Cost-effectiveness of freeze-all policy - A retrospective study based upon the outcome of cumulative live births.

OBJECT: We have previously reported that cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) are higher in the freeze-all group compared with controls (64.3% vs. 45.8%, p = 0.001). Here, we aim to determine if the freeze-all policy is more cost-effective than fresh embryo transfer followed by frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The analysis consisted of 704 ART (Assisted reproductive technology) cycles, which included in IVF (In vitro fertilisation) and ICSI (Intra Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection) cycles performed in Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan between January 2012 and June 2014. The freeze-all group involved 84 patients and the fresh Group 625 patients. Patients were followed up until all embryos obtained from a single controlled ovarian hyper-stimulation cycle were used up, or a live birth had been achieved. The total cost related to treatment of each patient was recorded. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was based on the incremental cost per couple and the incremental live birth rate of the freeze-all strategy compared with the fresh ET strategy. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) were performed. RESULTS: The total treatment cost per patient was significantly higher for the freeze-all group than in the fresh group (USD 3419.93 ± 638.13 vs. $2920.59 ± 711.08 p < 0.001). However, the total treatment cost per live birth in the freeze-all group was US $5319.89, vs. US $6382.42 in the fresh group. CEAC show that the freeze-all policy was a cost-effective treatment at a threshold of US $2703.57 for one additional live birth. Considering the Willingness-to-pay threshold per live birth, the probability was 60.1% at the threshold of US $2896.5, with the freeze-all group being more cost-effective than the fresh-ET group; or 90.1% at the threshold of $4183.8. CONCLUSION: The freeze-all policy is a cost-effective treatment, as long as the additional cost of US $2703.57 per additional live birth is financially acceptable for the subjects.

The cost-effectiveness of progesterone in preventing miscarriages in women with early pregnancy bleeding: an economic evaluation based on the PRISM trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of progesterone compared with placebo in preventing pregnancy loss in women with early pregnancy vaginal bleeding. DESIGN: Economic evaluation alongside a large multi-centre randomised placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Forty-eight UK NHS early pregnancy units. POPULATION: Four thousand one hundred and fifty-three women aged 16-39 years with bleeding in early pregnancy and ultrasound evidence of an intrauterine sac. METHODS: An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from National Health Service (NHS) and NHS and Personal Social Services perspectives. Subgroup analyses were carried out on women with one or more and three or more previous miscarriages. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost per additional live birth at ≥34 weeks of gestation. RESULTS: Progesterone intervention led to an effect difference of 0.022 (95% CI -0.004 to 0.050) in the trial. The mean cost per woman in the progesterone group was £76 (95% CI -£559 to £711) more than the mean cost in the placebo group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for progesterone compared with placebo was £3305 per additional live birth. For women with at least one previous miscarriage, progesterone was more effective than placebo with an effect difference of 0.055 (95% CI 0.014-0.096) and this was associated with a cost saving of £322 (95% CI -£1318 to £673). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that progesterone is associated with a small positive impact and a small additional cost. Both subgroup analyses were more favourable, especially for women who had one or more previous miscarriages. Given available evidence, progesterone is likely to be a cost-effective intervention, particularly for women with previous miscarriage(s). TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Progesterone treatment is likely to be cost-effective in women with early pregnancy bleeding and a history of miscarriage.

What are the costs of stillbirth? Capturing the direct health care and macroeconomic costs in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Reducing stillbirth rates is an international priority; however, little is known about the cost of stillbirth. This analysis sought to quantify the costs of stillbirth in Australia. METHODS: Mothers and costs were identified by linking a state-based registry of all births between 2012 and 2015 to other administrative data sets. Costs from time of birth to 2 years postbirth were included. Propensity score matching was used to account for differences between women who had a stillbirth and those that did not. Macroeconomic costs were estimated using value of lost output analysis and value of lost welfare analysis. RESULTS: Cost to government was on average $3774 more per mother who had a stillbirth compared with mothers who had a live birth. After accounting for gestation at birth, the cost of a stillbirth was 42% more than a live birth (P < .001). Costs for inpatient services, emergency department services, services covered under Medicare (such as primary and specialist care, diagnostic tests and imaging), and prescription pharmaceuticals were all significantly higher for mothers who had a stillbirth. Mothers who had a stillbirth paid on average $1479 out of pocket, which was 52% more than mothers who had a live birth after accounting for gestation at birth (P < .001). The value of lost output was estimated to be $73.8 million (95% CI: 44.0 million-103.9 million). The estimated value of lost social welfare was estimated to be $18 billion. DISCUSSION: Stillbirth has a sustained economic impact on society and families, which demonstrates the potential resource savings that could be generated from stillbirth prevention.

