Effects of preconception lifestyle intervention in infertile women with obesity: The FIT-PLESE randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Women with obesity and infertility are counseled to lose weight prior to conception and infertility treatment to improve pregnancy rates and birth outcomes, although confirmatory evidence from randomized trials is lacking. We assessed whether a preconception intensive lifestyle intervention with acute weight loss is superior to a weight neutral intervention at achieving a healthy live birth. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this open-label, randomized controlled study (FIT-PLESE), 379 women with obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) and unexplained infertility were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to 2 preconception lifestyle modification groups lasting 16 weeks, between July 2015 and July 2018 (final follow-up September 2019) followed by infertility therapy. The primary outcome was the healthy live birth (term infant of normal weight without major anomalies) incidence. This was conducted at 9 academic health centers across the United States. The intensive group underwent increased physical activity and weight loss (target 7%) through meal replacements and medication (Orlistat) compared to a standard group with increased physical activity alone without weight loss. This was followed by standardized empiric infertility treatment consisting of 3 cycles of ovarian stimulation/intrauterine insemination. Outcomes of any resulting pregnancy were tracked. Among 191 women randomized to standard lifestyle group, 40 dropped out of the study before conception; among 188 women randomized to intensive lifestyle group, 31 dropped out of the study before conception. All the randomized women were included in the intent-to-treat analysis for primary outcome of a healthy live birth. There were no significant differences in the incidence of healthy live births [standard 29/191(15.2%), intensive 23/188(12.2%), rate ratio 0.81 (0.48 to 1.34), P = 0.40]. Intensive had significant weight loss compared to standard (-6.6 ± 5.4% versus -0.3 ± 3.2%, P < 0.001). There were improvements in metabolic health, including a marked decrease in incidence of the metabolic syndrome (baseline to 16 weeks: standard: 53.6% to 49.4%, intensive 52.8% to 32.2%, P = 0.003). Gastrointestinal side effects were significantly more common in intensive. There was a higher, but nonsignificant, first trimester pregnancy loss in the intensive group (33.3% versus 23.7% in standard, 95% rate ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79 to 2.50). The main limitations of the study are the limited power of the study to detect rare complications and the design difficulty in finding an adequate time matched control intervention, as the standard exercise intervention may have potentially been helpful or harmful. CONCLUSIONS: A preconception intensive lifestyle intervention for weight loss did not improve fertility or birth outcomes compared to an exercise intervention without targeted weight loss. Improvement in metabolic health may not translate into improved female fecundity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02432209.

Effect of an Active vs Expectant Management Strategy on Successful Resolution of Pregnancy Among Patients With a Persisting Pregnancy of Unknown Location: The ACT or NOT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Women with an early nonviable pregnancy of unknown location are at high risk of ectopic pregnancy and its inherent morbidity and mortality. Successful and timely resolution of the gestation, while minimizing unscheduled interventions, are important priorities. Objective: To determine if active management is more effective in achieving pregnancy resolution than expectant management and whether the use of empirical methotrexate is noninferior to uterine evacuation followed by methotrexate if needed. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter randomized clinical trial recruited 255 hemodynamically stable women with a diagnosed persisting pregnancy of unknown location between July 25, 2014, and June 4, 2019, in 12 medical centers in the United States (final follow up, August 19, 2019). Interventions: Eligible patients were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to expectant management (n = 86), active management with uterine evacuation followed by methotrexate if needed (n = 87), or active management with empirical methotrexate using a 2-dose protocol (n = 82). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was successful resolution of the pregnancy without change from initial strategy. The primary hypothesis tested for superiority of the active groups combined vs expectant management, and a secondary hypothesis tested for noninferiority of empirical methotrexate compared with uterine evacuation with methotrexate as needed using a noninferiority margin of -12%. Results: Among 255 patients who were randomized (median age, 31 years; interquartile range, 27-36 years), 253 (99.2%) completed the trial. Ninety-nine patients (39%) declined their randomized allocation (26.7% declined expectant management, 48.3% declined uterine evacuation, and 41.5% declined empirical methotrexate) and crossed over to a different group. Compared with patients randomized to receive expectant management (n = 86), women randomized to receive active management (n = 169) were significantly more likely to experience successful pregnancy resolution without change in their initial management strategy (51.5% vs 36.0%; difference, 15.4% [95% CI, 2.8% to 28.1%]; rate ratio, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.04 to 1.96]). Among active management strategies, empirical methotrexate was noninferior to uterine evacuation followed by methotrexate if needed with regard to successful pregnancy resolution without change in management strategy (54.9% vs 48.3%; difference, 6.6% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -8.4% to ∞]). The most common adverse event was vaginal bleeding for all of the 3 management groups (44.2%-52.9%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with a persisting pregnancy of unknown location, patients randomized to receive active management, compared with those randomized to receive expectant management, more frequently achieved successful pregnancy resolution without change from the initial management strategy. The substantial crossover between groups should be considered when interpreting the results. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02152696.

