Efficacy of random-start controlled ovarian stimulation in cancer patients

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 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.

A reappraisal of ovarian stimulation strategies used in assisted reproductive technology

Ovarian stimulation is a fundamental step in assisted reproductive technology (ART) with the intention of inducing ovarian follicle development prior to timed intercourse or intra-uterine insemination and facilitating the retrieval of multiple oocytes during a single in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle. The basis of ovarian stimulation includes the administration of exogenous gonadotropins, with or without pre-treatment with oral hormonal therapy. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist or antagonist is given in addition to the gonadotropins to prevent a premature rise of endogenous luteinizing hormone that would in turn lead to premature ovulation. With the advancement in technology, various stimulation protocols have been devised to cater for different patient needs. However, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and its serious complications may occur following ovarian stimulation. It is also evident that suboptimal ovarian stimulation strategies may have a negative impact on oogenesis, embryo quality, endometrial receptivity, and reproductive outcomes over recent years. This review describes the various forms of pre-treatment for ovarian stimulation and stimulation protocols, and aims to provide clinicians with the latest available evidence.

Fertility Preservation in Young Women With Breast Cancer: A Review

Fertility preservation is a major concern in young patients diagnosed with breast cancer and planning to receive multimodality treatment, including gonadotoxic chemotherapy with or without age-related decline through long-term endocrine therapy. Most breast cancer patients undergo multimodality treatments; many short-term and long-term side effects arise during these therapies. One of the most detrimental side effects is reduced fertility due to gonadotoxic treatments with resultant psychosocial stress. Cryopreservation of oocytes, embryos, and ovarian tissue are currently available fertility preservation methods for these patients. As an adjunct to these methods, in vitro maturation or gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist could also be considered. It is also essential to communicate well with patients in the decision-making process on fertility preservation. It is essential to refer patients diagnosed with breast cancer on time to fertility specialists for individualized treatment, which may lead to desirable outcomes. To do so, a multimodal team-based approach and in-depth discussion on the treatment of breast cancer and fertility preservation is crucial. This review aims to summarize infertility risk related to currently available breast cancer treatment, options for fertility preservation and its details, barriers to oncofertility counseling, and psychosocial issues.

The Late Effects of Cancer Treatment on Female Fertility and the Current Status of Fertility Preservation-A Narrative Review

Fertility counseling should be offered to all individuals of young reproductive age early in the patient's trajectory following a cancer diagnosis. Systemic cancer treatment and radiotherapy often have an inherent gonadotoxic effect with the potential to induce permanent infertility and premature ovarian failure. For the best chances to preserve a patient's fertility potential and to improve future quality of life, fertility preservation methods should be applied before cancer treatment initiation, thus multidisciplinary team-work and timely referral to reproductive medicine centers specialized in fertility preservation is recommended. We aim to review the current clinical possibilities for fertility preservation and summarize how infertility, as a late effect of gonadotoxic treatment, affects the growing population of young female cancer survivors.

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.

Outcomes after assisted reproductive technology in women with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY QUESTION

What are the associations between a history of cancer and outcomes after ART?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Compared to women without cancer, on average, women with cancer had a lower return for embryo transfer and a lower likelihood of clinical pregnancy and live birth after ART.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Small, single-institution studies have suggested that cancer and its treatment may negatively affect ART outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis of studies comparing ART outcomes between women with and without cancer. PubMed, Embase and Scopus were searched for original, English-language studies published up to June 2021.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Inclusion criteria required reporting of ART outcomes after controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) among women with a history of cancer compared to women without cancer who used ART for any indication. Outcomes of interest ranged from duration of COS to likelihood of live birth after embryo transfer. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate mean differences and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs and 95% prediction intervals (PIs). We assessed heterogeneity by age-adjustment, referent group indication for ART, study location and among women with breast cancer and women who initiated ART before cancer treatment. We used visual inspection, Egger's test and the trim-and-fill method to assess funnel plot asymmetry.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Of 6094 unique records identified, 42 studies met inclusion criteria, representing a median per study of 58 women with cancer (interquartile range (IQR) = 159) and 114 women without cancer (IQR = 348). Compared to women without cancer, on average, women with cancer had a lower return for embryo transfer (OR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.07, 0.74; 95% PI: 0.00, 64.98); lower likelihood of clinical pregnancy (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.35, 0.73; 95% PI: 0.19, 1.35); and lower likelihood of live birth (OR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.38, 0.83; 95% PI: 0.19, 1.69). Substantial among-study heterogeneity was observed for COS duration, gonadotropin dose, cycle cancellation, total oocytes and mature oocytes. Fertilization percentage showed less heterogeneity, but study-specific estimates were imprecise. Similarly, number of embryos showed less heterogeneity, and most studies estimated minimal differences by cancer history. Funnel plot asymmetry was observed for estradiol peak and oocyte maturation percentage.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Appreciable confounding is possible in 11 studies that lacked adequate control for group differences in age, and among-study heterogeneity was observed for most outcomes. Lack of data limited our ability to assess how cancer clinical factors (e.g. cancers other than breast, cancer stage and treatment) and ART cycle characteristics (e.g. fresh versus frozen embryo transfers and use of gestational carriers) may affect outcomes.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Women with cancer may be less likely to achieve pregnancy and live birth after embryo transfer. Further examination of reproductive outcomes and sources of heterogeneity among studies is warranted to improve evidence of the expected success of ART after a cancer diagnosis.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This research was supported in part by R01 CA211093 and P30 ES010126. C.M. was supported by the University of North Carolina Lineberger Cancer Control Education Program (T32 CA057726) and the National Cancer Institute (F31 CA260787). J.A.R.-H. was supported by the National Cancer Institute (K08 CA234333, P30 CA016672). J.A.R.-H. reports receiving consulting fees from Schlesinger Group and Guidepoint. The remaining authors declare no competing interests.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

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.

