Effective method for emergency fertility preservation: random-start controlled ovarian stimulation

Current practices in oncofertility counseling: updated evidence on fertility preservation and post-treatment pregnancies in young women affected by early breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Anticancer treatments have significantly contributed to increasing cure rates of breast cancer in the last years; however, they can also lead to short- and long-term side effects, including gonadotoxicity, and compromised fertility in young women. Oncofertility is a crucial issue for young patients who have not yet completed their family planning at the time of cancer diagnosis.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to cover all the latest available evidence in the field of oncofertility, including the gonadotoxicity of currently adopted anticancer therapies in the curative breast cancer setting, the available strategies for fertility preservation and the feasibility of achieving a pregnancy following anticancer treatment completion.

EXPERT OPINION

Over the past years, a significant progress has been made in oncofertility care for young women with breast cancer. In the context of the currently available evidence, every young woman with newly diagnosed breast cancer should receive a proper and complete oncofertility counseling before starting any anticancer treatment to increase her chances of future pregnancies.

Changing the Perspective on Fertility Preservation for Women with Metastatic or Advanced Stage Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this Perspective we share the personal story of a 33-year-old patient diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer and her journey through fertility preservation, surrogacy, and eventually motherhood, highlighting misconceptions about fertility preservation in this population.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are nearly 1 million women under the age of 50 diagnosed and living with cancer in the USA. These patients are met with life-altering decisions, including those that may limit their reproductive ability. While there have been tremendous advances and advocacy in the field of oncofertility, there has been limited focus on patients with advanced stage or metastatic cancer. We describe five key misconceptions surrounding fertility preservation in patients with advanced stage cancer, offering a review of the literature and our approach to challenging topics like desiring fertility preservation in the face of Stage 4 disease, the safety and timing of ovarian stimulation during cancer treatment, and passing away following fertility preservation. We review the importance of assessing perceptions of fertility preservation in patients with metastatic cancer and highlight the lack of research in this area as a call to action.

Fertility preservation in patients undergoing gonadotoxic treatments: a Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society clinical practice guideline

The management of young patients with cancer presents several unique challenges. In general, these patients are ill prepared for the diagnosis and the impact on their fertility. With the improved survival for all tumour types and stages, the need for adequate fertility counselling and a multidisciplinary approach in the reproductive care of these patients is paramount. Recent advances in cryopreservation techniques allow for the banking of spermatozoa, oocytes, embryos and ovarian tissue without compromising survival. This Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society (CFAS) guideline outlines the current understanding of social and medical issues associated with oncofertility, and the medical and surgical technologies available to optimize future fertility.

Comparison of luteal phase and follicular phase in-vitro maturation in women with oocyte maturation abnormalities

RESEARCH QUESTION

Are there differences in immature oocyte retrieval following luteal phase in-vitro maturation (IVM) compared with follicular phase IVM in women with oocyte maturation abnormalities (OMAs).

DESIGN

From January 2019 to May 2023, a retrospective cohort study at a private IVF centre included 36 women with 53 IVM cycles in Group 1 (follicular phase) and 24 women with 32 IVM cycles in Group 2 (luteal phase). Additionally, nine women had both follicular and luteal phase IVM cycles for intracycle variability analysis.

RESULTS

There were no differences in oocyte maturation stages between the groups at collection. Group 1 and Group 2 exhibited comparable median metaphase II oocyte rates per patient at 48 h after collection [40.0%, interquartile range (IQR) 0.0-66.7% versus 22.5%, IQR 0.0-52.9%] (P = 0.53). The median fertilization rate in Group 1 (66.7%, IQR 50.0-66.7%) was found to be comparable with that in Group 2 (66.7%, IQR 50.0-66.7%). There were no significant differences in the yielded embryo grades and pregnancy rates between the groups. Comparing follicular and luteal phase IVM within the same menstrual cycle in nine patients, no differences were observed in metaphase II oocyte maturation rates (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study found no significant differences in oocyte maturation, fertilization rate, embryo quality or pregnancy outcomes between luteal phase and follicular phase IVM in women with OMAs. These findings suggest that luteal phase IVM can be used similarly to follicular phase IVM, offering a potential avenue to enhance embryo yield for women with OMAs.

Fertility preservation parameters in patients with haematologic malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Patients with haematologic malignancies represent one of the most common groups referred for fertility preservation before gonadotoxic oncological treatment. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of haematologic cancer on ovarian reserve and response to ovarian stimulation compared with healthy controls. A total of eight observative studies were included in the final quantitative analysis. Despite a younger age (mean difference -4.17, 95% CI -6.20 to -2.14; P < 0.0001), patients with haematologic malignancy had lower serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels compared with the control group (MD -1.04, 95% CI -1.80 to -0.29; P = 0.007). The marginally higher total recombinant FSH dose (MD 632.32, 95% CI -187.60 to 1452.24; P = 0.13) and significantly lower peak oestradiol serum level (MD -994.05, 95% CI -1962.09 to -26.02; P = 0.04) were demonstrated in the study group compared with the healthy controls. A similar number of retrieved oocytes were achieved in both groups (MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.80 to 1.20; P = 0.69). In conclusion, haematologic malignancies may detrimentally affect ovarian function manifesting in decreased AMH serum levels despite a younger age compared with healthy controls. This effect can be overcome by the application of relevant IVF protocols and stimulation doses to achieve an adequate oocyte yield.

Comparison of luteal phase stimulation with follicular phase stimulation in poor ovarian response: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In the last decade, luteal-phase ovarian stimulation (LPOS) has been suggested as an alternative controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocol for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) cycles mainly in women with a history of poor ovarian response (POR). The present randomized controlled trial study aimed to compare the outcomes of follicular phase ovarian stimulation (FPOS) and LPOS protocols in POR cases undergoing ICSI cycles.

METHODS

Seventy-eight POR patients who met the Bologna criteria and underwent an ICSI cycle were included. In this study, 39 POR cases were allocated to the FPOS group, and 39 POR cases were allocated to the LPOS group. The primary outcome was the number of metaphase II (MII) oocytes. In addition, the total number of oocytes, number of top-quality day 3 embryo, day 3 embryo development rate, chemical pregnancy and clinical pregnancy rates were defined as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The obtained results demonstrated that the number of MII oocytes significantly increased in the LPOS group compared to the FPOS group (P = 0.007). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the number of GV and MI oocytes, number of top-quality day 3 embryos and day 3 embryo development rate among both categories of patients. Also, the number of total and MII oocytes was significantly higher in the LPOS group (P = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that LPOS protocol effectively increases the number of mature oocytes in women with a history of POR.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

IRCT20210405050852N1 (Registered at Iranian registry of clinical trials; available at https://en.irct.ir/trial/55402 ).

Early versus late follicular phase ovarian stimulation: a randomized controlled trial

RESEARCH QUESTION

Is late follicular phase stimulation as efficient as early follicular phase stimulation in a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol in oocyte donors in terms of the number of oocytes.

DESIGN

In this open label, phase 3, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial using a two-arm design with a 1:1 allocation ratio, 84 oocyte donors were allocated to the early follicular start group (control group, n = 41) or the late follicular start group (study group, n = 43). In the control group, women followed a fixed GnRH antagonist protocol with recombinant FSH (r-FSH) 225 IU. In the study group, r-FSH 225 IU was initiated in the late follicular phase. The primary outcome was the number of oocytes. The secondary outcomes were the number of mature oocytes, consumption of gonadotrophins and GnRH antagonist, and cost of medication.

RESULTS

The number of oocytes did not differ between the control group and the study group (intent-to-treat analysis 15.5 ± 11.0 versus 14.0 ± 10.7, P = 0.52; per-protocol analysis 18.2 ± 9.7 versus 18.8 ± 7.8, P = 0.62). In addition, the number of mature oocytes did not differ between the groups (14.1 ± 8.1 versus 12.7 ± 8.5, P = 0.48). The duration of stimulation was shorter in the control group (10.0 ± 1.4 versus 10.9 ± 1.5 days, P = 0.01). The total amount of r-FSH used was lower in the control group (2240.7 ± 313.9 IU versus 2453.9 ± 330.1 IU, P = 0.008). A GnRH antagonist was used for approximately 6 days in the control group, while a GnRH antagonist was only prescribed for one woman in the study group (6.0 ± 1.4 days versus 0.13±0.7 days, P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in the cost of medication per cycle between the groups (1147.9 ± 182.8€ in control group versus 979.9 ± 129.0€ in study group, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Late follicular phase stimulation is as efficient as early follicular phase stimulation in terms of the number of oocytes.

Oocyte vitrification for fertility preservation is an evolving practice requiring a new mindset: societal, technical, clinical, and basic science-driven evolutions

Infertility is a condition with profound social implications. Indeed, it is not surprising that evolutions in both medicine and society affect the way in vitro fertilization is practiced. The keywords in modern medicine are the four principles, which implicitly involve a constant update of our knowledge and our technologies to fulfill the "prediction" and "personalization" tasks, and a continuous reshaping of our mindset in view of all relevant societal changes to fulfill the "prevention" and "participation" tasks. A worldwide aging population whose life priorities are changing requires that we invest in fertility education, spreading actionable information to allow women and men to make meaningful reproductive choices. Fertility preservation for both medical and nonmedical reasons is still very much overlooked in many countries worldwide, demanding a comprehensive update of our approach, starting from academia and in vitro fertilization laboratories, passing through medical offices, and reaching out to social media. Reproduction medicine should evolve from being a clinical practice to treat a condition to being a holistic approach to guarantee patients' reproductive health and well-being. Oocyte vitrification for fertility preservation is the perfect use case for this transition. This tool is acquiring a new identity to comply with novel indications and social needs, persisting technical challenges, brand-new clinical technologies, and novel revolutions coming from academia. This "views and reviews" piece aims at outlining the advancement of oocyte vitrification from all these tightly connected perspectives.

