Embryo and uterine influences on IVF outcomes: an analysis of a UK multi-centre cohort.

BACKGROUND In order to optimize IVF strategies, particularly with the use of single embryo transfer, good predictive models are required. Here, we develop a model to allow such prediction, and the structure of the models point to more general conclusions about the mode of action of prognostic factors. METHODS Anonymized data from consecutive embryo transfers in five IVF centres in the UK for the 2000-2005 period were extracted and the morphological grade based on common scoring criteria was included. There were 16 096 (12 487 fresh and 3609 frozen) transfers, for 8775 couples, available for analysis. Live birth data were fitted to a model with separate sub-models for embryo and recipient effects [the 'Embryo-Uterus' (EU) model]. All covariates were included, with sub-model selection using Akaike's information criterion. RESULTS Age, number of embryos created, attempt number, previous history of pregnancy, duration of infertility, day of transfer and tubal diagnosis were all identified as significant prognostic factors, along with embryo grade and growth rate. Frozen transfers were substantially less likely to lead to a live birth with odds ratios of 1/3 to 1/2 compared with fresh transfers, with no evidence of differential loss for any particular patient group. Age acts predominantly through the embryo component with only a weak effect on the uterus. The embryo number, attempt number, previous pregnancies and duration of infertility act predominantly through the uterine environment. Both sub-models show significant heterogeneity between centres. CONCLUSIONS The EU modelling framework has generated a model for predicting outcomes of embryo-transfer procedures, subject to the limitations of routinely collected data. With this large data set, the model allows identification of factors that act specifically on embryo viability or maternal receptivity. Variability in the two components between centres with similar overall outcomes suggests scope for further optimization of IVF treatment.

[1]  A. Vail,et al.  Towards single embryo transfer? Modelling clinical outcomes of potential treatment choices using multiple data sources: predictive models and patient perspectives. , 2010, Health technology assessment.

[2]  V. Dukic,et al.  A hierarchical Bayesian approach to modeling embryo implantation following in vitro fertilization. , 2002, Biostatistics.

[3]  Marinus J C Eijkemans,et al.  A prediction model for selecting patients undergoing in vitro fertilization for elective single embryo transfer. , 2002, Fertility and sterility.

[4]  Stephen A. Roberts,et al.  Elective Single Embryo Transfer: Guidelines for Practice British Fertility Society and Association of Clinical Embryologists , 2008, Human fertility.

[5]  J. Testart.  Cleavage stage of human embryos two days after fertilization in vitro and their developmental ability after transfer into the uterus. , 1986, Human reproduction.

[6]  M. Sauer,et al.  The impact of the woman's age on the success of standard and donor in vitro fertilization. , 1997, Fertility and sterility.

[7]  R. Legro,et al.  Recipient's age does not adversely affect pregnancy outcome after oocyte donation. , 1995, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[8]  D. Grainger,et al.  Clinical outcomes among recipients of donated eggs: an analysis of the U.S. national experience, 1996–19981 1Reprints are not available. , 2002 .

[9]  S. Roberts,et al.  Modelling the impact of single embryo transfer in a national health service IVF programme. , 2008, Human reproduction.

[10]  R. Bell.  Trends in birthweight in the north of England , 2008, Human fertility.

[11]  J. Habbema,et al.  Validation of a model predicting spontaneous pregnancy among subfertile untreated couples. , 2002, Fertility and sterility.

[12]  L. Nardo,et al.  Circulating basal anti-Müllerian hormone levels as predictor of ovarian response in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. , 2009, Fertility and sterility.

[13]  K Lundin,et al.  Selection of patients suitable for one-embryo transfer may reduce the rate of multiple births by half without impairment of overall birth rates. , 2000, Human reproduction.

[14]  J Cohen,et al.  Maternal age, morphology, development and chromosome abnormalities in over 6000 cleavage-stage embryos. , 2007, Reproductive biomedicine online.

[15]  P. Matson.  Internal quality control and external quality assurance in the IVF laboratory. , 1998, Human reproduction.

[16]  D. Grainger,et al.  Clinical outcomes among recipients of donated eggs: an analysis of the U.S. national experience, 1996-1998. , 2002, Fertility and sterility.

[17]  S. Roberts,et al.  Models for assisted conception data with embryo‐specific covariates , 2007, Statistics in medicine.

[18]  C. Giorgetti,et al.  Implantation: Embryo score to predict implantation after in-vitro fertilization: based on 957 single embryo transfers , 1995 .

[19]  C R Weinberg,et al.  Evaluating effects of exposures on embryo viability and uterine receptivity in in vitro fertilization. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[20]  S. Campbell,et al.  The cumulative embryo score: a predictive embryo scoring technique to select the optimal number of embryos to transfer in an in-vitro fertilization and embryo transfer programme. , 1992, Human reproduction.