Maternal mortality in the United States: research gaps, opportunities, and priorities.

Maternal mortality and severe maternal morbidity are urgent issues in the United States. It is important to establish priority areas to address these public health crises. On April 8, 2019, and May 2 to 3, 2019, the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development organized and invited experts with varied perspectives to 2 meetings, a community engagement forum and a scientific workshop, to discuss underlying themes involved in the rising incidence of maternal mortality in the United States. Experts from diverse disciplines reviewed current data, ongoing activities, and identified research gaps focused on data measurement and reporting, obstetrical and health system factors, social determinants and disparities, and the community perspective and engagement. Key scientific opportunities to reduce maternal mortality and severe maternal morbidity include improved data quality and measurement, understanding the populations affected as well as the numerous etiologies, clinical research to confirm preventive and interventional strategies, and engagement of community participation in research that will lead to the reduction of maternal mortality in the United States. This article provides a summary of the workshop presentations and discussions.

The efficiency of single institutional review board review in National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Cooperative Reproductive Medicine Network-initiated clinical trials.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Timely review of research protocols by institutional review boards leads to more rapid initiation of clinical trials, which is critical to expeditious translation from bench to bedside. This observational study examined the impact of a single institutional review board on time and efforts required to initiate clinical trials by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Cooperative Reproductive Medicine Network. METHODS: Collection of data from the same six main clinical sites for three current clinical trials and two past clinical trials, including time from institutional review board submission to approval, pages submitted, consent form length, number of required attachments, other regulatory requirements, order of review at central or local sites, and language in documents at individual participating sites. Results from two past clinical trials were also included. RESULTS: While time required for actual institutional review board submission's review and initial approval was reduced with use of a single institutional review board for multicenter trials (from a mean of 66.7-24.0 days), total time was increased (to a mean of 111.2 or 123.3 days). In addition to single institutional review board approval, all institutions required local approval of some components (commonly consent language and use of local language), which varied considerably. The single institutional review board relied on local institutions for adding or removing personnel, conflict of interest review, and auditing of activities. CONCLUSION: A single institutional review board reduced time for initial review and approval of protocols and informed consents, although time for the entire process was increased, as individual institutions retained oversight of components of required regulatory review. In order to best achieve the National Institute of Health's goals for improved efficiency in initiation and conduct of multisite clinical research, greater coordination with local institutional review boards is key to streamlining and accelerating initiation of multisite clinical research.

Letrozole, Gonadotropin, or Clomiphene for Unexplained Infertility.

BACKGROUND: The standard therapy for women with unexplained infertility is gonadotropin or clomiphene citrate. Ovarian stimulation with letrozole has been proposed to reduce multiple gestations while maintaining live birth rates. METHODS: We enrolled couples with unexplained infertility in a multicenter, randomized trial. Ovulatory women 18 to 40 years of age with at least one patent fallopian tube were randomly assigned to ovarian stimulation (up to four cycles) with gonadotropin (301 women), clomiphene (300), or letrozole (299). The primary outcome was the rate of multiple gestations among women with clinical pregnancies. RESULTS: After treatment with gonadotropin, clomiphene, or letrozole, clinical pregnancies occurred in 35.5%, 28.3%, and 22.4% of cycles, and live birth in 32.2%, 23.3%, and 18.7%, respectively; pregnancy rates with letrozole were significantly lower than the rates with standard therapy (gonadotropin or clomiphene) (P=0.003) or gonadotropin alone (P<0.001) but not with clomiphene alone (P=0.10). Among ongoing pregnancies with fetal heart activity, the multiple gestation rate with letrozole (9 of 67 pregnancies, 13%) did not differ significantly from the rate with gonadotropin or clomiphene (42 of 192, 22%; P=0.15) or clomiphene alone (8 of 85, 9%; P=0.44) but was lower than the rate with gonadotropin alone (34 of 107, 32%; P=0.006). All multiple gestations in the clomiphene and letrozole groups were twins, whereas gonadotropin treatment resulted in 24 twin and 10 triplet gestations. There were no significant differences among groups in the frequencies of congenital anomalies or major fetal and neonatal complications. CONCLUSIONS: In women with unexplained infertility, ovarian stimulation with letrozole resulted in a significantly lower frequency of multiple gestation but also a lower frequency of live birth, as compared with gonadotropin but not as compared with clomiphene. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01044862.).

Allostatic load, a measure of chronic physiological stress, is associated with pregnancy outcomes, but not fertility, among women with unexplained infertility.