Random start ovarian stimulation before gonadotoxic therapies in women with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to quantify the effect of random start ovarian stimulation (RSOS) compared with conventional start ovarian stimulation (CSOS) in cancer patients before gonadotoxic treatment. The final analytical cohort encompassed 688 RSOS and 1076 CSOS cycles of cancer patients before gonadotoxic treatment. Eleven studies were identified by database searches of MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and cited references. The primary outcomes of interest were the number of oocytes and mature oocytes collected, the number of embryos cryopreserved and the metaphase II (MII)-antral follicle count (AFC) ratio. The studies were rated from medium to high quality (from 6 to 9) according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. The two protocols resulted in similar numbers of oocytes collected, MII oocytes, embryos available for cryopreservation and comparable MII-AFC and fertilization rates. The duration of ovarian stimulation was longer (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.35, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.61; P = 0.009) and gonadotrophin consumption was higher (SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.40; P = 0.009) in RSOS compared with CSOS. This systematic review and meta-analysis show that the duration of stimulation is longer, and the total gonadotrophin consumption is higher in cancer patients undergoing RSOS compared with those undergoing CSOS, with no significant effect on mature oocyte yield.

DuoStim protocol- a novel fertility preservation strategy for female oncology patients

Fertility loss is one of the primary concerns among female oncology patients of childbearing age about to undergo gonadotoxic therapy. Currently, controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) followed by oocyte or embryo cryopreservation is the only technique of fertility preservation (FP) endorsed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology. This retrospective cohort study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a modified 'DuoStim' COS protocol in 36 female oncology patients at an FP clinic at St Mary's Hospital Reproductive Medicine Unit (Manchester, UK). Patients underwent two consecutive cycles of COS and outcomes assessed included total oocyte yield, mature oocytes of metaphase stage II, side effects of ovarian stimulation such as ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and delays to planned cancer therapy. Details of patient outcomes were determined by the review of patient medical records. Results of the study showed that this novel protocol increased oocyte yield by two-fold without delaying oncology treatment. Medical records confirmed that none of the 36 patients developed OHSS or experienced any delays in their cancer therapy. We conclude that the results of this study are encouraging and support DuoStim protocol as an effective strategy for FP in female FP patients.

Outcomes of random-start letrozole protocol with PGT-A in women with breast cancer undergoing fertility preservation

PURPOSE  : To compare the cycle characteristics and outcomes of random-start-controlled ovarian stimulation (RSCOS) protocols to the outcomes of standard-start-controlled ovarian stimulation (SSCOS) cycles and to report the utility of PGT-A in these cycles.

METHODS

One hundred and seventeen who underwent SSCOS and 39 who underwent RSCOS for oocyte and/or embryo cryopreservation before breast cancer chemotherapy were retrospectively evaluated. Mean number of embryos and blastocyst euploidy rates were the main outcome measures.

RESULTS

A majority of RSCOS cycles were initiated in the luteal phase (66.6% luteal vs. 33.3% follicular). While the total dose of gonadotropins was significantly higher in the RSCOS (3720.8 ± 1230.0 vs. 2345.1 ± 803.6 IU; P < 0.001), the mean number of mature oocytes and embryos was similar to SSCOS. However, there was a trend for a higher number of mean embryos with luteal start RSCOS (6.9 ± 2.7 in late follicular start vs. 9.4 ± 4.2 in luteal start, P = 0.08). PGT-A was performed in 48% of the cases that underwent embryo cryopreservation in RSCOS (12 women, mean age = 35.3 ± 4.1; 87 blastocysts), revealing a euploidy rate of 36.2 ± 22.3% per patient. This rate was comparable to a 45% aneuploidy rate from similarly aged published data. Of the 7 RSCOS patients who returned for frozen embryo transfer, 5 delivered and one has an ongoing pregnancy, while in SSCOS, 18 out of 40 cycles resulted in live birth.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggests that RSCOS fertility preservation cycle outcomes are similar to those with SSCOS and result in age-appropriate euploidy rates.

Preservation of Fertility in Cancer Patients: A Narrative Review

The survival rates for cancer patients have been steadily improving in recent years due to the improved efficacy of contemporary oncological care, including radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Modern technology makes it feasible to maintain fertility in cancer patients, and this practice needs to be included in oncological care. In many instances, it is impossible to avoid the harm that cancer treatments can cause to a patient's fertility; hence, research in fertility preservation techniques is being conducted to allow cancer patients to have future children biologically related to them. The development of fertility preservation approaches has grown in importance in the field of research over the past few years to increase patient's quality of life and survival. Oncologists must be aware of circumstances in which cancer patients' fertility will be impacted by their therapy and the avenues open for procedures like cryopreservation of the gametes or embryos. When cancer therapy is scheduled, all patients should receive prompt and thorough information on the fertility-related side effects of treatment and the prospects for fertility preservation. The article analyzes the literature, enlisting the factors that contribute to cancer and their effects on fertility, followed by a list of available and newly developed strategies for maintaining fertility in patients. The efficiency of the various fertility preservation techniques following cancer therapy is also discussed.

Ovarian stimulation and oocyte cryopreservation in females with cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We reviewed the most recent developments including the safety and effectiveness data and success rates in individualized ovarian stimulation protocols for adult and postpubertal females with cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

In women with breast cancer, aromatase inhibitor- and tamoxifen-supplemented stimulation protocols increase the margin of safety by limiting estrogen exposure. The outcomes of ovarian stimulation appear similar between cancer and noncancer populations, even with the recently developed random-start protocols, which allow initiation of ovarian stimulation anytime during the menstrual cycle. Based on lower anti-Mullerian hormone levels and primordial follicle density, carriers of BRCA pathogenic variants ( BRCApv ) have decreased ovarian reserve in comparison to women without those variants and may lose larger portion of their ovarian reserve post chemotherapy. Oocyte cryopreservation is also emerging as a suitable fertility preservation approach for selected postpubertal girls as young as 12 years of age.

SUMMARY

Individualized ovarian stimulation approaches combined with improvements in cryopreservation techniques increased the success and safety margin to preserve fertility with oocyte freezing. Women with BRCApv , on the other hand, may be at disadvantage as they have lower ovarian reserve and may lose larger portion of their ovarian reserve post chemotherapy compared to women who do not carry these variants.

Outcomes of Different In Vitro Maturation Procedures for Oocyte Cryopreservation for Fertility Preservation and yet Another Live Birth in a Cancer Patient

To ensure patient care in an oncological fertility preservation (FP) programme, specialists must provide technology that best suits the patients' clinical conditions. In vitro oocyte maturation (IVM) and ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC) are possible fertility preservation treatments for women in need of urgent oncological treatment. IVM consists of the retrieval of immature oocytes from small antral follicles, with no or minimal ovarian stimulation by gonadotropins. Therefore, IVM has become a pertinent option for fertility preservation, especially for cases whereby ovarian stimulation is unfeasible or contra-indicated. Existing data on immature oocytes, retrieved transvaginally (OPU-IVM) or extracted from ovarian tissue 'ex vivo' (OTO-IVM), are still limited on technical consistency, efficacy, and safety. The present retrospective cohort study includes 89 women undergoing fertility preservation using IVM methodologies and 26 women undergoing ovarian stimulation (OS) in concomitant period. In total, 533 immature oocytes were collected from IVM patients, achieving a maturation rate of 57% and 70% in OTO-IVM and 73% and 82% in OPU-IVM at 24 h and 48 h in culture, respectively. The observed high maturation rates might be due to the use of patients' serum in its innate status, i.e., without heat-inactivation. This permitted 7.6 ± 5.7 and 4.6 ± 4.9 oocytes to be vitrified in OTO-IVM and OPU-IVM, respectively, compared to 6.8 ± 4.6 from OS patients. Regarding OS patients, two of them underwent embryo transfer following the insemination of warmed oocytes after complete remission, resulting in a single live birth from one patient. Upon follow-up of two OTO-IVM patients after the termination of their oncological treatment, a total of 11 warmed oocytes lead to a transfer of a single embryo, but pregnancy was not achieved. From OPU-IVM, six embryos were transferred in three patients 4.25 years after oocyte vitrification, leading to the live birth of a healthy boy. The present case of live birth is among the first cases reported so far and supports the notion that IVM might be a relevant and safe FP option for cancer patients when oocyte preservation is required but ovarian stimulation is contra-indicated.

