Current issues in medically assisted reproduction and genetics in Europe: research, clinical practice, ethics, legal issues and policy. European Society of Human Genetics and European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.

In March 2005, a group of experts from the European Society of Human Genetics and European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology met to discuss the interface between genetics and assisted reproductive technology (ART), and published an extended background paper, recommendations and two Editorials. Seven years later, in March 2012, a follow-up interdisciplinary workshop was held, involving representatives of both professional societies, including experts from the European Union Eurogentest2 Coordination Action Project. The main goal of this meeting was to discuss developments at the interface between clinical genetics and ARTs. As more genetic causes of reproductive failure are now recognised and an increasing number of patients undergo testing of their genome before conception, either in regular health care or in the context of direct-to-consumer testing, the need for genetic counselling and preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) may increase. Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) thus far does not have evidence from randomised clinical trials to substantiate that the technique is both effective and efficient. Whole-genome sequencing may create greater challenges both in the technological and interpretational domains, and requires further reflection about the ethics of genetic testing in ART and PGD/PGS. Diagnostic laboratories should be reporting their results according to internationally accepted accreditation standards (International Standards Organisation - ISO 15189). Further studies are needed in order to address issues related to the impact of ART on epigenetic reprogramming of the early embryo. The legal landscape regarding assisted reproduction is evolving but still remains very heterogeneous and often contradictory. The lack of legal harmonisation and uneven access to infertility treatment and PGD/PGS fosters considerable cross-border reproductive care in Europe and beyond. The aim of this paper is to complement previous publications and provide an update of selected topics that have evolved since 2005

SARS-CoV-2, fertility and assisted reproduction

Abstract Background: In 2020, SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 pandemic had a huge impact on the access to and provision of ART treatments. Gradually, knowledge of the virus and its transmission has become available, allowing ART activities to resume. Still, questions on the impact of the virus on human gametes and fertility remain. Objective and rationale: This article summarizes published data, aiming to clarify the impact of SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 disease on human fertility and assisted reproduction, as well as the impact of vaccination, and from this, provide answers to questions that are relevant for people contemplating pregnancy and for health care professionals. Search methods: PUBMED/MEDLINE and the WHO COVID-19 database were searched from inception to 5 October 2022 with search terms focusing on ‘SARS-CoV-2’ and gametes, embryos, reproductive function, fertility and ART. Non-English studies and papers published prior to 2020 were excluded, as well as reviews and non-peer reviewed publications. Full papers were assessed for relevance and quality, where feasible. Outcomes: From the 148 papers included, the following observations were made. The SARS-CoV-2-binding proteins, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and type II transmembrane serine protease (TMPRSS2), are expressed in the testis, but co-expression remains to be proven. There is some evidence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the ejaculate of COVID-19 patients with severe disease, but not in those with mild/moderate disease. SARS-CoV-2 infection can impair spermatogenesis, but this seems to resolve after one spermatogenic cycle. Testosterone levels seem to be lower during and after COVID-19, but long-term data are lacking; disease severity may be associated with testosterone levels. COVID-19 cannot be considered a sexually transmitted disease. There is no co-expression of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 in the myometrium, uterus, ovaries or fallopian tubes. Oocytes seem to have the receptors and protease machinery to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection; however, viral RNA in oocytes has not been detected so far. Women contemplating pregnancy following COVID-19 may benefit from screening for thyroid dysfunction. There is a possible (transient) impact of COVID-19 on menstrual patterns. Embryos, and particularly late blastocysts, seem to have the machinery to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most studies have not reported a significant impact of COVID-19 on ovarian reserve, ovarian function or follicular fluid parameters. Previous asymptomatic or mild SARS-CoV-2 infection in females does not seem to negatively affect laboratory and clinical outcomes of ART. There are no data on the minimum required interval, if any, between COVID-19 recovery and ART. There is no evidence of a negative effect of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on semen parameters or spermatogenesis, ovarian function, ovarian reserve or folliculogenesis. A transient effect on the menstrual cycle has been documented. Despite concerns, cross reactivity between anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies and Syncytin-1, an essential protein in human implantation, is absent. There is no influence of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine on patients’ performance during their immediate subsequent ART cycle. Pregnancy rates post-vaccination are similar to those in unvaccinated patients. Wider implications: This review highlights existing knowledge on the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 on fertility and assisted reproduction, but also identifies gaps and offers suggestions for future research. The knowledge presented should help to provide evidence-based advice for practitioners and couples contemplating pregnancy alike, facilitating informed decision-making in an environment of significant emotional turmoil

A picture of medically assisted reproduction activities during the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe

Abstract Study question: How did coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) impact on medically assisted reproduction (MAR) services in Europe during the COVID-19 pandemic (March to May 2020)? Summary answer: MAR services, and hence treatments for infertile couples, were stopped in most European countries for a mean of 7 weeks. What is known already: With the outbreak of COVID-19 in Europe, non-urgent medical care was reduced by local authorities to preserve health resources and maintain social distancing. Furthermore, ESHRE and other societies recommended to postpone ART pregnancies as of 14 March 2020. Study design, size, duration: A structured questionnaire was distributed in April among the ESHRE Committee of National Representatives, followed by further information collection through email. Participants/materials, setting, methods: The information was collected through the questionnaire and afterwards summarised and aligned with data from the European Centre for Disease Control on the number of COVID-19 cases per country. Main results and the role of chance: By aligning the data for each country with respective epidemiological data, we show a large variation in the time and the phase in the epidemic in the curve when MAR/ART treatments were suspended and restarted. Similarly, the duration of interruption varied. Fertility preservation treatments and patient supportive care for patients remained available during the pandemic. Large scale data: N/A Limitations, reasons for caution: Data collection was prone to misinterpretation of the questions and replies, and required further follow-up to check the accuracy. Some representatives reported that they, themselves, were not always aware of the situation throughout the country or reported difficulties with providing single generalised replies, for instance when there were regional differences within their country. Wider implications of the findings: The current article provides a basis for further research of the different strategies developed in response to the COVID-19 crisis. Such conclusions will be invaluable for health authorities and healthcare professionals with respect to future similar situations. Study funding/competing interest(s): There was no funding for the study, apart from technical support from ESHRE. The authors had no COI to disclose

The calm after the storm:re-starting ART treatments safely in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic

Abstract The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created a significant impact on medically assisted reproduction (MAR) services. ESHRE decided to mobilize resources in order to collect, analyse, monitor, prepare and disseminate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) knowledge specifically related to ART and early pregnancy. This article presents the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic focusing on reproductive healthcare. It details the rationale behind the guidance prepared to support MAR services in organizing and managing the re-start of treatments or in case of any future wave of COVID-19 disease. The guidance includes information on patient selection and informed consent, staff and patient triage and testing, adaptation of ART services, treatment planning and code of conduct. The initiatives detailed in this article are not necessarily COVID-specific and such action plans could be applied effectively to manage similar emergency situations in different areas of medicine, in the future

Outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infected pregnancies after medically assisted reproduction

Abstract STUDY QUESTION:What is the impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection on the outcome of a pregnancy after medically assisted reproduction (MAR)? SUMMARY ANSWER:Our results suggest that MAR pregnancies are not differentially affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to spontaneous pregnancies. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Information on the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on pregnancy after MAR is scarce when women get infected during MAR or early pregnancy, even though such information is vital for informing women seeking pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION:Data from SARS-CoV-2 affected MAR pregnancies were collected between May 2020 and June 2021 through a voluntary data collection, organised by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: All ESHRE members were invited to participate to an online data collection for SARS-CoV-2-infected MAR pregnancies. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE:The dataset includes 80 cases from 32 countries, including 67 live births, 10 miscarriages, 2 stillbirths and 1 maternal death. An additional 25pregnancies were ongoing at the time of writing. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: An international data registry based on voluntary contribution can be subject to selective reporting with possible risks of over- or under-estimation. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The current data can be used to guide clinical decisions in the care of women pregnant after MAR, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The authors acknowledge the support of ESHRE for the data registry and meetings. J.S.T. reports grants or contracts from Sigrid Juselius Foundation, EU and Helsinki University Hospital Funds, outside the scope of the current work. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest

Targeted gene expression profiling for accurate endometrial receptivity testing

Abstract Expressional profiling of the endometrium enables the personalised timing of the window of implantation (WOI). This study presents and evaluates a novel analytical pipeline based on a TAC-seq (Targeted Allele Counting by sequencing) method for endometrial dating. The expressional profiles were clustered, and differential expression analysis was performed on the model development group, using 63 endometrial biopsies spanning over proliferative (PE, n = 18), early-secretory (ESE, n = 18), mid-secretory (MSE, n = 17) and late-secretory (LSE, n = 10) endometrial phases of the natural cycle. A quantitative predictor model was trained on the development group and validated on sequenced samples from healthy women, consisting of 52 paired samples taken from ESE and MSE phases and five LSE phase samples from 31 individuals. Finally, the developed test was applied to 44 MSE phase samples from a study group of patients diagnosed with recurrent implantation failure (RIF). In validation samples (n = 57), we detected displaced WOI in 1.8% of the samples from fertile women. In the RIF study group, we detected a significantly higher proportion of the samples with shifted WOI than in the validation set of samples from fertile women, 15.9% and 1.8% (p = 0.012), respectively. The developed model was evaluated with an average cross-validation accuracy of 98.8% and an accuracy of 98.2% in the validation group. The developed beREADY screening model enables sensitive and dynamic detection of selected transcriptome biomarkers, providing a quantitative and accurate prediction of endometrial receptivity status

Sex Steroid Hormones and Reproductive Disorders:Impact on Women's Health

The role of sex steroid hormones in reproductive function in women is well established. However, in the last two decades it has been shown that receptors for estrogens, progesterone and androgens are expressed in non reproductive tissue /organs (bone, brain, cardiovascular system) playing a role in their function. Therefore, it is critical to evaluate the impact of sex steroid hormones in the pathophysiology of some diseases (osteoporosis, Alzheimer, atherosclerosis). In particular, women with primary ovarian insufficiency, polycystic ovary syndrome, endometriosis and climacteric syndrome may have more health problems and therefore an hormonal treatment may be crucial for these women

The Maribor consensus:report of an expert meeting on the development of performance indicators for clinical practice in ART

Abstract STUDY QUESTION: Is it possible to define a set of performance indicators (PIs) for clinical work in ART, which can create competency profiles for clinicians and for specific clinical process steps? SUMMARY ANSWER:The current paper recommends six PIs to be used for monitoring clinical work in ovarian stimulation for ART, embryo transfer, and pregnancy achievement: cycle cancellation rate (before oocyte pick-up (OPU)) (%CCR), rate of cycles with moderate/severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (%mosOHSS), the proportion of mature (MII) oocytes at ICSI (%MII), complication rate after OPU (%CoOPU), clinical pregnancy rate (%CPR), and multiple pregnancy rate (%MPR). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY:PIs are objective measures for evaluating critical healthcare domains. In 2017, ART laboratory key PIs (KPIs) were defined. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION:A list of possible indicators was defined by a working group. The value and limitations of each indicator were confirmed through assessing published data and acceptability was evaluated through an online survey among members of ESHRE, mostly clinicians, of the special interest group Reproductive Endocrinology. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS:The online survey was open for 5 weeks and 222 replies were received. Statements (indicators, indicator definitions, or general statements) were considered accepted when ≥70% of the responders agreed (agreed or strongly agreed). There was only one round to seek levels of agreement between the stakeholders. Indicators that were accepted by the survey responders were included in the final list of indicators. Statements reaching less than 70% were not included in the final list but were discussed in the paper. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE:Cycle cancellation rate (before OPU) and the rate of cycles with moderate/severe OHSS, calculated on the number of started cycles, were defined as relevant PIs for monitoring ovarian stimulation. For monitoring ovarian response, trigger and OPU, the proportion of MII oocytes at ICSI and complication rate after OPU were listed as PIs: the latter PI was defined as the number of complications (any) that require an (additional) medical intervention or hospital admission (apart from OHSS) over the number of OPUs performed. Finally, clinical pregnancy rate and multiple pregnancy rate were considered relevant PIs for embryo transfer and pregnancy. The defined PIs should be calculated every 6 months or per 100 cycles, whichever comes first. Clinical pregnancy rate and multiple pregnancy rate should be monitored more frequently (every 3 months or per 50 cycles). Live birth rate (LBR) is a generally accepted and an important parameter for measuring ART success. However, LBR is affected by many factors, even apart from ART, and it cannot be adequately used to monitor clinical practice. In addition to monitoring performance in general, PIs are essential for managing the performance of staff over time, and more specifically the gap between expected performance and actual performance measured. Individual clinics should determine which indicators are key to the success in their organisation based on their patient population, protocols, and procedures, and as such, which are their KPIs. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION:The consensus values are based on data found in the literature and suggestions of experts. When calculated and compared to the competence/benchmark limits, prudent interpretation is necessary taking into account the specific clinical practice of each individual centre. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS:The defined PIs complement the earlier defined indicators for the ART laboratory. Together, both sets of indicators aim to enhance the overall quality of the ART practice and are an essential part of the total quality management. PIs are important for education and can be applied during clinical subspecialty. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This paper was developed and funded by ESHRE, covering expenses associated with meetings, literature searches, and dissemination. The writing group members did not receive payment. Dr G.G. reports personal fees from Merck, MSD, Ferring, Theramex, Finox, Gedeon-Richter, Abbott, Biosilu, ReprodWissen, Obseva, PregLem, and Guerbet, outside the submitted work. Dr A.D. reports personal fees from Cook, outside the submitted work; Dr S.A. reports starting a new employment in May 2020 at Vitrolife. Previously, she has been part of the Nordic Embryology Academic Team, with meetings were sponsored by Gedeon Richter. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. DISCLAIMER:This document represents the views of ESHRE, which are the result of consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders and where relevant based on the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. The recommendations should be used for informational and educational purposes. They should not be interpreted as setting a standard of care, or be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care nor exclusive of other methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. They do not replace the need for application of clinical judgment to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type. Furthermore, ESHREs recommendations do not constitute or imply the endorsement, recommendation, or favouring of any of the included technologies by ESHRE