Trends in Use of Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy Before Dobbs, After Dobbs Leak, and After Dobbs Final Ruling.

IF 6.6 1区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Kiley Hunkler, David Boedeker, Kerry Flannagan, Arielle Yeshua, Elizabeth Gill, Kate Devine, Phillip Romanski, Trimble Spitzer
{"title":"Trends in Use of Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy Before Dobbs, After Dobbs Leak, and After Dobbs Final Ruling.","authors":"Kiley Hunkler, David Boedeker, Kerry Flannagan, Arielle Yeshua, Elizabeth Gill, Kate Devine, Phillip Romanski, Trimble Spitzer","doi":"10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.02.017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine if utilization of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) increased following the Dobbs decision leak on May 2<sup>nd</sup>, 2022, and after the Dobbs final ruling on June 24<sup>th</sup>, 2022, compared to prior to the Dobbs decision.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study SUBJECTS: Patients that underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF) within a large fertility network geographically distributed across six states from June 2021 through June 2023. PGT-A cycles were defined as cycles with at least one embryo biopsied.</p><p><strong>Exposure: </strong>IVF cycles were grouped by cycle start date. Cycles starting between May 3<sup>rd</sup>, 2022 and June 24<sup>th</sup>, 2022 were considered Post-Dobbs leak. These were compared to cycles starting within the year leading up to the leak and those starting within the year following the final ruling.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Percentage of cycles utilizing PGT-A, defined as number of IVF cycles utilizing PGT-A divided by total number of IVF cycles during the study period. We stratified by age, socioeconomic status, and state abortion access legislation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We analyzed 9,371 IVF cycles prior to Dobbs, 1,581 IVF cycles after Dobbs leak, and 11,536 IVF cycles after Dobbs final ruling, totaling 22,488 IVF cycles. Age, BMI, AMH, parity, and number of embryos obtained per cycle were similar across time periods, but differences existed among race and infertility diagnoses. There were no differences in the primary outcome of percentage of cycles utilizing PGT-A between study time periods (57.2% pre-Dobbs, 56.8% post-Dobbs leak, 56.2% post-Dobbs final ruling); a finding which remained when adjusting for confounders. There was no association between the Dobbs decision and PGT-A use in subgroups stratified by age and socioeconomic status. A slight decrease in PGT-A use was noted in states with protective abortion legislation after the Dobbs final ruling (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.99), with overall PGT-A use higher in states with restrictive policies (66.8%) than protective states (52.4%) across all time periods using Guttmacher's institute's protective vs. restrictive classifications.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is no association between Dobbs decision timing and patients' pursuit of PGT-A, but PGT-A use was more common in restrictive states across all included time periods.</p>","PeriodicalId":12275,"journal":{"name":"Fertility and sterility","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fertility and sterility","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.02.017","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To determine if utilization of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) increased following the Dobbs decision leak on May 2nd, 2022, and after the Dobbs final ruling on June 24th, 2022, compared to prior to the Dobbs decision.

Design: Retrospective cohort study SUBJECTS: Patients that underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF) within a large fertility network geographically distributed across six states from June 2021 through June 2023. PGT-A cycles were defined as cycles with at least one embryo biopsied.

Exposure: IVF cycles were grouped by cycle start date. Cycles starting between May 3rd, 2022 and June 24th, 2022 were considered Post-Dobbs leak. These were compared to cycles starting within the year leading up to the leak and those starting within the year following the final ruling.

Main outcome measures: Percentage of cycles utilizing PGT-A, defined as number of IVF cycles utilizing PGT-A divided by total number of IVF cycles during the study period. We stratified by age, socioeconomic status, and state abortion access legislation.

Results: We analyzed 9,371 IVF cycles prior to Dobbs, 1,581 IVF cycles after Dobbs leak, and 11,536 IVF cycles after Dobbs final ruling, totaling 22,488 IVF cycles. Age, BMI, AMH, parity, and number of embryos obtained per cycle were similar across time periods, but differences existed among race and infertility diagnoses. There were no differences in the primary outcome of percentage of cycles utilizing PGT-A between study time periods (57.2% pre-Dobbs, 56.8% post-Dobbs leak, 56.2% post-Dobbs final ruling); a finding which remained when adjusting for confounders. There was no association between the Dobbs decision and PGT-A use in subgroups stratified by age and socioeconomic status. A slight decrease in PGT-A use was noted in states with protective abortion legislation after the Dobbs final ruling (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.99), with overall PGT-A use higher in states with restrictive policies (66.8%) than protective states (52.4%) across all time periods using Guttmacher's institute's protective vs. restrictive classifications.

Conclusions: There is no association between Dobbs decision timing and patients' pursuit of PGT-A, but PGT-A use was more common in restrictive states across all included time periods.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Fertility and sterility
Fertility and sterility 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
6.00%
发文量
1446
审稿时长
31 days
期刊介绍: Fertility and Sterility® is an international journal for obstetricians, gynecologists, reproductive endocrinologists, urologists, basic scientists and others who treat and investigate problems of infertility and human reproductive disorders. The journal publishes juried original scientific articles in clinical and laboratory research relevant to reproductive endocrinology, urology, andrology, physiology, immunology, genetics, contraception, and menopause. Fertility and Sterility® encourages and supports meaningful basic and clinical research, and facilitates and promotes excellence in professional education, in the field of reproductive medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信