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

Use of tamoxifene-controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for fertility preservation before breast cancer treatment: A prospective cohort study with a 5-year follow-up

PURPOSE

Fertility issues are of great concern for young women undergoing treatment for breast cancer (BC). Fertility preservation (FP) protocols using controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with letrozole have been widely used with overall good results. However, letrozole cannot be used in every country in this context. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of tamoxifen for COS in women with early BC undergoing FP.

METHODS

This multicentric prospective study included patients aged 18-40, diagnosed with stage I, II and III invasive BC, undergoing tamoxifen-COS before adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The primary endpoint was the efficacy of tamoxifen-COS protocol evaluated by the number of oocytes collected and vitrified. Secondary endpoints included the time interval before chemotherapy, breast cancer (BC) recurrence rates, and reproductive outcomes.

RESULTS

Ninety-five patients were included between 2014 and 2017, aged 31.5 ± 4 years on average. 37.9 % received NAC and 62.1 % received adjuvant chemotherapy. FP procedure was successful in 89.5 % of the cycles. The mean number of collected and vitrified oocytes was 12.8 ± 7.9 and 9.8 ± 6.2, respectively. The mean duration of COS was 10.4 ± 1.9 days. Median time before chemotherapy initiation was 3.6 weeks (IQR 3.1; 4.1) for women receiving NAC. Five-year relapse-free and overall survival rates were in-line with those expected in this population. Twenty-one women had spontaneous full-term pregnancies, while 5 underwent IVF cycles with frozen-thawed oocytes, without pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

Tamoxifen-COS protocols appear to be feasible before adjuvant or NAC treatment in young BC patients and efficient in terms of oocyte yield.

Ovarian stimulation response and fertility outcomes in patients with breast cancer across different stages, grades, and hormone receptor status for fertility preservation

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to explore the potential impact of stage, grade, and hormone receptor profile on ovarian stimulation response and fertility preservation outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study evaluated data from breast cancer patients who underwent fertility preservation at a tertiary medical center between 2014 and 2022. The outcomes of women with low-stage cancer (stages I and II) were compared with those of women with high-stage disease (stages III and IV or lymph node metastasis). Similarly, we compared those with low-grade (grades 1 and 2) and high-grade (grade 3) malignancies. In addition, we compared different hormone statuses of breast cancer (1) estrogen receptor (ER) positive vs. ER-negative and (2) triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) vs. non-TNBC. The primary outcome measured was the number of mature oocytes, while the secondary outcomes included the numbers of total oocytes retrieved, peak estradiol levels, and subsequent fertility preservation outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 47 patients were included. Patients with high-grade tumors had a comparable number of mature oocytes (8 vs. 10, p = 0.08) compared to patients with low grade cancers. The stage-based analysis revealed a similar number of mature oocytes (8 vs. 10, p = 0.33) between high/low stage patients. In the hormone receptor-based analysis, no differences were seen in mature oocytes collected between the ER-positive/ER-negative group (9 vs. 9, p = 0.87) and the TNBC/non-TNBC group (11 vs. 9, p = 0.13). The utilization rate was 27.6% (13/47).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed similar ovarian stimulation response and fertility preservation outcomes among breast cancer patients with different prognostic factors.

Is there a preferred time interval between gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist trigger and oocyte retrieval in GnRH antagonist cycles? A retrospective cohort of planned fertility preservation cycles

BACKGROUND

The ideal time frame between gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist (GnRHa) trigger administration and oocyte retrieval in GnRH antagonist cycles has not been well studied. Our goal was to evaluate the effect of this time interval on oocyte yield and oocyte maturation rate in GnRH antagonist cycles designated for non-medical ("planned") oocyte cryopreservation.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study including patients who underwent elective fertility preservation, using the GnRH antagonist protocol and exclusively triggered by GnRH-agonist. We focused on the effect of the trigger-to-retrieval time interval on oocyte yield and maturation rate, while also incorporating age, body mass index (BMI), anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels, basal Follicle-Stimulating Hormone (FSH) levels, as well as the type and dosage of gonadotropin FSH medication.

