Top

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

Published in:

01-08-2016 | Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Predictors of treatment failure in young patients undergoing in vitro fertilization

Authors: Marni B. Jacobs, Hillary Klonoff-Cohen, Sanjay Agarwal, Donna Kritz-Silverstein, Suzanne Lindsay, V. Gabriel Garzo

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 8/2016

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to evaluate whether routinely collected clinical factors can predict in vitro fertilization (IVF) failure among young, “good prognosis” patients predominantly with secondary infertility who are less than 35 years of age.

Methods

Using de-identified clinic records, 414 women <35 years undergoing their first autologous IVF cycle were identified. Logistic regression was used to identify patient-driven clinical factors routinely collected during fertility treatment that could be used to model predicted probability of cycle failure.

Results

One hundred ninety-seven patients with both primary and secondary infertility had a failed IVF cycle, and 217 with secondary infertility had a successful live birth. None of the women with primary infertility had a successful live birth. The significant predictors for IVF cycle failure among young patients were fewer previous live births, history of biochemical pregnancies or spontaneous abortions, lower baseline antral follicle count, higher total gonadotropin dose, unknown infertility diagnosis, and lack of at least one fair to good quality embryo. The full model showed good predictive value (c = 0.885) for estimating risk of cycle failure; at ≥80 % predicted probability of failure, sensitivity = 55.4 %, specificity = 97.5 %, positive predictive value = 95.4 %, and negative predictive value = 69.8 %.

Conclusion

If this predictive model is validated in future studies, it could be beneficial for predicting IVF failure in good prognosis women under the age of 35 years.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Society for Reproductive Medicine and Society for Assisted Reproductive Technolog. 2012 Assisted Reproductive Technology Success Rates: National Summary and Fertility Clinic Reports: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Atlanta: CDC; 2014.

Gourounti K, Anagnostopoulos F, Potamianos G, Lykeridou K, Schmidt L, Vaslamatzis G. Perception of control, coping and psychological stress of infertile women undergoing IVF. Reprod Biomed Online. 2012;24(6):670–9. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.03.002.CrossRefPubMed

Pasch LA, Gregorich SE, Katz PK, Millstein SG, Nachtigall RD, Bleil ME, et al. Psychological distress and in vitro fertilization outcome. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(2):459–64. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.05.023.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Almog B, Eldar I, Barkan G, Amit A, Wagman I, Levin I. Embryo quality in controlled ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization in young poor responders. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2014;30(9):657–9. doi:10.3109/09513590.2014.920003.CrossRefPubMed

Cataldi T, Cordeiro FB, Costa Ldo V, Pilau EJ, Ferreira CR, Gozzo FC, et al. Lipid profiling of follicular fluid from women undergoing IVF: young poor ovarian responders versus normal responders. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2013;16(4):269–77. doi:10.3109/14647273.2013.852255.CrossRef

Figueira RC, Braga DP, Nichi M, Madaschi C, Semiao-Francisco L, Iaconelli A, et al. Poor ovarian response in patients younger than 35 years: is it also a qualitative decline in ovarian function? Hum Fertil (Camb). 2009;12(3):160–5. doi:10.1080/14647270902942928.CrossRef

Hanoch J, Lavy Y, Holzer H, Hurwitz A, Simon A, Revel A, et al. Young low responders protected from untoward effects of reduced ovarian response. Fertil Steril. 1998;69(6):1001–4.CrossRefPubMed

Farhi J, Ben-Haroush A, Dresler H, Pinkas H, Sapir O, Fisch B. Male factor infertility, low fertilisation rate following ICSI and low number of high-quality embryos are associated with high order recurrent implantation failure in young IVF patients. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2008;87(1):76–80. doi:10.1080/00016340701743074.CrossRefPubMed

Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology www.sart.org.

10.

Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB. In vitro culture of human blastocyst. In: Jansen R, Mortimer D, editors. Towards reproductive certainty: fertility and genetics beyond 1999. Carnforth: Parthenon Press; 1999. p. 378–88.

11.

Lintsen AM, Eijkemans MJ, Hunault CC, Bouwmans CA, Hakkaart L, Habbema JD, et al. Predicting ongoing pregnancy chances after IVF and ICSI: a national prospective study. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(9):2455–62. doi:10.1093/humrep/dem183.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Nelson SM, Lawlor DA. Predicting live birth, preterm delivery, and low birth weight in infants born from in vitro fertilisation: a prospective study of 144,018 treatment cycles. PLoS Med. 2011;8(1):e1000386. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000386.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Stolwijk AM, Zielhuis GA, Hamilton CJ, Straatman H, Hollanders JM, Goverde HJ, et al. Prognostic models for the probability of achieving an ongoing pregnancy after in-vitro fertilization and the importance of testing their predictive value. Hum Reprod. 1996;11(10):2298–303.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Harlow SD, Linet MS. Agreement between questionnaire data and medical records. The evidence for accuracy of recall. Am J Epidemiol. 1989;129(2):233–48.PubMed

15.