STUDY QUESTION: Among infertile women undergoing ovarian stimulation, is allostatic load (AL), a measure of chronic physiological stress, associated with subsequent fertility and pregnancy outcomes? SUMMARY ANSWER: AL at baseline was not associated with conception, spontaneous abortion or live birth, however, it was significantly associated with increased odds of pre-eclampsia and preterm birth among women who had a live birth in the study. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Several studies have linked AL during pregnancy to adverse outcomes including preterm birth and pre-eclampsia, hypothesizing that it may contribute to well-documented disparities in pregnancy and birth outcomes. However, AL biomarkers change over the course of pregnancy, raising questions as to whether gestational AL assessment is a valid measure of cumulative physiologic stress starting long before pregnancy. To better understand how AL may impact reproductive outcomes, AL measurement in the non-pregnant state (i.e. prior to conception) is needed. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A secondary data analysis based on data from 836 women who participated in Assessment of Multiple Intrauterine Gestations from Ovarian Stimulation (AMIGOS), a multi-center, randomized clinical trial of ovarian stimulation conducted from 2011 to 2014. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Ovulatory women with unexplained infertility (ages 18-40) were enrolled and at baseline, biological and anthropometric measures were collected. AL scores were calculated as a composite of the following baseline variables determined a priori: BMI, waist-to-hip ratio, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, C-reactive protein and HOMA score. Participants received ovarian stimulation for up to four cycles and if they conceived, were followed throughout pregnancy. We fit multi-variable logistic regression models examining AL (one-tailed and two-tailed) in relation to the following reproductive outcomes: conception, spontaneous abortion, live birth, pre-eclampsia, preterm birth and low birthweight. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Adjusting for covariates, a unit increase in two-tailed AL score was associated with 62% increased odds of pre-eclampsia (OR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.14, 2.38) 44% increased odds of preterm birth (OR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.02, 2.08), and 39% increased odds of low birthweight (OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 0.99, 1.97). The relationship between AL and preterm birth was mediated by pre-eclampsia (P = 0.0003). In one-tailed AL analyses, associations were similar, but slightly attenuated. AL was not associated with fertility outcomes (conception, spontaneous abortion, live birth). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Results may not be generalizable to fertile women who conceive naturally or women with other types of infertility. Comparisons to previous, related work are difficult because variables included in AL composite measures vary across studies. AL may be indicative of overall poor health, rather than being specific to chronic physiological stress. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our results suggest that chronic physiological stress may not impact success of ovarian stimulation, however, they confirm and extend previous work suggesting that AL is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. Physiological dysregulation due to chronic stress has been proposed as a possible mechanism underlying disparities in birth outcomes, which are currently poorly understood. Assessing biomarkers of physiological dysregulation pre-conception or in early pregnancy, may help to identify women at risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, particularly pre-eclampsia. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): Support for AMIGOS was provided by: U10 HD39005, U10 HD38992, U10 HD27049, U10 HD38998, U10 HD055942, HD055944, U10 HD055936 and U10HD055925. Support for the current analysis was provided by T32ES007271, R25HD075737, P30ES001247 and P30ES005022. This research was made possible by funding by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of NICHD, NIEHS or NIH. E.B., W.V., O.M., R.A., M.R., V.B., G.W.B., C.C., E.E., S.K., R.U., P.C, H.Z., N.S. and S.T. have nothing to disclose. R.L. reported serving as a consultant to Abbvie, Bayer, Kindex, Odega, Millendo and Fractyl and serving as a site investigator and receiving grants from Ferring. K.H. reported receiving grants from Roche Diagnostics and Ferring. R.R. reported a grant from AbbVie. M.D. reported being on the Board of Directors of and a stockholder in Advanced Reproductive Care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinical Trials.gov number: NCT01044862.

Comparison of sonohysterography to hysterosalpingogram for tubal patency assessment in a multicenter fertility treatment trial among women with polycystic ovary syndrome.

PURPOSE: To compare saline infusion sonohysterography (SIS) versus hysterosalpingogram (HSG) for confirmation of tubal patency. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial, Pregnancy in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome II (PPCOS II). Seven hundred fifty infertile women (18-40 years old) with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) were randomized to up to 5 cycles of letrozole or clomiphene citrate. Prior to enrollment, tubal patency was determined by HSG, the presence of free fluid in the pelvis on SIS, laparoscopy, or recent intrauterine pregnancy. Logistic regression was conducted in patients who ovulated with clinical pregnancy as the outcome and HSG or SIS as the key independent variable. RESULTS: Among women who ovulated, 414 (66.9%) had tubal patency confirmed by SIS and 187 (30.2%) had at least one tube patent on HSG. Multivariable analysis indicated that choice of HSG versus SIS did not have a significant relationship on likelihood of clinical pregnancy, after adjustment for treatment arm, BMI, duration of infertility, smoking, and education (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.77, 1.67, P = 0.52). Ectopic pregnancy occurred more often in women who had tubal patency confirmed by HSG compared to SIS (2.8% versus 0.6%, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of women with PCOS, there was no significant difference in clinical pregnancy rate between women who had tubal patency confirmed by HSG versus SIS. SIS is an acceptable imaging modality for assessment of tubal patency in this population.