Effect of preconception low dose aspirin on pregnancy and live birth according to socioeconomic status: A secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

Low socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes and infertility. Low-dose aspirin (LDA) was shown to improve livebirth rates in certain subsets of women, and therefore, may impact pregnancy rates differentially by SES status. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to examine whether daily preconception-initiated LDA affects rates of pregnancy, livebirth, and pregnancy loss differently across strata of socioeconomic status (SES). This is a secondary analysis of The Effects of Aspirin in Gestation and Reproduction (EAGeR) Trial, a multisite, block- randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted at four U.S. medical centers (n = 1,228, 2007-2012). Women attempting spontaneous conception with a history of pregnancy loss were randomly allocated preconception to 81mg of aspirin + 400mcg of folic acid (n = 615) or placebo + 400mcg of folic acid (n = 613). Study medication was administered for six menstrual cycles or until 36 weeks' gestation if pregnancy was achieved. For this analysis, women were stratified by SES, which included income (low, mid, high) and a combined grouping of education and income (low-low, low-high, high-low, high-high). Log binomial models with robust variance estimated risks of pregnancy, livebirth, and pregnancy loss for LDA versus placebo. LDA increased pregnancy and livebirth rates (RR 1.23, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.45) in the high-income, but not mid- or low-income groups. LDA increased pregnancy rates in both the low education-low income group (RR 1.22, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.46) and the high education-high income group (RR 1.23, 95%CI: 1.06, 1.42), with no effect observed in mid-SES groupings. LDA, a low-cost and widely available treatment, may be particularly beneficial to women at the highest and lowest ends of the socioeconomic spectrum, though underlying mechanisms of this disparity are unclear. Confirming these findings and identifying factors which may modulate the effectiveness of LDA will ultimately facilitate personalized clinical care and improvements in population-level reproductive health. Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00467363.

Area-level deprivation and preterm birth: results from a national, commercially-insured population.

BACKGROUND: Area-level deprivation is associated with multiple adverse birth outcomes. Few studies have examined the mediating pathways through which area-level deprivation affects these outcomes. The objective of this study was to investigate the association between area-level deprivation and preterm birth, and examine the mediating effects of maternal medical, behavioural, and psychosocial factors. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using national, commercial health insurance claims data from 2011, obtained from the Health Care Cost Institute. Area-level deprivation was derived from principal components methods using ZIP code-level data. Multilevel structural equation modeling was used to examine mediating effects. RESULTS: In total, 138,487 women with a live singleton birth residing in 14,577 ZIP codes throughout the United States were included. Overall, 5.7% of women had a preterm birth. In fully adjusted generalized estimation equation models, compared to women in the lowest quartile of area-level deprivation, odds of preterm birth increased by 9.6% among women in the second highest quartile (odds ratio (OR) 1.096; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.021, 1.176), by 11.3% in the third highest quartile (OR 1.113; 95% CI 1.035, 1.195), and by 24.9% in the highest quartile (OR 1.249; 95% CI 1.165, 1.339). Hypertension and infection moderately mediated this association. CONCLUSIONS: Even among commercially-insured women, area-level deprivation was associated with increased risk of preterm birth. Similar to individual socioeconomic status, area-level deprivation does not have a threshold effect. Implementation of policies to reduce area-level deprivation, and the screening and treatment of maternal mediators may be associated with a lower risk of preterm birth.