Advances in the Management of Menopausal Symptoms, Fertility Preservation, and Bone Health for Women With Breast Cancer on Endocrine Therapy

In patients with hormone receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer, adjuvant endocrine treatment administered for up to 5-10 years after diagnosis significantly reduces the risk of recurrence and death. However, this benefit comes with the cost of short- and long-term side effects that may negatively affect patients' quality of life (QoL) and treatment adherence. Among them, the prolonged estrogen suppression associated with the use of adjuvant endocrine therapy in both premenopausal and postmenopausal women can induce life-altering menopausal symptoms, including sexual dysfunction. Moreover, a decrease in bone mineral density and an increased risk of fractures should be carefully considered and prevented whenever indicated. For young women diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer with unfulfilled childbearing plans, several challenges should be addressed to manage their fertility and pregnancy-related concerns. Proper counseling and proactive management of these issues are critical components of survivorship and should be pursued from diagnosis through the breast cancer care continuum. This study aims to provide an updated overview of the available approaches for improving the QoL of patients with breast cancer receiving estrogen deprivation therapy, focusing on advances in the management of menopausal symptoms, including sexual dysfunction, fertility preservation, and bone health.

Management of testosterone around ovarian stimulation in transmasculine patients: challenging common practices to meet patient needs-2 case reports

Approximately 50% of transmasculine people use testosterone for gender affirmation, yet very little is known about the effects of testosterone on future reproductive capacity. Moreover, there are no data to guide fertility specialists on how to manage testosterone leading up to or during ovarian stimulation. Most clinics require cessation of testosterone prior to ovarian stimulation in this setting of no data; however, the current literature does suggest a potential increase in dysphoria with cessation of testosterone and during stimulation. This divergence begs the question of whether clinicians may be doing more harm than good by enacting this requirement. Here, we present two cases of transmasculine individuals who were on testosterone prior to stimulation and maintained their testosterone dosage throughout stimulation as proof of concept, followed by a discussion of current clinical practice and providing some rationale to support continuation of testosterone throughout stimulation.

The effect of aromatase inhibitor on controlled ovarian stimulation for oocyte cryopreservation in adolescent and young cancer patients

AIM

To determine the impact of aromatase inhibitor (AI) use in oocyte cryopreservation among Japanese adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients for fertility preservation, we evaluated the oocyte cryopreservation outcomes following AI therapy in combination with the follicular phase start (FPS) and random start (RS) protocols.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 81 cycles of controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) among 73 AYA patients with cancer who underwent oocyte cryopreservation to maintain fertility. The outcome measures were the total number of matured oocytes that were retrieved and cryopreserved, as well as their maturation rates. The AI (+) and AI (-) groups were compared using the RS and FPS protocols.

RESULTS

Our results showed that the combined use of AI and COS decreases serum E2 levels and maintains the number of retrieved and cryopreserved mature oocytes. We also confirmed the efficacy of the RS protocol, which was found to have comparable outcomes to that of the FPS protocol in both AI (+) and AI (-) groups.

CONCLUSION

The combined use of AI and COS is beneficial for oocyte cryopreservation in patients with estrogen-sensitive cancer, regardless of the menstrual cycle phase of COS initiation.

Oocyte vitrification for fertility preservation following COS does not delay the initiation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer compared to IVM

PURPOSE

The objective of the present study was to evaluate whether oocyte vitrification following controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for fertility preservation (FP) delays the initiation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for breast cancer (BC) as compared to in vitro maturation (IVM).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study including all BC patients eligible for oocyte vitrification following COS or in vitro maturation (IVM) before initiation of NAC between January 2016 and December 2020. The inclusion criteria were female patients aged between 18 and 40, with confirmed non metastatic BC, with indication of NAC, who have had oocyte retrieval for FP after COS, or IVM + / - cryopreservation of ovarian tissue (OTC). Various time points related to cancer diagnosis, FP, or chemotherapy were obtained from a medical record review.

RESULTS

A total of 197 patients with confirmed BC who had oocyte retrieval following COS (n = 57) or IVM + / - OTC (n = 140) for FP prior to NAC were included. Overall, the average time from cancer diagnosis to chemotherapy start was similar between patients having undergone COS or IVM before oocyte vitrification (37.3 ± 13.8 vs. 36. 8 ± 13.5 days; p = 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

The indication of NAC for BC should not be considered as an impediment to urgent COS for oocyte vitrification for FP.

Maximize the safety and efficacy of fertility preservation by random start/dual ovarian stimulation for early breast cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

What is the more efficient and safer protocol during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) for early-stage breast cancer patients seeking emergency fertility preservation before adjuvant chemo/radiotherapy?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective, case-series study involved two early-stage (Ia) breast cancer patients that requested for fertility preservation within 3 weeks. Random start/dual stimulation protocols with aromatase inhibitor (AI) were used to maximize oocyte yield and suppress serum estradiol (E2) level.

RESULTS

E2 levels on trigger day during dual COH were between 112.0 and 407.0 pg/mL. Duration of COH could be shortened to only 17 days, and up to 41 oocytes were successfully retrieved with two retrievals.

CONCLUSION

This remarkable efficient and safe protocol involves the combination of random start/dual stimulation with step-up AI dosage beforehand which not only maximize oocyte yield within the shortest possible timeframe, but also to maintain the low level of E2 to avoid over-stimulating estrogen-sensitive cancer cells and to decrease the risk of developing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).

Controlled Ovarian Stimulation Initiated at Different Phases of the Menstrual Cycle for Fertility Preservation in Oncological Patients: a Retrospective Study

The purpose of this study is to compare conventional start in early follicular phase (EFP) with late follicular phase (LFP) and luteal phase (LP) in controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for fertility preservation (FP) to assess differences in clinical outcomes. Retrospective study of the first cycles of COS for FP in oncological patients between 2012 and 2020 in a tertiary hospital. Two-hundred forty-eight cycles were classified into 3 groups: 176 cycles in EFP, 8 cycles in LFP, and 52 cycles in LP. Comparing LFP to EFP, there were no differences in number of oocytes (10.0 [6.3-16.0] vs 12.0 [8.0-18.0]; p = 0.253) or number of metaphase II (MII) obtained (7.0 [2.3-13.3] vs 9.0 [6.0-13.0]; p = 0.229). Total number of days needed was higher in LFP (14.5 [12.5-16.0] vs 3.0 vs 10.0 [8.3-11.0 p = 0.000) but without significant differences in number of days of usage of gonadotropins (11.5 [8.3-12.8] vs 10.0 [8.3-11.0] p = 0.308). No differences were found between LP and EFP in number of oocytes (14.5 [9.0-20.0] p = 0.151) or MII (11.5 [7.0-16.0] p = 0.084). Number of days of gonadotropins (11.0 [10.0-12.0] p = 0.00) and total dosing (3000.0 [2475.0-3600.0] p = 0.013) were significantly higher in LP. FORT and FOI were similar in all groups. COS with a random start in fertility preservation has similar outcomes to EFP start. Therefore, we can initiate COS at any phase of the menstrual cycle with optimal results. However, LP may need more days of stimulation.

Response to Ovarian Stimulation for Urgent Fertility Preservation before Gonadotoxic Treatment in BRCA-Pathogenic-Variant-Positive Breast Cancer Patients

BRCA 1/2 pathogenic variants increase the risk of developing early and aggressive breast cancers (BC). For these patients, fertility potential can be directly affected by oncologic treatments. In addition, evidence indicates that BRCA-mutated women had a significant reduction in their ovarian reserve. In order to improve their chances of conception after the completion of cancer treatments, fertility preservation should be proposed before the administration of gonadotoxic drugs, ideally by oocyte vitrification after controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH). The present investigation aims to assess the ovarian response to COH in BRCA 1/2-pathogenic-variant carriers diagnosed with BC. Patient characteristics and COH outcomes were compared between BRCA-positive (n = 54) and BRCA-negative (n = 254) patients. The number of oocytes recovered did not differ between the two groups. However, the oocyte maturation rate and the number of mature oocytes obtained (7 (4.5-11.5) vs. 9 (5-14) oocytes, p = 0.05) were significantly lower in the BRCA-mutated patients. Although individualized COH protocols should be discussed, BRCA-mutated patients would benefit from FP before BC occurs, in order to cope with the potential accelerated decline of their ovarian reserve, optimize the success rate of FP by repeating COH cycles, and to preserve the feasibility of PGT-M by collecting a large amount of eggs.

Clinical outcomes of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device present during controlled ovarian stimulation in patients with early stage endometrioid adenocarcinoma and atypical endometrial hyperplasia after fertility-sparing treatments: 10-year experience in one tertiary hospital in China

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the oncologic and pregnancy outcomes of patients with early stage endometrioid adenocarcinoma (EMC) and atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH) treated with controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with or without levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) after fertility-sparing treatment (FSTs).

METHODS

A total of 67 patients with EMC or AEH who achieved complete response after FSTs and underwent COS between January 2010 and December 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate the risk factors for recurrence after COS.

