Dataset Information

Factors associated with study protocol adherence and bio banking participation in reproductive medicine clinical trials and their relationship to live birth.

ABSTRACT:

Study question

What demographic and baseline characteristics are predictive of adherence to reproductive medicine clinical trial protocols, live birth or participation in genetic studies?

Summary answer

Race, BMI and lower income are associated with likelihood of non-adherent to reproductive medicine clinical trial protocols, while race influences collection of biological samples and non-adherent to study protocols is associated with lower probability of live birth.

What is known already

Although aspects of adherence to study protocol have previously been evaluated as individual factors in infertile women, the factors that affect overall non-adherent to study protocol have not been previously evaluated.

Study design, size, duration

A secondary data analysis of 1650 participants from two prospective multicenter, double-blind controlled studies was carried out: Pregnancy in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome II (PPCOS II) and Assessment of Multiple Intrauterine Gestations from Ovarian Stimulation (AMIGOS).

Participants/materials, setting, methods

The participants were women aged 18-40 years old with either polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) with ovulatory dysfunction in combination with either hyperandrogenemia and/or polycystic ovarian morphology (PPCOS II), or regular ovulatory cycles with unexplained infertility (AMIGOS). The study was carried out in 14 clinical sites in the USA. Non-adherence to clinical trial protocol was chosen as the primary outcome for this analysis. To evaluate whether demographic and baseline characteristics were predictive of adherence to study protocols, live birth or participation in blood sampling for DNA and repository, and pregnancy registry, these putative factors were compared between the outcome measures. Logistic regression was used to establish a prediction model using the putative predictors introduced above.

Main results and the role of chance

Women who self-identified as African American or Asian and those with higher BMI and lower household income were less likely to adhere to protocol. Non-adherence to the study protocol was associated with a lower probability of live birth (odds ratio: 0.180, 95% CI: 0.120, 0.272, P < 0.001). African Americans or Asians were less likely to participate in optional study DNA collection compared to Whites. Participants who were African American or with high annual income or from the Southwest sites or had PCOS were less likely to participate in the blood repository studies.

Limitations, reasons for caution

Race and ethnicity were self-reported and such self-classification to strict race and ethnicity may not always be representative of a whole racial or ethnic group. This study included two US multicenter trials and therefore the findings may not be extrapolated to international trials.

Wider implications of the findings

Identification of populations with low participation is an important initial step, as further investigation can develop specific measures to improve adherence to study protocols and participation in biospecimen banking and thereby extend the representativeness of reproductive medicine clinical trial findings.

Study funding/competing interest(s)

Supported by NIH Eunice Kennedy Shriver NICHD Grants: U10 HD39005, U10 HD38992, U10 HD27049, U10 HD38998, U10 HD055942, HD055944, U10 HD055936, U10HD055925, PPCOSII: U10 HD27049, U10 HD38992, U10 HD055925, U10 HD39005, U10 HD38998, U10 HD055936, U10 HD055942, U10 HD055944; Clinical Reproductive Endocrine Scientist Training Program (CREST): R25HD075737. Outside this study, M.P.D. received NIH/NIHCD research grant and R.S.L. received research grant from Ferring and was consultant for Bayer, Kindex, Odega, Millendo and AbbVie.

Trial registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT00719186; NCT01044862.

SUBMITTER: Engmann L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8453415 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Live birth is the most important concern for assisted reproductive technology (ART) patients. Therefore, in the medical reproductive centre, obstetricians often need to answer the following question: "What are the chances that I will have a healthy baby after ART treatment?" To date, our obstetricians have no reference on which to base the answer to this question. Our research aimed to solve this problem by establishing prediction models of live birth for ART patients. Between January 1, 2010, and May 1, 2017, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of women undergoing ART treatment at the Reproductive Medicine Centre, Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Hunan, China. The birth of at least one live-born baby per initiated cycle or embryo transfer procedure was defined as a live birth, and all other pregnancy outcomes were classified as no live birth. A live birth prediction model was established by stepwise multivariate logistic regression. All eligible subjects were randomly allocated to two groups: group 1 (80% of subjects) for the establishment of the prediction models and group 2 (20% of subjects) for the validation of the established prediction models. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of each prediction model at different cut-off values were calculated. The prediction model of live birth included nine variables. The area under the ROC curve was 0.743 in the validation group. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of the established model ranged from 97.9-24.8%, 7.2-96.3%, 44.8-83.8% and 81.7-62.5%, respectively, at different cut-off values. A stable, reliable, convenient, and satisfactory prediction model for live birth by ART patients was established and validated, and this model could be a useful tool for obstetricians to predict the live rate of ART patients. Meanwhile, it is also a reference for obstetricians to create good conditions for infertility patients in preparation for pregnancy.

Project description:Study questionDoes the interval from delivery to initiation of a subsequent ART treatment cycle impact clinical pregnancy or live birth rates?Summary answerAn interval from delivery to treatment start of <6 months or ?24 months is associated with decreased likelihood of clinical pregnancy and live birth.What is known alreadyShort interpregnancy intervals are associated with poor obstetric outcomes in the naturally conceiving population prompting birth spacing recommendations of 18-24 months from international organizations. Deferring a subsequent pregnancy attempt means a woman will age in the interval with an attendant decline in her fertility.Study design, size, durationRetrospective analysis of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinical Outcome Reporting System (SARTCORS) cohort containing 61 686 ART cycles from 2004 to 2013.Participants/materials, setting, methodsThe delivery-to-cycle interval (DCI) was calculated for patients from SARTCORS with a history of live birth from ART who returned to the same clinic for a first subsequent treatment cycle. Generalized linear models were fit to determine the risk of clinical pregnancy and live birth by DCI with subsequent adjustment for factors associated with outcomes of interest. Predicted probabilities of clinical pregnancy and live birth were generated from each model.Main results and the role of chanceA DCI of <6 months was associated with a 5.6% reduction in probability of clinical pregnancy (40.1 ± 1.9 versus 45.7 ± 0.6%, P = 0.009) and 6.8% reduction in live birth (31.6 ± 1.7 versus 38.4 ± 0.6%, P = 0.001) per cycle start compared to a DCI of 12 to <18 months. A DCI of ?24 months was associated with a 5.1% reduction in probability of clinical pregnancy (40.6 ± 0.5 versus 45.7 ± 0.6%, P < 0.001) and 5.7% reduction in live birth (32.7 ± 0.5 versus 38.4 ± 0.6%, P < 0.001) compared to 12 to <18 months.Limitations, reasons for cautionThe SART database is reliant upon self-report of many variables of interest including live birth. It remains unclear whether poorer outcomes are a result of residual confounding from factors inherent to the population with a very short or long DCI or the interval itself.Wider implications of the findingsBirth spacing recommendations for naturally conceiving populations may not be generally applicable to patients with a history of infertility. Patients planning ART treatment should wait a minimum of 6 months, but not more than 24 months, from a live birth for optimization of clinical pregnancy and live birth rates.Study funding/competing interest(s)National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, UCSF-CTSI Grant number UL1TR001872. The authors have no competing interests.