Kate Devine1, Sunni L Mumford2, Kara N Goldman3, Brooke Hodes-Wertz3, Sarah Druckenmiller3, Anthony M Propst4, Nicole Noyes3. 1. Program in Reproductive and Adult Endocrinology, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, New York, New York. Electronic address: kate.devine@nih.gov. 2. Epidemiology Branch, Division of Intramural Population Health Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, New York, New York. 3. New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York. 4. Texas Fertility Center, Austin, Texas.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether oocyte cryopreservation for deferred reproduction is cost effective per live birth using a model constructed from observed clinical practice. DESIGN: Decision-tree mathematical model with sensitivity analyses. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): A simulated cohort of women wishing to delay childbearing until age 40 years. INTERVENTION(S): Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Cost per live birth. RESULT(S): Our primary model predicted that oocyte cryopreservation at age 35 years by women planning to defer pregnancy attempts until age 40 years would decrease cost per live birth from $55,060 to $39,946 (and increase the odds of live birth from 42% to 62% by the end of the model), indicating that oocyte cryopreservation is a cost-effective strategy relative to forgoing it. If fresh autologous assisted reproductive technology (ART) was added at age 40 years, before thawing oocytes, 74% obtained a live birth, and cost per live birth increased to $61,887. Separate sensitivity analyses demonstrated that oocyte cryopreservation remained cost effective as long as performed before age 38 years, and more than 49% of those women not obtaining a spontaneously conceived live birth returned to thaw oocytes. CONCLUSION(S): In women who plan to delay childbearing until age 40 years, oocyte cryopreservation before 38 years of age reduces the cost to obtain a live birth. Published by Elsevier Inc.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether oocyte cryopreservation for deferred reproduction is cost effective per live birth using a model constructed from observed clinical practice. DESIGN: Decision-tree mathematical model with sensitivity analyses. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): A simulated cohort of women wishing to delay childbearing until age 40 years. INTERVENTION(S): Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Cost per live birth. RESULT(S): Our primary model predicted that oocyte cryopreservation at age 35 years by women planning to defer pregnancy attempts until age 40 years would decrease cost per live birth from $55,060 to $39,946 (and increase the odds of live birth from 42% to 62% by the end of the model), indicating that oocyte cryopreservation is a cost-effective strategy relative to forgoing it. If fresh autologous assisted reproductive technology (ART) was added at age 40 years, before thawing oocytes, 74% obtained a live birth, and cost per live birth increased to $61,887. Separate sensitivity analyses demonstrated that oocyte cryopreservation remained cost effective as long as performed before age 38 years, and more than 49% of those women not obtaining a spontaneously conceived live birth returned to thaw oocytes. CONCLUSION(S): In women who plan to delay childbearing until age 40 years, oocyte cryopreservation before 38 years of age reduces the cost to obtain a live birth. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Laura Rienzi; Ana Cobo; Alessio Paffoni; Claudia Scarduelli; Antonio Capalbo; Gábor Vajta; José Remohí; Guido Ragni; Filippo Maria Ubaldi Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2012-03-22 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: J Hirshfeld-Cytron; L L van Loendersloot; B W Mol; M Goddijn; W A Grobman; L M Moolenaar; M P Milad Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2012-09-27 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Marlene B Goldman; Kim L Thornton; David Ryley; Michael M Alper; June L Fung; Mark D Hornstein; Richard H Reindollar Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2014-04-30 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Kara N Goldman; Nicole L Noyes; Jaime M Knopman; Caroline McCaffrey; James A Grifo Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2013-05-28 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Sara Crawford; Sheree L Boulet; Jennifer F Kawwass; Denise J Jamieson; Dmitry M Kissin Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2016-11-11 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Clare Meernik; Stephanie M Engel; Ally Wardell; Christopher D Baggett; Parul Gupta; Nidia Rodriguez-Ormaza; Barbara Luke; Valerie L Baker; Ethan Wantman; Jose Alejandro Rauh-Hain; Jennifer E Mersereau; Andrew F Olshan; Andrew B Smitherman; Jianwen Cai; Hazel B Nichols Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2022-02-16 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Esther H Chung; Stephanie L Lim; Evan Myers; Haley A Moss; Kelly S Acharya Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2021-05-11 Impact factor: 3.357