolescents, there were no trials for this comparison. The OCP versus metformin combined with the OCP In adult women, the OCP may be less effective in improving hirsutism compared to metformin combined with the OCP (MD 0.54, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.89, 6 RCTs, n = 389, I2= 1%, low-quality evidence). The OCP may decrease the incidence of severe gastro-intestinal adverse events compared to metformin combined with the OCP (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.72, 5 RCTs, n = 228, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence). We are uncertain if there is a difference between the OCP and metformin combined with the OCP for severe other adverse events (OR 1.61, 95% CI 0.49 to 5.37, 4 RCTs, n = 159, I2 = 12%, low-quality evidence). The OCP may decrease the incidence of minor (gastro-intestinal) adverse events compared to metformin combined with the OCP (OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.44, 2 RCTs, n = 98, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence). In adolescents, we are uncertain whether there is a difference between the OCP, compared to metformin combined with the OCP, on hirsutism or adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In adult women with PCOS, metformin may be less effective in improving hirsutism compared to the OCP in the subgroup BMI 25 kg/m2 to 30 kg/m2 but we are uncertain if there was a difference between metformin and the OCP in subgroups BMI < 25 kg/m2 and BMI > 30kg/m2. Compared to the OCP, metformin may increase the incidence of severe gastro-intestinal adverse events and decrease the incidence of severe other adverse events with no trials reporting on minor adverse events. Either metformin alone or the OCP alone may be less effective in improving hirsutism compared to metformin combined with the OCP. We are uncertain whether there is a difference between the OCP alone and metformin alone compared to metformin combined with the OCP for severe or minor adverse events except for the OCP versus metformin combined with the OCP where the OCP may decrease the incidence of severe and minor gastro-intestinal adverse events. In adolescent women with PCOS, we are uncertain whether there is a difference between any of the comparisons for hirsutism and adverse events due to either no evidence or very low-quality evidence. Further large well-designed RCTs that stratify for BMI are needed to evaluate metformin versus the OCP and combinations in women with PCOS, in particular adolescent women.

Barriers and facilitators to weight management in overweight and obese women living in Australia with PCOS: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Lifestyle modification targeting weight management is the first-line treatment for women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) regardless of presenting symptoms. Women with PCOS are more likely to gain more weight compared with women without PCOS, which may be related to barriers in engaging in lifestyle modification. The aim of this study is to explore the experience of women with PCOS in weight management and to determine the facilitators and barriers to lifestyle modifications in women with PCOS. METHODS: Ten women with PCOS participated in focus groups and semi-structured telephone interviews on lifestyle and weight management in PCOS. Discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis of the transcripts was conducted. Thematic analysis of the transcripts were conducted using the method of constant comparison. RESULTS: Women in the current study attempted a wide range of weight loss interventions, but had difficulties losing weight and preventing weight regain. Women felt that having PCOS affected their ability to lose weight and to keep it off. Facilitators to lifestyle modification for weight management were reported as structured approaches such as having balanced meals and support by health professionals, peers, friends or family. Barriers to lifestyle changes in women with PCOS included logistical barriers such as time and cost, motivational barriers including tiredness or feeling unrewarded, environmental barriers such as not having access to safe places to exercise, emotional barriers such as having depressive and defeating thoughts, and relational barriers such as having unsupportive partner or prioritising children's meal preferences. CONCLUSIONS: Women with PCOS face a number of personal, environmental and social facilitators and barriers to lifestyle modification for weight loss. While many of these are also experienced by women without PCOS, women with PCOS face additional barriers in having low sense of self-confidence and high prevalence of negative thoughts which may impair their ability to maintain efforts in lifestyle modification over the long term. Future research should further explore the impact of the emotional and mental burden of PCOS on the management of weight and other aspects of PCOS. Future lifestyle intervention should also address the psychosocial aspect of PCOS.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) for up to three complete assisted reproductive technology cycles in women of advanced maternal age.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence suggests that preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) used during assisted reproductive technology improves per-cycle live-birth rates but cumulative live-birth rate (CLBR) was similar to a strategy of morphological assessment (MA) of embryos. No study has assessed the cost-effectiveness of repeated cycles with PGT-A using longitudinal patient-level data. AIM: To assess the cost-effectiveness of repeated cycles with PGT-A compared to MA of embryos in older women. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Micro-costing methods were used to value direct resource consumption of 2093 assisted reproductive technology-naïve women aged ≥37 years undergoing up to three 'complete assisted reproductive technology cycles' (fresh plus cryopreserved embryos) with either PGT-A or MA in an Australian clinic between 2011 and 2014. Incremental cost-effective ratios were calculated from healthcare and patient perspectives with uncertainty assessed using non-parametric bootstrap methods. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were constructed to evaluate the probability of PGT-A being cost-effective over a range of willingness-to-pay thresholds. RESULTS: The CLBR and mean healthcare costs per patient were 30.90% and $22 962 for the PGT-A group, and 26.77% and $21 801 for the MA group, yielding an incremental cost-effective ratio of $28 103 for an additional live birth with PGT-A. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 and above, there is more than an 80% probability of PGT-A being cost-effective from the healthcare perspective and a 50% likelihood from a patient perspective. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to use real-world patient-level data to assess the cost-effectiveness of PGT-A in older women from the healthcare and patient perspectives. The findings contribute to the ongoing debate on the role of PGT-A in clinical practice.