Clinical efficacy of dual trigger with human chorionic gonadotropin and a gonadotropin‐releasing hormone agonist for women undergoing fertility preservation

Purpose

To determine the optimal maturation method to increase the yield of mature oocytes, especially for cancer patients with fewer chances of fertility preservation (FP) before gonadotoxic therapy.

Methods

A total of 373 cycles in 293 patients undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for FP using a gonadotropin‐releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol were enrolled. The control group (n = 225) received 250 µg of recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin (rhCG) while the study group (n = 148) received 250 µg of rhCG and 0.2 mg of triptorelin for triggering. Subgroup analyses were performed for stimulation cycles with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR; anti‐Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels <1.1 ng/ml, n = 86), with endometrioma (n = 104), or with breast cancer and endometrial cancer using 5 mg of letrozole during the COS cycles (n = 84).

Results

There was no significant difference in the baseline characteristics or the number of total and mature oocytes between the two groups. Subgroup analyses for women with endometrioma or DOR showed similar results. However, the dual trigger group had a significantly higher number of mature oocytes than the rhCG trigger group in breast and endometrial cancer patients using letrozole during the COS cycles (6.9 ± 6.0 vs. 4.6 ± 3.6, p = 0.034). The maturation rate was higher in the dual trigger group, although the difference was not statistically significant (59.3 ± 26.7 vs. 50.0 ± 28.0, p = 0.124).

Conclusions

Dual triggering can be an efficient maturation method to maximize the yield of mature oocytes in breast or endometrial cancer patients using letrozole‐combined GnRH antagonist protocol for FP.

Utility of Blood Markers for Predicting Outcomes of Fertility Preservation in Patients With Breast Cancer

This study aimed to investigate the usability of blood markers for predicting controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) outcomes in patients with breast cancer undergoing fertility preservation (FP). In total, 91 patients with breast cancer who had undergone COS using a letrozole-combined gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol before chemotherapy were enrolled retrospectively in a single tertiary hospital. FP outcomes were compared in terms of the mean platelet volume (MPV), MPV/platelet count (PC), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR). The cutoff values for obtaining 10 or more mature oocytes as favorable prognoses were obtained for each parameter, and the COS outcomes were compared based on the cutoff values. The optimal cutoff levels for MPV and MPV/PC were 10.15 [sensitivity: 90.0%; specificity: 45.1%; AUC: 0.687; 95% CI (0.563, 0.810)] and 0.41 [sensitivity: 65.0%; specificity: 67.6%; AUC: 0.682; 95% CI (0.568, 0.796)], respectively. The oocyte numbers did not significantly differ with respect to the cutoff values of NLR, PLR, and LMR (p > 0.05). However, the total number of acquired and mature oocytes were significantly lower in the group with MPV<10.15 than in that with MPV≥10.15 (8.0 ± 5.1 vs. 12.6 ± 9.1, p=0.003; 4.0 ± 3.7 vs. 7.3 ± 6.3, p=0.002, respectively). Similarly, considering the cutoff of MPV/PC as 0.41, the low-MPV/PC group showed a significantly lower total oocyte yield than the high-MPV/PC group (9.5 ± 7.1 vs. 13.1 ± 9.1, p=0.048), whereas the number of mature oocytes showed similar patterns with no statistical significance (5.3 ± 5.4 vs. 7.3 ± 6.1, p=0.092). From logistic regression analysis, age, anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level, MPV, and MPV/PC≥0.41 were found to be significant factors for the acquisition of 10 or more MII oocytes (p=0.049, OR: 0.850; p<0.001, OR: 1.622; p=0.018, OR: 3.184; p=0.013, OR: 9.251, respectively). MPV or MPV/PC can be a reliable marker for predicting FP outcome in patients with breast cancer. Protocols to acquire more mature oocytes, such as the dual-trigger approach, could be recommended for patients with breast cancer with MPV<10.15. Furthermore, a higher dose of gonadotropins was considered to obtain more oocytes in patients with MPV/PC<0.41.

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.

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.

Mathematical Modeling and Simulation Provides Evidence for New Strategies of Ovarian Stimulation

New approaches to ovarian stimulation protocols, such as luteal start, random start or double stimulation, allow for flexibility in ovarian stimulation at different phases of the menstrual cycle. It has been proposed that the success of these methods is based on the continuous growth of multiple cohorts ("waves") of follicles throughout the menstrual cycle which leads to the availability of ovarian follicles for ovarian controlled stimulation at several time points. Though several preliminary studies have been published, their scientific evidence has not been considered as being strong enough to integrate these results into routine clinical practice. This work aims at adding further scientific evidence about the efficiency of variable-start protocols and underpinning the theory of follicular waves by using mathematical modeling and numerical simulations. For this purpose, we have modified and coupled two previously published models, one describing the time course of hormones and one describing competitive follicular growth in a normal menstrual cycle. The coupled model is used to test ovarian stimulation protocols in silico. Simulation results show the occurrence of follicles in a wave-like manner during a normal menstrual cycle and qualitatively predict the outcome of ovarian stimulation initiated at different time points of the menstrual cycle.

Efficacy and Safety of Controlled Ovarian Stimulation With or Without Letrozole Co-administration for Fertility Preservation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: The co-administration of letrozole during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with gonadotropins is used to limit the potentially harmful effects of a supra-physiological rise in estrogen levels on hormone-sensitive cancers. However, the efficacy and safety of adding letrozole to COS remain debated.

