BACKGROUNDHuman male infertility has a notable genetic component, including well-established diagnoses such as Klinefelter syndrome, Y-chromosome microdeletions and monogenic causes. Approximately 4% of all infertile men are now diagnosed with a genetic cause, but a majority (60–70%) remain without a clear diagnosis and are classified as unexplained. This is likely in large part due to a delay in the field adopting next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, and the absence of clear statements from field leaders as to what constitutes a validated cause of human male infertility (the current paper aims to address this). Fortunately, there has been a significant increase in the number of male infertility NGS studies. These have revealed a considerable number of novel gene–disease relationships (GDRs), which each require stringent assessment to validate the strength of genotype–phenotype associations. To definitively assess which of these GDRs are clinically relevant, the International Male Infertility Genomics Consortium (IMIGC) has identified the need for a systematic review and a comprehensive overview of known male infertility genes and an assessment of the evidence for reported GDRs.OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALEIn 2019, the first standardised clinical validity assessment of monogenic causes of male infertility was published. Here, we provide a comprehensive update of the subsequent 1.5 years, employing the joint expertise of the IMIGC to systematically evaluate all available evidence (as of 1 July 2020) for monogenic causes of isolated or syndromic male infertility, endocrine disorders or reproductive system abnormalities affecting the male sex organs. In addition, we systematically assessed the evidence for all previously reported possible monogenic causes of male infertility, using a framework designed for a more appropriate clinical interpretation of disease genes.SEARCH METHODSWe performed a literature search according to the PRISMA guidelines up until 1 July 2020 for publications in English, using search terms related to ‘male infertility’ in combination with the word ‘genetics’ in PubMed. Next, the quality and the extent of all evidence supporting selected genes were assessed using an established and standardised scoring method. We assessed the experimental quality, patient phenotype assessment and functional evidence based on gene expression, mutant in-vitro cell and in-vivo animal model phenotypes. A final score was used to determine the clinical validity of each GDR, across the following five categories: no evidence, limited, moderate, strong or definitive. Variants were also reclassified according to the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics-Association for Molecular Pathology (ACMG-AMP) guidelines and were recorded in spreadsheets for each GDR, which are available at imigc.org.OUTCOMESThe primary outcome of this review was an overview of all known GDRs for monogenic causes of human male infertility and their clinical validity. We identified a total of 120 genes that were moderately, strongly or definitively linked to 104 infertility phenotypes.WIDER IMPLICATIONSOur systematic review curates all currently available evidence to reveal the strength of GDRs in male infertility. The existing guidelines for genetic testing in male infertility cases are based on studies published 25 years ago, and an update is far overdue. The identification of 104 high-probability ‘human male infertility genes’ is a 33% increase from the number identified in 2019. The insights generated in the current review will provide the impetus for an update of existing guidelines, will inform novel evidence-based genetic testing strategies used in clinics, and will identify gaps in our knowledge of male infertility genetics. We discuss the relevant international guidelines regarding research related to gene discovery and provide specific recommendations to the field of male infertility. Based on our findings, the IMIGC consortium recommend several updates to the genetic testing standards currently employed in the field of human male infertility, most important being the adoption of exome sequencing, or at least sequencing of the genes validated in this study, and expanding the patient groups for which genetic testing is recommended.