A brief update on the evidence supporting the treatment of infertility in polycystic ovary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is complex with reproductive, metabolic and psychological features. Infertility is a prevalent presenting feature of PCOS with approximately 75% of these women suffering infertility due to anovulation, making PCOS by far the most common cause of anovulatory infertility. Previous guidelines either lacked rigorous evidence-based processes, did not engage consumer and international multidisciplinary perspectives, or were outdated. AIMS: This review paper aims to provide a brief update on the best available and most current research evidence supporting the treatment of PCOS which informed the recommendations in the assessment and treatment of infertility section of the international evidence-based guideline on PCOS 2018. MATERIALS AND METHODS: International evidence-based guideline development engaged professional societies and consumer organisations with multidisciplinary experts and women with PCOS directly involved at all stages. RESULTS: Lifestyle change alone is considered the first-line treatment for the management of infertile anovulatory PCOS women who are overweight or obese. Letrozole should now be considered first-line pharmacological treatment for ovulation induction to improve fertility outcomes. Clomiphene citrate alone and metformin alone could also be used as first-line pharmacological therapy, although both are less effective than letrozole and metformin is less effective than clomiphene citrate in obese women. Gonadotrophins or laparoscopic ovarian surgery are usually second-line ovulation induction therapies. In the absence of an absolute indication for in vitro fertilisation (IVF) / intracytoplasmic sperm injection, women with PCOS and anovulatory infertility could be offered IVF as third-line therapy where first- or second-line ovulation induction therapies have failed. CONCLUSION: This review provides the best available evidence informing recommendations (along with clinical expertise and consumer preference) which provide clinicians with clear advice on best practice for the management of infertile women with PCOS.

Recommendations from the international evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the recommended assessment and management of women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), based on the best available evidence, clinical expertise, and consumer preference? SUMMARY ANSWER: International evidence-based guidelines including 166 recommendations and practice points, addressed prioritized questions to promote consistent, evidence-based care and improve the experience and health outcomes of women with PCOS. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Previous guidelines either lacked rigorous evidence-based processes, did not engage consumer and international multidisciplinary perspectives, or were outdated. Diagnosis of PCOS remains controversial and assessment and management are inconsistent. The needs of women with PCOS are not being adequately met and evidence practice gaps persist. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: International evidence-based guideline development engaged professional societies and consumer organizations with multidisciplinary experts and women with PCOS directly involved at all stages. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II-compliant processes were followed, with extensive evidence synthesis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was applied across evidence quality, feasibility, acceptability, cost, implementation and ultimately recommendation strength. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Governance included a six continent international advisory and a project board, five guideline development groups (GDGs), and consumer and translation committees. Extensive health professional and consumer engagement informed guideline scope and priorities. Engaged international society-nominated panels included pediatrics, endocrinology, gynecology, primary care, reproductive endocrinology, obstetrics, psychiatry, psychology, dietetics, exercise physiology, public health and other experts, alongside consumers, project management, evidence synthesis, and translation experts. Thirty-seven societies and organizations covering 71 countries engaged in the process. Twenty face-to-face meetings over 15 months addressed 60 prioritized clinical questions involving 40 systematic and 20 narrative reviews. Evidence-based recommendations were developed and approved via consensus voting within the five guideline panels, modified based on international feedback and peer review, with final recommendations approved across all panels. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The evidence in the assessment and management of PCOS is generally of low to moderate quality. The guideline provides 31 evidence based recommendations, 59 clinical consensus recommendations and 76 clinical practice points all related to assessment and management of PCOS. Key changes in this guideline include: (a) considerable refinement of individual diagnostic criteria with a focus on improving accuracy of diagnosis; (b) reducing unnecessary testing; (c) increasing focus on education, lifestyle modification, emotional wellbeing and quality of life; and (d) emphasizing evidence based medical therapy and cheaper and safer fertility management. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Overall evidence is generally low to moderate quality, requiring significantly greater research in this neglected, yet common condition, especially around refining specific diagnostic features in PCOS. Regional health system variation is acknowledged and a process for guideline and translation resource adaptation is provided. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The international guideline for the assessment and management of PCOS provides clinicians with clear advice on best practice based on the best available evidence, expert multidisciplinary input and consumer preferences. Research recommendations have been generated and a comprehensive multifaceted dissemination and translation program supports the guideline with an integrated evaluation program.