Burden of care is the primary reason why insured women terminate in vitro fertilization treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To study the reason(s) why insured patients discontinue in vitro fertilization (IVF) before achieving a live birth. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Private academically affiliated infertility center. PATIENT(S): A total of 893 insured women who had completed one IVF cycle but did not return for treatment for at least 1 year and who had not achieved a live birth were identified; 312 eligible women completed the survey. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Reasons for treatment termination. RESULT(S): Two-thirds of the participants (65.2%) did not seek care elsewhere and discontinued treatment. When asked why they discontinued treatment, these women indicated that further treatment was too stressful (40.2%), they could not afford out-of-pocket costs (25.1%), they had lost insurance coverage (24.6%), or they had conceived spontaneously (24.1%). Among those citing stress as a reason for discontinuing treatment (n = 80), the top sources of stress included already having given IVF their best chance (65.0%), feeling too stressed to continue (47.5%), and infertility taking too much of a toll on their relationship (36.3%). When participants were asked what could have made their experience better, the most common suggestions were evening/weekend office hours (47.4%) and easy access to a mental health professional (39.4%). Of the 34.8% of women who sought care elsewhere, the most common reason given was wanting a second opinion (55.7%). CONCLUSION(S): Psychologic burden was the most common reason why insured patients reported discontinuing IVF treatment. Stress reduction strategies are desired by patients and could affect the decision to terminate treatment.

Projecting the potential impact of the Cap-Score™ on clinical pregnancy, live births, and medical costs in couples with unexplained infertility.

PURPOSE: The Cap-Score™ was developed to assess the capacitation status of men, thereby enabling personalized management of unexplained infertility by choosing timed intrauterine insemination (IUI), versus immediate in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in individuals with a low Cap-Score™. The objective of this study was to estimate the differences in outcomes and costs comparing the use of the Cap-Score™ with timed IUI (CS-TI) and the standard of care (SOC), which was assumed to be three IUI cycles followed by three IVF-ICSI cycles. METHODS: We developed and parameterized a decision-analytic model of management of unexplained infertility for women based on data from the published literature. We calculated the clinical pregnancy rates, live birth rates, and medical costs comparing CS-TI and SOC. We used Monte Carlo simulation to quantify uncertainty in projected estimates and performed univariate sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Compared to SOC, CS-TI was projected to increase the pregnancy rate by 1-26%, marginally reduce live birth rates by 1-3% in couples with women below 40 years, increase live birth rates by 3-7% in couples with women over 40 years, reduce mean medical costs by $4000-$19,200, reduce IUI costs by $600-$1370, and reduce IVF costs by $3400-$17,800, depending on the woman's age. CONCLUSION: The Cap-Score™ is a potentially valuable clinical tool for management of unexplained infertility because it is projected to improve clinical pregnancy rates, save money, and, depending on the price of the test, increase access to treatment for infertility.