Letrozole versus clomiphene for infertility in the polycystic ovary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Clomiphene is the current first-line infertility treatment in women with the polycystic ovary syndrome, but aromatase inhibitors, including letrozole, might result in better pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: In this double-blind, multicenter trial, we randomly assigned 750 women, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive letrozole or clomiphene for up to five treatment cycles, with visits to determine ovulation and pregnancy, followed by tracking of pregnancies. The polycystic ovary syndrome was defined according to modified Rotterdam criteria (anovulation with either hyperandrogenism or polycystic ovaries). Participants were 18 to 40 years of age, had at least one patent fallopian tube and a normal uterine cavity, and had a male partner with a sperm concentration of at least 14 million per milliliter; the women and their partners agreed to have regular intercourse with the intent of conception during the study. The primary outcome was live birth during the treatment period. RESULTS: Women who received letrozole had more cumulative live births than those who received clomiphene (103 of 374 [27.5%] vs. 72 of 376 [19.1%], P=0.007; rate ratio for live birth, 1.44; 95% confidence interval, 1.10 to 1.87) without significant differences in overall congenital anomalies, though there were four major congenital anomalies in the letrozole group versus one in the clomiphene group (P=0.65). The cumulative ovulation rate was higher with letrozole than with clomiphene (834 of 1352 treatment cycles [61.7%] vs. 688 of 1425 treatment cycles [48.3%], P<0.001). There were no significant between-group differences in pregnancy loss (49 of 154 pregnancies in the letrozole group [31.8%] and 30 of 103 pregnancies in the clomiphene group [29.1%]) or twin pregnancy (3.4% and 7.4%, respectively). Clomiphene was associated with a higher incidence of hot flushes, and letrozole was associated with higher incidences of fatigue and dizziness. Rates of other adverse events were similar in the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with clomiphene, letrozole was associated with higher live-birth and ovulation rates among infertile women with the polycystic ovary syndrome. (Funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00719186.).

Age-stratified thresholds of anti-Müllerian hormone improve prediction of polycystic ovary syndrome over a population-based threshold.

OBJECTIVE: Due to its consistent elevation in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and correlation with polycystic ovarian morphology (PCOM), anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) has been proposed as a marker of the syndrome. However, prior studies reporting thresholds of AMH for a PCOS diagnosis have been limited by small sample size, inappropriate controls, and heterogeneous AMH assays. We sought to evaluate the suitability of a standardized AMH assay as a biomarker of PCOS. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study at academic medical centres across the United States. PATIENTS: Women with PCOS were diagnosed by Rotterdam criteria and included 282 subjects from the multisite PPCOS II trial and 109 patients from a tertiary academic centre's multidisciplinary PCOS clinic. Controls included 245 participants in the ovarian ageing (OVA) study, a community-based cohort of ovulatory women not seeking treatment for fertility. MEASUREMENTS: Determination of AMH by a central laboratory. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were used to investigate the accuracy of AMH thresholds for prediction of PCOS diagnosis with stratification by age. RESULTS: The optimal threshold of AMH to distinguish PCOS from controls was 55.36 pmol/L (sensitivity: 0.82, specificity: 0.78, J: 0.60). When examining the population by age groups, the optimal AMH threshold decreased with increasing age. CONCLUSIONS: AMH is an effective biomarker of PCOS. Age-stratified thresholds more accurately predicted PCOS than an overall population-based threshold.

Racial and ethnic differences in the polycystic ovary syndrome metabolic phenotype.

BACKGROUND: Women with polycystic ovarian syndrome have a high prevalence of metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Blacks and Hispanics have a high morbidity and mortality due to cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus in the general population. Since metabolic syndrome is a risk factor for development of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, understanding any racial and ethnic differences in metabolic syndrome among women with polycystic ovarian syndrome is important for prevention strategies. However, data regarding racial/ethnic differences in metabolic phenotype among women with polycystic ovary syndrome are inconsistent. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine if there are racial/ethnic differences in insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome, and hyperandrogenemia in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted secondary data analysis of a prospective multicenter, double-blind controlled clinical trial, the Pregnancy in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome II study, conducted in 11 academic health centers. Data on 702 women with polycystic ovarian syndrome aged 18-40 years who met modified Rotterdam criteria for the syndrome and wished to conceive were included in the study. Women were grouped into racial/ethnic categories: non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks, and Hispanic. The main outcomes were the prevalence of insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome, and hyperandrogenemia in the different racial/ethnic groups. RESULTS: Body mass index (35.1 ± 9.8 vs 35.7 ± 7.9 vs 36.4 ± 7.9 kg/m2) and waist circumference (106.5 ± 21.6 vs 104.9 ± 16.4 vs 108.7 ± 7.3 cm) did not differ significantly between non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic women. Hispanic women with polycystic ovarian syndrome had a significantly higher prevalence of hirsutism (93.8% vs 86.8%), abnormal free androgen index (75.8% vs 56.5%), abnormal homeostasis model assessment (52.3% vs 38.4%), and hyperglycemia (14.8% vs 6.5%), as well as lower sex hormone binding globulin compared to non-Hispanic whites. Non-Hispanic black women had a significantly lower prevalence of metabolic syndrome (24.5% vs 42.2%) compared with Hispanic women, and lower serum triglyceride levels compared to both Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites (85.7 ± 37.3 vs 130.2 ± 57.0 vs 120.1 ± 60.5 mg/dL, P < .01), with a markedly lower prevalence of hypertriglyceridemia (5.1% vs 28.3% vs 30.5%, P < .01) compared to the other 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Hispanic women with polycystic ovarian syndrome have the most severe phenotype, both in terms of hyperandrogenism and metabolic criteria. Non-Hispanic black women have an overall milder polycystic ovarian syndrome phenotype than Hispanics and in some respects, than non-Hispanic white women.