RESULTS

438 cycles were included. Trigger-to-retrieval time interval ranged from 32.03 to 39.92 h. The mean oocyte yield showed no statistically significant difference when comparing retrievals < 36 h (n = 240, 11.86 ± 8.6) to those triggered at ≥ 36 h (n = 198, 12.24 ± 7.73) (P = 0.6). Upon dividing the cohort into four-time quartiles, no significant differences in the number of retrieved oocytes were observed (P = 0.54). Multivariate regression analysis failed to reveal any significant associations between the interval and the aforementioned variables.

CONCLUSIONS

The GnRHa trigger to oocyte retrieval interval range in our cohort did not significantly affect oocyte yield and maturation rate.

Survey on the implementation status and reproductive outcomes of oocyte and ovarian tissue cryopreservation in Japan: Historical comparison with nationwide surveys

PURPOSE

To clarify the reproductive outcomes of fertility preservation (FP) treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a mailed-in questionnaire survey at institutions certified by the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology to investigate the number of oocyte cryopreservations (OC) and ovarian tissue cryopreservations (OTC) performed from December 2016 to the end of 2020. And, we conducted a detailed investigation of cases in which frozen specimens were used during the investigation period, and made historical comparisons with previous nationwide studies.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 114 out of 150 facilities (response rate: 76.0%) for OC and 43 out of 51 for OTC (response rate: 84.3%). Breast cancer was the most common disease among patients whose FP specimens were used. During the study period, 1237 OCs and 198 OTCs were performed. In addition, 57 cycles of embryo transfer (ET) using cryopreserved oocytes and 12 cases of ovarian tissue transplantation (OTT) were performed. The mean age of patients who underwent ET using cryopreserved oocytes was 34.8 (±5.8) years, with a median age of 36 years. The pregnancy rate per ET using cryopreserved oocytes was 26.3% and the live birth rate (LBR) was 17.5%. Further, the LBR per patient was 43.3%, and the pregnancy rate following OTTs was 33.3%. Also, controlled ovarian stimulation using the random start method or the combination of aromatase inhibitors had no effect on pregnancy outcome.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of both OCs and OTCs have markedly increased over time in Japan, with comparable reproductive outcomes as other reports.

Fertility preservation before and after cancer treatment in children, adolescents, and young adults

Fertility is a top concern for many survivors of cancer diagnosed as children, adolescents and young adults (CAYA). Fertility preservation (FP) treatments are effective, evidence-based interventions to support their family building goals. Fertility discussions are a part of quality oncology care throughout the cancer care continuum. For nearly 2 decades, clinical guidelines recommend counseling patients about the possibility of infertility promptly at diagnosis and offering FP options and referrals as indicated. Multiple guidelines now recommend post-treatment counseling. Infertility risks differ by cancer treatments and age, rendering risk stratification a central part of FP care. To support FP decision-making, online tools for female risk estimation are available. At diagnosis, females can engage in mature oocyte/embryo cryopreservation, ovarian tissue cryopreservation, ovarian suppression with GnRH agonists, in vitro oocyte maturation, and/or conservative management for gynecologic cancers. Post-treatment, several populations may consider undergoing oocyte/embryo cryopreservation. Male survivors' standard of care FP treatments center on sperm cryopreservation before cancer treatment and do not have the same post-treatment indication for additional gamete cryopreservation. In practice, FP care requires systemized processes to routinely screen for FP needs, bridge oncology referrals to fertility, offer timely fertility consultations and access to FP treatments, and support financial navigation. Sixteen US states passed laws requiring health insurers to provide insurance benefits for FP treatments, but variation among the laws and downstream implementation are barriers to accessing FP treatments. To preserve the reproductive futures of CAYA survivors, research is needed to improve risk stratification, FP options, and delivery of FP care.

Is controlled ovarian stimulation safe in patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy?