Modeling of live-birth rates and cost-effectiveness of oocyte cryopreservation for cancer patients prior to high- and low-risk gonadotoxic chemotherapy.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the live-birth rate (LBR) and cost-effectiveness of fertility preservation with oocyte cryopreservation (FP-OC) compared to expectant management in cancer patients age 25-40 based on estimated gonadotoxicity of treatments 5 years after cancer diagnosis? SUMMARY ANSWER: Oocyte cryopreservation prior to cancer treatment is more costly, yet more effective (producing more live births), than not undergoing oocyte cryopreservation but it is most beneficial for patients undergoing high-risk chemotherapy (HRC). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The decision to undergo FP prior to treatment is multifactorial and can be costly and delay treatment. Not all treatments carry the same gonadotoxicity and patients may choose to undergo FP-OC based on the probability of premature ovarian insufficiency, predicted outcomes and cost. A comprehensive model that incorporates age at diagnosis and toxicity of treatment to help guide patients in the decision to undergo FP-OC does not yet exist. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE DURATION: This study used a Decision Analysis Model to estimate effectiveness and cost of FP for cancer patients. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Age-based estimates of LBR and cost per live birth were calculated for ages 25-40 years based on gonadotoxicity of treatment. A decision analysis model was constructed using Treeage Pro 2015 with case base probabilities derived from national registries, practice guidelines and medical records from a national network of infertility practices (IntegraMed). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Compared to no FP-OC, FP-OC improved LBRs for women of all ages undergoing either low-risk chemotherapy (LRC) or HRC; however, it was most cost effective for women undergoing LRC at older ages or HRC at younger ages. Although FP-OC results in higher LBRs, it was always more costly. Using donor oocyte IVF can be a successful alternative to autologous FP-OC. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: Decision tree results reflect probabilities of certain events and are compiled from multiple reputable sources but are not directly derived from a recruited cohort of patients. Outcomes are based on United States estimates and should be interpreted in the broader context of individual patient diagnoses, treatment care plans and country of origin. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The development of this analytic model will help guide practitioners in their counseling of women from age 25 to 40 years, who are considering FP-OC at the time of cancer diagnosis. It provides a realistic pathway from diagnosis to LB and accounts for the majority of costs and outcome possibilities. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(s): This study was partially funded by a grant from National Institute of Health (NIH)/National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) (R01 HD67683) to A.Z.S. There are no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

A 50% reduction in multiple live birth rate is associated with a 13% cost saving: a real-life retrospective cost analysis.

Belgian legislation limiting the number of embryos for transfer has been shown to result in a 50% reduction of the multiple live birth rate (MLBR) per cycle without having a negative impact on the cumulative delivery rate per patient within six cycles or 36 months. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the cost saving associated with a 50% reduction in MLBR. A retrospective cost analysis was performed of 213 couples, who became pregnant and had a live birth after one or more assisted reproductive technology treatment cycles, and their 254 children. The mean cost of a singleton (n = 172) and multiple (n = 41) birth was calculated based on individual hospital invoices. The cost analysis showed a significantly higher total cost (assisted reproductive technology treatment, pregnancy follow-up, delivery, child cost until the age of 2 years) for multiple births (both children: mean €43,397) than for singleton births (mean: €17,866) (Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney P < 0.0001). A 50% reduction in MLBR resulted in a significant cost reduction related to hospital care of 13%.

Optimal timing for elective egg freezing.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the optimal age to pursue elective oocyte cryopreservation. DESIGN: A decision-tree model was constructed to determine the success and cost-effectiveness of oocyte preservation versus no action when considered at ages 25-40 years, assuming an attempt at procreation 3, 5, or 7 years after initial decision. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): Hypothetical patients 25-40 years old presenting to discuss elective oocyte cryopreservation. INTERVENTION(S): Decision to cryopreserve oocytes from age 25 years to age 40 years versus taking no action. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE(S): Probability of live birth after initial decision whether or not to cryopreserve oocytes. RESULT(S): Oocyte cryopreservation provided the greatest improvement in probability of live birth compared with no action (51.6% vs. 21.9%) when performed at age 37 years. The highest probability of live birth was seen when oocyte cryopreservation was performed at ages <34 years (>74%), although little benefit over no action was seen at ages 25-30 years (2.6%-7.1% increase). Oocyte cryopreservation was most cost-effective at age 37 years, at $28,759 per each additional live birth in the oocyte cryopreservation group. When the probability of marriage was included, oocyte cryopreservation resulted in little improvement in live birth rates. CONCLUSION(S): Oocyte cryopreservation can be of great benefit to specific women and has the highest chance of success when performed at an earlier age. At age 37 years, oocyte cryopreservation has the largest benefit over no action and is most cost-effective.

Age-specific cost and public funding of a live birth following assisted reproductive treatment in Japan.