Recommendations from the international evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the recommended assessment and management of women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), based on the best available evidence, clinical expertise and consumer preference? SUMMARY ANSWER: International evidence-based guidelines, including 166 recommendations and practice points, addressed prioritized questions to promote consistent, evidence-based care and improve the experience and health outcomes of women with PCOS. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Previous guidelines either lacked rigorous evidence-based processes, did not engage consumer and international multidisciplinary perspectives, or were outdated. Diagnosis of PCOS remains controversial, and assessment and management are inconsistent. The needs of women with PCOS are not being adequately met and evidence practice gaps persist. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: International evidence-based guideline development engaged professional societies and consumer organizations with multidisciplinary experts and women with PCOS directly involved at all stages. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II-compliant processes were followed, with extensive evidence synthesis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was applied across evidence quality, feasibility, acceptability, cost, implementation and ultimately recommendation strength. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Governance included a six continent international advisory and a project board, five guideline development groups, and consumer and translation committees. Extensive health professional and consumer engagement informed guideline scope and priorities. Engaged international society-nominated panels included pediatrics, endocrinology, gynecology, primary care, reproductive endocrinology, obstetrics, psychiatry, psychology, dietetics, exercise physiology, public health and other experts, alongside consumers, project management, evidence synthesis and translation experts. In total, 37 societies and organizations covering 71 countries engaged in the process. Twenty face-to-face meetings over 15 months addressed 60 prioritized clinical questions involving 40 systematic and 20 narrative reviews. Evidence-based recommendations were developed and approved via consensus voting within the five guideline panels, modified based on international feedback and peer review, with final recommendations approved across all panels. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The evidence in the assessment and management of PCOS is generally of low to moderate quality. The guideline provides 31 evidence based recommendations, 59 clinical consensus recommendations and 76 clinical practice points all related to assessment and management of PCOS. Key changes in this guideline include: (i) considerable refinement of individual diagnostic criteria with a focus on improving accuracy of diagnosis; (ii) reducing unnecessary testing; (iii) increasing focus on education, lifestyle modification, emotional wellbeing and quality of life; and (iv) emphasizing evidence based medical therapy and cheaper and safer fertility management. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Overall evidence is generally low to moderate quality, requiring significantly greater research in this neglected, yet common condition, especially around refining specific diagnostic features in PCOS. Regional health system variation is acknowledged and a process for guideline and translation resource adaptation is provided. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The international guideline for the assessment and management of PCOS provides clinicians with clear advice on best practice based on the best available evidence, expert multidisciplinary input and consumer preferences. Research recommendations have been generated and a comprehensive multifaceted dissemination and translation program supports the guideline with an integrated evaluation program. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The guideline was primarily funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC) supported by a partnership with ESHRE and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Guideline development group members did not receive payment. Travel expenses were covered by the sponsoring organizations. Disclosures of conflicts of interest were declared at the outset and updated throughout the guideline process, aligned with NHMRC guideline processes. Full details of conflicts declared across the guideline development groups are available at https://www.monash.edu/medicine/sphpm/mchri/pcos/guideline in the Register of disclosures of interest. Of named authors, Dr Costello has declared shares in Virtus Health and past sponsorship from Merck Serono for conference presentations. Prof. Laven declared grants from Ferring, Euroscreen and personal fees from Ferring, Euroscreen, Danone and Titus Healthcare. Prof. Norman has declared a minor shareholder interest in an IVF unit. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. The guideline was peer reviewed by special interest groups across our partner and collaborating societies and consumer organizations, was independently assessed against AGREE-II criteria, and underwent methodological review. This guideline was approved by all members of the guideline development groups and was submitted for final approval by the NHMRC.