INTRODUCTION

Controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for oocyte/embryo cryopreservation is the method of choice for fertility preservation (FP) in young patients diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer (eBC). Nevertheless, some challenges still question its role, particularly in the neoadjuvant setting, where concerns arise about potential delay in the onset of anticancer treatment, and in hormone receptor-positive (HR+) disease, as cancer cells may proliferate under the estrogenic peak associated with stimulation. Therefore, this review aims to examine the available evidence on the safety of COS in eBC patients eligible for neoadjuvant treatment (NAT), particularly in HR+ disease.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify studies evaluating the feasibility and safety of COS in eBC and including patients referred to NAT and/or with HR+ disease. Time to NAT and survival outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Of the three matched cohort studies assessing the impact of COS on time to start NAT, only one reported a significant small delay in the cohort undergoing COS compared with the control group, whereas the other studies found no difference. Regarding survival outcomes, overall, no increased risk of recurrence or death was found, either in patients undergoing COS in the neoadjuvant setting regardless of HR expression or in HR+ disease regardless of the timing of COS relative to surgery. However, there are no data on the safety of COS in the specific combined scenario of HR+ disease undergoing NAT.

CONCLUSION

Neither the indication to NAT nor the HR positivity constitutes per se an a priori contraindication to COS. Shared decision making between clinicians and patients is essential to carefully weigh the risks and benefits in each individual case. Prospective studies designed to specifically investigate this issue are warranted.

Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in breast cancer patients: Does oestrogen receptor status make a difference?

BACKGROUND

The presence of different breast cancer receptor status may impact ovarian stimulation outcomes.

AIM

To study the association between oestrogen receptor (ER) status in breast cancer patients and fertility preservation outcomes in a major tertiary referral centre.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Women who underwent fertility preservation following the diagnosis of breast cancer from 2008 to 2018 were included in the study. Patient age, ovarian stimulation parameters and laboratory outcomes were recorded and compared between the ER positive and negative groups. The primary outcome was total number of oocytes frozen. Secondary outcomes included total number of oocytes collected, mature oocytes, and embryos frozen.

RESULTS

The women included in the study (n = 214) were analysed in the following groups based on their fertility preservation method: oocyte freezing (n = 131), embryo freezing (n = 70), and both embryo and oocyte freezing (n = 13). There was an increase in the mean (but not mature) number of oocytes frozen (12.4 and 9.2, P-value = 0.03) favouring the ER positive group, even though the women in this group were older (35.0 and 33.4, P-value of 0.03). There is no difference in the starting follicle-stimulating hormone dose, duration of stimulation, mature oocytes collected, and embryos frozen in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients with ER positive breast cancer may have more positive ovarian stimulation outcomes.

Breast Cancer and Fertility Preservation in Young Female Patients: A Systematic Review of the Literature

INTRODUCTION

Breast cancer affects almost 1.5 million women worldwide below the age of 45 years each year. Many of these women will be advised to undergo adjuvant chemotherapy to minimize the risk of death or recurrence of the tumor. For these patients, chemotherapy is a known cause of infertility, as it can damage primordial follicles, which can lead to early menopause or premature ovarian insufficiency. This systematic review aims to synthesize the current evidence of the most suitable treatments for fertility preservation.

METHODOLOGY

This review was performed following the PRISMA guidelines. The authors conducted an extensive search from the last 15 years. Relevant studies were pursued in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up until 31 July 2023. A total of seven eligible studies were identified.

RESULTS

From the reviewed literature, ovarian suppression with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists showed promising results in preserving fertility for breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Additionally, oocyte and embryo cryopreservation demonstrated successful outcomes, with embryo cryopreservation being the most effective option. Notably, the slow-freezing and vitrification methods were both effective in preserving embryos, with vitrification showing superior results in clinical-assisted reproductive technologies. Ovarian tissue cryopreservation emerged as a viable option for prepubertal girls and those unable to undergo conventional ovarian stimulation. The potential of in vitro maturation (IVM) as an alternative method presents a promising avenue for future fertility preservation research.