Methods: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies that compared the efficacy and safety of COS with co-administration of letrozole vs. COS without letrozole in all patient populations. A secondary analysis was done including only the studies in breast cancer patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was the number of retrieved mature Metaphase II (MII) oocytes. Secondary efficacy and safety endpoints were total number of oocytes, maturation rate, fertilization rate, number of cryopreserved embryos, peak estradiol levels, progesterone levels, and total gonadotropin dose. Data for each endpoint were reported and analyzed thorough mean ratio (MR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results: A total of 11 records were selected including 2,121 patients (990 patients underwent COS with letrozole and 1,131 COS without letrozole). The addition of letrozole to COS did not have any negative effect on the number of mature oocytes collected (MR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.87–1.16; P = 0.967) and the other efficacy endpoints. COS with letrozole was associated with significantly decreased peak estradiol levels (MR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.24–0.32; P < 0.001). Similar results were observed in the secondary analysis including only breast cancer patients.

Conclusions: These findings are reassuring on the efficacy and safety of COS with gonadotropins and letrozole and are particularly important for fertility preservation in women with hormone-sensitive cancers.

Ovarian response to stimulation for fertility preservation in women with hematologic cancer

PURPOSE

To compare the ovarian response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in patients with hematologic malignancies treated for fertility preservation (FP) and healthy subjects (oocyte donors (OD)).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective cohort study comparing 41 women (18-37 years) who underwent COH for oocyte vitrification prior to gonadotoxic treatment for hematologic cancer (FP group) from January 2014 to February 2019 and with 117 women undergoing COH as part of an OD protocol (OD group) during the same period. The number of frozen mature oocytes, number of oocytes retrieved, total dose of rFSH, maximal estradiol levels, percentage of maturity, number of dominant follicles >14 mm, days of stimulation were evaluated. Results were adjusted for age, body mass index (BMI), anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) and rFSH starting dose.

RESULTS

Patients in the FP group were younger and had a lower BMI than those in the OD group. rFSH starting dose was higher in the FP group (median 225UI (125;450) vs 150UI (87.5;337.5), p < 0.0001). After adjusting for age, BMI and starting rFSH dose according to ANCOVA, more frozen mature oocytes (median 10 (0;45) vs 8 (0;22] p = 0.0055) and retrieved oocytes (median 12 (0;49) vs 11 (0;29) p = 0.0468) were found in the FP group. Other outcome measures did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Ovarian response after COH in women with a hematologic cancer is similar to that in the general population. A higher number of mature oocytes were collected in the FP group after strong COH.

The impact of letrozole administration on oocyte morphology in breast cancer patients undergoing fertility preservation

Objective:

Patients submitted to oncological fertility preservation with letrozole and gonadotropins seem to present a higher rate of immature oocytes and lower fertilization rates in comparison to infertile patients submitted to IVF cycles with gonadotropins. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of letrozole on oocyte morphology in patients with breast cancer submitted to fertility preservation.

Methods:

Retrospective analysis performed at a public tertiary hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. The oocytes were retrieved from patients with breast cancer undergoing fertility preservation (n=69), and from infertile women undergoing in vitro fertilization (n=92). We evaluated 750 oocytes obtained from breast cancer patients submitted to ovarian stimulation with letrozole and gonadotropins, and 699 oocytes from patients without breast cancer submitted to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization with gonadotropins only due to male factor infertility. The mature oocytes retrieved were analyzed for the presence of refractile bodies, ooplasm color and regularity, central granulation degree, cortical granules, zona pellucida staining and regularity, perivitelline space, presence of vacuoles or abnormal smooth-surfaced endoplasmic reticle and oocyte retraction.

Results:

There was a higher incidence of alterations in oocyte morphology in the letrozole group when compared to the control group: increased perivitelline space (p=0.007), irregular zona pellucida (p<0.001), refractile bodies (p<0.001), dark ooplasm (p<0.001), granular ooplasm (p<0.001), irregular ooplasm (p<0.001) and dense central granulation (p<0.001).

Conclusion:

Letrozole is a risk factor for worse oocyte morphology. However, the clinical impact of ovarian stimulation protocol with combined use of gonadotropins and letrozole for fertility preservation remains unclear in this setting. These data underline the importance of establishing the predictive potential of morphological dimorphisms of human oocytes in IVF outcomes.

The effects of letrozole on women with endometriosis undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization

This study aimed to analyze the effects of a new protocol with letrozole on the outcomes of in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles in women with endometriosis. This retrospective cohort study was conducted for women diagnosed with endometriosis undergoing IVF from an infertility clinic. A new protocol, combination therapy with letrozole and gonadotropin, was used from August 2016 to January 2018 ('protocol 1', n = 38). From March 2014 to July 2016, conventional IVF with gonadotropin was administered ('protocol 2', n = 26). Age and ovarian reserve were comparable between the two groups. The patients who received protocol 1 resulted in a significantly lower peak estradiol level in IVF compared with those received protocol 2 (722 ± 1076 pg/mL versus 2168 ± 1521 pg/mL, p < .001). The length of stimulation, the total dose of gonadotropin, number of oocytes retrieved, fertilization rates, and number of embryos obtained were similar between the two groups. The mean percentage of mature oocytes was lower (69.9 ± 23.7% versus 80.2 ± 21.0%, p = .029) in patients with protocol 1. While maintaining low estrogen levels, the combination therapy with letrozole and gonadotropin produce similar oocyte and embryo yield to the conventional IVF protocol in women with endometriosis.