Sexual function in infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome and unexplained infertility.

BACKGROUND: While female sexual dysfunction is a frequent occurrence, characteristics in infertile women are not well delineated. Furthermore, the impact of infertility etiology on the characteristics in women with differing androgen levels observed in women with polycystic ovary syndrome and unexplained infertility has not been assessed. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to determine the characteristics of sexual dysfunction in women with polycystic ovary syndrome and unexplained infertility. STUDY DESIGN: A secondary data analysis was performed on 2 of Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Cooperative Reproductive Medicine Networks clinical trials: Pregnancy in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Study II and Assessment of Multiple Intrauterine Gestations From Ovarian Stimulation. Both protocols assessed female sexual function using the Female Sexual Function Inventory and the Female Sexual Distress Scale. RESULTS: Women with polycystic ovary syndrome had higher weight and body mass index than women with unexplained infertility (each P < .001), greater phenotypic (Ferriman-Gallwey hirsutism score, sebum score, and acne score; each P < .001), and hormonal (testosterone, free testosterone, and dehydroepiandrosterone; each P < .001) evidence of androgen excess. Sexual function scores, as assessed by the Female Sexual Function Inventory, were nearly identical. The Female Sexual Distress Scale total score was higher in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. The mean Female Sexual Function Inventory total score increased slightly as the free androgen index increased, mainly as a result of the desire subscore. This association was more pronounced in the women with unexplained infertility. CONCLUSION: Reproductive-age women with infertility associated with polycystic ovary syndrome and unexplained infertility, despite phenotypic and biochemical differences in androgenic manifestations, do not manifest clinically significant differences in sexual function.

Fertility-related quality of life from two RCT cohorts with infertility: unexplained infertility and polycystic ovary syndrome.

STUDY QUESTION: Does fertility-related quality of life (FertiQOL) differ by infertility diagnosis between women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and their partners, compared with couples with unexplained infertility (UI)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Women with PCOS report lower QOL than those with UI, whereas males with UI report lower QOL than males with PCOS partners. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The fertility-specific QOL survey, FertiQOL, has been used to examine fertility-related QOL in a number of worldwide cohorts. Few data have addressed fertility-related QOL as a function of infertility diagnosis. Overall, men report better QOL than women with infertility, and there is variation in FertiQOL scores across different samples from different countries. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This was a prospective, cohort study derived from two concurrent, randomized clinical trials, and designed to examine QOL in infertile females with PCOS and UI at the time of enrollment compared with each other and their male partners; to compare concordance FertiQOL scores in this study across other worldwide cohorts; and to determine if baseline FertiQOL was associated with pregnancy outcome. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Women with PCOS and their partners (n = 733 and n = 641, respectively), and couples with UI (n = 865 women and 849 men) completed a validated fertility-specific QOL survey (FertiQOL) at the time of the study screening visit. PCOS women were randomized to either clomiphene citrate or letrozole treatment; couples with UI were randomized to clomiphene citrate, letrozole or gonadotrophin plus IUI. FertiQOL results were compiled by diagnosis (PCOS or UI) and compared by diagnosis and sex using Wilcoxon Rank-Sum testing. Relationships between baseline FertiQOL and pregnancy outcomes were examined using logistic regression. Multivariable models were performed to assess the association between FertiQOL scores and key participant characteristics. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Women with PCOS had lower total FertiQOL scores (72.3 ± 14.8) than those with UI (77.1 ± 12.8; P < 0.001); this was true for each domain (except Relational). These differences were largely explained by variation in BMI, hirsutism, household income and age. Women had lower overall FertiQOL scores than their male partners. Males with PCOS partners had higher scores than males with UI (84.9 ± 10.2 versus 83.3 ± 10.8; P = 0.003). Scores were not consistently associated with conception or pregnancy outcome. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The use of multiple tests of association may have resulted in spurious statistically significant findings. Inherent sociodemographic differences between women with PCOS and those with UI largely account for the lower QOL in women with PCOS. Our study was unable to assess if changes in QOL affected pregnancy outcome as FertiQOL data were collected prior to treatment. Finally, the participants for both studies represent their local communities, but are not a population-based sample and thus firm conclusions about how representative these couples are to the general population must be made with caution. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Women with PCOS with elevated BMI and hirsutism scores and with lower socioeconomic status may require more, targeted psychosocial support than those with other diagnoses. Possible attribution of infertility to the male partner appears to result in a lower QOL. There appears to be substantial national variation in FertiQOL scores, with US-based cohorts reporting overall higher QOL. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This work was supported by National Institutes of Health (NIH)/Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Grants U10 HD39005 (to M.D.), U10 HD38992 (to R.S.L.), (to C.C.), U10 HD38998 (to R.A.), U10 HD055942 (to R.D.R.), HD055944 (to P.C.), U10 HD055936 (to G.C.), U10HD055925 (to H.Z.); and U10 U54-HD29834 (to the University of Virginia Center for Research in Reproduction Ligand Assay and Analysis Core of the Specialized Cooperative Centers Program in Reproduction and Infertility Research). Most importantly, this research was made possible by the funding by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. N.S., E.E., J.C.T., C.G., H.H., R.A., P.C., G.C., C.C., M.D., S.J., W.D.S. and H.Z. report no conflicts of interests/disclosures. L.B.C. reports research support from Ferring Pharmaceuticals and Roche Diagnostics; R.S.L. reports receipt of consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Euroscreen, Sprout Pharmaceuticals, Taken, Kindex, Clarus and Bayer, Inc., and research support from AstraZeneca and Ferring Pharmaceuticals. R.D.R. reports research support from AbbVie. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Pregnancy in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome II (PPCOS II), NCT00719186; Assessment of Multiple Intrauterine Gestations in Ovulation Stimulation (AMIGOS) NCT01044862, clinicaltrials.gov. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: PPCOS II 17 July 2008; AMIGOS 7 January 2010. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: PPCOS II 19 February 2009; AMIGOS 2 August 2010.