DISCUSSION

The most suitable treatments for fertility preservation in young patients is the temporary suppression with luteinizing hormone-releasing analogs, while the patient undergoes chemotherapy and cryopreservation. For cryopreservation, the physicians might deem it necessary to either cryopreserve ovarian tissue taken from the patient before any treatment or cryopreserve embryos/oocytes. Cryopreservation of oocytes and/or embryos is the most effective solution for fertility preservation in women of reproductive age, who have a sufficient ovarian reserve and are diagnosed with breast cancer, regardless of the histological type of the tumor. Because approximately 50% of young breast cancer patients are interested in becoming pregnant right after completion of therapy, the evolution and development of fertility preservation techniques promise to be very exciting.

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.

[Indication and implementation of fertility preservation measures in female cancer patients]

The aspects of fertility preservation in women prior to surgical, gonadotoxic or radiation therapy represent a challenging topic in many disciplines and often in an interdisciplinary setting. Within an often short period of time, individual counselling and consideration must be given as to whether fertility-protective measures are useful. The implementation is ultimately decided by the patient. A prerequisite for helpful counselling is knowledge about the potential effects of cancer treatment on ovarian function as well as the implementation and potential individual benefits of fertility-protective measures. Networks such as FertiPROTEKT Netzwerk e. V. are helpful for orientation in terms of content and timely implementation of counselling and corresponding measures.

Impact of Breast Cancer and Germline BRCA Pathogenic Variants on Fertility Preservation in Young Women

BACKGROUND

Several studies have suggested that breast cancer (BC) and germline BRCA pathogenic variants (gBRCA PVs) could have a deleterious impact on ovarian reserve. Nevertheless, data are limited and mixed. Our objective was to evaluate the performance of fertility preservation (FP) in terms of the number of collected mature oocytes after ovarian stimulation (OS) in young women carrying a gBRCA PV, associated or not with BC.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective monocentric study at HUB-Hôpital Erasme in Brussels. All women aged between 18 and 41 years diagnosed with invasive non-metastatic BC and/or gBRCA PV carriers who underwent OS for FP or preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic disorder (PGT-M) between November 2012 and October 2021 were included. Three groups were compared: BC patients without a gBRCA PV, BC patients with a gBRCA PV, and healthy gBRCA PV carriers. Ovarian reserve was evaluated based on the efficacy of OS and AMH levels.

RESULTS

A total of 85 patients underwent 100 cycles. The mean age (32.2 ± 3.9 years; p = 0.61) and median AMH level (1.9 [0.2-13] μg/L; p = 0.22) were similar between groups. Correlations between the number of mature oocytes and AMH level (p < 0.001) and between AMH and age (p < 0.001) were observed. No differences in the number of retrieved mature oocytes were observed between groups (p = 0.41), or for other OS parameters.

CONCLUSION

Neither BC nor a gBRCA PV significantly affects ovarian reserve and FP efficacy in terms of the number of mature oocytes retrieved.

The effectiveness of controlled ovarian stimulation with tamoxifen for patients with estrogen-sensitive breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

Tamoxifen is used for the suppression of estrogen-sensitive tumor recurrence in oocyte retrieval cycles. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the quality of controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with co-administration of gonadotropins and tamoxifen (COS with tamoxifen).

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for articles on October 30, 2022. The authors included studies comparing COS with tamoxifen and COS with gonadotropins and letrozole (COS with letrozole) or gonadotropin only (COS with gonadotropin only) for fertility preservation in patients with breast cancer. The main outcome measures were the COS quality, total number of retrieved oocytes (TOR), total number of mature oocytes (TMO), and peak estradiol levels (PEL).

Results

Four studies (348 patients, two randomized controlled trials, and two cohort studies) were included in our meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in TOR (95% CI, [-3.84, 2.90]) and TMO (95% CI, [-2.20, 2.64]) between COS with tamoxifen and COS with letrozole. There was also no difference in TOR (95% CI, [-6.14, 1.86]) between COS with tamoxifen and COS with gonadotropin only. Statistically significant decrease was observed in PEL during COS with letrozole compared with tamoxifen (95% CI, [1414.4, 4953.7]).

Conclusions

The quality did not differ between COS with tamoxifen and COS with letrozole or gonadotropin only.