Page URL:

Fertility specialists warn against unnecessary, expensive treatments

23 May 2016
Appeared in BioNews 852

A number of fertility specialists have raised concerns over private clinics offering expensive 'add-on' treatments to patients, sometimes without sufficient evidence of their effectiveness.

In a series of interviews with The Independent, some of the leading experts in the field of assisted conception claim that clinics are handing out expensive, and 'potentially harmful' treatments 'like Smarties', and they criticise the industry for announcing 'breakthroughs' that were sometimes closer to marketing 'hype'.

The UK's fertility regulator, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) also told the newspaper that it has become 'increasingly concerned' about IVF 'add-ons'.

Speaking to The Independent, Professor Martin Johnson, emeritus professor of reproductive sciences at the University of Cambridge, said that some treatments used at fertility clinics suffered from 'a lack of scientific rigour'.

'What it means is the treatment could be making their situation worse and certainly not improving it – and is costing them money. It's all about anecdotal evidence or no objective evidence,' he said.  

One of the 'add-on' treatments that has been highlighted is an immune-suppressing treatment to prevent the embryo from being rejected by the mother, with several experts raising concerns about potential harmful consequences of this form of intervention.

Ashley Moffett, professor of immunology at the University of Cambridge, told The Independent: 'There's certainly no evidence that this does any good, and there is the potential that it can do harm because these treatments are immunosuppressive.'

Dr John Parsons, founder and former director of King's College Hopsital's Assisted Conception Unit and a trustee of the Progress Educational Trust, which publishes BioNews, said the increasing number of women waiting longer to have children and then seek help when they do not conceive has created a 'perfect storm' for fertility doctors at the moment.

'They often become desperate for help, even though the best thing to do is to keep trying to conceive naturally, and they'll pay money for treatments that they don't really have,' Dr Parsons told The Telegraph.

Dr Parsons said that some women are offered add-on treatments that have not been sufficiently tested by private providers when IVF fails to work. 'An awful lot of these clinics would not be financially viable without offering people these treatments,' he said.

Other add-on treatments have also been criticised, including preimplantation genetic screening, time-lapse photography and the use of intrauterine insemination, according to The Independent. Fertility treatment has seen only a slight rise in the IVF success rate of 26.5 percent in 2013 from 20 percent ten years previously (see BioNews 845), despite new treatments regularly being offered.

The HFEA told The Independent that it is working on providing information on additional treatments so that people are able to make informed decisions about whether or not to accept 'extras'.

Sally Cheshire, chair of the HFEA, said: 'Although the vast majority of clinics provide excellent care for fertility patients, we are becoming increasingly concerned about IVF treatment "add-ons" without a strong evidence base being offered at some clinics.'

However, the chairman of the British Fertility Society, Professor Adam Balen, said that clinics were already informing couples appropriately, providing information about the nature of the treatment and success rates.

He also argued that clinics were providing scientifically founded treatments only. 'All of these treatments have been tested around the world and have been studied in clinical trials – every single one. None have been shown to do harm,' he told the Mail Online.

24 July 2017 - by BioNews 
The fourth in a series of videos filmed at the Progress Educational Trust's recent public debate 'Fertility Treatment Add-Ons: Do They Add Up?'...
26 June 2017 - by BioNews 
The second in a series of videos filmed at the Progress Educational Trust's recent public debate 'Fertility Treatment Add-Ons: Do They Add Up?'...
19 June 2017 - by BioNews 
The first in a series of videos filmed at the Progress Educational Trust's recent public debate 'Fertility Treatment Add-Ons: Do They Add Up?'...
9 January 2017 - by Rebecca Carr 
Avalanche is a courageous and intimate account of Australian novelist Julia Leigh's attempts to have a child through IVF...
5 December 2016 - by Professor Adam Balen 
Professor Adam Balen argues that the recent Panorama investigation into the use of add-ons in fertility clinics is a misrepresentation of these clinics and a misunderstanding of the data...
2 November 2015 - by Rebecca Carr 
The number of CCGs in England offering the recommended number of IVF cycles to its patients is falling, with two CCGs in Essex decommissioning their assisted conception services altogether...
12 January 2015 - by Dr Ëlo Luik 
Are business and medicine hopelessly intertwined in fertility care, at (quite literally) the expense of the patient?...
11 November 2013 - by Dr Steven Fleming 
Despite the views of several IVF experts that intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection is overused in IVF, it continues unabated. So why is nobody listening?...
9 July 2013 - by Siobhan Chan 
A new technique using basic equipment to perform IVF could dramatically reduce costs and make the treatment 'universally accessible', say scientists reporting that 12 babies have been born so far from this approach...
to add a Comment.

By posting a comment you agree to abide by the BioNews terms and conditions

Syndicate this story - click here to enquire about using this story.