RESULTS

The average age was 32.9 ± 3.46 years. 23.9 % of these patients relapsed after COS during the follow-up period. The 2-year cumulative recurrence rate was 14.9 % (9.1 % and 20.6 % in the LNG-IUD and control groups, respectively). Compared with the control group, the recurrence rate was lower in patients with LNG-IUDs present during COS (12.1 % vs 35.5 %, p = 0.027). The clinical pregnancy (42.4 % vs 52.9 %, p = 0.392) and live birth (21.2 % vs 29.4 %, p = 0.444) rates were similar between the LNG-IUD and control groups. Age, body mass index (BMI), histology, FST type and time to complete response were not related to prognosis after COS. After adjusting for age and BMI in a multivariate Cox regression model, the use of LNG-IUD during COS was a favorable factor for better oncologic outcomes after COS (HR 0.263, 95 %CI 0.084-0.822, p = 0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with early stage EMC and AEH treated with assisted reproductive technology after FSTs might benefit from LNG-IUDs present during COS.

Comparison of blastocyst euploidy rates following luteal versus follicular phase stimulation in a GnRH antagonist protocol: a prospective study with repeated ovarian stimulation cycles

STUDY QUESTION

Is there any difference in the mean number of euploid embryos following luteal phase start (LS) and follicular phase start (FS) of ovarian stimulation?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The mean number of euploid blastocysts is equivalent independent of whether the inseminated oocytes are derived from FS or LS.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Starting ovarian stimulation at any time of the cycle ('random-start') is commonly used for emergency fertility preservation in cancer patients. A few retrospective studies have been published evaluating LS in women undergoing ovarian stimulation in the context of IVF, but there is a lack of robust data on the comparative efficacy of LS versus FS.Although 'random start' is commonly used in cancer survivors, few retrospective and uncontrolled studies have been published evaluating luteal phase stimulation in women undergoing ovarian stimulation in the context of IVF. Owing to this evident lack of robust data on the efficacy of LS, guidelines typically recommend the LS approach only for medical reasons and not in the context of IVF.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This is a prospective, equivalence study, with repeated stimulation cycles, conducted between May 2018 and December 2021. Overall, 44 oocyte donors underwent two identical consecutive ovarian stimulation cycles, one initiated in the FS and the other in the LS. The primary outcome of the study was to evaluate whether FS and LS in the same patient would result in equivalent numbers of euploid embryos following fertilization of oocytes with the same sperm sample.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Overall, 44 oocyte donors underwent two consecutive ovarian stimulation protocols with 150 μg corifollitropin alpha followed by 200 IU recombinant FSH (rFSH) in a fixed GnRH antagonist protocol. The only difference between the two cycles was the day of initiation of ovarian stimulation, which was in the early follicular phase (FS) in one cycle, and in the luteal phase (LS) in the other. Forty-four oocyte recipients participated in the study receiving a mean of six metaphase II (MII) oocytes from each stimulation cycle (FS and LS). All MIIs were inseminated with the corresponding recipient's partner sperm (which had been previously frozen) or donor sperm, in order to safeguard the use of the same sample for either the FS or LS. Following fertilization and blastocyst culture, all generated embryos underwent genetic analysis for aneuploidy screening (preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy).

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

FS resulted in a significantly shorter duration of ovarian stimulation (difference between means (DBM) -1.05 (95% CI -1.89; -0.20)) and a lower total additional dose of daily rFSH was needed (DBM -196.02 (95% CI -319.92; -72.12)) compared with LS. The donors' hormonal profile on the day of trigger was comparable between the two stimulation cycles, as well as the mean number of oocytes (23.70 ± 10.79 versus 23.70 ± 8.81) (DBM 0.00 (95% CI -3.03; 3.03)) and MII oocytes (20.27 ± 9.60 versus 20.73 ± 8.65) (DBM -0.45 (95% CI -2.82; 1.91)) between FS and LS cycles, respectively. Following fertilization, the overall blastocyst formation rate was 60.70% with a euploid rate of 57.1%. Comparisons between the two stimulation cycles did not reveal any significance differences in terms of fertilization rates (71.9% versus 71.4%), blastocyst formation rates (59.4% versus 62%) and embryo euploidy rates (56.9 versus 57.3%) for the comparison of FS versus LS, respectively. The mean number of euploid blastocysts was equivalent between the FS (1.59 ± 1.30) and the LS (1.61 ± 1.17), (DBM -0.02 (90%CI -0.48; 0.44)).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The study was performed in young, potentially fertile oocyte donors who are patients with high blastocyst euploidy rates. Although results may be extrapolated to young infertile women with good ovarian reserve, caution is needed prior to generalizing the results to infertile women of older age.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The current study provides evidence that initiation of ovarian stimulation in the luteal phase in young potentially fertile women may result in a comparable number of oocytes and comparable blastocyst euploidy rates compared with follicular phase stimulation. This may imply that in case of a freeze-all protocol in young patients with good ovarian reserve, clinicians may safely consider initiation of ovarian stimulation during the luteal phase.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This research was supported by an unrestricted grant from MSD/Organon. N.P.P. has received Research grants and honoraria for lectures from: Merck Serono, MSD/Organon, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Besins Intenational, Roche Diagnostics, IBSA, Theramex, Gedeon Richter. F.M., E.C., M.R. and S.G. declared no conflict of interests.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The study was registered at Clinical Trials Gov (NCT03555942).

Clinical outcome of embryo cryopreservation in Japanese breast cancer patients: pregnancy rates after transfer of thawed embryos

PURPOSE

To examine pregnancy outcomes after cryopreserved embryo transfer (ET) in breast cancer patients and to investigate the effect of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) as well as that of aromatase inhibitor (AI) administration and of the random start (RS) ovarian stimulation method.

METHODS

This retrospective study covered 126 patients who underwent embryo cryopreservation between 2010 and 2019. Thirty-one patients underwent frozen embryo transfer (FET), and we examined resulting pregnancy rates (PRs) and live birth rates (LBRs) in those who did and did not undergo COH and in relation to the AI and RS methods.

RESULTS

PR and LBR per patient were higher among patients who underwent COH than among those who did not. PR per ET did not differ from that documented for non-cancer infertility patients, after adjustment for age. The PR and LBR did not differ between use and non-use of AI (27.8% vs 35.2%). In addition, there was no significant difference in the PR or LBR between RS and conventional start ovarian stimulation (33.3% vs 30.8%). No prenatal fetal abnormalities were observed in 8 cases (including 5 AI cases and 2 RS cases).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that the outcome of FET after FP was equivalent to that seen in non-cancer patients. Further, neither use of AI nor the RS method influenced LBR. COH including use of AI and the RS method are useful in FP for collecting and freezing many embryos within a short period and for increasing the per patient LBR after cancer treatment.

Fertility preservation for women with breast cancer: a multicentre randomized controlled trial on various ovarian stimulation protocols

STUDY QUESTION

Does ovarian stimulation with the addition of tamoxifen or letrozole affect the number of cumulus-oocyte complexes (COCs) retrieved compared to standard ovarian stimulation in women with breast cancer who undergo fertility preservation?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Alternative ovarian stimulation protocols with tamoxifen or letrozole did not affect the number of COCs retrieved at follicle aspiration in women with breast cancer.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Alternative ovarian stimulation protocols have been introduced for women with breast cancer who opt for fertility preservation by means of banking of oocytes or embryos. How these ovarian stimulation protocols compare to standard ovarian stimulation in terms of COC yield is unknown.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This multicentre, open-label randomized controlled superiority trial was carried out in 10 hospitals in the Netherlands and 1 hospital in Belgium between January 2014 and December 2018. We randomly assigned women with breast cancer, aged 18–43 years, who opted for banking of oocytes or embryos to one of three study arms; ovarian stimulation plus tamoxifen, ovarian stimulation plus letrozole or standard ovarian stimulation. Standard ovarian stimulation included GnRH antagonist, recombinant FSH and GnRH agonist trigger. Randomization was performed with a web-based system in a 1:1:1 ratio, stratified for oral contraception usage at start of ovarian stimulation, positive estrogen receptor (ER) status and positive lymph nodes. Patients and caregivers were not blinded to the assigned treatment. The primary outcome was number of COCs retrieved at follicle aspiration.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

During the study period, 162 women were randomly assigned to one of three interventions. Fifty-four underwent ovarian stimulation plus tamoxifen, 53 ovarian stimulation plus letrozole and 55 standard ovarian stimulation. Analysis was according to intention-to-treat principle.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

