Search

We prospectively examined the association between COVID-19 vaccination and menstrual cycle characteristics in an internet-based prospective cohort study. We included a sample of 1,137 participants who enrolled in Pregnancy Study Online (PRESTO), a preconception cohort study of couples trying to conceive, during January 2021-August 2022. Eligible participants were aged 21–45 years, United States or Canadian residents, and trying to conceive without fertility treatment. At baseline and every 8 weeks for up to 12 months, participants completed questionnaires on which they provided information on COVID-19 vaccination and menstrual cycle characteristics, including cycle regularity, cycle length, bleed length, heaviness of bleed, and menstrual pain. We fit generalized estimating equation (GEE) models with a log link function and Poisson distribution to estimate the adjusted risk ratio (RR) for irregular cycles associated with COVID-19 vaccination. We used linear regression with GEE to estimate adjusted mean differences in menstrual cycle length associated with COVID-19 vaccination. We adjusted for sociodemographic, lifestyle, medical and reproductive factors. Participants had 1.1 day longer menstrual cycles after receiving the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine (95 % CI: 0.4, 1.9) and 1.3 day longer cycles after receiving the second dose (95 % CI: 0.2, 2.5). Associations were attenuated at the second cycle post-vaccination. We did not observe strong associations between COVID-19 vaccination and cycle regularity, bleed length, heaviness of bleed, or menstrual pain. In conclusion, COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a ∼1 day temporary increase in menstrual cycle length, but was not appreciably associated with other menstrual cycle characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a well-documented decline in fertility treatment success with increasing female age; however, there are few preconception cohort studies that have examined female age and natural fertility. In addition, data on male age and fertility are inconsistent. Given the increasing number of couples who are attempting conception at older ages, a more detailed characterization of age-related fecundability in the general population is of great clinical utility.Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine the association between female and male age with fecundability.Study Design: We conducted a web-based preconception cohort study of pregnancy planners from the United States and Canada. Participants were enrolled between June 2013 and July 2017. Eligible participants were 21-45 years old (female) or ≥21 years old (male) and had not been using fertility treatments. Couples were followed until pregnancy or for up to 12 menstrual cycles. We analyzed data from 2962 couples who had been trying to conceive for ≤3 cycles at study entry and reported no history of infertility. We used life-table methods to estimate the unadjusted cumulative pregnancy proportion at 6 and 12 cycles by female and male age. We used proportional probabilities regression models to estimate fecundability ratios, the per-cycle probability of conception for each age category relative to the referent (21-24 years old), and 95% confidence intervals.Results: Among female patients, the unadjusted cumulative pregnancy proportion at 6 cycles of attempt time ranged from 62.0% (age 28-30 years) to 27.6% (age 40-45 years); the cumulative pregnancy proportion at 12 cycles of attempt time ranged from 79.3% (age 25-27 years old) to 55.5% (age 40-45 years old). Similar patterns were observed among male patients, although differences between age groups were smaller. After adjusting for potential confounders, we observed a nearly monotonic decline in fecundability with increasing female age, with the exception of 28-33 years, at which point fecundability was relatively stable. Fecundability ratios were 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-1.11) for ages 25-27, 0.88 (95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.08) for ages 28-30, 0.87 (95% confidence interval, 0.70-1.08) for ages 31-33, 0.82 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.05) for ages 34-36, 0.60 (95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.81) for ages 37-39, and 0.40 (95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.73) for ages 40-45, compared with the reference group (age, 21-24 years). The association was stronger among nulligravid women. Male age was not associated appreciably with fecundability after adjustment for female age, although the number of men >45 years old was small (n=37).Conclusion: In this preconception cohort study of North American pregnancy planners, increasing female age was associated with an approximately linear decline in fecundability. Although we found little association between male age and fecundability, the small number of men in our study >45 years old limited our ability to draw conclusions on fecundability in older men. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the association between adiposity, physical activity (PA), and fecundability.Design: Prospective cohort study.Setting: Not applicable.Patient(s): A total of 2,062 female pregnancy planners from the United States and Canada who were enrolled during the preconception period.Intervention(s): None.Main Outcome Measure(s): Self-reported pregnancy. Fecundability ratios (FRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using proportional probabilities models that adjusted for potential confounders.Result(s): Relative to body mass index (BMI) 18.5-24 kg/m(2), FRs for BMI <18.5, 25-29, 30-34, 35-39, 40-44, and ≥45 kg/m(2) were 1.05 (95% CI 0.76-1.46), 1.01 (95% CI 0.89-1.15), 0.98 (95% CI 0.82-1.18), 0.78 (95% CI 0.60-1.02), 0.61 (95% CI 0.42-0.88), and 0.42 (95% CI 0.23-0.76), respectively. Reduced fecundability was observed among women with the largest waist-to-hip ratios (≥0.85 vs. <0.75; FR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.74-1.01) and waist circumferences (≥36 vs. <26 inches [≥90 vs. <66 cm]; FR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.59-1.01). Tendency to gain weight in the chest/shoulders (FR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.36-1.08) and waist/stomach (FR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.79-1.02), relative to hips/thighs, was associated with lower fecundability. Moderate PA was associated with increased fecundability (≥5 vs. <1 h/wk; FR = 1.26, 95% CI 0.96-1.65), but there was no dose-response relation. Among overweight/obese women (BMI ≥25 kg/m(2)), fecundability was 27% higher for vigorous PA of ≥5 versus <1 h/wk (95% CI 1.02-1.57).Conclusion(s): Various measures of overall and central adiposity were associated with decreased fertility among pregnancy planners. Vigorous PA was associated with improved fertility among overweight and obese women only; moderate PA was associated with improved fertility among all women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]