Translation and implementation of the Australian-led PCOS guideline: clinical summary and translation resources from the International Evidence-based Guideline for the Assessment and Management of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: We have developed the first international evidence-based guideline for the diagnosis and management of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), with an integrated translation program incorporating resources for health professionals and consumers. The development process involved an extensive Australian-led international and multidisciplinary collaboration of health professionals and consumers over 2 years. The guideline is approved by the National Health and Medical Research Council and aims to support both health professionals and women with PCOS in improving care, health outcomes and quality of life. A robust evaluation process will enable practice benchmarking and feedback to further inform evidence-based practice. We propose that this methodology could be used in developing and implementing guidelines for other women's health conditions and beyond. Main recommendations: The recommendations cover the following broad areas: diagnosis, screening and risk assessment depending on life stage; emotional wellbeing; healthy lifestyle; pharmacological treatment for non-fertility indications; and assessment and treatment of infertility. Changes in management as a result of this guideline: •Diagnosis:▪when the combination of hyperandrogenism and ovulatory dysfunction is present, ultrasound examination of the ovaries is not necessary for diagnosis of PCOS in adult women;▪requires the combination of hyperandrogenism and ovulatory dysfunction in young women within 8 years of menarche, with ultrasound examination of the ovaries not recommended, owing to the overlap with normal ovarian physiology; and▪adolescents with some clinical features of PCOS, but without a clear diagnosis, should be regarded as "at risk" and receive follow-up assessment.•Screening for metabolic complications has been refined and incorporates both PCOS status and additional metabolic risk factors.•Treatment of infertility: letrozole is now first line treatment for infertility as it improves live birth rates while reducing multiple pregnancies compared with clomiphene citrate.

Metformin during ovulation induction with gonadotrophins followed by timed intercourse or intrauterine insemination for subfertility associated with polycystic ovary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Clomiphene citrate (CC) is generally considered first-line treatment in women with anovulation due to polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Ovulation induction with follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH; gonadotrophins) is second-line treatment for women who do not ovulate or conceive while taking CC. Metformin may increase the effectiveness of ovulation induction with gonadotrophins and may promote safety by preventing multiple pregnancy. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of metformin co-treatment during ovulation induction with gonadotrophins with respect to rates of live birth and multiple pregnancy in women with PCOS. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group specialised register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAH) on 8 June 2016, and the reference lists of included and other relevant studies. We searched ongoing trials registries in the World Health Organization (WHO) portal and on clinicaltrials.gov on 4 September 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reporting data on comparison of clinical outcomes in women with PCOS undergoing ovulation induction with gonadotrophins plus metformin versus gonadotrophins alone or gonadotrophins plus placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Primary review outcomes were live birth rate and multiple pregnancy rate. Secondary outcomes were ovulation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate, miscarriage rate, cycle cancellation rate and adverse effects. MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs (with 264 women) comparing gonadotrophins plus metformin versus gonadotrophins. The gonadotrophin used was recombinant FSH in four studies and highly purified FSH in one study. Evidence was of low quality: The main limitations were serious risk of bias due to poor reporting of study methods and blinding of participants and outcome assessors. Live birth Metformin plus FSH was associated with a higher cumulative live birth rate when compared with FSH (odds ratio (OR) 2.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23 to 4.34; two RCTs, n = 180; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth after FSH is assumed to be 27%, then the chance after addition of metformin would be between 32% and 60%. Other pregnancy outcomes Metformin use was associated with a higher ongoing pregnancy rate (OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.36 to 4.46; four RCTs, n = 232; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence) and a higher clinical pregnancy rate (OR 2.51, 95% CI 1.46 to 4.31; five RCTs, n = 264; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). Multiple pregnancy Results showed no evidence of a difference in multiple pregnancy rates between metformin plus FSH and FSH (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.95; four RCTs, n = 232; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence) and no evidence of a difference in rates of miscarriage or OHSS. Other adverse effects Evidence was inadequate as the result of limited available data on adverse events after metformin compared with after no metformin (OR 1.78, 95% CI 0.39 to 8.09; two RCTs, n = 91; I2 = 0%; very low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary evidence suggests that metformin may increase the live birth rate among women undergoing ovulation induction with gonadotrophins. At this moment, evidence is insufficient to show an effect of metformin on multiple pregnancy rates and adverse events. Additional trials are necessary before we can provide further conclusions that may affect clinical practice.

