Literature DB >> 26861966

The impact of patient preselection on reported IVF outcomes.

Norbert Gleicher1,2,3, Vitaly A Kushnir4,5, David H Barad4,6.   

Abstract

We, in this manuscript, address the fact that increasing numbers of published studies in reproductive medicine selectively report outcomes for only favorably selected patients; while failing to note that, so reported outcome data,therefore, cannot be applied to unselected patient populations. Almost all favorable patient selection methods, starting with prolonged embryo culture to blastocyst stage, have, thus, been widely misrepresented in the literature since they almost universally report outcomes only in reference to embryo transfer. These outcome reports, however, do not include outcomes for poorer prognosis patients who do not reach embryo transfer. Study outcomes are universally applicable only if performed in unselected patient populations and reported with reference point cycle start (intent to treat). All other studies greatly exaggerate clinical pregnancy and live birth rates if applied to general populations, unless specifically noting that they can be extrapolated only to women who reach embryo transfer.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Blastocyst stage embryo culture; Embryo banking; In vitro fertilization (IVF); Outcome reporting; Patient selection biases; Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26861966      PMCID: PMC4818643          DOI: 10.1007/s10815-016-0673-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet        ISSN: 1058-0468            Impact factor:   3.412


  39 in total

1.  The status of public reporting of clinical outcomes in assisted reproductive technology.

Authors:  Vitaly A Kushnir; Andrea Vidali; David H Barad; Norbert Gleicher
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2013-06-10       Impact factor: 7.329

2.  Comprehensive chromosome screening with synchronous blastocyst transfer: time for a paradigm shift.

Authors:  Richard T Scott; Jason M Franasiak; Eric J Forman
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 7.329

3.  Preimplantation genetic screening: back to the future.

Authors:  Sebastiaan Mastenbroek; Sjoerd Repping
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2014-07-08       Impact factor: 6.918

Review 4.  Embryonic aneuploidy: overcoming molecular genetics challenges improves outcomes and changes practice patterns.

Authors:  Jason M Franasiak; Richard T Scott
Journal:  Trends Mol Med       Date:  2014-08-08       Impact factor: 11.951

5.  Good intentions and ICH-GCP: Trial conduct training needs to go beyond the ICH-GCP document and include the intention-to-treat principle.

Authors:  Lois H Browne; Peter H Graham
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2014-07-14       Impact factor: 2.486

6.  The use of morphokinetics as a predictor of  implantation: a multicentric study to define and validate an algorithm for embryo selection.

Authors:  N Basile; P Vime; M Florensa; B Aparicio Ruiz; J A García Velasco; J Remohí; M Meseguer
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2014-12-19       Impact factor: 6.918

7.  Cleavage-stage biopsy significantly impairs human embryonic implantation potential while blastocyst biopsy does not: a randomized and paired clinical trial.

Authors:  Richard T Scott; Kathleen M Upham; Eric J Forman; Tian Zhao; Nathan R Treff
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2013-06-15       Impact factor: 7.329

8.  Clinical validation of embryo culture and selection by morphokinetic analysis: a randomized, controlled trial of the EmbryoScope.

Authors:  Irene Rubio; Arancha Galán; Zaloa Larreategui; Fernando Ayerdi; Jose Bellver; Javier Herrero; Marcos Meseguer
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2014-09-11       Impact factor: 7.329

9.  Is it time for a paradigm shift in understanding embryo selection?

Authors:  Norbert Gleicher; Vitaly A Kushnir; David H Barad
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2015-01-11       Impact factor: 5.211

Review 10.  Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) still in search of a clinical application: a systematic review.

Authors:  Norbert Gleicher; Vitaly A Kushnir; David H Barad
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2014-03-15       Impact factor: 5.211

View more
  5 in total

1.  The importance of redundancy of functional ovarian reserve when investigating potential genetic effects on ovarian function.

Authors:  David H Barad; Vitaly A Kushnir; Norbert Gleicher
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-07-16       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Should preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) be implemented to routine IVF practice?

Authors:  Raoul Orvieto; Norbert Gleicher
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A)-finally revealed.

Authors:  Raoul Orvieto; Norbert Gleicher
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-02-02       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 4.  Is the hypothesis of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) still supportable? A review.

Authors:  Norbert Gleicher; Raoul Orvieto
Journal:  J Ovarian Res       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 4.234

Review 5.  Recurrent Implantation Failure-update overview on etiology, diagnosis, treatment and future directions.

Authors:  Asher Bashiri; Katherine Ida Halper; Raoul Orvieto
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 5.211

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.