AIM: The aim of this study was to calculate and assess the cost of assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment cycles and live-birth events in Japan in 2010. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 238,185 ART cycles, registered with the national registry of assisted reproductive treatment during 2010. Costs were calculated, using a decision analysis model. RESULTS: The average cost per live birth was ¥1,974,000. This varied from ¥1,155,000 in women aged < 30 years to ¥50,189,000 in women aged ≥ 45, which was 29.6 times higher than that of women aged 35-39 years. This rose sharply in the early 40s and upwards. Public funding per live birth was ¥442,000. This was ¥6,118,000 in women aged ≥ 45, 15.4 times higher than that of the 35-39-year-old age group. CONCLUSIONS: The costs and public funding of a live birth after ART treatment rises with age due to the lower success rates in older women. It may provide economic background to improve the current subsidy system for ART and to provide practical knowledge about fertility for the general population.

Management of the first in vitro fertilization cycle for unexplained infertility: a cost-effectiveness analysis of split in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of split IVF-intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) for the treatment of couples with unexplained infertility. DESIGN: Adaptive decision model. SETTING: Academic infertility clinic. PATIENT(S): A total of 154 couples undergoing a split IVF-ICSI cycle and a computer-simulated cohort of women <35 years old with unexplained infertility undergoing IVF. INTERVENTION(S): Modeling insemination method in the first IVF cycle as all IVF, split IVF-ICSI, or all ICSI, and adapting treatment based on fertilization outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Live birth rate, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULT(S): In a single cycle, all IVF is preferred as the ICER of split IVF-ICSI or all ICSI ($58,766) does not justify the increased live birth rate (3%). If two cycles are needed, split IVF/ICSI is preferred as the increased cumulative live birth rate (3.3%) is gained at an ICER of $29,666. CONCLUSION(S): In a single cycle, all IVF was preferred as the increased live birth rate with split IVF-ICSI and all ICSI was not justified by the increased cost per live birth. If two IVF cycles are needed, however, split IVF/ICSI becomes the preferred approach, as a result of the higher cumulative live birth rate compared with all IVF and the lesser cost per live birth compared with all ICSI.

Minimising twins in in vitro fertilisation: a modelling study assessing the costs, consequences and cost-utility of elective single versus double embryo transfer over a 20-year time horizon.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cumulative costs and consequences of double embryo transfer (DET) or elective single embryo transfer (eSET) in women commencing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment aged 32, 36 and 39 years. DESIGN: Microsimulation model. SETTING: Three assisted reproduction centres in Scotland. SAMPLE: A total of 6153 women undergoing treatment at one of three Scottish IVF clinics, between January 1997 and June 2007. METHODS: A microsimulation model, populated using data inputs derived from a large clinical data set and published literature, was developed to compare the costs and consequences of using eSET or DET over multiple treatment cycles. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Disability-free live births; twin pregnancy rate; women's quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs); health service costs. RESULTS: Not only did DET produce a higher cumulative live birth rate compared with eSET for women of all three ages, but also a higher twin pregnancy rate. Compared with eSET, DET ranged from costing an additional £ 27,356 per extra live birth in women commencing treatment aged 32 years, to costing £ 15,539 per extra live birth in 39-year-old women. DET cost ∼ £ 28,300 and ∼ £ 20,300 per additional QALY in women commencing treatment aged 32 and 39 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the high twin pregnancy rate associated with DET, coupled with uncertainty surrounding QALY gains, eSET is likely to be the preferred option for most women aged ≤ 36 years. The cost-effectiveness of DET improves with age, and may be considered cost-effective in some groups of older women. The decision may best be considered on a case-by-case basis for women aged 37-39 years.