Since its introduction in the 1980s, oocyte donation (OD) has been largely integrated into ART. Lately, both demand and the indications for OD have increased greatly. Oocyte donors are healthy and potentially fertile women undergoing voluntarily ovarian stimulation (OS). Selection of the optimal type of stimulation is of paramount importance in order to achieve the most favourable outcomes for the oocyte recipients, but most importantly for the safety of the oocyte donors. This is the first systematic review (SR) with the objective to summarize the current evidence on OS in oocyte donors. The scope of this SR was to evaluate the OD programme by assessing four different aspects: how to assess the ovarian response prior to stimulation; how to plan the OS (gonadotrophins; LH suppression; ovulation trigger; when to start OS); how to control for the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and other complications; and the differences between the use of fresh versus vitrified donated oocytes. A systematic literature search was conducted in May 2020, according to PRISMA guidelines in the databases PubMed and Embase, using a string that combined synonyms for oocytes, donation, banking, freezing, complications and reproductive outcomes. Studies reporting on the safety and/or efficacy of OS in oocyte donors were identified. The quality of the included studies was assessed using ROBINS-I and ROB2. Meta-analysis was performed where appropriate. Data were combined to calculate mean differences (MD) for continuous variables and odd ratios (OR) for binary data with their corresponding 95% CIs. Heterogeneity between the included studies was assessed using I2 and tau statistics. In total, 57 manuscripts were selected for the review, out of 191 citations identified. Antral follicle count and anti-Müllerian hormone levels correlate with ovarian response to OS in OD but have limited value to discriminate donors who are likely to show either impaired or excessive response. Five randomized controlled trials compared different type of gonadotrophins as part of OS in oocyte donors; owing to high heterogeneity, meta-analysis was precluded. When comparing different types of LH control, namely GnRH antagonist versus agonist, the studies showed no differences in ovarian response. Use of progesterone primed ovarian stimulation protocols has been evaluated in seven studies: the evidence has shown little or no difference, compared to GnRH antagonist protocols, in mean number of retrieved oocytes (MD 0.23, [95% CI 0.58-1.05], n = 2147; 6 studies; I2 = 13%, P = 0.33) and in clinical pregnancy rates among recipients (OR 0.87 [95% CI 0.60-1.26], n = 2260, I2 = 72%, P < 0.01). There is insufficient evidence on long-term safety for babies born. GnRH agonist triggering is the gold standard and should be used in all oocyte donors, given the excellent oocyte retrieval rates, the practical elimination of OHSS and no differences in pregnancy rates in recipients (four studies, OR 0.86, 95%CI 0.58-1.26; I2 = 0%). OS in OD is a safe procedure with a low rate of hospitalization after oocyte retrieval. The use of a levonorgestrel intrauterine device or a progestin contraceptive pill during OS does not impact the number of oocytes retrieved or the clinical pregnancy rate in recipients. Ultrasound monitoring seems enough for an adequate follow up of the stimulation cycle in OD. Use of fresh versus vitrified donated oocytes yielded similar pregnancy outcomes. This update will be helpful in the clinical management of OS in OD based on the most recent knowledge and recommendations, and possibly in the management of women under 35 years undergoing oocyte vitrification for social freezing, owing to the population similarities. More clinical research is needed on OS protocols that are specifically designed for OD, especially in term of the long-term safety for newborns, effective contraception during OS, and treatment satisfaction.

In Europe, the number of frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles is steadily increasing, now accounting for more than 190000 cycles per year. It is standard clinical practice to postpone FET for at least one menstrual cycle following a failed fresh transfer or after a freeze-all cycle. The purpose of this practice is to minimise the possible residual negative effect of ovarian stimulation on the resumption of a normal ovulatory cycle and receptivity of the endometrium. Although elective deferral of FET may unnecessarily delay time to pregnancy, immediate FET may be inefficient in a clinical setting, following an increased risk of irregular ovulatory cycles and the presence of functional cysts, increasing the risk of cycle cancellation. This review explores the impact of timing of FET in the first cycle (immediate FET) versus the second or subsequent cycle (postponed FET) following a failed fresh transfer or a freeze-all cycle on live birth rate (LBR). Secondary endpoints were implantation, pregnancy and clinical pregnancy rates (CPR) as well as miscarriage rate (MR). We searched PubMed (MEDLINE) and EMBASE databases for MeSH and Emtree terms, as well as text words related to timing of FET, up to March 2020, in English language. There were no limitations regarding year of publication or duration of follow-up. Inclusion criteria were subfertile women aged 18-46 years with any indication for treatment with IVF/ICSI. Studies on oocyte donation were excluded. All original studies were included, except for case reports, study protocols and abstracts only. Covidence, a Cochrane-tool, was used for sorting and screening of literature. Risk of bias was assessed using the Robins-I tool and the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Out of 4124 search results, 15 studies were included in the review. Studies reporting adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for LBR, CPR and MR were included in meta-analyses. All studies (n = 15) were retrospective cohort studies involving a total of 6,304 immediate FET cycles and 13,851 postponed FET cycles including 8,019 matched controls. Twelve studies of very low to moderate quality reported no difference in LBR with immediate versus postponed FET. Two studies of moderate quality reported a statistically significant increase in LBR with immediate FET and one small study of very low quality reported better LBR with postponed FET. Trends in rates of secondary outcomes followed trends in LBR regarding timing of FET. The meta-analyses showed a significant advantage of immediate FET (n =2,076) compared to postponed FET (n =3,833), with a pooled aOR of 1.20 (95% CI 1.01-1.44) for LBR and a pooled aOR of 1.22 (95% CI 1.07-1.39) for CPR. The results of this review indicate a slightly higher LBR and CPR in immediate versus postponed FET. Thus, the standard clinical practice of postponing FET for at least one menstrual cycle following a failed fresh transfer or a freeze-all cycle may not be best clinical practice. However, as only retrospective cohort studies were assessed, the presence of selection bias is apparent, and the quality of evidence thus seems low. Randomised controlled trials including data on cancellation rates and reasons for cancellation are highly needed to provide high-grade evidence regarding clinical practice and patient counselling.