Identification and replication of prediction models for ovulation, pregnancy and live birth in infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome.

STUDY QUESTION: Can we build and validate predictive models for ovulation and pregnancy outcomes in infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS)? SUMMARY ANSWER: We were able to develop and validate a predictive model for pregnancy outcomes in women with PCOS using simple clinical and biochemical criteria particularly duration of attempting conception, which was the most consistent predictor among all considered factors for pregnancy outcomes. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Predictive models for ovulation and pregnancy outcomes in infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome have been reported, but such models require validation. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, AND DURATION: This is a secondary analysis of the data from the Pregnancy in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome I and II (PPCOS-I and -II) trials. Both trials were double-blind, randomized clinical trials that included 626 and 750 infertile women with PCOS, respectively. PPCOS-I participants were randomized to either clomiphene citrate (CC), metformin, or their combination, and PPCOS-II participants to either letrozole or CC for up to five treatment cycles. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, AND METHODS: Linear logistic regression models were fitted using treatment, BMI, and other published variables as predictors of ovulation, conception, clinical pregnancy, and live birth as the outcome one at a time. We first evaluated previously reported significant predictors, and then constructed new prediction models. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed and the area under the curves (AUCs) was calculated to compare performance using different models and data. Chi-square tests were used to examine the goodness-of-fit and prediction power of logistic regression model. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Predictive factors were similar between PPCOS-I and II, but the two participant samples differed statistically significantly but the differences were clinically minor on key baseline characteristics and hormone levels. Women in PPCOS-II had an overall more severe PCOS phenotype than women in PPCOS-I. The clinically minor but statistically significant differences may be due to the large sample sizes. Younger age, lower baseline free androgen index and insulin, shorter duration of attempting conception, and higher baseline sex hormone-binding globulin significantly predicted at least one pregnancy outcome. The ROC curves (with AUCs of 0.66-0.76) and calibration plots and chi-square tests indicated stable predictive power of the identified variables (P-values ≥0.07 for all goodness-of-fit and validation tests). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This is a secondary analysis. Although our primary objective was to confirm previously reported results and identify new predictors of ovulation and pregnancy outcomes among PPCOS-II participants, our approach is exploratory and warrants further replication. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: We have largely confirmed the predictors that were identified in the PPCOS-I trial. However, we have also revealed new predictors, particularly the role of smoking. While a history of ever smoking was not a significant predictor for live birth, a closer look at current, quit, and never smoking revealed that current smoking was a significant risk factor. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Grants U10 HD27049, U10 HD38992, U10HD055925, U10 HD39005, U10 HD33172, U10 HD38998, U10 HD055936, U10 HD055942, and U10 HD055944; and U54-HD29834. Heilongjiang University of Chinese Medicine Grants 051277 and B201005. R.S.L. reports receiving consulting fees from Euroscreen, AstraZeneca, Clarus Therapeutics, and Takeda, and grant support from Ferring, Astra Zeneca, and Toba. K.R.H. reports receiving grant support from Roche Diagnostics and Ferring Pharmascience. G.C. reports receiving Honorarium and grant support from Abbvie Pharmaceuticals and Bayer Pharmaceuticals. M.P.D. holds equity from Advanced Reproductive Care Inc. and DS Biotech, receives fees from Advanced Reproductive Care Inc., Actamax, Auxogyn, ZSX Medical, Halt Medical, and Neomed, and receives grant support from Boehringer-Ingelheim, Abbott, and BioSante, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, and EMD Serono. H.Z. receives research support from the Chinese 1000-scholar plan. Others report no disclosures other than NIH grant support. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PPCOS-I and -II were respectively registered at Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00719186 and NCT00719186.

