Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2022 Aug;39(8):1937-1949.
doi: 10.1007/s10815-022-02547-4. Epub 2022 Jun 29.

Adaptive data-driven models to best predict the likelihood of live birth as the IVF cycle moves on and for each embryo transfer

Véronika Grzegorczyk-Martin  1 , Julie Roset  2 , Pierre Di Pizio  2 , Thomas Fréour  3   4 , Paul Barrière  3   4 , Jean Luc Pouly  5 , Michael Grynberg  6   7   8   9   10 , Isabelle Parneix  11 , Catherine Avril  2 , Joe Pacheco  12 , Tomasz M Grzegorczyk  12
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Adaptive data-driven models to best predict the likelihood of live birth as the IVF cycle moves on and for each embryo transfer

Véronika Grzegorczyk-Martin et al. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2022 Aug.

Erratum in

Abstract

Purpose: To dynamically assess the evolution of live birth predictive factors' impact throughout the in vitro fertilization (IVF) process, for each fresh and subsequent frozen embryo transfers.

Methods: In this multicentric study, data from 13,574 fresh IVF cycles and 6,770 subsequent frozen embryo transfers were retrospectively analyzed. Fifty-seven descriptive parameters were included and split into four categories: (1) demographic (couple's baseline characteristics), (2) ovarian stimulation, (3) laboratory data, and (4) embryo transfer (fresh and frozen). All these parameters were used to develop four successive predictive models with the outcome being a live birth event.

Results: Eight parameters were predictive of live birth in the first step after the first consultation, 9 in the second step after the stimulation, 11 in the third step with laboratory data, and 13 in the 4th step at the transfer stage. The predictive performance of the models increased at each step. Certain parameters remained predictive in all 4 models while others were predictive only in the first models and no longer in the subsequent ones when including new parameters. Moreover, some parameters were predictive in fresh transfers but not in frozen transfers.

Conclusion: This work evaluates the chances of live birth for each embryo transfer individually and not the cumulative outcome after multiple IVF attempts. The different predictive models allow to determine which parameters should be taken into account or not at each step of an IVF cycle, and especially at the time of each embryo transfer, fresh or frozen.

Keywords: In vitro fertilization; Live birth; Predictive factors; Predictive models.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Calibration plots showing the good agreement between the predicted live birth probability and the computed one within each corresponding decile
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) for the 4 models for fresh embryo transfers, with their corresponding area under the curve (AUC)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) for the 2 models for frozen embryo transfers, with their corresponding area under the curve (AUC)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
An example of step 4 (transfer step) live birth probability prediction with respect to age and number and quality of cleavage stage embryos to transfer in women having 10 retrieved oocytes. Quality B embryos included typical blastomere numbers and less than 30% fragmentation; C embryos included atypical blastomere numbers and/or between 30 and 50% fragmentation
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Templeton A, Morris JK, Parslow W. Factors that affect outcome of in-vitro fertilisation treatment. Lancet. 1996;348:1402–1406. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)05291-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Nelson SM, Lawlor DA. Predicting live birth, preterm delivery, and low birth weight in infants born from in vitro fertilisation: a prospective study of 144,018 treatment cycles. PLoS Med. 2011;8:e1000386. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000386. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. McLernon DJ, te Velde ER, Steyerberg EW, Mol BWJ, Bhattacharya S. Clinical prediction models to inform individualized decision-making in subfertile couples: a stratified medicine approach. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:1851–1858. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deu173. - DOI - PubMed
    1. McLernon DJ, Raja EA, Toner JP, Baker VL, Doody KJ, Seifer DB, Sparks AE, Wantman E, Lin PC, Bhattacharya S, Van Voorhis BJ. Predicting personalized cumulative live birth following in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2021;S0015–0282(21):02053–2057. - PubMed
    1. La Marca A, Capuzzo M, Donno V, Mignini Renzini M, Del Giovane C, D’Amico R, Sunkara SK. The predicted probability of live birth in in vitro fertilization varies during important stages throughout the treatment: analysis of 114,882 first cycles. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2021;50(3):101878. 10.1016/j.jogoh.2020.101878. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources