Original delayed-start ovarian stimulation protocol with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, medroxyprogesterone acetate, and high-dose gonadotropin for poor responders and patients with poor-quality embryos

IntroductionThe delayed-start gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol seems effective for patients who are poor ovarian responders, but there are insufficient data on whether it is also effective for patients with poor-quality embryos and low rates of good blastocyst formation. Specifically, the effectiveness of delayed-start gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists with progesterone has not been adequately investigated. Therefore, we compared the efficacy of the original delayed-start gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol using medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) and high-dose gonadotropin in patients with poor ovarian response.MethodsOverall, 156 patients with recurrent assisted reproductive technology failure who underwent the original protocol were included. They received cetrorelix acetate (3 mg) and MPA (10 mg) on cycle day 3, and high-dose gonadotropin was initiated on day 11. When the leading follicle reached 14 mm, ganirelix acetate (0.25 mg) was administered until the trigger day. The number of oocytes retrieved, metaphase II (MII) oocytes, two pronuclear (2PN) zygotes, and good blastocysts and live birth rates were compared between the previous (Cycle A) and original (Cycle B) cycles in three groups (Group A, all patients; Group B, poor responders; and Group C, patients with poor-quality embryos).ResultsIn Group A (n=156), the number of MII oocytes (3.6 ± 3.3 versus 4.5 ± 3.6), 2PN zygotes (2.8 ± 2.9 versus 3.8 ± 3.1), good blastocysts (0.5 ± 0.9 versus 1.2 ± 1.6), and live birth rates (0.6 versus 24.4) significantly increased in Cycle B. Similar results were obtained in Group B (n=83; 2PN zygotes [1.7 ± 1.7 versus 2.3 ± 1.8], good blastocysts [0.4 ± 0.7 versus 0.9 ± 1.3], live birth rates [0 versus 18.1]) and Group C (n=73; MII oocytes [5.1 ± 3.8 versus 6.6 ± 4.0], 2PN zygotes [4.0 ± 3.4 versus 5.4 ± 3.4], good blastocysts [0.7 ± 1.1 versus 1.6 ± 1.9], and live birth rates [1.4 versus 31.5]).ConclusionThis original protocol increased the number of MII oocytes retrieved, 2PN zygotes, good blastocysts, and live birth rates in both poor responders and in patients with poor-quality embryos

Reliability and validity of the patient disability-oriented diagnostic nomenclature system for prosthetic dentistry

Purpose: The Japan Prosthodontic Society (JPS) has proposed a new diagnostic nomenclature system (DNS), based on pathogenesis and etiology, to facilitate and improve prosthodontic treatment. This systemspecifies patient disability and the causative factor (i.e. ‘‘B (disability) caused by A (causative factor)’’). The purpose of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of this DNS. Study selection: The JPS Clinical Guideline Committee assessed mock patient charts and formulated disease names using the new DNS. Fifty validators, comprising prosthodontic specialists and dental residents, made diagnoses using the same patient charts. Reliability was evaluated as the consistency of the disease names among the validators, and validity was evaluated using the concordance rate of the disease names with the reference disease names. Results: Krippendorff’s α was 0.378 among all validators, 0.370 among prosthodontic specialists, and 0.401 among dental hospital residents. Krippendorff’s α for 10 validators (3 specialists and 7 residents) with higher concordance rates was 0.524. Two validators (1 specialist and 1 resident) with the highest concordance rates had a Krippendorff’s α of 0.648. Common disease names had higher concordance rates, while uncommon disease names showed lower concordance rates. These rates did not show correlation with clinical experience of the validator or time taken to devise the disease name. Conclusions: High reliability was not found among all validators; however, validators with higher concordance rates showed better reliability. Furthermore, common disease names had higher concordance rates. These findings indicate that the new DNS for prosthodontic dentistry exhibits clinically acceptable reliability and validity

An Attempt to Replicate Randomized Trials of Diabetes Treatments Using a Japanese Administrative Claims and Health Checkup Database: A Feasibility Study

Abstract Background Use of real-world evidence (RWE) has been limited for evaluating effectiveness because of the lack of confidence in its reliability. Examining whether a rigorously designed observational study using real-world data (RWD) can reproduce the results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) will provide insights into the implementation of high-quality RWE studies that can produce valid conclusions. Objective We aimed to replicate published RCTs using a Japanese claims and health checkup database and examine whether the emulated RWE studies’ results agree with those of the original RCTs. Methods We selected three RCTs on diabetes medications for replication in patients with type 2 diabetes. The study outcome was either the change or percentage change in HbA1c levels from baseline. We designed three observational studies using the RWD to mimic the critical study elements of the respective RCTs as closely as possible. We performed 1:1 propensity score nearest-neighbor matching to balance the groups for potential confounders. The differences in outcomes between the groups and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated in each RWE study, and the results were compared with those of the RCT. Results Patient characteristics, such as age, sex, and duration of diabetes, differed between the RWE studies and RCTs. In Trial 1 emulation, the percentage changes in HbA1c levels were larger in the treatment group than in the comparator group (difference −6.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) −11.01 to −1.40). In Trial 2, the change in HbA1c level was larger in the treatment group (difference −0.01; 95% CI −0.25 to 0.23), and in Trial 3, it was smaller in the treatment group (difference 0.46; 95% CI −0.01 to 0.94). These results did not show regulatory or estimate agreement with the RCTs. Conclusions None of the three emulated RWE studies using this claims and health checkup database reproduced the same conclusions as the RCTs. These discrepancies could largely be attributed to design differences between RWE studies and RCTs, primarily due to the lack of necessary data in the database. This particular RWD source may not be the best fit for evaluating treatment effects using laboratory data as the study outcome