No differences among groups were observed in the mean (±SD) number of COCs retrieved: 12.5 (10.4) after ovarian stimulation plus tamoxifen, 14.2 (9.4) after ovarian stimulation plus letrozole and 13.6 (11.6) after standard ovarian stimulation (mean difference −1.13, 95% CI −5.70 to 3.43 for tamoxifen versus standard ovarian stimulation and 0.58, 95% CI −4.03 to 5.20 for letrozole versus standard ovarian stimulation). After adjusting for oral contraception usage at the start of ovarian stimulation, positive ER status and positive lymph nodes, the mean difference was −1.11 (95% CI −5.58 to 3.35) after ovarian stimulation plus tamoxifen versus standard ovarian stimulation and 0.30 (95% CI −4.19 to 4.78) after ovarian stimulation plus letrozole versus standard ovarian stimulation. There were also no differences in the number of oocytes or embryos banked. There was one serious adverse event after standard ovarian stimulation: one woman was admitted to the hospital because of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The available literature on which we based our hypothesis, power analysis and sample size calculation was scarce and studies were of low quality. Our study did not have sufficient power to perform subgroup analysis on follicular, luteal or random start of ovarian stimulation.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Our study showed that adding tamoxifen or letrozole to a standard ovarian stimulation protocol in women with breast cancer does not impact the effectiveness of fertility preservation and paves the way for high-quality long-term follow-up on breast cancer treatment outcomes and women’s future pregnancy outcomes. Our study also highlights the need for high-quality studies for all women opting for fertility preservation, as alternative ovarian stimulation protocols have been introduced to clinical practice without proper evidence.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The study was supported by a grant (2011.WO23.C129) of ‘Stichting Pink Ribbon’, a breast cancer fundraising charity organization in the Netherlands. M.G., C.B.L. and R.S. declared that the Center for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam UMC (location VUMC) has received unconditional research and educational grants from Guerbet, Merck and Ferring, not related to the presented work. C.B.L. declared a speakers fee for Inmed and Yingming. S.C.L. reports grants and non-financial support from Agendia, grants, non-financial support and other from AstraZeneca, grants from Eurocept-pharmaceuticals, grants and non-financial support from Genentech/Roche and Novartis, grants from Pfizer, grants and non-financial support from Tesaro and Immunomedics, other from Cergentis, IBM, Bayer, and Daiichi-Sankyo, outside the submitted work; In addition, S.C.L. has a patent UN23A01/P-EP pending that is unrelated to the present work. J.M.J.S. reported payments and travel grants from Merck and Ferring. C.C.M.B. reports her role as unpaid president of the National guideline committee on Fertility Preservation in women with cancer. K.F. received unrestricted grants from Merck Serono, Good Life and Ferring not related to present work. K.F. declared paid lectures for Ferring. D.S. declared former employment from Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD). K.F. declared paid lectures for Ferring. D.S. reports grants from MSD, Gedeon Richter and Ferring paid to his institution; consulting fee payments from MSD and Merck Serono paid to his institution; speaker honoraria from MSD, Gedeon Richter, Ferring Pharmaceuticals and Merck Serono paid to his institution. D.S. has also received travel and meeting support from MSD, Gedeon Richter, Ferring Pharmaceuticals and Merck Serono. No payments are related to present work.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NTR4108.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

6 August 2013.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT

30 January 2014.

Is letrozole during ovarian stimulation useful in breast cancer patients undergoing fertility preservation to reduce early luteal progesterone levels following GnRH-agonist trigger?

BACKGROUND

In absence of contraindication, breast cancer patients of reproductive age can undergo fertility preservation with controlled ovarian stimulation for oocyte/embryo cryopreservation before the administration of potentially gonadotoxic treatments. High hormonal levels induced by ovarian stimulation might have an adverse impact on hormone-positive breast cancer. Whether letrozole supplementation during ovarian stimulation (COSTLES) reduces serum progesterone levels after GnRHa trigger remains unknown. We aimed to determine whether COSTLES might be useful for breast cancer patients undergoing fertility preservation to reduce early luteal progesterone levels following GnRH-agonist (GnRHa)trigger.

METHODS

All women who underwent COS with GnRH antagonist protocol with GnRHa trigger were included. Serum progesterone level measured 12 h after GnRHa trigger was compared between patients undergoing COS with letrozole supplementation (COSTLES group) and patients undergoing COS without letrozole (Control group) for fertility preservation purposes.

RESULTS

A total of 246 patients were included, of which 84 patients (34.1%) in the COSTLES group and 162 patients (65.6%) in the Control group. All patients in the COSTLES group were BC patients (n = 84, 100%), while the Control group included 77 BC patients (47.5%). Patients in the two groups were comparable. The mean number of oocytes recovered and vitrified at metaphase 2 stage did not significantly differ between the two groups. Serum progesterone levels on the day after GnRHa trigger were significantly lower in the COSTLES group (8.6 ± 0.7 vs. 10.5 ± 0.5 ng/mL, respectively, p < 0.03), as well as serum E2 levels (650.3 ± 57.7 vs. 2451.4.0 ± 144.0 pg/mL, respectively, p < 0.01). However, the GnRHa-induced LH surge was significantly higher in in the COSTLES group (71.9 ± 4.6 vs. 51.2 ± 2.6 UI/L, respectively, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that COSTLES for fertility preservation in breast cancer patients using GnRHa trigger reduces serum progesterone levels compared to ovarian stimulation without letrozole. These findings encourage the use of COSTLES in this context to decrease the potential deleterious effect of elevated hormonal levels on hormone-positive breast cancer.

Intraovarian Injection of Recombinant Human Follicle-Stimulating Hormone for Luteal-Phase Ovarian Stimulation during Oocyte Retrieval Is Effective in Women with Impending Ovarian Failure and Diminished Ovarian Reserve

It is a challenge to obtain sufficient eggs during in vitro fertilization (IVF) in women with impending ovarian failure (IOF)/diminished ovarian reserve (DOR). Although studies have suggested that more than one wave of follicle growth exists, the efficacy of controlled ovulation stimulation (COS) in both follicular and luteal phases of the same ovarian cycle (DuoStim) is not established in women with IOF/DOR. We investigated the efficacy of DuoStim using the intraovarian injection of recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (rhFSH) during oocyte retrieval in women with DOR. For luteal-phase stimulation, intraovarian (Group A, N = 28) or superficial subcutaneous (Group B, N = 18) injection of 300 IU rhFSH immediately after oocyte retrieval was administered as the first dose, and intermittent superficial subcutaneous addition of gonadotropins was employed accordingly for further COS in both groups. In Group A, significantly lower Gn doses, a shorter duration of COS, a greater number of antral follicle counts, and an increased number of retrieved mature and total oocytes were noted. Compared with the clinical outcomes of luteal-phase COS, the average daily doses of rhFSH used in Group A were significantly lower. In summary, the novel approach using intraovarian rhFSH injection provides an efficient treatment regimen in women with IOF/DOR.

Folliculogenesis in random start protocols for oocytes cryopreservation: quantitative and qualitative aspects

Random start protocols are commonly used for oocytes cryopreservation in women with cancer. However, evidence to support their effectiveness is yet modest. This study aims to compare the quality of ovarian response between the ovary carrying the dominant follicle or the corpus luteum (active ovary) and the contralateral ovary (resting ovary). Women with a diagnosis of malignancy who underwent oocytes cryopreservation were reviewed. The main inclusion criterion was the presence of a unilateral dominant follicle or a unilateral corpus luteum on the first day of ovarian hyperstimulation. The primary outcome was the number of mature oocytes retrieved. Intra-patient comparisons between the two ovaries were made using the nonparametric Wilcoxon test for paired data. Forty-three women were included. The number of mature oocytes retrieved from the active and the resting ovaries did not differ, the median [interquartile range-IQR] being 4 [2-7] and 5 [2-8], respectively (p = 0.09). The rate [IQR] of mature oocytes per developed follicle was 58% [40-80%] and 65% [33-87%], respectively (p = 0.42). In addition, no significant difference emerged when repeating the analyses separately for women carrying dominant follicles and for those carrying corpora lutea. This study failed to detect any detrimental effect of the presence of a dominant follicle or a corpus luteus on the ovarian response to hyperstimulation, thus supporting the validity of random start protocols.

A comparison of fertility preservation outcomes in patients who froze oocytes, embryos, or ovarian tissue for medically indicated circumstances: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare obstetric outcomes in patients cryopreserving reproductive cells or tissues before gonadotoxic therapy.

DESIGN

A literature search was conducted following PRISMA guidelines on Embase, Medline, and Web of Science. Studies reporting obstetric outcomes in cancer patients who completed cryopreservation of oocyte, embryo, or ovarian tissue were included.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

Cancer patients attempting pregnancy using cryopreserved cells or tissues frozen before cancer therapy.

INTERVENTION(S)

Oocyte, embryo, or ovarian tissue cryopreservation for fertility preservation in cancer.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The total numbers of clinical pregnancies, live births, and miscarriages in women attempting pregnancy using cryopreserved reproductive cells or tissues were calculated. A meta-analysis determined the effect size of each intervention.

RESULT(S)

The search returned 4,038 unique entries. Thirty-eight eligible studies were analyzed. The clinical pregnancy rates were 34.9%, 49.0%, and 43.8% for oocyte, embryo, and ovarian tissue cryopreservation, respectively. No significant differences were found among groups. The live birth rates were 25.8%, 35.3%, and 32.3% for oocyte, embryo, and ovarian tissue cryopreservation, respectively, with no significant differences among groups. The miscarriage rates were 9.2%, 16.9%, and 7.5% for oocyte, embryo, and ovarian tissue cryopreservation, respectively. Significantly fewer miscarriages occurred with ovarian tissue cryopreservation than with embryo cryopreservation.

CONCLUSION(S)

This enquiry is required to counsel cancer patients wishing to preserve fertility. Although the limitations of this study include heterogeneity, lack of quality studies, and low utilization rates, it serves as a starting point for comparison of reproductive and obstetric outcomes in patients returning for family-planning after gonadotoxic therapy.

Random Start Ovarian Stimulation

Fertility preservation is emerging in recent years as an important option for various indications many of which being for cancer patients and for certain benign conditions as well. In the present case report, we set out to utilise the same protocol, however, for different indications.