IVM was implemented in medically assisted reproduction 25 years ago. IVM does not involve controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) and is mainly indicated in patients with a high risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, in particular in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS); it is also an acknowledged option in fertility protection. However, the in-vitro culture of immature oocytes raises concerns over their developmental potential and the putative impact on children's health. Although an increasing number of studies on obstetric and neonatal outcomes of IVM children and their development have been published in recent years, study designs are difficult to compare, since IVM is used in women with various indications and IVM protocols do not follow the same standards. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current evidence from IVM children of an impact of in-vitro culture of immature oocytes. Primary outcome parameters were birthweight and children's development up to the age of 2 years. We also compared pregnancy pathologies and the outcome of IVM children and COS children in relation to maternal indications, in particular PCOS, and to the type of IVM protocols with or without ovulation trigger as the secondary outcome parameters. IVM is an accepted clinical option for many centres; however, a comprehensive analysis of the available data is needed to establish whether the use of human oocytes that are fully matured in vitro is safe for both children and their mothers. Google Scholar and PubMed were used for identifying peer-reviewed original articles and reviews through January 2020. A total of 191 studies were screened and 16 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Studies were stratified according to indications, the use of an ovulation trigger and multiplicity. Birthweights of IVM singletons and multiples were comparable to their respective COS controls: birthweights were also similar if the analysis was restricted to mothers with PCOS. IVM children had a comparable birthweight to COS children, irrespective of whether an ovulation trigger was used in IVM cycles or not. The frequency of gestational diabetes (GD) in singleton pregnancies was comparable between IVM and COS, regardless of infertility background. There was also no difference in GD frequency between IVM and COS, if an hCG ovulation trigger in IVM cycles was used or not. Hypertensive disorders in singleton pregnancies of women with PCOS were significantly more frequent after IVM compared to COS, in particular if IVM cycles were performed only with in-vitro matured oocytes. There was no difference in the preterm birth rate of singleton pregnancies between IVM and COS. Preterm birth rates were still similar if only women diagnosed with PCOS were compared and whether an ovulation trigger in IVM was used or not. The malformation rate in IVM children did not differ in COS children versus children after natural conception. At the age of 2 years, IVM singletons showed similar anthropometric and mental development compared to COS children or children from natural conception. The higher incidence of hypertensive disorders in IVM pregnancies needs monitoring during pregnancy. Current data on the development of IVM children are encouraging, although the quality of many studies is limited and long-term data beyond 2 years are scarce. Further studies should be based on generally accepted IVM protocols. Studies on long-term outcomes beyond 2 years are needed to search for potential long-time sequelae of IVM.

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is the most common cause of anovulatory infertility. An endometrial component has been suggested to contribute to subfertility and poor reproductive outcomes in affected women. The aim of this review was to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to support that endometrial function is altered in women with PCOS, whether clinical features of PCOS affect the endometrium, and whether there are evidence-based interventions to improve endometrial dysfunction in PCOS women. An extensive literature search was performed from 1970 up to July 2020 using PubMed and Web of Science without language restriction. The search included all titles and abstracts assessing a relationship between PCOS and endometrial function, the role played by clinical and biochemical/hormonal factors related to PCOS and endometrial function, and the potential interventions aimed to improve endometrial function in women with PCOS. All published papers were included if considered relevant. Studies having a specific topic/hypothesis regarding endometrial cancer/hyperplasia in women with PCOS were excluded from the analysis. Experimental and clinical data suggest that the endometrium differs in women with PCOS when compared to healthy controls. Clinical characteristics related to the syndrome, alone and/or in combination, may contribute to dysregulation of endometrial expression of sex hormone receptors and co-receptors, increase endometrial insulin-resistance with impaired glucose transport and utilization, and result in chronic low-grade inflammation, immune dysfunction, altered uterine vascularity, abnormal endometrial gene expression and cellular abnormalities in women with PCOS. Among several interventions to improve endometrial function in women with PCOS, to date, only lifestyle modification, metformin and bariatric surgery have the highest scientific evidence for clinical benefit. Endometrial dysfunction and abnormal trophoblast invasion and placentation in PCOS women can predispose to miscarriage and pregnancy complications. Thus, patients and their health care providers should advise about these risks. Although currently no intervention can be universally recommended to reverse endometrial dysfunction in PCOS women, lifestyle modifications and metformin may improve underlying endometrial dysfunction and pregnancy outcomes in obese and/or insulin resistant patients. Bariatric surgery has shown its efficacy in severely obese PCOS patients, but a careful evaluation of the benefit/risk ratio is warranted. Large scale randomized controlled clinical trials should address these possibilities.