Correlation of Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome Phenotypes With Pregnancy and Neonatal Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in women with hyperandrogenic polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) phenotypes compared with nonhyperandrogenic PCOS phenotypes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of participants in the PPCOS (Pregnancy in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome) I and II randomized controlled trials; all of the participants met the National Institutes of Health diagnostic criteria for PCOS and were then sorted into three of the four Rotterdam criteria categories based on medical interview, demographics, physical examination, and laboratory data. The two hyperandrogenic (A and B) Rotterdam categories were compared with the nonhyperandrogenic phenotype of PCOS (phenotype D). Our outcomes of interest were clinical pregnancy, pregnancy loss, live birth, obstetric complications (including preterm labor, preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, intrauterine growth restriction, and premature rupture of membranes), and neonatal outcomes (including jaundice, respiratory distress syndrome, neonatal hospitalization, and neonatal infection). RESULTS: Of the 1,376 participants included in the study, 1,249 (90.8%) had hyperandrogenic PCOS phenotypes compared with 127 (9.2%) nonhyperandrogenic PCOS (nonhyperandrogenic PCOS). Compared with participants with nonhyperandrogenic PCOS, those with hyperandrogenic PCOS had higher body mass index (BMI) (35.5±8.9 vs 31.9±9.3 kg/m 2 , P <.001), fasting insulin (21.6±27.7 vs 14.7±15.0 micro-international units/mL, P <.001), and homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance score (5.01±9.1 vs 3.4±4.1, P =.0002). Age and race were similar between groups. Months attempting pregnancy were greater in participants with hyperandrogenic PCOS compared with nonhyperandrogenic PCOS (41.8±37.3 vs 33.9±32.0). The proportion of participants who achieved pregnancy (29.9% vs 40.2%, P =.02) and live birth rates (20.1% vs 33.1%, P =.001) were lower among those with hyperandrogenic PCOS compared with nonhyperandrogenic PCOS, although pregnancy loss rates did not differ significantly (23.9% vs 32.3%, P =.06). The hyperandrogenic PCOS group had lower odds of live birth compared with the nonhyperandrogenic PCOS group (odds ratio [OR] 0.51, CI, 0.34-0.76), even after adjusting for BMI (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.59, CI, 0.40-0.89). The hyperandrogenic PCOS group also had lower odds of achieving pregnancy compared with the nonhyperandrogenic PCOS group (OR 0.63, CI, 0.44-0.92); however, this association was no longer significant after adjusting for BMI (aOR 0.74, CI, 0.50-1.10). The overall low prevalence of prenatal complications and neonatal outcomes precluded a meaningful comparison between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Participants with hyperandrogenic PCOS achieved lower rates of pregnancy and live birth compared with those with nonhyperandrogenic PCOS. Evaluating distinct PCOS phenotypes may allow for individualized guidance regarding the probability of pregnancy and live birth. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00068861 and NCT00718186.

Sleep Habits of Women With Infertility.

CONTEXT: Sleep plays important roles in metabolic and reproductive function, and polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is associated with sleep disturbances, including increased prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate sleep parameters in infertile women with PCOS compared with women with unexplained infertility (UI) and identify risk factors for disturbed sleep. METHODS: At private and academic ambulatory gynecology and infertility practices, we evaluated a prospective cohort of women diagnosed with PCOS or UI from 2 randomized clinical trials. We included 1603 infertile women enrolled in 2 concurrent randomized clinical trials. The main outcome measures were self-reported sleep measures. RESULTS: Sleep duration <6 hours (6.1% vs 2.7%; P < .001), habitual snoring (37.8% vs 19.0%; P < .001), and clinical sleepiness (12.0% vs 8.6%; P < .026) were more common in women with PCOS than those with UI. After adjusting for covariates, PCOS and elevated fasting insulin were associated (P = .010) with clinical symptoms of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) diagnosis, whereas PCOS, elevated insulin (P = .003), WC >88 cm (P = .003), and current smoking (P = .012) were associated with habitual snoring. Clinical depression score (P < .001) and PCOS diagnosis (P = .002) were associated with perceived daytime sleepiness. Short sleep duration and clinical symptoms of OSA were not associated with conception and live birth rates. CONCLUSION: Infertile women with PCOS more commonly report sleep disturbances than those with UI. Markers of insulin resistance are associated with previous diagnosis of OSA, habitual snoring, and short sleep duration. The presence of clinical symptoms of OSA or short sleep duration does not affect fertility treatment response.

