MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125624387 · doi:10.1093/humrep/des156

Prospective follow-up of 838 fetuses conceived after ovarian stimulation with corifollitropin alfa: comparative and overall neonatal outcome

2012· article· en· W2125624387 on OpenAlexaff
M Bonduelle, Bernadette Mannaerts, Arthur Leader, C Bergh, D. Passier, Paul Devroey

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Reproduction · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian function and disorders
Canadian institutionsOttawa Fertility CentreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLive birthEmbryo transferPregnancyObstetricsRandomized controlled trialIncidence (geometry)FetusGynecologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY QUESTION: Is treatment with corifollitropin alfa, a new recombinant gonadotrophin with sustained follicle-stimulating activity, safe in terms of perinatal complications and birth defects in infants conceived following corifollitropin alfa treatment for contolled ovarian stimulation (COS)? SUMMARY ANSWER: In terms of neonatal outcome and risk of malformations, treatment with a single dose of corifollitropin alfa during COS is as safe as treatment with daily recombinant FSH (rFSH). WHAT IS KNOWN AND WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: This is the first pooled analysis of individual safety data in terms of neonatal outcome and major and minor congenital malformations collected following intervention trials of corifollitropin alfa. DESIGN: Pregnancy and follow-up studies were conducted prospectively and data were collected from all Phase II and III trials with corifollitropin alfa intervention, including two comparative randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which patients received either a single dose of corifollitropin alfa or daily rFSH for the first 7 days of COS. Patients with ongoing pregnancies at 10 weeks after embryo transfer were followed up to labour and the health of the offspring was assessed up to 4-12 weeks after birth. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Following corifollitropin alfa treatment prior to IVF or ICSI, the health of 677 pregnant women, 838 fetuses and 806 live born infants was evaluated. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Among 440 fetuses in the corifollitropin alfa arm and 381 fetuses in the rFSH arm of the two RCTs, there were 424 (96.4%) and 370 (98.7%) live births, respectively. Neonatal characteristics, the frequency of premature births and the incidence of infant adverse events were similar in both treatment arms. The overall incidence of any congenital malformations in live born infants was 16.3 and 17.0%, with major malformation rates of 4.0 and 5.4% in the corifollitropin alfa and rFSH groups, respectively [odds ratio (OR) for major malformations, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-1.38]. From 838 fetuses assessed in all corifollitropin alfa intervention trials, there were 806 (96.2%) live births with a major malformation rate of 4.5% in live born infants. BIAS, CONFOUNDING AND OTHER REASONS FOR CAUTION: Both RCTs had a double-blind and active-controlled design and the adjudication of congenital malformations was also performed in a blinded fashion. As the total number of major malformations was limited (37), the confidence interval around the OR was rather wide. GENERALISABILITY TO OTHER POPULATIONS: The similarity of corifollitropin alfa and rFSH with respect to the incidence of congenital malformations was consistent across the RCTs and pregnancy type (singleton, multiple). This suggests that this similarity could hold in general. Overall incidences, however, may depend on the definitions of malformations and rules to adjudicate these events as major or minor.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman ReproductionSame topicOvarian function and disordersFrench-language works237,207