Fertility Preservation During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Modified But Uncompromised

Purpose: Throughout COVID-19, our clinic remained operational for patients requiring urgent fertility preservation (FP). This study aimed to characterize changes to clinical protocols during the first wave of COVID-19 and compare outcomes to historical controls.

Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study at a university fertility center examining all patients who underwent medically indicated FP cycles during the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) COVID-19 Task Force-recommended suspension of fertility treatment (March 17–May 11, 2020) and patients from the same time period in 2019. FP care was modified for safety during the first wave of COVID-19 with fewer monitoring visits and infection control measures. FP cycle characteristics and outcomes were compared across years.

Results: The volume of cycles was nearly 30% higher in 2020 versus 2019 (27 vs. 19). Diagnoses, age, and anti-Mullerian hormone were similar between cohorts. More patients elected to pursue embryo cryopreservation over oocyte cryopreservation in 2020 versus 2019 (45.8% vs. 5.2%, p < 0.005). Patients managed during COVID-19 had fewer monitoring visits (5 ± 1 vs. 6 ± 1, p = 0.02), and 37.5% of cycles utilized a blind trigger injection. There was no difference in total days of ovarian stimulation (11 ± 1 vs. 11 ± 2, p > 0.05), but 2020 cycles utilized more gonadotropin (4770 ± 1480 vs. 3846 ± 1438, p = 0.04). There was no difference in total oocytes retrieved (19 ± 14 vs. 22 ± 12, p > 0.05) or mature oocytes vitrified (15 ± 12 vs. 17 ± 9, p > 0.05) per cycle.

Conclusions: FP continued during COVID-19, and more cycles were completed in 2020 versus 2019. Despite minimized monitoring, outcomes were optimal and equivalent to historical controls, suggesting FP care can be adapted without compromising outcomes.

Pregnancy after breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers

Background

Often young women affected with BRCA1/2 positive breast cancer have not finished or even not started their childbearing before the onset of the disease. The aim of our mini-review is to summarize state of art knowledge on pregnancy after breast cancer in BRCA1/2 carriers.

Methods

A broad review of the literature was conducted using MEDLINE (via PubMed) for relevant articles published.

Main body of the abstract

This review summarizes the impact of different cytotoxic agents on a fertility, fertility preservation, maternal and fetal prognosis after pregnancy in breast cancer survivors with BRCA1/2.

Conclusion

According to the existing literature evidence pregnancy after therapy for breast cancer in BRCA carriers is safe for the mother and offspring, but patients’ needs, oncofertility counseling and fertility-sparing strategy should be carefully planned before starting the cytotoxic treatment.

Usefulness of random-start progestin-primed ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation

Background

Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) has been used in infertility cases in recent years, and several reports have stated that it has oocyte collection results similar to those of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol. For emergency fertility preservation, random-start ovarian stimulation is usually recommended. Therefore we compared the clinical outcomes of random-start PPOS with those of conventional random-start GnRH-ant protocols in fertility-preserving cases.

Methods

We retrospectively examined 86 cycles of oocyte collection, of which 56 were random-start GnRH-ant and 30 were random-start PPOS for fertility preservation at our hospital between January 2016 and April 2021. The primary outcome was the number of mature oocytes per cycle. The secondary outcome was the number of vitrified blastocysts per cycle for embryo freezing cases.

Results

No significant differences were noted in the number of days of stimulation, total dose of gonadotropin preparation, and the number of mature oocytes and vitrified blastocysts. The number of hospital visits for monitoring was significantly lower in the PPOS group. The start of menstruation before oocyte collection was significantly less in the PPOS group.

Conclusions

Random-start PPOS and GnRH-ant were similar in oocyte collection results. PPOS can reduce the number of hospital visits, thus reducing patient stress. PPOS at the start of the luteal phase can prevent the start of menstruation during ovarian stimulation.

The earlier the initiation of gonadotropin in poor responders in luteal phase stimulation protocols, the better

INTRODUCTION

Luteal-phase ovarian stimulation has been proved to be feasible for producing competent oocytes/embryos and achieving live births, yet there is no standardized stimulation protocol for luteal-phase ovarian stimulation (LPS). The aim of this study was to explore the optimal timing of gonadotropin initiation in the LPS protocol for poor ovarian responders.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in the reproductive medicine center of a tertiary hospital. A total of 327 poor responders fulfilling Bologna criteria underwent LPS with IVF/ICSI treatment. HMG and letrozole were administrated after ovulation. Patients were stratified into three groups according to the gonadotropin start day: early, early-mid, and mid-late luteal phase. A freeze-all strategy was performed for all cycles. The duration of ovarian stimulation, total gonadotropin dose, number of oocytes retrieved, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, and live birth rate after frozen/thawed embryo transfer cycles were included for evaluation.

RESULTS

The group accepted ovarian stimulation in the earlier phase tended to have a shorter duration of ovarian stimulation [8 (7,10) in early luteal group, 9 (8,10.25) in early-mid luteal group, and 11 (10,12) in mid-late luteal group; P <0.001] and lower gonadotropin consumption [1993.35 ± 720.31, 2282.73 ± 703.38, and 2764.83 ± 722.26, respectively; P <0.001]. Logistic regression and multiple linear regression were used to assess the associations between the phase of gonadotropin initiation and duration of ovarian stimulation (or total gonadotropin dose) by adjusting for confounding factors. Compared with the early luteal group, longer ovarian stimulation(>9 days) was more likely to occur in the early-mid and mid-late luteal groups, with the adjusted odds ratios 0.584 (0.327-1.042) and 0.116 (0.049-0.271), respectively (P-trend<0.001). Delayed gonadotropin initiation showed an 113.200 IU increase (95%CI: 70.469, 155.930) per-day in the total gonadotropin dosage. Meanwhile, there were no significant differences in the mean number of oocytes, utilizable embryos, pregnancy outcomes among three groups.

CONCLUSION

Although the timing of gonadotropin initiation is not associated with pregnancy outcomes, earlier initiation of gonadotropin therapy after ovulation was associated with a shorter duration of ovarian stimulation and lower gonadotropin consumption in poor responders in LPS.

Fertility Preservation for Adolescent and Young Adult Transmen: A Case Series and Insights on Oocyte Cryopreservation

BACKGROUND

The opportunity for fertility preservation in adolescent and young adult (AYA) transmen is growing. Many AYA transmen desire future biologic children and are interested in ways to preserve fertility through oocyte cryopreservation prior to full gender affirmation, yet utilization of oocyte cryopreservation remains low. Additionally, standard practice guidelines currently do not exist for the provision of oocyte cryopreservation to AYA transmen. Our objective was to review our experience with oocyte cryopreservation in adolescent and young adult transmen in order to synthesize lessons regarding referral patterns, utilization, and oocyte cryopreservation outcomes as well as best practices to establish treatment guidance.

METHODS

This is a case series of all AYA transmen (aged 10 to 25 years) who contacted, consulted or underwent oocyte cryopreservation at a single high volume New York City based academic fertility center between 2009 and 2021.

RESULTS

Forty-four adolescent and young adult transmen made contact to the fertility center over the study period. Eighty percent (35/44) had a consultation with a Reproductive and Endocrinology specialist, with a median age of 16 years (range 10 to 24 years) at consultation. The majority were testosterone-naive (71%, 25/35), and had not pursued gender affirming surgery (86%, 30/35). Expedited initiation of testosterone remained the most commonly cited goal (86%, 30/35). Fifty-seven percent (20/35) pursued oocyte cryopreservation. Ninety-five percent (19/20) underwent successful transvaginal oocyte aspiration, with a median of 22 oocytes retrieved and 15 mature oocytes cryopreserved. There were no significant adverse events. At time of review, no patient has returned to utilize their cryopreserved oocytes.

CONCLUSIONS

Oocyte cryopreservation is a safe fertility preservation option in AYA transmen and is an important aspect of providing comprehensive transgender care. Insights from referral patterns, utilization, and oocyte cryopreservation outcomes from a single center's experience with adolescent and young adult transmen can be integrated to identify lessons learned with the goal of providing transparency surrounding the oocyte cryopreservation process, improving the education and comfort of patients and providers with fertility preservation, and easing the decision to pursue an oocyte cryopreservation cycle in parallel to gender-affirmatory care.

Fertility Preservation: How to Preserve Ovarian Function in Children, Adolescents and Adults

Chemotherapy, pelvic radiotherapy and ovarian surgery have known gonadotoxic effects that can lead to endocrine dysfunction, cessation of ovarian endocrine activity and early depletion of the ovarian reserve, causing a risk for future fertility problems, even in children. Important determinants of this risk are the patient’s age and ovarian reserve, type of treatment and dose. When the risk of premature ovarian insufficiency is high, fertility preservation strategies must be offered to the patient. Furthermore, fertility preservation may sometimes be needed in conditions other than cancer, such as in non-malignant diseases or in patients seeking fertility preservation for personal reasons. Oocyte and/or embryo vitrification and ovarian tissue cryopreservation are the two methods currently endorsed by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, yielding encouraging results in terms of pregnancy and live birth rates. The choice of one technique above the other depends mostly on the age and pubertal status of the patient, and personal and medical circumstances. This review focuses on the available fertility preservation techniques, their appropriateness according to patient age and their efficacy in terms of pregnancy and live birth rates.