Decision trees for identifying predictors of treatment effectiveness in clinical trials and its application to ovulation in a study of women with polycystic ovary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Double-blind, randomized clinical trials are the preferred approach to demonstrating the effectiveness of one treatment against another. The comparison is, however, made on the average group effects. While patients and clinicians have always struggled to understand why patients respond differently to the same treatment, and while much hope has been held for the nascent field of predictive biomarkers (e.g. genetic markers), there is still much utility in exploring whether it is possible to estimate treatment efficacy based on demographic and baseline variables. METHODS: The pregnancy in polycystic ovary syndrome (PPCOS) study was a prospective, multi-center, randomized clinical trial comparing three ovulation induction regimens: clomiphene citrate (CC), metformin and the combination of the two. There were 446 women who ovulated in response to the treatments among the entire 626 participants. In this report, we focus on the 418 women who received CC (alone or combined with metformin) to determine if readily available baseline physical characteristics and/or easily obtainable baseline measures could be used to distinguish treatment effectiveness in stimulating ovulation. We used a recursive partitioning technique and developed a node-splitting rule to build decision tree models that reflected within-node and within-treatment responses. RESULTS: Overall, the combination of CC plus metformin resulted in an increased incidence of ovulation compared with CC alone. This is particularly so in women with relatively larger left ovarian volumes (≥ 19.5 cubic cm), and a left ovarian volume <19.5 cubic cm was related to treatment outcomes for all subsequent nodes. Women who were older, who had higher baseline insulin, higher waist-to-hip circumference ratio or higher sex hormone-binding globulin levels had better ovulatory rates with CC alone than with the combination of CC plus metformin. CONCLUSIONS: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a phenotypically diverse condition. Both baseline laboratory and clinical parameters can predict the ovulatory response in women with PCOS undergoing ovulation induction. Without a priori hypotheses with regard to any predictors, the observation regarding left ovary volume is novel and worthy of further investigation and validation.

The effect of antioxidants on male factor infertility: the Males, Antioxidants, and Infertility (MOXI) randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether antioxidants improve male fertility, as measured by semen parameters and DNA fragmentation at 3 months and pregnancy resulting in live birth after up to 6 months of treatment, among couples with male factor infertility. DESIGN: Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial with an internal pilot study. SETTING: Nine fertility centers in the United States from December 2015 to December 2018. PATIENT(S): Men (N = 174) with sperm concentration ≤15 million/mL, motility ≤40%, normal morphology ≤4%, or DNA fragmentation >25%, and female partners who were ovulatory, ≤40 years old, and had documented tubal patency. INTERVENTION(S): Males randomly assigned to receive an antioxidant formulation (n = 85) containing 500 mg of vitamin C, 400 mg of vitamin E, 0.20 mg of selenium, 1,000 mg of l-carnitine, 20 mg of zinc, 1,000 µg of folic acid, 10 mg of lycopene daily, or placebo (n = 86). Treatment lasted for a minimum of 3 months and maximum of 6 months, and couples attempted to conceive naturally during the first 3 months and with clomiphene citrate with intrauterine insemination of the female partner in months 4 through 6. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Primary outcome was live birth; secondary outcomes included pregnancy within 6 months of treatment. For the internal pilot, the primary outcomes were semen parameters and sperm DNA fragmentation index after 3 months of treatment. RESULT(S): In the Males, Antioxidants, and Infertility (MOXI) study, after 3 months of treatment, the change in sperm concentration differed between the antioxidant group (median -4.0 [interquartile range-12.0, 5.7] million/mL) and placebo group (+2.4 [-9.0, 15.5] million/mL). However, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups for changes in sperm morphology, motility, or DNA fragmentation. Among the 66 oligospermic men at randomization, sperm concentration did not differ at 3 months between the antioxidant and control groups: 8.5 (4.8, 15.0) million/mL versus 15.0 (6.0, 24.0) million/mL. Of the 75 asthenospermic men, motility did not differ at 3 months: 34% ± 16.3% versus 36.4% ± 15.8%. Among the 44 men with high DNA fragmentation, DNA fragmentation did not differ at 3 months: 29.5% (21.6%, 36.5%) versus 28.0% (20.6%, 36.4%). In the entire cohort, cumulative live birth did not differ at 6 months between the antioxidant and placebo groups: 15% versus 24%. CONCLUSION(S): Antioxidants do not improve semen parameters or DNA integrity among men with male factor infertility. Although limited by sample size, this study suggests that antioxidant treatment of the male partner does not improve in vivo pregnancy or live-birth rates. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02421887.