The Future of Cryopreservation in Assisted Reproductive Technologies

Societal changes and the increasing desire and opportunity to preserve fertility have increased the demand for effective assisted reproductive technologies (ART) and have increased the range of scenarios in which ART is now used. In recent years, the "freeze-all" strategy of cryopreserving all oocytes or good quality embryos produced in an IVF cycle to transfer later-at a time that is more appropriate for reasons of medical need, efficacy, or desirability-has emerged as an accepted and valuable alternative to fresh embryo transfer. Indeed, improvements in cryopreservation techniques (vitrification) and the development of more efficient ovarian stimulation protocols have facilitated a dramatic increase in the practice of elective frozen embryo transfer (eFET). Alongside these advances, debate continues about whether eFET should be a standard treatment option available to the whole IVF population or if it is important to identify patient subgroups who are most likely to benefit from such an approach. Achieving successful outcomes in ART, whether by fresh or frozen embryo transfer, is influenced by a wide range of factors. As well as the efficiency of IVF and embryo transfer protocols and techniques, factors affecting implantation include maternal aging, sperm quality, the vaginal and endometrial microbiome, and peri-implantation levels of serum progesterone. The safety of eFET, both during ART cycles and on longer-term obstetric and neonatal outcomes, is also an important consideration. In this review, we explore the benefits and risks of freeze-all strategies in different scenarios. We review available evidence on the outcomes achieved with elective cryopreservation strategies and practices and how these compare with more traditional IVF cycles with fresh embryo transfers, both in the general IVF population and in subgroups of special interest. In addition, we consider how to optimize and individualize "freeze-all" procedures to achieve successful reproductive outcomes.

Elective and Onco-fertility preservation: factors related to IVF outcomes

STUDY QUESTION

Is the indication for fertility preservation (FP) related to success in IVF cycles after elective-FP (EFP) for age-related fertility decline and FP before cancer treatment (Onco-FP)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Although success rates were lower in cancer patients, there was no statistically significant association between malignant disease and reproductive outcome after correction for age and controlled-ovarian stimulation (COS) regime.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

FP is increasingly applied in assisted reproduction, but little is known about the outcome of IVF cycles with vitrified oocytes in FP patients.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Retrospective, observational multicenter study of vitrification cycles for FP and of the warming cycles of women who returned to attempt pregnancy from January 2007 to May 2018.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

In all, 6362 women (EFP = 5289 patients; 7044 cycles + Onco-FP = 1073 patients; 1172 cycles) had their oocytes vitrified for FP. A logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the impact of indication for FP corrected for age at vitrification. The protocol used for COS was also included as a possible confounder. The main outcome measures were oocyte survival and live birth. A detailed description of the baseline and clinical data is provided, with comparisons between EFP and Onco-FP. The cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) per utilized oocyte according to age at vitrification was analyzed in those patients returning to use their oocytes.

MAIN RESULTS AND ROLE OF CHANCE

Age at vitrification was significantly older in EFP patients (37.2 ± 4.9 vs. 32.3 ± 3.5 year; P < 0.0001). Fewer oocytes were retrieved and vitrified per cycle in EFP (9.6 ± 8.4 vs. 11.4 ± 3.5 and 7.3 ± 11.3 vs. 8.7 ± 2.1, respectively; P < 0.05), but numbers became comparable when analyzed per patient (12.8 ± 7.4 vs. 12.5 ± 3.2 and 9.8 ± 6.4 vs. 9.5 ± 2.6). Storage time was shorter in EFP (2.1 ± 1.6 vs. 4.1 ± 0.9 years; P < 0.0001). In all, 641 (12.1%) EFP and 80 (7.4%) Onco-FP patients returned to attempt pregnancy (P < 0.05). Overall oocyte survival was comparable (83.9% vs. 81.8%; NS), but lower for onco-FP patients among younger (≤35 year) subjects (81.2% vs. 91.4%; P > 0.05). Fewer EFP cycles finished in embryo transfer (50.2% vs. 72.5%) (P < 0.05). The implantation rate was 42.6% and 32.5% in EFP versus Onco-FP (P < 0.05). Ongoing pregnancy (57.7% vs. 35.7%) and live birth rates (68.8% vs. 41.1%) were higher in EFP patients aged ≤35 than the Onco-FP matching age patients (P < 0.05). The reason for FP per se had no effect on oocyte survival (OR = 1.484 [95%CI = 0.876-2.252]; P = 0.202) or the CLBR (OR = 1.275 [95%CI = 0.711-2.284]; P = 0.414). Conversely, age (<36 vs. ≥36 y) impacted oocyte survival (adj.OR = 1.922 [95%CI = 1.274-2.900]; P = 0.025) and the CLBR (adj.OR= 3.106 [95%CI = 2.039-4.733]; P < 0.0001). The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a significantly higher cumulative probability of live birth in patients <36 versus >36 in EFP (P < 0.0001), with improved outcomes when more oocytes were available for IVF.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Statistical power to compare IVF outcomes is limited by the few women who came to use their oocytes in the Onco-FP group. The patients' ages and the COS protocols used were significantly different between the EFP and ONCO-PP groups.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Although the implantation rate was significantly lower in the Onco-FP patients the impact of cancer disease per se was not proven'. EFP patients should be counseled according to their age and number of available oocytes.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No external funding was used for this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Oocyte cryopreservation for future fertility: comparison of ovarian response between cancer and non-cancer patients

Objective:

This study aimed to assess whether a diagnosis of cancer interferes with ovarian function prior to the treatment of the disease.

Methods:

This observational retrospective study used data from medical records of ovarian stimulation cycles performed for purposes of oocyte cryopreservation.

Results:

The included patients had a mean age of 35.13±3.72 years and 51.6% of them were aged between 36 and 40 years. More than half of the patients (57.6%) were single and 82.1% had a normal body mass index (BMI). Most women had not become pregnant (85.5%) or had babies (95.1%) or miscarriages (89.6%) prior to cryopreservation. The mean number of oocytes obtained from non-cancer patients was 11.4±8, while for cancer patients the number was 13.8±9. The mean number of frozen mature oocytes was 9.7±7 for the non-cancer group and 11.2±7.2 for the cancer group. The majority (63.1%) of the patients had up to 10 oocytes frozen per cycle. Breast cancer had the highest incidence among the included patients. There was no significant difference in ovarian response between patients with different types of cancer.

