Compliance with Daily, Home-based Collection of Urinary Biospecimens in a Prospective, Preconception Cohort

Overview

Journal Environ Epidemiol

Publisher Wolters Kluwer

Specialty Environmental Health

Date 2019 Jul 26

PMID 31342009

Citations 1

Authors

Kyley J Cox

Joseph B Stanford

Brenna E Blackburn

Christina A Porucznik

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Exposures in the periconceptional environment may impact fertility and future health. Assessing time-varying exposures during the periconceptional window requires identifying approximate fertile windows around ovulation. In this prospective cohort study, we instructed women in daily cervical fluid observation and interpretation to identify incipient ovulation; they used this information to time daily urine collection for both partners. Timing and completeness of collection were compared to expert review.

Methods: One hundred seventy couples planning pregnancy enrolled from community volunteers from 2011 to 2015; women were taught the Peak Day method to identify fertile windows. Both partners collected daily urine specimens from the first day of fertile-quality fluid (estimator of the beginning of fertile window). Men discontinued on the estimated day of ovulation/conception +2 days; women continued through the onset of next menses, or positive pregnancy test at estimated day of ovulation/conception +18 days. We compared dates from samples with participants' fertility charts to determine proportion correctly collected. Also, expert reviewers judged on which days urine should have been collected, determining investigator-identified sampling days.

Results: One hundred sixty-nine couples submitted 6,118 urine samples from 284 cycles. Reviewers and participants agreed in 87% of cycles for the date of the beginning of the fertile window ±3 days (65% exact-day agreement); agreement on ovulation date, ±3 days, was 93% (75% exact-day agreement). Five thousand three hundred twenty-nine female samples were expected based on investigator-identified sampling days, and 4,546 were collected, of which 82% were correctly collected on expected days. Fifty-nine percent of male samples were correctly collected relative to investigator-identified sampling days.

Conclusions: Intensively-scheduled, biologically-triggered, at-home biospecimen collection can successfully be targeted to the periconceptional window and completed in a longitudinal cohort study.

Citing Articles

Acceptability and Feasibility of a 13-Week Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial Testing the Effects of Incremental Doses of Beetroot Juice in Overweight and Obese Older Adults.

Babateen A, Shannon O, OBrien G, Okello E, Khan A, Rubele S Nutrients. 2021; 13(3).

PMID: 33653009 PMC: 7996834. DOI: 10.3390/nu13030769.

References

Chapin R, Robbins W, Schieve L, Sweeney A, Tabacova S, Tomashek K . Off to a good start: the influence of pre- and periconceptional exposures, parental fertility, and nutrition on children's health. Environ Health Perspect. 2003; 112(1):69-78. PMC: 1241800. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.6261. View

Buck G, Lynch C, Stanford J, Sweeney A, Schieve L, Rockett J . Prospective pregnancy study designs for assessing reproductive and developmental toxicants. Environ Health Perspect. 2003; 112(1):79-86. PMC: 1241801. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.6262. View

Tingen C, Stanford J, Dunson D . Methodologic and statistical approaches to studying human fertility and environmental exposure. Environ Health Perspect. 2003; 112(1):87-93. PMC: 1241802. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.6263. View

Fehring R, Raviele K, Schneider M . A comparison of the fertile phase as determined by the Clearplan Easy Fertility Monitor and self-assessment of cervical mucus. Contraception. 2004; 69(1):9-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2003.09.011. View

Zinaman M . Using cervical mucus and other easily observed biomarkers to identify ovulation in prospective pregnancy trials. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2006; 20 Suppl 1:26-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3016.2006.00767.x. View

Ronnenberg A, Venners S, Xu X, Chen C, Wang L, Guang W . Preconception B-vitamin and homocysteine status, conception, and early pregnancy loss. Am J Epidemiol. 2007; 166(3):304-12. DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwm078. View

Brezina P, Haberl E, Wallach E . At home testing: optimizing management for the infertility physician. Fertil Steril. 2011; 95(6):1867-78. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.01.001. View

Buck Louis G, Schisterman E, Sweeney A, Wilcosky T, Gore-Langton R, Lynch C . Designing prospective cohort studies for assessing reproductive and developmental toxicity during sensitive windows of human reproduction and development--the LIFE Study. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2011; 25(5):413-24. PMC: 4118054. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3016.2011.01205.x. View

Porucznik C, Cox K, Schliep K, Stanford J . Pilot test and validation of the peak day method of prospective determination of ovulation against a handheld urine hormone monitor. BMC Womens Health. 2014; 14:4. PMC: 3893397. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6874-14-4. View

10.

Robbins C, Zapata L, Farr S, Kroelinger C, Morrow B, Ahluwalia I . Core state preconception health indicators - pregnancy risk assessment monitoring system and behavioral risk factor surveillance system, 2009. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2014; 63(3):1-62. View

11.

Gluckman P, Hanson M, Buklijas T . A conceptual framework for the developmental origins of health and disease. J Dev Orig Health Dis. 2014; 1(1):6-18. DOI: 10.1017/S2040174409990171. View

12.

Stanford J, Smith K, Varner M . Impact of instruction in the Creighton model fertilitycare system on time to pregnancy in couples of proven fecundity: results of a randomised trial. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2014; 28(5):391-9. PMC: 4861655. DOI: 10.1111/ppe.12141. View

13.

Schultze A, Akmatov M, Andrzejak M, Karras N, Kemmling Y, Maulhardt A . Comparison of stool collection on site versus at home in a population-based study : feasibility and participants' preference in Pretest 2 of the German National Cohort. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2014; 57(11):1264-9. PMC: 4210724. DOI: 10.1007/s00103-014-2051-z. View

14.

Ecochard R, Duterque O, Leiva R, Bouchard T, Vigil P . Self-identification of the clinical fertile window and the ovulation period. Fertil Steril. 2015; 103(5):1319-25.e3. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.01.031. View

15.

Stanford J . Revisiting the fertile window. Fertil Steril. 2015; 103(5):1152-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.02.015. View

16.

Lenters V, Portengen L, Rignell-Hydbom A, Jonsson B, Lindh C, Piersma A . Prenatal Phthalate, Perfluoroalkyl Acid, and Organochlorine Exposures and Term Birth Weight in Three Birth Cohorts: Multi-Pollutant Models Based on Elastic Net Regression. Environ Health Perspect. 2015; 124(3):365-72. PMC: 4786980. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.1408933. View

17.

Smarr M, Grantz K, Sundaram R, Maisog J, Kannan K, Buck Louis G . Parental urinary biomarkers of preconception exposure to bisphenol A and phthalates in relation to birth outcomes. Environ Health. 2015; 14:73. PMC: 4567813. DOI: 10.1186/s12940-015-0060-5. View

18.

Cox K, Porucznik C, Anderson D, Brozek E, Szczotka K, Bailey N . Exposure Classification and Temporal Variability in Urinary Bisphenol A Concentrations among Couples in Utah--The HOPE Study. Environ Health Perspect. 2015; 124(4):498-506. PMC: 4829981. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.1509752. View

19.

Stanford J, Brenner R, Fetterer D, Palmer L, Schoendorf K . Impact of preconception enrollment on birth enrollment and timing of exposure assessment in the initial vanguard cohort of the U.S. National Children's Study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015; 15:75. PMC: 4581516. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-015-0067-1. View

20.

Porucznik C, Cox K, Schliep K, Wilkins D, Stanford J . The Home Observation of Periconceptional Exposures (HOPE) study, a prospective cohort: aims, design, recruitment and compliance. Environ Health. 2016; 15(1):67. PMC: 4898368. DOI: 10.1186/s12940-016-0153-9. View