BACKGROUNDInfertility affects 48.5 million couples worldwide with a prevalence estimated at 3.5–16.7% in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), and as high as 30–40% in Sub-Saharan Africa. ART services are not accessible to the majority of these infertile couples due to the high cost of treatments in addition to cultural, religious and legal barriers. Infertility and childlessness, particularly in LMIC, have devastating consequences, which has resulted in considerable interest in developing affordable IVF procedures. However, there is a paucity of evidence on the safety, efficiency and ability to replicate techniques under different field conditions, and how to integrate more affordable ART options into existing infrastructures.OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALEThis review was performed to investigate the current availability of IVF in LMIC and which other ART options are under development. This work will unfold the landscape of available and potential ART services in LMIC and is a key element in positioning infertility more broadly in the Global Public Health Agenda.SEARCH METHODSA systematic literature search was performed of articles and gray literature on IVF and other ART options in LMIC published between January 2010 and January 2020. We selected studies on IVF and other ART treatments for infertile couples of reproductive age (18–44 years) from LMIC. The review was limited to articles published after 2010, based on the recent evolution in the field of ART practices in LMIC over the last decade. Citations from high-income countries, including data prior to 2010 and focusing on specialized ART procedures, were excluded. The literature search included PubMed, Popline, CINHAL, EMBASE and Global Index Medicus. No restrictions were applied with regard to study design or language. Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts, and extracted data. A search for gray literature was performed using the ‘Google’ search engine and specific databases (worldcat.org, greylit.org). In addition, the reference lists of included studies were assessed.OUTCOMESThe search of the electronic databases yielded 3769 citations. After review of the titles and abstracts, 283 studies were included. The full texts were reviewed and a further 199 articles were excluded. The gray literature search yielded 586 citations, most of which were excluded after screening the title, and the remaining documents were excluded after full-text assessment due to duplicate entries, not from LMIC, not relevant or no access to the full document. Eighty-four citations were included as part of the review and separated into regions. The majority of the studies were observational and qualitative studies. In general, ART services are available and described in several LMIC, ranging from advanced techniques in China to basic introduction of IVF in some African countries. Efforts to provide affordable ART treatments are described in feasibility studies and efficacy studies; however, most citations were of low to very low quality. We found no studies from LMIC reporting the implementation of low-cost ART that is effective, accessible and affordable to most of those in need of the services.WIDER IMPLICATIONSThe World Health Organization is in a unique position to provide much needed guidance for infertility management in LMIC. This review provides insight into the landscape of ART in LMIC in various regions worldwide, which will guide efforts to improve the availability, quality, accessibility and acceptability of biomedical infertility care, including ART in these countries.