Conclusion:

The number of harvested and frozen oocytes from cancer and non-cancer patients indicated that in the two groups response to ovarian stimulation was similar.

Time from referral to ovarian tissue cryopreservation in a cohort of Danish women

INTRODUCTION

Young women with a cancer diagnosis often have very little time to decide whether or not to commence fertility-preserving strategies before initiating potentially sterilizing cancer treatment. Minimizing the interval from opting for fertility preservation to completion of the procedure will reduce the potential risk of delaying cancer treatment. In the current study, we have evaluated the period of time from referral to ovarian tissue cryopreservation (OTC) to actual freezing of the tissue in a cohort of Danish women.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study population comprised 277 consecutive patients with both malignant and nonmalignant diseases referred for OTC from four centers in the Danish network. Statistical analysis was conducted to analyze the impact of age, diagnosis, and referring center on the time from OTC-referral to OTC. A literature search for "random start" protocols for controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for fertility preservation in cancer patients was performed.

RESULTS

The time from OTC-referral to OTC was significantly influenced by diagnosis, age, and referring center. Women with malignant diseases other than breast cancer, such as sarcomas, pelvic cancers, and hematological cancers, experienced a significantly shorter interval to OTC (5 days) than women with breast cancer (7 days) and nonmalignant diseases including systemic, ovarian, and hereditary conditions (13-17.5 days). Women over the age of 30 years experienced a significantly longer time to OTC (P < 0.03), and the diagnosis determined the length of the interval (P < 0.001). According to the literature, fertility preservation by oocyte vitrification requires 13-14 days, as the average time for 1 round of COS was 11 days and oocyte collection can be performed 2 days later.

CONCLUSIONS

It is in the interest of both cancer patients and clinicians to perform fertility preservation as quickly and safely as possible. In a Danish setting, OTC provides a short interval of around 6 days from the patient choosing this option to completion of the procedure. This is considerably less time than what is needed to perform COS and oocyte vitrification, and therefore OTC might be considered the preferred choice of fertility preservation when urgency is needed.

Specific protocols of controlled ovarian stimulation for oocyte cryopreservation in breast cancer patients

Background

Fertility preservation is an important concern in breast cancer patients. In the present investigation, we set out to create a specific protocol of controlled ovarian stimulation (cos) for oocyte cryopreservation in breast cancer patients.

Methods

From November 2014 to December 2016, 109 patients were studied. The patients were assigned to a specific random-start ovarian stimulation protocol for oocyte cryopreservation. The endpoints were the numbers of oocytes retrieved and of mature oocytes cryopreserved, the total number of days of ovarian stimulation, the total dose of gonadotropin administered, and the estradiol level on the day of the trigger.

Results

Mean age in this cohort was 31.27 ± 4.23 years. The average duration of cos was 10.0 ± 1.39 days. The mean number of oocytes collected was 11.62 ± 7.96 and the mean number of vitrified oocytes was 9.60 ± 6.87. The mean estradiol concentration on triggering day was 706.30 ± 450.48 pg/mL, and the mean dose of gonadotropins administered was 2610.00 ± 716.51 IU. When comparing outcomes by phase of the cycle in which cos was commenced, we observed no significant differences in the numbers of oocytes collected and vitrified, the length of ovarian stimulation, and the estradiol level on trigger day. The total dose of follicle-stimulating hormone and human menopausal gonadotropin administered was statistically greater in the group starting cos in the luteal phase than in the group starting in the late follicular phase.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that using a specific protocol with random-start ovarian stimulation for oocyte cryopreservation in breast cancer patients is effective and could be offered to young women undergoing oncologic treatment.

Luteal phase stimulation, the future of fertility preservation? Retrospective cohort study of luteal phase versus follicular phase stimulation

RESEARCH QUESTION

Is luteal phase stimulation capable of improving fertility preservation?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of consecutive ovarian stimulations, during July 2012 and September 2018 at Strasbourg University Teaching Hospital in France. Enrollment criteria were patients aged below 40 who had been referred to our center following a diagnosis of cancer or requiring gonadotoxic treatment. All patients enrolled had regular menstrual cycles and normal ovulation. Non-enrollment criteria were an expected low ovarian response (defined by an anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level <0.75μg/L and/or an antral follicle count inferior (AFC) inferior than 5), polycystic ovarian syndrome, amenorrhea, prior history of infertility or gonadotoxic treatment. The primary endpoint is the number of mature oocytes (metaphase II) obtained. Secondary outcomes were oocyte yields obtained, stimulation duration, initial gonadotropin dose and total gonadotropin dose.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients were included: 20 in luteal phase and 80 in follicular phase. A larger number of mature oocytes was obtained in luteal phase versus follicular phase (13.1+/8.0 versus 9.2+/-5.8 with p=0.01). A greater amount of total (mature and immature) oocytes was obtained in luteal phase versus follicular phase with a significant difference (16.8+/-9.3 versus 11.8+/-7.3 with p=0.01). No difference was found for the initial and total doses of gonadotropin.

CONCLUSIONS

Luteal phase stimulation has the advantage of a better flexibility with positives results as to the number of oocytes obtained in fertility preservation.

The serum estradiol/oocyte ratio in patients with breast cancer undergoing ovarian stimulation with letrozole and gonadotropins

Objective

To investigate the patterns of estradiol-oocyte ratio (EOR) and estradiol-mature oocyte ratio (EMOR) in patients with breast cancer undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) using letrozole and gonadotropins for fertility preservation.