Disparities in Female Pediatric, Adolescent and Young Adult Oncofertility: A Needs Assessment

Advancements in cancer screening and implementation of targeted treatments have significantly improved survival rates to 85% for pediatric and AYA survivors. Greater than 75% of survivors will live to experience the long-term adverse outcomes of cancer therapies, termed late effects (LE), that disrupt quality of life (QoL). Infertility and poor reproductive outcomes are significant disruptors of QoL in survivorship, affecting 12-88% of survivors who receive at-risk therapies. To mitigate risk, fertility preservation (FP) counseling is recommended as standard of care prior to gonadotoxic therapy. However, disparities in FP counseling, implementation of FP interventions, and screening for gynecologic late effects in survivorship persist. Barriers to care include a lack of provider and patient knowledge of the safety and breadth of current FP options, misconceptions about the duration of time required to implement FP therapies, cost, and health care team bias. Developing strategies to address barriers and implement established guidelines are necessary to ensure equity and improve quality of care across populations.

Dynamic changes in serum steroid hormone during the first trimester of pregnancy between infertile women conceiving with and without hormone replacement therapy

Objective

Recent advances in cancer treatment and reproductive medicine have made the post-treatment quality of life an important concern for cancer survivors. We aimed to evaluate the safety of sex hormone (estradiol and progesterone) replacement therapy (HRT) in women who conceived by assisted reproductive technology (ART) with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

Methods

We measured serum E2 and P4 levels at 4–10 weeks of gestation in women who conceived naturally or after timed intercourse or intrauterine insemination for infertility without HRT for luteal support (non-HR group; n = 135). We conducted a retrospective comparison of the values from the non-HR group with those of women who conceived by ART with HRT for infertility (HR group; n = 75).

Results

Serum E2 levels were significantly higher in the non-HR group than in the HR group at 5, 6, and 8 weeks of gestation. Similarly, serum P4 levels were significantly higher in the non-HR group than in the HR group at 4, 5, and 6 weeks of gestation.

Conclusions

This study suggests that in cancer reproductive medicine for hormone-dependent breast cancer survivors, HRT administered during the first trimester of a pregnancy after primary disease treatment may not increase the sex hormone levels to levels above those seen in spontaneous pregnancy.

Follicular waves in ontogenesis and female fertility

Antral follicle growth and recruitment are the basis of female reproduction. Follicular wave theory explains the recruitment, growth, and selection of antral follicles. This article is devoted to the follicular wave pattern in female reproduction throughout life. We highlight progress in understanding the rhythmic follicle changes based on clinical studies and studies on animal models. We review the follicular wave pattern before puberty, during pregnancy, and in perimenopause. Several mathematical models are known which quite accurately describe follicular wave dynamics. The follicular waves theory allows the implementation of the new approaches to ovarian stimulation. Stimulation in the luteal phase and double stimulation are used more widely nowadays for fertility preservation in cancer patients and for increasing the chances of IVF programs success in poor responder patients.

Controlled ovarian stimulation outcomes of fertility preservation procedures in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients: a retrospective study from a single-tertiary-IVF centre

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) using the letrozole-supplemented stimulation protocol in breast cancer (BC) patients prior to their cancer treatment. Sixty-one BC patients (Stages 0-3) who were referred to a university IVF unit for fertility preservation (FP) and underwent embryo and/or oocyte cryopreservation between 2008 - 2020 were included in this retrospective study. Time intervals between breast surgery and initial fertility consultation (IFC)/completion of FP procedures were evaluated. COS outcomes were assessed and compared between the early follicular phase (EFP) and the random-start (RS) protocols. The patients' mean age was 33.3 ± 4.9 years. The mean time interval between breast surgery and IFC was 20.6 ± 11 (day, mean ± SD) and from IFC to completion of FP procedure was 14.7 ± 5.3. Overall, 9.1 ± 5.9 mature oocytes were obtained, with a peak serum oestradiol level of 388 ± 358 pg/mL. The number of oocytes obtained (11.5 ± 9.3 vs. 10.9 ± 6.9, p = .9) and maturation rates (84.3 ± 17.5% vs. 89.2 ± 11.7, p = .5) were not statistically different between the EPF and RS protocols. The study results support that oocyte or embryo freezing can be performed effectively in a limited time period with letrozole-supplemented COS protocols before the initiation of oncological treatments in breast cancer patients.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Currently, embryo and oocyte freezing are considered the most established fertility preservation (FP) methods for newly diagnosed cancer patients.What do the results of this study add? This study reports the COS outcomes of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients for FP over a period of twelve years from a single IVF unit. The results support that a considerable number of oocytes can be harvested with letrozole-supplemented COS protocol, which appears to be an effective protocol for BC patients.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? There is a need for additional studies evaluating long-term follow-up of patients with their pregnancy outcomes.

Fertility preservation for women with breast cancer before chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The preservation of fertility in women of childbearing age with breast cancer is challenging since the time for ovarian stimulation is restricted and only a limited amount of oocytes can be retrieved before gonadotoxic therapies. The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the fertility preservation outcomes after ovarian stimulation with various protocols in women with breast cancer. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched. Studies comparing the outcomes of women with breast cancer receiving random-start ovarian stimulation or conventional protocol; single or double ovarian stimulation cycles; and coadministration of aromatase inhibitors or tamoxifen were included. Twenty-two studies were included. Random-start ovarian stimulation resulted in a comparable number of retrieved oocytes to the conventional protocol. Two ovarian stimulation cycles had significantly higher numbers of total retrieved oocytes than one cycle (mean difference: 7.91, 95% CI: 3.42-12.4). Coadministration of letrozole and tamoxifen showed similar results of retrieved oocytes to those without. A significantly lower peak serum estradiol level was observed in letrozole-based groups than in letrozole-free groups. In conclusion, our study indicated that implementing random-start protocols to shorten the duration of waiting for ovarian stimulation, applying two ovarian stimulation cycles, and coadministering letrozole can lead to more desirable outcomes.

Concomitant tamoxifen or letrozole for optimal oocyte yield during fertility preservation for breast cancer: the TAmoxifen or Letrozole in Estrogen Sensitive tumors (TALES) randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

To determine whether concomitant tamoxifen 20 mg with gonadotropins (tamoxifen-gonadotropin) versus letrozole 5 mg with gonadotropins (letrozole-gonadotropin) affects mature oocyte yield.

METHODS

Open-label, single-institution, randomized trial. Inclusion criteria included the following: females, ages 18-44 years old, with new diagnosis of non-metastatic breast cancer, who were undergoing fertility preservation with either oocyte or embryo cryopreservation. Those with estrogen-receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer were randomized to tamoxifen-gonadotropin or letrozole-gonadotropin. Another group with estrogen-receptor-negative (ER-) breast cancer was recruited, as a prospectively collected comparison arm who took neither letrozole nor tamoxifen (gonadotropin only). The primary outcome was the number of mature oocytes obtained from the cycle. The randomized groups were powered to detect a difference of three or more mature oocytes.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients were randomized to tamoxifen-gonadotropin and fifty-one to letrozole-gonadotropin. Thirty-eight patients completed gonadotropin only. Age, antral follicle count, and body mass index were similar between the randomized groups. Our primary outcome of mature oocyte yield was similar between the tamoxifen-gonadotropin and letrozole-gonadotropin groups (12±8.6 vs. 11.6±7.5, p=0.81, 95%CI of difference =-2.9 to 3.7). In a pre-specified secondary comparison, mature oocyte yield was also similar with tamoxifen-gonadotropin or letrozole-gonadotropin versus gonadotropin only (12±8.6 vs. 11.6±7.5 vs. 12.4±7.2). There were no serious adverse events in any of the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Tamoxifen-gonadotropin and letrozole-gonadotropin produced a similar number of mature oocytes. Women who received either tamoxifen-gonadotropin or letrozole-gonadotropin had a similar number of oocytes to the gonadotropin-only group.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03011684 (retrospectively registered 1/5/2017, after 9% enrolled).

Current Fertility Preservation Options for Female Patients With Hodgkin Lymphoma

Importance

Many adolescents and young adults diagnosed with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) experience disease progression requiring high-dose alkylating salvage therapy, which often results in permanent infertility.

Objective

The aim of this report is to discuss fertility preservation options in female patients with consideration of chemotherapeutic agents in HL.

Evidence Acquisition

An electronic literature review was performed utilizing a combination of the terms "Hodgkin lymphoma," "fertility preservation," "ovarian tissue cryopreservation," "oocyte cryopreservation," "embryo cryopreservation," and "gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist." References and data from identified sources were searched and compiled to complete this review.

Results

Initial treatment of HL is often nonsterilizing; however, salvage therapy and conditioning for stem cell transplantation confer significant gonadotoxicity. Established fertility preservation options for pubertal females include embryo cryopreservation and oocyte cryopreservation. These options are contraindicated within 6 months of receipt of chemotherapy. Ovarian tissue cryopreservation is an option for patients who require salvage therapy within 6 months of first-line therapy.

Conclusions

Timing and choice of fertility preservation techniques depends on planned first-line chemotherapy and response to treatment. In patients initially treated with low-risk chemotherapy, it is reasonable to defer invasive fertility techniques until treatment failure; however, upfront fertility preservation should be considered in patients planning to undergo primary treatment with high-risk therapy.