Infertility is a major issue in human reproductive health, affecting an estimated 15% of couples worldwide. Infertility can result from disorders of sex development (DSD) or from reproductive endocrine disorders (REDs) with onset in infancy, early childhood or adolescence. Male infertility, accounting for roughly half of all infertility cases, generally manifests as decreased sperm count (azoospermia or oligozoospermia), attenuated sperm motility (asthenozoospermia) or a higher proportion of morphologically abnormal sperm (teratozoospermia). Female infertility can be divided into several classical types, including, but not limited to, oocyte maturation arrest, premature ovarian insufficiency (POI), fertilization failure and early embryonic arrest. An estimated one half of infertility cases have a genetic component; however, most genetic causes of human infertility are currently uncharacterized. The advent of high-throughput sequencing technologies has greatly facilitated the identification of infertility-associated gene mutations in patients over the past 20 years. This review aims to conduct a narrative review of the genetic causes of human infertility. Loss-of-function mutation discoveries related to human infertility are summarized and further illustrated in tables. Corresponding knockout/mutated animal models of causative genes for infertility are also introduced. A search of the PubMed database was performed to identify relevant studies published in English. The term 'mutation' was combined with a range of search terms related to the core focus of the review: infertility, DSD, REDs, azoospermia or oligozoospermia, asthenozoospermia, multiple morphological abnormalities of the sperm flagella (MMAF), primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD), acephalic spermatozoa syndrome (ASS), globozoospermia, teratozoospermia, acrosome, oocyte maturation arrest, POI, zona pellucida, fertilization defects and early embryonic arrest. Our search generated ∼2000 records. Overall, 350 articles were included in the final review. For genetic investigation of human infertility, the traditional candidate gene approach is proceeding slowly, whereas high-throughput sequencing technologies in larger cohorts of individuals is identifying an increasing number of causative genes linked to human infertility. This review provides a wide panel of gene mutations in several typical forms of human infertility, including DSD, REDs, male infertility (oligozoospermia, MMAF, PCD, ASS and globozoospermia) and female infertility (oocyte maturation arrest, POI, fertilization failure and early embryonic arrest). The causative genes, their identified mutations, mutation rate, studied population and their corresponding knockout/mutated mice of non-obstructive azoospermia, MMAF, ASS, globozoospermia, oocyte maturation arrest, POI, fertilization failure and early embryonic arrest are further illustrated by tables. In this review, we suggest that (i) our current knowledge of infertility is largely obtained from knockout mouse models; (ii) larger cohorts of clinical cases with distinct clinical characteristics need to be recruited in future studies; (iii) the whole picture of genetic causes of human infertility relies on both the identification of more mutations for distinct types of infertility and the integration of known mutation information; (iv) knockout/mutated animal models are needed to show whether the phenotypes of genetically altered animals are consistent with findings in human infertile patients carrying a deleterious mutation of the homologous gene; and (v) the molecular mechanisms underlying human infertility caused by pathogenic mutations are largely unclear in most current studies. It is important to use our current understanding to identify avenues and priorities for future research in the field of genetic causes of infertility as well as to apply mutation knowledge to risk prediction, genetic diagnosis and potential treatment for human infertility.

BACKGROUNDChildren with cancer often face infertility as a long-term complication of their treatment. For boys, compromised testicular function is common after chemotherapy and currently there are no well-established options to prevent this damage. Platinum-based agents are used to treat a wide variety of childhood cancers. However, platinum agents are not currently included in the cyclophosphamide equivalent dose (CED), which is used clinically to assess the risks to fertility posed by combination chemotherapy in children with cancer.OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALEThis was a systematic search of the literature designed to determine the evidence for effects of platinum-based cancer treatment on the prepubertal human testis in relation to subsequent testicular function and fertility.SEARCH METHODSPubMed and EMBASE were searched for articles published in English between 01 January 1966 and 05 April 2020 using search terms including ‘cancer treatment’, ‘chemotherapy’, ‘human’, ‘prepubertal’, ‘testis’, ‘germ cells’, ‘testosterone’ and related terms. s were screened and full-text articles were obtained for those that met the three major inclusion criteria (age ≤12 years at treatment, exposure to platinum-based chemotherapeutic and measure of reproductive function). Screening of bibliographies for full-text articles was used to identify additional studies.OUTCOMESOur initial search identified 1449 articles of which 20 (1.3%) studies (n = 13 759 males) met all inclusion criteria. A control group (healthy individuals or siblings) was included for 5/20 (25%) studies. A total of 10/20 (50%) studies provided sub-analysis of the relative gonadotoxicity of platinum-based agents.The primary outcome measures were: pregnancies and fatherhood; semen analysis; and hormonal function. For pregnancies and fatherhood, three studies (n = 10 453 males) reported negative associations with platinum-agents, including the largest (n = 5640) controlled study (hazard ratio = 0.56, P = 0.0023), whilst two other studies (n = 1781) with platinum sub-analysis reported no association. For semen analysis (based on World Health Organization criteria), platinum-based chemotherapy was associated with azoospermia in one study (n = 129), whilst another (n = 44) found no association and the remainder did not perform platinum-based sub-analysis. For hormone analysis, conflicting results were obtained regarding potential associations between platinum-based agents and elevated FSH (a proxy for impaired spermatogenesis); however, the majority of these studies were based on low numbers of patients receiving platinum-based chemotherapy.WIDER IMPLICATIONSOverall, these results indicate that platinum-based chemotherapy should be included in clinical calculators, for example CED, used to determine gonadotoxicity for childhood cancer treatment. These findings have important implications for clinicians regarding counselling patients and their carer(s) on fertility risk, guiding requirements for fertility preservation strategies (e.g. testicular tissue cryopreservation) and modification of treatments to reduce or eliminate the risk of infertility in childhood cancer survivors.