Metformin treatment before and during IVF or ICSI in women with polycystic ovary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The use of insulin-sensitising agents, such as metformin, in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) who are undergoing ovulation induction or in vitro fertilisation (IVF) cycles has been widely studied. Metformin reduces hyperinsulinaemia and suppresses the excessive ovarian production of androgens. As a consequence, it is suggested that metformin could improve assisted reproductive techniques (ART) outcomes, such as ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), pregnancy and live birth rates. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of metformin as a co-treatment during IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in achieving pregnancy or live birth in women with PCOS. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the metaRegister of Controlled Trials and reference lists of articles (up to 15 October 2014). SELECTION CRITERIA: Types of studies: randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing metformin treatment with placebo or no treatment in women with PCOS who underwent IVF or ICSI treatment. TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS: women of reproductive age with anovulation due to PCOS with or without co-existing infertility factors.Types of interventions: metformin administered before and during IVF or ICSI treatment.Types of outcome measures: live birth rate, clinical pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome , incidence of participant-reported side effects, serum oestradiol level on the day of trigger, serum androgen level, and fasting insulin and glucose levels. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected the studies, extracted the data according to the protocol and assessed study quality. The overall quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE methods. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine randomised controlled trials involving a total of 816 women with PCOS. When metformin was compared with placebo there was no clear evidence of a difference between the groups in live birth rates (OR 1.39, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.40, five RCTs, 551 women, I(2) = 52%, low-quality evidence). Our findings suggest that for a woman with a 32 % chance of achieving a live birth using placebo or other treatment, the corresponding chance using metformin treatment would be between 28% and 53%.When metformin was compared with placebo or no treatment, clinical pregnancy rates were higher in the metformin group (OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.07 to 2.15; eight RCTs, 775 women, I(2) = 18%, moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that for a woman with a 31% chance of achieving a clinical pregnancy using placebo or no treatment, the corresponding chance using metformin treatment would be between 32% and 49%.The risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome was lower in the metformin group (OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.49, eight RCTs, 798 women, I(2) = 11%, moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that for a woman with a 27% risk of having OHSS without metformin the corresponding chance using metformin treatment would be between 6% and 15%.Side effects (mostly gastrointestinal) were more common in the metformin group (OR 4.49, 95% CI 1.88 to 10.72, for RCTs, 431 women, I(2)=57%, low quality evidence)The overall quality of the evidence was moderate for the outcomes of clinical pregnancy, OHSS and miscarriage, and low for other outcomes. The main limitations in the evidence were imprecision and inconsistency. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review found no conclusive evidence that metformin treatment before or during ART cycles improved live birth rates in women with PCOS. However, the use of this insulin-sensitising agent increased clinical pregnancy rates and decreased the risk of OHSS.

Recommendations from the 2023 International Evidence-based Guideline for the Assessment and Management of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the recommended assessment and management of those with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), based on the best available evidence, clinical expertise, and consumer preference? SUMMARY ANSWER: International evidence-based guidelines address prioritized questions and outcomes and include 254 recommendations and practice points, to promote consistent, evidence-based care and improve the experience and health outcomes in PCOS. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The 2018 International PCOS Guideline was independently evaluated as high quality and integrated multidisciplinary and consumer perspectives from six continents; it is now used in 196 countries and is widely cited. It was based on best available, but generally very low to low quality, evidence. It applied robust methodological processes and addressed shared priorities. The guideline transitioned from consensus based to evidence-based diagnostic criteria and enhanced accuracy of diagnosis, whilst promoting consistency of care. However, diagnosis is still delayed, the needs of those with PCOS are not being adequately met, evidence quality was low and evidence-practice gaps persist. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The 2023 International Evidence-based Guideline update reengaged the 2018 network across professional societies and consumer organizations with multidisciplinary experts and women with PCOS directly involved at all stages. Extensive evidence synthesis was completed. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-II (AGREEII)-compliant processes were followed. