Search

Objective: To assess predictors of desire for genetically related children among a national cohort of reproductive-age transgender and gender-diverse patients aged 18 to 44 years initiating gender-affirming hormone therapy for the first time. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: National telehealth clinic. Patients: A cohort of patients from 33 US states initiating gender-affirming hormone therapy. A total of 10,270 unique transgender and gender-diverse patients—aged 18 to 44 years (median age 24 years), with no prior use of gender-affirming hormone therapy—completed clinical intake forms between September 1, 2020, and January 1, 2022. Intervention(s): Patient sex assigned at birth, insurance status, age, and geographic location. Main Outcome Measure(s): Self-reported desire for children using own genetic material. Result(s): Transgender and gender-diverse patients seeking gender-affirming medical treatments who are open to having genetically related children are an important population to identify and appropriately counsel. Over one quarter of the study population reported being interested in or unsure about having genetically related children, with 17.8% reporting yes and 8.4% unsure. Male-sex-assigned-at-birth patients had 1.37 (95% confidence interval: 1.25, 1.41) times higher odds of being open to having genetically related children compared with female-sex-assigned-at-birth patients. Those with private insurance had 1.13 (95% confidence interval: 1.02, 1.37) times higher odds of being open to having genetically related children compared with those without insurance. Conclusion(s): These findings represent the largest source of self-reported data on the desire for genetically related children among reproductive-age adult transgender and gender-diverse patients seeking gender-affirming hormones. Guidelines recommend that providers offer fertility-related counseling. These results indicate that transgender and gender-diverse patients, particularly male-sex-assigned-at-birth individuals and patients with private insurance, could benefit from counseling regarding the impacts of gender-affirming hormone therapy and gender-affirming surgeries on fertility.

Objective: To investigate associations between reproductive endocrinology and infertility (REI) providers’ prior training and current knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviors regarding fertility preservation and family building for transgender and gender-diverse (T/GD) patients. Design: The survey was distributed to members of the Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, the REI-physician-focused professional body within the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, with additional participants recruited through snowball sampling. Results: Participants (n = 206) reported on training in T/GD care; 51% endorsed prior training. Most participants (93%) believed T/GD individuals were as fit for parenthood as cisgender individuals. Prior training was associated with an increased likelihood of offering T/GD health resources and more frequent consultations with specialist colleagues.Common barriers to providing care indicated by respondents included cost, delays in gender-affirming care, and lack of knowledge of the potential impact of hormonal interventions. Common facilitators included education and training, prior experience, and affordability of services. Conclusions: Most REI providers believed T/GD individuals are fit for parenthood and agreed that prior training facilitates care for T/GD patients. The lack of provider knowledge emerged as a barrier to care. Although training helped facilitate some components of care, systemic barriers such as the cost and variability of patient population characteristics/experiences are important considerations when serving T/GD individuals.

Objective: Evidence strongly supports the use of mifepristone-misoprostol combination treatment for early pregnancy loss (EPL) among pregnancies conceived without assisted reproductive technologies. No literature exists, however, regarding the efficacy of this treatment in the medical management of EPL among pregnancies after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET). These patients differ as some use exogenous hormonal supplementation to provide pregnancy support. Thus, the management for EPL may differ between unassisted conceptions and those after ET. Mifepristone, a progesterone receptor antagonist, may demonstrate an altered treatment effect when used with misoprostol to manage EPL in assisted reproductive technologie-conceived pregnancies. Objective: To describe our institution’s experience using mifepristone-misoprostol to manage EPL after in vitro fertilization with embryo transfer IVF-ET. Design: Retrospective case series Setting: Single academic institution from 2020 to 2022. Patients(s): Nine patients with ultrasound confirmed EPL after IVF-ET. Intervention(s): All 9 patients underwent in vitro fertilization followed by fresh or frozen embryo transfer. All 9 received 200 mg of mifepristone 24 hours before 800 μg of misoprostol. Main Outcome Measurement(s): Incomplete abortion, need for surgical management, number of days to negative serum human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG). Result(s): Of the 9 subjects included, one had a programmed frozen embryo transfer cycle, 6 had modified natural frozen embryo transfer cycles, and 2 underwent fresh ET. Eight subjects had successful expulsion of tissue with one dose of treatment, and one required uterine aspiration. No subjects required additional dosing of misoprostol. The mean number of days elapsed from mifepristone treatment to tissue expulsion was 4.89 ± 11.30 days and the mean days to negative-range serum hCG was 36.89 ± 18.59 days. At the initial ultrasound, all pregnancies had one gestational sac seen; 5/9 had a yolk sac; only 3 had fetal cardiac activity. The mean gestational age at the time of EPL diagnosis was 55.22 ± 8.77 days, with the majority (8/9) having completed 7 weeks gestation. Conclusion(s): Mifepristone-misoprostol combination treatment appears to be a reasonable option for those with EPL after IVF-ET. Future, larger-scale studies are needed comparing combination treatment with misoprostol only among various ET protocols.

Objective: To evaluate aneuploidy rates and in vitro fertilization (IVF)/pregnancy outcomes for patients undergoing IVF and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) with a recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) diagnosis compared to infertility diagnoses without RPL. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Academic fertility center. Patient(s): Of 372 patients undergoing IVF/PGT-A between January 2016-December 2018, 294 patients were included in the analysis: 56 patients with an RPL diagnosis and 238 with infertility diagnoses without RPL. Intervention(s): None. Main Outcome Measure(s): The primary outcome measured was the embryonic aneuploidy rate. Secondary outcomes included fertilization and blastulation rates, number of blastocysts biopsied, cycles without euploid blastocysts, and rates of pregnancy losses, clinical pregnancies, and live births after a euploid embryo transfer. Result(s): The cohort included 56 patients with RPL and 238 patients without RPL, including data from their first IVF cycle within the time period. Aneuploidy rates were similar between the groups, with a mean of 55% (±31%) in RPL and 54% (±34%) in non-RPL cycles. Similar rates persisted after controlling for age, ovarian reserve, and infertility diagnosis. Fertilization and blastulation rates, as well as cumulative clinical pregnancy, pregnancy loss, and live birth rates after the transfer of at least one euploid embryo were also similar between the two groups. Conclusion(s): These results suggest that IVF/PGT-A cycles from patients with an RPL diagnosis have similar IVF and pregnancy outcomes to those of patients with infertility without RPL. This research can help guide counseling for RPL patients considering IVF with PGT-A.