Kristensen P, Irgens LM. Maternal reproductive history: a registry based comparison of previous pregnancy data derived from maternal recall and data obtained during the actual pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2000;79(6):471–7.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Wilcox AJ, Horney LF. Accuracy of spontaneous abortion recall. Am J Epidemiol. 1984;120(5):727–33.PubMed

17.

Cassell DL. Don’t be loopy: re-sampling and simulation the SAS way. SAS Global Forum. Cary: SAS Institute Inc; 2007.

18.

Guidelines for the number of embryos to transfer following in vitro fertilization No. 182, September 2006. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2008; 102(2):203–16.

19.

Elective single-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(4):835–42. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.11.050.

20.

Cutting R, Morroll D, Roberts SA, Pickering S, Rutherford A. Elective single embryo transfer: guidelines for practice British Fertility Society and Association of Clinical Embryologists. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2008;11(3):131–46. doi:10.1080/14647270802302629.CrossRef

21.

Roberts SA, Hirst WM, Brison DR, Vail A. Embryo and uterine influences on IVF outcomes: an analysis of a UK multi-centre cohort. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(11):2792–802. doi:10.1093/humrep/deq213.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Terriou P, Sapin C, Giorgetti C, Hans E, Spach JL, Roulier R. Embryo score is a better predictor of pregnancy than the number of transferred embryos or female age. Fertil Steril. 2001;75(3):525–31.CrossRefPubMed

23.

van Loendersloot LL, van Wely M, Limpens J, Bossuyt PM, Repping S, van der Veen F. Predictive factors in in vitro fertilization (IVF): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2010;16(6):577–89. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmq015.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Klonoff-Cohen H. Female and male lifestyle habits and IVF: what is known and unknown. Hum Reprod Update. 2005;11(2):179–203. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmh059.PubMed

25.

Lintsen AM, Pasker-de Jong PC, de Boer EJ, Burger CW, Jansen CA, Braat DD, et al. Effects of subfertility cause, smoking and body weight on the success rate of IVF. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(7):1867–75. doi:10.1093/humrep/deh898.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Wellons MF, Fujimoto VY, Baker VL, Barrington DS, Broomfield D, Catherino WH, et al. Race matters: a systematic review of racial/ethnic disparity in Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology reported outcomes. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(2):406–9. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.05.012.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Barad D, Gleicher N. Effect of dehydroepiandrosterone on oocyte and embryo yields, embryo grade and cell number in IVF. Hum Reprod. 2006;21(11):2845–9. doi:10.1093/humrep/del254.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Batioglu AS, Sahin U, Gurlek B, Ozturk N, Unsal E. The efficacy of melatonin administration on oocyte quality. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2012;28(2):91–3. doi:10.3109/09513590.2011.589925.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Gleicher N, Weghofer A, Barad DH. Improvement in diminished ovarian reserve after dehydroepiandrosterone supplementation. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010;21(3):360–5. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.04.006.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Papaleo E, Unfer V, Baillargeon JP, Fusi F, Occhi F, De Santis L. Myo-inositol may improve oocyte quality in intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles. A prospective, controlled, randomized trial. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(5):1750–4. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.01.088.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Predictors of treatment failure in young patients undergoing in vitro fertilization
Authors: Marni B. Jacobs
Hillary Klonoff-Cohen
Sanjay Agarwal
Donna Kritz-Silverstein
Suzanne Lindsay
V. Gabriel Garzo
Publication date: 01-08-2016
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 8/2016
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-016-0725-1

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Predictors of treatment failure in young patients undergoing in vitro fertilization

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 8/2016

SNP array-based analyses of unbalanced embryos as a reference to distinguish between balanced translocation carrier and normal blastocysts

Differentially expressed genes in preimplantation human embryos: potential candidate genes for blastocyst formation and implantation

Seminal plasma HSPA2 mRNA content is associated with semen quality

Ovarian stimulation in the luteal phase: systematic review and meta-analysis

Growth and differentiation factor 9 promotes oocyte growth at the primary but not the early secondary stage in three-dimensional follicle culture

Does combining magnetic-activated cell sorting with density gradient or swim-up improve sperm selection?