Molecular Mechanism and Prevention Strategy of Chemotherapy- and Radiotherapy-Induced Ovarian Damage

Fertility preservation is an emerging discipline, which is of substantial clinical value in the care of young patients with cancer. Chemotherapy and radiation may induce ovarian damage in prepubertal girls and young women. Although many studies have explored the mechanisms implicated in ovarian toxicity during cancer treatment, its molecular pathophysiology is not fully understood. Chemotherapy may accelerate follicular apoptosis and follicle reservoir utilization and damage the ovarian stroma via multiple molecular reactions. Oxidative stress and the radiosensitivity of oocytes are the main causes of gonadal damage after radiation treatment. Fertility preservation options can be differentiated by patient age, desire for conception, treatment regimen, socioeconomic status, and treatment duration. This review will help highlight the importance of multidisciplinary oncofertility strategies for providing high-quality care to young female cancer patients.

When Should We Freeze Embryos? Current Data for Fresh and Frozen Embryo Replacement IVF Cycles

Recent years have seen a dramatic rise in the number of frozen-thawed embryo replacement (FER) cycles. Along with the advances in embryo cryopreservation techniques, the optimization of endometrial receptivity has resulted in outcomes for FER that are similar to fresh embryo transfer. However, the question of whether the Freeze all strategy is for all is nowadays a hot topic. This review addresses this issue and describes current evidence based on randomized controlled trials and observational studies. To date, it is reasonable to perform FER in cases with a clear indication for the benefits of such strategy including impending ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) or preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A); however, this strategy does not fit for all. This review analyses the pros and cons of the freeze all strategy highlighting the need to follow a personalized plan in embryo transfer, avoiding a freeze all methodology for all patients in an unselected manner.

Combining fertility preservation procedures to spread the eggs across different baskets: a feasibility study

STUDY QUESTION

What is the reproductive potential following combinations of ovarian stimulation, IVM and ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC) in female patients seeking fertility preservation (FP)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

In selected patients, combining different FP procedures is a feasible approach and reproductive outcomes after FP in patients who return to attempt pregnancy are promising.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

FP is increasingly performed in fertility clinics but an algorithm to select the most suitable FP procedure according to patient characteristics and available timeframe is currently lacking. Vitrification of mature oocytes (OV) and OTC are most commonly performed, although in some clinical scenarios a combination of procedures including IVM, to spread the sources of gametes, may be considered in order to enhance reproductive options for the future.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Retrospective, observational study in a university-based, tertiary fertility centre involving all female patients who underwent urgent medical FP between January 2012 and December 2018. Descriptive analysis of various FP procedures, either stand-alone or combined, was performed, and reproductive outcomes of patients who attempted pregnancy in the follow-up period were recorded.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

In total, 207 patients underwent medical FP. Patient-tailored strategies and procedures were selected after multidisciplinary discussion. When deemed feasible, FP procedures were combined to cryopreserve different types of reproductive tissue for future use. The main primary outcome measure was the number of mature oocytes. Live birth rates were evaluated in patients who returned for reproductive treatment.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Among patients seeking FP, 95/207 (46%) had breast cancer, 43/207 (21%) had haematological malignancies and 31/207 (15%) had a gynaecological tumour. Mean ± SD age was 27.0 ± 8.3 years. Eighty-five (41.1%) patients underwent controlled ovarian stimulation (COS), resulting in 10.8 ± 7.1 metaphase II (MII) oocytes for vitrification. Eleven (5.3%) patients had multiple COS cycles. Transvaginal oocyte retrieval for IVM was performed in 17 (8.2%) patients, yielding 9.2 ± 10.1 MII oocytes. Thirty-four (16.4%) patients underwent OTC combined with IVM of oocytes retrieved from ovarian tissue 'ex vivo' (OTO-IVM), yielding 4.0 ± 4.3 MII oocytes in addition to ovarian fragments. Seventeen (8.2%) patients had OTC combined with OTO-IVM and transvaginal retrieval of oocytes for IVM from the contralateral ovary, resulting in 13.5 ± 9.7 MII oocytes. In 13 (6.3%) patients, OTC with OTO-IVM was followed by controlled stimulation of the contralateral ovary, yielding 11.3 ± 6.6 MII oocytes in total. During the timeframe of the study, 31/207 (15%) patients have returned to the fertility clinic with a desire for pregnancy. Of those, 12 (38.7%) patients had preserved ovarian function and underwent ART treatment with fresh oocytes, resulting in nine (75%) livebirth. The remaining 19 (61.3%) patients requested warming of their cryopreserved material because of ovarian insufficiency. Of those, eight (42.1%) patients had a livebirth, of whom three after OTO-IVM. To date, 5/207 patients (2.4%) achieved an ongoing pregnancy or livebirth after spontaneous conception.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Our FP programme is based on a patient-tailored approach rather than based on an efficiency-driven algorithm. The data presented are descriptive, which precludes firm conclusions.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Combining different FP procedures is likely to enhance the reproductive fitness of patients undergoing gonadotoxic treatment but further follow-up studies are needed to confirm this.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No external funding was used for this study and the authors have no competing interests.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Efficacy and safety of controlled ovarian stimulation using GnRH antagonist protocols for emergency fertility preservation in young women with breast cancer-a prospective nationwide Swedish multicenter study

STUDY QUESTION

How efficacious and safe are the current approaches to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) aimed at fertility preservation (FP) in women with breast cancer (BC)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

In women with BC undergoing COS aiming at egg/embryo cryopreservation, letrozole-based protocols and those randomly started were equally effective compared with conventional COS, and the overall survival was similar between the women that proceeded to FP and those who did not.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Cryopreservation of oocytes and embryos is an established method for FP in women with BC. Recent improvements to COS protocols include concomitant use of letrozole, random-cycle start day of stimulation and the use of GnRHa for the egg maturation trigger. To date, limited sample size of the available studies has not allowed investigation of differences in the efficacy of the different approaches to COS for FP in this patient population.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A prospective multicenter study with national coverage including 610 women with BC counseled between 1 January 1995 and 30 June 2017 at six Swedish FP regional programs.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

After counseling, 401 women elected to undergo COS. Treatments differed in the use or not of concomitant letrozole, a conventional or random-cycle day COS initiation and the use of hCG versus GnRHa trigger for oocyte maturation. Numbers of cryopreserved oocytes and embryos were defined as primary outcome. Pregnancy attempts, reproductive outcomes and long-term survival, investigated by the linking of individuals of the cohort to the total population register of the Swedish Tax Agency (up to 25 November 2018), were evaluated.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Using letrozole or not resulted in similar numbers of oocytes and embryos cryopreserved (mean_oocytes = 9.7 versus 10 and mean_embryos 4.0 versus 5.3, respectively), similar to COS with random versus conventional start (mean_oocytes 9.0 versus 10.6 and mean_embryos 4.8 versus 4.8). In COS with letrozole, a GnRHa trigger was associated with a higher number of oocytes retrieved (P < 0.05) and embryos cryopreserved (P < 0.005), compared with conventional hCG trigger. Of 99 women who returned to fertility clinics after cancer treatment, 32 proceeded to thawing of oocytes or embryos and 10 of them had live births. The all-cause survival between the women that underwent COS and those who did not was similar and did not differ between the two groups.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Data on tumor characteristics and estrogen receptor (ER) status were not known for all women at the time of FP counseling and planning of COS, thus protocols with letrozole have been used for both estrogen-sensitive and non-estrogen-sensitive BC. For the same reason, subsequent adjustment for ERs in the BC or tumor characteristics as potential confounders were not performed as these parameters were not available and did not influence the provision of FP through COS.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The results of our study support the premise that recently introduced potential improvements to COS protocols for FP in women with BC are efficacious and safe.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This study was supported by research grants from the Swedish Cancer Society, the Stockholm County Council, the Percy Falk Stiftelsen, Radiumhemmets Forskningsfonder, The Swedish Breast Cancer Association and Karolinska Institutet to K.A.R.W. J.B. reports grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis and Merck, outside the submitted work, and payment from UpToDate to Asklepios Medicine HB for a chapter on BC prediction and prognostication. All the other authors have no competing interests to report.

Ovarian follicular waves during the menstrual cycle: physiologic insights into novel approaches for ovarian stimulation

Elucidation of multiple waves of antral ovarian follicular development during the menstrual cycle has challenged traditional concepts of female reproductive physiology and foundations of assisted reproductive therapies. Approximately two-thirds of women develop two follicle waves throughout an interovulatory interval and the remainder exhibit three waves of follicle development. Major and minor waves of follicle development have been observed. Major waves are those in which a dominant follicle develops; dominant follicles either regress or ovulate. In minor waves, physiologic selection of a dominant follicle is not manifest. Knowledge of waves of antral follicular development has led to the global adoption of novel ovarian stimulation strategies in which stimulation can be initiated at various times throughout the cycle. Random-start and luteal-phase ovarian stimulation regimens have had important clinical applications for women requiring urgent oocyte or embryo cryopreservation for fertility preservation prior to chemotherapy. Ovarian stimulation twice in the same cycle, referred to as double stimulation, may be used to optimize clinical outcomes in women with a poor ovarian response to stimulation as well as in those requiring fertility preservation before chemotherapy.