Methods

This retrospective study included 32 breast cancer patients underwent COS for fertility preservation and no patients had previously undergone gonadotoxic treatments. Basal characteristics and in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes were compared according to the age of women (age <35 vs. age ≥35) and the starting phase of ovarian stimulation (early follicular phase vs. late follicular phase vs. luteal phase).

Results

Patients who were administered with a letrozole-combined regimen, the peak serum estradiol (E2) was maintained at a low level (386.3±346.9 pg/mL). EOR was 52.4±78.8 pg/mL, and EMOR was 71.0±41.2 pg/mL. When the 2 groups were compared according to the age of women (age <35 vs. age ≥35), EOR was 34.5 (22.2–46.5) pg/mL and 40.7 (19.3–65.3) pg/mL, respectively; EMOR was 79.8 (40.8–90.6) pg/mL and 68.8 (44.5–85.9) pg/mL, respectively. There was no significant difference in the IVF outcomes. When the 2 groups were compared according to the starting phase of ovarian stimulation, there were no significant differences in IVF outcomes, EOR and EMOR among the groups.

Conclusion

Measuring the peak E2 concentration in breast cancer patients undergoing IVF for fertility preservation with a co-treatment of letrozole allows for the prediction of the numbers of oocytes and mature oocytes.

Long-term outcomes in cancer patients who did or did not pursue fertility preservation

OBJECTIVE

To compare long-term outcomes of cancer patients who pursued fertility preservation (FP) with those who did not and compare random-start (RS) and menstrual cycle-specific (CS) protocols for FP.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

Single urban academic institution.

PATIENT(S)

Oncology patients who contacted the FP patient navigator, 2005-2015.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Time to cancer treatment, disease-free survival, and reproductive outcomes in FP versus no-FP patients and cycle outcomes for RS versus CS protocols. Data were analyzed by χ² and logistic regression.

RESULT(S)

Of 497 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 41% elected FP. The median number of days to cancer treatment was 33 and 19 days in the FP and no-FP groups, respectively. There was no difference in cancer recurrence or mortality. There were no differences in stimulation parameters, outcomes, or days to next cancer treatment in RS versus CS protocols. Twenty-one patients returned to use cryopreserved specimens, resulting in 16 live births. Eight of 21 returning patients used a gestational carrier. Thirteen FP (6.4%) and 16 no-FP (5.5%) patients experienced a spontaneous pregnancy.

CONCLUSION(S)

FP is both safe and efficacious for eligible cancer patients. Only 10% of patients returned to use cryopreserved specimens, and almost half used a gestational carrier, suggesting the need for further research into reproductive decision-making in cancer survivors.

Fertility preservation for patients with breast cancer: The Korean Society for Fertility Preservation clinical guidelines

With advances in the methods of cancer treatment used in modern medicine, the number of breast cancer survivors has been consistently rising. As the number of women who wish to become pregnant after being diagnosed with breast cancer increases, it is necessary to consider fertility preservation in these patients. However, medical doctors may be unaware of the importance of fertility preservation among cancer patients because most patients do not share their concerns about fertility with their doctors. Considering the time spent choosing and undergoing treatment, an early referral to a reproductive specialist is the best way to prevent a delay in cancer treatment. Since it is not easy to make decisions on matters related to cancer diagnosis and fertility, patients should be provided with enough time for decision-making, and to allow for this, an early referral will provide patients with sufficient time to choose an appropriate method of fertility preservation. The currently available options of fertility preservation for patients with breast cancer include cryopreservation of embryos, oocytes, and ovarian tissue and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist treatment before and during chemotherapy. An appropriate method of fertility preservation must be selected through consultations between individual patients and health professionals and analyses of the pros and cons of different options.

A specific controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocol for fertility preservation in women with breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Aim of the study

The authors present a novel and specific controlled ovarian stimulation protocol for fertility preservation in women with estrogen-positive receptor breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The protocol foresees random start ovarian stimulation and the use of letrozole associated to tamoxifen.

Material and methods

Forty breast cancer patients were included in the study. COS was performed either with recombinant FSH or hMG. Concomitantly with COS, letrozole in a dose of 5 mg and tamoxifen in a dose of 20 mg were given orally on a daily basis. The trigger was performed with 0.2 mg of triptorelin, in the presence of follicles ≥ 19 mm. Oocyte retrieval was scheduled 35-36 hours after triptorelin injection. Our main outcome measures were the number of oocytes collected and number of oocytes vitrified, the length of ovarian stimulation, total dose of gonadotropins administered, and levels of estradiol on the day of the trigger.

Results

The mean age of patients was 30.43 ±4.25 years. Nineteen women commenced COS in the luteal phase, eleven in the early follicular phase and ten in the late follicular phase. The mean number of collected oocytes was 11.78 ±9.12 and the mean number of vitrified oocytes was 9.72 ±7.36. The mean duration of COS was 10.03 ±1.33 days. The mean estradiol concentrations on the triggering day was 623.10 ±441.27, and the mean dose of gonadotropins administered was 2540 ±713.10.

Conclusions

The authors suggest that the protocol is efficient and may be a safe option for oocyte vitrification in these patients.

