Retrospective study identifies predictors of fertilization failure in conventional IVF cycles, suggesting improved protocol selection.
OBJECTIVES: To develop a multidimensional clinical indicator-based prediction model for identifying high-risk patients with fertilization failure conventional in vitro fertilization (c-IVF) cycles, thereby optimizing therapeutic decision-making. METHODS: This retrospective single-center study analyzed 691 cycles (594 c-IVF, 97 rescue ICSI) from January 2019 to August 2024. Key parameters included female age, BMI, male semen parameters (sperm concentration, total progressive motile sperm count [TPMC], DNA fragmentation index [DFI]), and infertility duration. Three machine learning models (logistic regression, random forest, XGBoost) were developed and validated using a nested cross-validation framework with SMOTE oversampling. RESULTS: The logistic regression model demonstrated superior predictive performance (mean AUC = 0.734 ± 0.049), significantly outperforming random forest (0.714 ± 0.034) and XGBoost (0.697 ± 0.038). Significant predictors included protective factors-male age (OR = 0.642, 95%CI:0.598-0.689) and TPMC (OR = 0.428, 95%CI:0.392-0.466), and risk factors-female BMI (OR = 1.268, 95%CI:1.191-1.351) and DFI (OR = 1.362, 95%CI:1.274-1.455). The nomogram showed moderate-to-high discriminative power (C-index = 0.722, 95%CI:0.667-0.773) upon internal validation. Decision curve analysis confirmed clinical utility at threshold probabilities between 0.05 and 0.60. CONCLUSIONS: The logistic regression-based prediction model exhibits robust performance in assessing c-IVF fertilization failure risk. While optimized for our center's specific clinical context, external multicenter validation is required to confirm broader clinical applicability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xu et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: