S J Bhatt1, N M Marchetto2, J Roy3, S S Morelli2,4, P G McGovern2,4. 1. Reproductive Gynecology and Infertility, Akron, OH, USA. 2. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA. 3. Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Rutgers School of Public Health, Piscataway, NJ, USA. 4. University Reproductive Associates, Hasbrouck Heights, NJ, USA.
Abstract
STUDY QUESTION: Can preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) improve the live birth rate in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL)? SUMMARY ANSWER: PGT-A use was associated with improved live birth rates in couples with recurrent pregnancy loss undergoing frozen embryo transfer (IVF-FET). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Euploid embryo transfer is thought to optimize outcomes in some couples with infertility. There is insufficient evidence, however, supporting this approach to management of recurrent pregnancy loss. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This study included data collected by the Society of Assisted Reproductive Technologies Clinical Outcomes Reporting System (SART-CORS) for IVF-FET cycles between years 2010 through 2016. A total of 12 631 FET cycles in 10 060 couples were included in this analysis designed to assess the utility of PGT-A in couples with RPL undergoing FET, including 4287 cycles in couples with tubal disease who formed a control group. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The experimental group included couples with RPL (strictly defined as a history of 3 or more pregnancy losses) undergoing FET with or without PGT-A. The primary outcome was live birth rate. Secondary outcomes included rates of clinical pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, and biochemical pregnancy loss. Differences were analyzed using generalized estimating equations logistic regression models to account for multiple cycles per patient. Covariates included in the model were age, gravidity, geographic region, race/ethnicity, smoking history, and indication for assisted reproductive technologies. Analyses were stratified for age groups as defined by SART: <35 years, 35-37 years, 38-40 years, 41-42 years, and >42 years. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In women with a diagnosis of RPL, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) comparing IVF-FET with PGT-A versus without PGT-A for live birth outcome was 1.31 (95% CI: 1.12, 1.52) for age <35 years, 1.45 (95% CI: 1.21, 1.75) for ages 35-37 years, 1.89 (95% CI: 1.56, 2.29) for ages 38-40, 2.62 (95% CI: 1.94-3.53) for ages 41-42, and 3.80 (95% CI: 2.52, 5.72) for ages >42 years. For clinical pregnancy, the OR was 1.26 (95% CI: 1.08, 1.48) for age <35 years, 1.37 (95% CI: 1.14, 1.64) for ages 35-37 years, 1.68 (95% CI: 1.40, 2.03) for ages 38-40 years, 2.19 (95% CI: 1.65, 2.90) for ages 41-42, and 2.31 (95% CI: 1.60, 3.32) for ages >42 years. Finally, for spontaneous abortion, the OR was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.21) for age <35 years, 0.85 (95% CI: 0.65, 1.11) for ages 35-37 years, 0.81 (95% CI: 0.60, 1.08) for ages 38-40, 0.86 (95% CI: 0.58, 1.27) for ages 41-42, and 0.58 (95% CI: 0.32, 1.07) for ages >42 years. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The retrospective collection of data including only women with recurrent pregnancy loss undergoing FET presents a limitation of this study, and results may not be generalizable to all couples with recurrent pregnancy loss. Also, data regarding evaluation and treatment for RPL for the included women is unavailable. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This is the largest study to date assessing the utility of PGT-A in women with RPL. PGT-A was associated with improvement in live birth and clinical pregnancy in women with RPL, with the largest difference noted in the group of women with age greater than 42 years. Couples with RPL warrant counseling on all management options to reduce subsequent miscarriage, which may include IVF with PGT-A for euploid embryo selection. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): There are no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.
STUDY QUESTION: Can preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) improve the live birth rate in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL)? SUMMARY ANSWER: PGT-A use was associated with improved live birth rates in couples with recurrent pregnancy loss undergoing frozen embryo transfer (IVF-FET). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Euploid embryo transfer is thought to optimize outcomes in some couples with infertility. There is insufficient evidence, however, supporting this approach to management of recurrent pregnancy loss. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This study included data collected by the Society of Assisted Reproductive Technologies Clinical Outcomes Reporting System (SART-CORS) for IVF-FET cycles between years 2010 through 2016. A total of 12 631 FET cycles in 10 060 couples were included in this analysis designed to assess the utility of PGT-A in couples with RPL undergoing FET, including 4287 cycles in couples with tubal disease who formed a control group. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The experimental group included couples with RPL (strictly defined as a history of 3 or more pregnancy losses) undergoing FET with or without PGT-A. The primary outcome was live birth rate. Secondary outcomes included rates of clinical pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, and biochemical pregnancy loss. Differences were analyzed using generalized estimating equations logistic regression models to account for multiple cycles per patient. Covariates included in the model were age, gravidity, geographic region, race/ethnicity, smoking history, and indication for assisted reproductive technologies. Analyses were stratified for age groups as defined by SART: <35 years, 35-37 years, 38-40 years, 41-42 years, and >42 years. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In women with a diagnosis of RPL, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) comparing IVF-FET with PGT-A versus without PGT-A for live birth outcome was 1.31 (95% CI: 1.12, 1.52) for age <35 years, 1.45 (95% CI: 1.21, 1.75) for ages 35-37 years, 1.89 (95% CI: 1.56, 2.29) for ages 38-40, 2.62 (95% CI: 1.94-3.53) for ages 41-42, and 3.80 (95% CI: 2.52, 5.72) for ages >42 years. For clinical pregnancy, the OR was 1.26 (95% CI: 1.08, 1.48) for age <35 years, 1.37 (95% CI: 1.14, 1.64) for ages 35-37 years, 1.68 (95% CI: 1.40, 2.03) for ages 38-40 years, 2.19 (95% CI: 1.65, 2.90) for ages 41-42, and 2.31 (95% CI: 1.60, 3.32) for ages >42 years. Finally, for spontaneous abortion, the OR was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.21) for age <35 years, 0.85 (95% CI: 0.65, 1.11) for ages 35-37 years, 0.81 (95% CI: 0.60, 1.08) for ages 38-40, 0.86 (95% CI: 0.58, 1.27) for ages 41-42, and 0.58 (95% CI: 0.32, 1.07) for ages >42 years. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The retrospective collection of data including only women with recurrent pregnancy loss undergoing FET presents a limitation of this study, and results may not be generalizable to all couples with recurrent pregnancy loss. Also, data regarding evaluation and treatment for RPL for the included women is unavailable. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This is the largest study to date assessing the utility of PGT-A in women with RPL. PGT-A was associated with improvement in live birth and clinical pregnancy in women with RPL, with the largest difference noted in the group of women with age greater than 42 years. Couples with RPL warrant counseling on all management options to reduce subsequent miscarriage, which may include IVF with PGT-A for euploid embryo selection. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): There are no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.