Association of Assisted Reproductive Technology With Offspring Growth and Adiposity From Infancy to Early Adulthood.
Journal
JAMA network open
ISSN: 2574-3805
Titre abrégé: JAMA Netw Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101729235
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 07 2022
01 07 2022
Historique:
entrez:
26
7
2022
pubmed:
27
7
2022
medline:
29
7
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
People conceived using assisted reproductive technology (ART) make up an increasing proportion of the world's population. To investigate the association of ART conception with offspring growth and adiposity from infancy to early adulthood in a large multicohort study. This cohort study used a prespecified coordinated analysis across 26 European, Asia-Pacific, and North American population-based cohort studies that included people born between 1984 and 2018, with mean ages at assessment of growth and adiposity outcomes from 0.6 months to 27.4 years. Data were analyzed between November 2019 and February 2022. Conception by ART (mostly in vitro fertilization, intracytoplasmic sperm injection, and embryo transfer) vs natural conception (NC; without any medically assisted reproduction). The main outcomes were length / height, weight, and body mass index (BMI; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared). Each cohort was analyzed separately with adjustment for maternal BMI, age, smoking, education, parity, and ethnicity and offspring sex and age. Results were combined in random effects meta-analysis for 13 age groups. Up to 158 066 offspring (4329 conceived by ART) were included in each age-group meta-analysis, with between 47.6% to 60.6% females in each cohort. Compared with offspring who were NC, offspring conceived via ART were shorter, lighter, and thinner from infancy to early adolescence, with differences largest at the youngest ages and attenuating with older child age. For example, adjusted mean differences in offspring weight were -0.27 (95% CI, -0.39 to -0.16) SD units at age younger than 3 months, -0.16 (95% CI, -0.22 to -0.09) SD units at age 17 to 23 months, -0.07 (95% CI, -0.10 to -0.04) SD units at age 6 to 9 years, and -0.02 (95% CI, -0.15 to 0.12) SD units at age 14 to 17 years. Smaller offspring size was limited to individuals conceived by fresh but not frozen embryo transfer compared with those who were NC (eg, difference in weight at age 4 to 5 years was -0.14 [95% CI, -0.20 to -0.07] SD units for fresh embryo transfer vs NC and 0.00 [95% CI, -0.15 to 0.15] SD units for frozen embryo transfer vs NC). More marked differences were seen for body fat measurements, and there was imprecise evidence that offspring conceived by ART developed greater adiposity by early adulthood (eg, ART vs NC difference in fat mass index at age older than 17 years: 0.23 [95% CI, -0.04 to 0.50] SD units). These findings suggest that people conceiving or conceived by ART can be reassured that differences in early growth and adiposity are small and no longer evident by late adolescence.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35881399
pii: 2794642
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.22106
pmc: PMC9327583
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e2222106Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : G9815508
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_PC_15018
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_PC_19009
Pays : United Kingdom
Références
BMJ. 1999 Feb 13;318(7181):427-31
pubmed: 9974455
PLoS Med. 2021 Jun 25;18(6):e1003683
pubmed: 34170923
Eur J Epidemiol. 2020 Jul;35(7):709-724
pubmed: 32705500
Fertil Steril. 2011 Aug;96(2):344-8
pubmed: 21737072
PLoS Med. 2021 Sep 7;18(9):e1003723
pubmed: 34491995
JAMA. 2015 Dec 22-29;314(24):2654-2662
pubmed: 26717030
Lancet. 2020 Oct 17;396(10258):1160-1203
pubmed: 33069325
BJOG. 2019 Jan;126(2):237-243
pubmed: 30548407
JAMA. 2021 Jul 06;326(1):65-76
pubmed: 34228062
Int J Epidemiol. 2016 Dec 1;45(6):1895-1903
pubmed: 28204514
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jan 11;378(2):126-136
pubmed: 29320646
Hum Reprod Update. 2013 May-Jun;19(3):232-43
pubmed: 23449642
Hum Reprod. 2021 Mar 18;36(4):1074-1082
pubmed: 33592626
Nat Rev Urol. 2018 Sep;15(9):535-562
pubmed: 29967387
Obes Rev. 2005 May;6(2):143-54
pubmed: 15836465
Hum Reprod Update. 2019 Mar 1;25(2):137-158
pubmed: 30753453
Hum Reprod. 2021 Jul 19;36(8):2403-2413
pubmed: 34136910
Nat Commun. 2021 Sep 23;12(1):5613
pubmed: 34556649
BMC Med. 2019 Nov 13;17(1):202
pubmed: 31718643
Lancet. 2019 Mar 23;393(10177):1225-1232
pubmed: 30655015
Eur J Epidemiol. 2021 May;36(5):565-580
pubmed: 33884544
Hum Reprod Update. 2017 Nov 1;23(6):646-659
pubmed: 28981654
Hum Reprod Update. 2013 Mar-Apr;19(2):87-104
pubmed: 23154145
Hum Reprod. 2017 Sep 1;32(9):1786-1801
pubmed: 29117321
Fertil Steril. 2016 Sep 1;106(3):710-716.e2
pubmed: 27187051
Int J Epidemiol. 2018 Feb 1;47(1):226-235
pubmed: 29040562
Hum Reprod. 2021 Mar 18;36(4):1083-1092
pubmed: 33416878
JAMA. 2022 Mar 15;327(11):1083-1084
pubmed: 35226050
JAMA. 2019 May 7;321(17):1702-1715
pubmed: 31063572
Nat Commun. 2019 Sep 2;10(1):3922
pubmed: 31477727
BMJ. 2003 Sep 6;327(7414):557-60
pubmed: 12958120
BMC Med. 2018 Nov 28;16(1):224
pubmed: 30482203
Fertil Steril. 2017 Mar;107(3):622-631.e5
pubmed: 28104241