Search

Study Question: How does the cost-effectiveness (CE) of immediate IVF compared with postponing IVF for 1 year, depend on prognostic characteristics of the couple?, Summary Answer: The CE ratio, i.e. the incremental costs of immediate versus delayed IVF per extra live birth, is the highest (range of €15 000 to >€60 000) for couples with unexplained infertility and for them depends strongly on female age and the duration of infertility, whilst being lowest for endometriosis (range 8000-23 000) and, for such patients, only slightly dependent on female age and duration of infertility., What Is Known Already: A few countries have guidelines for indications of IVF, using the diagnostic category, female age and duration of infertility. The CE of these guidelines is unknown and the evidence base exists only for bilateral tubal occlusion, not for the other diagnostic categories., Study Design, Size, Duration: A modelling approach was applied, based on the literature and data from a prospective cohort study among couples eligible for IVF or ICSI treatment, registered in a national waiting list in The Netherlands between January 2002 and December 2003., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: A total of 5962 couples was included. Chances of natural ongoing pregnancy were estimated from the waiting list observations and chances of ongoing pregnancy after IVF from follow-up data of couples with primary infertility that began treatment. Prognostic characteristics considered were female age, duration of infertility and diagnostic category. Costs of IVF were assessed from a societal perspective and determined on a representative sample of patients. A cost-effectiveness comparison was made between two scenarios: (I) wait one more year and then undergo IVF for 1 year and (II) immediate IVF during 1 year, and try to conceive naturally in the following year. Comparisons were made for strata determined by the prognostic factors. The final outcome was a live birth., Main Results and the Role of Chance: The gain in live birth rate of the immediate IVF scenario versus postponed IVF increased with female age, and was independent from diagnostic category or duration of infertility. By contrast, the corresponding increase in costs primarily depended on diagnostic category and duration of infertility. The lowest CE ratio was just below €10 000 per live birth for endometriosis from age 34 onwards at 1 year duration. The highest CE ratio reached €56 000 per live birth for unexplained infertility at age 30 and 3 years duration, dropping to values below € 30 000 per live birth from age 32 onwards. It reached values below €20 000 per live birth with 3 years duration at age 34 and older. The CE ratio was in between for the three other diagnostic categories (i.e. Male infertility, Hormonal and Immunological/Cervical)., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: We applied estimates of chances with IVF, excluding frozen embryos, for which we had no data. Therefore, we do not know the effect of frozen embryo transfers on the CE., Wider Implications of the Findings: The duration of infertility at which IVF becomes cost-effective depends, firstly, on the level of society's willingness to pay for one extra live birth, and secondly, given a certain level of willingness to pay, on the woman's age and the diagnostic category. In current guidelines, the chances of a natural conception should always be taken into account before deciding whether to start IVF treatment and at which time., Study Funding/competing Interest(s): Supported by Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMW, grant 945-12-013). ZonMW had no role in designing the study, data collection, analysis and interpretation of data or writing of the report. Competing interests: none., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com)

Study Question: How well does the recently developed UK model predicting the success rate of IVF treatment (the 2011 Nelson model) perform in comparison with a UK model developed in the early 1990s (the Templeton model)?, Summary Answer: Both models showed similar performance, after correction for the increasing success rate over time of IVF., What Is Known Already: For counselling couples undergoing IVF treatment it is of paramount importance to be able to predict success. Several prediction models for the chance of success after IVF treatment have been developed. So far, the Templeton model has been recommended as the best approach after having been validated in several independent patient data sets. The Nelson model, developed in 2011 and characterized by the largest development sample containing the most recently treated couples, may well perform better., Study Design, Size, Duration: We tested both models in couples that were included in a national cohort study carried out in the Netherlands between the beginning of January 2002 and the end of December 2004., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: We analysed the IVF cycles of Dutch couples with primary infertility (n = 5176). The chance of success was calculated using the two UK models that had been developed using the information collected in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority database. Women were treated in 1991-1994 (Templeton) or 2003-2007 (Nelson). The outcome of success for both UK models is the occurrence of a live birth after IVF but the outcome in the Dutch data is an ongoing pregnancy. In order to make the outcomes compatible, we used a factor to convert the chance of live birth to ongoing pregnancy and use the overall terms 'success or no success after IVF'. The discriminative ability and the calibration of both models were assessed, the latter before and after adjustment for time trends in IVF success rates., Main Results and the Role of Chance: The two models showed a similarly limited degree of discriminative ability on the tested data (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.597 for the Templeton model and 0.590 for the Nelson model). The Templeton model underestimated the success rate (observed 21% versus predicted 14%); the Nelson model overestimated the success rate (observed 21% versus predicted 29%). When the models were adjusted for the changing success rates over time, the calibration of both models considerably improved (Templeton observed 21% versus predicted 20%; Nelson observed 21% versus predicted 24%)., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: We could only test the models in couples with primary infertility because detailed information on secondary infertile couples was lacking in the Dutch data. This shortcoming may have negatively influenced the performance of the Nelson model., Wider Implications of the Findings: The changes in success rates over time should be taken into account when assessing prediction models for estimating the success rate of IVF treatment. In patients with primary infertility, the choice to use the Templeton or Nelson model is arbitrary.