Fertility Preservation and Sexual Health After Cancer Therapy

Recent developments in cancer diagnostics and treatments have considerably improved long-term survival rates. Despite improvements in chemotherapy regimens, more focused radiotherapy and diverse surgical options, cancer treatments often have gonadotoxic side-effects that can manifest as loss of fertility or sexual dysfunction, particularly in young cancer survivors. In this review, we focus on two pertinent quality-of-life issues in female cancer survivors of reproductive age-fertility preservation and sexual function. Fertility preservation encompasses all clinical and laboratory efforts to preserve a woman's chance to achieve future genetic motherhood. These efforts range from well-established protocols such as ovarian stimulation with cryopreservation of embryos or oocytes, to nascent clinical trials involving cryopreservation and re-implantation of ovarian tissue. Therefore, fertility preservation strategies are individualized to the cancer diagnosis, time interval until initiation of treatments must begin, prognosis, pubertal status, and maturity level of patient. Some patients choose not to pursue fertility preservation, and the conversation then centers around other quality of life issues. Not all cancer treatments cause loss of fertility; however, most treatments can directly impact the physical and psychosocial aspects of sexual function. Cancer treatment is also associated with fear, anxiety, and depression, which can further decrease sexual desire, function, and frequency. Sexual dysfunction after cancer treatment is generally ascertained by compassionate inquiry. Strategies to promote sexual function after cancer treatment include pelvic floor exercises, clitoral therapy devices, pharmacologic agents, as well as couples-based psychotherapeutic and psycho-educational interventions. Quality-of-life issues in young cancer survivors are often best addressed by utilizing a multidisciplinary team consisting of physicians, nurses, social workers, psychiatrists, sex educators, counselors, or therapists.

Random-start ovarian stimulation in women desiring elective cryopreservation of oocytes

The current study investigates the utility of random-start ovarian stimulation in women desiring elective oocyte cryopreservation. Women in the study cohort underwent random-start ovarian stimulation, and were subdivided based on the phase of the menstrual cycle that ovarian stimulation began, i.e. early follicular, late follicular or luteal phase. Women undergoing conventional cycle day (CD) 2/3 ovarian stimulation start were controls. A total of 1302 women were included - 859 (66.0%) conventional CD 2/3, 342 (26.3%) early follicular, 42 (3.2%) late follicular and 59 (4.5%) luteal ovarian stimulation starts. There was no difference in the demographics or baseline ovarian stimulation characteristics. The duration of ovarian stimulation (11 versus 9 days; P < 0.001) and total dosage of gonadotrophins administered (4095.5 versus 3155 IU; P < 0.001) was higher in the random-start group. The number of total and MII oocytes in the control and random-start groups was similar. A non-significant trend towards increased cycle cancellation was noted in the late follicular start group (7.1%). Study findings indicate the number of total and MII oocytes derived from random-start protocols initiated during any phase of the menstrual cycle is similar to conventional CD 2/3 ovarian stimulation start protocols in women desiring elective oocyte cryopreservation.

Ethical, moral and other aspects related to fertility preservation in cancer patients

Post-treatment fertility emerges as an important issue in the early counseling of individuals with cancer, since survivors may have their quality of life affected by the occurrence of functional failure of the gonads because of antineoplastic therapies. In the context, oncofertility has been developed as an interdisciplinary field of study that combines expertise in reproductive medicine and oncology, to provide strategies aiming to maintain the possibility of future procreation. Today, we have many options and techniques available for the preservation of gametes in men and women. Some of them are already considered well established and used in routine, but ethical and moral issues on the subject still need to be debated.

Toward precision medicine for preserving fertility in cancer patients: existing and emerging fertility preservation options for women

As the number of young cancer survivors increases, quality of life after cancer treatment is becoming an ever more important consideration. According to a report from the American Cancer Society, approximately 810,170 women were diagnosed with cancer in 2015 in the United States. Among female cancer survivors, 1 in 250 are of reproductive age. Anticancer therapies can result in infertility or sterility and can have long-term negative effects on bone health, cardiovascular health as a result of reproductive endocrine function. Fertility preservation has been identified by many young patients diagnosed with cancer as second only to survival in terms of importance. The development of fertility preservation technologies aims to help patients diagnosed with cancer to preserve or protect their fertility prior to exposure to chemo- or radiation therapy, thus improving their chances of having a family and enhancing their quality of life as a cancer survivor. Currently, sperm, egg, and embryo banking are standard of care for preserving fertility for reproductive-age cancer patients; ovarian tissue cryopreservation is still considered experimental. Adoption and surrogate may also need to be considered. All patients should receive information about the fertility risks associated with their cancer treatment and the fertility preservation options available in a timely manner, whether or not they decide to ultimately pursue fertility preservation. Because of the ever expanding number of options for treating cancer and preserving fertility, there is now an opportunity to take a precision medicine approach to informing patients about the fertility risks associated with their cancer treatment and the fertility preservation options that are available to them.

Ovarian stimulation in the luteal phase: systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether outcomes are different if controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) is started in the luteal phase rather than the follicular phase.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Sixteen studies were included in the qualitative analysis, and eight studies with a total of 338 women were included in the quantitative analysis.

RESULTS

Cycles initiated in the luteal phase were slightly longer (WMD 1.1 days, 95 % CI 0.39-1.9) and utilized more total gonadotropins (WMD 817 IU, 95 % CI 489-1144). However, no differences were noted in peak estradiol levels (WMD -411 pg/ml, 95 % CI -906-84.7) or in the total number of oocytes retrieved (WMD 0.52 oocytes, 95 % CI -0.74-1.7). There were slightly more mature oocytes retrieved in the luteal phase (WMD 0.77 oocytes, 95 % CI 0.21-1.3), and fertilization rates were significantly higher (WMD 10 %, 95 % CI 0.03-0.18). While only three studies reported pregnancy outcomes, no difference was noted in the FET pregnancy rates after COS in the luteal versus follicular phase (RR 0.95, 95 % CI 0.56-1.7). A post hoc power analysis revealed that a sample of this size was sufficient to detect a clinically meaningful difference of 2 oocytes retrieved with 93 % power.

CONCLUSION

Although initiating COS in the luteal phase requires a longer stimulation and a higher dose of total gonadotropin, these differences are not clinically significant. Furthermore, COS initiated in the luteal phase does not compromise the quantity or quality of oocytes retrieved compared to outcomes of traditional stimulation in the follicular phase.

Random start or emergency IVF/in vitro maturation: a new rapid approach to fertility preservation

There is a need to develop rapid protocols for ovarian stimulation for women who wish to preserve their fertility following diagnosis of cancer. Conventional gonadotropin stimulation protocols are lengthy and are delayed until the start of the next menstrual period, potentially compromising cancer treatments. The development of random start IVF/in vitro maturation has made significant strides for enabling couples undergoing cancer therapy to achieve a family. However, several unanswered questions still remain. What do we know about the endocrinology of stimulating ovarian follicular activity outside the established protocols of stimulation during the follicular phase? This article explores what is known about antral follicle development during the menstrual cycle, novel ovarian stimulation proposals for optimizing assisted reproductive therapies in women, and direction.

Flexibility in starting ovarian stimulation at different phases of the menstrual cycle for treatment of infertile women with the use of in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection

OBJECTIVE

To investigate flexibility in starting controlled ovarian stimulation at any phase of the menstrual cycle in infertile women undergoing treatment with assisted reproduction.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Academic tertiary-care medical center.

PATIENT(S)

At total of 150 infertile patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment. Ninety of the women also underwent frozen embryo transfer (FET) procedures.

INTERVENTION(S)

Depending on the phase of the menstrual cycle when ovarian stimulation was started, three groups of patients were identified, namely: conventional group (ovarian stimulation started in the early follicular phase), late follicular phase group, and luteal phase group. When dominant follicles were observed, final oocyte maturation was triggered with the use of GnRH agonist and hCG. In all three groups, viable embryos were cryopreserved for subsequent transfer.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

PRIMARY OUTCOME

number of mature oocytes retrieved.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

fertilization rate, viable embryo rate per oocyte retrieved, cancellation rate, and clinical pregnancy outcomes from FET cycles.

RESULTS(S)

There were no differences in the mean number of mature oocytes retrieved in the conventional group, late follicular phase group, and luteal phase group (5.7 ± 3.6, 5.2 ± 3.7, and 5.2 ± 3.9, respectively). Similarly, no significant differences were observed in the viable embryo rate per oocyte retrieved (37.9%, 38.5%, and 43.6%), clinical pregnancy rates (41.5%, 45.5%, and 38.9%), and implantation rates (30.7%, 30.2%, and 27.1%) in the three groups.

CONCLUSION(S)

All three ovarian stimulation protocols were observed to be equally effective. These results demonstrate that ovarian stimulation can be commenced on any day of the menstrual cycle.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR-OPN-15007332.

Female patients with lymphoma demonstrate diminished ovarian reserve even before initiation of chemotherapy when compared with healthy controls and patients with other malignancies

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to investigate if female patients with lymphoma demonstrate diminished ovarian reserve prior to initiation of the lymphoma treatment.

METHODS

Sixty-four patients with newly diagnosed lymphoma undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for fertility preservation were compared with 365 healthy controls undergoing elective oocyte cryopreservation (controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH)) and 128 patients with other types of malignancy prompting fertility preservation. The data of all lymphoma patients, all elective, and all the patients with other types of malignancy who met the inclusion criteria and underwent COH for fertility preservation during the study period were retrospectively analyzed. Primary outcomes included serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels (ng/mL) and antral follicle count (AFC).

RESULTS

Patients in the lymphoma group demonstrated significantly lower AMH levels and AFC and had less oocytes harvested and cryopreserved when compared to healthy controls as well as patients with other malignancies.

CONCLUSION

Patients with lymphoma demonstrate diminished ovarian reserve when compared with healthy controls and patients with other malignancies. This should be taken into consideration when deciding on the dose for COH.

Mature oocyte retrieval during laparotomic debulking surgery following random-start controlled ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation in a patient with suspected ovarian cancer

Herein, we report a case of successful mature oocyte retrieval during laparotomy after random-start controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) in a 21-year-old nulliparous woman with suspected recurrent ovarian immature teratoma. The patient had been diagnosed with stage IIIC immature teratoma two years earlier following a staging operation, including right oophorectomy and left ovarian cystectomy. And she had subsequently undergone four rounds of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin. Approximately two years after the initial surgery, she was strongly suspected of having recurrent ovarian immature teratoma on radiologic follow-up. We performed random-start COS and in vivo oocyte retrieval during laparotomic debulking surgery including left oophorectomy. Eight mature oocytes were successfully retrieved and vitrified for fertility preservation. The final pathologic diagnosis was mature cystic teratoma of the ovary and peritoneal implants consistent with gliomatosis peritonei. This is the first case report in which random-start COS and in vivo oocyte retrieval were performed.

IVF for fertility preservation in breast cancer patients--efficacy and safety issues

BACKGROUND

Potential risks on future fertility have become a dominant issue in consultation and management of newly diagnosed young cancer patients. Several fertility preservation strategies are currently available. Of those, ovarian stimulation followed by IVF and embryo cryopreservation is the most established one and is especially applicable in reproductive aged breast cancer patients.

AIM

The aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive review on ovarian stimulation and IVF for fertility preservation in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients.

METHODS

Review of relevant literature is available through PubMed and Google scholar.

RESULTS

The use of IVF for fertility preservation in breast cancer patients raises dilemmas regarding efficacy and safety of controlled ovarian stimulation. Among these are the suggested role of malignancy and BRCA mutation in reducing ovarian response to stimulation, strategies designated to protect against hyper-estrogenic state associated with stimulation (co-treatment with tamoxifen or letrozole), and possible adjustments to accommodate oncologic-related time constraints.

CONCLUSION

Ovarian stimulation followed by IVF forms an important fertility preservation strategy for newly diagnosed young breast cancer patients, though live born rates following thawed embryo transfer in these patients are still lacking. Recent advances in controlled ovarian stimulation protocols provide practical options for some of the challenges that breast cancer patients present.