One donor egg and ‘a dollop of love’: ART and de-queering genealogies in Facebook advertising

We consider what genealogical links, kinship and sociality are promised through the marketing of assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs). Using a mixed method of formal analysis of Facebook's algorithmic architectures and textual analysis of twenty-eight adverts for egg donation drawn from the Facebook Ad Library, we analyse the ways in which the figure of the ‘fertile woman’ is constituted both within the text and at the level of Facebook's targeted advertising systems. We critically examine the ways in which ART clinics address those women whose eggs they wish to harvest and exchange, in combination with the ways in which Facebook's architecture identifies, and sorts those women deemed of ‘relevance’ to the commercial ART industry. We find that women variously appear in these adverts as empowered consumers, generous girlfriends, potential mothers and essentialised bodies who provide free-floating eggs. The genealogical and fertility possibility offered through ART is represented with banal ambiguity wherein potentially disruptive forms of biogenetic relatedness and arrangements of kinship are derisked by an overarching narrative of simplicity and sameness which excludes men, messy genealogies and explicitly queer forms of kinship. This rationalisation is supported by the simplicity and certainty of the Facebook targeted advertising algorithm which produces a coherent audience and interpellates users as fertile subjects whose choices are both biologically determined and only available through clinical intervention.

IVF Outcome Comparisons Between Fresh Embryo Transfers and Embryo Banking Cycles With Subsequent Thawed Transfers Vary Between Good-, Intermediate- and Poor-prognosis Patients

Never investigated before in poor prognosis patients, we here determined how in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes after fresh embryo transfers compare to frozen-thawed transfers after embryo banking. Using data from our center’s anonymized electronic research data bank, we in a retrospective controlled observational study investigated IVF cycle outcomes of poor-prognosis infertility patients, utilizing autologous eggs, while utilizing donor-egg recipient cycles as controls for covariables. To accomplish statistically valid comparisons, 4 different pairings of 1st IVF cycles were utilized: (i) 127 fresh vs. 193 frozen donor recipient cycles; (ii) 741 autologous fresh unselected non-donor IVF cycles vs. 217 autologous frozen non-donor IVF cycles; (iii) 143 favorably selected autologous non-donor IVF cycles vs. the same 217 frozen autologous cycles non-donor; and (iv) 598 selected average and poor-prognosis autologous non-donor cycles vs. the same 217 frozen autologous non-donor cycles. Main outcome measures were pregnancies and live births. Even within poor-prognosis patients, patient selection to significant degrees impacted how fresh and frozen-thawed IVF cycles compared. Though embryo banking with delayed embryo transfer in best-prognosis patients marginally improved IVF outcomes, in unselected patients it had no effect on outcomes, while in poor-prognosis patients it adversely affected IVF outcomes. Unexpectedly, the study also discovered a previously unreported effect of recipient-age on miscarriage risk in donor-egg recipient cycles, which apparently is independent of age-associated increases in chromosomal abnormalities and, therefore, must have other causes. This study suggests that in poor-prognosis patient banking cycles should be considered contraindicated, in intermediate-prognosis patients they do not appear to change outcomes and, therefore, do not warrant additional costs from thaw cycles, leaving only good-prognosis patients as potential candidates for such a strategy.

P–090 Cumulative live birth rates (CLBR) per embryo transfer, embryo transferred and inseminated oocyte are not affected by paternal age in infertile male donor egg cycles

Study question Is reproductive success measured as CLBR per inseminated oocyte, per embryo transfer and per embryo transferred affected by paternal age in donor egg IVF-ICSI cycles? Summary answer Paternal age does not significantly affect reproductive outcomes measured by CLBR per inseminated oocyte, embryo transfer and embryo transferred in donor egg IVF-ICSI cyles. What is known already In recent years, the delay in the start of formation of a family has led to an increase of the average male age at which the first child is conceived. Therefore, there is a growing interest on the study of the impact of male age on the reproductive outcomes in assisted reproduction cycles (ART). Several studies have evaluated the effect of paternal age on reproductive outcomes using donor egg cycles to control for female factors. However, the results obtained on this topic are still controversial leading to a need of more research about it, which this study tries to address. Study design, size, duration This retrospective observational multicentric cohort study has included donor IVF-ICSI treatments (n = 1539) performed to couples with etiology of male infertility (non-normozoospermic) in Spain IVIRMA clinics between January 2008 and March 2020 using patients’ own sperm sample. Paternal age ranged from 28 to 74 years. The study population was categorized in 5 groups following the criterion of homogenizing the number of observations between groups 28–38 (A), 38–41 (B), 41–44 (C), 44–48 (D) y 48–74 (E) years. Participants/materials, setting, methods Considering that male age could be a factor affecting reproductive outcomes, we evaluated men with different age that performed a donor IVF-ICSI treatment with their own semen, etiology of male infertility and known age. Data was exported in order to obtain the clinical database and Kaplan-Meier was used for data analysis. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. We measured reproductive success by CLBR per embryo transfer, per embryo transferred and per inseminated oocytes until live birth. Main results and the role of chance This study considered approximately 836 patients and 1411 embryo transfers. The CLBR per inseminated oocyte showed no significant difference between the study groups: A (3.09%, 42.61%, 71.96%), B (4.53%, 39.76%, 84.19%), C (5.89%, 47.04%, 78.61%), D (2.99%, 46.7%, 73.15%) and E (3.89%, 38.39%, 78.85%) for 7, 12 and 17 inseminated oocytes, respectively. In terms of CLBR per embryo transfer, the results obtained for each of the age groups were: A (51.55%, 70.69%, 92.18%), B (50.40%, 78.13%, 100.00%), C (53.68%, 71.69%, 100.00%), D (51.71%, 79.72%, 100.00%) and E (46.69%, 60.02%, 70.01%) for 3, 5 and 7 embryo transfers, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found among the studied age groups. CLBR per embryo transferred also did not show statistically significant differences between the age groups: A (8.43%, 53.34%, 72.13%), B (8.55%, 44,67%, 71.65%), C (10.40%, 53.94%, 72.49%), D (7.25%, 43.61%, 75.12%) and E (8.21%, 45.99%, 64.55%) for 1, 4 and 7 embryos transferred, respectively. Therefore, no significant differences were found in the number of inseminated oocytes, embryo transfers and embryos transferred needed to achieve a live birth between the age groups (p > 0.05), suggesting that maybe paternal age has no relevant clinical effect on donor egg cycles with our categorization. Limitations, reasons for caution The retrospective nature of this study leads to biases derived from the clinical practice and to the presence of missing data (limiting sample size). Moreover, this study included donor egg cycles for controlling female factors, so this limits the generalization of our results to a population of young women. Wider implications of the findings: Our study showed that the reproductive success measured as CLBR per embryo transfer, embryo transferred and inseminated oocytes was not statistically significant different among the studied age groups in donor egg cycles. Therefore, considering our study setting, paternal age does not affect reproductive success, however further studies should be done. Trial registration number NA