Increasing maternal age at first pregnancy planning: health outcomes and associated costs.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the consequences in terms of health outcomes, care and associated healthcare costs for three hypothetical cohorts of women planning their first pregnancy at a fixed, different age. DESIGN: Decision model based on data from perinatal registries and the literature. SETTING: The Netherlands. POPULATION: 3 hypothetical cohorts of 100, 000 women aged 23, 29 and 36 years, planning a first pregnancy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Live birth, pregnancy complications for mother and child and associated healthcare costs. Results For the three cohorts of 23-, 29- and 36-year-old women, 1.6%, 4.6% and 14% of women would not succeed in an ongoing pregnancy (spontaneous or after assisted reproductive technology). The cohort aged 36 gave 9% more miscarriages, 8% more fertility treatment and 1.4% more multiple births than the cohort aged 29. The proportion of caesarean sections among low risk women was 4.9% and 11% higher respectively for the cohorts aged 29 and 36, compared with the cohort aged 23 at start. Eventually, 98%, 95% and 85% of the women in each of the three cohorts gave live birth. The costs for the two older cohorts were €415 and €1662 higher per ongoing pregnancy than the cohort aged 23 years. CONCLUSIONS: Spontaneous conception and mode of delivery are most susceptible to increasing maternal age leading to involuntary childlessness and non-spontaneous labour. The increase in assisted reproduction technology, twin pregnancies and delivery complications results in higher costs along with fewer ongoing pregnancies at higher age.

Educational attainment and smoking among women: risk factors and consequences for offspring.

We examine the association between education and smoking by women in the population, including smoking during pregnancy, and identify risk factors for smoking and the consequences of smoking in pregnancy for children's smoking and behavioral problems. Secondary analyses of four national data sets were implemented: The National Survey of Drug Use and Health (2006), the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (1979-2004); the National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health (Wave III); National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2005-2006). The lower the level of education, the greater the risk of being a current smoker, smoking daily, smoking heavily, being nicotine dependent, starting to smoke at an early age, having higher levels of circulating cotinine per cigarettes smoked, and continuing to smoke in pregnancy. The educational gradient is especially strong in pregnancy. Educational level and smoking in pregnancy independently increase the risk of offspring smoking and antisocial and anxious/depressed behavior problems. These effects persist with control for other covariates, except maternal age at child's birth, which accounts for the impact of education on offspring smoking and anxious/depressed behavior problems. Women with low education should be the target of public health efforts toward reducing tobacco use. These efforts need to focus as much on social conditions that affect women's lives as on individual level interventions. These interventions would have beneficial effects not only for the women themselves but also for their offspring.

A cost per live birth comparison of HMG and rFSH randomized trials.

To help inform healthcare treatment practices and funding decisions, an economic evaluation was conducted to compare the two leading gonadotrophins used for IVF in Belgium. Based on the results of a recently published meta-analysis, a simulated decision tree model was constructed with four states: (i) fresh cycle, (ii) cryopreserved cycle, (iii) live birth and (iv) treatment withdrawal. Gonadotrophin costs were based on highly purified human menopausal gonadotrophin (HP-HMG; Menopur) and recombinant FSH (rFSH) alpha (Gonal-F). After one fresh and one cryopreserved cycle the average treatment cost with HP-HMG was lower than with rFSH (HP-HMG euro3635; rFSH euro4103). The average cost saving per person started on HP-HMG when compared with rFSH was euro468. Additionally, the average costs per live birth of HP-HMG and rFSH were found to be significantly different: HP-HMG euro9996; rFSH euro13,009 (P < 0.0001). HP-HMG remained cost-saving even after key parameters in the model were varied in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Treatment with HP-HMG was found to be the dominant treatment strategy in IVF because of improved live birth rates and lower costs. Within a fixed healthcare budget, the cost-savings achieved using HP-HMG would allow for the delivery of additional IVF cycles.

Success rates and cost of a live birth following fresh assisted reproduction treatment in women aged 45 years and older, Australia 2002-2004.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to calculate assisted reproductive technology (ART) success rates for fresh autologous and donor cycles in women aged > or = 45 and the resultant cost per live birth. METHODS: We performed a retrospective population-based study of 2339 ART cycles conducted in Australia, 2002-2004 to women aged > or = 45 years. The cost-outcome study was performed on fresh autologous treatment cycles. RESULTS: There were 1101 fresh autologous cycles initiated in women aged > or = 45, with a pregnancy rate of 1.9 per 100 initiated cycles. There were 21 women who achieved a clinical pregnancy with 15 (71%) ending in early pregnancy loss and 6 in live singleton births. The live birth rate following fresh autologous initiated cycles was 0.5% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.1-1.0%]. Fresh donor recipients had an higher live birth rate of 19.1% (95% CI: 15.1-23.2) (odds ratio 43.2; 95% CI: 18.6-100.3) compared with women having fresh autologous cycles. The average cost of a live birth following fresh autologous cycles was 753,107 euros. CONCLUSIONS: The success rate of fresh autologous treatment for women aged > or = 45 years was < 1%. The very high cost of a live birth reflects a treatment failure rate of > 99%. The ART profession should counsel patients of the reality of the technology before the patients consent to treatment.