Objective: Intrauterine insemination (IUI) with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) is commonly used as treatment of first choice in couples with unexplained subfertility. This treatment should only be applied when there is a realistic increase in chance of pregnancy, particularly because it carries the increased risk of multiple pregnancies. We evaluated the effectiveness of IUI with COH relative to expectant management in couples with unexplained subfertility and an intermediate prognosis of a spontaneous ongoing pregnancy., Design: Multicentre randomised clinical study., Method: 253 couples with unexplained subfertility and a probability of a spontaneous ongoing pregnancy of 30% to 40% within 12 months, were randomly assigned to IUI with COH for 6 months or expectant management for 6 months. The primary endpoint of our study was ongoing pregnancy within 6 months. Analysis was carried out according to the intention to treat principle. This study was registered with the Dutch Trial Register and has the International Standard Randomised Clinical Trial number ISRCTN72675518., Results: Of the 253 couples included, 127 couples were allocated to IUI with COH and 126 to expectant management. In the intervention group, 42 women (33%) conceived, of which 29 pregnancies were ongoing (23%). In the expectant management group, 40 women (32%) conceived, of which 34 pregnancies were ongoing (27%) (relative risk: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.63-1.1). In the expectant management group one twin pregnancy occurred and in the intervention group one woman conceived twins and one a triplet., Conclusion: A substantial beneficial effect of IUI with COH in couples with unexplained subfertility and an intermediate prognosis can be excluded. Expectant management for a period of 6 months therefore appears justified in these couples.

Background: Prediction models for spontaneous pregnancy may be useful tools to select subfertile couples that have good fertility prospects and should therefore be counselled for expectant management. We assessed the accuracy of a recently published prediction model for spontaneous pregnancy in a large prospective validation study., Methods: In 38 centres, we studied a consecutive cohort of subfertile couples, referred for an infertility work-up. Patients had a regular menstrual cycle, patent tubes and a total motile sperm count (TMC) >3 x 10(6). After the infertility work-up had been completed, we used a prediction model to calculate the chance of a spontaneous ongoing pregnancy (www.freya.nl/probability.php). The primary end-point was time until the occurrence of a spontaneous ongoing pregnancy within 1 year. The performance of the pregnancy prediction model was assessed with calibration, which is the comparison of predicted and observed ongoing pregnancy rates for groups of patients and discrimination., Results: We included 3021 couples of whom 543 (18%) had a spontaneous ongoing pregnancy, 57 (2%) a non-successful pregnancy, 1316 (44%) started treatment, 825 (27%) neither started treatment nor became pregnant and 280 (9%) were lost to follow-up. Calibration of the prediction model was almost perfect. In the 977 couples (32%) with a calculated probability between 30 and 40%, the observed cumulative pregnancy rate at 12 months was 30%, and in 611 couples (20%) with a probability of >or=40%, this was 46%. The discriminative capacity was similar to the one in which the model was developed (c-statistic 0.59)., Conclusions: As the chance of a spontaneous ongoing pregnancy among subfertile couples can be accurately calculated, this prediction model can be used as an essential tool for clinical decision-making and in counselling patients. The use of the prediction model may help to prevent unnecessary treatment.

Background: Several models have been published for the prediction of spontaneous pregnancy among subfertile patients. The aim of this study was to broaden the empirical basis for these predictions by making a synthesis of three previously published models., Methods: We used the original data from the studies of Eimers et al. (1994), Collins et al. (1995) and Snick et al. (1997) on couples consulting for various forms of subfertility. We developed a so-called three-sample synthesis model for predicting spontaneous conception leading to live birth within 1 year after intake based on the three data sets. The predictors used are duration of subfertility, women's age, primary or secondary infertility, percentage of motile sperm, and whether the couple was referred by a general practitioner or by a gynaecologist (referral status). The performance of this model was assessed according to a 'jack-knife' analysis. Because the post-coital test (PCT) was not assessed in one of the samples, a synthesis model including the PCT was based on two samples only., Results: The ability of the synthesis models to distinguish between women who became pregnant and those who did not was comparable to the ability of the one-sample models when applied in the other samples. The reliability of the predictions by the three-sample synthesis model was somewhat better. Predictions improved considerably by including the PCT., Conclusions: The synthesis models performed better and had a broader empirical basis than the original models. They are therefore better suitable for application in other centres.

BACKGROUND: The Dutch IVF guideline suggests triage of patients for IVF based on diagnostic category, duration of infertility and female age. There is no evidence for the effectiveness of these criteria. We evaluated the predictive value of patient characteristics that are used in the Dutch IVF guideline and developed a model that predicts the IVF ongoing pregnancy chance within 12 months. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]