RiteeshGrandhi/sciclaimeval-shared-task huggingface dataset:
Results
According to the inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria, a total of 4,091 cycles were enrolled in this retrospective study. There were 2,605 cycles in group A and 1,486 cycles in group B. In group A, 1,965 cycles underwent HRT and 640 cycles underwent a long-term GnRH-a plus HRT; In group B, 1,054 cycles received HRT and 432 cycles received GnRH-a + HRT ( Figure 1 ).

The baseline characteristics were described in Table 1 . For women <35 years old, the median age for the HRT group and GnRH-a group were 30.6 and 31.3 years, respectively. Among women aged ≥35, the median age of the HRT group was 38.1 years and that of the GnRHa-HRT group was 38.3 years. Male age, female BMI, duration of infertility, infertility type, and fertilization type were comparable between the groups.

Notes:

Abbreviations PPOS Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation LPOI luteal phase ovulation induction

Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation

luteal phase ovulation induction

The double embryo transfer rate was higher in the GnRHa-HRT group in younger women (70.00% vs 65.55%, P = 0.0381). The prevalence of prior uterine adhesions was higher in the down-regulation group among women ≥35 years (19.44% vs 12.14%, P = 0.0004). Additionally, the protocol in the fresh cycle was statistically different between groups ( P = 0.0014 and P = 0.0040, respectively).

Table 2 shows the clinical outcomes of FET. Women aged <35 years had higher clinical pregnancy and live birth rates than women aged ≥35 years. Among young women, the HRT group had higher clinical pregnancy and live birth rates and lower biochemical pregnancy and miscarriage rates than the GnRHa-HRT group, although none of the differences were statistically significant. In women of advanced age, there was no statistically significant difference in biochemical pregnancy and miscarriage rates between the GnRHa-HRT group and HRT group, but there was a substantial increase in clinical pregnancy (44.68% vs 36.91%, P = 0.0059) and live birth rates (31.94% vs 24.38%, P = 0.0036) following down-regulation.

Notes:

Logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the variables associated with live birth rate ( Table 3 ). Results showed that female age and number of embryos transferred had significant effects on the live birth rate in the whole population. The impact of downregulating or not on the live birth rate did not differ statistically among women aged <35 years (OR = 0.912, 95% CI [0.760–1.094], P = 0.321). However, down-regulation with GnRH-a prior to HRT significantly improved live birth rates in women of advanced age (OR = 1.614,95% CI [1.246–2.091], P < 0.001).

Notes:

Abbreviations OR odds ratio CI 95% confidence interval

odds ratio

confidence interval
Figure 1: Selection and grouping of the study population.
FET, frozen embryo transfer; PCOS, polycystic ovary syndrome; HRT, hormone replacement treatment; GnRH-a, Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist.

  Download full-size image
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.17447/fig-1
Demographic characteristics of patients between different age groups and endometrial preparation groups.
Comparison of reproductive outcomes.
Logistic regression analysis of potential factors associated with live birth rate after FET.