The combined effect of age and basal follicle-stimulating hormone on the cost of a live birth at assisted reproductive technology.

OBJECTIVE: To predict the cost of a delivery following assisted reproductive technologies (ART). DESIGN: Cost analysis based on retrospective chart analysis. SETTING: University-based ART program. PATIENT(S): Women aged >or=26 and

Preimplantation genetic screening in older women: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the strategy of traditional IVF with prenatal diagnosis versus IVF with preimplantation genetic screening (IVF/PGS) to prevent aneuploid births in women with advanced maternal age. DESIGN: A decision tree analytic model was created to compare IVF alone versus IVF/PGS to evaluate which strategy is the least costly per healthy (euploid) infant. SETTING: Outpatient IVF practices. PATIENT(S): Infertile women, 38-40 and >40 years old. INTERVENTION(S): IVF or IVF/PGS. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Cost per healthy infant. RESULT(S): Using base-case estimates of costs and probabilities in women aged 38-40 years, after a maximum of two fresh IVF cycles and two frozen cycles, the chance of having a healthy infant was 37.8% with IVF alone versus 21.7% with IVF/PGS. The average cost for each strategy is $25,700, but the cost per healthy infant is substantially higher when IVF/PGS is applied as opposed to IVF alone ($118,713 vs. $68,026). To assess the robustness of the model, all probabilities were varied simultaneously in a Monte Carlo simulation, and in 96.2% of trials, IVF alone proved to be the most cost-effective option. Conversely, our data demonstrate that in women aged >40, IVF and IVF/PGS are essentially equal in terms of cost-effectiveness ($122,000 vs. $118,713). CONCLUSION(S): IVF alone is less costly per healthy infant than IVF/PGS in women ages 38-40.

Cost-effectiveness of primary offer of IVF vs. primary offer of IUI followed by IVF (for IUI failures) in couples with unexplained or mild male factor subfertility.

BACKGROUND: In unexplained and mild male factor subfertility, both intrauterine insemination (IUI) and in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) are indicated as first line treatments. Because the success rate of IUI is low, many couples failing IUI subsequently require IVF treatment. In practice, it is therefore important to examine the comparative outcomes (live birth-producing pregnancy), costs, and cost-effectiveness of primary offer of IVF, compared with primary offer of IUI followed by IVF for couples failing IUI. METHODS: Mathematical modelling was used to estimate comparative clinical and cost effectiveness of either primary offer of one full IVF cycle (including frozen cycles when applicable) or "IUI + IVF" (defined as primary IUI followed by IVF for IUI failures) to a hypothetical cohort of subfertile couples who are eligible for both treatment strategies. Data used in calculations were derived from the published peer-reviewed literature as well as activity data of local infertility units. RESULTS: Cost-effectiveness ratios for IVF, "unstimulated-IUI (U-IUI) + IVF", and "stimulated IUI (S-IUI) + IVF" were 12,600 pounds sterling, 13,100 pound sterling and 15,100 pound sterling per live birth-producing pregnancy respectively. For a hypothetical cohort of 100 couples with unexplained or mild male factor subfertility, compared with primary offer of IVF, 6 cycles of "U-IUI + IVF" or of "S-IUI + IVF" would cost an additional 174,200 pounds sterling and 438,000 pounds sterling, representing an opportunity cost of 54 and 136 additional IVF cycles and 14 to 35 live birth-producing pregnancies respectively. CONCLUSION: For couples with unexplained and mild male factor subfertility, primary offer of a full IVF cycle is less costly and more cost-effective than providing IUI (of any modality) followed by IVF.