Cargando…
Adaptive data-driven models to best predict the likelihood of live birth as the IVF cycle moves on and for each embryo transfer
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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9428070/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35767167 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10815-022-02547-4 |
_version_ | 1784779036219670528 |
---|---|
author | Grzegorczyk-Martin, Véronika Roset, Julie Di Pizio, Pierre Fréour, Thomas Barrière, Paul Pouly, Jean Luc Grynberg, Michael Parneix, Isabelle Avril, Catherine Pacheco, Joe Grzegorczyk, Tomasz M. |
author_facet | Grzegorczyk-Martin, Véronika Roset, Julie Di Pizio, Pierre Fréour, Thomas Barrière, Paul Pouly, Jean Luc Grynberg, Michael Parneix, Isabelle Avril, Catherine Pacheco, Joe Grzegorczyk, Tomasz M. |
author_sort | Grzegorczyk-Martin, Véronika |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9428070 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94280702022-09-01 Adaptive data-driven models to best predict the likelihood of live birth as the IVF cycle moves on and for each embryo transfer Grzegorczyk-Martin, Véronika Roset, Julie Di Pizio, Pierre Fréour, Thomas Barrière, Paul Pouly, Jean Luc Grynberg, Michael Parneix, Isabelle Avril, Catherine Pacheco, Joe Grzegorczyk, Tomasz M. J Assist Reprod Genet Assisted Reproduction Technologies 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. Springer US 2022-06-29 2022-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9428070/ /pubmed/35767167 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10815-022-02547-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2022, corrected publication 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Assisted Reproduction Technologies Grzegorczyk-Martin, Véronika Roset, Julie Di Pizio, Pierre Fréour, Thomas Barrière, Paul Pouly, Jean Luc Grynberg, Michael Parneix, Isabelle Avril, Catherine Pacheco, Joe Grzegorczyk, Tomasz M. Adaptive data-driven models to best predict the likelihood of live birth as the IVF cycle moves on and for each embryo transfer |
title | Adaptive data-driven models to best predict the likelihood of live birth as the IVF cycle moves on and for each embryo transfer |
title_full | Adaptive data-driven models to best predict the likelihood of live birth as the IVF cycle moves on and for each embryo transfer |
title_fullStr | Adaptive data-driven models to best predict the likelihood of live birth as the IVF cycle moves on and for each embryo transfer |
title_full_unstemmed | Adaptive data-driven models to best predict the likelihood of live birth as the IVF cycle moves on and for each embryo transfer |
title_short | Adaptive data-driven models to best predict the likelihood of live birth as the IVF cycle moves on and for each embryo transfer |
title_sort | adaptive data-driven models to best predict the likelihood of live birth as the ivf cycle moves on and for each embryo transfer |
topic | Assisted Reproduction Technologies |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9428070/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35767167 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10815-022-02547-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT grzegorczykmartinveronika adaptivedatadrivenmodelstobestpredictthelikelihoodoflivebirthastheivfcyclemovesonandforeachembryotransfer AT rosetjulie adaptivedatadrivenmodelstobestpredictthelikelihoodoflivebirthastheivfcyclemovesonandforeachembryotransfer AT dipiziopierre adaptivedatadrivenmodelstobestpredictthelikelihoodoflivebirthastheivfcyclemovesonandforeachembryotransfer AT freourthomas adaptivedatadrivenmodelstobestpredictthelikelihoodoflivebirthastheivfcyclemovesonandforeachembryotransfer AT barrierepaul adaptivedatadrivenmodelstobestpredictthelikelihoodoflivebirthastheivfcyclemovesonandforeachembryotransfer AT poulyjeanluc adaptivedatadrivenmodelstobestpredictthelikelihoodoflivebirthastheivfcyclemovesonandforeachembryotransfer AT grynbergmichael adaptivedatadrivenmodelstobestpredictthelikelihoodoflivebirthastheivfcyclemovesonandforeachembryotransfer AT parneixisabelle adaptivedatadrivenmodelstobestpredictthelikelihoodoflivebirthastheivfcyclemovesonandforeachembryotransfer AT avrilcatherine adaptivedatadrivenmodelstobestpredictthelikelihoodoflivebirthastheivfcyclemovesonandforeachembryotransfer AT pachecojoe adaptivedatadrivenmodelstobestpredictthelikelihoodoflivebirthastheivfcyclemovesonandforeachembryotransfer AT grzegorczyktomaszm adaptivedatadrivenmodelstobestpredictthelikelihoodoflivebirthastheivfcyclemovesonandforeachembryotransfer |