Leigh A Humphries1,2, Laura E Dodge1,2,3, Erin B Kennedy1, Kathryn C Humm1,2,4,5, Michele R Hacker1,2,3, Denny Sakkas6. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Ave., KS 3, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. 2. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck St, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. 3. Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, 677 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. 4. Boston IVF, 130 2nd Ave, Waltham, MA, 02451, USA. 5. The George Washington University Medical Faculty Associates, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC, 20057, USA. 6. Boston IVF, 130 2nd Ave, Waltham, MA, 02451, USA. dsakkas@bostonivf.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether younger oocyte donor age is associated with better outcomes after in vitro fertilization (IVF) compared with older oocyte donor age. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Large academically affiliated infertility treatment center. PATIENTS: We included all women ≥ 18 years who started their first fresh cycle using donor oocytes at our center from January 2002 through October 2017; only the first oocyte recipient cycle was analyzed. INTERVENTION: Log-binomial regression was used to compare the incidence of clinical pregnancy and live birth among the following donor age groups: < 25 years, 25 to < 30 years, and 30 to <35 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Incidence of clinical pregnancy and live birth among donor age groups. RESULTS: We included 774 donor cycles; 269 (34.8%) used donors < 25 years, 399 (51.6%) used donors 25 to < 30 years, and 106 (13.7%) used donors 30 to < 35 years. Median donor age was 26 years (range 18-34.5), and median recipient age and partner age were both 42 years. Per cycle start, after adjusting for recipient age, cycles using donors < 25 years were not associated with a higher incidence of clinical pregnancy (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.77-1.06) or live birth (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.72-1.04) compared with donors age 25-< 30 years. CONCLUSIONS: Donor age < 25 was not associated with better outcomes after IVF. Under the age of 30, the prioritization of <25 year old donors may not be recommended given the lack of evidence for superior pregnancy or live birth outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether younger oocyte donor age is associated with better outcomes after in vitro fertilization (IVF) compared with older oocyte donor age. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Large academically affiliated infertility treatment center. PATIENTS: We included all women ≥ 18 years who started their first fresh cycle using donor oocytes at our center from January 2002 through October 2017; only the first oocyte recipient cycle was analyzed. INTERVENTION: Log-binomial regression was used to compare the incidence of clinical pregnancy and live birth among the following donor age groups: < 25 years, 25 to < 30 years, and 30 to <35 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Incidence of clinical pregnancy and live birth among donor age groups. RESULTS: We included 774 donor cycles; 269 (34.8%) used donors < 25 years, 399 (51.6%) used donors 25 to < 30 years, and 106 (13.7%) used donors 30 to < 35 years. Median donor age was 26 years (range 18-34.5), and median recipient age and partner age were both 42 years. Per cycle start, after adjusting for recipient age, cycles using donors < 25 years were not associated with a higher incidence of clinical pregnancy (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.77-1.06) or live birth (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.72-1.04) compared with donors age 25-< 30 years. CONCLUSIONS:Donor age < 25 was not associated with better outcomes after IVF. Under the age of 30, the prioritization of <25 year old donors may not be recommended given the lack of evidence for superior pregnancy or live birth outcomes.
Entities:
Keywords:
Age; Assisted reproductive technology; IVF; Live birth; Oocyte donation
Authors: Sérgio Reis Soares; Carmen Rubio; Lorena Rodrigo; Carlos Simón; José Remohí; Antonio Pellicer Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Frank J Broekmans; Erik A H Knauff; Egbert R te Velde; Nick S Macklon; Bart C Fauser Journal: Trends Endocrinol Metab Date: 2007-02-01 Impact factor: 12.015
Authors: Laura E Dodge; Leslie V Farland; Katharine F B Correia; Stacey A Missmer; Emily A Seidler; Jack Wilkinson; Anna M Modest; Michele R Hacker Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Luis R Hoyos; Connie Y Cheng; Kathleen Brennan; Gary Hubert; Brandon Wang; Richard P Buyalos; Molly Quinn; Mousa Shamonki Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2020-01-18 Impact factor: 3.412