Longevity and Reproductive Aging Age and Fertility

Age and fecundability in a North American preconception cohort study

Wesselink AK, Rothman KJ, Hatch EE, Mikkelsen EM, Sørensen HT, Wise LA

Published December 2017 American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 217(6), 667.e1-667.e8
DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.09.002 PMID 28917614 PMC PMC5712257

RRM Academy Synopsis

Women's per-cycle chance of conceiving fell with age in 2,962 couples

Older age was associated with a lower per-cycle chance of conceiving in women, in a North American cohort of 2,962 couples planning a pregnancy. Women aged 40 to 45 had 0.40 times the per-cycle chance of women aged 21 to 24. In these couples, a man's age showed little link to conceiving once the woman's age was accounted for.

Key Findings

  • Among 2,962 couples with no history of infertility, 62.4% conceived over follow-up of up to 12 menstrual cycles.
  • At 12 cycles, the unadjusted cumulative pregnancy proportion was 79.3% for women aged 25–27 and 55.5% for women aged 40–45.
  • Adjusted fecundability ratios, compared with ages 21–24, were 0.60 (95% CI: 0.44–0.81) for ages 37–39 and 0.40 (95% CI: 0.22–0.73) for ages 40–45.
  • The decline was stronger in women with no earlier pregnancy: at ages 37–39 the ratio was 0.51 (95% CI: 0.30, 0.85), versus 0.70 (95% CI: 0.46, 1.08) with an earlier pregnancy.
  • In this cohort, a man's age had little association with the couple's per-cycle chance once the woman's age was taken into account. Only 37 men were over age 45.

Interpretation

Pregnancy Study Online is a prospective cohort, which follows couples forward in time and reports associations. The women were pregnancy planners recruited through the internet, and couples with a history of infertility were excluded. The results therefore describe couples without a known fertility problem. Compared with ages 21 to 24, the lower per-cycle chance of conceiving was not statistically clear at ages 25 to 36 and was statistically clear from age 37 onward. The authors note that leaving out unplanned pregnancies may have pushed the ratios for older women upward.

RRM Context

Restorative reproductive medicine evaluates both partners and looks for the underlying causes of delayed conception. Age is one factor among several. A man's age showing little association once the woman's age was counted fits that couple-level approach.

Abstract

Background

There is a well-documented decline in fertility treatment success with increasing female age; however, there are few preconception cohort studies that have examined female age and natural fertility. In addition, data on male age and fertility are inconsistent. Given the increasing number of couples who are attempting conception at older ages, a more detailed characterization of age-related fecundability in the general population is of great clinical utility.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to examine the association between female and male age with fecundability.

Study Design

We conducted a web-based preconception cohort study of pregnancy planners from the United States and Canada. Participants were enrolled between June 2013 and July 2017. Eligible participants were 21-45 years old (female) or ≥21 years old (male) and had not been using fertility treatments. Couples were followed until pregnancy or for up to 12 menstrual cycles. We analyzed data from 2962 couples who had been trying to conceive for ≤3 cycles at study entry and reported no history of infertility. We used life-table methods to estimate the unadjusted cumulative pregnancy proportion at 6 and 12 cycles by female and male age. We used proportional probabilities regression models to estimate fecundability ratios, the per-cycle probability of conception for each age category relative to the referent (21-24 years old), and 95% confidence intervals.

Results

Among female patients, the unadjusted cumulative pregnancy proportion at 6 cycles of attempt time ranged from 62.0% (age 28-30 years) to 27.6% (age 40-45 years); the cumulative pregnancy proportion at 12 cycles of attempt time ranged from 79.3% (age 25-27 years old) to 55.5% (age 40-45 years old). Similar patterns were observed among male patients, although differences between age groups were smaller. After adjusting for potential confounders, we observed a nearly monotonic decline in fecundability with increasing female age, with the exception of 28-33 years, at which point fecundability was relatively stable. Fecundability ratios were 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-1.11) for ages 25-27, 0.88 (95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.08) for ages 28-30, 0.87 (95% confidence interval, 0.70-1.08) for ages 31-33, 0.82 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.05) for ages 34-36, 0.60 (95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.81) for ages 37-39, and 0.40 (95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.73) for ages 40-45, compared with the reference group (age, 21-24 years). The association was stronger among nulligravid women. Male age was not associated appreciably with fecundability after adjustment for female age, although the number of men >45 years old was small (n=37).

Conclusion

In this preconception cohort study of North American pregnancy planners, increasing female age was associated with an approximately linear decline in fecundability. Although we found little association between male age and fecundability, the small number of men in our study >45 years old limited our ability to draw conclusions on fecundability in older men.

Topics

By this author

Related research

Longevity and Reproductive Aging › Age and Fertility › Female Age and Fecundability · Male Fertility › Male Factor Causes › Lifestyle and Environment
Amelia K Wesselink, Kenneth J Rothman, Elizabeth E Hatch, Ellen M Mikkelsen, Henrik T Sørensen, Lauren A Wise
A Wesselink, Ken Rothman, K Rothman, Liz Hatch, Beth Hatch, Betsy Hatch, E Hatch, E Mikkelsen, H Sørensen, L Wise
PMID 28917614 28917614 DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.09.002 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.09.002 Wesselink et al. 2017, Wesselink 2017