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was applied across evidence quality, feasibility, acceptability, cost, implementation and ultimately recommendation strength and diversity and inclusion were considered throughout. PARTICIPANTS/ MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: This summary should be read in conjunction with the full Guideline for detailed participants and methods. Governance included a six-continent international advisory and management committee, five guideline development groups, and paediatric, consumer, and translation committees. Extensive consumer engagement and guideline experts informed the update scope and priorities. Engaged international society-nominated panels included paediatrics, endocrinology, gynaecology, primary care, reproductive endocrinology, obstetrics, psychiatry, psychology, dietetics, exercise physiology, obesity care, public health and other experts, alongside consumers, project management, evidence synthesis, statisticians and translation experts. Thirty-nine professional and consumer organizations covering 71 countries engaged in the process. Twenty meetings and five face-to-face forums over 12 months addressed 58 prioritized clinical questions involving 52 systematic and 3 narrative reviews. Evidence-based recommendations were developed and approved via consensus across five guideline panels, modified based on international feedback and peer review, independently reviewed for methodological rigour, and approved by the Australian Government National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The evidence in the assessment and management of PCOS has generally improved in the past five years, but remains of low to moderate quality. The technical evidence report and analyses (∼6000 pages) underpins 77 evidence-based and 54 consensus recommendations, with 123 practice points. Key updates include: i) further refinement of individual diagnostic criteria, a simplified diagnostic algorithm and inclusion of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels as an alternative to ultrasound in adults only; ii) strengthening recognition of broader features of PCOS including metabolic risk factors, cardiovascular disease, sleep apnea, very high prevalence of psychological features, and high risk status for adverse outcomes during pregnancy; iii) emphasizing the poorly recognized, diverse burden of disease and the need for greater healthcare professional education, evidence-based patient information, improved models of care and shared decision making to improve patient experience, alongside greater research; iv) maintained emphasis on healthy lifestyle, emotional wellbeing and quality of life, with awareness and consideration of weight stigma; and v) emphasizing evidence-based medical therapy and cheaper and safer fertility management. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Overall, recommendations are strengthened and evidence is improved, but remain generally low to moderate quality. Significantly greater research is now needed in this neglected, yet common condition. Regional health system variation was considered and acknowledged, with a further process for guideline and translation resource adaptation provided. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The 2023 International Guideline for the Assessment and Management of PCOS provides clinicians and patients with clear advice on best practice, based on the best available evidence, expert multidisciplinary input and consumer preferences. Research recommendations have been generated and a comprehensive multifaceted dissemination and translation programme supports the Guideline with an integrated evaluation program. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This effort was primarily funded by the Australian Government via the National Health Medical Research Council (NHMRC) (APP1171592), supported by a partnership with American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Endocrine Society, European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology, and the Society for Endocrinology. The Commonwealth Government of Australia also supported Guideline translation through the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFCRI000266). HJT and AM are funded by NHMRC fellowships. JT is funded by a Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) fellowship. Guideline development group members were volunteers. Travel expenses were covered by the sponsoring organizations. Disclosures of interest were strictly managed according to NHMRC policy and are available with the full guideline, technical evidence report, peer review and responses (www.monash.edu/medicine/mchri/pcos). Of named authors HJT, CTT, AD, LM, LR, JBoyle, AM have no conflicts of interest to declare. JL declares grant from Ferring and Merck; consulting fees from Ferring and Titus Health Care; speaker's fees from Ferring; unpaid consultancy for Ferring, Roche Diagnostics and Ansh Labs; and sits on advisory boards for Ferring, Roche Diagnostics, Ansh Labs, and Gedeon Richter. TP declares a grant from Roche; consulting fees from Gedeon Richter and Organon; speaker's fees from Gedeon Richter and Exeltis; travel support from Gedeon Richter and Exeltis; unpaid consultancy for Roche Diagnostics; and sits on advisory boards for Roche Diagnostics. MC declares travels support from Merck; and sits on an advisory board for Merck. JBoivin declares grants from Merck Serono Ltd.; consulting fees from Ferring B.V; speaker's fees from Ferring Arzneimittell GmbH; travel support from Organon; and sits on an advisory board for the Office of Health Economics. RJN has received speaker's fees from Merck and sits on an advisory board for Ferring. AJoham has received speaker's fees from Novo Nordisk and Boehringer Ingelheim. The guideline was peer reviewed by special interest groups across our 39 partner and collaborating organizations, was independently methodologically assessed against AGREEII criteria and was approved by all members of the guideline development groups and by the NHMRC.